CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
FIRST SESSION, HELD NOVEMBER 24TH, 1879.
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.
SESSIONS I, TO VI.
STEVENS & SONS, 119, CHANCERY LANE, E.C.
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 PARTS OF THE COUNTIES OF ESSEX, KENT, AND SURREY, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,
Held on Monday, November 24th, 1879, and following days,
BEFORE THE RIGHT HON. SIR FRANCIS WYATT TRUSCOTT, Knt., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; The Hon. Sir WILLIAM VENTRIS FOELD, Knt., one of the Justices of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice; The Hon. Sir JOHN WALTER HUDDLESTON , Knt., one of the Justices of the Exchequer Division of the High Court of Justice; The Hon. Sir HENRY HAWKINS , Knt., one other of the Justices of the Exchequer Division of the High Court of Justice; Sir ROBBRT WALTER CARDEN, Knt., Sir WILLIAM ANDERSON ROSE , Knt., Sir THOMAS DAKIN , Knt., DAVID HENRY STONE , Esq., THOMAS SCAMBLE OWDEN, Esq., Aldermen of the said City; Sir Thomas chambers, Knt., Q.C., M.P., Recorder of the said City; WILLIAM McARTHUR , Esq., JOHN WHITTAKER ELLIS, Esq., JAMES FIGGTNS, Esq., SIMEON JOHN HADLEY , Esq., HENRY EDMUND KNIGHT , Esq., and ROBERT NATHANIEL FOWLER , Esq., other of the Aldermen of the said City; WILLIAM THOMAS CHABLEY, Esq., D.C.L., M.P., Common Serjeant of the said City; and ROBERT MALCOLM Kerr, Esq., LL.D., Judge of the Sheriffs' Court; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery of Newgate, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
HENRY KELLY BAYLEY, Esq.,
HENRY HOMEWOOD CRAWFORD, Esq.,
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
TRUSCOTT, MAYOR. FIRST 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.
NEW COURT.—Monday, November 24th, 1879.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
4. ROBERT CONSTABLE (18) to stealing out of a post letter a sovereign and a shilling, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
5. ROBERT WARD (27) to forging and uttering a receipt for 21. with intent to defraud; also to stealing from an officer of the Post Office a post letter, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General— Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MESSRS. LLOYD and DR MICHELE Prosecuted.
ALEXANDER KINO . I am barman at the Barley Mow, Drury Lane—on 8th October I served the prisoner with a pot of ale—he tendered a florin. I put it in the till, and gave him 1s. 8d. change—I then saw him hand a florin to a female, who called for a pot of ale—she handed me a florin, but I cannot say whether it was the one he gave her—the said, "Don't let him see you give me the change, because I don't want him to know I have got so much money"—I put it in the till and gave her 1s. 8d. change—I afterwards looked in the till and found two florins, a shilling, and a sixpence—I found the florins were bad, and gave them to my master, who said to the prisoner "Have you any more of these?"—he said "No, I have not any more of the kind"—my master had been upstairs for 10 minutes, and I am the only person who had put money into the till—the prisoner was given in custody.
HENRY STYLES . I keep the Barley Mow—on the night of 8th October, King handed me two bad florins—I bit them and gave them to the constable—I recognised the prisoner, having seen him there two or three days-before
—he paid me with a shilling on the former occasion, and I afterwards found one shilling only in the till, which was bad—I broke it with my these—these are the pieces (produced)—I gave him in custody—he was with a woman.
Witnesses for the Defence.
Cross-examined. I cannot say whether he was there when I went in; the doors were shut on me when he was taken.
Prisoner's Defence. If I was in the house three or four days before, it is not likely I should go there with bad money on ma I had plenty of time to get away if I knew anything about what the woman was doing. On the 13th of the month the landlord says I gave him two florins, but I was not charged with the shilling till 27th October.
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. LLOYD and DR MICHELE Prosecuted; MR. FRITH Defended.
FREDERICK ABERLINE (Police Inspector). On 7th November about 8 p.m I was with Thick and Wright in Great Eastern Street, Shoreditch, and saw the prisoner and two other persons, who are in the Dock (See next case)—I followed them to Sun Street and lost sight of them—I went on to the City Road, met the prisoner, and took hold of him by the right sleeve; he knew me and began struggling—rhis right hand was in his coat pocket—I saw his hand come out of his pocket and Thick caught him round the body—this packet dropped from his right hand, I picked it up; it contained four bad florins packed in paper, with paper between each—he was taken to the station, and on the way he said "You did not find this on me, Mr. Aveline, did you?—I did not say anything—when I picked them up I said "I shall take you for having these coins in your possession with intent to utter them," and then he made that remark—he was violent when I took hold of him, but walked quietly to the station.
Cross-examined. He appeared as sober as he is now—Sergeant Wright was present when I found the money on the ground holding the other man, and Sergeant Thomas was holding the prisoner—the other man was allowed to go, as I was not sure he was with the prisoner.
WILLIAM THICK (Police Sergeant H). I was with Aberline and Wright, and saw the prisoner and two women and two other persons; we followed them; I held the prisoner while Aberline searched him; I heard something fall, and saw Aberline pick up a packet—the prisoner was very violent, I had as much as I could do to hold him—going to the
station he said, "Well, you have lost the swag," of "the suagger"—the pieces they carry.
GUILTY . He was futher charged with a previous conviction of uttering aft December, 1877, to which he
PLEADED GUILTY;**— Two Years' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. LLOYD and DR MICHELR Prosecuted.
LYDIA HARTSHORN . My husband keeps the Earl of Aberdeen, Bedford Place", Holborn—on 25th October I served Sadler with a glass of ale—she gave me a bad half-crown; I tried it with my teeth, and immediately gave it to my husband, who gave her in custody.
EDMUND HARTSHORN . My wife gave me this half-crown, I broke it with, my teeth, and saw Sadler sitting in a box—I went to the door ami saw Tanner crossing the road—I went into the compartment where Sadler was and said to Sadler, "Where did you get this half-crown from"—she said "A gentleman gave it to me in the King's Road"—I gate her in custody with the broken pieces; she Was brought up at Worship Street and discharged next day, and I saw the two prisoners going away from the police-court together and called a policeman a attention to them.
Cross-examined by Tanner. I could net be certain: that' it Was you I saw in the read, but it was a woman in a red plaid shawl; you must have seen me and you ran away.
CAROLINE THOMPSON . I am employed at the Royal crown, George Street—on the evening of 4th November I sewed Tanner with a half-pint of ale and she gave me a half-crown; I gave her 2s. 4 1/2 d. change and put it in the till, where there was no other—she left? and something, was said to me; I went to the till and found' a bad half-crown, the only one there—I tried it with my teeth and put it on a shelf; it was afterwards given to McKenaie—this is it—I picked out Tanner at the station from about 12 others.
ROBERT McKENZIE (Policeman). I had Tanner in custody on 4th November lor passing a bad half-crown at the Royal Crown, and on 11th November I went with Wright to 6, Nicholas Row, and. Sound the two prisoners—I said to Tanner, "I shall take you in custody en suspicion of uttering a half-crown at the Royal Crown public-house St. George's Street—she said, "I was not in the house that night"—I told her she would also be charged with being concerned with a man named Bowers in custody for having in his possession four counterfeit florins en the night of the 7th she said, "I was not with Jemmy, that night"—she was placed with a
number of others and identified at the station—Sadler was taken at the same time.
EDWARD MAYDELL . I am employed at the White Horse, St. George's-in-the-East—on 5th November I served Sadler with a glass of ale—she tendered a half-crown; I told her it was bad—she said, "I have no more money"—I took the ale away and gave' her one piece of the half-crown and kept the other, and afterwards gave it to the governor—she had half a pint of porter and paid with a penny—she came again next day for half a pint of ale—I identify this fragment as the remains of the half-crown I broke.
GEORGE WRIGHT (Police Sergeant H). I saw the two prisoners with Bowers on the night of 7th November—on the 11th I went with McKenzie to a lodging house in Nicholls Bow, and said to Sadler, "I am going to take you in custody on suspicion of uttering a counterfeit half-crown at the White Hart, Turner Street, Whitechapel, on the evening of the 5th—she said, "I never was in the house"—I said, "I have no doubt you will be charged with being concerned with Bowers in passing base coin on the evening of the 7th"—she said, "I was not with him"—they were both taken to the station and identified—the landlord gave me this piece of a bad half-crown.
FREDERICK ABERLINE (Police Inspector). On 7th November, about 8 p.m., I was with Thick and Wright and saw the prisoners with two men, they all crossed the road together towards Finsbury—I lost sight of them in Sun Street; I am sure of them; I knew them before.
Cross-examined by Sadler. I had some doubt about the other man who was with Bowers; the officer searched him; nothing was found on him.
Tanner's Defence. The only thing they know me by is my wearing a red shawl, but there are a great many shawls like that.
Sadler's Defence. I passed one coin, but I did not know it was bad.
GUILTY .*— Twelve Months' Imprisonment each.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, November 25th, 1879.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. LLOYD and DR MICHELE Prosecuted.
WILLIAM DALWOOD . I am barman at 77, Wardour Street—on the afternoon of 22nd October I served the prisoner with twopennyworth of hot rum—he tendered a bad florin—I said "Are you aware what you have given me?"—he said "No, I have been into Carrera's, tobacconist, and they gave it to me in change"—that is about 100 yards off—I gave him in custody and gave the piece to the manager—these are them produced. Samuel Cullum. I am manager of the Duke of Wellington, 77, Wardour Street—on 22nd October I was in the bar, but did not see the florin until after it was broken—I said to the prisoner "Now look here, you may have got this by way of mistake; have you any money about you to pay for what you have called for?"—he said "No"—I said "Have you any more bad money now?"—he said "No"—I called a constable, who
searched him, but found nothing in his pockets, but in the palm of his hand were these five florins, each wrapped up separately—I gave the piece to the constable.
RICHARD MAYNARD (Policeman C 193). I was called to the Duke of Wellington and took the prisoner—I said "Have you any more coin in your possession?"—he said "No"—I searched him, and found in his left hand these five florins wrapped up in paper with a piece of paper between each—I received this broken florin from Mr. Cullum.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . This broken coin is bad—these five others are also bad—they are wrapped in paper to keep them from rubbing, which is generally done with counterfeit coin—two of the five are from the same mould as the broken one.
Prisoner's Defence. I found the coins about five minutes before, and was very pleased. I did not know they were bad.
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. LLOYD and DR MICHELE Prosecuted.
LYDIA FOX . I am barmaid at the Marquis of Granby, Drury Lane—on 14th October, a little after 11 a.m., the prisoner came in with a man and woman for a pot of ale—he tendered a shilling—I tried it in the tester—it was bad—I gave it back to him—he gave me another, which I tested, and that was bad—he then put 1d. down, and also gave me a florin and said "Wait a minute, take it out of this"—I took up the 4d. and tested the florin he put down and it was bad—I said "How many more have you got like this?"—he made no answer; I called Mr. Snellgrove—the man and woman drank some of the ale—the prisoner went out and came in a second time, and we gave him in charge—I gave the shilling and florin to Tozer—I gave the first shilling back to the prisoner, and he said thai he dropped it down a grating.
SAMUEL. TOZER (Policeman E 178). I was sent for, and when I went in the prisoner rushed to the door—I stopped him and said "How many more have you got?"—he said "You won't find any more; I threw one down a grating in front of the house"—the barmaid gave me this shilling and florin and Curtis gave me this shilling—I found on the prisoner 2 1/4 d., but no bad money—on the way to the station he said "I took them at the West, where I did some work"—I saw a drain dose to the house.
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. LLOYD and DR MICHELE Prosecuted; MR. RIBTON Defended.
FREDERICK JOHNSON . I live at 60, Mayton Street, Hoiloway, and am a tallyman—the prisoner owed me some money—I called on her on 25th September, and she paid me two florins, which I put in my waistcoat pocket, where I had no other money—after leaving her house I went round the corner and looked at them, and one florin was bad—I ultimately gave it to Cain—on 2nd October I called on the prisoner again, and she paid
me three separate shillings—I kept them in my hand, and directly I got round the corner I found that one of them was bad—I took it to the police-station and gave it to Bull—on 9th October I called again—Cain and Baker remained outside—the prisoner paid me two separate shillings and a sixpence—she said I need not stop now, but I might put it on the bill next week—I left and found that one of the shillings was bad—I showed it to Cain and Baker, and returned to the house with them and the prisoner was charged—she said "Why did you not bring it back and have another for it?"
Cross-examined. I have been calling there to get my weekly instalments since April last—I have about 200 people to call upon on my rounds—I collect about 5l. a day, mostly in silver—I generally carry it in my trousers pocket—I have also called on the prisoner from 5.45 to 6 o'clock, after my rounds, so that I had all that silver when I called upon her—I never asked her a question about the florin—I am so in the habit of taking silver that I put it in my pocket quietly without noticing it—I did not go back to her on the first occasion—I waited to see if I took any more—I did not put it with the rest of the money—I kept it in my waistcoat pocket on account of it being bad—I had got bad money on Thursday for some months previously—I put the money in my pocket and looked at it afterwards, and to see who I had got the bad money from—I was responsible to my employers—it was so much loss to me—I did not examine the three shillings on 2nd October before I left the house—I had no more bad money that day when I got home—I did not communicate with the police before 2nd October—I believe the prisoner passes as a married woman—this money was for furniture for the house which I had supplied to her: a set of chairs, price 36a., and she had had some drapery in April—she paid me 1s., 2s., or 3s. a week—I always called on Thursdays—the police-court is about a mile from her house, but I was only 15 yards from her house when I found the shilling was bad on the 2nd—I preferred walking a mile to going back to her house—the police accompanied me on the third occasion—I did not tell her the police were there—I kept the coins in my hand until I saw the police—I have never been a prosecutor before—I go my rounds every day in the week—I did not hear her say "If I have given you a bad shilling I was not aware of it"—she said "Why did you not bring it back and have another one?"—she also said "I made 8s. by pawning some things, and if I have I must have got it from the pawnbroker"—I do not recollect whether she mentioned Mr. Hornsey, of Stoke Newington, as the pawnbroker—I think the Magistrate said to the policeman or inspector "If you take my advice you will consent to the case being dismissed"—being a married woman she, was obliged to get a security, and was admitted to bail in 20l.
WILLIAM CAIN . On 9th October I watched the prisoner's house at Margaret Street, Clapton, with Baker—I saw Johnson go in and come out—he showed us some money, among which was a bad shilling—she said "If I have given him a bad one I will give him a good one for it"—he said that she had given him one the week before—she made no reply—a man named Brotzell was there, who I believe was her brother.
Cross-examined. She said "If I have given him a bad shilling I will give him a good one for it"—I do not think she said "If I have I am not aware of it," but I will not swear she did not—she did not tell me that she made 8s. by pawning some things, and must have got the bad coins at the pawnbroker's
—I did not hear the name of Hornsey, of Stoke Newington, men-tioned, but there is such a person in Stoke Newington—I have been there many times—I did not go there to make inquiries in this case—I saw a man who the prisoner said was her husband—the Magistrates refused to take her own recognisances on the ground of her being a married woman, and she obtained a surety for 20l.—I have no ground for saying that the man was not her brother—she may be respectable, but her connections are not—she occupied one room—there were several people in the house—the is only a lodger—I did not know whether her brother lodged there till I went there on October 9th—there was another constable with us on the Thursday before, when Johnson took the coin at a shop to get it tested—his name was Boon—he is dead—I do not know whether he went to the pawnbroker—I know that these coins are not from the same mould.
JOHN BAKER (Policeman N). I saw Johnson go into the prisoner's house—he came out and showed me two shillings and sixpence—one of the shillings was bad—I then went with him and Gain to the prisoner's house and saw her—she said, "If I have given you a bad shilling why didn't you bring it back, and I would have given you a good one for if—Cain said that she had tendered a bad one the week before, and another the week before that—she said she knew nothing about it—Boon went to a chemist about it, but I did not go with him.
Cross-examined. She said going to the station that she had got 8s. by pawning things that day, and she must have got the shilling at the pawnbroker's, Mr. Hornsey—I do not know whether Cain was present then—she did not give the pawnbroker's address, but I went there and found that she had been there and pawned some things that day, but they said that they had never given her any bad money.
The Prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. LLOYD and DR MICHELE Posecuted.
ROBERT MILLS . I keep the Bull's Head, Little Windmill Street—on 16th October, about 11.30,1 served the prisoner with a pint of ale—he gave my wife a shilling in my presence—she handed it to me.—it was had—I said "Have you any more like that i"—he made no answer, pat his hand in his pocket and laid three shillings on the counter—I examined thein and found one bad—I gave him into custody with the two coins.
ELIZABETH MILLS . The prisoner tendered a bad shilling to ma—I gave it to my husband, who asked him if he had any more—he pulled out three shillings, one of which was bad, and we gave him in custody—these an the shillings.
WILLIAM ARNOCK (Policeman Q 98). I took the prisoner and received these two shillings, and also two good ones—I said "I shall have to take you to the station—he said "All right, I will go"—I said, "Where did you get the money from?"—he said "I got them from my father"—I asked his address—he said "67, Neal Street," where he lived with his father—I went there, but could not find either of them—I found nothing on him.
Cross-examined. You had had a glass or two, but you knew what you were about.
GUILTY on Second Count. — Six Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. LLOYD and DR MICHELE Prosecuted.
ANNIE HUNT . In May last I was barmaid at the Falcon, Princes Street, Leicester Square, and on 7th May I served the prisoner with a glass of ale and a biscuit—he tendered a florin, it was smooth and I saw that it was bad—I told him to wait till I got the change, and gave him in custody with the florin—I went to Marlborough Street next day—he was remanded and afterwards discharged.
FRANK CADMAN . The prisoner was given into my custody with this florin—he gave his name Foster, and said that he got it from the barman of a public-house near London Bridge—he only had a penny on him.
ELIZABETH ATFIELD . I am assistant to Mr. Straker, Ludgate Hill—on 22nd October about 5 p.m I sold the prisoner a 1 1/2 d. packet of envelopes—he gave me a bad shilling, I gave it to the cashier and saw him give it to Mr. Farr—Mr. Howell, an assistant, spoke to the prisoner and he was given into custody—I had seen him in the shop twice within five or six weeks, and saw Elston serve him on the second occasion, when he tendered a bad florin. Edward Moss Farr. I am manager to Mr. Straker—on 22nd October I saw the prisoner in the shop, and afterwards took a bad shilling from the cashier who had seen Mrs. Atfield give it to him.
THOMAS HOWE . I am an assistant to Mr. Straker—on 22nd October Farr gave him a bad shilling—I told the prisoner it was bad and said "Where did you get it?"—he said "I received it in change for a sovereign from a gentleman in the street"—I said "It is very singular, as you told me the same tale a few weeks ago when you tried to pass a florin, which I returned"—that was the fact—he said "I am very sorry"—I bent the florin, it bent easily, I saw Elston take it from him, I had seen him in the shop twice before.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. Five or six weeks elapsed between your first and second visit; I do not think it was eight weeks.
EDGAR ELSTON . I am assistant to Mr. Straker of Ludgate Hill—on 22nd October I saw the prisoner there—I had seen him there twice before, the first time was five or six weeks before, I served him with some notepaper—he gave me a good florin, I changed it and he left—he came again the next day, Saturday, and tendered a florin to me, which I gave to Howell—I do not know whether it was good or bad.
Cross-examined. Mr. Howell pronounced it to be bad, but I took it to be good—I saw Howell bend it, it bent easily.
WILLIAM FENN (City Policeman 406). On 2nd October Mr. Farr gave the prisoner into my custody—I said "You will be charged with uttering a counterfeit shilling"—he said "I am very sorry, I did not know it was bad; I took it in change for a sovereign"—I found 4 1/2 d. on him—I received this bad shilling from Howell.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . The shilling and florin are bad. The prisoner in his defence stated thai he received 15s. change out of a sovereign for a bill of 5s., and was not aware that any of the money was bad.
GUILTY . He was further charged with a previous conviction of uttering at this Court, to which he
PLEADED GUILTY**.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
OLD COURT, Monday and Tuesday, November 24th and 25th;
NEW COURT, Wednesday, November 26th; and
THIRD COURT, Thursday, November 27th, 1879.
Before Mr. Recorder.
15. CLEMENT JOHN FOSTER (25) to stealing divers valuable securities of the Foreign and Colonial Trust Company (Limited), his masters.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
SIMS and TOER for Summers, Watson defended himself.
HENRY ALFRED STACEY . I am Superintendent of Records in the London Court of Bankruptcy—I produce the proceedings in the liquidation of John Lordan, described as a leather merchant, of 10, Worship Street, Finsbury—Mr. John Cox, of 18, Railway Approach, London Bridge, was appointed trustee on 25th January, 1879—the petition is dated 18th Dec., 1878—the total amount of the debts is 12,639l. 15s. 8d., and the assets 2,207l. 11s. 6d.—I also produce the transcript of the shorthand writer's notes of the examination of Lordan and the other defendants; also the proceedings in three bankruptcies of Mannion—the last was on 27th August, 1878.
CHARLES LEOGATT BARBER , I am one of the official shorthand writers to the London Court of Bankruptcy—I took the notes of the examination of Edward Mannion on 19th February and 6th March, 1879; of Watson on 13th March, 1879; Summers on the same day; and of Lordan on 20th March—these (produced) are the documents that were produced at the examination.
THOMAS LEEMING . I was carman to Mr. Patten on 5th December, 1878—previous to that I had worked for Lordan and Co., of 10, Worship Street—when I went there I was in the habit of seeing Watson—I knew him under the name of Lordan—I knew Summers; I have seen him at Claro Terrace, West Brompton, Mrs. Ellis's—on 5th December I went to 10, Worship Street, by my master's order, and saw Watson, and in his presence I loaded a one-horse van with goods weighing between a ton and 25 cwt.—it was not a full load, but pretty nearly—they were skins of leather and hides—Watson was present—I went with the load with a boy called Darkey to 10, Claro Terrace, Brompton, a boot shop—I went
round the corner to a yard, and there unloaded; that was when I saw Summers; I received instructions from him where to unload—I saw a female in the kitchen—I had something to eat and left.
CHARLES WATKINS . I am a carman in the employment of Mr. Patten—on 5th December I was ordered to go to 10, Worship Street—I had been there before, but not that day—I knew Watson; we used to call him Mr. Lordan—I also knew Summers and Mannion by sight, but not by name—I went on the 5th with a horse and cart, and loaded it with seven or eight bales of leather of about 11 2/2 cwt. or 2 cwt. each—a lad called Darkey and another young chap helped me to load—I then took it to West Brompton, a corner shop—the young chap went inside: he came out, and told me to turn round to the railway station to a new shop on the left-hand side, and I went there and unloaded—I saw a tallish man there, neither of the defendants—I then went back to 10, Worship Street, where I put in two boxes from the second floor and ten or eleven bundles of skins—I took them to Mrs. Ellis's, 10, Claro Terrace.
RICHARD WILLIAMS . I am employed by Mr. West, who keeps a repository at Fulham—in consequence of instructions from him on 6th of December I went to 10, Claro Terrace, West Brompton, to'look over some goods there and to fetch them—I saw a shopman there named Foley—I took away 12 bales of butts and 63 hides, and three bundles of skins containing 15, 17, and 18 skins each—I have my book here in which I entered them at the time—those goods remained at our premises a little less than a fortnight, and they then went away by our carts—I have seen Summers in the shop at 10, Claro Terrace.
Cross-examined by MR. TORE. It was a boot shop, Mrs. Ellis's.
JOHN EYLES . I am employed by Mr. West—about the 14th or 15th December last I took some leather goods, butts, bales, hides, and skins, from my master's repository to the North-Western Station, Camden Town—I saw them weighed on the weigh-bridge, and they weighed a ton—I unloaded them and helped put them in a truck labelled "Northampton"—I took with me a ticket from Mr. West, which I left in the office, and brought back a receipt, which I took to 10, Claro Terrace next morning, and gave it to a young man in the shop.
WILLIAM EYLES . About the 14th or 15th December I was a packer at Mr. West's—a man named Foley came there and sorted out some parcels of leather, some of which went to the North-Western Station, and some I took to Watson Austin in Hogarth Terrace, dose by our place, about 1 1/2 cwt.—I only saw Foley there; he told me to deposit them; I did so, and went away.
WATSON AUSTIN . I am a boot and shoe maker of 3, Hogarth Terrace, South Kensington—I am a cousin of Mrs. Ellis, who did carry on a boot and shoe business at No. 10, Claro Terrace—I am related to Watson, and have known Summers as lodging with Mrs. Ellis for some years—I had one little transaction with Lordan and Co. of 10, Worship Street in the summer of 1878—in December last year a light spring cart brought some leather goods to me; I did not know where they came from—I know Mr. Foley, Mrs. Ellis's late shopman—I don't think he came with them—I believe a boy brought them—I had not ordered them—I asked Summers where they came from—he had told me previously that he was going to send some—he said he had bought a parcel of goods, and would I store
them for him for a short time—he did not my where he had purchased them—I saw him afterwards respecting them—he said "Will you keep them until I can remove them and sell them?"—there were a few skins among them, I could not say the number, and seven or eight bales of butts; they might average 6l. or 7l. a bale—I could not put any value upon the skins; the whole amount might be 60l. or 70l.—Summers came round when some of them were removed; they went away at different times; they were lying at my place for the best part of a month—I know Mann ion by sight; I do not know anything about him—I saw him once or twice at Worship Street—I did not go there frequently; I called once or twice—I did a little business with them—what I did buy I bought there—I don't know Lordan at all—I am not at all connected with my cousin in business; mine is quite a separate establishment.
Cross-examined by MR. TORB. These would be the ordinary class of goods in the leather trade—there was nothing to attract my attention to them—Mrs. Ellis keeps a boot and shoe shop—such leather would be used in making boots, but she does not make them; hers is only a sale shop.
JOSEPH DR CABLE . I am employed at the Camden Town goods station, London and North-Western Railway Company—I produce a consignment note in respect of leather goods dispatched to Northampton from that station on 13th December, 1878; they left in due course—these are my figures on this memorandum (These were consigned to L. Collins, Overstone, Northampton, from W. Foley, 10, Claro Terrace. Brompton).
WILLIAM FOLEY . I did live in Blackfriars Road, and am now living at 10, North Street, Holborn, and am a boot salesman—in December, 1878, I was employed at Mrs. Ellis's, 10,. Claro Terrace—I knew Lordan seven or eight years ago—I only knew Mannion as a relation—I had no connection with him; I know Watson only by seeing him at Worship Street once or twice—I think I have seen him at Claro Terrace once or twice—I knew Summers as living at Claro Terrace—I saw him there about 5th December, 1878—I believe he had a conversation with Mr. Edwards there—he told me that he expected a van; he did not say where from—a few minutes afterwards a van arrived—I asked htm in a General way how they were getting on at Worship Street; I understood him to say that it belonged to a Mr. Hammeraley—when the van arrived he asked permission of Mr. Edwards to unload it—Mr. Edwards had the shop at that time; he had bought the business of Mrs. Ellis—permission was given, and I helped to unload the van; there were some bales of leather skins and about 18 bales of butts—Summers said that he had come from Worship Street—I think he said he had made himself answerable for some money; 250l. I think it was, and he had got these as security from Hammersley—he was present while the van was being unloaded—the leather was put in the garden at the back of the house, and in the afternoon it was removed from there to West's Repository—about a fortnight afterwards I saw Summers, and went to West's Repository, and sorted the leather there, and I believe it was taken to the Camden Town Station to go to Northampton—Summers gave me the address—I called his attention that there was no name that it came from, and he said "Put your own, it will be all right"—soma of the goods remained at the Repository, and I took those to Watson Austin's place in Earl's Court in accordance with Summers's instructions.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. I never saw Hammersley—my knowledge
of him was derived solely from the statement Summers made on that day—I think I had heard his name mentioned before—the statement made by Summers on 5th November was that Hammersley was the proprietor of this business in Worship Street that was carried on in the name of Lordan and Co.—I think I had heard of it quite a month previous—Summers told me that Lordan and Go. had become indebted to Hammersmith and Splenthall, and that they had taken over the business.
JOHN COLLINS . I am a leather! merchant at Overstone Road, Northampton—I first became acquainted with Summers about November, 1878—I know nothing of the other prisoners—Summers was introduced to me through one of my travellers, and on his representations I made a small sale to Summers of goods to the amount of 29l. 6s.—I sent them to the address given me, 10, Worship Street, London—in the beginning of December I saw Summers at 10, Worship Street, on the second floor, respecting the account that he owed me for the goods that I had sent him—I think his name was there; there was no stock there—not many pounds' worth—he represented that he was going to do a large trade, and wished to make arrangements for me to supply him with more goods—I arranged to take part leather and part cash in settlement of my account—I sent him goods for that, and on or about 24th December I received this letter from him (This and the subsequent letters were proved by Andrew James Irving to be in Summers's handwriting)—previous to that letter I had received a consignment of leather by the North-Western Railway, and this invoice gives the details of it—on the 14th I received this letter (This stated that Summers had removed to 24, Castle Street, Finsbury)—the value of the parcel I dispatched was 67l., another parcel to the value of 50l., and on 16th January another parcel, 37l. 14s. 3d.—I gave him permission to draw on me for 50l.—this (produced) is the bill I accepted and subsequently met; that balanced the account between us.
Cross-examined by Watson. The first goods I sent to Worship Street was on the 19th November, and I called for payment early in December—I sent the 67l. worth of goods on 20th December—I did not know at that time Lordan had failed—I did not know Lordan; I had no transactions with him at all—I sent the goods to 10, Worship Street; they were directed to Summers.
Cross-examined by A.R. TORR. The total amount of my transactions with Summers was 183l. 12s. 9d.—I received goods from him to the amount of 174l. 8s.—I was fully paid; the account was balanced—ho told me he was doing an agency business, but I should have expected to have found more stock than I saw there.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. It was the second floor at 10, Worship Street that I went to; that was where Summers was carrying on business by himself—I saw the name of Lordan and Co. at the bottom; that was not connected with Summers's business.
EDWARD HARBRIDGE . I work for Mr. Patten—on 6th December I went to 10, Worship Street with a van—I there saw Watson—the van was loaded with butts and bundles of leather, and I took them to a place at Hoxton—a man called Darkey went with me to show me where to take them.
Cross-examined by Watson. It was before dinner, before 1 o'clock. Mart Hodd. In December last I and my husband had a little leather
and grindery shop—I recollect the carman bringing a van load of leather and depositing it in the shop—I was attending to the shop at the time in my husband's absence—I did not know they were coming, and knew nothing about them—I knew from whence they came; it was our usual carman that brought them—Darkey came with them, who used to come from Lordan.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. I know Mr. Splenthall, not as connected with the business of Lordan and Co., merely by seeing him—I can't remember when I saw him at my place—I very seldom saw him—I saw him on one occasion—I had known him two or three years.
FREDERICK HODD . I live at 33, Myrtle Street, Hoxton—I have known Mannion six or seven years—I knew him when he was trading under the name of Stokes and Co., in Sun Street, Finsbury—I was a warehouseman and salesman in the hop trade in 1876—I went into Mannion's service as ware-houseman and salesman—I received weekly wages—I was there when the failure took place; Stokes and Co. became bankrupt—I knew that Mannion was bankruptr—I recollect after that the Leather and Shoe Co. being commenced about 4th January, 1877—the warehouse was in Sun Street, and the offices in Finsbury Place—they took the premises of Stokes and Co., and I occupied the same position as I had hitherto, warehouseman and salesman—I did not act and write letters as the secretary—I acted as manager for about fortnight—I believe Mannion was manager when it commenced—I never knew what Lordan was; he was there on and off—they held their meetings at the offices, which I knew nothing about; I was never there—I had my salary, 30s. a week, and then 21. at the latter part of the time the company did business—they got goods from various places; I was not the buyer—Watson merely called in there casually—I believe the company lasted'a bout 12 or 15 months; it was registered in January, 1877—it afterwards became a limited company—we had transactions with John Pantony, of Liverpool—I received this telegram from him—I recollect Lordan and Co. starting at 10, Worship Street, in September, 1877—I remained in Sun Street for about two months in the Leather and Shoe Co.; after that I went to Hoxton Street, and started a small business as a leather-cutter—I had no capital—it was agreed between Mannion and I that I should take that shop; he was to supply me with the leather—Lordan and Co. had started then—I did not know the position of Mannion at Lordan's; I did not inquire—they did supply me with leather from 10, Worship Street, to the extent of about 400l. altogether—I have paid them money on account—I can't say how much, perhaps 50l. or 60l., with bills and that—I had grindery goods from other places, but no leather—I accepted bills for them; I can't tell you the amounts—I did not pay any of them with my own money; I met some of them, and a good many I did not—directly Lordan and Co. failed, I failed; I owed about 800l. or 900l. with these bills—I only had what I stood upright in—some of the bills were brought blank; I do not know what I accepted; I accepted them as they came from Worship Street—I recollect going heme one day, and finding some boots there—at that time I did not know that Lordan and Co. had failed—I had not ordered them; I asked my wife, and she said they came from Worship Street; they remained there two or three days; Butler fetched them; I saw Mannion the day before, and he said they would be fetched to-morrow morning—I think Watson called twice in
Hoxton Street in a friendly way on his way home—I bare known him four or five years as an occasional acquaintance—he knew that I had been at the Leather and Shoe Co.
Cross-examined by MR. DAVIS. While I was at the Leather and Shoe Co., Lordan occasionally used to come in, being acquainted with Mannion—I might have met him at Worship Street once or twice when I have been there on business—he never asked me to accept any bills—I never bought anything from him.
Cross-examined by Watson. You never called to offer me any leather, or to receive any money, not on the way of business, merely on your way home.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. I had known Mannion some years—I was in his service when he was carrying on business in the name of Stokes and Co.; that was a leather warehouse—from all I saw, it Was a bond fide business—I never saw anything that was not bond fide—gooda were bought and sold in the usual way—there was nothing suggestive of fraud—just before the business failed Mannion sprained his ankle or knee, and he was away for a week or a fortnight; and then he used to come in a cab, and go away again directly—for a considerable period he was practically unable to attend to the business—there was not much business doing there in consequence of there being no one there—the result was that the business fell away; it never recovered from Mannion's absence, and he was obliged to file his petition—previous to that, Stokes and Co. met all their liabilities to the best of my knowledge—the Leather and Shoe Co. was started after that; it did a comfortable trade; it was a bond fide business; it afterwards became a limited company, and Mannion continued as manager up to a short time before it closed—a. great many of the creditors of Stokes and Co. were also creditors of the Leather and Shoe Co., and they continued to supply goods—when I started in business for myself I asked Mannion whether he would assist me by letting me have goods—I hoped to he able to make the business pay—I did tolerably well at first, but I was never able to get over the fact of starting without capital—I was originally supplied with stock by Lordan and Co.—I did not pay for those goods when I first had them—I subsequently agreed to accept bills on account of those goods, and some for the accommodation of Lordan and Co.; I can't say to what amount—some were taken up by Lordan and Co.—at the time of their failure there were acceptances of mine out—there were two bills due—I don't know the amounts—about 300l. was due from me to Lordan and Co. at the time of their failure—I could not say whether or no the bills were in respect of goods I had from Lordan and Co.—I was never told what they were for—I accepted hills previous to that, they were not all taken up—I know Hammersley and Splenthall—I have had an intimation that they were connected with the business of Lordan and Co.—I heard it just after the failure, not before—I know them personally.
Re-examined. I say that the Leather and Shoe Co. was a regular and proper business (A number acceptances were produced by Sergeant Littlechild, found by him at Mannion's residence)—! do not know that a number of acceptances drawn by the Leather and Shoe Oo. on different traders were sent to Jpbn Pantony and Co.—I had nothing to do with the bill transactions—I received this telegram. (Read; From Jno. Pantony and Son, Liverpool, to the witness. "Is the paltry company you are connected with a reality or
humbug? five bills dishonoured, and excuses; paltry conduct; does if not look like a swindle?") I still say that as far as the business was concerned, and I was connected with it, it was bond fide—I do not know whether five bills had been dishonoured—I was not manager at that time, I was only temporary manager for a fortnight—a business was certainly carried on—Mannion used to buy goods as manager from Pantony and other places—I only had the sale; I did not have the buying—I had invoices—I hate not them with me; I know some came from Finsbury, and some from Bermondsey—I did not keep any books; they were kept in the desk—I merely entered in the rough book.
By the COURT. I merely Went to the office, perhaps once a day—I never saw a journal, or cash-book, or ledger—I had nothing to do with the books—I believe there were books kept, but I did not keep them, and never had access to them; I have seen the outsides of them; I never saw the insides—I can't say what the books were—I don't know the names of them; I merely saw books there.
THOMAS BUTLER . I am a leather seller, of 51, Lower Marsh, Lambeth, in business for myself—I have known Mannion for 10 years—I bought some goods of Lordan and do.; I can't tell the amounts from memory, it is over two years ago—I was reminded of them at Worship Street; it was something like 250l.; it might be 280l.—they were drawn for—my affairs went into an accountant's hands, and I cannot tell whether the bills were paid or not; I did not meet the bills myself; my affairs went into liquidation—I don't know whether my estate has paid any dividend—I heard of the failure of Lordan and Go. about January this year, I think—I can't tell who told me—I think I saw Mannion before the failure—he said they had got some butts lying at Hodd's in Kingslaftd Road that he wanted to raise money upon by the next day, as he had the brokers or Sheriff's officers in the house—he said he wished them sold, and the money realised by 12 o'clock next day, as he wished to pay the officers out—I went to Hodd's and took them away, and did the best I could with them—I sold them at Fryer's in Chiswell street for 05l. 11s., and received from him an open cheque—I cashed it, and handed over 60l. of it to Mannion, for which he gave me this receipt, signed "E. Mannion." and after that I paid him 4l. besides—the goods amounted to about 260l.
Cross-examined by MR. DAVIS. I never saw Lordan take an active part in the business.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. At the time these goods were supplied to me by Lordan and Co. I was doing a good business—I had been 12 years in business—I failed to a certain extent; my affairs got into a little difficulty; I went to an accountant, and he drew out my liabilities as 20l. in the pound, and balanced 1,008l.—that statement was put before my creditors—my estate has been taken away, and I have nothing left.
WILLIAM ROBERT AYRES . I am not now carrying on any business—the place in Worship Street is closed—I have filed a petition for liquida tion, through the proceedings taken at the police-court—I have known Lordan, Mannion, and Watson about two years, and Summers since June, 1878—previous to September, 1877, I was clerk to my father at Hackney—he failed in business—about September, 1877,1 was introduced to Lordan and Co. by a person named Webb—I was first introduced to Mannion at 10, Worship Street—I was looking about for premises, and I was told they had something there that would suit me to
start in business—I took the two top floors at a rental of 70l. per annum—there was no written agreement; they agreed to accept me as a quarterly tenant—as a boot and shoe manufacturer I required a little plant, and I put it in to the value of about 50l.—I had been married just previous to that, and I borrowed some money from my wife—I think I had 200l. to start in business with—some of the goods the raw material, I bought of Lordan, and some of other people in the trade—I do not know that there were any agreed terms with Lordan—I was to do the best I could in payment; it was a credit transaction, all I bad with them—there was no arrangemeut made—I used to pay them when I could; if I could pay in a month I did, if not perhaps they would draw upon me at three months—I used to deal with three or four other houses—about half the goods were purchased of Lordan and Co.—I think I only accepted one accommodation bill for them—these five bills (produced) are my acceptances; they are drawn by Mannion—this bill for 25l., dated 10th December, 1878, was for goods I bought of Lordan; that was paid—I signed five bills at the same time; they related to one parcel of foods that I bought—I could not say for certain that these are the five did not know anything about their filing a petition when I accepted the five bills; they were dated three months after each—I think two out of the five were paid—the others are not due yet—a parcel of goods was sent to me on consignment in the early part of December to see if I could do with them—I knew at that time that one execution had been put into their premises—I had heard that they were in difficulties—I did not trouble much about their business; I had my own to attend to—I think it was Mannion and Watson both who suggested this consignment; there was nothing unusual in it—I often used to have parcels of goods from them—I am now in liquidation—I think at the time I was turned out of the premises I had received about 700l. or 800l. worth of goods from Lordan and Co.—I could not say for certain how much I have paid them, perhaps 200l.—it was suggested by Watson when I owed them that amount that I should surrender my premises and business to them—there was a lot of fixtures; over 200l. worth altogether—I surrendered my premises to Lordan and Co. for the amount I owed them, and got a discharge for my debt—I was to work the same business for them, and receive a salary from them for doing so—while in business on my own account I used to do business with auctioneer?—I might on one or two occasions have sent goods to auctioneers for sale in my own name when I became manager to Lordan and Co.; I was their servant—the business was carried on in my name—these (produced) are account sales from Davis and Son in my name, but I was away from the premises sometimes, and Lordan used my name when I was away—I can't answer for what they did when I was away—in the agreement that was drawn out there was no clause that they should continue to use my name while I was managing for them—I went back again to the top floor as principal in September, 1878—I borrowed a little more money from my wife, and bought the business back—I think I had about 150l. to 200l.—I paid Lordan and Co. 170s. for all that was there, and I was there as Ayres only—I took receipts for the payments—I paid the money to Mannion—I think Hammersley was present at the first payment—I took receipts for all the payments; they are in the hands of the solicitors—all the 170l. was paid to Mannion—the first payment was made at the Chequers
public-house, opposite 10, Worship Street; we were dining there that day—the other payments were at 10, Worship Street, and I was then allowed to return to the top floor—I again started doing business with them on credit—I think I owed them 40l. when they failed—no goods were brought up to my place from Lordan's while the Sheriff's officers were below; I swear that—that statement was made at the police-court, and it has done me a deal of harm—the consignment in December was brought up in the usual way, with a pulley in front.
Cross-examined by MR. TORR. I have seen Lordan walking about the premises once or twice, but never to take an active part in the business; he had nothing to do with making the agreement or with these bills.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. I commenced business on my own account on these premises shortly after my marriage, and I was supplied with some goods by Lordan and Co.—there is nothing unusual in sending goods to auctioneers; that firm of auctioneers was one of my best customers, I used to do perhaps 70l. or 100l. worth of business with them—I did not sell them for whatever I could get—they were not sold at any sacrifice; there might not have been much profit, but no sacrifice—when I was not able to meet my liabilities to Lordan and Co., I became manager to them; I carried on the same business exactly, only for Lordan instead of on my own account—the goods were sent to the auctioneer's in the same way as I sent them while I was in business; they were not sold at any sacrifice—I have seen Hammersley and Splenthall—I was told by Hammersley that the business was assigned to them in October, 1878. previous to the bankruptcy; he told me I was to look to him and not to Mannion or Lordan; that was at the time I was carrying on business for the second time on my own account—Hammersley was not called as a witness before the Magistrate.
Cross-examined by Watson. You had nothing to do with the goods I sent to Davis—when I wanted to buy goods I went and saw you as manager—you said, "Your account is heavy, and you had better assign the business over to Lordan and Co.," and I took up with your suggestion and did so—no goods were sent up the spiral staircase, they were generally pulled, up by the crane outside.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMS. I became manager in June, 1878, and remained so six or seven weeks—I have given information to the solicitor for the prosecution of the whole of the transaction with Lordan and Co.—I gave all my invoices from the beginning to the end—it was about a fortnight before I ceased to be manager that I first saw Summers—I do not know that he took my position after I left; I had notice to leave—I had no reason to think that Lordan and Co. were carrying on a business of fraud and deception; I never saw the least indication of it—I have lost about 600l. or 700l. of my own money and my wife's; when I first went there my father was with me advising me.
Re-examined. My liabilities in liquidation are not 2,700l., nothing like it, nor 2,000l.; my assets may be 20l., I don't know for certain—I have not taken stock.
FREDERICK WHITCOMB . I am managing clerk to Messrs. James Davis and Son, auctioneers, of 18 and 19, Bishopsgate Avenue—I do not know Lordan, I know Mannion, Watson and Summers, Ayres and Irving—in September, 18 7, Watson brought me some leather goods for sale—I sold them for 17l., and on 20th October and the early part of November
there were two sales to the amount of 25l.—this is the consignment note of October; this is a cheque for 20l. which I advanced on the goods, and this is Watson's receipt—the first address he gave was Russell Street, Bermondsey, the second was London Fields, Hackney, and the last Essex Road, Islington—in December, 1877, I sold goods for Mann ion to the amount of 7l.; in January, 1878, 270l., in February, 1878,70l., March, 29l. and April, 33l.; that was the last transaction with Mannion; these are the papers referring to those transactions—in February, 1878, I sold goods for Summers amounting to 8l., in March, 105l., in April, 130s., May, 25l., July, 91l., August, 63l., September, 254l. and November 30l.; those were all sales by public auction—these are some of the consignment notes and cheques—for Ayres in October, 1877, I sold 19l. worth of goods, in November, 53l., December, 121l., January, 1878, 107l., February, 48l., March, 23l., April, 5l., May, 88l., June, 50l., July. 122l., August, 179l., September, 11l., October, 15l., November, 45l., December, 8l.; we had consignment notes with those at the time from Ayres, these are some of them—he invariably came himself with the goods at the time they were delivered—I first heard of the firm of Lordan and Co. in October, 1878, in this letter from Summers—in September, 1878, we advanced 35l., to Irving on a lot of goods, he gave his address, 10, Worship Street; the goods were sold on the 11th—I paid him by cheque.
Cross-examined by MR. GLYN. I did not know Lordan at all, I never saw him.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. I knew Mannion personally—it is not at all unusual for goods to be sent to our auction rooms to be sold—these goods fetched very near their market value; we have consignments from the trade generally; they are very often goods not suited for the purposes of the trade—they were not sold at a sacrifice, we invariably get the market value, we never sacrifice them—Schlesser Brothers are in the habit of sending goods to us to be sold in this way; they do a large trade—their consignments to us have been very small, perhaps unsaleable damaged skins, or things of that sort.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMS. Summers only mentioned Lordan and Co. in the letter:—before that the consignments were always in his own name he did not tell me that in carrying on business as a leather-seller he had gone to Lordan and Co., and that the consignment in September was on their account—lie had been a customer of ours for some years, and he always told us that he was agent for the trade; his name has been on our books 7 or 8 years—we had purchased manufactured goods of him for some years, boots and shoes.
Cross-examined by Watson. The first parcel of goods sent by you was prior to the date I have given now; I have only given the dates I have been asked for—the goods were sent in your name; I don't know whose goods they were, none were sent by you from Worship Street.
Re-examined. When goods are sent to us we sell them under the hammer in most cases; they are not always knocked down to the highest bidder, we hold them if we think they are not fetching a fair price; we never sacrifice goods; if sent without special instructions, we knock them down to the highest bidder—we know the value of the leather sent to us, we do not see the invoice prices—people do not always put their prices when they send goods—some of the goods from Ayres were manufactored
goods; all those from Mannion were unmanufactured, and also those from Summers and Watson.
ANEREW JAMES IRVING . About December, 1877, I entered into the service of Lordan and Co. on the introduction of Mannion; I had known him very slightly for some years—I had not known Lordan, Watson, or Summers until I entered the service—I was engaged as clerk—I found a set of books, but they had not been opened; I did the beet I could, not particularly to open the books; they had got in arrear—I saw the delivery order book and the initials "J. D. and S."In one part of it—I asked Mannion what they meant, and he said I most not bother about it, that they were some things that had been sent to John Davis and Sons for auction sale—I subsequently knew them to be auctioneers—there was no account in the ledger at that time opened to John Davis and Sons—I don't think I opened one—they kept a bill book in which bills taken from customers were entered at one end, and hills payable at the other end—the business of Lordan and Co. was carried en in the basement—I believe Ay res was on the top floor; I did not know him then personally—Summers was not there when I first went—no agreement was made with me as to salary; it appeared to me to be temporary work at first; I was paid a regular weekly salary, about 4l. a week at first, and subsequently 3l.—Mannion took a part in the business; he had a great deal to do with the financing, the cash part of it, attending to the bills, and looking of customers—Watson was salesman—I have seen a Mrs. Ellis in the place; I can hardly speak from memory as to when she first became a customer; the only entry in the ledger is March, 1878, 26l. 1s. 10d.—I had the most to do with taking up dishonoured bills; I took up a great number; the book will show them; the margin of the cheques will show where I get the money to pay the bills—the "cash received" book will show what goods were sent to auction sales; this (produced) is it—the first I look at is 13th July 100l. from Summers—I presume that refers to goods sent to Davis in Summers's name—whose goods they were I cannot tell—the receipt of the money is entered in this book—on 21st February, 1878, there is an entry of "Davis and Co, per Summers, 100l.," and on March 1st "T. Summers, cash, 32l."—I made all these entries from verbal information given me at the time by some of the partners; I saw no documents—there is an account entered to Ayres from October, 1877—the sum total appears to be 1,646l. 15s. 10d.—the amount paid by him in cash and bills is totalled of as 536l.—I cannot tell whether the bills were paid, without referring to the bill book—from October, 1878, 4th 4th December the amount of goods he received was about 583l.; that includes an account rendered of 370l.; that is entered in pencil—I can't tell whether that wen part of the 536l.—there are "returns in goods;"I suppose that would be manufactured goods; in cash, bills, and goods it is about 400l.—there is no entry in this book of a sale of 100l. of goods after the petition in December—I was there up to the day of the filing of the petition—I do not recollect any goods being sent up to Ayres the day before the petition; I was then leaving the employ, and lor about six weeks before I was engaged out of doors collecting bills and looking up customers whose bills had been returned—I was very little in the place, and I was frequently buck when the place was dosed—I cannot tell yen how many executions had been put in during the three months previous to 18th December, perhaps half a dozen, all of them had
been more or less partly paid out—I knew of people calling to serve writs—it was some months after I entered the service before there was any execution put in, I would not pledge myself to say exactly—as far as I know, there is no entry in the books of any loan by Watson to the firm; it is possible he did from his own cash, but he kept his own private cash book—an accountant was called in in July, and he made up the cash account—the margins of the cheques will show what each person drew; they drew as they pleased—when I first knew Lordan I believe he was living with his brother in-law, Mannion—iu the early part of 1878 he was living at Payne's Hotel, Brighton—I had a great many letters and telegrams from him from there; these (produced) are some of them. (These contained repeated applications to the witness to send him money, and complaints of delay.) His drawings from 1877 amounted to perhaps 1,000l.—he occasionally came to 10, Worship Street—the books were always there; he had them to look at—he used to make inquiries about the business; I told him the books would show what we were doing—a few days before 10th December I sent some skins to the cloak-room of the London Bridge Station in my own name—I sent them from a letter I had from Lordan asking me to do so, to borrow some money, or rather to sell some goods if I could—this is the letter—I believe I told him what to say; he wanted some money, and so did I; there was great difficulty in getting it—I think that letter was written about the early part of December—I did not send the goods, they were sent by my direction; I asked Watson if he could get a cash customer for them, and he promised to do so—I saw no more of them—I think he gave me a sovereign, I was very short of money—all our moneys had been taken away by Mr. Holland, the gentleman who had been carrying on business for Mr. Hammersley; all the bills and money that had been collected—in September, 1878, Watson said "There are some goods we are sending to Davis, and I am going to send them in your name;"I said "Why?" He said "We have sent there before, and we want another name;"I said "I know nothing about it;"I had no idea there was anything wrong in doing so; he sent them, I did not—I received the money and put it into the cash received book—I presume I paid it into the bank; I accounted for it, it was 30l., I think—the prices were put on them by Watson; they came to 60l. 1s. 10d., they realised 38l.—I received this letter from Summers in August, 1878—he was then on the second floor, as I thought as a servant of Lordan's—when Lordan was going away he used to leave blank cheques—I received this letter of 2nd October, 1879, from Mannion the day before I went to sign my deposition, after I had been examined—I handed it to the solicitor for the prosecution—it is not signed, but I took it to be Mannion's writing. (This contained suggestions as to the questions that might be addressed to the witness on his cross-examination on the trial.)
Cross-examined by MR. GLYN. I was engaged by Mannion—I think Lordan was there within a day or two, he was in town at that time—I arranged as to salary with Mannion, I always looked upon him as the principal manager—Lordan did very little with regard to the business, he did not seem to know anything about it—he never seemed to enter into it as a man of business would—he did not appear to know how to raise money on the goods, and I told him what I considered was the best way—he was very frequently at Brighton, he stayed there for a month
—he signed cheques because he knew they would be required in carrying on the business while he was away—he signed blank cheques, and left them in my custody, and I filled them up as they were required for the business—I dare say he asked me what was in the bank and what bills were out; but he had the opportunity of seeing, it was all in the books—there was no secret, nothing was kept from him—when he was at Brighton he used to write most piteously for 5l.; I supposed he wanted mouey—all these letters were intended for Mannion though addressed to me—he no doubt thought Mannion did not pay attention to his requirements, so he addressed me as a sort of intermediate or go-between—Lordan was very little there; he was not of temperate habits—he was knowu to take a great deal more than was good for him—he was frequently in drink—he was generally right when he came to the office—I always thought he was a man who understoad right and wrong, and would not do any one any harm or wrong—I don't know the exact amount that he drew out, it is to be got at—Mannion also signed cheques—I know that Lordan advanced 4,500l. in the business; it is all entered in the books—I thought there was a great deal more to come—I presume he is without a shilling—I think Mannion borrowed some money on his wife's income in some way.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. I do not know that Mannion's wife's private income has been stopped during these proceedings—when I first went into the business I thought it was a prosperous one—I thought it was a very good thing for me to go there; that it was a good bond fide trade—I thought it was merely when they were short that goods were sent to auction, when customers' bills came back and they had to meet them—I think I knew Hammersley within a few weeks of the first—I believe he and Mannion had done business together in some company—I think he was a director of one of the companies, and goods were supplied by Lordan and Co. to the company—I remember witnessing documents, at one time, some agreement with Hammersley and Splenthall—I can't tell when that was—it would be at the first part when Some money was put in—it was long before Mr. Holland was sent to manage the business; that was about October, 878, about two months before the stoppage—I considered it was Hammersley and Splenthall's business from the date of my leaving—I cannot say that they took over the business in October, but they sent Holland to take control of matters—I suppose they were not satisfied with the way things were going on. and they would have financial control, in conjunction with Watson—Hammersley opened a banking account at the Capital and Counties Bank, Paddington branoh, and gave Holland permission to sign for him—Manuion still came there; he told me he was very likely to leave as well as me—I can't tell whether he considered himself a servant; he never was in the position that I was—I can't say that from the time Holland came Mannion practically ceased to be manager, because he was there, and I still looked upon him as the same—I believe Mr. Barrow was one of the largest creditors of Lordan and Co. at the time of the bankruptcy—I have seen, him frequently at 10, Worship Street—I have seen him and Mannion at the desk together, with the books before them, talking over matters—I did not leave previous to the filing of the petition—I was with the trustee for a time to assist, but I was out so much—I have no doubt that I witnessed certain documents between Hammersley and Splenthall—I can't say
that it was in July—I do not recollect bonds being given signed by Mrs. Mannion as collateral security—I have no doubt said to Mannion "You don't know what you are doing," but he would not take my advice—I believe an assignment was made—I have witnessed many documents, and very likely that one.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMS. Summers came into the premises first after some trouble between Lonian and Co., and Mr. Ayres and his lather; he came in to manage the manufacturing part of the business, in place of Ayres—when I went there Ayres occupied two floors, and the factory was the part that Summers came in to manage after Ayres left—X supposed the factory to be a portion of Lordan and Co.'s business—when Summers was there Manuion managed the business, Summers never, and to my knowledge he was entirely upstairs—I saw very little of him after Holland came—the business seemed to go on under a joint proprietorship with Hammersley and Spleuthall and Lordan and Co.—the books were still continued as Lordan and Co.—a fresh account was entered as for Hammersley and Co., and everything was to go through Holland—I think Lordan's interest in the business was very little then—they were coming in and taking it from him; they had been under heavy liabilities for Ayres—all the arrangements with Hammersley were behind my back.
Cross-examined by Watson. You had charge of all the goods that came to the warehouse—you had all the invoices, and checked all the goods that came in—I attended to all the orders—I sent the leather to London Bridge, and sent for it back again—I did not sell it; you sold it for me, but you never rendered me an account of the money—you said you had made it all right—you let me have a sovereign or two at different times—no doubt the goods sent to Davis was to meet some bill or something—you had nothing to do with the finance, only the buying and selling—I do not know anything about 300l. that Mrs. Ellis let the firm have, or about 60l. and 25l. that she owed to the firm—you superintended the stock taking with Hammersley's representative; Mr. Musgrave was the accountant—from that time I was under the impression that Hammersley paid the wages and expenses—I remained as Lordan and Co.'s clerk-1 know nothing of any purchase made by Lordan alter the stock was takes on 1st September—I thought he was out of it entirely—after you had done with the invoices they would come into my hands—I have seen invoices that came in after 1st September—I think you showed me one of 2,600l., or a consignment note or something in connection with it—nothing of the sort came into my hands—after Holland came I was under the impression that you were remaining with him.
Re-examined. Holland's coming did not alter my position, except thai I heard from Mannion that Hammersley wished to take the entire control, and they could do without me. and I was going away—I did not know the true position of these people, but they took some active part—I knew some change was brewing—I remained till Mr. Cox, the trustee, came in—I looked in, and there was nothing to do—I claimed 267. from Lordan and Co. for back wages.
GEORGE ROGERS HARRISON . I am a solicitor—I know Mannion Watson, and Lordan, not Summers—I was not present in the Bankruptcy Court on 13th March, when Lordan was examined, or after he had been examined—I might have seen him and Maunion on that day, being there on other business—I cannot fix my mind to the date; I
believe there was a private examination going on—I saw Mannion and Lordan after that—I cannot say whether I went on that day with Mannion to Mr. phillips, a law stationer, in Southampton Buildings—I did not go there with him within one or two days of that date—I don't know what day it was—I never did go there; that I swear—I believe I remained outside when Mannion went in—it might have been in March last—I can't say that it was after the examination at the Bankruptcy Court; if your dates are correct it must have been after—Mannion came from that shop with a piece of parchment—this is my signature to this deed (produced)—this signature was written by me at home—this is Lordan's signature to the deed; that was made at a tavern just out of Basinghall Street, called the Axe, I believe, about April this year—I did not get the deed engrossed; Mannion did—I attested Lordan's signature to it—I did not see the date of it, I never even read it over; it is 18th March, 1878—I did not know that was the date of it—I did not know at the time that Lordan was a bankrupt or a liquidating debtor; I had heard of it—I had heard of the failure of Lordan and Co.—I knew that Lordan was Mannion's brother-in-law—I understood Mannion was manager of Lordan and Co.—I did not knew them intimately—I saw them—no money passed.
Cross-examined by MR. GIYN. Mannion, Lordan, and myself were present at the Axe—I did not know the date of the deed, therefore I did not point it out to Lordan—I had not seen Lordan for some time; not at all in reference to the deed—all I had to do was to get die signature of the person who had to sign the deed; that was all that was done—it took about half a minute.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. Mannion went to the law stationer's, and he it was who requested me to be a witness—this deed was drawn up by me—I did not know the date that was inserted in the deed—I knew the droit was in existence—the outside has the date in large letters, 18th March, 1878—that is not my writing—I did not see the date; it might have been in blank—this appears to have been written afterwards—I cannot possibly tell whether it was blank—I put my signature as a witness, perhaps the same day, after Lordan had signed it; being signed where it was I put it in my bag and attested it when I got home, and handed it to Mannion—I was not to derive any benefit from it—I will swear that Mannion was there—I have no one to corroborate my statement that Mannion went to the. law stationer's, and handed me the deed.
Re-examined. I had taken Mannion through his last bankruptcy some three years ago. (The deed conveyed Lordan't. interest in 300l. to Mannion in consideration, of 200l. received from him.)
EDMUND PHILLIPS . I am a law stationer, of Southampton Buildings, Chancery Lane—I sold this parchment—I keep a large stock of stamped 'parchments; every single item I sell is put down in this book—on 18th March, 1679, I sold a 1l. parchment deed, a back-dated one; I charged 1l. 5s. for it; that shows that it was a back-dated one; and besides that, I have a private mark which indicates that it was back-dated—I do not know who purchased it; it was a stranger—I do not know either of the prisoners.
GEORGE NICHOLL . I am an auctioneer, of George Yard, Aldgate—I know Mannion—in September, October, and November, 1877, I had some transactions with him in leather, sent to my place for sale at different times, to
the amount of about 300l.; they were sent in his name—I gave him cheques for the amount.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. A good many of the goods were sent from Sun Street—there were two from 10, Worship Street, on November 26 and December 5 to the amount of about 250l.
GEORGE PRESSWELL . I am a solicitor, of 8, Old Jewry—I first saw this deed on 20th Juno this year; it was brought to me by Mr. McCarthy; he was introduced to me by a client—I subsequently saw him in company with Mannion upon it—McCarthy instructed me to prepare an assignment of a reversionary interest on this deed, which I did, an assignment from Mannion to McCarthy, this being an assignment from Lordan to Mannion—McCarthy told me that he had advanced money to Mannion, I think he said 50l. or 60l., and he was going to make it up to 100l.—it was an absolute assignment.
Crow-examined by MR. GLYN. I did not see Lordan.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. This took place on January 20 this year—my clerk put on the endorsement—the original deed purports to bear date 18th March, 1878, and the endorsement is 10th July, 1879—the deed was in the same condition then as it is now except the endorsement—I suppose it bore date 18th March, 1878, or I should have noticed it.
ARTHUR BOLD HAMMBRTON . I am now manager to Samuel Smith and Co., bankers, at Derby—the firm of Hammereley and Co., of Leake, in Staffordshire and Derby, banked with our firm, and also Splenthall and Co., of Derby—they were separate accounts—there were three accounts altogether: Hammersley, of Leake; Hammersley, of Derby; and Splenthall, of Derby—they were allowed to discount bills—both Hammersley, of Leake, and Splenthall, of Derby, are bankrupt—Hammersley, of Derby, is not actually in liquidation; they were wound up privately—we are the holders of a number of dishonoured bills of those two firms; I have them here, (enumerating them) also some bills drawn by Summers in September, 1878, to the amount of 40l. 17s. 6d.—altogether they amount to 3,661l. 1s. 6d.,—in addition to those, I hold a great deal of paper of Hammersley and Splenthall.
Cross-examined by Mr. Glyn. I have six acceptances of Lordan and Co.
Cross-examined by Mr. Fulton. We have one bundle of Hammersley's assignments to which Mannion was a party—I don't think we have two—we have one to which Mrs. Mannion was a party, and one to which Splenthall was a party—speaking from recollection, I think Mrs. Mannion is also a party to it—I have not got those papers here—I do not think they have been before the trustee—I believe we have a judgment against Mrs. Mannion in respect of those two matters; our solicitors are attending to it.
Cross-examined by MR. TORR. The bill of October 15 for 24l. 7s. was drawn by Summers and accepted by Austin—I think 13l. has been paid on account of that, and I think 4l. was paid on account of the bill of 1st November.
DR. JAMES DAVISON, M.D . I live at 8, Oxford Terrace, Upper Holloway—I have been attending Mr. McCarthy, 22, Sussex Road North—I have seen him this morning; he is suffering from rheumatic gout; he cannot move out of his bed—he is not in a condition to come to this Court and be examined as a witness; it is physically impossible. (The deposition of Francis McCarthy was put in and read.)
the trustee in this matter, appointed under the estate of Lordan and Co.—I have examined a number of banking books connected with the trading at 10, Worship Street, which were given to me by Mr. Cox—I found there the pass-book of Lordan and Co. with the City Bank, Ludgate Hill branch, also one with the Capital and Counties—during the currency of the account at the City Bank Mannion drew out 4,707l. 3s. 5d. Watson 546l. 6s. 2d. Lordan 2,025l. 16s. 11d., Summers 343l. 13s. 9d., Ayres 272l., Ellis 155l. 15s., and Hodd 107l.—the total amount of sales from 25th September, 1878, to 10th December, 1878, appears to have been 4,294l. 17s. 9d. according to the books—they were generally paid for by acceptances—I find no entries of the sales by auction to Davis and lsenberg, but by tracing I find they amount to 891l. 0s. 9d.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. Among the books is a delivery order book—I have directed my attention to that, but have not examined it—there is no book or paper from which I could get any information of the sales to Davis—the initials "D. and S." did not call to my mind that it was Davis and Sons—I had not the slightest conception what those initials referred to—there is an entry to "D. and S." to the amount of 198l. 7s. 5d. in the name of T. Summers on 30th January, 1878—the latest date of goods sent to the auctioneer's is 6th November, 1878, to the amount of 29l.—there are two others, one on May 29, 25l. 3s. 5d., and one on September 11,1878, 38l. 16s. 3d.
Cross-examined by MR. GLTN. The 2,025l. 16s. 11d. is drawn out by Lordan and Co.—I do not know who signed those cheques.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMS. According to my memorandum there was only one lot of goods sent to Davis's in November, 1878—the names of tradesmen with whom business was done appear in the pass-book—there is an account in the ledger with T. Hanimersley and Co.—no transfer of the books to Hammereley and Co. has come under my notice.
Cross-examined by Watson. I have not ascertained the amount of goods purchased from September, 1877, to September, 1878.
WILLIAM JOHN COX . I am an accountant of 7 and 8, Railway Approach, London Bridge—on 25th January, 1879, I was appointed trustee to the estate of J. Lordan and Co.—I had previously been appointed receiver and manager of the estate—on 11th December, 1878, I took possession of the books, papers, and cheques—I am not quite sure who I found on the premises, I don't think Maunion was; he did call—Watson was on the premises in charge of the stock; Irving and Darkey, not Summers—I don't remember seeing Lordan there; I saw him at my office for the purpose of getting out a statement of the affairs of J. Lordan and Co.—on the first occasion I saw him with Mannion respecting the accounts when they were nearly completed—I had a general conversation with them in order to draw out a general statement of the affairs—they and their clerk Irving gave me information, and ultimately on the information they had given me a statement of affairs was got ready for their signature—this is a true copy—the reversionary interest of Lordan is set out at 600l.; it states "The debtor is entitled to one moiety of the estate under the will of his father, of which he has received 4,300l., the residue estimated to produce 400l.;" that includes the 600l.—that sheet is signed by Lordan, it is treated as an asset—I got the information in the first instance from Lordan, after that from Mannion, and subsequently from Grueber, the solicitor to the
proceedings—he agreed to the wording of the statement—I was not told by Mannion, Lordan, or Grueber that there was any charge on it—I treated it as an unencumbered asset—I have examined all the bills referred to by Mr. Hamilton, and find they are entered in the bill-book of Lordan and Co.; they are copied into another list which Mr. Hamilton has detailed—I practically found the stock that they have set out; it is estimated to realise 943l.—I have actually realised 144l. 17s. 6d., that includes dividends from eight insolvent estates—there are 59 debtors put down—I have traced that 21 out of those have failed, 11 gone away, and 16 dispute the debts entirely; they either deny their indebtedness altogether or dispute the amount; most of them entirely dispute the debt—I have done my best to collect the debts that appear here, and the result is 100l. odd—I have had considerable experience in the leather trade as an accountant—I know the names of nearly all the debtors who appear here—I have been an accountant upwards of 10 years—a large number, I should say about half, of these debtors failed to meet their engagements before 1878, before these debts accrued—I found Summers on the first floor latterly—I did not find any books of the Leather and Shoe Company, they were given up to me by Summers after some difficulty—I did not get the minute book of the Leather and Shoe Company from Summers's premises; the first floor was subdivided, this was found on Lordan's premises on the first floor, in the room known as Mannion's room—this affidavit (produced) is signed by Watson (read), it relates to a claim made by him on behalf of Mrs. Ellis to the amount of 196l. 13s. 3d. upon goods which I took possession of at 10, Worship Street—Mrs. Ellis did not file any affidavit in support of her claim—she was subpœnaed on several occasions to appear by order of the Registrar; she did not appear; I never saw her there, and the matter was dismissed; I am not sure as to the costs—after thai I saw Summers and Watson at 24, Castle Street, Finsbury, and had conversation with them as to the assets belonging to the estate—up to the time they were examined in the Bankruptcy Court they had not told me of any removals from Worship Street to Claro Terrace, or any other place; or to Ayres on 9th December, or about the removal by Mannion to Hodd's—I did find, among the papers some account of Patten's, the carman, but no account of any removals after 2nd October—I was present at the Bankruptcy Court when Watson was examined, and produced what purported to be an account of Patten's with reference to these removals—none of them accounted for the money they had received from Collins, of Northampton—it is not in the books—I have taken out from the invoices the purchases made by Lordan and Co. within four months of 25th January, the total amount is 4,016l. 10s. 1d. between.25th September and 10th December.
Cross-examined by MR. GLVN. Mr. Barrow, the principal trade creditor, was appointed receiver, and I believe the application was sworn by Lordan—I have not seen Lordan many times—he does not appear to be a man of business at all, nor able to manage such a business as this—he appears to have entirely neglected it, and did not seem capable of giving me any proper explanation of what I asked fox—Hanuneraley's bills were to the extent of 3,425l., but if they had been paid Lordan and Co. would not have been solvent, though they might have gone on for some time.
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. About 4,000l. worth of goods were supplied within four months of the bankruptcy, and all but 70l. worth
between the beginning of October and my being appointed trustee—they were mostly supplied by Mr. Jas. Barrow and Mr. Grimsdale—I do not see Mr. Barrow here, but he was here yesterday—he supplied 2,690l. worth out of 4,000l., Grimsdale 1,000l., Barrow 212l., and Warre and Son of Bristol 89l.—I have had numerous conferences with Mr. Barrow—he was one of the original committee of inspection, but it was the trustee's duty to investigate—I do not know that the 2,000l. worth of goods were supplied by Mr. Barrow not to the order of these persons, but by Splenthall and Hammersley—I have heard exactly the opposite from Mr. Barrow—all the defendants had to do with the business up to the filing of the petition—Mr. Hammersley's name was up on the second floor, and as far as I know had nothing to do with Lordan's business—the earliest debt which I have in connection with this establishment was about May—all goods supplied previously have not been paid for—they owe Mr. Barrow for goods supplied in May and August—a bill was given but it was never paid—the debt was commenced about May, amounting to about 2,400l.—unless the goods had been paid for in May they would not have been able to get further credit—the other 8,000l. was not all incurred between May and October, because some of that is technical liabilities and accommodation bills—about 6,000l. was owing for goods purchased—I should say that all goods up to May had been paid for—the sales of Lordan and Co. from their commencement to their failure amount to about 22,000l., in addition to the sales by auction, 2,000l., the bulk of which were by Davis and Son—I have not referred to the delivery order book to see what amount of sales are entered to Davis and Son, but I looked at it before the Magistrate, and can say that there are none after January, 1878—I pointed this out to. my clerk yesterday—I prepared the statement of affairs with my clerk's assistance—Mannion's examination took place in February—this reversion was entered in the statement of affairs as an unencumbered asset—the wording was I believe settled by Mr. Mannion and Mr. Grueber, the debtor having given the the intimation that there was that 600l., but I will not pledge myself, as we had several interviews, and I was engaged on other important matters—it was read over in Mr. Grueber's presence after it was completed—I said before the Magistrate "In the presence of Mr. Grueber we agreed the wording with him," and that is what I say now—I will not pledge my oath that Mannion; was present at the time the wording was agreed—supposing Hammersley and Splenthall's bill had been met, the firm, though not absolutely solvent, would have been a going concern; they would have been able to carry on business for some time longer—Hammersley and Splenthall were not examined with the defendants at the Bankruptcy Court.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMS. The books do not disclose that Hammersley and Splenthall were taking part in the transactions previous to December; I know that they were to put some money into the business—there is no deed of partnership, if the word "partnership "Is put in, that is a mistake; but I believe the solicitor referred to it as a partnership deed as you have now—a man named Musgmve was not hi the business on behalf of Hammersley and Splenthall, he was a nominee of theirs, and was attempting to inspect a set of books—they had a clerk named Holland—I did not know that they were buying goods and having them consigned to them in their name—from inquiries I have made as trustee I believe it is utterly untrue—their name was on some of the bills in Lordan and Co's bankruptcy
—I do not know that goods sent by Barrow shortly More the bankruptcy were consigned and were upon the orders of Hammersley and Co.; I have made special inquiries, and Mr. Barrow will support me if he is put in the box—the butts said to have been removed on 15th December were not consigned by Barrow, they were sent by him—when I took possession they were not entered in the books, but these (produced) are Barrow's original invoices—the earliest items are Lordan and Co., Hammersley and Splenthall's name only comes in on the later transactions—the butts which were removed were a portion of these goods—they were not consigned, they were sold out and out to Lordan—I had nothing to do with purchasing those goods, I only know it from my inquiries as trustee.
Cross-examined by Watson. I recollect you calling on me in January, relating to a 200l. bill—you brought a consignment sheet, which you said belonged to Hammersley and Splenthall, and was put under your care—I had stock taken at 10, Worship Street a few days after I took possession—you assisted my clerk to take stock, and this is the stock-book you went through with him—there is no note of any of them being consignments at that date—the whole of the stock was taken as it stood, and you pointed out certain goods which you said were Mrs. Ellis's—I had a claim sent in from Hainmersley—the notice not to sell his stock is on the file—I do not believe any goods were purchased by Mrs. Ellis; there is only a memorandum of yours in the books—I sent an order that you were not to complete any orders, and I took possession of the premises, and left my representative there—on 10th December you wanted to send a parcel of goods to Mrs. Ellis, and I refused to let them go—she owes me 3,000l.; she cannot be made bankrupt, because her husband is in America—I made an affidavit that I believed this was done to cheat and defraud the creditors—you have threatened to follow me till the day of my death—the stock taken by Musgrave on the premises on August 31st, 1878, was 2,200l.—my clerk has checked the goods sold by you up to December 6th, and the result is that in leather alone there appears to be a deficiency of 60 cwt.—I have gone through the books of the sale of all the butts from September 1st to December 6th; the weight is 259 cwt. 3 qrs. 27lb.
By the COURT. I have taken all the purchases and the stock on 31st August, and the stock I found on the premises, and I find a deficiency of 1,600l.—that is all from the books of Lordan and Co., and there is a further deficiency in the kid skins—the weight of stock on 31st August was 234 cwt 1/2 lb.; the purchases since are 566 cwt. 11 1/2 lb.; total, 800 cwt. 121b.—the sales are 631 cwt 1 qr. 21 1/2 lb., leaving a balance of 189 cwt, 23 1/2 lb.; the deficiency on some articles is 104 cwt 15 1/2 lb., but from the difficulty of describing some items there is an apparent excess of 43 cwt 26 lb.—those which Mrs. Ellis claimed are included.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMS. I said before the Magistrate "I have not been able to learn the true position of the sales between Lordan and Co. and Hammersley and Splenthall because Lor dan's books were kept so badly"—there are a large number of cash transactions which it is impossible to understand.
Re-examined. Mr. Musgrave has claimed about 197l. from the estate for his services—when I took possession of the premises both Hammersley and Splenthall were there; nothing was said about their being the proprietors of the business—I attended both meetings, claims were made by the receivers of both estates, who I fought successfully; one of them withdrew.
JOHN GEORGE LITTLECHILD (City Police Sergeant). I took charge of these transactions from the commencement before any of the persons were arrested—I had had the premises of 44, Snn Street, under my inspection—I arrested Mannion and Lordan on Sunday night, 17th August, up a small turning in Featherstone Road—they were in company—I had been watching them for some time, but had not seen them together before—Inspector Hoots was with me—it was dark—I said that we were about to arrest them in connection with Lordan's bankruptcy—Lordan made no reply, Mannion said "All right, this matter has been on the tapis three months; it has been to the Treasury and they have thrown it out, and now it is taken up out of spite"—I took them to Mann ion's house, where I read the warrant to Mannion, and asked if he had any papers connected with the matter—he at first said "No"—I found a bag and asked him what it was—he said "There are some papers there, but they relate to Sun Street"—I have gone through them with the solicitor's clerk and sorted them—I went on to Watson's house, 146, Church Street, Islington, and saw him at the area steps—I said we were police officers and were going to arrest him in connection with the bankruptcy of Lordan—we went into the house and I read the warrant—he said "Well, I am not at all surprised; I am glad it has come to a point, as the matter can now be settled; I have lost a great deal of business during the three last months that this matter has been noised about; the business was a curious one, but I was only a servant, and as far as I am concerned it is quite straight"—I took them to the station, where Watson handed me some papers, which I brought away; among them was this document relating to 10 butts delivered to Hodd (Handing in several documents awl dishonoured bills for 90l. and 97l.)—I went to Sheerness next day and took Summers about 10 p.m—I told him the charge; he made no reply.
WILLIAM JOHN COX (Re-examined by Watson), I do not remember receiving a consignment note from you—I have a copy of a note sent by Mr. Hammersley—I have not compared the names in the traveller's books with the names in the ledger—the goods sent out do not leave a balance in my favour, it would be near the mark if the removals were included—the amount of bond-fide purchases by Mr. Lordan for the firm in October alone was about 3,500l.
The examinations of the defendants in the Bankruptcy Court, after being partially read, were, by consent, put in and taken as read.
Watson in his defence stated that he only bought what he was instructed to buy, that he had nothing to do with the financial part of the business, his duty being confined to the warehouse.
GUILTY . LORDAN was recommended to mercy by the Jury. — To enter into recognizances to appear for judgment.
MANNION— Two Years' Imprisonment.
WATSON— One Year's Imprisonment.
SUMMERS— Six Months' Imprisonment.
FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday, November 25th, 1879.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
19. GEORGE TAYLOR (20) to burglary in the dwelling-house of Joseph Hemming, and stealing therein three coats and other articles.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
21. JOHN FOX (38) to burglary in the dwelling-house of William Henry Meade, and stealing therein a pair of socks and other articles.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
23. HENRY THOMPSON (21) and HAWTRY PRYNN (24) to feloniously forging and uttering an order for the delivery of a pair of ducks, a pair of fowls, and 2lb. of sausages, with intent to defraud.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment each. PRYNN was also further charged with having been before convicted of felony at Portsmouth on 6th July, 1877, in the name of Henry Prynn, but upon this pari of the charge he was acquitted. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MESSRS. BESLEY and THOKNE COLE Prosecuted; and MR. M. WILLIAMS Defended.
RICHARD FENNELLY . I am a sausage manufacturer at Brewery Road, Caledonian Road, and a provision merchant in the Poultry Market; I employed the prisoner as town traveller, and provided him with a horse and trap, and paid him 1l. per week and commission; he would receive the sausages at Brewery Road, and the cheeses at the market; I went to Brewery Road once or twice a week—Hogan was manager there; it was the prisoner's duty to account daily for the deliveries, and it was a ready-money business as far as I knew—on 20th August the prisoner said he wanted cheeses for a customer, and 5 cheeses in boxes were given to him weighing 3 cwt. 5 lb., value 6l. 9s. 3d., for which he should have accounted to Mr. Hogan—he said he had not been paid for them! and if I would let him have a second lot he should be paid for both together; in consequence of what I heard I saw him about the end of September, and said "I understand you say you got these goods on your own account, and the debt is yours"—he said I never stated anything of the kind"—J said "You; know perfectly well, Bradley, when you get goods to sell, that they are got for my account"—he said "I know that—I went to the police on 19th October, and he was given in custody—he was before the Alderman on the 20th, and allowed to go out on his recognisances; I was present on 27th October, when the evidence was taken against him—he defended himself, and asked for a small book from the officer, but never disclosed the name of Mr. Welch as the purchaser of the cheeses—on 3rd November he was represented by a solicitor, and was committed for trial—after that his father came to me—I never saw him with his father—his wife and children came to my place afterwards—I did not speak to her—he was present, and said he wanted to speak to me—I took him to my private room, and told him to be careful to say nothing to commit himself—he said "I have come to beg your pardon for what I have done, and to crave your forgiveness; I was pressed at the time, and had the brokers in the house, and had got your money, and I intended to repay it to you"
—I had not solicited the interview—he never paid over the 5l. 9s. 3d. or the 5l. 14s. received from Welch, and I have never had it.
Cross-examined. These cheeses were supplied on 20th August, and I discharged him early in October—Hogan said he never took an I O U for the 5l. 9s. 3d.—he subsequently corrected it; I heard him in his depositions at the Guildhall swear that the prisoner had given an I O U for that 5l. 9s. 3d. to balance his cash—I did not hear him say be had allowed the prisoner a month's credit for the cheese—I heard him say that he had no option when the prisoner did not bring back the money according to the rule of the business, and said that. Peterson demanded a month's credit—I do not say that he acquiesced in it.
Re-examined. I did not know he had taken the I O U until lie corrected himself at the police court—I never sold the prisoner anything.
PATRICK FRANCIS HOGAN . I am manager to Mr. Fennelly at the factory, Brewery Road—the prisoner accounted to me daily for all goods taken out—he did not account for the goods taken out on 20th August, five cheeses, 5l. 9s. 3d.—he told me in the evening that Mr. Peterson, 352, Ley ton Road, was the purchaser, and the money would come in on the following day; I asked him for it next day, and day after day, and he always said that he could not see Mr. Peterson, or that he had not called on him—about the end of August, when I accused him with not having brought in the amount in due time, he replied "Oh, if is a month's credit"—I waited for the expiration of the time, and Peterson had six more cheeses—at the end of September I gave the prisoner a statement for the two lots of cheese, and told him to collect the money and bring it to me that evening—he did not bring it, but again said he could not see Mr. Peterson—I afterwards gave him a second statement, and told him to drive Mr. Mackey to Mr. Peterson's to collect the money—he said "I won't drive him there; Mr. Peterson does not know Mr. Mackey, and will only pay me"—I instantly sent Mr. Mackey to the address, 352, Leyton Road—I saw the prisoner on the following day—this I O U which he gave me is the only one I had, and it applies to the second lot of cheeses—he claimed that he owed the money to Mr. Fennelly as a debt—I said "I hat is impossible, inasmuch as you are an employe, and could hot incur the debt '—he was a servant—I told Mr. Fennelly—he never paid over the money to me.
Cross-examined. The first lot was supplied on 20th August—he subsequently told me they were supplied on a month's credit, and afterwards hud some fresh cheeses, for which on 29th August took his I O U for 6l. 13s. 1d.—he was discharged in September—before supplying the second lot and taking the I O U, I waited till the end of the month, and if he had brought me the money I would have taken it.
Re-examined. Goods obtained from the market by a traveller, being a cash transaction, had to be entered as cash received, and I took this I O U as a memorandum to remind the prisoner of it—I never gave him credit in any way.
ROBERT MACKEY . I am a clerk to Mr. Fennelly, and was present when Hogan gave him a statement for two parcels of cheese—the same evening I heard Hogan ask the prisoner if he had brought the money, and he said "Peterson was out"—he gave the address as 352, Leyton Road, Stratford—I afterwards went there, and found there were only 136 houses in that road,
and no such number as 352, 352, or 152—the next morning I said to him "What do you mean by sending me on a fool's errand down to 352, Ley ton Road, Stratford, when there was no such number?"—he said "It should be 252"—I said "There is no such number"—he said "It should be 152"—the word "Leytonstone "upon the I O U is in Hogan's handwriting.
PATRICK FRANCIS HOGAN (Re-examined). The prisoner was in the habit of giving me "Leytonstoue sometimes, and I wrote "Leytonstone" on the 10U as a memorandum of the item—I was not over particular. John Hudspeth. I live at 106, Ley ton Road, Stratford, and have been there about 17 years—no such person as Peterson has lived there during that time.
BAXTER HUNT (City Detective), On Sunday, 19th Ootober, I took the prisoner in custody at his house, 52, Dunstan Road, Limehouse—I found on him this memorandum book and 10d.—he surrendered upon his recognisances on the 27th, and used that book in his defence—I found 5(2. on him and a ticket of August 29th.
PATRICK FRANCIS HOGAN (Re-examined). I know the prisoner's handwriting—this entry of the cheeses to Mr. Peterson, Victoria Dock Road, 12l. 2s. 1d., address given 126, Ley ton Road, is in his handwriting—I find that amount is made up here in his handwriting and figures "Fennelly, August 20th, 5l. 9s. 3d., August 29th, 6l. 13s. 4d. =12l. 2s. 7d."
GEORGE BENJAMIN WELCH , I keep the Shipwrights' Arms, Poplar—on 20th August the prisoner came to me and sold me five American cheeses in boxes at 38s. per cwt. (5l.)—I paid cash and he gave me this receipt (produoed)—! had not ordered them, and did not know that he was a servant to Mr. Fennelly—he had a horse and covered cart—I did not ask for credit—I afterwards showed the bones and the remaining cheeses to Mr. Fennelly.
WALTER LEWIS PINGO . I am a cheesemonger, Forest Gate—the prisoner called on me twice a week with a covered cart of the Victoria Sausage Co.—on 29th September he told me he had sold a certain amount of cheeses to a party, and did not want to sell any more—he said he did not want the company to know who he had sold them to, and he asked me to take a bill representing that I had bought them—I said I would have nothing to do with it.
NOT GUILTY .
There woe another indictment , upon which no evidence was offered.— NOT GUILTY .
MR. BESLBY Prosecuted.
ROBERT UNDERFIELD . I am a chimney sweep, at 33, Neal Street, Lone Acre—in October, 1878, Connor came to see me—I had known him a few months through his coming from Mr. Hathaway—he said, "I have been to the Freemasons' Tavern and agreed to take a porter's place at 14s. a week and food and lodging, and the man will not have me until I get some better olothing, will you lend me some money?"—I lent him 24s. to do
him a kindness, knowing he was very poor—he came again and said one of his fellow-servants had blackguarded him because he bad no box to put his dirty linen in, and be asked me to lend Mm 3s., which I did.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You gave me an I O U for 27s.; I should not have lent you the money if you had not told me you were at the Freemasons' Tavern.
THOMAS HATHAWAY . I am a sweep—I was form erly in the army—I know Connor perfectly well—in October, 1878, he was staying with me—he asked me the loan of my waistcoat because he had obtained a situation at the Freemasons' Tavern—I made inquiries afterwards and looked for him, but could not find him—I saw him again in October, 1879, and said to him, "Is it true you have obtained money from Sir Robert Garden t"—he said, "Yes, it was all through drink, and I am very, very sorry for what I have dona I hope I shall be able to replace it to Mr. Vandexfield and likewise Sir Robert in a short time."
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrates. I gave Mr. Vanderfield an I O U for the money, and had not any idea of defrauding him.
The Prisoner in a written defence said;—"I will repay Mr. Vanderfield every farthing of the money I borrowed. I will bind myself with the strongest tie of the law to this statement. On 22nd October, 1878, I saw Mr. Vanderfield at Long Acre, and he asked me how I got on. I told him; and that I could get employment at the Freemasons' public-house if I had better clothes. 'Come along with me,' he said, and I went and he gave me 7s., and the rest of the money in small sums afterwards".
NOT GUILTY .
26. JAMES HOOPER (57), ANN HOOPER (56), and THOMAS WALSH (58) , Burglariously entering the dwelling-house of Edward Draper, and stealing therein 9 teaspoons and other articles, a purse, and 1l. 8s., of Mary Webb.
EDWARD DRAPER . I am a solicitor, at 60, Vincent Square—about 7 a.m. on 23rd September I found the back door of my house unfastened leading to the garden, and the catch of the back parlour window forced back—in the kitchen I found the servant's work box with candle marks on it, and the day after I found a piece of bread that had been used as act handle-stick—I also found that a ladder belonging to a neighbour had been moved and placed against my window—in the garden I found an empty case which used to contain a poultry knife and fork—the things were all safe when I went to bed the night before at 11.40, and I was the last up—when I found the plaee broken open I gave information to the police—I have seen and identified the spoons produced.
HANNAH DRAPER . I am wife of the last witness—there were two fastenings to the back window, and both were safe—I found the shutters partly up and unfastened on the morning of the 23rd, and missed a purse belonging to Mary Webb containing 28s., some linen, and other things mentioned in the indictment.
HENRY GEORGE Russell . I am a jeweller, at 8, St. George's Circus—on 2 3rd September, between 5 and 6pm, I bought three teaspoons and a salt spoon (produced) of James Hooper for 7s.—I asked him if they were his own, and he said they were; he gave me the name of William Bartlett—I looked at the spoons and they are marked "D"—I said, "This is not your initial"—he said, "No, but they have been in the family for years."
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. I did not know him—I am not a pawnbroker—I am in the habit of buying silver spoons from people over the counter—he was better dressed then, and gave the address, 18, Manor Place, Surrey Gardens—the spoons were worth about 9s.—I weighed them at the time, but forget the weight now, and made no memorandum—I buy the spoons by weight.
WILLIAM PAGE . I am a pawnbroker, at 21, Borough Road—on 27th August, about 5 p.m., Ann Hooper came and offered me two teaspoons and a salt spoon, which I had seen in the pawnbroker's list—I said, "Where have you got them from?"—she said they had a death in the family—I said, "I shall give you in custody." and I did so.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Nothing was said about Walsh.
FRANZ GUSTAVUS VEARING . I am a dealer in silver at Westminster Bridge Road—on 24th August I bought two tablespoons and sugar tongs of James Hooper for 23s.—he gave me the name of Edwards, 80, York Road, and said he had had them a long while, and they were family relics.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. I gave him about 3s. 11d. an ounce, the proper price is about 4s. 11d.—I never saw him before and had not the slightest idea where he got them, and he said he could not tell me what "D" stood for.
JAMES WALSH (Police Sergeant M). On the night of the 27th I took James Hooper in custody to Southwark Street station, and told him he would be charged with having silver spoons in his possession—he said he bought them from a man in the Westminster Bridge Road who looked like an engineer—I said "Why not that man pledge them as well as you, or sell them? you got 7s. for four of them"—he said "I was out of work when I did it"—he gave me his correct address, 89, Lancaster Street—he came to the station looking for his wife and gave himself up.
AMOS STRATTON (Detective M). I took Ann Hooper, and when shown the spoons by Sergeant Walsh she said "I had them from my husband; I can't help what my husband does; I know nothing about them"—James Hooper did not say where they came from.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. I believe Mrs. Hooper also said "He (her husband) told me he had bought them of a man in the Westminster Bridge Road."
SQUIRE WHITE (Police Inspector B). On the night of the 27th the Hoopers were brought to the station and charged—after being in the cell some time Ann Hooper sent for me and said "I will state the whole truth"—she then said her husband had received the property from Mr. Walsh, a publican in Westminster, where she had been as nurse, and that if her
husband knew she was telling this he would kill her, but that she intended to get him out of it, as he was innocent—at 12 o'clock at night I went with Sergeant Bull and saw the prisoner Walsh at the front of his bar—he said "What are you going to have, gentlemen?"—I said "Nothing. Do you know a man named Hooper?"—he said "No"—I said "I think you do, his wife was your wife's nurse"—he said "Oh, yes"—I said "I hare every reason to believe that you have stolen property in your possession"—he said "No"—I said "Yes, I believe you have some knives and forks"—he said "What I had I had from a man (mentioning his name), but they are gone"—I said "I must search your cellar,' and with two officers I went into his cellar, and behind a barrel in a basket I found the articles produced tied in a rag—they have been identified by Mr. Draper as his property, and part of the proceeds of the burglary—they consist of a sugar sifter, fish knife, lemon knife, and an eye-glass—we were about to make a further search in the cellar when Walsh went up about four steps and put his hand between the rafters and the ceiling and took from there these-knives and forks wrapped in newspaper—they have also been identified as part of the proceeds of the burglary—we then made further search—I found between the ceiling and the rafters, over some coals, two card trays tied up in eloth; also come sheets, and upstairs some clocks, and also a small Geneva watch behind the barrel in the cellar—that property has not been identified—I asked him if he could account for it—he said he had bought it from a man whom he well knew, giving the name of a man whom I know by sight, but have not been able to find.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. The name was Mason—I know him by sight; he lived in the neighbourhood and frequented the public-houses near since he came home—he is a convicted thief—Walsh told me he believed him to be a respectable man—he has had penal servitude.
CHARLES CLENCH (Police Sergeant B). About 8 am. on 23rd Semtember I went to Mr. Draper's and found an entry had been effected by climbing the wall and getting in at the window—there was a ladder there close to the window catch, and the glass had been broken and had fallen inside—a staple had been taken out of the wall outside—I found in the garden a dinner napkin and a piece of candle—I found foot-marks of one person near the back gate in the garden—it had been a very wet night.
JOHN PRESTON (Police Sergeant B). About 12 o'clock at night on 27th September I went with Inspector White to Walsh's premises, when the property was found, and his evidence is true—I searched upstairs, and found two clooks and a pair of opera glasses, and other small property, and in the coal cellar two spoons and a knife and fork.
Ann Hooper's Defence. I am innocent; everything my husband had was given him by Mr. Walsh, who told him he bought them and paid money for them and wanted to get his money back. Walsh came to our house on the Monday and asked for my husband. I said he was at work. Walsh said "Tell him if he is not at work on Tuesday to come to me, I want to see him particularly." My husband did not go out except to work till Tuesday morning, and about 12 o'clock he met Walsh, who gave him those spoons.
James Hooper's Defence. We were disposing of the two portions of property I had from Walsh. The first I took to my wife a month previous
to the other plated articles. I said to her "These are some of the articles Mr. Walsh wants to dispose of, I suppose he wants to make some of the money; you take care of them."Had I known they were stolen I should not have sold them. A month after, when those spoons were sold, Walsh said "You need not tell them my name."I did not give my own name, as I did not want people to know I was so poor as to have to pawn things.
WALSH received a good character.
JAMES HOOPER— GUILTY of receiving.—Judgment Respited.
ANN HOOPER— NOT GUILTY .
WALSH— GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
There was another indictment against ANN HOOPER, no evidence being offered.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, November 26th, 1879.
Before Baron Huddleston.
MESSRS. POLAND and MONTAGU WILLIAMS Prosecuted.
The prisoner being a foreigner', the evidence teas interpreted to him.
MIRZA ALI I am secretary to the Persian Ambassador, Prince Malcolm Kahn—I remember seeing the prisoner in the hall at the Embassy conversing with the servants, but they did not understand him—I can't say the exact date; it is nearly 40 days ago, and a week before the letter was received—I asked what he wanted, who he wad, and where he had come from—he said he was a Persian subject and an Armenian—I asked from what part—he said from Ispahan—I asked if he knew the Persian language—he said "No"—I said "How is it you have come from Persia and yet not know the Persian language?"—he said he was five years old when he left Ispahan, and then he was in Russia and was educated in Russia—I then said "What do you want?"—he said "I came here to be helped; I am a poor man; I don't know what I shall do"—I said "Why do you come here? what is your business here?"—he said "I came here to learn some profession"—I said "How came you here without money?"—he said "I had 600 roubles" (nearly 50l. or 60l.)," but I have lost them"—I said "Where have you lost them?"—he said "In France"—I said "Were you robbed or did you drop it somewhere?"—he said "I do not know; I don't remember in which country it happened"—I then told the servants to give him something to eat, which they did—he said "I wish to see the Princess," the Ambassador's wife—I said "You can't see her; if you want to say something put it on paper; she understands Armenian"—on Sunday, the 26th October, I saw this letter in the Ambassador's hand, at his residence, Holland Park, which is also the Embassy—I afterwards saw the envelope; the butler showed it to me.
watching 80, Holland Park, in consequence of directions I bad ricived—the prisoner passed me—I followed and stopped him in Princes Road, and took him into custody—I tried by signs to convey to him what I took him for—he tried to answer me, but I could not understand him—I searched him at the station and found a purse containing 13 Hanoverian medals and half a sovereign—at the station he wrote this letter, marked A, in a foreign language.
GARABA AROOBIMN . I am an interpreter, and lire at 8, Booklet Road, West Kensington Park—I have made a translation of this letter, addressed to His Excellency the Persian Minister—it is perfectly correct—the original is in Armenian—it is the letter of a man of a certain education—this letter was shown to the prisoner before the Magistrate, and he made this statement, which I interpreted to the Magistrate: "Really and truly I am the writer of the letter to M. the Minister, because he has no care for me. I have inadvertently fallen into trouble to the extent of 600 roubles. I am without bread, and am without means to earn my daily bread. Why?"
(The translation of the letter being read stated that he went to the embossy to ask for advice and assistance, and was unable torn the Ambassador. It contained the following sentence; "Do you think think I am an ignorant man, and know nothing and have seen nothing? Ton are mistaken, consider it superfluous to Bay more. Should you not by some means succour me your soul will not have any significance in my sight, as my soul has not had in yours. Therefore I shall be obliged first to kill you and then kill myself. I assure you I will certainly and surely do so."
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate was translated as follaws; "I don't recollect what I wrote in the letter. What I say here I will repeat elsewhere. I admit that the letter shown me is in my writing, but I do not recollect the circumstances under which I wrote it. I don't recollect writing it I have a trouble which from time to time upsets my mind, and I wish for doctors to examine me."
The Prisoner in his defence stated that he had no intention to do anything of the sort contained in the letter; that he had no cause of complaint against the Ambassador, he having been treated with kindess by the Princess, and that he had no recollection of what he wrote.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Jury and Prosecutor. Six Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. POLAND and MONTAGU WILLIAMS Prosecuted.
KLIZAETH WELSH . I live at 7, Catherine Place, Poplar—the prisoner is my father—I had a stepbrother named James Sullivan—he Mas 23 years of age—he died on 16th November—on Sunday morning, 16th November, between 12 and 1, James Sullivan came into the house—he lived next door—my father asked him was he going so bed—my brother used bad language, and took up his fist to strike him—my father said "Do you want to knock my other eye out"—he has lost one eye, my brother knocked it out three weeks before—my brother struck him in his well eye, and my father said "You may as well take my life as take my other eye"—after that I heard my brother cry that he was stabbed—I did not see anything in my father's hand—my brother fell on the couch—I ran into the kitchen and gat some water—
my father said "I will get the water"—he did so—I did not see what he did with it—my brother had said "I mean to do for you"—he said that when he came in—he was half drunk—my father was sober—there was no other person in the room but my mother.
PATBICK SULLIVAN . I am a brother of the deceased—on Saturday, 15th November, I was living at 7, Catherine Place, Poplar, with my stepfather and my mother—I saw my brother James at 9 o'clock at Black wall, and had a little drop of beer with him then—that was the last time I saw him alive—I got home about 20 minutes past 1 on the Sunday morning—I found my brother lying on the couch in the front room, and the last witness—I tore his clothes open, and put my hand on the cut—I took him to the hospital—as I returned home that night, at a distance from the door I heard some one running in a direction from the house—I could not say who it was—I stopped with my brother till he died at 10.30.
BENJAMIN WARREN . I am a shoemaker at 47, Robin Hood Lane, Poplar—the prisoner's house is at the back of our yard—at 11.30 in the morning of the 16th; I found this knife on our fowl-shed, about 6 yards from the prisoner's yard—there as no knife there on the Saturday.
SIDNEY COLLINS WATKINS . I am surgeon at the Poplar Hospital—James Sullivan was brought there about 2 o'clock in the morning of the 16th November—he was suffering from loss of blood from a wound on the left side of the chest, between the third and fourth ribs—it was a punctured clean-cut wound—he died at about 10.30 that same morning, from the wound—on the post-mortem I found that the instrument had penetrated the lungs, and so caused death—a knife of this kind would produce such a wound—a great deal of force must have been used.
JOHN GUSHING (Police Sergeant) On 18th November I took the prisoner into custody—I told him he would be charged with causing the death of James Sullivan on the 16th by stabbing him—he said "It was not done intentionally. I was not in fault; I was in the act of drying my singlet to put it on when I go to bed; it was accidentally done; I had a knife in my hand that I took out of the cupboard. I was cutting a piece of tobacco; I threw my hands up, but I don't know how it was done. I was going to poplar to give myself up"—I took it down.
STEPHEN ROWLAND (Police Inspector K). After the prisoner was in custody, he made a statement to me which was taken down in my presence by the inspector on duty, and the prisoner signed it. (This repeated in substance the former statement, and stated what he did was in self-defence, without any intention of serious injury.)
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, November 26th, 1879.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
30. ROBERT SMART (53) PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully obtaining from Charles Thompson an order for 10s. by false pretences, with intent to defraud, and to two similar offences; also to feloniously forging and uttering two receipts for money, and to stealing a watch and chain, &c., the goods of Charles Thompson.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
31. CHARLES MORRISON (53) to unlawfully writing and publishing a defamatory libel concerning Edward Henry Newton.— Two Months' Imprisonment, and to enter into recognisances in 100l. for twelve month. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
32. EDWIN PUXLEY (44) and BENJAMIN NASH (25) to unlawfully obtaining various sums of money from Arthur Wellesley Wesley and other persons by false pretences, with intent to defraud, and to conspiracy with others to defraud divers persons of their moneys.
PUXLEY— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
NASH— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. BESLEY Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
THOMAS SAUNDERS . I am manager to Mr. Bankhouse, who trades at Roberts and Co. at 76, New Bond Street, Chemists—I was with then in the Paris house three years, and only knew Blunt as an assistant when I came to manage the London shop about seven months ago—his salary was 65l. a year and board and lodging—in consequence of suspicions I saw Sergeant O'Dee at Vine Street Station, and he marked some coins in my presence with a letter-punch—I received from him live half-sovereigns marked "J," which I placed in the till at New Bond Street just before 11.30, removing all other money except between 6s. and 9s. in silver unmarked—I had sent Blunt upstairs—we keep this cash-book (produced) at the shop, and also a cash-sheet—the assistant who receives money for shop sales enters the amount and the article sold, on the cash-sheet, and puts the amount in the till—while Blunt was upstairs I made a fictitious entry in the book, so that he might not suspect that the half-sovereigns had been put into the till—the page was blank—the sheet was in its place by the till—the entries are in pencil; there were three, and I had marked the last—Blunt came down in a few minutes—it was his duty in my absence to serve customers and receive moneys—I had communicated with Mr. Williams, the other assistant—I then went away for about half an hour—Detective Sergeant O'Dee was near the shop by arrangement when I returned, and Blunt Was serving—I do not remember if Williams was there—I stood at my bureau, and saw Blunt write the last entry in the cash-book "1s. 6d., Miss Stuarton"—"Pinto" is the fictitious entry—the 26s. is Blunt's, and "Sands "is mine—"Sutton "and "Stuarton "are his writing—"Livier "and "1s. 6d. cash-book "are mine—I then cleared the till of all the gold, viz., five half-sovereigns marked "J," one half-sovereign marked "F," and three unmarked—there was about 10s. silver—I found three entries had been written in the cash-sheet by Blunt "Anti-fat, 6s. 6d.; Mrs. Ellis, 6s.; Maddison, 16s."—after communicating again with O'Dee, I came back to business and waited for him—I said nothing to Blunt—O'Dee came in about ten minutes and spoke to me in a private room—Blunt was then called in from the shop, and O'Dee asked him if he had any money; he produced two half sovereigns—after examining them, O'Dee said "These are marked coins; I caused them to be paid over the counter"—he replied "You have me"—I give him in custody—I had seen the two half-sovereigns stamped "T "by the officer.
Cross-examined. We have generally two, and often three assistants, not including the boy Fitzgerald—on this occasion Williams and Blunt were the only two, and the shop was under-handed—it would not be Blunt's duty to prepare medicines or prescriptions; that was Williams's
duty—we have a cash trade and a credit trade—ready money across the counter would be entered in the day-sheet, and money received on credit aecount would be entered in the cash-book—Williams would also enter on the sheet anything he sold over the counter, and it would be his duty to enter it then and there; that is the practice, but I have known it violated—at the end of every day there is always an item "sundries," which includes money received for goods sold over the counter—I do not know that the prosecution have received notice to produce the other day-sheets—"sundries "would appear in all of them, and would sometimes amount to 16s. or 20s.—it is irregular, but there is nothing wrong in it—I first gave information to the police on Thursday, 30th October—Detective O'Dee was called in on 1st November—Blunt has been with us about 18 months—I do not know of my own knowledge whether he came with testimonials or a character—he is qualified to dispense medicines; we have been friendly—I had a tiff with him on 29th October—I told him not to be so insolent—I told him that in the presence of a customer—I told him that unless he apologised I would write to the manager in Paris—Williams was in the shop when I put the 2l. 10s. in the till; he did not see me; Blunt was there; he could see if he liked—I did not call him; I Buspected him some two or three weeks; I do not remember the day I quarrelled with him—I said at the police-court "When I came back at 12 o'clock I found one half-sovereign marked T and three half-sovereigns not marked n—I saw the boy Fitzgerald when I came back—Blunt said he had replaced the two sovereigns by the half-sovereigns—I do not remember what else he said—when the detective told him they were marked he did not say "Well, if they are marked you have me, but I took four half-sovereigns out of my pocket and put them into the till"—he only said "You have me," and nothing about "if they are marked"—I do not remember what else—I cannot remember the conversation, except that he said he replaced the two sovereigns he had in his pocket by four halves—I saw the boy in the hall when I came back—there is an entry 1l. 6d. written in the cash-book by Blunt; that is Mr. Sutton's account; also 4s. 6d. received on account from Mr. Stuarton; also 16s., the ready-money purchases of the persons who paid the 4s. 6d.
Re-examined. Stuarton was the customer the boy was sent to—when I cleared the cash I noticed that "Stuarton" was entered in Blunt's handwriting—the tiff arose intentionally on my part—we had all been watching him so closely that I thought he was getting suspicious, and to restore his confidence I pretended to have a tiff with him—my principal was in Paris; the marking of the money was not with his knowledge, but they knew I was Watching Blunt—they have left the prosecution entirely to me—Mr. Bankhousc has been over since.
By MR. GEOGHEGAN. I remember its being stated at the police-court that Blunt had two 10l. notes in his possession—I did not tell O'Pce I believed I could trace them, or that they had been improperly come by—I heard O'Dee state that he believed he could trace them, but I do not know who gave him the information—I did not suggest it.
By MR. BESLEY. There is an entry of Sutton 6s.—I do not find in the day-sheet an entry for the goods 9s.—Blunt would be writing labels and entering proscriptions in the book while Williams made them up—there is I no difficulty about putting down the entry at the time—sundries are
entered at the end of the day, because in a brisk trade in the afternoon things may possibly be omitted, but they ought not to be—we balance the entries against coin in the till, and the surplus in the till we enter as sundries.
By the COURT. The 1l. 16s. 3d. was for balancing the cash in the till, and extends over the whole day—I did not put back the marked money after taking it out, but an equivalent amount.
JAMES O'DEE (Detective Sergeant C). On 1st November I marked these gold coins (produced)—the two sovereigns taken from Blunt are marked T; there were no other marked sovereigns to my knowledge—I did mark these others, but they never, left my possession—I gave the two marked sovereigns to Elliot—I also marked these five half-sovereigns with the letter J and gave them to Mr. Saunders, and he took them away—I also marked four half-sovereigns with the letter F, and gave two of them to Elliot with certain instructions—I only got one back again—I kept the other two (produced) and have now three—after marking them I went a few minutes to 12 o'clock to 76, New Bond Street—Mr. Saunders had left me about half an hour before—I waited at the corner and walked up and down till he came to me—I saw him return to the shop, and I went in shortly after and saw Blunt there—after a conversation with Saunders in the private room Blunt was called in—I said to him "Have you taken any money?" he said "I have"—I said, "What have you got? just put it on the table"I had told him I was a detective sergeant—he took from his pocket the two sovereigns produced marked T, and about 7s. 6d. silver unmarked—I said "These are the two sovereigns" that were paid in juet now; where did you get them from?"—he said "I took them over the counter, and I placed four half-sovereigns in the till in place of them"—after some conversation with Saunders Blunt said "There is no question but what you have me"—I then took him to the station—he gave no reason for replacing the two marked sovereigns—I afterwards searched his lodgings and found two 10l. notes—I made inquiries and ascertained that they were his own money, and had been drawn from his banker's—he had 17l. in the bank, and paid in 3l. in gold and drew out the notes.
Cross-examined. I did not find a marked half-sovereign on him—I first mentioned the 10l. notes to the Magistrate on the second hearing, and Blunt was remanded because I said I thought I should be able to trace them—I told Mr. Saunders that from what I had heard I thought We should be able to trace tern as money received from his employer—he was with me when they were found, and he said "They may be our money, and will you please ask for a remand," and I did so—Blunt, when told he would be given in custody, said "Dont do this, and don't do that; you know the position I am in," or words to that effect anything he said would not have been to the interest of the prosecution, or I should recollect it—he commenced talking at the first, and would not walk to the police-station, but asked for a cab—it was in answer to the charge of stealing the money that he said "There is no question that you have me."
Re-examined. No other charge was made—I knew his quarter's salary would not amount to 20l.—I did not know how he came possessed of the notes till I made inquiries—we gave up 16l. at the police-court, and the Magistrate directed us to retain the 3l.—I have kept nothing back in favour or against Blunt.
GEORGE ELLIOTT . I live at 14, Hills Place, Oxford Street—on Saturday, 1st November, I received from the police two sovereigns marked "T." and two half-sovereigns—I gave the half-sovereigns to Susan Little—I took the sovereigns to Roberts's shop, 76, New Bond Street, and handed them with this invoice (produced) to Blunt—I said "I have called to pay for an account in the name of Sutton, 1l. 6s."—I also bought one bottle of Evaus's elixir, 4s., and two pots tooth-paste, 5s. =9s., and he gave me two florins and a shilling change from the till—he asked me a question about the Suttons, and I left him standing with the two sovereigns in his hand—it was about 12 o'clock—Susan Little was coming out of the shop-door as I went in—I had directed her what to do.
Cross-examined. At the police-court the same day I said I went to the shop about 11.50—my memory would be fresher then.
SUSAN LITTLE . I am employed by Mr. George Elliott—on Saturday, 1st November, I received from him two half-sovereigns marked "F," and at his request I went to the chemist's shop, 76, New Bond Street, and bought a bottle of Mrs. Allen's hair restorer, 6s., and a bottle of anti-fat, 6s. 6d. 12s. 6d.—I gave the two half-sovereigns to Blunt, who gave me 7s. 6d.= change, and I met Mr. Elliott as I was leaving the shop—it was about 11.45 or 11.50.
WILLIAM WILLIAMS . I am an assistant to Roberts and Co.—I have been there about five months—there was no assistant in the shop between 11.30 and 12 on the Saturday morning besides Blunt and myself—I knew what was being done, and carefully abstained from serving any customer during that half-hour—about eight or more customers came in, and I saw one (a French lady) pay Blunt 4s. 6d.—I do not think they all paid money over to him—I saw Susan Little and Elliott—the boy Fitzgerald was out, and I do not remember seeing him return—he might have been there; I was downstairs part of the time—the French lady bought Creme Orizer—it is not entered in the sheet—there was nothing doing to prevent Blunt entering it.
Cross-examined. I was watching him—I made up some prescriptions—I knew him before I came there—we have always been pretty good friends, and, as far as I know, he and Saunders have always been good friends there was a little tiff between them a few days before this occurred—I afterwards asked Blunt what the governor told him, and he said "Oh, it is not a matter of what he told me, but what I told him"—from that I inferred that he had reproved Saunders—he did not tall me what he said—it is not unusual to take change from the till—the "sundries "at the end of the day are things omitted, or small amounts of 1d. and 2d.—I do not think the 1d., and 2d. items would amount to 20s. or 30s.—larger sums should not be in cluded—there is some of my writing on this sheet—I only saw the sheet the few days we were watching Blunt, and I cannot say what was the largest sum for sundries.
Re-examined. We did not have sundries that week; the money was always short of the sheet—I have quarrelled with him once or twice, but cannot tell exactly what about—I do not know if the French lady paid gold or silver, but I saw change given.
JOHN FITZGERALD . I am errand boy at Roberts's—on Saturday, November 1st, I was sent to take goods to Mrs. Stuarton's with a bill for 1l. 0s. 6d., and I received two half-sovereigns and returned to the shop.
Cross-examined. It was striking 12 o'clock as I went out, and I came back and paid Blunt in about 25 minutes.
Re-examined. Mr. Saunders was in the hall, and I spoke to him as I went in to pay Blunt—I did not see Blunt make the entry in a book—I did not see the detective—Biunt was standing at his desk, and was not in custody.
By MR. GEOGHEGAN. I said at the police-court I did not see Mr. Saunders when I came back—I was confused at the time—I am clear now—Mr. Saunders reminded me of it—it is true that I saw Mr. Saunders.
NOT GUILTY .
For cases tried in Old Court, Thursday, see Essex, Kent, and Surrey cases.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, Nov. 27th, 1879.
Before Mr. Recorder.
34. FREDERICK SHAWCROSS (15), JAMES HENRY PARLETT (16), and ALBERT MILSOM (14), PLEADED GUILTY to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Joseph Kingham, and stealing a pipe and other articles his property.— Nine Months' Imprisonment each
35. GEORGE HOLLIDGE (19) and THOMAS BEECHEY (19) , to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Samuel Hurst, and stealing a pair of boots and other articles, Hollidge having been before convicted.
HOLLIDGE**— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
BEECHEY— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
36. JAMES ANDERSON** (64) , to stealing a purse and 5s. 0 1/2 d. from the person of Marian Geeen, after a previous conviction in 1875.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
37. ARTHUR EDWARD SIDNEY BUDGETT (37) , Unlawfully aiding and abetting Henry Appleby, a bankrupt, and preventing the production of a certain document relating to his affairs. Other Counts for conspiracy with Appleby and other persons.
THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL with MESSRS. BESLEY and GRAIN Prosecuted; MR. GILL Defended.
HENRY ALFRED STACEY . I am in charge of the Records of the Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file in Appleby's bankruptcy—Bangs and Bangs are the petitioning creditors on a judgment, the date of which is not given—the adjudication was December 18th, 1874, and Mr. Leatherdale was appointed trustee in 1875; here is the order to prosecute Appleby, which was in March, 1876; the transcript of the shorthand notes is on the file, containing Budgett's examination.
FRANCIS EDWARD PIESSE . My firm were solicitors for Mr. Leatherdale the trustee—down to the oriminal proceedings we wore solicitors for the petitioning creditor, Mr. Bangs—we were seeking to make Appleby a bankrupt for avoiding his creditors, and we summoned Budgett to tie Bankruptcy Court to give evidence on that point—I have the original draft affidavit—I had only seen Budgett in the Bankruptcy Court before that, when I examined him; he came to me once, I believe, 19th January, 1875, after the adjudication—this is the draft of the arrangement made before he gave me
any information—a day or two after 29th January the trustees' managing clerk, Mr. Humphrey, who has since died, came to me, and after that communication I saw Budgett—this draft was, I believe, drawn up on the 28th, and presented to Mr. Budgett on the 29th—I drew it upon the instructions of Mr. Humphrey, who was Mr. Leatherdale's managing clerk—the engrossment of that was put before Budgett; he approved of it, and Mr. Leatherdale signed it; he came to my office on the same day, and the affidavit was taken down by my clerk—I read it to Budgett—I did not see him sign it; it was afterwards filed.
Cross-examined. At the time the examination took place nothing had been done beyond the filing of the petition against Appleby and the petition and affidavit in support of it; he had not been an adjudicated bankrupt then—our object in getting Budgett there was to show that Appleby had departed from his dwelling-house to defraud his creditors—I examined Budgett for the purpose of proving an act of bankruptcy, and it was proved to the satisfaction of the Court, because they adjudicated it—I was satisfied with the examination—you do not find, as a rule, a brother-in-law coming forward voluntarily to give evidenoe—the first person Budgett put himself into communication with was Mr. Humphrey, as far as I know—Mr. Leatherdale is here, but Mr. Humphrey knew a great deal more about it—I saw Mr. Leatherdale frequently, but I saw Mr. Humphrey much oftener—there was no conversation between me and Humphrey and Budgett about it, except that I read the draft—giving evidence on a prosecution was never mentioned—what we wanted to do was to discover the bankrupt's property—the affidavit was taken down by the clerk; it is more Budgett's language than the clerk's, but it was put into legal form; in fact, they are Budgett's words; I have no doubt it was read over to him—the contract he entered into about giving me information was carried out by him—the result of his coming forward voluntarily and giving me information was to upset the deed by which some sum was recovered—I am perfectly satisfied with the way in which Budgett carried out the contract—that affidavit was supplemented by another to correct the date, it is upwards of four years ago—this affidavit, coupled with others, were used on the motion—the trustee was represented—I think notice was given to Budgett to cross-examine him on his affidavit—he was cross-examined by Mr. Brown's representative four hours, it extends over 3,000 questions; Brown was cross-examined by Mr. Robertson Griffiths, and it seemed very much like being done in a hostile spirit—the decision of the Bankruptcy Court was in my favour; there was no appeal, and during all the time the proceedings were pending Budgett was at my disposal up to the last, and gave me every information—when it was proposed to take criminal proceedings and I heard that it was going into the hands of Miller and Miller, I said that it could not be in better hands—their appointment as solicitors is on the file; that was the first of criminal proceedings—the matter remained in my hands until criminal proceedings were instituted.
Re-examined. I do not know whether Budgett received 20 per cent upon this agreement. (The draft stated that Budgett was to receive 20 per cent.) I think he fulfilled the agreement—we recovered certain property for the estate.
the signature to this affidavit is in the defendant's writing—I have had several letters from him. (The affidavit sworn 30th January, 1875, and a second affidavit amending the former one, were here put in.) The attesting signature of Sidney Budgett to this agreement is the defendant's writing. (The agreement was pat in and read.)
Cross-examined. I only knew Budgett while I was repairing Appleby's house—Appleby is a chemist; I did not know that he was in difficulties, or I should not have commenced a 400l. or 500l. job—a cheque of his was given me by Budgett which was dishonoured—the work was done about two months before the bankruptcy; it was the renovation of the house in Tottenham Court Road, I was the builder—Appleby had to do the work in order to get a renewal of the lease, and it considerably advanced the value of the premises—Budgett is Appleby's brother-in-law, and assisted him in his business, he was always there—when Appleby was served with a writ I spent some weeks in trying to see him—he told me he had a good deal of money, and showed me a cheque for 300l., and said that he could pay, but as I had taken proceedings he should not—I gave evidence against Appleby at this Court, and he was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment (See Sessions Papers, vol. 85, p. 271). I gave evidence against Appleby and Brown—I have never attested anybody's signature to a document, I should not read the whole document in doing so—I was one of the committee of inspection—I believe 500l. or 600l. was recovered from Budgett'a information—I was the first to come forward and say that any expense I should be happy to contribute to, although I had lost a good deal—I knew of the contract Budgett had entered into to give information to the committee—I did not approve of his conduct in-going away—I heard that he met with an accident to his hand between the first and second hearings, but I do not know of his life being in danger, or of his being in St. Bartholomew's Hospital for three months—Brown was defended by Mr. Serjeant Ballantine, and Appleby by Mr. Montagu Williams—Brown was acquitted.
G. B. SNBLL (Re-examined). The examination was before Mr. Registrar Spring Rice—the questions ran to 721 on one day, but there is another book which I have not got here—Mr. Roxburgh and Mr. "Wright ware counsel for the trustee, and Mr. Griffiths appeared for Brown—minute particulars of Budgett's life were gone into, even to his being summoned by a cabman for a disputed fare.
GEORGE EDWARD MEAD . I am a solicitor, of 5, Jermyn Street, St. James's—in 1874 I had a client named Passmore, a chemist—my evidence on the former trial is correct (See Vol. 85, p. 284)—on 10tn December Budgett inquired how matters stood, and I said I had not had time to look at the documents—Budgett called on the 9th, and again on the 10th, and I told him if there were no proceedings under the bankruptcy Brown could claim under the mortgage—this is the mortgage," (This was dated December 1, 1874, and was from Appleby in Brow).
Cross-examined. I saw a letter asking Budgett to do the best he could to find a purchaser for the business and pay the money into the bank—Passmore did not refer Budgatt to me—when Passmore came to me he assured me, in Brown's presence, that no proceedings had been taken—I did not see Brown so often as Budgett—the first interview with them both was on 27th November—I spoke to Brown about the bankruptcy proceedings on 12th December—it is not usual in Loudon fur a solicitor
to keep stamped paper in his office, as you can get a document stamped in five minutes; but it is done in the country, where you cannot send to Somerset House—if you keep stamps you must keep several of every sort, and it would run into money—you can buy them from stationers.
THOMAS EDWARD CHAMBERS . I am common law clerk to Messrs. Pattison, of Victoria Street—in 1874 I acted on behalf of Barron, Squires, and Co., in recovering judgment against Appleby—he pleaded to the declaration in person—we got a verdict, and immediate execution, on 18th November—when execution was put in Brown, put in a claim to the things there—the usual interpleader proceedings took place to try the question between our clients and Brown—Brown and Appleby were examined on 13th January, 1875—Budgett was not examined, but he was about the Court—the Jury returned a verdict for Brown's claim—there was no evidence the other way.
Cross-examined. The action was brought by Brown—he had two Counsel, Mr. Waddy, Q.C., and Mr. Bruce—we lost the case, and had to pay Brown's costs—I have seen Brown here to-day—I do not know whether he is subpœnaed by the prosecution.
ALFRED EDWARD WASIIBOURNE . I am one of the officers of Bow Street Police-court—criminal proceedings against Brown and Appleby were commenced in March, 1876, and remands took place from time to time up to 23rd May—the depositions commenced on 23rd May, and there were hearings on 30th May, 6fh, 13th, and 21st June, 5th 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th July, when he was committed.
FREDERICK KERLEY (Police Inspector). I was at Bow Street during most of the remands, but never saw Budgett there after the first occasion—I attended at the Court after Brown and Appleby were committed for trial, and there were adjournments up to January, for Budgett's attendance, and on the indictment being found a warrant was put into my hands to take him, dated 24th December, 1877—I used every endeavour to take him.
Cross-examined. The first hearing at Bow Street was in April, 1876—the warrant was issued after the trial of Brown and Appleb—whenever I heard he had been seen anywhere I went there or made a report to the police—when the examination was going on at Bow Street I did not hear that he was at St. Bartholomew's Hospital, but I heard it after he had left the hospital—I ascertained that he had been there three months; he was there from April to June, 1876—it was after the first hearing that he was in the hospital.
Re-examined. His father came to make inquiries, and said that he was on the Continent—I left the summons at his father's, his last known residence—that was in July, 1876; he was not in the hospital then.
Cross-examined. In Appleby's bankruptcy the management was left a good deal to my clerk, Humphrey, who has since died—he was the person Budgett first saw as managing clerk—I had no conversation with Budgett about his giving evidence in a prosecution; he was gone—I saw him in January, and I upset this deed in the Bankruptcy Court, and there was an appeal to the Lords Justices, and Budgett was constantly present—I made no arrangement with him from first to last that he was to give evidence.
Re-examined. I gave Budgett 20 per cent.—I have seen him on the
subject—it was paid by crossed cheque; it amounted to 130l.—he sold; the debt, I believe.
Witnesses for the Defines.
ROBERT SAMUEL PRESTON , M.R.C.S. I practise in South wart Bridge; Road, and have known the defendant ever since he was a boy—about the middle of April, 1875, I attended him for an accident to his right hand; erysipelas had set in, and he was getting in a somewhat critical condition—I felt somewhat anxious about him, as he was in a State which would soon become dangerous, and by my advice he Went into St. Bartholomew's Hospital, where he remained, I dare say, three months—I saw him there several times, and I saw Mr. Morant make I think it was 26 incisions in his arm at one time—he must have suffered very acute pain, and was in that critical condition that Mr. Morant consulted, me about writing to his friends, as he was very likely to sink—I afterwards advised him to go to the sea-side for change of air—his arm swelled to such a size that I can quite imagine he had to wear these splints (produced)—he has quite lost the use of his middle finger.
ALFRED HENRY JOHN BUDGETT . I am the prisoner's brother, and am' a registered medical practitiomer—I saw the state in which he was at this time, and I corroborate Mr. Preston's statement; I was of opinion for some days that he would never recover, and that opinion was shared by the medical officer—this is the splint which he wore when he got better—he required change of air and scene when he came out, and we advised him to get away—he has now been in London two years and a half.
ALLEN GAT FISHER . I am publisher of the London and Provincial Directory and Continental Guide—the prisoner has been in my employ 18 months, constantly attending to his business up to the time he was taken.
GUILTY. Recommended to Mercy by the Jury — One Month's Imprisonment.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, November 27th, 1879.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. POLAND and M. WILLIAMS Prosecuted.
WILLIAM ROBINSON . I am an able seaman, and was mate on board the British barque Hilarian—on 10th September, between 3 and 4 am., I was asleep in my hammock—the vessel was lying at Hudiksval Harbour, Sweden—the prisoner came and told me to turn out—I said "I shall not,' he drew a sheath knife and jagged it across my nose, cutting through it, 'and said "Take that, and if you don't turn out I will jag you, in the neck"—I got out, and he struck me again in the face between the eyes and nose, and at the back of my head—the cook came, to my assistance—I was on the floor I believe—I hardly knew where I was—I had had no quarrel with him to speak of—I had had a few words with him the day before, but he said that he had forgotten all about that.
WILLIAM SHERWOOD . I was cook and seaman on board the Hilarian—on 10th September, about 3 30 a.m. one of the seamen, Tilliar, called me—I immediately ran down into the forecastle, and there saw Robinson in a
stooping position on the floor, covered with blood; the prisoner had hold of him by the collar, and was pressing him down with his left arm—his right hand was raised with a knife in it—I caught it and said "What are you doing?" and he said "I told him I would do for him, I told him I would cut him"—I said "No you won't, get up"—Robinson ran on deck, and the prisoner tore away from me and ran after him into the house we live in, and struck him two or three times between the eyes, I could not see what with; the prisoner sat down, and I persuaded him to be quiet, and then took Robinson down into the cabin and called the captain; the prisoner appeared to have been drinking, but I could not swear he was drunk—he seemed to know what he was doing—I cannot say what time he came on board that morning—I did not sleep where they did—Robinson was sober—we all went to bed the previous night between 9 and 10—I heard them having a few words the previous day in the cabin, but did not know what it was about.
WILLIAM TILLIAR . I was an able seaman on board the Hilarian—on September 10th, at Hudiksval, Sweden, at 3.30 aim., the prisoner came on board and called Robinson to get out of his hammock, and he said he would not turn out—I jumped out of mine and saw the prisoner, go to him; Robinson said he was cut, and I called the cook—I threw the knife overboard—Wallis was the worse for drink—I think, both he and Robinson had had a few words the previous day—I took the knife from Wallis's hand.
GEORGE MARTIN . I am a seaman, and was on board the Hilarian—on the morning in question I heard the prisoner call Robinson, and he said he would not turn out—the prisoner said "If you don't turn out I will cut the wizzen from you," and drew a knife and cut Robinson, striking him downwards—Robinson said "He has got a knife in his hand, and he has cut me"—he got out of his hammock, and the prisoner then struck him again, and had him down on the floor—the cook came and caught held of his arm as he was kneeling upon Robinson—they had had some words the previous day about working the cargo—the prisoner was half and half, but seemed to know what he was about.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I saw you cut Robinson—you went on the right-hand side of him—he was lying on the port side—you had the knife in your hand.
Cross-examined. We drank of the brandy together—I did' not see you bring the bottle on board again—I came in the same boat with you, but did not see you take the bottle—you had two aboard, but only fetched one on shore.
GEORGE GREENHAM (Police Inspector). On 9th October the prisoner was given into my charge in Millwall Docks—I took him to the station and charged him with stabbing William Robinson on board the British barque Hilarian, whilst lying at Hudiksval—he said "I don't remember anything about it; I was drunk at the time."
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I went ashore at 6 o'clock and was drinking all the evening. I came aboard between 2 and 3 with a bottle of brandy. I offered some to Robinson and he would not take it. We had a few words that day, but I passed it all over, as he knows
himself. I don't remember coming on board, and I don't remember what occurred. I was brought up before the court that same evening, but was so stupefied I did not remember until the day after. A gentleman told me I was to be sent home to be tried."
The prisoner in his defence repeated his former statement, denying that he recollected anything about it.
GUILTY .— Fifteen Months' Imprisonment.
39. GEORGE REID (60) , Unlawfully obtaining, by false pretences, two tons of borax from Ernest Laremont Fleming, with intent to defraud; also a quantity of clothing from Edward Clark, and conspiring with Charles Clarke, to defraud Edward Clark of his goods and moneys.
MESSRS. POLAND and MONTAGU WILLIAMS Prosecuted.
ERNEST LAREMONT FLEMING . I carry on business at the Borax Works, Old Swan, Liverpool—in April last I advertised in the Daily Telegraph for, agents to sell my borax, and in reply received this letter of 18th April, printed at the top "Smith Brothers, 39, Wilson Street, Finsbury, London" (applying for the agency)—it is addressed to Mr. Young, a gentleman in my office—I have seen the prisoner write, and this letter is in his handwriting—I replied to it the same day, and in answer received this letter of 22nd April, also in the prisoner's writing—I then appointed him my agent—I received this other letter of 23rd April (Asking for better terms and ordering sample goods)—in that letter there was a cheque for 3l. 8s., which inspired mo with confidence—I sent off the goods addressed to "Smith Brothers, 39, Wilson Street, Finsbury," and then received this letter of 28th April (Acknowledging receipt of goods, and asking for printed circulars for distribution)—on 22nd May I wrote again to Smith Brothers, and received this letter in reply, enclosing several orders—in accordance with that order I sent the goods, value 13l. 16s. 4d., and then received these two letters, both dated 28th May (Read)—on 12th June I received from the prisoner this telegram from "Smith Brothers, Wilson Street, to Mr. Flaming, Old Swan, Liverpool. Send direct Pinchon and Johnson, Cable Street, London, 500 crystals, 500 powdered borax, samples in bair Is, letter follows to day"—on the following day I received the letter produced—I sent the goods to Pinchon and Johnson, amounting to 18l. 9s.3d., and the invoice to Smith Brothers, and have never been paid—J find the prisoner has sold the goods considerably under cost price; he had no authority to sell to Pinchon and Co. at 33s. per cwt.—he never told me he had received the cheque from Pinchon and Co. for the goods; I heard of it afterwards—the endorsement on the back of the cheque produced to me is in prisoner's handwriting—on 16th June I received this letter from Smith Brothers, signed G. Reid (This stated that the lust bag of borax had been sent out, and gave particulars, of other orders asking for further supply)—an order was enclosed for goods value 20l.—I sent off the goods accordingly, addressed to Smith Brothers; in the other case they were sent direct to the people, and at the same time I gent goods to the prisoner to the value of 65l., as he had said in his letter there were other small orders—I believed the orders to have been genuine, and upon that belief I forwarded the goods—I have since learned that neither the London and Westminster Supply Association nor the Civil Service Supply Association
had given orders as stated in his letter—on 28th June I received telegram "Half-lump, half-powdered, for Stores; got orders yesterday for a ton of powdered"—I also received another order enclosing cheque that was in Payment for goods that had been dispatched in May—I received this letter of 8th July: "Dear Sir,—Our Mr. Reid left London for Birmingham on Monday night, and will pay you a visit before he returns. You may expect to see him on Thursday or Friday next, when he will make arrangements. We beg to enclose a bill for 65l., which our Mr. Reid will explain." I produce the bill dated 8th July drawn by Fleming, accepted by Smith Brothers at two months—that bill was subsequently dishonoured—it was sent down by them, and I signed it, and on the Thursday or Friday the prisoner came down to Liverpool, and I saw him, and he then gave me an order in the names of 20 or 30 respectable firms in London—I had a conversation with him about the bill—he said he had left town on the Monday that I received the letter from Smith Brothers saying "Our Mr. Reid will call upon you, etc.," and added "That has been sent up in my absence; I know nothing about it; I will make inquiries when I return"—I explained to him that the bill was of no use to me, as I expected cash, and he said he would see about it when he returned—at that time he referred to an order of Mr. Leigh Cande, of Dunkerque—I asked him whether he was a reliable person, and he said he was—upon that I sent the goods, and sent. the invoice to Smith Brothers—he said I should receive the cash immediately on the receipt of the goods—I have not received it—the Monday afterwards, 29th August, I received from the prisoner this other bill for 1,000 francs, drawn on Ricoto and accepted by "Whitehouse, payable at 42, Rue de Moscow, Paris—I passed it through a bill-broker in London—I did not supply any more goods until after 12th July—in the middle of August I came to London and went to 39, Wilson Street—I found it to consist of two front offices on the ground floor, level with the street, and some back premises and a long passage—I saw Some empty barrels, and found a few samples of sardines and pickles—tie name of Smith Brothers was on the door—I then saw the prisoner, and told him I did not like the bill which was running, and that I would take 60l. for the 65l., and 40l. for the other goods—he said that he had bills owing that would become due before this bill matured, and he could not possibly let me have any more; he told me to call again in two or three hours, and he would try and get the money for me—I went into the City, and when I came back I saw the prisoner sitting on a stool in his office eating a bun—I asked him if he had got the money—ho said "No," he had not been out—I asked him what he had done with the goods, and he said "I hare sold them"—I asked him what he had done with the money—he said "I have spent it"—I parted with the goods believing the orders were genuine, and that Smith Brothers was a bond fide firm doing a genuine business—putting it down at the lowest figure, after deducting commission, etc., I have lost 140l. by the prisoner—I saw no person of the name of Smith.
The prisoner having complained that he could not cross-examine the witness without his books and papers, which the police had taken from him, MR. WILLIAMS said they should be sent for.
that transaction—he gave me the name of Smith Brothers and Co.—he asked 33s. per cwt., and no other price was mentioned—the borax was delivered to me, and I paid for it by the cheque produced, and received from him the receipt and invoice produced—the cheque was paid in due course, and has gone through the bank.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I think before you came to see me a traveller had previously called and left this memorandum (produced)—when you called for payment I said "The borax has been received, but the quality is not quite uniform", and we went up to look, and you compared it with some you had received from another firm, and admitted it was very inferior, and promised to write to the firm at Liverpool and state my complaint—I did not four or five days after say I would accept a discount of 2 1/2 per cent, but you volunteered to allow 2 1/2 in consideration of the inferior quality—I consider the price I paid for it was the fair wholesale value, and not below the price to such a house as ours—I should not have given mora.
By the COURT. The price to the retail dealer would be the price the prisoner had quoted.
JOHN COPE HARRISON . I am manager of the drug department—I did not in June or July last give the prisoner an order for borax, and he had not on 16th June placed 3 cwt. of borax at our stores or at any time, and I have never paid him money for borax.
Cross-examined. I saw you and Mr. Fleming at the stores carly in May, and Mr. Fleming said he could supply borax at the same price I was paying, and I think I said I would look to my invoices, and if you would call again I would let you know—I cannot say if Mr. Fleming said you would bo authorised to sell at the price I was buying previously—you called a second time, but I do not remember saying that I had seen the prices and was satisfied with them—I did not say "When I want borax I will send you an order"—I sent you an order a long while after, in September, but you did not execute it—it came from Mr. Fleming—the prices you quoted the second time were what I was paying, but I never promised you an order.
Re-examined. I gave no order in June, and he did not supply me with borax in June—in September I sent an order for borax to Smith Brothers, which was not executed.
EDWARD ARTHUR POWELL . I am employed at the Civil Service Supply Association, Queen Victoria Street—I have never given an order for borax to the prisoner or Smith Brothers, and neither the prisoner or Smith Brothers placed 2 cwt. of borax at our stores on 16th June 'last—any ordar or delivery would appear in the books—I have searched, and there is no such order—all orders pass through my hands.
Cross-examined. There is no one named Mr. Morris in the Drug Department—there is another Civil Service Stores in Queen Victoria Street, but not the same title—I know nothing about it—their premises are very close to ours.
Re-examined. I was examined at the police-court, and the prisoner did not then suggest it was another supply association.
JOHN COLLIER . I carry on business at the stores, Leytonstone—I do not know the prisoner, and never gave him an order for borax, and he did not on 16th June place 2 cwt. of borax with us or at any other time.
Cross-examined. We publish a price list—I have not one with me—we
employ an advertisement canvasser, and advertisers expect us to take their goods—the canvasser does not take goods in lieu of payment—he is not here—this order, from Smith Brothers, for the page advertisement in the price list, was sent to Mr. Theakstone—it is not usual for all stores to take goods in lieu of payment for advertisements—we only do so in one or two cases—we had the advertisement specifying that we sold Mr. Fleming's goods—the same printer and canvasser who got up Mr. Theakstone's hook also got up our price list.
Re-examined. I have received no orders from Smith Brothers, or given any—at the bottom of the advertisement in the price list is printed "Smith Brothers, London Agents"—that is for Fleming's borax, and the advertisement is supposed to be paid by Mr. Fleming—we do not sell Fleming's borax, and never had it.
By the Prisoner. We have a similar advertisement to this (another list), but Ours is a page and this is half a page—it says that all these goods are to be obtained at the South Metropolitan Stores—I cannot say if it says that in our book—many things in the list we get only when asked for, but never had any inquiry for the borax.
JOHN ROBINSON (Police Inspector). I took the prisoner in custody—on reading the warrant to him he said "Oh, Fleming; he can only make a debt of it"—I said "Is Mr. Smith in?"—he said "No, there is no Smith; my name is Reid, and I am the only one in the firm"—he looked over some papers for about an hour and a half, and then I took him to the station.
Cross-examined. Mr. Fleming was at the front door—I don't know anything about your papers—I took possession of about one dozen half-pound boxes of borax and a few ounce packets.
Cross-examined. With your letter of 23rd April you sent money for the amount of goods I forwarded—our terms were cash on delivery—when I came to London in May I saw you and two clerks in the front office and a boy—no one introduced me to Mr. Smith—you may have told mo my prices were too high for London and you could not sell—I asked you what you had been doing, and I recommended the different stores as good mediums for trade, and I took you to the London and Westminster Stores, and we there saw the manager, who said he did not want any borax then—I did not offer to advertise if he would take borax from me—my prices were, retail, 5d. and 6d.t and I authorised you to sell large quantities at 40s. and 42s. per hundredweight—I got the 20l. cheque immediately after receipt of I the goods—I do not remember the date—it was for the first lot of goods—you had a large quantity of goods, and then you sent the cheque a long time after the money was due—I made out some invoices for Pinchen and Johnson—the price was not stated at the first rate—it was invoiced at the higher figure, 40s. and 42s.; you made some excuse, and I made it out 35s.—when the 20l. cheque was received there was about 100l. due, and a large amount of borax was sent after that—I was willing to take 100l. in I settlement in August—I do not remember you saying you had spent 140l., I of your own money along with mine in advertising and canvassing—I did I ask for Smith, and you said he was away in the country, that his brother I had died, and other excuses—the 200l. of goods were all out of the steamer I—you gave a large order for 1,000 boxes at Liverpool, and I had them put I
into the steamer—I only dispatched the goods upon the representation of your orders—the orders are in Court—I did not press you to take a quantity of soda from me, as I found the prices were not right, and I told you I could not compete with the Newcastle people—there were small orders. for ground soda, but not soda crystals—your invoice is ill. 3s. 9d.—it was rather more than a ton—the 1,000 cases mentioned in your letter of 13th August were made on your representations that you had orders for them—I always made out invoices to Smith Brothers—I sent invoices through you for the goods, which you represented as having sold, and your business was to send those invoices straight on after booking the amounts, but you did not do so—I sent the invoices to you of Pinchen and Co., and the London aud Westminster and all the other stores—the goods which you ordered on consignment were sent to you—the invoices were to refresh your memory for collection—these were the amounts you ought to have collected from the different stores (paper produced), and it appears those stores never had the stuff—without authority from me you gave orders far and wide—no advertisement has appeared by Willing and Co., but anybody may ask for estimates. (The Prisoner read the letter of appointment from Fleming of 19th April, stating terms of remuneration.) There were no fresh terms—it was cash on delivery, or 14 days' credit where you could not get the cash—we have different scales of commission—the letter of 1st July ("My terms ought to be strictly adhered to in both cases a month, and now it is nearly two months") refers to the boxes—the 20l. cheque was in payment of the previous amount, and had nothing to do with Pinchen and Johnson's—I sent you a receipt for the 60l. bill on 9th July—J had it in a safe three weeks, and then put it through the bank and it was returned marked "No account"—I was advised to wait till the bill was matured—I saw you in August, and offered to take 100l. in settlement of all you owed me—at the end of July or beginning of August my suspicions were aroused, and I wanted a substantial guarantee before we resumed business—you gave me a list of firms you said you could get orders from, and you brought two orders to substantiate your statement—I have got nothing by the orders you got for me—you got a very good order from the London and Westminster, which was supplied, but I never got the money, and so with the Civil Service and other stores.
Re-examined. I recovered about 200l. worth of goods from the ship when my suspicions were aroused.
HENRY BERKLEY . I was cashier to Mr. Edward Clark, Pentonville Road, clothier, who carried on business as the Co-operative Supply Club—he employs agents to obtain orders and collect money by instalments—in November last year we had an agent named Charles Clarke who introduced the prisoner as Mr. Reid, 24, Farringdon Road, tobacconist; and on his recommendation I appointed him as an agent, and furnished him with a copy of the rules (produced)—he supplied orders amounting to 180l. 10s. or there—abouts, in respect of which be paid about 20l.
Cross-examined. I knew you were in business at Farringdon Road—you were brought to me and I appointed you as agent to issue orders to customers after making all necessary inquiries as to their respectability, and to collect the money due—you were to get a commission of ten per cent. when the accounts were paid—at the time of issuing the orders you were supposed to have collected at the rate of 15 per cent.—I have not the cash-book here
showing the amounts you have paid—the orders were presented to us and we executed them ana you collected the money—as the orders were coming in thickly and we were not getting an adequate sum of money, you were to settle up every Monday—you did not pay me every Monday—you did not pay me 15l. money you had received that day the last time I called at your shop—we took no steps against you previous to this last charge—it is 12 months ago since you were our agent—I do not know if you lived in the same place six months afterwards.
Re-examined. Clarke introduced him personally and said he was a respectable man, and would prove a good agent—I made no inquiries about him; I left that to Mr. Clarke—Clarke left us rather suddenly, and I do not know where he is—Clarke supplied a groat number of orders, but the cash in his case was not at all eqvivalent.
CHARLES EDGAR BARRETT . I am in the service of Edward Clark—I knew the prisoner as one of our agents, and I received orders from him amounting in the aggregate to 188l. 10s.—the customers brought the orders and we supplied them with the goods, I produce specimens of orders. (Containing name, address and occupation of member, and address of his employer, and endorsed at the back,") I hereby certify that the signature on the other side of this slip is in the handwriting of the purchaser. Signed G. Read." As we did not get money in proportion to the orders, I spoke to Mr. Clark, and then saw the prisoner, who promised to come and see Mr. Clark—I went again, but he had left the shop and I could not find him—I wrote to the alleged customers, and nearly all the letters came back through the Dead Letter Office—I went to all the addresses, but I found very few of the customers—this order is "Henry Watkins, plasterer, 18, Bemerton Street, Caledonian Road," for clothing 5l.—the goods were supplied—I went to the address, and no such person lived there—this other order from "J. Jones, carman, 43, Stanhope Street, Hampstead Road," was for 5l. clothing supplied to the prisoner's order—I went to the address, but no such person as J. Jones lived there—this (another), "William Smith, timber porter, 13, Cumberland Market," 5l. clothing—I went and found no such person there—I find there is due 155l. upon these fictitious orders, where I could not find the people—somebody had the goods—the 15l. 10s. refers to goods supplied to the prisoner and his relatives and friends, and it has not been paid—we tried to find the prisoner, but could not—when the orders were executed we believed them to be bona fide—Clarke, who introduced him, served us the same to a very large amount, and we cannot find him—the goods were delivered at the establishment to the persons bringing the orders, but we knew that the orders came from the prisoner's book.
Cross-examined. I wrote to the people not to pay you any more money, and I wrote to tell you not to receive any—you had not paid me everything up to that date—you had paid in 20l. when you ought to have paid in 30l., which we knew you had received—you could not have collected the whole amount of the orders—I cannot show any of the returned letters, it is 12 months ago—you were not answerable for the goods, but were supposed to have made inquiries, and to have sent us correct names and addresses—we took weekly payments—I went to look for you just after Christmas—we cancelled your agency in November.
Prisoner's Defence. I tried to earn a living by selling Mr. Fleming's borax, and lost a deal of money over it by payments to travellers and can-vassers. I only went after it was sold to collect the accounts, and I found it was sold for as much as it was worth. Mr. Clark keeps a tally shop and asked me to issue books to anybody who came into my shop who wanted goods on that system, and no doubt some of them gave me false addresses, and I could not look after them. I went to the Magistrate and tried to get a detective to take one man who gave me a false address. If I had my receipt book it would show that I had paid Barrett 40l., and that I paid him 15l. the last time I saw him. Depositors pay about 1s. in the pound when they received the order. I thought I was assisting Mr. Clark in his business, and I left him to look after them himself, and did not leave my shop.
GUILTY .*— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
OLD COURT.—Friday and Saturday, November 28th and 29th, 1879.
Before Mr. Justice Field.
MESSRS. POLAND and MONTAGU WILLIAMS Prosecuted; MESSRS. KEITH FRITH and WILLES defended all the prisoners but Goldsmith.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT, Friday, November 28th;
THIRD COURT, Saturday, November 29th; and
NEW COURT, Monday, December 1st, 1879.
Before Mr. Recorder.
41. MONTAGUE BARNETT (34) was indicted (with Eleazar Barnett, not in custody) for unlawfully failing to discover to his trustee in bank. ruptcy 387l. received by him in October, 1878. Other Counts for obtaining goods on credit within four months of his bankruptcy. Other Counts for obtaining goods from Manchester.
MESSRS. BULWER, Q.C., and GILL Prosecuted; MR. BESLEY Defended.
By the advice of MR. BESLEY the prisoner declined to plead to the 8th and following Counts, which were for conspiracy with Eleazar Barnett, who was not mentioned in the depositions, he not having been before the Magistrate, and the conspiracy Counts having been added by order of this Court. MR. BULWER contended that as the bankruptcy-proceedings were on the file, and were also against Eleazar Barnett, they became part of the depositions. MR. BESLEY also objected to the Counts relating to offences at Manchester, which was not in this jurisdiction, and they were afterwards struck out, a plea of
NOT GUILTY being entered for the prisoner on the 8th and following Counts.
Bankruptcy Court—I produce two files, one in bankruptcy and one in liquidation, in the matter of Montague and Eleazar Barnett—the liquidation petition was filed on 8th November, 1878, and the first meeting held on December 6th—the bankruptcy petition was filed on 16th November, and the first meeting was on 4th February, 1879—Mr. John Sears was appointed trustee that day—the adjudication was on 15th January, 1879.
Cross-examined. The petitioning creditors on 16th November, 1878, were Hassfelt and Hassfelt, of 34, London Wall, commission merchants, for 486l. 18s. 4d.—the first meeting under the liquidation was on 6th December, at which no resolutions were passed, and the proceedings fell through—he passed his examination on 3rd April, 1879—the short-hand notes are on the file.
CHARLES LEGGATT BARBER . I am one of the official short-hand writers of the Bankruptcy Court—I took short-hand notes in this matter on 25th February, 13th March, 2nd May, and 20th May, 1879—the transcript on the file is correct—I was present at the first meeting of creditors under the liquidation; it was of a very stormy character; it lasted till a late hour in the evening, and broke up without any resolutions being passed.
Cross-examined. Hassfelt was there—I do not know whether he is a relative of the Barnetts—Mr. George Lewis appeared for the creditors something was said about a warrant, but I do not recollect what—the defendant was taken in custody on a warrant just at the close of the meeting—I was at the Mansion House on several occasions—I do not remember hearing Hassfelt say "Now we shall get 20s. in the pound" when the prisoner was given in custody—there were a great many adjournments, and while he was at the Mansion House they were going on with the private sittings—I do not think the meeting was so disorderly that Mr. Lewis could not be heard; Mr. Lewis is always heard with great attention when he speaks, and they listened to what he had to say.
Re-examined. Eleazar Barnett was there and answered certain questions—I should not know him again—the taking in custody was not till quite the end of the meeting; that was the result.
FREDERICK FISTER . I am engaged for Cope and Simner, general merchants, 7, Well Street, City—I have known the prisoner two or three years, he had small dealings with the firm—I called on him first at the end of February or the beginning of March and said that I heard from our traveller that he had an order for Lima, and we had prepared a collection, and a few days afterwards he called with Mr. Coates—we were to supply the goods on three months' credit, and if they were not paid for then, a three months' draft at two and a half—those conditions were agreed to—I had not known Mr. Coates before; the defendant said that he was his buyer—Coates made a large choice of goods, Barnett simply assenting—that lasted two or three days, and the collection he made came to a much larger amount than I expected, and at the close I had a private conversation with Barnett upon it in his office—I knew that it was an old-established firm, and he said that it was Harris, Cohen, and Co. of Lima—the defendant said that he had known Coates as a little boy and had more confidence in him than he had in his own brother—they said that Harris and Co. were an old-established firm of jewellers, and were opening a dry goods' store as well—the articles selected were dry goods to the amount of about 1,100/.—they were to be forwarded to Harris, Cohen, and Co. of Lima, and the invoice, bill of lading,
and insuaance policy were to be sent to Mr. Barnett—we were to draw on Barnett if any bills were drawn—the money was not paid at the expiration of three months, and we drew three bills which Barnett accepted, the first of which was paid, and the other two dishonoured—we had them at the meeting of creditors and they passed into Mr. Sears's hands, and from him to Mr. Wontner—700l. is still due to us—Barnett said, "You may look to me," and he was indignant that I should not think him worth 30s. in the pound—I was not satisfied with that, but I could not get more from him—not being paid when we expected, I went and saw Barnett about it early in November—I asked him what was the meaning of the bill being returned dishonoured—ho said it was in consequence of the non-arrival of remittances from Lima, which had taken him by surprise—I asked whether that firm had failed—he said no, and he should be very sorry for the creditors if they had paid, that it was unfortunate for them, his brother was present, especially after all the money he had paid into the concern—I went home after that interview, taking the name of their solicitor, and in a few days I heard that they had stopped payment—we parted with the goods in consequence of his repeated statements that the firm in Lima was an old—established firm, otherwise I would not have done it—the transactions were small, 100l. or so; we never had one of 1,100l. before—shipping business is not our legitimate business—I saw Coats in the street for one or two months afterwards, sometimes with Barnett, and sometimes alone, but I never spoke to him.
Cross-examined. Cope and Simner are Germans, but the firm is in Paris, London, Lyons, and Gottingen—I have represented them four years—these goods were specially insured—we packed them ourselves, and directed them to Harris, Cohen, and Co., through the Liverpool agency of the Lima line, to go to Callao, which is the port of Lima—nothing was said about confirming these sales—he said "I am responsible, and you have only to look to this firm," assuring me that it was an old-established firm, and he might as well earn a safe commission—he was, of course, pledging himself to see me paid—it spread over a month or six weeks before the whole of the goods were dispatched, but the time began to reckon from the very day of each respective invoice; there were three or four invoices—we then took three months before we drew at three months—we did not begin the shippings till the middle of March, and it was the end of April before they were completed; we went to the middle of July before we drew—we did not sell the defendant one shilling's-worth of goods after the last shipment—large houses like Faudell and Phillips and Hattons deal in cheap jewellery as well as trimmings, but they do not consider themselves trading houses—I am a Swiss—if the purchaser is not very clever to forecast the fashion, the depreciation of value of such articles may be enormous—I believe I went to the Mansion House to get the warrant, on the very day of the first meeting of creditors—I do not think I had been there before to lay an information—I employed Mr. Wontner—Gard and Godwin are my regular solicitors—Mr. Hassfelt introduced me to Mr. Wontner; Mr. Hassfelt told me that he is Barnett's brother-in-law—I only saw him a very little time before the meeting—he called on me—I cannot remember that he told me that, if I got a warrant, I should get all my money; I did not say to him that I did not like to undertake the responsibility alone, but if he would give me an indemnity I would join—I said that such proceedings were generally
costly things, and I did Dot like to go into it without knowing how far it would go, but if he considered himself aggrieved, and liked to join in it, I did not mind—he suggested criminal proceedings—20l. was the limit I was prepared to go to, and all the rest for Hassfelt—I have that in writing, but not here; we exchanged ideas, and from him I got the idea that all the statements Mr. Barnett had made were false—I do not like to swear that no syllable passed my lips or Hassfelt's about getting a large dividend by criminal proceedings—I do not recollect that 10s. or 15s. in the pound was mentioned—Hassfelt did not say that he would pay most of the costs, and would take me to a good criminal solicitor, Messers. Wontner and Son—I believe he said that he had collected some evidence, and had put it, or was going to put it, into Messrs. Wontner's hands, and he took me to Mr. Wonter—he did not say that, though he had collected all the evidence, it was not well for a brother-in-law to be prosecuting a relative; but he said that my evidence was the only evidence on which a warant could be got—I do not think he said that that was what Mr. Wontner had told him: until he told me that I had not seen Mr. Wontner, and that was the first time his name was mentioned—I had not supplied him with my evidence, or given my statement to any one on oath—I don't think Has-felt made notes of my statement, but it is a year and a half ago; this conversation was a week or ten days before the first meeting of creditors—Hassfelt was a perfect stranger to me—the petition was filed on the 18th November, and he may have come to me on the 19th; I do not think I went to Mr. Wontner the same day, but within a day or two—I only saw Mr. Wontner once before I went to the Mansion House, and my statement was then taken down, and questions asked me as to my statement, which was not always very clear, because I wrote it in English—I understand all you say to me—the warrant was not in the hands of the police before December 6th—I do not know whether it was brought to the Lord Mayor's attention that the first meeting was to take place that day—I was at the meeting, but Mr. Wontner was not—Mr. Hassfelt was there, and was very excited—I did not hear him call out to the officer to have Barnett handcuffed—I saw Barnett taken in custody when the meeting was over, but I did not even know the officer till I saw him take Barnett—it was arranged that he should wait till the meeting was over and then take him—he was put in the dock before the Lord Mayor; the information that I had sworn was read—I was sworn and said that it was true—it was stated that he had been arrested at his first meeting of creditors, and Mr. Wontner asked to have it adjourned, which was done—I went there on oath twice—I may have been sworn as to the truth of my information—Barnett was admitted to bail, and came up several times at the Mansion House while the private examination was going on—after he passed his last examination there were adjournments till I was examined on 9th June—I have not paid my 20l. yet—I have not discontinued Mr. Wontner as my solicitor in this matter—I believe the Treasury have taken it up, and I suppose Mr. Wontner represents the Treasury—I did not get from Mr. Hassfelt also an indemnity against any damages which Mr. Barnett might recover against my firm for malicious prosecution—I think I can get a paper which I say is an indemnity; it is at our office; I can send for it—I did not, between April and September, when the 400l. was paid, solicit Barnett to give me further orders for Lima, or orders on his own
account—a number of people collect orders for us, but not on commission; they have salaries—four out of about 25 take orders—I did not send either of them to solicit orders from Barnett after we got the 4007., but they were constantly doing so—it was their regular course of business.
Re-examined. I had no occasion to doubt the solvency of these parties till they failed, but when they owed us 1,100l. I thought it more than enough, and forbade the travellers going there—he said that the firm at Lima were an old firm he had known for some time, and had done some little business with—Hassfelt came to consult me as one of the creditors—he said "I am Mr. Hassfelt," and stated the amount to which he was a creditor, that he knew there was some fraud in the case, some false statement which he thought he had evidence enough to show, and he wanted to know whether our firm would join in the prosecution—he gave me a few outlines of what the frauds were just to satisfy my conscience—I told him I could not embark in anything which I did not know where it would lead me to: I know that law costs money—nearly all of the creditors at the meeting were indignant—Mr. George Lewis was there on Barnett's behalf; I knew him as a well-known criminal solicitor—the indignation of the creditors was the cause of the confusion—no warrant was taken out against Eleazar Barnett.
ARTHUR PEARCE . I am clerk to Cope and Simner—I was present when this order was given by Barnett when Mr. Coats was there, but I think not during the conversation—the bills of lading were made out in Liverpool by the Pacific Steam Navigation Company; I handed them over to the defendant.
DAVID MARTIN EDER . I am a commission merchant, of 17, Hatton Garden—I have known Mr. Coates 18 or 20 years, but never knew of his being connected with the firm of Harris and Cohen; there was once a firm of Harris and Cohen at Lima, and I knew the Harris of that firm; they were general merchants; I have known the firm 15 or 16 years; I also knew Mr. Cohen; I also knew Mr. William Harris, the defendant's brother. in-law; he is not the Mr. Harris of Lima—I do not know Cohen, a youth of 19, Barnett's clerk, but Cohen of Lima is an old man—I know that Harris, Barnett's brother-in-law, went to Lima in June, 1878, and Cohen also—I took their passage, and they went out in the same ship—Mr. Harris had then been eight or ten years in England to my knowledge; he had been at Lima some years previously; he had business there 17, 18, or 20 years back; he went out to Lima several times to my knowledge—I have seen Harris since I paid his passage, but not Cohen—I paid about 60l. or 64l. which Harris gave me by this cheque. (This was dated June, 1878, on Glyn, Mills, and Co. "Pay Mr. D. Eder or bearer 63l., Barnett and Co.") I do not know whose writing Barnett and Co. 1s.
Cross-examined. I have been to Lima 40 odd times in 25 years—I have made trips three and four times a year, but I never went direct—I go by Aspinwall—the direct trip would occupy from four to five weeks—Mr. Coates has also been going to and fro to Lima many years, and I have seen him there—he would have some knowledge of the requirements of trade in Lima, and be a judge of the articles which would sell there, but he would not be a good buyer of dry goods; he would have a good general knowledge of hard goods—I saw him in Lima in 1877—I have never had any transactions with Harris and Cohen, but I know that such a firm is in existence
—I have seen William Harris in London; he is not the Harris I have seen in Lima—the last time I saw Harris in Lima was in 1869—I first saw William Harris, the defendant's brother-in-law, 16 or 18 years ago—I have seen him in Lima six or seven times; whenever I went there he was trading there—I do not think he had agents in London, but he shipped goods after I came from Lima in March Harris came to my office, and samples were sent to mo for my opinion—I do not think Coates would be the man to present himself as a buyer of goods at that time; he would not be a judge of soft goods—Harris consulted me on Cope and Simner's parcels in March, 1878, and I told him they were not suitable at all for the market—there has been a revolution in Lima, and war is going on now; persons sending goods there have made great losses for the last two years, and unfortunately I am one of them—trade has been deranged for two years, which has become more intense during the last six months—I have not seen Harris since I took this cheque from him for the passage money, nor have I had or seen letters from him.
Re-examined. I have not been to Lima since I paid Harris and Cohen's passage out there—I do not know where Eleazar Barnett is—the disturbance in Peru was not going on at the time Harris came to ask my opinion about the goods; trade has been deranged since then—I said that the goods were not suitable for the market—I do not know whether they went out.
By the Court. When Harris came to me about the passage he said that he was going to see whether he could not make money out at Lima.
SAMUEL JAMES LAZARUS . I am a wholesale optician of Newgate Street—I know the defendant and William Harris his brother-in-law—I also know the youth Samuel Isaac Cohen who was in Barnett's employ; he is from 18 to 20 years of age—I recollect him and Harris going out to Lima together—I have never seen them since—Harris had been out to Lima 10 or 12 years before, and afterwards I saw him in London; for seven years I scarcely missed a week without seeing him.
Cross-examined. Mr. Hassfelt married my daughter, and the defendant is unfortunately my nephew, the villain—I consider he is the murderer of my daughter, for this case has taken such an effect upon her that she died last week—the doctor said that if it had not been for Barnett she would bo living now—I had not the same bitter feeling against the defendant last year as a murderer, but I had as a robber—I have seen Mr. Hassfelt here this Session—I have a very heavy claim against Barnett, and not only that, but on account of his villainy I have been half ruined by him—Miss Lewin is one of his family, but he took care of her—Harris told me that while in England he shipped goods to his late partner after coming back from Lima"—Harris went to Lima two or three times, but I do not think he has been there for 10 years—there has been no dissolution of the firm in Lima of which Mr. Myers was a partner—I do not know of Harris and Myers being dissolved, but I know they have not been partners for many years—I have never applied to Barnett to help me with money, and he never applied to me till a fortnight before he was bankrupt—I have never sent any one to Barnett to ask him to advance me money.
Re-examined. I was never at Lima, but the only person Harris was connected with there was Myers, but there was no such firm, and Myers was in England, I believe.
till they stopped payment—I knew Mr. Harris, he was a brother-in-law of Barnett's—I knew a youth named Isaac Cohen, from 18 to 20 years old; he was a clerk at Barnett's—I remember Harris and Cohen leaving England to go to Lima in June, 1878, and the former said that they were going to establish a fancy business there, dry goods; the firm was to be "Harris, Cohen, and Cohen," but I believe Cohen was only to be a name—I cannot say whether I have heard the defendant say that personally, but I have heard so—I have never seen Cohen or Harris since they went out—before Harris went out I used to see him frequently at Barnett's.
Cross-examined. I have known the Barnetts two years—up to the time of the failure the firm was Montague and Eleazar, and no one else—I went in August, 1876—Mr. Trotter was called half-yearly to audit the books up to the time of his death, which was in the spring of 1878—I did the writing in the books; there was a ledger, journal, cash 'book, bill book, and press copy letter book, which I have seen in Sears' possession—a set of books was kept in connection with the Manchester business—we used to supply large dress houses, but Barnett and Co.'s business was considered a wholesale one in London—I think there would be an objection among retail traders to do with wholesale houses who do retail business; that was the reason that the firm in Manchester was called Nicolle, Dupin, and Co.—Mr. Phillips was the manager; he remitted money and bills to London, and had the entire control of the sales at Manchester—the cash credits are: April 1, 50l.; April 4, 50l., &c. (Reading a number of entries front the ledger)—at the end of July I have a bill for 1,147l. 17s. 6d., and at the end of July bills for 100l., 150l.:, and 450l.—those have, I believe, all been paid—there are five bills of 25l. 2s. 2d. each on Price at the end of July—I have no entries after July 25th, but there are several cash remittances in the ledger in August amounting to 400l. or 500l.—in September the cash remittances amounted to about 300l.—all the remittances are duly entered into the cash-book—all large amounts were paid into the bank and entered in the books—anything which did not go to the bank could be paid out by the trustee if he chose to do so—Phillips was, I believe, paid a commission as well as a salary; here is an item of 125l. on September 14th which I believe is commission—I believe Phillips was allowed 10 per cent. on all transactions at Manchester—during the whole time I was there the bills were paid regularly; no bill had come back—I used to carry the cash to the bank, and the Jury may take it that the defendant has not been able to take a shilling out of the concern, the very money for the cheque for the passage money was debited to Harris's private account; that appears in the private ledger—debts were owing to Harris when he went to Lima, which were collected by his brother-in-law, Barnett, and this cheque was put against them. (For 63l., endorsed "Royal Mail Steam, Moor gate Street ")—this is Harris's private account; that is outside the business—the red figures at page 4 refer to postings from the cash book to the ledger—there is an irregularity in the chronological order, the 63l. item was left in abeyance, and the other items got posted and it was overlooked—when Cohen left, Lionel Harris and I kept the books; he is a relation of the family: the, defendant did not interfere with them—when Mr. Trotter died he was actually engaged in making up the balance-sheet to the end of December, 1877—I do not think an account of the stock at Manchester
had been taken from Trotter's figures; I do not think he had the figures—when he died Mr. Watson was asked to complete the matter, and said that if he had to go through all the books and make out a proper balance-sheet it would cost 10 guineas—the defendant said something about Mr. Trotter's figures being taken as far as they went, and when next half year came they should audit properly—there was a book in which balance sheets were signed by the partners—I have got some of the balance-sheets, the earliest is December, 1867, when the partners were Montague Barnett and S. Drouitt—the balance-sheets for June and December, 1877, are not signed, the last one signed is December 31, 1876—Eleazar Barnett was a partner when I went there, so I cannot say when he came in—the cash payments are brought out at the end of each month; the total for July is 7,069l. 2s. 5d.; for August, 11,128l. 11s. 3d.; for September, 10,721l. 10s. 4d., and down to the stoppage on 25th October 12,110l. 13s. 9d. cash payments, including bills—I do not see why those figures should be subject to correction—all bills entered here are paid; that was the flow of cash out of the concern—with regard to the comings in, Montague Barnett or his friends brought in 800/. before 26th October—as to the actual stop. page, there had been a failure of remittances from Harris of Lima—orders for fancy goods or trimmings and braids are usually given two or three mouths before they can be executed—the generality of the goods delivered in August, September, and October would be ordered two months before—as far as I know, there was no pressure on the firm then—several parcels were refused after the first bill was dishonoured to the amount of many thousand pounds—I remember Miss Lewin coming and getting the silk and the watches before the first bill was dishonoured—I can't say whether she insisted on having the goods to meet her bill, but the goods given her were duly entered in the books—I believe Barnett sent money to Manchester in November, 1877, to fit up the premises there—I continued to act for the trustee for a few weeks—Andrews and Mason were the receivers under ha liquidation down to the adjudication in January, and they received letters from Lima and about 200/.—I gave them the figures and helped thorn to take out the figures—this is the statement lithographed for the creditors for the meeting of 6th December—I gave the figures for it as I found them in the books, and the defendant did not interfere—I urn not aware of any inaccuracy.
Re-examined. I was their clerk 2 1/2 years—I have not communicated with Messrs. Lewis since—I have seen Barnett since the proceedings, but have not gone through these matters with him—I remember 811/. being paid, and it should appear in the cash book—I can't tell you the amount of bills drawn by Barnett on Phillips, of Manchester—the ledger shows, some of them—some of them were dishonoured; I can't give you the amount—the amount of goods sent from our London house to Manchester in the course of the summer of 1877, before the failure, was 10,800l.—till these figures were prepared from books kept by me Mr. Watson took my figures—Lionel Harris is a son of William Harris—I have not seen him for some time—I do not know where Phillips is—he was not in conneotion with Barnett's house before he went to manage the Manchester business—I did not know him before that—he used to sign "Samuel J. Phillips"—I have not seen him since the bankruptcy.
By MR. BESLEY. I believe a valuation was made of the goods at
Manchester at 10,800l.; that would be the sum of the invoices—the valuation has nothing to do with it—12 1/2 per cent. was added to the sum of the invoices to make it up to 12,000l.; the difference between the net and the gross would be 12 1/2 per cent.
JOACHIM EUGENE PANION . I am a commission agent, at Paris, with M. Theolier—we had dealings with the defendant, and in June, 1878, he owed us a little over 2,000l.—he called on us on 21st June, and saw me, and again on 24th June, and saw me to get increased credit—I replied that we thought his credit was too large according to the references we had, and we could not increase it unless we knew something more about his real standing—I asked him if he could give me positive and satisfactory references; he said that I had made inquiries before, and I ought to know, and that all our reports had not enabled us to know what his real capital was, and I wanted a statement of what his net surplus was on his last stock-taking—ho refused positively to give it to me, and said that I ought not to be so inquisitive—I said that I could not increase his credit or continue dealing with him unless he would do what I considered. was his positive duty—he went away on the 24th, saying that he would think of it, and on the 27th he came again and asked me if I would increase his credit without his making the statement I had demanded; I refused again, and after hesitating he said "Well, I will make the statement," and said that he had at his last stock-taking a net surplus balance of more than 4,000/.; I asked him when the stock-taking took place—he said about the end of last year—I said "Would not you go to 5,000l.?"—he said "No"—I said "That is your capital?"—he said "Yes"—I asked htm to repeat it, and adjured him as a gentleman, a man, and a merchant, and told him it was satisfactory, and said "I take upon myself to concede you a certain amount of credit, which will amount to 8,000l., and if you waist in a certain case a little more, we will talk about it and will give it to you, to be paid within 30 days—we supplied him with goods according to his wants, and he exceeded the limit through a mistake of our manager; it was under 4,000l., but not much—after that conversation I supplied him with about 10,000l. worth of goods, and when we were informed by circular that he had stopped payment he owed us between 3,800l. and 8,900l.—it was his statement of capital which induced us to allow him to have more goods after June 27.
Cross-examined. Mr. Leggie and Mr. Campin in our house attended to the selection of goods for the defendant; neither of them are here—ours is a commission house; the manufacturer and the buyer make the bargains, and we check the invoices and add our commission before business is done—we do not put on 15 per cent., nor does it generally average 12 1/2—the Bametts dealt with us from May, 1877, to June, 1878; they paid regularly—we sold them a parcel of diamonds in January, 1878, which were paid for—the invoice was about 1,000l.—we knew that Nicholle, Dupin, et Cie., of Manchester, was a branch house of Barnett and Co., and the reason given was that their retail customers in Manchester should not find them selling retail—I went to the meeting of 6th December, and not only that, I was the chairman—my attention was drawn to the diamonds—I made a note of the conversation of 27th June, and wrote to my partner the same day—I have a copy here, in my partner's writing, hut not what I wrote—I dealt largely with, Hassfelt, but not
with Lazarus—we got a statement of affairs from Andrews and Mason, and Hassfelt asked me to join him in a criminal prosecution; that was after October 1 and before December 6—I don't think Hassfelt told me that he was going to make him bankrupt—I came over to this country two or three times between 8th November and 6th December—I did not limit my responsibility, because I refused to join in the prose. cution—I took the chair at 4.30, and the meeting broke up about 6; I was toid a few minutes before that an officer had been introduced to take the defendant in custody—when he was taken I did not hear any one call out "Handcuff him—Hassfelt did not tell me that if I would join in a criminal prosecution I should get 20s. in the pound, but he said that if Barnett had a chance to get away we had no chance to get our money, that was the reason he gave for prosecuting—on 27th June he proposed to buy another parcel of diamonds, which I think were handed to him in Paris—I said "We told you we did not like them, and you promised not to have any more, and now you come again, and we don't like it; if you will stick to your ordinary business, may be we should not be so nervous, but going into a very risky and a very new article makes us suspicious"—I was nervous for other reasons—I did not say that if he would give up the purchase of the diamonds he might go and select anything he pleased; it was too late, I thought he had gone too far—I did not ask him for anything in writing—he said "I always paid you well; if I had not I could understand your demand; but I always paid you like a good merchant"—I said at the last stock-taking the bills should show a surplus of more than 4,000l.—I have a copy of the Paris books, but you do not believe in copies—on 3rd January an acceptance for 213l. 7s. was paid, and on 2nd February 205l. 4s. 3d.; I was shown the bill book. (A number of items were here read from the book.) If I signed that it is correct—I am positive about facts, but not about amounts—the amount of bills drawn in June was 62,000 francs, which is 2,400l.—the actual indebtedness was not 3,500l.—the small part of the bankrupt's books which I have seen was correc, but I have not verified the whole of them—I think we agreed up to June—if I have stated that the amount of goods was 6,000l. I should not have said 10,000l. to-day—if I said that 6,000l. included the diamonds that was so—instead of 10,000l. it is 6,000l., but we are left creditors for 3,500l.
Re-examined. When Barnett called on me in Paris he said that he had more than 4,000l. clear capital, and we were to add to that the profit of our Manchester house, which was doing very well—goods were supplied to him from time to time, and paid for—we used to draw at the end of the month—if he had not paid we should not have gone on supplying him with goods—there was general in lignation at the meeting of 6th December, not of Mr. Hassfelt in particular—there were more than 20 creditors; the meeting was opened by the accountant, and then Mr. Lewis spoke, and a great many questions were put to him, and then the two Barnetts were introduced, and questions put to them, and they made answers which were so little satisfactory, and showing such a state of affairs, that I found it was very difficult to control the indignant feeling, for they found that after eight or ten months the man had 400l. to his credit, and 4,000l. to his pretended credit, and had lost 10,000l. in 10 months, and all the goods had vamonsed—Eleazsr Barnett left the meeting of his own will—when the constable came to arrest
the prisoners Mr. Lewis asked him by my desire as chairman to wait, so as to allow the creditors to put some questions to them, and then the defendant was taken in custody.
SEPTIMUS WOOD WATSON . I am an accountant, of 20, Ely Place, Holborn—I was applied to by Barnett, 18th May, 1878, to make a balance-sheet for him for the last half of 1877—a trial balance which had been made by a gentleman named Trotter was handed to me—it was imperfect, and I requested Barnett to allow me to compare it with the books—he refused, but finally I got the materials to make a true balance-sheet, and the final balance for the half-year ending 31st December, 1877, showed a net capital of 360l. odd—the value of the lease of the premises in King Street was included in that sum; the value of them is shown in the private ledger,—I believe it was 600l.—the result of my investigations was entered in his private book; this is the entry signed by me—the lease is put down at 600l.; it was given me originally as 200l., and it was put down with the assets as 200l. in the first balance-sheet; it appeared at 142l. 10s. in the previous balance-sheet for June, and in the trial balance-sheet at 200l.,—omitting the question of the lease altogether the previous balance-sheet showed a deficiency on the capital account of about 60l.—I called his attention to that, and he told me he wished the value of the lease increased by 400l., as he had made several alterations on the premises, which fully accounted for the amount to be added—I acquiesced in that after asking him to specify the alterations, and it was entered in the balance-sheet as 600l.—I did not look at the alterations.
Cross-examined. I do not know Mr. Trotter—he may have said after the final balance-sheet had been given to him that he wanted the books gone through, and the stock taken, but not before—I said I understood he could not let me have the books, because they were very busy, and the books were in use—that is what I call a refusal—he said that I might safely take Mr. Trotter's figures—my charge of four guineas would have been a most inadequate remuneration if I had not taken Mr. Trotter's figures—neither I nor any clerk under my direction took any account of the stock with the exception of the figures raising the value of the lease—the defendant never gave me a single figure—I remember seeing the bill-book; all the other books were very much in arrear—as to posting up entries book, a bill should be entered the moment it is given—I di covered a little error of 300l., but I cannot say that it was made by Mr. Trotter, and another little error of 1,200l.; that did not affect the trial balance, but the 300l. did—the 300l. was an error of the clerk in the office, and the 1,200l. was a balance which had been omitted to be written off—after the conclusion of the four guineas' worth of work I delivered the papers to E'eazar Barnett at his request—the Manchester stock is entered in the balance-sheet, and I cannot say whether the defendant said "You have taken no account of the Manchester stock"—I will not swear he did not—I believe I have not said "I cannot recollect anything being said about Manchester at all"—the conversation about the lease was previous to my handing over the papers in August—I sent in my account for four guineas on 20th July, and on 28th August I professed my readiness to make up the balance-sheet to June; no arrangement was made as to my remuneration for that; it would have been far more than four guineas—I compared the trade ledger with the bill-book, and the entries were all correct except the
300l., which was clearly a clerical error—I was not supplied with any of the previous balance-sheets; a private ledger was handed to me—I did not investigate the figures—I was 19 hours over the matter; it sometimes takes weeks or months to prepare a balance-sheet—I never make one without checking it; it would take me a month with my clerk's assistance; the labour would be less in the next half-year—Mason and Andrews, the receivers, are a very respectable firm—I do not know whether they estimated the lease at 300l.; if improvements have been made it was not an extravagant sum in the City of London—I rendered two balance-sheets to the defendant, and the first would have been accepted if it had not been for the mistake of the 300l.—he spoke to me about the improvements before the balance-sheet was ready—neither of the balance-sheets were handed to Eleazar Barnett—I sent the final balance-sheet by my clerk to the prisoner.
Re-examined. It was when I presented the first balance-sheet to him that he raised the question of the increased value; the balance-sheet he was then speaking of showed a deficiency, and the lease was put down at 200l.; he said it was too low—Mr. Trotter has done what I should have had to do if he had not—I presumed that he had checked the whole of the work—my labours were only putting the figures together, otherwise I should have had extra labour for which I should have charged—the error of 300l. was the only one affecting the balance-sheet, that was corrected in my final balance-sheet—the value of the stock at Manchester, 50l., and of the cash at Manchester, 144l. 0s. 7d., was included; that refers to the state of things on 31st December, 1877.
HENRY PARSONS . I am manager of the Beaufort Club, Rathbone Place—I knew the Barnetts some time before their failure, they were both members of the club—before October I frequently had betting with the defendant, and he won from me 435l. on Wednesday, 22nd October; we should settle on the following Monday, the 28th, in the ordinary course, and on the Sunday evening I received a letter purporting to be from him, which I tore up—I had never seen his writing—after that I paid Mr. Lewin 379l. 3s., that was deducting two sums of 25l. and 23l. due to me from the defendant and his brother, and on the next day, Tuesday, I heard that he had filed his petition—I had seen Mr. Lewin before; I do not know what he is; his age is about 25 or 26; I know that he is a distant relation—I had had bets with Lewin personally—the defendant has not applied to me since to pay him this money.
Cross-examined. There were 699 members of the Beaufort Club last year—it is one of the rules that bets are only to be made between members of the club—Lewin was not a member—my son paid him; I think he gave him a cheque of Mr. Hassfelt for 80l., with other money—I do not know when the liquidation was, but it was on a Monday that I paid Lewin the money, and I think I heard of the liquidation on Tuesday or Wednesday; I know he was paid on the previous day—the bets I had with Lewin were made outside the club, at a society which I used to belong to—I think I the defendant betted with me more than six times in 1868—he never told me that he was betting for some one outside—the club members may say to me "I want so-and-so done," and I do it—I am a bookmaker—I should think the defendant won about 400l. on the balance; independently of this one occasion I had to pay him 100l., and he may have lost half of
that back again; that was in 1878; therefore 50l. would represent the money passing from him and his brother to me in 1878—I did not appear at the Mansion House—Hassfelt did not introduce Lewin to me—the 80l. was apparently lost by Hassfelt to me—he did not introduce me to the Barnetts, Mr. Albert did—Lewin never bet with anybody but me; if he bet with any one outside the club I should not know it.
Re-examined. The Cambridgeshire was run on a Wednesday in October; Isonomy won; he backed Isonomy and won 435l., which was paid on the following Monday—Barnett has never asked me to pay him again—I received no letter telling me that he was going to compound with his creditors.
By the Court. What bets people make outside the club I know nothing about—I should not bet with anybody who was not a member—members have to be elected, and they subscribe so much a year—the bets are not all made with me; everybody can do as they like.
JOHN SEEAR . I am an accountant of 23, Holborn Viaduct, and am trustee in Burnett's bankruptcy—I was present at the meeting of the 6th under the liquidation—I was appointed trustee on 4th February, 1879—I had before been appointed receiver under the bankruptcy—no resolution was passed under the liquidation proceedings—a few days after December 19th the books came into my possession—I fully investigated them—the whole of the liabilities amounted to about 30,000l.—I have realised under 900l., and I expect to realise 100l. more, 150l. would be the outside—I cannot say that all those liabilities were incurred during 1878, but the greater part of them were—I endeavoured to dispose of the lease; nobody bid for it by auction, and a new lease has been granted at an advance of 25l. on the rent—the value of the lease and the statement of affairs is 300.l.—that estimate would be made by the bankrupts themselves—their statement was filed on 4th February, 1879—the statement of affairs in which it is valued at 300l. is signed by them—I looked at the premises, but was not able to discover any signs of 300l. or 600l. being laid out upon them—the first acceptance was dishonoured on 25th or 26th October—we have it in Montague Barnett's books on 25th October—that bill was drawn by W. Harris for 200l., and accepted by the bankrupt at three months, dated 23rd July—I find on 28th October the following bills were dishonoured: one drawn by William Harris, accepted by Barnett, and held by Joseph Brothers for 568l. 10s. 3d.; it fell due on 25th October, being a six months' bill from 25th April, and on the same day a bill drawn by Bacher and Leon, on 25th July, at three months, for 90l. 7s. 3d., due on 28th October, and on 30th October a bill for 577l. 6s. 1d., a bill drawn by Cope and Simner at 90 days, dated 29th July—by the statsment of affairs I find 18,733l. 8s. 7d., due to unsecured creditors, and 1,115l. 5s. 3d. due to creditors fully secured; estimated value of securities 1,445l. 5s. 6d., surplus 330l. 0s. 3d.; the creditors partly secured are 2,443l. 0s. 2d., estimated value of securities 913l. 10s. 10d.—I find other liabilities put down at 2,292l. 8s. 3d. expected to rank for dividend to the extent of 500l.; the liabilities on bills discounted was 6,935l. 10s. 3d. which will rank against the estate 4,524l. 6s. 11d., less cash and bills held by bankers 387l. 8s. 4d., total value ranking against the estate 4,149l. 18s. 8d.—the stock in trade in Ring Street is estimated at 860l. 6s., and the book debts 2,672l. 12s. 8d., estimated to produce 1,886l. 10s. 5d.—the amount
owing by Harris, Cohen, and Co., of Lima, is 7,759l. 7s. 2d., and amongst the assets are 25 bills estimated to produce 1,052l. 10s. 5d.—the furniture is put down at 50l., and altogether the assets are put down at 11,944l. 15s., and all that I shall realise will be 1,000l. or 1,052l.—the bills of exchange estimated to produce 1,052l. 10s. 5d., I do not think they have produced 25s.—only about two of them have been all paid, the larger ones remain in my hands—they are all from Paris—the stock at King Street estimated to produce 866l. 6s. 1d. realised about 185l. 10s. 6d.—as to the debt of 7,759l. from Harris, Cohen, and Co., a draft for 200l. was handed to me by Mason and Andrews, who received it—it has been paid—I sent out a power of attorney to Lima, but could not find, nothing came out of it—the purchases by Barnett during July, August, September, and October were 11,627l. 1s. 9d., that is four months before the presentation of the bankruptcy petition—that differs from the figures I gave before, because I took them from the filing of the petition—goods were supplied right up to the time of the suspension—I find in July, 1878, goods to the amount of 667l. 18s. 2d. debited to the Manchester house, and 2,073l. 2s. 9d. to Harris and Co. of Lima—the London sales that month are 281l. 4s., in August 1,635l. 15s. 8d. to Manchester, and 522l. 18s. 6d. to Harris, Cohen, and Co.—in September 4,879l. 18s. 7d. to Manchester, and 1,583l. 17l. 9d. to the London house, and 1,714l. 8l. 6d. to Harris, Cohen, and Co.—in October 1,422l. 10s. 5d. to Manchester, 1,228l. 19s. 6d. to Harris, Cohen, and Co, and 1,153l. 10s. 10l. to the London house—the total sales in London are 3,553l. 10s. 11d., of which 2,150l. 2s. 11d. are to friends and relatives made up of sales to Messrs. Lewin, to Mindeson of Riga, and E. and M. Barnett; the balance is to ordinary customers—the Manchester sales to the London house in the four months amount to 8,742l. 5s. 6d., and to Harris, Cohen, and Co., 3,539l. 9s. 3d.—the total amount of goods sent to the Manchester house from December 1st, 1877, to 10th October, 1878, is 13,615l. 18s. 9d., that is from the starting of the Manchester business, that leaves 12,745l.—I find entered in the books "Oct. 3rd, 1878, J. Wolf, Manchester account, 2,000l., ditto our acceptances cancelled as per bill book, 2,400l.," and on the other side "Oct. 3rd, by bills payable J. Wolf 2,400l."—there is no other entry to show what that is for, but it is called the Manchester account—the first of the bills which appear as cancelled was due on October 22nd, then comes November 14th, 22nd, 30th; December 4th, 22nd; and January 22nd and February 22nd, 1879—they are drawn by W. Harris on the bankrupts, and I was present at the examination when Mrs. Harris admitted that the signature was hers—my materials for the value of the stock at Manchester are just what the bankrupt stated, which is all down here, and his books, and I also made inquiries for Nicholle, Dupin, and Co.'s employed—at the time of the sale to Wolf the bills remitted from the London house to Manchester from the beginning were 1,879l. 5s. 4d., they are all in the hands of creditors who have not been paid; they appear in the books (Heading a number of entries)—I find among Barnett's a number of bills drawn on Phillips, of Manchester, amounting to 989l. 0s. 6d. by the bill book—they are payable on the National Provincial Bank of England—that may be the Manchester branch—I find Miss Lewin's name in the books, and an entry on 25th October, 1878, "Messrs. Lewin and Co., No. 30,921, 79 1/2 yards of black silk at 8s. 3d., 32l. 15s. 11d.; 30,991, 72 1/2 yards of 83l. 5s. 6d.; 1,033, 437/8 yards at 5s. 4d., 11l. 11s. 4d.; total 77l. 4s. 2d.; 5 per cent, commission,
81l. 1s. 5d.; 12 silver watches at 77s., 46l. 4s.; total, 127l. 5s. 5d." M. Barnett did not account for 300l. and odd received from Mr. Parsons.
Cross-examined. Exhibit "H," which was produced at the Mansion House, was Miss Lewin's bill—the date of it does not correspond with the debtor's books; the bill itself is payable on 22nd July; a noting ticket is put on value 1s. 6d., but the ticket bears no date—the bill shows that it is due on 25th October—a bill of Narcoso's fell due on the 26th—Miss Lewin was examined—I have not been advised at present to bring an action against her to recover the value of the goods—she is entered as a creditor for 39l. 1s. 10d.—she holds several bills, one of which is for 100l.—there has been no proof by her at present—she can prove for what she likes, but we should not admit the proof; we should not allow her to rank for dividend without charging for the goods—she can only rank against the estate after crediting all the cash and goods she has received—I acted for Josephs Brothers' creditors for 1,015l. on October 28th, that was the first time my attention was called to the failure—I saw Mr. George Lewis, sen., who is now dead; Josephs were his clients, I went there to instruct him, and he had already been instructed—Mason and Andrews were acting already and had sent out a circular that the books were in their hands—they' are respectable people—they ceased to have anything to do with it because the liquidation had fallen through—the papers came from them into my possession; they prepared the statement, ana in the bankruptcy also; I prepared none—I believe a copy of the same statement served; I don't think there was any alteration—the committee of inspection were Mr. Percy, Mr. Josephs, Mr. Appleby, Mr. Kelly, and Mr. Fister—I went fully into the defendants' books when I became trustee—I prepared this exhibit "G," it shows that the firm of which M. Barnett was a partner commenced prior to December, 1866—he continued a partner all those years down to this failure—he has had three partners in that time, Mr. Druitt, Philip Samuels, and William Harris—Druitt was the first partner, and then Harris, Druitt, and Montagu Bantt were all together from 1867 to December, 1871; they all signed the balance sheets—William Harris and M. Barnett were then left alone till December, 1873; Harris has not signed the balance sheets, but his capital is here—the firm was next composed of M. Barnett and Philip Samuels, up to December, 1874, and then M. Barnett, Philip Samuels, and Eleazar Barnett—the first balance sheet showing capital to Eleazar Barnett is in June, 1875—I believe Samuels went out in June, 1876, leaving only the two Barnetts in; no, I see he was still in in December, 1876—the capital rose from 2,129l. 9s. 6d. in 1866, to 11,948l. in December, 1871; it fluctuated to 7,500l. and 8,400l:, until it appeared in December, 1875, at 4,452l., it then gradually fell to 363l. 6s. 6d.—when the capital was 11,000l. the reserve for bad debts was 700l., and when it was 3,000l., 150l.—there was a loss in four half-years, and the other half-years a profit—there has been great commercial depression for the last few years—I have no materials by which to estimate the stock at Manchester; there are in the bankruptcy two principal leaks—I have no proof of any banking account at Manchester; Mason and Andrews had the Manchester books—Woolf has an action against us, and we have a counter claim; I took possession of the Manchester business and he got an injunction against me—I do not know that Mr. Charles V. Lewis was acting for Woolf when I first got into communication with him—Mr. Lewis did not satisfy me that the sale had been the subject of a deed—I have never
seen a deed; it was not produced by Woolf when he was examined—between six and nine months after the business was disposed of they offered it to me for 10s. in the pound, but that was after they had had the business in their own hands, and after there had been sales intermediate—on 6th December Mr. Woolf got up and said he would give 1,600l. to the estate; 1 took that to be the estimated value of the stock—he did not claim against that 1,600l. to have the 10s. in the pound—it was stated, I believe by the bankrupt, that the stock was worth 6,000l., and Mr. Woolf said that he would give the difference between the price he had given and the valuation, but when it came to the time he never carried out the promise—we have not got the bankrupt's book relating to the Manchester business, and there is no account of the stock week by week at Manchester in Barnett's book—the only account is that the book when marked shows what has gone to Manchester—the destination of all the goods is shown clearly on the books—the vast mass of the goods went direct to Manchester without going through their hands at all—all the invoices sent from Barnett and Co. Were debited for stock in the invoice book—I found the actual invoiced from the manufacturers in Barnett's books—only 10 per cent, was put on the value of the goods as against Manchester; I made a mistake in saying 12 1/2—the 13,000l. includes the 10 per cent. up to June, 1878, but not afterwards—I should not like to swear I knew Parsons 5 or 6 months ago; I gave no evidence against him at the Mansion House—my impression is that I heard about Parsons before the committal in July—I have a list of the hands employed in the London ware-house—from January, 1877, to October, 1878, the monthly expenses in London were 2,087l. 15s. 11d., of which 400l. 15s. was paid to Messrs. Barnett for travelling expenses—that does not include their drawings for their own maintenance, that came out of their share of profit—Montagu Barnett's weekly drawings are mixed up with several accounts—he did not keep them separate—there are loans to Miss Lewin and other people, borrowing and paying back, but his drawings for the four months from July 1 to the end of October were 644l. 10s. 10d., and in June, 1878, it is 812l. for the six months; that would be about 2,000l. a year—I am not able to say to what purpose those drawings were devoted—I have taken out the loans on both sides—they credit themselves at the end of every half year, and Montagu Barnett's is 520l. for the half-year; he took 20l. and his brother 15l. a week; that went to the trade expenses; he was entitled to draw as an employe—that had not to be taken out in the balance sheet before we got the net profits—we should look at the amount of profit made in the business—Montagu Barnett was living at the rate of about 2,000l. a year from 1877 to 1878—if he paid any person who obliged him any interest that would be debited to him, and being debited to him, it would be in the 2,000l. a year—if he drew money from the business and paid it away it must appear to his debit—those amounts we can trace. I have told you of; those we cannot trace we conclude are his personal expenses—every farthing he drew which I cannot trace for loans I put down as personal expenses—the bankers' pass-book is correct, and the items vouched—all the items which appear in the cash-book are carried to some account—I do not think the prisoner wrote in the book at all—we have discovered no item omitted from the books but Parsons; it is impossible; we have no materials—when Mason and Andrews handed me the 200l. they gave me several
letters from Lima, signed W. Harris—they were among the exhibits; they were addressed to Barnett, and I took possession of them and opened them—I have not received 500l., only 200l., but 850l. was received by the bankrupts prior to filing their petition—I believe the refusals to receive goods date from 25th October—hore is at page 668 of the letter-book a letter to Hutchison, of Sloe Street, saying "The goods will be useless now, as the season is too far advanced"—there are lots of countermands from the 28th, including Jules Clare and Co.—these expenses commenced in July, 1878—the total for July is 67l., for August 78l., and for September 88l. or 90l.—we have the old expenses book prior to this—the petty cash in July is 23l.—I find I have omitted 5l. in one week and 6l. in another for petty cash—there is an account here called travelling expenses, which I believe includes traveller's salary—these are the only books showing trade expenses—no rent or taxes are included in the figures I have given—I am given to understand that two holdings were turned into one warehouse some time before—when I became receiver I did not find two landlords—there was an entrance in Ironmonger Lane and another in King Street and a warehouse right through—Barnett employed only two men—the lease has only ten years to run—I should put the release at about 150l.—the fixtures were of no value except to a new tenant using the same business—we made 25l. out of them—the tenant took them because he wanted the safe, which was let into the wall—I think he would give that for the safe alone.
Re-examined. I do not know what became of the 2,000l. a year, whether it went to Mr. Parsons or whether it was given away in charity—that was exclusive of what Eleazar Barnett had—in the ease of Philip Samuels we found that the goods were sold considerably below the invoice price—I O U per cent was lost, which was put on to cover charges, and 14 per cent. was lost as well—the balance-sheets are not all signed—the balance-sheet in June, 1877, is 821l. 6s., and in December also, and if you take off the lease a profit was made by adding 400l. to the lease. (MR. BULWER proposing to put in the bankrupts' examination, MR. BESLEY objected on the ground that, at it was not voluntary, it could not be used against himt he not having received any caution before answering questions, upon which MR. BULWER withdrew the examination.)
MR. BOWEN (Re-examined by MR. BESLEY). I do not think the 20l. a week drawn latterly by the defendant included what he had to lay out for travelling expenses; they were separate—I never knew him draw 2,000l. a year—five people were employed in the warehouse when the business was in full swing: two clerks, a porter, the manager, and the junior—the payments to them were about 12l. a week—there were three or four travellers besides at one time, two of whom had 2l. a week and travelling expenses and commission, which would, I think, average 2l. 10s. a week each man—I kept an account of the travellers' expenses in this book (produced)—they amount to 35l. a month, on an average—this 23l. for petty cash is correct—that is entirely exclusive of the wages and travelling expenses.
MR. BESLEY submitted that there was no evidence that the defendant ever received the 380l. on 8th October; that, as to the diamonds, they were obtained in France, out of the jurisdiction of this Court; that the
statement that Harris's firm was an old-established one at Lima had not been negatived; that the examination not being put in, there was no evidence I on the tenth count, and that, as to the conspiracy counts, the two brothers were hardly brought together, and there was no evidence of conspiracy at all.
MR. BULWER contended that there was ample evidence of conspiracy as to the "bogus"firm at Lima; that a man might obtain goods in London by I means of a lie told in Paris, the offence being committed where the goods were obtained.
The Court considered that there was evidence for the Jury on all the I counts except the two relating to Manchester.
HENRY RANDALL (Policeman). I took the defendant on the 6th Dec., at the meeting of creditors, and found this letter in two pieces on him, which was impounded. (This had been torn out of the letter book, and was from the defendant to Mr. Phillips, dated July 30th, stating that he had closed with the offer of 5,000l. for the Manchester business). I found on I him between 2l. and 3l., which was given up to him.
JOHN SEARS (Re-examined). I know Mr. Philip by sight—I do not I know of his being in business, but I believe he has been to my office several times as the manager of Nicholle, Dupin, and Co.; that was after the 19th December.
The prisoner received an excellent character.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Imprisonment.
MR. GILL Prosecuted;. and MR. BESLEY Defended.
ERNEST ROBINSON . I am a clerk in the Registrar's office of the Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of proceedings in the defendant's bank ruptcy—the petition is dated 5th April, 1073, and the adjudication I April 7th—no accounts are filed—the examination of the bankrupt was on 22nd September, 1879—James Proctor was appointed trustee on the I 24th April.
Cross-examined. James Procter, warehouseman, of 22, Well Street, Jewin Street, was the petitioning creditor—he swore that his debt was 56l. 3s., excepting a bill of exchange dishonoured—I do not see his proofs on the file—he had them away—we have a receipt for them; these are office copies—the Registrar was chairman at the first meeting—the debts disclosed then amounted to 148l. 6s. 7d.—James Procter accepted the trusteeship at the same meeting—the total number of creditors assenting are three—they are the only creditors who prove their debts.
JAMES PROCTER . In 1873 I was in business with my brother Joseph, at 22, Well Street, as James Procter and Co., warehousemen—prisoner was a wholesale clothier at 6, Anthony Street, Commercial Road—he bad bought woollen goods of us for six years—we gave him two months' credit and discount, and then we gave him longer credit and discount by drawing bills, and he met them till 1872, when he got behind—in consequence of something that happened my brother went to see him in March; he then owed us only 300l.—I had been to the premises in March, and conversed with him, and seen stock there, and business going on as usual—we sent Upton, a porter, there on 4th April to present a bill for payment—he came back, and, from what he said, I went there and found the place shut up—we afterwards got inside and found it empty—we saw the other creditors,
and then filed a petition, and the defendant was adjudicated a bankrupt—he did not attend any of the meetings—I have seen furniture in his house—I only proved for one bill for 56l., because the other bills had not matured—he has been since examined at the Bankruptcy Court, and his son-in-law Rosenberg—in consequence of information I went several times to a house in Virginia Place, Commercial Road, and saw the defendant's wife, sons, and daughters, and recognised some furniture as Sternheim's, which I had seen at Anthony Place—he now owes us 330l., the debt and the expenses of the bankruptcy.
Cross-examined. I liquidated my affairs in 1873 for 20l.; some of my creditors got 20s. and others 10s.; there is only 2,000l. wanted to make them all up to 20s.; I paid it to every creditor—I have been up and down stairs at Anthony Street—I have not heard him describe any woman as his wife; that woman was introduced to me as his wife by his sons and daughters, and I believe she was his Wife, because she became chargeable on the parish when he deserted her—there were two grown-up sons and a daughter; I did not see a daughter-in-law—I will swear to seeing a chair and a table, but cannot remember other things, it is so long ago—I did not sell them; the landlord claimed six months' rent, or else I should have, but he did not put in, an execution—I had not seen the defendant since the latter end of March—I have never had a paper off the file, but I received three proofs as trustee; they were left in Court—I did not swear to two exhibits, one of 36l. 6s. 4d., and an invoice for goods supplied, 19l. 6s. 8d., covered by a bill—here is the proof which you say was removed from the file; it was not sworn by me—the goods were supplied on 7th February, 1873—he was indebted to McCarthy 69l. 12s., a member of the committee of inspection—M'Carthy did not, to my knowledge, go to the premises and remove the goods which he had supplied—he is not here, he is laid up with gout—these circumstances took place 18 months previous to the bankruptcy—he had 200 coats, and gave Sternheim credit for them—two sons and one daughter worked in the business—if I had known that this old man had pawned the goods to raise the means of paying my bill I should have given him in custody—he did not tell me the last time I saw him that he should return the goods and go back to Rotterdam.
Re-examined. The rent of the house was about 25l., and the son valued the furniture at.30l.
JOSEPH PROCTER . In the latter end of March I went through the defendant's stock with him at cost price, and found that he had got 25s. for every pound he owed—there was from 400l. to 500l. worth of stock—his liabilities were put at 380l., 300l. of which he owed us—I recognised clothes of ours there—I came away very well satisfied—on 6th April our porter, Upton, was sent to present a bill, and in consequence of what we heard from him my brother went to the premises, and I afterwards went and found the place empty—I afterwards went to Virginia Place, and saw Stemheim's daughter—I spoke to nobody else—I recognised a chair there which I had seen at Anthony Street, as it was a very peculiar one—I was one of the committee of inspection—the matter was put into the hands of Hague and Ellis, solicitors—I did not see the prisoner again till September, when I was passing the Mansion House, and I said "Sternheim"—he laid down his bundle, and said "My God, Mr. Procter, I will pay you"—I called a constable, having obtained a warrant in April—he was taken to
Bow Street, where I asked him where he had been—he said "To Rotterdam"—I said "What has become of the money?" and he said "I have I been robbed of it."
Cross-examined. I do not know whether he came from Rotterdam originally—I only found two sons working on the premises—on 28th March a bill of ours in Smith's hands had come back; Smith sued us, and got judgment—I am not aware that 45l. execution was taken out after he had given us 10l. in cash—I do not know whether he paid 6l. 6s. solicitor costs—we had a bill; I think it was for 25l., but what it was for I do not know; it was on Rosenbaum and it was paid—although I speak of the property being of this value we did take out the execution—I dissolved partnership with my brother at the end of 1873, and never did anything I more in the matter till I met the prisoner.
MR. BESLEY submitted that there was no case to go to the Jury as to removing property value 10l., as the only property proved to be removed was a chair and a table, and that if property was removed, the value of beds, bedding, and wearing apparel should be deducted; but there was an utter failure of proof that any property was removed by him, and if he abscondd and did not take 20l. with him he would not be liable accept for contempt of Court, and his wife and daughters might have removed the property after he went to Rotterdam, for which he would not be responsible unless he was present, aiding and assisting them. MR. GILL contended that it was not I necessary to prove that any one was present at the removal of the goods; that no one had an interest in the removal of the stock but the bankrupt himself) and that the fact of the things having disappeared was a proof of their removal. The COURT considered that there was a case to go to the Jury.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his age. — Two Months' Imprisonment.
THIRD COURT.—Friday, November 28th, 1879.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted.
FRANK HOOPER . I live with my mother, Mary Ann Hooper, at 21, St. Mary's Road, Islington—on Saturday, 8th November, between 9.30 and 10 p.m., I was in the dining-room, and thought I heard a noise in the garden—I called up the dog, and it barked at the closet door inside the house—the back door leading into the garden was closed, bolted, and chained—the closet door opening into the hall was bolted on the outside—there is a window in the closet looking into the garden, and large enough for a man to get through—I opened the closet door and found the prisoner there, lying on the Root, and his boots were off—I said "What are you doing there?"—he said "Please to let me go; this is my first time"—I am not certain whether the I window was shut or open—his boots were lying at his side—I called somebody—I took hold of him and he asked me to let him go—I said "I shall not; "then he struggled and made for the back door, but it was bolted I—I caught hold of him by the shirt and it tore and he ran through the
front door into the street—I followed and caught him a little distance down the street and some other people came up—I never lost sight of him.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. When I found you in the closet I bolted you in, but thinking you might get through the window I opened the door again—you had time to slip your boots on and had them on when you ran in the street—I jumped on your back as you were running—I did not look to see if your boots were unlaced—I have not the slightest doubt you are the man.
ALFRED CLARKE (Policeman N 405). The prisoner was given into my custody and I charged him with burglary in the dwelling-house of the prosecutor—he made no reply and I took him to the station—I afterwards examined Hooper's premises—there is a wall in the back garden—the closet window looks into the garden, and is about seven or eight feet high from the ground—to get to it he would have to get up some lattice work—on searching him I found upon him these two knives and silent matches—one of the knives has a piece of cork stuck upon it—the other knife would go between the sashes of the window.
Cross-examined. You were on the steps of the front door when I took you in custody, and had your boots on, but they were both unlaced—you had no property on you belonging to the prosecutor—I had not seen you in the neighbourhood—there were no marks on the window.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I have nothing to say."
Witness for the Defence.
CHARLES SINCLAIR . On Saturday, 8th November, about 8 p.m., I met you in Essex Road, Islington, and asked you to come and have is glass in the Three Brewers—I had an old shopmate with me whom I had not seen for about 18 months—I had not seen you for some time—we were drinking there from 8 till about 9.20 or 9.25—when we came outside I said "I shall have to take the bus now to get home by 10," and you asked me the nearest way to the Holliwell Road—I directed you, and got on the bus to High Street, Stoke Newington—it stops at the Clarence at the top of the street where I live.
Cross-examined. I live at 49, Defoe Road, High Street, Stoke Newington—the Three Brewers is in the Essex Road—I last saw the prisoner in Essex Road, about three minutes' walk from St. Mary's Road—I did not see him in St. Mary's Road—I came out of the public-bouse between 9.20 and 9.25—I have just heard that the burglary was in Si Mary's Road—we were in the public-house an hour and a half—the prisoner has been a sailor—he has been cutting laces for shoemakers, and I think I have seen similar knives to this (produced) in his possession, but it had no cork upon it—I never saw the other knife—I was not at the police-court—I first heard on Monday about 10 or 10.30 that he was in custody, and I went to the police-court prepared to give evidence, but was not called upon—the shopmate was Thomas Carter—I cannot find out where he lives.
Prisoner's Defence. I met him, and was with him in the Three Brewers from 8 to between 9.20 and 9.25 I asked him the nearest way to Holliwell Road, and he told me and got on the 'bus I went towards Holliwell Road, and heard somebody shout, and this young man jumped on my back, and three or four more came up and took me. I said, "What is this for!" and they said, "You know all about it;" and took me to the house, but I would not go in till the police came. The constable came, and I said, "I
did not break into anybody's house." He said, "You will have to state that before the Magistrate."
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
Mr. Davis Prosecuted.
DAVID CHRISTIE . I am an engineer at 25, Rutland Street, Pimlico—on Thursday night, 23rd October, about 12 o'clock, I was in the Pimlico Road, near Chelsea Barracks, going home—when the prisoner called out to me "Halloa! old fellow, are you getting home?"—I said "Yes"—he said "You are Scotch?"—I said "Yes"—he then said he belonged to Edinburgh, or had been there some time, and we had a conversation about Edinburgh—then he said "Will you give me a glass of beer?"—I took him into a public-house opposite and gave him some ale, and I had some lemonade—we went farther along the street, talking the whole time about Chelsea Barracks and Edinburgh and Scotland—he then said "It's time 1 was going"—I put my hand to see the time, and found my chain hanging to my waistcoat—I said "You have got my watch"—he said "I have not got your watch"—I said "Yes you have"—he swore he had not, and I got excited and said "I would rather lose anything than my watch. Give me my watch, I know you have got it, and I will give you all the money I have got"—I had only 2s.—he said "I have not got it"—my father bought me the watch, and I valued it a great deal—I then took hold of him by the coat and said "I shall not leave you till I get my watch; I will go to the barracks or the police-station"—then he commenced abusing me and striking me—I saw the witness Parker coming along, and I called out to him to help me; and just as he came up the prisoner gave me a violent blow on the eye, stunning me, and I do not know what took place after—I have the mark now—the policeman then came—I had the watch safe when I met the prisoner—this (produced) is it—it was not broken; it was taken off the swivel—I had only two glasses of stout before I saw him, and then I only had the glass of lemonade.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not meet you in the urinal; 1 was not in there—I did not ask you to go up the road with me when I came out of the Coach and Horses—I was sober; I did not know what you were—you were talking about the barracks, and asked me to go and see them, and you would treat me—I went about 300 yards in that direction—I did not offer you a present, or give you my watch, or make an indecent proposal to you—I said I would give you all the money I had to get back the watch, because I feared I should never get it back, and I would I have given 1l. to get it back—I did not see or feel you take my watch; I thought it was taken in the public-house—I do not know how you got it—I it is not cut or broken—I charged you with stealing it—you would have kicked me if the policeman had not come—you did not try to run away till I the policeman came—you knew you could master me.
Re-examined. There is no truth in his statement of my having made an I indecent proposal.
CLEMENT PALMER . I am a cabdriver at 3, Bolton Street, Church Street, Chelsea—on 23rd October, about 12.50 a.m., I was going across the college grounds opposite the barracks—it was rather foggy—the road goes through
the college—I heard Christie say "Give roe ray watch," and as I got nearer I saw his gold albert-chain hanging down—Christie was holding the prisoner by the collar—he said to me "Gentleman, if you are a gentleman, help me. He has stolen my watch"—I said to the prisoner "If you have got his watch, give it up; what do you want to knock the man about like that for?"—he was hitting him—he said "I have not got bis watch"—I said "Release him; I'll see that he does not get away;" and as soon as he released him, the prisoner struck him a violent blow in the eye, and knocked him into the road—I said "Well, now you shan't go till the policeman comes," and I detained the prisoner till the policeman came up—when I first came up they were struggling together—the prisoner said twice in my presence "I have not got your watch"—when the policeman came, be asked me to walk on the other Bide of the prisoner, but he did not show any violence—after walking about five minutes, the prisoner pulled the watch out of his pocket, and said "Here's the watch," handing it to the policeman—I believe he had told the policeman twice that he had not got the watch.
Cross-examined. You gave up the watch near the barracks; you struck the prosecutor; you did not try to run away; I did not see you take the watch.
ALBERT RANSOM (Policeman B 180). On the night in question I was coming off point duty just before 1 o'clock when I heard some one quarrelling on the other side, and when I got within 4 or 5 yards of them I saw the prosecutor run into the roadway holding his hand to his eye and say "Oh?"—I went across and saw the cabman holding the prisoner, and he said he had stolen the prosecutor's watch—the prisoner said "I have not got his watch"—I said "Then you have assaulted him"—he said "Yes, I have"—the prosecutor said he would charge him with stealing his watch—he said "I have not got your watch; I have struck you"—I said "You will have to come along with me now"—he said "Very well"—I took him in custody, and the cabdriver walked on the other side of him—after walking 300 or 400 yards he said "I have the watch," producing it from his tunic pocket, "I shall give it to the inspector when I get inside"—I took him to the station and charged him with stealing a watch and assaulting him, and there he gave me the watch.
Cross-examined. On the way to the station you pulled out the watch and said he had given it to you—you did not attempt to run away—I did not see you take the watch.
The Prisoners Statement before the Magistrates was that Prosecutor made him an indecent proposal and offered to give him his watch, and that then he (Prisoner) struck the Prosecutor in the eye.
In his defence he made a similar statement.
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment.
OLD COURT.—Monday, December 1st, 1879.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
MR. PURCELL Prosecuted; MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS Defended.
is at the corner of Guildford Road, fronting Stinkhouso Bridge—on 14th October, from 11 to 11.30 I was in ray shop, at the door—I saw the prisoner driving a van with two horses; he was coming as fast as the horses could gallop from Stinkhouse Bridge with a load of coke; it was not skidding the kerb, it was more in the centre of the road—I saw the deceased Ann Wyatt standing nearly on the kerb at the crossing of Broomfield Street—she was not on the roadway—she was crossing from Broomfield Street to Guildford Road; there are three cross-ways—she was just off the footpath—the horses struck her—she was then about a yard or a yard and a half from the kerb—one horse knocked her down and the other trampled upon her, and the two wheels went over her—the van went on a little way, not very far; I could not say how far, because I ran to the poor woman and I saw her arms jammed right off—she was picked up by two men, taken on to the pavement, and then to the hospital—the prisoner did not call out before she was knocked down, I am sure of that.
Cross-examined. I was inside the door of my shop—I can swear that no one called out—I heard no screaming till afterwards—I did not say before the Magistrate that the prisoner pulled up not far from the accident—she stopped in front of the horses before she was knocked down—I did not say that the horses would have knocked her down even if she had not stopped—I could not say whether they would or not—I did not see anything to make her stop—there was no other vehicle near.
CAROLINE SHERRING . I live at 22, Cottal Street, Poplar—on the morning of 14th October I was crossing from Guildford Road—I did not see the deceased—I saw the prisoner and his van coming down from the bridge right against the kerb, skidding the kerb, I am sure of that—I should I say he was coming as fast as he well could—I don't understand galloping, I have not been brought up with horses—I saw the wheel leaving the woman, and the second wheel going over her—I heard no cries till I saw I the wheel over the woman—I could not say whether the prisoner called out—he stopped at the other corner.
Cross-examined. I did not say before the Magistrate that could not I say whether the horses were galloping; I said they were galloping—the I van was very heavily laden.
STEPHEN TYLER (Police Constable K 191). On 17th October I went to 9, Broomfield Street, Bromley, and found the prisoner there—I told him he would be charged with furiously and recklessly driving two horses in Guildford Street, Bromley, and causing the death of a woman on 14th October—he said "All right; I will go with you."
MESSRS. MONTAGU WILLIAMS and PURCELL Prosecuted; MR. WARNER SLEIGH Defended, at the request of the Court.
IRA SPRAGUE CROWE . I was first mate on board the William—the captain and part owner was William Journay—she was a British ship—I I shipped at New York, on 12th September; the prisoner shipped at I New York, on 13th September, as second mate—he came as substitute for another man who aid not come—the voyage was from New York to Havre—the prisoners conduct was bad during the voyage he would not answer when he was spoken to—on the night of 11th October, about
8.30, I heard the captain order the prisoner to stand by the mizen gallant halliards; it was his watch on deck—about 10.30 I heard a noise on deck; it was my watch below—in going out of my berth I met the captain coming down the stairs—I heard him sing out "Mr. Crowe"—I heard the prisoner say "Where is Crowe? I will murder him too"—I could not see him; it was very dark—I stepped back alongside, of the mizen mast, and bethought me to make for my room—I had heard a belaying pin fall on deck; I did not see it—I ran round the steps, and the prisoner followed me up and stabbed! me in the back—I did not see him; he was behind me—he had come down the steps, making for my room—he stabbed me twice in the back and once on the' right hip, just under the left shoulder blade, and lower down—I went forward, and called the port watch—they all turned out—the prisoner Was then aft, on the poop—I went along midships, and wanted them to go aft and secure him, but no one would go near him—he did not move from where he Was; he waft upon the top of the house, lifting the skylight up and putting out the lights—I did not see him put out the lights; he was standing there, and the lights went out—he then came along to the companion-way—there was a light by the pilot-house door; it was the captain's wife that had the light in her hand—the prisoner told her to stand back, or he would murder her too—I saw the mark of the belaying pin on the side of the partition where it struck—she said he fired it at her, 1 did not see htm do it—I saw the mark there—the prisoner was running round the deck, looking for me; he said he would murder the first man that came near him—nobody touched him; they said they durst not go near him—I could not see anything in his hand—I went forward under the side of the gallant forecastle—I afterwards went down into the cabin and saw the captain; he had been stabbed—next day I saw the prisoner in irons—about three days afterwards he said he would hare murdered the captain before if he had him in sight—the crew dressed my wounds that night—this knife was taken from the prisoner when he was put in irons—I did not see it taken from him; I saw it in the captain's hands after the prisoner was in irons—I bad seen it in the prisoner's hands before that; it was the knife he used on board the ship for soraping, or cutting ropes or anything like tha'—my wounds bled a lot—I was three days before I could walk or get out of the cabin, and I was not fit for work the rest of the passage.
Cross-examined. The crew was 17 all told—there was nothing like mutiny among the crew—the crew were all right—they behaved well—the captain is about 45 years of age—he always used me well enough—he was a little violent at times—he did not strike any of the crew; I swear that—I know Nicholls, a German chap—he is not here—I can't say where he is—he gave evidence before the Consul—it was just a few words—I know Thomas Smith, who was an able seaman on board the William—I did not hear him give his evidence—I don't know where he is—on 11th October, about 8 o'clock, I did not hear the captain send the prisoner forward to got a bucket of water for the purpose of scrubbing the paint—the captain was not in the habit of drinking, he would take a glass of liquor—I never saw him drunk—he never was drunk—I never heard the captain come on deck and say to the crew, "I will shoot you fellows"—at 4 o'clock on 11th October the captain called the prisoner on deck and told him to stand by the mizen gallant halliards—he had he duty there—he had not got on his jacket
then—it was not necessary for him to be there, I suppose it was a bullying order—I did not hear the prisoner say that he wanted to put his jacket on—I did not see him go down for it, but I saw him a few minutes afterwards I with it on—I did not hear the captain speak to him then, not till 6 o'clock, when he told him to go below—he was kept there two hours doing nothing I—I saw the prisoner at 8 that morning working at a topsail—the captain I was on deck at the time—I did not hear him speak to him—when the prisoner was ordered to the mizen mast he was below, and he was called on deck—he was not then annoying any one or offensive to anybody—the captain did not go down to call him, he stood at the top of the stairs and sung out to him to get out of that—it was not in a very angry tone—he did not I say, "Get out of that, you son of a b——;" he said, "Get out of that I in three minutes"—the captain is an American, he belongs to Nova Scotia—I did not hear him say, "I am just going for you, I am going to see what you really can do"—I won't swear he did not say so—I went forward when he called him—I saw him come on deck in his shirt I sleeves—I suppose he had not time to put on his jacket—I belong to I Nova Scotia—it was not cold at this time—we were about 49 north—it it was not very cold, it was chilly in the afternoon about 4 o'clock—I did not hear him ask the captain to let him put bis jacket on—I did not see him with any tobacco—I did not hear the captain say, "You son of a b——, what have you got there?" or the prisoner say, "A bit of I tobacco, sir"—I did not see the captain with a revolver in his hand that afternoon—I was forward, I was not there at all then—he was not in the habit of carrying a revolver about with him, that I swear—it was in his cabin—I never saw him with it on deck but once, that was on the morning of 23rd September—he did not on the afternoon of 11th October draw the revolver from his pocket and say, "I will blow your brains out," and then put it on full cock—it was my watch on deck from I 6 to 8—the captain was on deck part of the time and part of the time below—I did not see him go to the prisoner's cabin at 8 o'clock—the prisoner was called up again at 8 by the captain and again ordered to go to the same place—the captain was on deck then—I did not see what the captain did, I went below at 8—the carpenter went below also—he was in my watch—the starboard watch was on deck, and the man at the wheel—I don't know his name, he is a Frenchman—the starboard watch would not I be able to see what took place at the halliards—the prisoner was entirely at the captain's mercy at 8 o'clock—the next time I came on deck was at 10.30—I had not heard any shooting then, I had been asleep—all hands were I not called on deck just then—I called out the port watch two or three I minutes after I went forward—all hands were then called up—the lights were in the cabin—there was not light enough on deck to see who was who, you could not tell one from another—the prisoner could not have mistaken me for the captain—there was a light on the side—the lights were not put I out till afterwards—there was light in the cabin—I could not see the man, and he could not see me—he left the captain and ran for my room—I heard a shot from the cabin a few minutes after the captain went into the cabin—that was after I was stabbed—the prisoner was then at the herd of the stain—he then ran forward—I did not see him with the carpenter's axe—he never went aft afterwards till the next morning, he came aft then when
he was sent for—I did not see him, I was below—I did not see him till he was in irons.
Re-examined. The prisoner's watch commenced at 8 o'clock at night—he was 10 or 15 minutes without his coat; he then went down and fetched it, and put it on—the captain had gone down into his cabin before I was stabbed—I was just coming out of my room when he called me—the prisoner followed the captain down to the foot of the steps, and then he made for my room, and it was after that that I was stabbed.
By the COURT. When he was ordered the second time to the mizen gallant halliards there was nothing for him to do there.
LABS LARSDEN . I was carpenter on board the William—I joined at New I York—on the night of 11th October I was on the watch below—I did not hear anything till I heard the belaying pin come down—I jumped up, and came out of my cabin, and saw the captain standing outside of my door bleeding—I wanted to go on deck, but the captain would not let me go—the prisoner was on deck singing out for the captain—he said "Come up on deck, I will kill you, you son of a b——"—the captain's wife came out to speak to the prisoner, and he said "If you don't stand clear I will kill you I too"—I then went up on deck; the prisoner had then gone forwards—I I saw him with a knife in his left hand, and an axe in the right—I said "Drop those things, and step forward, and don't come no more aft; don't do any more harm"—he said "No, I will not do any more harm to anybody if they will leave me alone"—I afterwards went down into the cabin, and I found the mate lying on the sofa, and the captain standing up; the mate was bleeding—I took off his clothes, and stopped the bleeding—the crew were on deck all night, the prisoner was in the forecastle—in the morning the captain called all hands aft, and asked them to go and tell the prisoner to come aft; he came; he was ready to come—the prisoner said "I know what you want me to come aft for, you will put me in irons"—the captain put him in double irons—the prisoner afterwards said "If the captain dies I suppose I will get 10 years for this"—we went to Havre, and the prisoner I was there given into custody, and taken hefore the Consul.
Cross-examined. I told the prisoner that it would be better for him to come aft and be put in irons—he came forward voluntarily—during the whole of the time he was on board I never heard him disobey a single order of the captain's—I never heard him refuse to do anything he was told by the captain or the mate—he was always friendly and well disposed with the rest of the crew—he and I were always friends—I never saw the captain drunk; he was sometimes shouting after the crew—he never threatened I to shoot the crew—I heard him on one occasion say "I will shoot you fellows"—I don't know what fellows they were—after the captain was I wounded I heard a shot fired from the captain's cabin—I heard the captain I order him to stop at the mizenmast halliards—I saw him repairing a topsail—I did not hear what was said—I did not belong to that watch.
MR. SLEIGH requested that a witness whose name appeared on the back of the bill might be called.
MR. WILLIAMS objected to call him; his evidence merely relating to alleged conduct on the part of the captain previous to the offence in question.
MR. JUSTICE Hawkins, on referring to the deposition, was of opinion that the evidence of the witness wets irrevelant to the present issue, and on that ground considered the prosecution was not bound to call him.
The prisoner in his statement before the Magistrate alleged repeated acts of cruelty on the part of the captain, and that hie conduct on the occasion in question was the result of the excitement from the captain's ill-usage.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. DOUGLAS Prosecuted; MR. AUSTIN METCALFE Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
FOURTH COURT.—Saturday, November 29th, 1879.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. GRAIN, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. MEAD and PURCELL Prosecuted; MESSRS. GRAIN and GEOGHEGAN Defended.
JANE ROWE . I am a laundress at 112, Canterbury Road, Kilburn—on 11th October I gave Charles Eaton two baskets of linen to take out, one to 4, Westbourne Crescent, and the other to 3, Queen's Gardens—these (produced) are only part of them, they were placed in a large basket fox Lady Travers, 3, Queen's Gardens—Eaton returned, and in consequence of I a statement he made I went to Paddington Green—I was afterwards shows these articles in Tottenham Court Road, on 22nd October—I do not know the value.
Cross-examined. There were other articles stolen which were in the I same basket, gentlemen's shirts, socks, chamber towels, two rail towels, five more linen pillow-cases, four cotton ditto, and one hearth cloth.
Re-examined. There are 30 or 40 pieces still missing—I should have I had to pay 15/. for them, the value fixed by the lady.
CHARLES EATON . On 11th October I took two baskets on a truck lor the last witness, one for 4, Westbourne Crescent and the other for Queen's Gardens—while delivering the basket at 4, Westbourne Crescent, about 8.45 p.m., I left the other basket on the barrow—I returned in three or four minutes at most, and found the basket was gone from the barrow.
GEORGE PERKINS . I am butler to Miss Woolf, of Elliott Bank, Forest Hill—the stables are attached to the house, and are locked at night—on 4th December, 1878, I saw this horse cloth and carriage rug (produced) in the stable, and next morning they were missing, and the harness-room window was found open—I next saw them three weeks ago in possession of the I police—we also lost some brushes, a mackintosh carriage apon, and a top coat, which were not recovered.
Cross-examined. The horse cloth had not been much used—the initials had been removed—I never buy horse cloths—the coachman who had charge of these things then was not there long after the robbery—he left not quite 12 months ago—there is no groom or stable lad—the gardener did not help in the stables—my mistress keeps two horses and they both
stand in the same stable—only one set of cloth was taken, except the collar, and the set left is still used.
Re-examined. This other set (produced) belongs to the other horse, and has the braided monogram "E.S. W."—the value is about 2l.
MARGARET KERSEY . I am a laundress at 148, Ellis Street, Kilburn Lane, Chelsea—on 1st July I took a Van to fetch the linen from Mr. Cook's, I 42, Wimpole Street—I received the kitchen linen in a bundle, and put it in the van—t went downstairs again to fetch a large bag and called the van driver to help me, as it was heavy—the van Was left unattended, and when I returned a cabman drew up and spoke to me, but not missing anything I drove off—I missed the things When I got home and counted the bundles—these (produced) are part of them, viz.: three napkins, one pair of drawers, four table cloths, two gowns, and one to Wel, but are not half of the things we lost.
Cross-examined. There were also eight other fish napkins, two jack towels, five kitchen towels, and the servants' body linen and aprons.
Re-examined. I saw none of the things again till three weeks ago at the station—I have had to pay more than 21. to replace them.
ELIZABETH POWELL . I am a laundress at Blenheim House, Podmore Road, Wandsworth—I was in our van with some linen on 28th July at 11 am. in Cavendish Square—I left the van for about five minutes Unattended—when I got back I missed a parcel of linen which I was taking to Mm Charleton, Half Moon Street, Piccadilly—the four sheets, one chemise, towel, cover, and nightgown produced are some of the articles which were in the parcel taken away—other things are still missing.
PRISCILLA GALTON . I am sister to Mrs. Ellis, laundress, 81, Alderman Street, Somers Town—on 10th October I sent George Ellis with some tinea to Mrs. Warner's, 8, Poland Street, Oxford Street—the chemise, tablecloth, sheet, drawers, two towels, two pillow cases, three cellars, two aprons, and two handkerchiefs produced were in Mrs. Warner's basket, and in a handle. Mrs. Davis's, Were these seven collars, two shirts, two pairs of cuffs, and one tablecloth.
GEORGE ELLIS . My wife is a laundress at 14, Johnson Street, Somers Town—on 10th October soma washing was given to me to deliver, one parcel for Mrs. Warner, 8, Poland Street, and another for Mrs. Davis, 5. Marlborough Street—about 9.35 p.m. I left the barrow in Brook Street while I went to a chemist's shop in Bond Street, and when I came back I missed Warner's basket and Davis's bundle.
HENRY ANGER (Police Inspector E). On Tuesday 21st October at 2.45 p.m. I went to 25, Montague Mews, St. George's, Bloomsbury, and asked to see Thomas Britton—I know him as a cab-proprietor—he has a horse and cab, and a horse and light van—I think his son drives—Thomas Britton occupies three rooms over the stables—he came downstairs and I said "I am come to make inquiries about a brown paper parcel that has been brought here this afternoon"—he replied "There has been no brown paper parcel brought here this afternoon"—someone called downstairs "What's the matter?"and I answered "I am come to inquire about a brown paper parcel that has been brought hero this afternoon"—the female prisoner then came downstairs and said "There has been no brown paper parcel brought here this afternoon"—I said "I know there has been; it contained Liebig's Extract of Meat"—Thomas Britton then went upstairs and gave me this
piece of paper (produced) off the stairs, saying "That is the piece of pape it was brought in"—Mrs. Britton stood at the top of the stairs and produced this box of twelve pots of Liebig's Extract of Meat—I said "Where did you get it from?"—she said "I bought it from a young man, I don't know who"—I said "What did you give for it?"—she made no answer—she then brought me eight separate pots—I said "I want two more"—she said "I have no more here," but on searching the rooms I found the other two pott (produced)—Thomas Britton was present, standing at the bottom of the stairs, and could hear all that was said—I then went into the stable and found two round costermonger's sieve baskets at the foot of the horse at the corner of the stall—the horse was there—I lifted off the top basket, which I think was empty, and saw in the bottom basket a quantity of linen—I took I it out and found there were the sheet marked W.E.C.T., Lady Travers's initials, and which has been identified by Jane Rowe; two pocket-handkerchiefs marked Warner; a shirt marked D.L.D., identified by Galton, that is I Davis's; a chemise marked E.C.T., Lady Travers's; also a few other articles, and this table-cloth unmarked, which has not been identified—Thomas Britton was present when I found them—I said "How do you account for those things?"—he replied "I buy them of any person who brings I them here"—I said "How much did you give for them?" and he made no I answer—that was all I found in the stable—I then went upstairs and across I the rail at the foot of the bed in the large front room I found a quantity I of linen marked W.E.C.T., which has all been produced here and identified I to-day, and also this horse-cloth—Thomas Britton was not present, but Mrs. I Britton was, and I asked her how she accounted for the linen—she said she I bought it of any one who brought it there—I said nothing about the horse-cloth, but when Britton saw it lying on the floor afterwards at the station, he said "I bought that of a man, I don't know who, and I don't know what I gave for it"—I also found a lady's cloak nearly new at the foot of the bed—I have it at the station, it has not been identified—I have not had I notice to produce the things here—there was a whole lot of things lying on the bed—I asked Mrs. Britton how she became possessed of them, and she said she bought them of anybody that brought them—the cloak was amongst them, but she did not mention it particularly—we found in the front room twelve watches—speaking to Mrs. Britton about these three watches found in a little strawberry basket, I said "How came you to be possessed of them—she said "They are mine"—I said "Where did you get that silver I candlestick from?" (produced)—she said "It is not silver, and I don't know where I got it from"—I find it is silver—I also found in the front room, lying on the floor, some linen marked W. H. Cook, identified by the witness Margaret Kersey—there was a large quantity of other linen there—they did not say what they paid for it, or from whom they bought it—I found no documents—I took both the prisoners to the station.
Cross-examined. I cannot say these spoons (produced) were stolen—I have not been able to find an owner for them; they are marked J.A.B.—some of the watches are without hands—I found some of the spoons buried in the ashes in the fender, and some we took out of a heap of mud and linen, and we had to get an iron bar to shift the mud—three of these spoons are marked E.B.; the others I found lying about the floor in the room—three watches I found in a basket, but many of them were found lying among the rubbish on the floor—I first spoke to Thomas
Britton—I think Mrs. Britton's first words were from the top of the stain; "What's the matter?"—she stood at the top of the stairs, with a box in her hand, but I do not know whether she said anything—when I asked her who she had got the box from she replied "I bought it from a young man, but I don't know his name"—I had to go through the stable and up a loft to get to the fo.t of the bed; their rooms are over the stables—Britton remained below—they had a standing for some carriages there—I did not know that they let qut some of the stalls in their stable; there are, I think, three stalls, one filled with old iron, and another full of hay—there is a corridor adjoining—I have not inquired whether other people had standing room for carriages—it is an open news, with a great number of stable-son both sides, with dwellings above them; it is not a thoroughfare—I did not know they bad three horses there; I never saw them—I did not inquire—the van generally stands outside in front of the mews—they have another stable opposite—I found the spoon marked J. A.B. in the loft—the stable was full of hay and harnese oil paintings, linen, and other things, all rotting, so that I could not bring them away; the stench from them was fearful—I asked Button if he had the key of the top room of No. 33, and he said "I have no key, I don't know where the key is," but I got in and saw all this property; there were fruit, onions and lettuces, baskets of butter, hams, and bacon, all rotting among the rubbish at the very place they were living.
Re-ezamined. We got up a ladder into his rooms—I first saw Britton at the stable door—I had the conversation with Mrs. Britton at the top of the ladder, where she produced the Liebig—I went up stairs, leaving Britton in the stable, and had a conversation with Mrs. Britton in his absence—I searched the stable afterwards, not on that day, but after they had been before the Magistrate—Britton was present when I found the linen in the basket on the first day—Mrs. Britton was upstairs—the silver spoon was found in the stable opposite where they lived—I sent it to a jeweller's, and they said it was silver.
MR. MEAD withdrew the charge as against Susan Britton, Witnesses for the Defence,
REUBEN LEAOH . I am an auctioneer, at 30, Bridge Street, Peter—borough, and brother to Mrs. Britton—my father died three years since and my mother two years since, and were possessed of a quantity of silver spoons and other plate, and some watches and clothing—after my father's death, but before my mother's death, the silver was divided between my sister and myself according to the will—it is so long ago I cannot identity this spoon marked J. A.B—my father's name was William Leach—the articles divided were something like these sugar tongs, tea-spoons, and mustard-spoons—I did not pay much attention to them; they were wrapped in papers, and I gave them to my sifter, saying "Now you can take your choice, which you like"—I believe there were two candlesticks, either plated or silver, something similar to the, among my mother's property, but I cannot say that this is the same—I know Britton's father is dead, but I do not know that he left him some property—I know that the defendants are husband and wife, and have been lawfully married for more than 80 years, and are living as husband and wife—I know there were watches, mostly silver, amongst my mother's property, but cannot speak to any other—my father was a tinman and
brazier by trade, and had a general shop at Peterborough, ray mother attending to it—they dealt all their lives in all kinds of secondhand clothes—I know Britton was in the oab business, and has a son in the business.
Cross-examined. It is about three months since I last saw Britton—I see him sometimes once in three months—I have not been to stop at Montagu Mews.
MARY ANN CROTAZ . I am a widow at 21, Rodney Street. Pentonville—I was in the room after the death of Mr. Leach, and saw a number of silver articles sorted out and divided—I am a sister of Mrs. Britton—I was present at her marriage—I think the silver was divided before ray mother's death, not quite two years ago—there were some silver spoons marked with my father's and mother's initials—I do not recognise this candlestick; these salt-spoons and silver spoons (produced) are not the same—I very rarely went to see the defendants—she would call occasionally, and they have both called to see. me—I know he was a cab-master, and that his father died some time ago and left him some property, and that he then gave up cab driving—my mother's wearing apparel and many things were divided between myself and sisters—I have not been to the police-station to see the articles there—my brother-in-law has lived 25 years in Montague Mews at least—he has property in Montague Mews—my parents kept the wardrobe shop a great many years.
Cross-examined. I have been from home over 30 years, and did not know much about my mother's business.
EDWIN GULLIVER . I am a tailor at Montague Mews, and have lived there four years—I have known Britton 20 years, but more intimately the last four years—I do not buy cast-off clothes as a rule, but sometimes people outgrow them—I have sold Britton three pairs of trousers in four years—I live within 50 yards of him—I did not know they were in the habit of buying miscellaneous articles—I have not been into the stables to notice that they consisted of three stalls; there is a coach-house, and another stable opposite, and any one living opposite could see anything taken in—I live some 15 or 20 yards up on the opposite side—we have heard that he has lived there a great number of years—his son drives a cab, and the horses are stalled in their stable.
HENRY HUGHES . I am a saddler at 7, Durham Road, Seven Sisters' Road—I have had dealings with Britton in saddlery and harness, and bare sold him all sorts of things, such as a perambulator, cradle, 12 second-hand whips, horse rugs, and pieces of rugs, old books, six carriage mats, an old-fashioned pipe with brass needles, a pair of spectacles, glasses, half a gross of bootlaces, dog chain, scavenger broom, new pair of brass pony reins, pair of gloves, set of white harness, pair of reins, horse cloth, collar, a lot of nails, and two Derby hats and other articles—I have known him, seven or eight years.
Cross-examined. He is my landlord—I sold him the things, and then deducted them for rent.
ELIZA BEVAN . I am a married woman, and under a protection order—I was a tenant of Britten's some three years ago, when under poor circumstances, and not being able to pay my rent, I gave up the house, and left with Britton a lot of articles in lieu of rent, and they have often
taken great quantities of miscellaneous articles from me—I was a wardrobe and furniture dealer—I have given them for rent several clocks, and all kinds of wearing apparel; it is five or six years since the last deal—I was living at 9, Durham Road; they have property there, and I believe at other places—I have delivered articles at Montague Mews, and put them in the stable—I have known them a great many years; they have been very kind to me, lending me money to purchase, and then bought from me, deducting the borrowed money,' so that I had nothing to pay for them.
Cross-examined. I should say they hoarded the things up.
WILLIAM TALL . I am a dealer in old harness—I had a loan transaction, and I sold to the Brittons a lot of underclothing for 10/. in April, 1870—I had lost my wife; there was one nice black silk dress.
The male Prisoner received a good character.
SUSAN BRITTON— NOT GUILTY .
THOMAS BRITTON— GUILTY of receiving. — Five Years' Penal Servitude.
There was another indictment against the male prisoner.
50. ROBERT RAVEN (29) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a watch and part of a chain from the person of Edward Portz. He was further charged with having been before convicted of felony at this Court on 8th April, 1876, as John Barns, to which he pleaded
GEORGE EGAN (Ex-Chief Warier, llolhway Prison). I produce the certificate of the conviction at this. Court of John Barns, sentenced toseven years' penal servitude, after a previous conviction—the prisoner is the same person.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I was present on that occasion, and proved other convictions against you—I was the officer appointed to prove the identity of old offenders—I identify you from your general appearance—I have entries in a note-book taken years ago; it is a long while since I saw you—there have been inquiries about you, and when I saw your photograph I knew you were an old offender, and on searching I found you were John Barns—I knew him well—the sentence prior to the seven years he served at Hollo way—there are marks on his person, and he has had additions put to them by seme means sincehe left penal servitude—he had three "Js," and I hear they have been altered.
JAMES BOLTON (Sessions Weirder). I examined the prisoner's arm at the Mansion House, and there were three distinct "J's "with a lot of flowering round them, making it a red rose with a blue centre—I knew him on several of the occasions spoken of by Egan—I was then a young officer in the gaol in which Egnn waa chief warder, and the prisoner came under my notice.
GUILTY.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, December 2nd, 1879.
Before Mr. Recorder.
51. JOHN SWEENEY (19), JAMES ENGLISH (21), JANE BANBURY (18), CHARLES FRANCIS (19), THOMAS ENGLISH (20), and LOUISA PUCKRIDGE (17) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Christopher David Kent, and stealing three watch cases and other articles, his property.
MR. A. B. KELLY and MR. PURCELL Prosecuted; MR. W. SLEIGH defended Puckridge.
THOMAS RANDALL . On 8th October, about 2 p.m., I was with Detective Robinson in Arlington Street, Clerkenwell, and saw Sweeney and English I with a man not in custody; I watched them some time and lost sight of them—about 2.45 I saw Sweeney eating bread and cheese in a beershop I in Arlington Street, and told him I should take him in custody, and asked what he had about him; he made no reply, but pulled a handkerchief out of his pocket; I opened it and found three gold watch-keys, a purse, three pencil-cases, six pairs of silver filagree worked earrings, a gold pin, and three gold lings (produced)—he said "The things were given to me"—I saw James English in Holborn about 4 o'clock; another constable followed him, and at 7 o'clock I went with Robinson to 51, Wyld Street, Drury Lane, and saw James English, Puckridge, and Banbury in a room together—I told them we should take them for being concerned with another man in a bur glary at 17, Albemarle Street; they made no reply—I asked Banbury what she had about her; she took from her pocket a pair of silver links and two brooches from her neck-tie, and handed me a purse an I eight pawn-tickets relating to this property—we took them to the station—on 21st October about 11.30 I took Francis at a coffee shop in St. John Street Road, and told him I wanted him for being concerned in the burglary at 17, Albemarle Street—he said "All right; I shall go with you"—on the way to the station he said "I did not go inside; I stopped outside, and the I other two went in."
Cross-examined by MR. W. SLEIGH. I did not get any property from Puckridge.
Cross-examined by J. English. I do not know a man named Cole.
JOHN ROBINSON (Detective G). I was with Randall on 8th October, and took J. English about 6 o'clock at 51, Great Wyld Street—I told him the charge—he said "I know nothing about it"—I said nothing about his brother—I was with Randall in Arlington Street about 2 o'clock that day, and saw J. English, Sweeney, and, I think, Francis—I was present when Sweeney was taken—on the same afternoon I saw J. English in Holborn, and followed him to 51, Great Wyld Street—when I took him, he was wearing this gold scarf-pin and this ring on his finger; Mr. Kent identifies, them and also another ring, the ticket of which I found on J. English—I searched the room, and found in a table-drawer the works of four watches, twelve brooches, and five pairs of ear-rings—Puckridge left while I was there, and I took her in the street, and told her the charge—she made no reply—she produced at the station from her dress-pocket eight brooches, two of which Mr. Kent identifies, five more pairs of ear-rings, three of which refer to this charge, four rings, two pencil-cases, one purse, and two lockets.
Cross-examined by MR. W. SLEIGH. There was a wedding-ring among them—Puckridge said "I bought them"—she did not say "I bought the wedding-ring, and Francis gave me the other things"—she did not mention Francis's name—Randall was not taking part in the conversation—I. English and Francis were present, and several officers; Randall may have
been by my side—I do not know whether Inspector Gearey was there—Puckridge did not live in the house where Banbury lives.
Cross-examined by Francis. You were not in the room with Banbury and Puckridge.
Re-examined. I am the officer Puckridge spoke to. and to whom she gave the articles and made the explanation—I took Thomas English on 21st October in Great Queen Street, Long Acre, and told him it was for being concerned with his brother James, who was in custody, in committing a burglary at 17, Albemarle Street, Clerkenwell, on the 6th, and further with another burglary at 10, Great Queen Street, next door to where he worked—he said "I know nothing about the Queen Street job, and all I had from the other was one watch, two rings, and a scarf-pin"—I found in his bed two rings and a scarf-pin, which Mr. Kent identifies—I also found two coats, which have been identified by another person, who is not able to attend on account of his leg being broken.
THOMAS RANDALL (Re-examined by MR. SLEIGH). I was not near enough to hear what took place when Puckridge was taken—I went with her and Robinson and Banbury in a cab to the station, but heard no conversation—next morning I heard Puckridge say, "The things do not belong to me, Francis gave them to me; why don't you get Georgie?"—on the day she was charged, when she put the things on the table Robinson asked her where she got them, and she said, "I bought them"—she said nothing about Francis then that I heard.
SAMUEL GEORGE GEAREY (Police Inspector G). On 7th October I examined Mr. Kent's premises, and found this scarf and handkerchief (produced) in the shop—I took James English, Sweeney, and the two women on the 9th; I said to English at the station, "Is this your property?" holding up the handkerchief and scarf—he said, "Yes, that is mine," taking the scarf out of my hand, "and, that is Sweeney's"—Sweeney could not hear that, he was in another cell, I went to his cell and asked him if the handkerchief was his property; he said, "Yes."
Cross-examined by Sweeney. You took it out of my hand—I did not say "James English says this handkerchief is yours."
GEORGE BACON . I keep the Carpenters' Arms, Arlington Street, Clerkenwell—on 7th October, between 7. and 8 p.m., James English and either Sweeney or English's brother came in with the two female prisoners—I served them with beer; they were showing jewellery and rings to each other,'and I showed them this piece of silver (produced), and asked them what it was—one of them looked at it and said, "This is a piece of good stuff, this is silver"—I said, "What is it worth?"—he said, "Not much, I will give you this little gold ring for it"—while I was looking at the ring he produced another and said, 'Here, buy this for the Missus"—I turned to the parlour to show it to my Missus, and when I returned three of them were gone and the last one said, "I will see you about it to-morrow," leaving the silver on the counter and the second ring with me—I was out when they came the next morning.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Puckridge did not show me any of the jewellery.
Cross-examined by James English. It was about 8 o'clock.; I will not swear it was not past 10; I was sober—the other man showed the jewellery and you looked at it—I also saw a brooch, which I believe Puckridge wanted
to look at, but the young man said, "No," and put it in his pocket—I do not say whether he was Sweeney or your brother—I have received ael from you asking me to bring my wife, and I said that I would not unl she was subpœnaed; she knew nothing about it till the next morning, when I was out—I wrote you a letter saying that she did not remember seeing you on Wednesday, though she was behind the bar all day.
CHRISTOPHER DAVID KENT . I am a watchmaker, of 17, Albema Street, Clerkenwell, and occupy the shop and parlour, kitchen, and bedroom—on Monday night, 6th October, I closed the back parlour window—I found it broken open in the morning, and found that a number of things had bo abstracted—I saw this scarf pin, ring, and locket a few days afterwards charge of the police, and identified them—I was shown some pawn tickets and went to the pawnbrokers' and identified the whole of this property—amounts to more than 30/., because several things belong to customers which I cannot make good; one movement, which is not worth 2d. to the prisoner cost me 4l.
Thomas English's Statement before the Magistrate. "I never had any of the things, they were given to me; I put them in a drawer, and the deter tive came and took them out of the diawer."
Sweeney in his defence stated that a man named Cole gave him the brooch and two rings in a coffee shop, and told him to meet him in the Carpenten Arms next day, and when he went there he was taken in custody.
James English's Defence. Sweeney and I were awoke about 7.30 by Francis, who had previously lived with us, and another man, who we gave a description of; he said he was a salesman; he went to the table drawer and put two brown paper parcels in it, and during the morning he gave me a scarf and a scarf ring, both of which I wore, which I should not have done if I had known they were stolen. The detective never saw me at 4 o'clock next day, for I never went out till 1 o'clock, and then went to Islington till 6 o'clock. He showed me the pawn ticket next day, and said if I got the articles out they would do for the young woman.
Francis's Defence. I met Cole and another chap at a music-hall. We went down Albemarle Street and he went into a house and came out with two parcels. I waited outside. They asked me where they could leave them, I said, "At James English's," and next morning I saw all the jewellery in the drawer, and thought it was not got honestly. I met Puckridge and said, "Louisa, put them on the table." I went out and was apprehended.
Thomas English's Defence. On "Wednesday morning my brother woke me up, and he and I, Francis, Sweeney and a chap, who I understand is Cole, went down the street together. Cole said, "Tom, there is something on the table for you." I don't know how he knew my name. I found brown paper parcel on the table, I opened it, it contained a watch, two rings, and a scarf pin. I was looking at the pin and a pearl fell out of it; I put the things in the drawer and when I opened it I saw a lot more jewellery. When I came home at night, I found my brother was locked up for breaking into a jeweller's shop.
Witness for James English.
ELIZABETH ENGLISH . I am married, and live at 21, Sebbons Place, Islington—on 7th October a person, whose name my son tells me is Cole, spoke to me in the street—my son James was with him—Cole called on me
I next day, and told me that my son was locked up—I do my son's washing I—I do not recognise this tie.
SWEENEY and JAMES ENGLISH— GUILTY of burglary.
BANBUBY, FKANCIS, THOMAS ENGLISH, and PUCKRLDGE— GUILTY of receiving.
SWEENEY was further charged with a previous conviction at Westminster in October, 1878, to which he
PLEADED GUILTY.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
JAMES ENGLISH* and FRANCIS*— Fifteen Months' Imprisonment each.
BANBURY and PUCKBLDGE— Nine Months' Imprisonment each.
THOMAS ENGLISH— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
52. CHARLES GEORGE WENTWORTH PHILLIPSON (38) PLEADED GUILTY to four indictments for stealing money and valuable securities, the property of Agnes Edith Jones and another, and to unlawfully obtaining money from Charles Shaw Smith by false pretences.— five Years' Penal Servitude, and to pay 330l. to the Misses Jones and 130l. to Mr. Smith. And
MR.D. METCALFE Prosecuted.
FREDERICK ERNEST HAWKINS . I am a warehouseman, at 20, Cannon Street—on November 8, at night, I was on the north side of St. Paul's Churchyard by Mr. Jessop's shop—there are no-shatters to it, only bare—I heard a rattle of the bars, and a sound as if something had fallen—I turned back sharply, and the prisoner and two other lads ran from the window—I followed the prisoner, who was the nearest, and saw his hand go out and heard something fall over the railing—I caught him—he tried to escape 1 put him on the ground and gave him in custody.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. There was a lamp a little farther on, but I could not see your face—it was very dark at some parts—no one was around us—I asked some one to fetch a policeman, who refused, and wanted me to let you go—I am sure of you—I never lost sight of you for a second.
ALFRED PEGRAM (City Policeman 565). On Saturday night, 8th November, I was on the north side of St. Paul's Churchyard, and saw Hawkins and the prisoner struggling—he said "This man has broken a window and thrown something into the churchyard iron the jeweller's shop"—I took him back to the window, which I found broken and stoned, and then to the station, and found on him a comb, 1/4 d., and a latchkey—he gave me an address—I went there, but discovered no trace-of him—I Went to the churchyard and found this gimlet nearly opposite the window—the prisoner's thumb was scratched, as it would be by glass, and I found a stain of blood on the window.
Cross-examined. You gave me the address in the police-court cell, not at the station—you said you did not know where you lived, but it was at the back of Shoreditch Church—you gave another address afterwards, which I did not go to, as the first was false—you said that your hand had been trod on, but the inspector said that it was cut with glass—your right hand was all over blood, all over the fingers and under them as well.
HENRY JESSOP . I am a jeweller, of 61, St. Paul's Churchyard—on 8th November I shut up my shop about 5 o'clock—the bars were up and safe—I received a message from the police, and on Monday morning found the window broken, and missed two bracelets, two lockets, and there might be two or three other things, as I keep a large stock—these are my bracelets.
Prisoner's Defence. I heard a shout, and the policeman took me by the collar—I said "Get away," and he put his knee in my back and trod on my hand and took me to the station.
GUILTY . He was further charged with a previous conviction at this Court in May, 1878, of having a mould for coining, to which he
PLEADED GUILTY.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, December 2, 3, 4, and 5, 1879.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
MESSRS. MONTAGU WILLIAMS, E. THOMAS, and CAVENDISH BENTINCK Prosecuted; MR. POWELL, Q.C, with MESSRS. POLAND and SIMS, Defended.
Cross-examined. I am the solicitor for the defendant in this case—Mr. George Purkiss is the prosecutor—I believe he is the publisher of the Illustrated Police News—this pamphlet purports to be published at that office—I was present when one was bought there—it is in the Strand—this portrait upon it purports to be a portrait of Hannah Dobbs—there was also a placard exhibited with portraits of Mr. and Mrs. Bastendorff and their child—I was instructed on behalf of Mr. Bastendorff to bring an action for libel against Mr. Purkiss, and I issued a writ accordingly—it is since that writ was issued that Mr. Purkiss has instituted this prosecution—the proceedings in the action have not gone further than the issue of the writ, but they are not stayed—there is no statement of claim at present—in the civil action both Mr. Bastendorff and his wife could have been examined as witnesses; here they cannot—I believe there is a very extensive sale of these things; they are sold at a penny.
CHARLES JOHN TEWTELL . I am a clerk in the civil office of the Common Pleas—I produce an affidavit in the Common Pleas division in an action of Bastendorff against Purkiss, purporting to be sworn on 26th September, 1879, and filed on 7th October, 1879.
FREDERICK GEORGE HUNT . I am a solicitor, and am in the office of Mr. Bowker, of 1, Gray's Inn Square—I was present before Mr. Justice Bo wen when an application for an injunction was made to restrain the publication of the pamphlet—I saw the Judge initial this notice of motion.
Cross-examined. I only attended on behalf of Mr. Armstrong, as he was out of town that day—the application was dismissed.
administered the oath to Siwerin Bastendorff to this affidavit on 26th September, 1879—I signed it; this is my signature—I can hardly say that it was signed in my presence by the person who swore it—I take a great many oaths—the signature was there at the time I administered the oath—I have no recollection of the person who swore it.
MR. HUNT (Re-examined). Thisfidavit was used on the application before the Judge.
Cross-examined. I heard it quoted—I have no means of identifying this affidavit as the one used before the Judge.
HANNAH DOBBS . I live at 31, Gilbert Street, Oxford Street—I know the defendant Siwerin Bastendorff—I first became acquainted with him in 1875—at that time I was in service at Mrs. Pearce's, 42, Torrington Square—I was cleaning the dining-room windows with Selina Knight, the housemaid, about 11 o'clock in the morning—Clara Green the nurse girl was in the room—I think it was in September or October—he asked if we wanted any help—Selina Knight said "Yes"—he remained talking for some time—I know the 'defendant's handwriting—the signature to this affidavit is his. (The affidavit was ultimately read. The pari upon which the perjury was assigned was a denial of the allegation modi in the fourth page of the pamphlet, that prior to Hannah Dobbs entering the service of the defendant or at any period, he had immoral intercourse with her. The original pamphlet produced on the hearing of the injunction was marked Exhibit A, and this not being forthcoming, a certified copy produced before the Magistrate was after much discussion proved and admitted.) I next saw the defendant about 7 o'clock that same evening; he came to the area gate, and whittled down the area, and Selina Knight went up—I afterwards went up—he asked me to go out for a walk—I said I could not go out then—he asked me if I would come out later in the evening—I told him I should not be allowed out so late; he asked me to come out after my people had gone to bed; after my master and mistress had gone to bed—I told him I would come out at 11 o'clock—nothing more passed then; he went away between 10 and 11 o'clock; I and my two fellow-servants dressed ourselves to go out—I had not locked the area gate—after we had dressed ourselves we all three laid down on the bed in the room behind the kitchen, where we all three slept, and we went to sleep—we were awoke by two policemen holding a bull's-eye lantern over us—we all three got up, went into the kitchen, I made some coffee, and gave to the policemen—they stopped about 20 minutes as near as I can say, and then went away up the area steps—I think it was about 1 o'clock when we went into the kitchen and gave them the coffee—we then locked up the area gate and the doors and went to bed—I saw the defendant the next evening about 7 o'clock—he whistled down the area again—Selina Knight went up first; I went up afterwards—he said "Why did not you keep your appointment last night?—I said we were very tired; we laid down on the bed, and dropped asleep, and were awoke by two policemen—he said, "Will you come out to night?" I said Yes, I would be out at 11—I got ready and went out at 11—I found him waiting down by the church in Torrington Square—I joined him there, and we went off together—we went to a coffee house; I don't know where it was; it was about a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes' walk from Torrington Square—I don't know in what street it was—we went into a bedroom there; I think it was on the second floor, I am not certain—we went to bed, and he had connection with me
there—we remained there about an hour or an hour and a half, it might have been two hours, I think it was about two houre—we then got up, and dressed ourselves, and went back to Torriugton Square—we walked round the square; he then went away, and I went in—I found the other servants in the kitchen—they could not go to bed, as the door was locked, and I had the key of the bedroom in my pocket—we all three went to bed then—I next saw the defendant on the following Sunday afternoon, about 3 or 3.30—my master and mistress were not at home; they had gone out of town—I saw him first at the area gate; I was looking out at the dining-room window, and I went down into the kitchen, up the area steps, and let him in—hs came down into the kitchen—Selina Knight and Clara Green were there—he was there from 3.30 till 8 o'clock—Knight and Green went out between 5 and 6 o'clock—I think he remained in the kitchen till they left—soon after they had gone we went into the bedroom—they said they were going out for a walk, and they did go, leaving me and the defendant in the kitchen—we then went into our bedroom, and he had connection with me—Green and Knight had not returned before he went—I think I next saw him on the following Tuesday evening—the family were then at home—I saw him about 9 o'clock at the area gate; he came down into the kitchen, and remained about an hour, I think—Knight and Green were there—I continued to see him on different occasions while I was in Mrs. Pearce's service—I left her service just before Christmas, 1875, and went to 42, Sandwich Street, Burton Crescent in lodgings before I got another situation—I remained there about a week, and then went into the service of Mr. Wallis, 133, Euston Road, as general servant—I was the only servant there; I remained there two or three months, and then went to Mrs. Cripps, 20, Guilford Street, Russell Square—Selina Knight was in that service as housemaid, and I was cook—I remained at Mrs. Cripps's one month—I then went to Mrs. Northoott'e, 12, New North Street, in a lodging, from the Friday till Monday—I then went to 4, Euston Square, Mr. Basteudorifs; that was-in June, 1876—while I was at Mrs. Wallis's I was in the habit of seeing the defendant; I used to meet him by St. Pancras Church—I saw him while I was at Mrs. Cripps'i; he never came in—followers were not allowed—I used to meet him at the corner by. the Foundling by appointment—I told him I should not stay with Mrs. Cripps, as I did not like it—he then told me that he was married, and told me I was not to be cross—he had not told me before that he was married; he pretended that he was single—I told him he ought to hare told me of it—he said that his wife would be in want of a servant, ana asked me if I would like to come and live with them as a servant—I asked him several things about the place—I asked him the wages—he said his wife never gave more than 11l. a year—I said I could not come for that, as I was then having 16/.—he said no doubt but that his wife would give 14l. if I asked, and he would make up the difference to me—he said when hie wife advertised he would let me know—while I was at Mrs. Northcott'e he called, and brought the newspaper containing the advertisement—I did not see him the first time he called—I was out—he left the paper—he called again later on, and I saw him (he had promised me when he saw me at Mrs. Cripps's that he would call at New North Street)—he told me that he had been there before, and brought the newspaper with him, so that I could go and see his wife—I had not seen the newspaper before he called—he gave it me—I looked at the advertisement, and I went to see Mrs.
Bastendorff at No. 4—I don't remember what I did wish the newspaper) it was the Clerkenwe)l paper—the defendant was not present when I had the interview with Mrs. Bastendorff—I saw her twice before I went into the service—he was net present on either occasion—I saw her the second time on the Saturday, and I went in on the Monday—a contract of service was entered into between me and Mrs. Bastendorff; she agreed to take me as servant—I think it was on 17th June, I am speaking from memory—at the latter end of 1875 and the commencement of 187s. the appearance of the defendant was different to what it is no w—his beard waa very long when I first knew him, a great deal longer then it is now; it came down to about here (describing); it was a very long beard—I remained in the service till August, 1877—during that time there was intercourse between us from time to time—there was another servant, a nurse girl, when I entered the service, Ellen Peek; she was about 14—Mr. Brooks kept his own servant—Ellen Peek was the only other servant in Beaten-dorff's service—we both went there the same day—she went on the Monday morning, and I went on the Monday evening—she left the beginning of January, 1877; no other servant same in her place—from January to August I was the sole servant in the Bastenderfa service—in June, 1876, they and three children; the eldest was between fire And six I think, the next about three, and the youngest about twelve months—Mr. and Mrs. Brooks had the dining-room, drawing-room, and a small room at the top of the house on the third floor for the servant; the back drawing-room was need as a bedroom—their servant was a female—I do not remember her name—they also had the back kitohen, and the outside coal cellar in the area—there was one coal cellar in the area, and one inside in the scullery—I have told you all the inmates of the house in January, 1876; the Brookses left at the end of December, 1876—Miss Griffiths came to live there then—before the Brookses left a Mrs. Pollard was there for a week; she had one room, the second floor back—I think that was in July—after she left Mr. Waldron came, before the Brookses left; he was there three weeks—he occupied the second floor back, the same room Mrs. Pollard had occupied, and we had people from No. 2 to sleep by the night—I have now mentioned all the occupants during the Brookses' time—after they left Miss Griffiths was the next that came—she occupied the drawing-room floor, and the second floor, and she had three rooms at the top of the house as well, and the back kitchen; she took the rooms unfurnished, and let them again—she was there two months; she came in January and left in March, 1877—Mr. Findlay came there to lodge with Miss Griffiths, and Mr. Minossa—Mr. Findlay occupied one large room at the top of the house, and he used the drawing-room as a sitting-room in common with others—Mr. Findlay left with Miss Griffiths in March, and came back in a week—Mr. Minossa stopped; Mr. Bastendorff asked him to stop, and let him have the room 6d. a week cheaper; he was also a lodger of Miss Griffhhs's; he occupied a small room at the top of the house, and the drawing-room as a sitting-room with the others—I am sure that Mr. Findlay and Mr. Minossa were the only persons that occupied the rooms as Miss Griffiths's lodgers—when Mr. Findlay returned he had the second floor back for a little while, I don't remember how long, not long, rather over a week; he took that one, because we had not furnished the top room that he had
before; he then went to the top room, his old lodging—a friend of Mr. Mimossa's came to lodge there about a fortnight after Miss Griffiths left' I don't remember his name—he had one of the small rooms at the top of the house; he stopped about a fortnight or three weeks—Mr. and Mrs. Leffler were the next persons that came—they occupied two rooms on the second floor, one as a bedroom and one as a sitting-room; they came about July, I think; they remained about a month—they were there when I left in August, 1877, and Mr. Findlay, nobody else—they were the sole lodgers in the house when I left in August—I returned into the service at the end of August—I had left on the Friday, and on the Saturday I went to Redhill—when I returned into the service at the end of August the same lodgers were not there—Mr. Riggenbach came in April—the old lodgers had gone except Mr. Riggenbach, I forgot him; he came in April, 1877, and when I returned in August he was the only lodger left; he had the two rooms on the drawing-room floor, with his own furniture—a lady and gentleman came for about 10 days, I don't remember their names; they had the back parlour and second floor front—Miss Hacker was the next that came; I don't remember the day of the month that she came; she came on the Monday, I think it was in September, and took the second floor front room, and on the Tuesday she came in—she only occupied that one room all the time she was there—she sat and slept in the same room; that was all she had; she had her meals in the same room—sometimes she was in the dining-room with Mrs. Bastendorff, the front room; she sometimes sat there with Mrs. Bastendorff; that was the room the Bastendorffs used when they did not let it—Miss Hacker remained there three weeks, and had begun her fourth week the last time I saw her—I left the service for good and all in September, 1878.
By the COURT. I could not fix the date—the last time I saw Miss Hacker she was in her bedroom writing a letter, and she went out to post it—I saw her go out of the house, about 11,1 think, in the morning—I think it was about the Thursday; it might have been Friday, I don't I know—it was in October, 1877, I don't remember the date—I never saw I her again after I saw her go out to post the letter.
By MR. WILLIAMS. I first saw Peter Bastendorff the same week that I I first went into the employment of Mrs. Bastendorff—he did not live on I the premises; I don't remember where he was living—he had very little beard at that time—I used to see him from time to time at his brother's house; he generally came there on Saturdays—I had intercourse with his; I it commenced at the end of January, 1877—before that I had reason to I believe there was something the matter with me; I told the defendant that I thought I was with child—Peter had asked me for the key of the street I door, and I told the defendant—it was soon after I was engaged—Peter had not asked me to marry him, he had made me an offer to keep company with him; that was at the end of December, 1876—I told the defendant that Peter had asked me for the key of the street door before I told him that I was in the family way—I cold him that Peter had asked me for the key that he might come in in the night and deep with me—when I told him that I thought I was with child he said "Peter has asked you for the key, let him have it, and put the child on him"—it was after that that Peter had connection with me for the first time—I slept in a small room at the top of the house—the connection between me and the defendant
continued up to the time I left for good and all in September, 1878—I never went to 4, Euston Square after that—when I left the first time it was on a Friday in August, 1877—on the next day, Saturday, I met the defendant at the Victoria Station.
(Mr. Powell objected to the reception of the evidence about to be tendered, as not applying to the perjury alleged in the indictment, which was confined to a denial of the allegation in the 4th page of the pamphlet. MR. JUSTICE HAWKINS considered the evidence admissible,) I met the defendant at the Victoria Station about five o'clock on the Saturday afternoon, by appointment, and we went by train to Redhill—we first went into a public-house there near the station—we did not remain there any time—the defendant only went in to have a glass of ale—after that we went to Mrs. Carponter's the Red Lion—we saw Mrs. Carpenter, and the defendant asked for a bedroom till Monday—she said yes she had got one—we went into the smoking-room there—I think it was about 8 o'clock when we got to Mrs. Carpenter's—the defendant had a glass of ale in the smoking-room—we remained there, and went to bed between 9 and 10 o'clock—I think I had with me one parcel and my waterproof, and the defendant had his bag—some one that was at Mrs. Carpenter's showed us up to the bedroom, Mrs. Carpenter carried the things up—the defendant and I slept together that night—we got up on Sunday morning and went out; I think just after 10 o'clock—I saw Mrs. Carpenter on the Sunday morning—we were out all day, and returned about 8 o'clock—I think it may be a little before or after; I could not say for certain—we had been for a walk over the commons—we went straight up to bed directly we got back—I saw Mrs. Carpenter that night—we got up on Monday morning and left between 10 and 11, I think—we had intercourse there—I saw Mrs. Carpenter before we left—we came to London to Victoria Station, and went and had dinner together—I don't know where it was; it was some distance from Victoria Station, towards the Edgware Road—we parted about 3 or 4 o'clock, I think, about the same place where we took our dinner—I saw him again that night between 7 and 8 o'clock in the Edgware Road by appointment, and he went and took a room for me at 21, Nutford Place—I slept there that night alone—he only went in and took the room for me, and went away again—I only remained there one night—on the Tuesday night he took a room for me at the Railway Hotel in Argyle Street, King's Cross—I remained there the night; the defendant was there with me about two hours; he went to bed with me and connection took place there—the next night, Wednesday, I went to the tobacco shop at King's Cross, No. 144, I think—the defendant took a room there for me—I remained there one night—after that I slept at 4, Euston Square, the defendant's house, until I re-entered the service—I slept in the second floor back—the defendant let me in at night; he always met me at St. Pancras Church—that did not continue from the time I left the tobacconist's shop until I re-entered the service; on the second Saturday, from Saturday till Monday, I went to Redhill with Christina Bastendorff—I left Mrs. Bastendorffs on the Friday, and the Saturday after I slept by myself in the Euston Road—I took the bed myself, as the defendant was in the country—with certain exceptions, from the time I left the tobacconist's shop the defendant met me of a night at St. Pancras Church, and I slept at 4, Euston Square—I don't remember the number in the Euston Road where I slept on the Friday night—it was the end near Tottenham Court Road—
it was on the Saturday after, the third Saturday, that I went to Redhill with Christina Bastendorff—she is" the defendant's eldest danghter—we went to the Brighton Road, Redhill—I don't remember the number or the land lady's name; it was a private house—I stayed there with Christina Basten-dorff until the following Tuesday—with those exceptions I have accounted for the whole of the time where I slept—I returned to the service on the Friday after—I was tried at the Central Criminal Court for the murder of Miss Hacker last July, and was acquitted—after the trial I made a statement, which was subsequently embodied in this pamiphlet; I wrote it myself; I received 30/. for it—that was all the money I received in respect of the pamphlet—I received that from Mr. Moore, one of the agents of the Central News Office—the first cheque I had was for 101—I received that in a coffee-house near Tottenham Court Road; the next sum I received was a cheque for 20/. at the Central News Office—after leaving 4, Euston Square for the last time I remained in London at 67, George Street, Gower Street Station, for three weeks I think; I then went with Mrs. Kregger at 10, Milton Street, Euston Street—I remained there a week; the defendant sent me there—I went there and took the room myself; it is a friend of the defendant's—I then went to my home at Bideford—I remained there a fortnight I think—I then came up to London again and went to Hunter Street, Brunswick Square—I don't remember the landlady's name, or the number—I stayed there a fortnight; I took the place myself—I then went to No. 9, Burton Street, Burton Crescent, for a week—I took that place myself—I was arrested there for stealing some things at the Hunter Street house—between the time of my leaving 4, Easton Square, and my going to Bideford, I saw the defendant several times (when I left Euston Square he was in Luxemburg)—the first time I saw him he called on me at 67, George Street, Mrs. Wright's,; he called there to pay me some money that he owed me—he did not call on me at any other house before I went to Bideford—I met him several times at different places by appointment; I saw him two or three times after my return from Bideford before I was taken into custody for stealing the things in Hunter' Street—I met him first just a little way off" St. Pancras Church, by appointment—I had a letter from him when I was at Bideford; he had promised to go down to Bideford with me, but he did not—I have not got the letter; I burnt it; I am not in the habit of keeping any one's letters—I did not answer it—it was in consequence of that letter that I met him—I saw him at the same place on each occasion; not in any house—I was charged at Bow Street with stealing the things in Hunter Street, and was committed and tried; I don't know where it was—I pleaded guilty and was sentenced to eight months' imprisonment, not with hard labour—I was doing my sentence in the prison when I was brought up for the murder—had not completed my term of imprisonment—I was taken to the police-court and remanded from time to time—I was prosecuted by the Treasury authorities and tried in the other Court.
Cross-examined. I have not any letter, or note, or any scrap of paper whatever that the defendant ever wrote to me; the letter which I got at Bideford I burnt as soon as I read it, I had no occasion to keep it—I have had two letters from him, this was the first—I had them both when I was at Bideford—it was in the first letter that he made the appointment—I got
the second letter after I left; I had one before that—I get the second latter when I was at home at Bideford, that is the one you are speaking of, it was the first letter that contained the appointment to meet him at St. Pancras Church; no, it was the second letter, I made a mistake; I burnt them both; I never keep any one's letters—Peter Bastendorff cashed the 10l. cheque for me—when I came out of prison, after serving the eight months, Peter was down there—the first time I ever saw the defendant was 'when I was cleaning the windows in Torrington Square; it was a day or two afterwards that 1 went out with him at night after the family were all gone to bed—the first time I ever went out with him we went to a coffee-house and I went to bed with him—I had not been with nay gentleman below—I said at Bow Street that I was not a chaste woman, but I did not know what it meant—I know what it means now, it means that I had never had any connection with any man before that—I was a chaste woman when I went with the defendant—at Bow Street I was asked if I were a chaste woman, and I said "No"—I thought it meant had I been with any gentleman before, and I said I was not a chaste woman—(the defendant was the first person with whom I had intercourse—I was at one time in the service of Lady Buck—this is true, "My folly and trouble began together at that place; one of the footmen and I became intimate we were great friends, he never had any (Connection with me—a cheque of Lady Back's was given to me to get changed; I think it was in 1872—I was not dismissed in consequence of that cheque—I gave warning to leave, that was not after the discovery about the cheque; I had given warning before that, and left in pursuance of my warning—I came to London after leaving Lady Bock's, and went to live at Rotherhithe—I'did not make the acquaintance of a policeman there; he came to visit me twice after I came to live in London—I was then living at Mrs. Pearce's; he used to come in plain clothes—became as a young man that I was keeping company with—I had not been engaged to the footman—I had been engaged before I came to London—the police-man visited me as a person to whom I was engaged—that was when I first went to Mrs. Pearce's—the engagement was broken off—I did not go from Rotherhithe to a situation with Mrs. Nicholson at Redhill; that was a mistake, I went from Rotherhithe to Torrington Square—I did go and stay at Redhill for some time in the Woodlands Road—that was before I went to Torrington Square—I stayed there 16 months—I think I know Redhill pretty well, but I never went about much; I had no company to go about with, therefore I did not know much about it—I only took a walk to church; attended church constantly—while I was at Redhill I stole 2l. 3s. from a box—I don't know that it was a missionary box—perhaps it would pat have made much difference if I had known it—I did not steal a piece of silk worth several pounds—I did steal a piece of silk—I was some months out of a situation after I left Mrs. Nicholson's—it might have been 12 months—my mother came up from Devonshire and paid the money that was required with reference to the box and the silk, and I then went home and stayed there nearly 12 months, my father and mother maintaining me—I then wrote to a servants' registry office—it was not through that I got the engagement with Mrs. Pearce—I answered an advertisement and got the situation through that, some time in the early part of 1875—I remember going to church every Wednesday when I first wont there—it might have been in Lent—after some little time I did not go—I only went for several week—
I went a time or two with Mrs. Pearce she went after I left off going—I don't know that it was in Lent; I forget—I was not charged at Mrs. Pearee'i with having stolen a sovereign—there was a dispute about a sovereign—I was not accused of it I did not leave in consequence of it—no sovereign was given to me, nor yet a shilling—Mrs. Pearce said she gave Selina Knigbt a sovereign for Clara Green to get some butter with—I said that I saw a shilling on the corner of the table, but no money was given to me—that was the month I was leaving—I had given warning—it is not true that I left Mrs. Pearce to go to Mrs. Wallis's; that is a mistake in the pamphlet—when I left Mrs. Pearce I went in Sandwich Street in lodgings, and then I went to Mrs. Wallis—I left Mrs. Wallis to go to Mrs. Cripps for higher wages—I think I stayed in Sandwich Street about a week—I was at Mb. Wallis's two or three months; that was at 133, Euston Road, I think, and I left there to go to Mrs. Cripps—I heard of Mrs. Cripps's situation through Selina Knight—she called on me once in Sandwich Street, and, once at Mrs. Wallis's I think—it might have been twice, but no I more—I met her the evening I was going to see Mrs. Cripps—we lived there together; she was servant at Mrs. Cripps—it was in consequence of what she told me that I applied for the situation there; I only stayed there one month—I left because I did not like it—Selina Knight called once; that was in Guilford Street—from there I went to No. 12, New North Street, Mrs. Northcott's; that is a private house where they let apartments—I was not in service there, I was only two or three days lodging there—I should have looked out for another situation after leaving Mrs. Cripps if I had not known that I was going to the defendant's—I did not know that I was going there before I went to Sandwich Street; I did not know that the defendant was married then—I think I went there on 17th June, 1876, and left on 2nd August, 1877; I was away nearly a month when I left in August, and I went back to live there again—Mr. Riggen-bach was still living there then—he complained of missing some of his things; there was a little dispute inconsoqnence of that; that was in July, 1877—that was not the reason for my leaving the second time—they did not accuse me of having pledged Mr. Kiggenbaeh's things or having sold them—the defendant wanted some money and he pawned all his own things that he had got—it was after the dispute of Mr. Riggenbach'i things that I left; he lost some more things again in 1878, there was another dispute about that—I did not pledge the second lot, I did the first; I did not sell the second lot, I had nothing to do with it—Mr. Riggenbach visited me when I was in prison for stealing; I told him I knew nothing about his things, he came to ask me about the second lot; it was true as to those—I had pawned the first lot—I did not tell him so, I told him I knew nothing about the second lot—I swear I had not pawned or sold the second lot—I did not sell the second lot to Mrs. Pearce in Euston Street—I never sold Mrs. Pearce any gentlemen's clothing or blankets, or things of that sort, I sold some ladies' clothing—I had not sold anything of Mr. Riggenbach's there; Mrs. Pearce keeps a wardrohe shop, a place for the sale of second hand clothes; I did sell some things to her, but none of Mr. Riggenbach's—I pledged the first lot of his things at Mr. Clarke's, 21, Hampstead Road—I pledged them for the defendant, because he wanted the money for us to go to Redhill together—I knew they were the lodger's things, (The following passages at page
4 of the pamphlet were read to the witness: "Mr. Findlay, the American, came to lodge with Miss Griffiths, taking the large top room. Mr. Findlay seemed to be a very mysterious personage, he had lots of money, got I know not how"—I did not know how the other lodgers got their money, I never saw anybody get money like Mr. Findlay—"but where he and his money have gone to, I am only permitted to suspect"—I could not say when I wrote this pamphlet where he and his money had gone to—to tell the truth, I mean to say that perhaps he might have been done the same as Miss Hacker—I meant that the sane might have been done to him as was done to Miss Hacker—that is what I suspect; there was a Mr. Findlay lodging there—I stated before the Magistrates, "I have read the pamphlet, there are two or three mistakes in it; one is that I went to Redhill with Mrs. Bastendorff; it should have been Mr. Bastendorff, and there is a wrong name of one of the gentlemen lodgers; Mr. Waldron it should be, it is Mr. Warren, I think those are the only mistakes, the rest of the pamphlet is true. "It is true; there may be some little mistakes in the dates—in the pamphlet H says that I went from Torrington Square to Mrs. Cripps; it should be that I wont to Sandwich Street, and that I went to Mrs. Wallis's before I went to Mrs. Cripps—with those explanations I think the rest of the pamphlet is tree, and that is what I mean. Q. Then are the jury to understand that when you wrote this you suspected that Mr. Findlay, like Miss Hacker, had been murdered at 4, Euston Square?—A. That was what I fancied, that was what I thought; because the defendant had a revolver. I first thought it when I went back into the service—when I went back I found that Mr. Findlay was gone. I don't say that I knew he had been murdered in the house; I did not suspect he was in the house; I did not think anything about it. I did suspect that he had been murdered. I went back and resided in the house where a lodger was missing since I left, suspecting that he was murdered. I afterwards had a watch and chain exactly like Mr. Findlay's, and which I thought was like Mr. Findlay's; I had that just after I went back to the service, about a week after I think. I don't remember how long I had it, about a fortnight or three weeks. I gave it back to the defendant I afterwards received the watch and chain of Miss Hacker. "The police have been too stupid to guess, their officers too im-becile even to accept, a broad and startling clue. Dogberry and Noodle-dum. No matter, that is public business now. "The startling due was to see if they could go and find Mr. Findlay—I could only suspect where he had gone to—I had not told the police that I thought he was murdered—that was what I thought myself; now you are speaking of what I said of the police—as I said before, the startling clue was to see if they could find him, and inquire about him—I did think he had been murdered, and yet I remained in the situation—I do not know who Dogberry is; I never heard of him till I read the pamphlet; I don't know where he lives—I don't know anything about it—I do not know who Noodle dum is, or what he is, or where he lives—I could not fix the time after my return when I received Miss Hacker's watch and chain; the last time I saw Miss Hacker was when she went out to post the letter—that might be on the Thursday or Friday I know it was after she had gone over the third week—she had gone out to post her letter, and she had not returned—it was on the Thursday or Friday that I went to Hampstead with the Bastendorff s' children; it might have been Wednesday—I can't
say; it was the same day On which I had seen her go to port the letter I think it was a week after that that I had her watch and chain; I had her eyeglass too, it was attached on to the chain—I had not often sees that watch and chain and eyeglass; Miss Hacker never wore it—I waited on her she did not wear it on Sundays indoors; she only wore it when she went to church—I never saw her eyeglass, only when she went to church—she had an eyeglass; she might have used that one to read her Book of Fate, but I have not noticed it—I knew that the watch and chain was hew after I saw the remains in the coal cellar. (MR. WILLIAM interposed, and called attention to the fact that the witness, although acquited of the murder, was still liable to be indicted as an accessory after the fact. MR. JUSTICE HAWKIS told the witness that anything which the believed would criminate herself, she was justified in refusing to answer.) I think I sat Miss Hacker's remains at the end of November or the beginning of December, 1877—I remained in the service of Mr. Bastendorff until September, the following year; not knowing that the remains were in the coal cellar—they were out in the outside coal cellar when I saw them, in the area; there are two coal cellars—I did not pawn the watch I pawned the chain in March: that would be three or four months after the remains had been found in the coal cellar—I don't know what became of the watch; I gave it to the defendant—I gave it to him to pawn, or to get it pawned—the coal cellars are side by side, one inside and the other out of the area—you have to go into the area to get to the outer one, you get to the inner one from the scullery, in the house; ft opens directly from the scullery—the two coal cellars are side by side under the pavement—J always understood from the defendant that the remains were "buried in the square; I mean in the enclosure—I under I stood that from him after they were moved away from the coal cellar, the I next morning after I saw the remains—remained there till the following I September, after I had been told that the remains of Miss Hacker had been buried in the square. (A passage from page 11 of the pamphlet was I read to the witness relating to the death of a little boy.) Q. Do you mean to sat I that you saw that boy killed? A. I said in the pamphlet that that was I true, but I decline to answer any of these questions; it is true—I don't I know what month that was in; in October, 1877, I think—I think it was I at the end of October—after seeing that, I remained till the following September; I then went to 67, George Street, Gower 'Street Station, Mr. Wright's—I went there in lodgings—I remained there about three weeks I I think—from there I went to Mr. Krigger's, a friend of the defendant's, 10, Milton Street, Euston Square; I stayed there one week—I then went home to Bideford, and remained there a fortnight or three weeks—Peter Bastendorff came to visit me there, as my husband; he slept with me at my father and mother's house—the defendant told me, when I was going down, that he would come down, but he wrote me a letter and told me he could not come, and said I was to send to Peter to come down, as he I could not—I have not got that letter—Peter came down on the Monday, and he and I came up to town on the "Wednesday—I think so; if I was I certain I would say so—we parted in Gower Street—he had a shop then in I Huntley Street—he went to his shop and I went to get a room in Hunter I Street—I occupied that room a fortnight—Peter did not visit me there—I met him while I was there—I went to his shop several times; that was I about 10 minutes' walk from Hunter Street—I went out with him a time I
or two—we did not have intercourse while I was staying there—I went from Hunter Street to Burton Street, and stayed there a week—the houses in Hunter Street and Barton Street were lodging-houses, where you could lodge for a night or a shorter time—I did not inquire whether they only took you in for a night—I went to prison from Burton Street for stealing the things from Hunter Street—I got eight months—I did not get hard labour; I don't think so; I did not hear it; I was not sentenced to hard labour, simply imprisonment—it is true that I richly deserved it. (A passage from page 14 of the pamphlet was read relating to her prison life, expressive of penitence, and a desire, to lead a better life.) Peter came to meet me at the prison gates when I left the prison, but I did not speak to him—I spoke to him about a week after—I took a cab myself, not with him—it is true that since I came out of prison I have had intercourse with him, twice—I came out on 8th August last—I have not been doing anything since—I have had some money from any home, and I have had some from the pamphlet—I don't remember when I got the 10l. cheque; it was some time in August, I think, when I first began to give the statement, to write it; at the end of August,' I think—I had enough from home to live on before that; I had had 3l.; my mother sent it me—I saw Peter last about three weeks ago, I think—I have been at Bow Street twice since I saw him—I have not seen him since I was at Bow Street—he has not been on good terms with the defendant, but he is now, I suppose, because he told me had made friends with his brother the last time I saw nam, when he came to see me in Southwark Bridge Road—I was lodging there—I have been to the police-court twice since I left there—Peter has keen with me on several occasions to the office of the Central News while this pamphlet was being pnepsred for the press—he has not been with me to Mr. Armstrong's, the solicitor for the prosecution—I have not seen him there; he has been there, hut I 'have not seen him—I have been there—I state every now and then in the pamphlet "Peter Bastendorff corroborates this"—I had ascertained that from him while the pamphlet was being written—the ones I saw he told them that it was quite true—when I had written some of the statements I have taken it down to the Central News, and Peter has been there, and it was read over in his presence, or he read it over and said it was true—we servants were not in the habit of going out at night when we were intorruigton Square—the defendant's was the first invitation that had been given to me—I accepted it—we all three dressed ourselves and fell asleep and the policemen came—I had seen both the policemen before; tone of them was a sergeant—inquiry has been made for them; I have not seen either of them since—I have not been to see if I could identify them,; I could,; I said I did not want to go; I don't know that I have been asked; I should know them if I were to see them—it was not Mr. Pearce's habit to have the keys of the area and the house taken up to him at night when he went to bed; he left it entirely to the servants—the next night I went out by myself, leaving Knight and Green in the house; they knew I was going out; I left about 11—we were always in the habit of locking the door of our bedroom, and I put the key in my pocket by 'mistake—they did not ask me about it.; they were in the kitchen when I went out—I don't think they asked one when I was coming in—they did not say anything about the key—I kept them up till 2 or half-past—they never went out at night after the family had gone to bed.; I did—the intercourse with the defendant was carried on
until I left Mrs. Pearce's—I went to live with him—he told me he was a married man when I was at Mrs. Oripps's, and I then learnt his name—I went to live with him, having had intercourse with him, and to have inter course with him as a married man in his own house—that continued up to! the time of my becoming acquainted with Peter—it was some time in I November or December that Peter asked me to keep company with him—he never promised mo marriage—I was engaged to him at the end of December—he never said anything about marriage—people get engaged in hopes to get married some time, I suppose—I did not say at Bow Street that I was engaged to be married to Peter; I said I was engaged, but not engaged to be married; I meant engaged to be married at some time—it was in January that I thought I was in the family way—I was engaged to be married to Peter at the time I was in the family way by his brother—the defendant and his wife knew we were engaged—it was with the defendant's permission that I gave Peter the key—he took it off the dresser; that was that he might come in in the night and have intercourse with me—he availed himself of the key several times—the house was pretty full of lodgers sometimes—the defendant had three children at that time, he has five now; I think they slept at the top of the house—when I went there first there were two beds in one room, the two children slept in one bed and the girl Peck and myself in the other for a few weeks, then I had a room to myself—after Peck left, no one slept with the children for some time—I did, in the spare bed in the same room; that was the room and the bed at which Peter used to visit me; that was on the same floor that Mr. and Mrs. Bastendorff slept—on 2nd August when I left, I told Peter that I was going to Bideford—the night before I left town I slept with Peter at a coffee-house, the Railway Hotel in Argyle Street, the same one that I afterwards went to with the defendant—after Peter had slept with me he went with me to the I railway-station to see me off to Bideford—instead of taking a ticket to I Bideford, I only took one to Vauxhall, and having parted with Peter, I went I to Vauxhall and came back again and met the defendant, so that I played 11 trick upon Peter—it was after that that I went to Redhill with the I defendant—when I came back with him we went and had some dinner, I I don't know the place; we came from Victoria Station and went on towards I the Edgware Road; it was not in the Edgware Road that we had dinner—I when we were at Redhill we went out early on the Sunday morning—we I did not have any breakfast before we went out—we did not return till 10 I at night—we went and had some dinner soon after 1 o'clock, I don't remember the place—I was never there before, I could go and find it—I went to Redhill with Mr. Armstrong to show him the place—there is no I one here from the house where the defendant had dinner, that I know of; I they said they could not remember us, just coming in and having our I dinner—we did not have any tea, we were obliged to be scanty, for money I was scarce; we had no breakfast or tea, no more than some biscuits, and we I went to bed without any supper; that is true—after coming to London and I having dinner I did not go to the coffee house where I had slept on the I Friday night; I went for a walk—I met the defendant again the same night—I slept by myself that night in Nutford Place; the defendant took the room for me—we did not go to bed together there, we did not have intercourse there; I think it does say so there (in the deposition)—I said so at Bow Street I think—on the Tuesday night I went to the Argyle
Hotel; on Monday night I slept by myself, the same as in the pamphlet. (The following extract from page 5 of the pamphlet was read to the witness: "I met Mr. Bastendorff at Victoria Station and we went to Redhill together; next night a room was taken in the Edgware Road, and there I passed the night alone the following night, Saturday, was passed at the hotel in Argyle Street, King's Cross; on Sunday, Kew Gardens.") It was not that Sunday that was spent at Kew Gardens—that is not as I wrote it down in my book—I went again and again to the office—the pamphlet states that I have read it through and declare it to be correct in every particular—I did not any I went to Kew with the defendant—it was not that Sunday that I went to Kew, I was at Redhill, I could not go—I did not read all the pamphlet—I did not read it from beginning to end—I did not write that part that it was true in every particular—I don't know who wrote it—I signed my name to it—I was told to sign it—I don't know by whom, Mr. Moore or Mr. Birley—I did not think of all these little things at the time—I said I thought all the rest was true, all the other particulars—I have not seen much of Mr. Moore and Mr. Birley lately—I have seen them several times about this matter, and have been about with them—I have not seen them here to-day—I saw Mr. Birley here yesterday, but have not spoken to him—I have not seen Selina Knight at their office—I saw her at Mr. Armstrong's office, I met her there—I have seen her every day that the case has been on, every time we came to the Court—I have not gone away with her—I have met Clara Green at the Court, and have seen her twice at Mr. Armstrong's office—I have not seen her at the. Central News office—I saw Selina Knight three or four times between the time of my leaving Mrs. Pearoe and going to Mrs. Cripps—we were always intimate after becoming acquainted at Mrs. Pearce's—I never went to see a baby at Goodge Street, nor vet a child—I really mean to say that, and it is true—I did not go to see her in Goodge Street—I do not know Mrs. Jones in Goodge Street, or Mr. Jones—I know Richard Henry Jones, I have seen him once—I was down there one evening, at his house with Selina Knight, in Goodge Street, Tottenham Court Road—I don't think I went by appointment—Selina Knight went with me, because it was a friend of hers—we went out one evening from Torrington Square, I think—I did not see a child there, nor hear of one—I did not know there was a child there—Selina Knight did not go to see a child to my knowledge—I went into Mrs. Grippe's service because Selina was there—she came and told me and I got a situation in the same house.
Re-examined. I only saw Knight once after leaving Mrs. Cripps's up to the time she became a witness in this case—there was no immoral connection between me and the footman at Lady Buck's—by my first folly and trouble taking place there I meant on account of the cheque, not on account of any connection with the footman—the cheque was put into a letter to send to London to a housemaid at Mrs. Buck's house—the footman took it out of the post bag and asked me to change it, and I gave him 1l. 10s. out of it—the cheque was for 3l. 3s., I think—I went into the town to do some shopping, and I went to my milliner's and left the cheque there for a bonnet—I did not cash it, I gave the footman 1l. 10s. out of my pocket before I took the cheque to bo cashed—I was going next day to get the cheque to go and change it, but I did not go for a day or two, and it was found,
and that was three days before I left my situation—I did not get any money for the cheque—the kitchen maid, I think, went to my milliner's awl the milliner asked her how it was I had not been, as I had loft the cheque there, and then it was found out—that was not the reason I left my place—the footman stole it out of the bag—I knew that he had stolen it—that was what I meant by its being my first trouble—it was a considerable time before I knew the defendant that I knew the policeman at Rotherhithe who visited me at Mr. Pearce's, it was before Knight and Green came there—I gave notice to leave Mrs. Pearce in the ordinary way—no imputation of dishonesty was brought against me while I was there—the things that I pledged of Mr. Riggenbach's were some of his clothes, trousers or jackets, or something—I did not take them, I took them from the defendant's hands—he gave them to me, and asked me to go and pledge them, and I did pledge them at Mr. Clarke's, 21, Hampstead Road I think it was—I don't remember what money I received—I gave it to the defendant with the ticket—I don't renumber in what name I pledged them—the defendant said he wanted to go into the country for a change, but he had not got money enough, and be asked me to pledge the things—he said he would take them out again when he could, he knew Mr. Riggenbach would not miss them, as he had got such a lot—I don't remember what day of the week it was that I pawned the things, it was a day or two before I left there, a few days before I left—we went down to Redhill on the Saturday it was in that same week that I pawned the things, shortly before the Saturday—I met Peter Basteudorff at Victoria Station on that Saturday; he had told me the night before that he would meet me there the defendant told me to take the ticket for the next station from Waterloo, he did not say what station; he said I was to let Peter think I was going to Bideford, and I was to come back and meet him at Victoria Station at 5 o'clock, and I did so as to the paragraph at page 5 beginning "Next night a room was taken, "&c., I did not know it was written like that; that room was taken on the Monday night at Nutford Place, Edgware lioad, the same night that I returned from Redhill—I was at Redhill from Saturday to Monday,; it was not that Saturday that I went to Kew Gardens—I did not go to Kew Gardens on a Saturday.; I think it was on a Monday, the Monday alter, I think—I went there one day, and I think it was a Monday—when I returned to Mr. Bastendoriff's Mr. Findlay had gone—it was about a week after my return that the defendant gave me the watch and chain which corresponded with Mr. Findlay's—he had often promised me a present, and he came down one morning and said "I have got a present for you at last; "he gave it me, I looked at it and said "It is like Mr. Find lay's; "he handed me the watch and chain at the same time—he said "How do you know it is like Mr. Findlay's?" I said "Because I have seen it many times;" he said "It is not Mr. Find lay's, I bought it at a sale; "I said "It is just like it;" he said "There are many watches alike;" I said "it is too large for me, this is a gentleman's watch;" he said "You can wear that before I can get you smaller one; "nothing else was said at that time—I took the watch and chain and kept them, not until he gave me Miss Hacker's watch and chain—I had returned that one before I received Miss Haoker's, about a month before, I think; it may be more, it may be live weeks—he asked me for it—he came down in the kitchen one morning and asked me he said
"Let me have that watch and chain, will you, and I will give you a smaller one; "I gave it to him, and I did not see anything of it afterwards—when he gave me Miss Hacker's watch and chain and eyeglass he came down in the kitchen and handed me a little box, and said "Here is a present for you"—I opened the box, and said "Is this for me?" he said "Yes, it is a smaller one than the first," he said "You will say you had it given to you by your uncle, the same as you said you had the first one from"—he said he had bought it—I did not know it was Miss Hacker's—he said "I bare bought this watch, but this one is rather large, you can wear that, and I may get the chance of buying a smaller one, and I will change that again; "that was all that passed that I can remember—I pawned the watch and chain, I think, in March—I remember taking the children to Hampstead when I saw Miss Hacker go to post a letter; I don't remember the day I went to Hampstead, but I think it was the Saturday after that that this conversation with the defendant took place; I know I received the watch on the Saturday; I cannot fix a date—it was before I pawned the chain that the defendant asked me for Miss Hacker's watch—I never saw that watch again after I gave it to him—he never handed me any money that he had received as the proceeds of the watch—he told me he had pawned it, I saw the ticket; he showed me a ticket, and said he had pawned the watch, and he would take it out again as soon as he could—he asked me to pawn the chain when he wanted some money—I first pawned Mrs. Bastendorffs necklet—there was some young person that had a child by Mr. Basteudorff—he gave me the necklet to pawn; he asked me if I would go and pawn it as he wanted the money—he said he wanted to pay her off, calling the girl by name, all at once, that she had had a child by him—I don't remember the girl's name now; she was a French girl; I had seen her at the house; she had been to the house; that was what took place at the time the necklet was given to me—it was about two days after the necklet was pawned that he asked me to pawn the chain, as he wanted to take the necklet out again, as his wife should not know it; he said so—I then pawned the chain—I never took it out of pawn—I gave the money to the defendant, except 2l. 10s. that I bought a watch with—when he gave me the necklet to pawn he said I could buy a small watch for myself—the chain was pawned for 7l.—the necklet was pawned at Mr. Gill's, in the Hampstead Road, in the name of Barnett, I think; I did not give any other name—I pawned the chain in Drummond Street; I don't remember the name; it was near the Hampstead Road end, Thomas's, I think—I pawned it in the name of Bastendorff—the necklet was redeemed; I went and took it out myself; that was after the chain was pawned—what 1 have written at page 14 of the pamphlet about my preparing for confirmation and about the clergyman and the sermon is true; I was confirmed—I don't remember the parson's name; it was at Tothill Fields Prison—Peter told me that he and his brother were bad friends no longer; he told me that in Southwark Bridge Road when he came to me one night about half-past 12—I think it was after the second hearing at Bow Street on this charge—I have been down to Redhill with Mr. Armstrong to the place where the defendant and I bad some refreshment on the Sunday, and I recognised a woman there—when I returned to Torrington Square after being out for the first night with the defendant I found my fellow-servants flitting up, and they were very cross with me for having taken the key of the bedroom out with me.
By the COURT. The threo of us slept in that room—it was usual to lock the door during the day; wo always kept it locked; there was only one key; sometimes I had it in my pocket, sometimes one of the others' had in their pocket, whoever went into the room last—we kept it locked, because our bedroom was downstairs, and the children were always running about it was an arrangement between ourselves, not a rule of the house—that had been the arrangement from the time that I first went there—the children went to bed about 9 o'clock—I was always in the habit of keeping the do locked; not always; I happened to lock it that night—the other servants were not going out—I left them sitting together at needlework—I had Miss Hacker's watch in my possession long, only a few weeks, I think—the chain was pawned some time in March, 1878—I had it in my possession from the time I first received it until March—Inspector Hogan has the eye-glass now; I kept it until it was taken out of my box after my arrest for the murder—I had not the watch up to Christmas; I think I gave it to the defendant at the end of October or the beginning of November, as near as can say—I had not seen the watch chain and eyeglass constantly in Mil Hacker's possession—I never saw her wearing them; I did not know them by sight; the defendant told me they were hers—I think it was the end November or beginning of December—I think it was the same day that had seen the remains of Miss Hacker in the cellar; it was in the outer cells that I saw the remains—I had been told at first that the watch had been bought.
SELINA KNIGHT . I am servant to Mrs. Clarke in Gower Street—I was a one time housemaid in the service of Mrs. Pearce, No. 2, Torrirgton Square—I entered that service in May, 1875, and quitted it in January, 1876—Hannah Dobbs was cook in the service, and Clara Green was nurse—I know the defendant—I saw him in Torrington Square for the first time; we wen cleaning the dining-room windows; Dobbs was helping me outside, ant I was inside, and Green was in the room—it was in September or October; I should rather say it was in September, 1875—he asked if we wanted any help; I said "Yes"—he stood talking for a little while; I should think for 10 minutes or a quarter of an hour, and then went away; in made an appointment to come the same evening, and he did come to the area, and whistled down the area; that was about 7 o'clock—I went up the area steps, and answered him; he asked where my fellow-servant was whom he had seen in the morning, that was Hannah Dobbs; she came up the area steps, I went down, and left them together; I could not say how long they remained there, because I had to do my duty upstairs; later on that night I and Dobbs and Green dressed ourselves to go out; Dobbs had made an appointment to meet the defendant at 11 o'clock; it was not quite time to go out, and we laid down on the bed and fell asleep—we were awoke by two policemen coming into the room—Dobbs had left the area gate un-fastened, and the area door, and the bedroom door was on the jar, and they entered the room—we then came out of the bedroom into the kitchen, and made them some coffee, cut some bread-and-butter, and gave to the police-men—after they left we turned off the gas, fastened the area gate and door and went to bed—the defendant came again the next night; he whistled down the area; I went up to him, and Dobbs came up afterwards—I went down into the kitchen again, leaving them in the kitchen together—when Hannah came down into the kitchen she told me something—she went
out that night, as near as I can say about 11 o'clock, and returned at about 2.30 in the morning—I and Green were then in the kitchen; we had not gone to bed, because she had locked our bedroom door, and taken the key away with her—the family went away on the Sunday; Mrs. Pearce went away on the Saturday—Mr. Pearce slept at home on the Sunday night; he went away for the day on the Sunday—Mrs. Pearce returned on the Tuesday; Mr. Pearce on the Sunday night between 10 and 11 o'clock, I think—I saw the defendant on that Sunday, between 3 and 4 o'clock in the afternoon—he was outside the house by the area gate—Dobbs was in the dining-room; she went down into the kitchen, up the area steps, and let him in; he came into the kitchen; Green, myself, and Dobbs were there—Clara Green and I went out in the evening as near 7 o'clock as I can say; the defendant was in the kitchen up to that time—when Green and I went out we left the defendant and Dobbs together in the kitchen—after we had put on our bonnets and shawls in the bedroom we went out at the front door—I returned, and found Green and Dobbs there; I did not return with Green—I saw the defendant again in the following week: I think on the Tuesday, down in the kitchen with Green and Dobbs; he did not stay very long—I could not say for certain how many times altogether I saw him at Torrington Square; it was more than six times anyhow—I conversed with him on several occasions; I have seen him on several occasions during this inquiry; his beard was very much longer then than it is now—when I left Mrs. Pearce's service I went to live at Mrs. Cripps's, 20, Guilford Street, about a fortnight after—I was out of a situation about a fortnight—Dobbs came to live at Mrs. Cripps's after I went there; I think I was there about 10 weeks altogether—I have been in service ever since, and am so now.
Cross-examined. It was in 1875 that I saw the defendant in Torrington Square—I have not seen him since then until the proceedings at the police-court this year—I think I saw him more than six times—I swear I saw him six—I won't swear that I saw him more than six—this is accurate: "I think I saw him more than three or four times—I would not say that I had seen him more than six—to the best of my knowledge he is the man—I don't think I will go beyond that"—I said I would swear to the best of my belief; it was at No. 4, Euston Square, that I saw him in the present year—I was taken to identify him by Mr. Moore and Mr. O'Connell, two gentlemen connected with the Central News—I met them at a public-house—I had never seen Dobbs for three years and a half, from the end of March or beginning of April, 1876, till September 1879—she had been home to my mother's, and she remembered my mother's address, and she gave them ray mother's address, and they found me out—they made an appointment with me to see me at the public-house, and it was arranged that I was to go to 4, Euston Square, for the purpose of seeing Mr. Bastendorff—I had seen Peter Bastendorff before I went to the public-house—I am not quite sure whether it was once or twice, but not more than twice, he was at the public-house when I went there—it was not through him that the arrangement was made for me to go to the public-house; it was with Mr. Moore I was to meet them, and Peter and Mr. Birley—it was not at Mrs. Cripps's that they came to me, but where am living now; that was where I saw Peter—he came there one night with Mr. O'Connell, but I can't remember whether Peter was present when the arrangement was made—I did not expect to see him at the public-house
—he was there, and Mr. Birley and Mr. Moore, Mr. O'Connell and Hannah Dobbs—I got there between two and three in the afternoon—I was not there more than ten minutes—it was arranged that they should go and knock at Mr. Bastendorffs door, and have him out at the door and talk to him, and that while they wore talking I should go up to him and ask him a question—they went and knocked at the door, and Mr. Basten-dorff came out—I could not say how far the public-house was from Elision Square, but I should think about ten minutes' walk—when I got there I found them talking to Mr. Bastendorff at the door—Mr. Moore and Mr. O'Connell went first—Peter left because he had some business to attend to—I heard him say so, and Dobbs went away with Mr. Birley—when I found the two talking to Mr. Bastendorff, I went up the steps and spoke to him, as had been arranged—I knew whose house I was going to, and who it was I was going to speak to—I asked him to direct me to the Caledonian Road—he said "Straight down the Euston Road"—I then went on, leaving the others still speaking to him—I saw no more of him until I saw him at the police court—I said, to the best of my belief, he was the man—I swear, to the best of my belief, he is the man—my last place before I went to Torrington Square was at Kensington—I had lived in North Audley Street, and I was with the same ladies at Kensington—when I was in North Audley Street I formed the acquaintance of Richard Henry Jones—he and his mother lived in Goodge Street—I visited there sometimes—Hannah Dobbs went there with me once, and Clara Green also—there was a child there, but the child was not in the room where we were—I went to see my friends Mr. and Mrs. Jones—I did not go to see the child—I did see the child—Dobbs did not know there was a child there nor Clara Green—Mr. Jones came and visited me in North Audley Street, and came to see me in the evening; he stayed there during the evening, but not in the night—he has not spent the night in that house in North Audley street—he has spent the whole night with me at North Audley Street—I was living there in the year 1872 or 1878—I had not to shut him up in the coal cellar on one occasion, or in the area—his visits resulted in my visit to Queen Charlotte's Hospital—the child spoken of was born there—Mrs. Jones took charge of that child—it was at her house that I used to visit, where the child was—I will swear that I never divulged to any one person that I had a child there—Dobbs and Green did not know it—that was not the only child—I had two altogether, not both by Mr. Jones; his was the first—the last was born three years last October, since I left Mrs. Pearce—Mrs. Pearce had three children—when I was living there the girl was thirteen, Harry was six, and little Willy was two—it was in the month of September that Mrs. Pearce was out of town on the Sunday; that is as near as I can say; I can give no date; little Willy, the youngest, was not out of town; I think the other two were at school—I think Mrs. Pearce went down to see her mother; she had a telegram about her mother's illness—I don't know the place she went to—little Willy was at home; the other children were not in the house—they did not go with Mrs. Pearce—I could not say for certain where they were, but I think they were at school—I can't remember where—Mr. Pearce went away on the Sunday morning and came back on the Sunday night—it was part of my duty to clean the windows at Torrington Square—I had not expressly stipulated that I should not clean the windows there;
it was my duty to do so; we never had anybody to clean them—I think I left Mrs. Pearce on 24th January, 1876; no, it was the day before Christinas Day, 1875, that I gave notice to leave, at a month's warning—Hannah Bobbe had left about two months before me—there was a dispute about a Sovereign before she left; Mrs. Pearce had given me a sovereign to purchase Kome butter—she gave it me between the lights in the dining-room—I took Bt down into the kitchen and put it on the table, and asked Dobbs to give it to Green when she came in to get the butter; I did not put it into her hand—afterwards, when the butter was bought, change was brought by Green for a shilling, and not for a sovereign—it was not in consequence of that dispute that Dobbs left—she had given a month's warning before that—after leaving Mrs. Pearce I went to Mrs. Cripps—not directly; I was out of a situation for a fortnight—I went to my sister's—it was in 1874 that I was in Queen Charlotte's Hospital—the second child was born in Endell Street, Long Acre, last October three years—before then I had been living in Ampthill Square, Hampstead Road—I was about ten weeks at Mrs. Eripps's—Hannah Dobbs came there because they wanted a cook, and I m new that she was leaving her situation in the Euston Road, and I asked her to come there—I had not kept up ray acquaintance with her—when I meat to answer an advertisement at 20, Guilford Street, it was for a cook and housemaid, and I spoke to Dobbs, who I knew was going to leave Mrs. Wallis—I saw her at Mrs. Wallis's, and when I heard that a cook was wanted, I went to her, and in consequence of that she came to Mrs. Cripps's—she left Mrs. Cripps's before me and went to lodge at a Mrs. Northcott's—I saw her there—I never saw her after that until the occasion when I law her at the public-house—I had not seen the pamphlet before I went to the public-house—I don't think I did—this is accurate: "Mr. O'Oonnell and Mr. Moore went with me to 4, Euston Square, I had before this seen the pamphlet and read it nearly all"—I had not read it through—I was not sure about having seen it—I had seen it—it is true that I nearly read it through, and having seen it and read it I went to identify the defendant.
Re-examined. I have had the misfortune to have two illegitimate children—I am dependent on my character for getting a place as a servant—I have tried as far as I could to conceal the fact—Jones is the father of ay child—I never told anybody that he had slept with me a night at North Audley Street—I had never told Dobbs or Green that bad had an illegitimate child—I have said "I heard him (the defenfont) speak—to the best of my belief he is the man"—I said I would swear to the best of my belief he is the man—I heard him speak on the steps at Euston Square, and I had heard him speak in 1875 on more than one occasion in Torrington Square.
By MR. POWELL. I never visited Hannah Dobbs at Euston Square in he summer of 1877—I never saw her for three years and a half.
By the COURT. The Sunday that I saw the defendant in Torrington square was the first Sunday after the policeman came and woke us in the room—we were cleaning the dining-room windows when we first saw him—I heard him speak then, and also the same evening when he asked for my fellow-servant; the next time was on the following night when I went up to answer the whistle—on the following Sunday he came from 3 to 4 in the afternoon—I should think he was there for about three hours that afternoon, we were talking together—during that time I went up and down
stairs and in the kitchen the whole of the time—the children slept in Mrs. Pearce's bedroom—we had little Willy downstairs with us sometimes, bat seldom—I have no recollection as to where the two elder children were that Sunday; they were not at home—we bad left little Willy up when we went out, in Hannah Dobbs's care—he was two years old.
CLARA GREEN . I am a domestic servant living with my friends at 18, Abbey Lane, Stratford—I am not in service there—in 1875 I was in the service of Mrs. Pearce, of 42, Torrington Square—Selina Knight and Hannah Dobbs were my fellow-servants—I know the defendant; I remember him coming there one morning; I was in the dining-room, Selina Knight was in the room, and Hannah Dobbs was sitting outside the windows; the defendant was standing outside talking to her—I don't remember whether I saw him again that night—I remember Dobbs going up the area step about 7 o'clock in the evening—Knight, Dobbs, and I dressed ourselves that night to go out—I don't remember the time, but Hannah was to meet the defendant—at 11 o'clock we went and laid down and fell asleep, and the two policemen came in, and there was some coffee made and given to them—they stayed there about 20 minutes, I believe half an hour—on the following Sunday afternoon I saw the defendant downstairs in the kitchen about 3.30—I believe my mistress was out of town at that time—Knight and Dobbs were in the kitchen—I went out between 6 and 7 o'clock; I would rather say it was 7 o'clock—the defendant was there all that time—I returned at 9 30; he was not there then—I saw him again on another occasion one evening about 10 o'clock; I cannot say how long it was afterwards; it might be two or three nights afterwards, I believe it was; he remained about an hour on that occasion—I see that his beard is mush shorter now than it was then—I saw him at Bow Streeet on 31st October this year, and looked at him, and I believed him to be the same man that I saw in Torrington Square—I say he is the man; I say so positively.
Cross-examined. I had not seen him since the time in Torrington Square till the 31st October last—I did not know him at that time—I had not seen him before, I did not take much notice of him the first time—the first time I saw the man was when he came down into the kitchen a night or two after the window cleaning—I was in and out of the kitchen—I don't remember whether I saw him after that Sunday night or not—I saw him twice come into the house; first on the Sunday afternoon and then a night or two after the Sunday—I did not say at the police-court "I don't remember whether I saw him after that Sunday or not"—I said "A night or two afterwards he came into the house, but I don't remember whether I saw him after that or not"—my depositions was taken down, read over, and I signed it—I don't remember saying that; I might have said it, but it was a mistake—I believe it was in September when the window-cleaning was—Mr. and Mrs. Pearce and family were out of town—they did not go out of town together; Mrs. Pearce went first, and Mr. Pearce afterwards—there was only the little boy at home, the others had gone away with Mrs. Pearce—I believe so, I won't be positive—they were away with Mrs. Pearce; they were not at school then; they used to go to school; they went to school daily, not on Sundays; they were not at school that day—I left Mrs. Pearce at the end of November, 1875; Hannah Dobts left a month before me—the next time I saw her was at Bow Street; at Mr. Armstrong's office was the first time I saw her since I left Mrs.
Pearce, that was before I went to Bow Street—I was ordered to go to Mr. Armstrong's office by a subpoena I had; Mr. Birley served me with it—I have seen Peter Bastendorff; I saw him at Bow Street; that was the frit time I saw him; that was after I had been to Mr. Armstrong's office, on the same morning that I came to Bow Street—I went with the other witnesses; I went there there to see Bastendorff I believe; to see whether I could identify him, to see whether he was the same man I had seen in the kitchen at Torrington Square—I had not been told that he was the man—I was told that he was the man that was in Torrington Square—I hare a pamphlet; I bought it on the day that I came to Bow Street, that was after Mr. Birley had served me with a subpoena—when I went to Bow Street, I went and looked at the defendant—I don't know whether he saw me; he was quite close against me; he might have seen me—this is true: "The defendant took no notice of me when I looked at him, he could see I was looking at him. I noticed no change in his countenance when I looked"—he was allowed a seat in the Court, and I went and sat beside him—I was not there above 10 minutes—I did not notice any change in his countenance; he took no notice of me; his is rather a peculiar face; I should net want to see a man's face more than once to swear to him—I believe I could swear to the policemen if I saw them—I said at Bow Street "I don't remember the policemen, "but that was a mistake—this is accurate: "I had a good opportunity of seeing him in the kitchen; his beard is different; I noticed nothing particular about his voice"—I did not hear much of his voice then; he was a foreigner, I believe; it is true that I noticed nothing particular about his voice.
Re-examined. As far as I know I have never seen those policemen since—I did not hear the defendant speak at all at Bow Street—I have never heard him speak since he was in Torrington Square—I saw him on the Sunday afternoon for some hours, and after that, on another occasion, for about an hour—I was told that the man who was in custody was the man that was in Torrington Square—I don't remember where it was that I was told that—when I got in Court I said I believed him to be the man that I saw in Torrington Square—he was sitting on a seat.
By the COURT. I said he had rather a peculiar face, because he had got rather small eyes—I believed him to be a foreigner when he was in Torrington Square; I was told so by my fellow-servant—I did not particularly take any notice of him—he did not have anything to say to me—he never had any conversation with me whatever.
JOHN ADOLPHUS DICKE . I am a cabinet maker, at 14, Charlton Street, Euston Road—I know the defendant; I think it might have been in 1874 that I first knew him, it might have been before; I Knew him in 1875, I am sure of that—I don't see any difference in his general appearance now; he might have his beard a little shorter—he has had a long beard—I know once he had to cut it out in the centre, what you would call a concave.
Cross-examined. I can't remember whether his beard was cut at all in 1875—I have always known him with a fine beard, what I call a full beard; it has not always been the same as it is now—I can't say whether it was before 1875 that he had a long beard—I never put anything of that kind down or take any particular notice unless—there is anything that I should take particular notice of—I can't really say when it was that he had a longer beard—he is a friend of mine, so far, I have seen him frequently—he sometimes came to my house.
ALBERT DAW KERRELL . I am a wholesale cabinet maker of 30, Argyle Square—the defendant was once my partner from February to November, 1875; I think I saw him every day during that time, barring Sundays—his beard then was very much longer than it is now, it nearly covered his shirt front.
Cross-examined. I first knew him about May or June, 1874; he then had a beard about the same length as when I was in partnership with him—he wore it long the whole time I was in partnership with him——our partnership ceased in November, 1875—I remember meeting him one night in Euston Square with Mr. Dicke some 18 months or two years after the dissolution—I don't know that it was in 1875 that his beard was cut—I should think it is more than probable that I saw him in the earlier part of 1877, but I cannot call to mind any date—I would not swear whether it was 1876 or 1877—I was about to say that I met him one evening with Mr. Dicke in the summer either of 1876 or 1877, and then I noticed that he had shortened his beard—it might have been in 1878, I could not tell.
Re-examined. During the whole of 1875, when he was my partner, he certainly had a much longer beard, and I may go a little further than that—I remember meeting him at Messrs. Hewitt's, in Baker Street, in the early part of 1877, and then I noticed that he had altered his beard by cutting a little portion off the chin, and wearing what are usually called Piccadilly weepers.
HENRY BUSH . I live at 25, Drummond Street, Euston Square—I was the beadle and gardener of Torrington Square from the month of January, 1875, till September, 1878—I know the defendant; I have seen him in Torrington Square on five or six different occasions—I can't remember the date when I first saw him, but it was the latter end of September or the beginning of October, 1875—he was only walking about, up and down, that an all—I suppose I saw him five or six times—that was not shortly after I saw had seen him the first time; it might have been for two or three nights after he was in Torrington Square walking up and down and across the top of the square, close to the Apostolic Church; he was only walking about by the church.
Cross-examined. In that year I lived in Seven Sisters Road, Holloway—my hours of duty in the square was at all times; I don't mean from in the morning until the next morning, 8 or 9 or 10—my regular hours were from 5.45 until 5; then I had to look after the square after tea until 9 or 10—I sometimes went at 6 in the morning, sometimes 7, sometimes 8; I had no set time, that I could please myself about—I did not get tired of the square and leave it as soon as I could—my usual time of leaving was 9 or 10—I was in the habit of staying there until 9 or 10 at night from 6 or 7 in the morning—I mean to swear that—I swear I did so in September and October, 1875, on several occasions—my usual hour for leaving in September and October, 1875, was about 4 or 4.30—I was there till 10 or 11 at night because my duty was this: if there were any organs or bands or anything like that playing in the square in the evening I was supposed to remove them up to a certain time—when I left at 4 I used to go to a coffee-shop and have my tea and go back again—I used not to be on duty every night up to 10 or 11—I dare say I was for 14 or 15 nights in the two months, the latter end of September and October—I did not request that my name might not be given to the attorney for the defence—I might have suggested it; I did—I did not want to be in it at all—I did not ask to come—I didn't want
my name shoved all over the papers—I was obliged to be mixed up in it when I was subpœnaed here—a Mr. Lloyd called at my bouse—I don't know who he is; he is a gentleman; I can't say what else—I suppose be if a detective—I didn't know it; I know it now—I did not know him before he came to me last Friday night fortnight—I was not at the police court; it was after the proceedings at the police-court that they found me out—I have seen Mr. Armstrong; I saw him on Monday week—I can't say how the detective found me out—I am a gardener now—I left Torrington Square I because I thought I could better myself—I don't say that I have; I don't say that I have worsed myself; I have at present on account of the weather and one tiling or another—I am a frozen-out gardener—I have employment if I could get to work, jobbing—I have been jobbing ever since I left the square—I left a regular situation in the square to go jobbing—at the time I saw this person walking about I did not know who he was—I don't know that it is an unusual thing to see a person walking up and down a square but when you take a certain distance—my attention was not called to the person between the time when I saw him in the square and the time when the detective called upon me.
Re-examined. The defendant is the man that I saw at the end of 1875 in the square on this occasion.
ANN CARPENTER . My husband keeps the Bee Hive at Reigate—in August, 18.77, he kept the Bed Lion, Keel hill—J know Hannah Dobbs by I sight, and remember her coming to the Bed Lion with the prisoner about 8 o'clock on a Saturday night at the beginning of August, 1877—I did not know his name then—I took a parcel and a bag up to the bedroom for them; they occupied the same room—before going upstairs they sat a short I time in the smoking-room—I saw them go out about 10 o'clock on the Sunday morning—the charwoman let them out, and when they returned at night they went into the smoking-room—they went to bed between 9 and 10 o'clock, and left about 10 on Monday morning—the prisoner paid I me for the room—on 15th or 16th October this year, between 5 and 6 p.m., I the defendant came down to the Bee Hive, Reigate, with that gentleman, I I believe (Mr. Frederick Jones)—I was up in the top room, what I call my parlour—I had no light there—the prisoner asked if I had lived at the Bed Lion, Redhiil—I said "Yes"—he said "Did you have lodgers?"—I said "Yes"—he asked if I had had some one down from London about some lodgers at the Lion—I said "Tea"—he said "Who?"—I said "Mr. Armstrong"—Mr. Jones put the questions in the prisoner's presence—he said could I remember the lodgers—I said "Yes"—he said "Why?"—I said "Because they were an uncommon couple, a tall lady and a short gentleman"—Mr. Jones said "Was he as tall as me?"—I said "I don't know, unless you stand up"—he stood up, and I said "Oh dear no, not near so tall, "and then he asked the prisoner to stand up, and I said "He was just about your height, and not at all unlike you"—Mr. Jones said "This is Mr. Bastendorff; it was not him, it was his brother"—I said "That tells me that brothers are alike."
Cross-examined. I had seen Mr. Armstrong before that, and knew from him that proceedings were being taken at Bow Street; bat I do not know when they commenced—we made up four beds at Redhill, and they were frequently occupied—I did not keep a servant, but Mrs. Popley was the charwoman—I have not seen her since the visit of these gentle-men—she was there on the day they came—I go into the smoking-room
when I like, but I am in the bar generally—I said at the police-court They sat a short time in the smoking room, and then went to bed"—Mrs. Popley let them out on Sunday morning, but I saw them—the only refreshment they had on Saturday night was ale and biscuits—they had nothing on Sunday—I left Redhill on 29th September—Keigate is two miles from Redhill—there are several inhabitants at Redhill; it is not a village—I had not seen Hannah Dobbs before she came with the short gentleman—I do not know that she had been living for 16 months at Red-hill—the next time I saw her was the beginning of October, when Mr. Moore came with her, Mr. Armstrong came next, and Moore with him—they did not stay long—they paid for bread and cheese which they had, and gave me a suspener—they did not buy anything of me—they did Dot give me an order for sucking pigs—if Armstrong has said that he gave an order for sucking pigs, or bought some of me, that is not true—I had no pigs, nor did he or Moore ask me to get any—Mr. Burley has not been to me. nor any gentleman from whom I received an order for pigs—Jones ana Bastendorff may have stayed 20 minutes—Armstrong and Moore said I should have some one down; and when Mr. Jones and Bastendorff came, I knew they came about the same business—I saw in the suspene that Armstrong and Moore were mixed up in Bastendorff's matter—I read nothing of it in the newspapers—when Bastendorff stood up I said that he was not unlike the man—I did not say "Not unlike you, but his beard was lighter"—I said "longer"—he had a long and light beard—when he stood up I recognised him as the man who came with Hannah Dobbs, bat before he stood up I was not thinking of such a thing—I expected some-body from Mr. Armstrong, but not on the other side—it is true that, till he stood up, I did not recognise him as the man who came to the house, although I had been talking to him—I said before the Magistrate "The man had high shoulders and a long beard, a light beard"—Mrs. Popley was there—she said that she did not believe she could recognise them, bat she remembered letting them out—my husband was not at that time on the Bank Holiday, I am sure of that—he was there when Mr. Bastes dorff came down—he was not there on the day Hannah Dobbs and Mr. Bastendorff came together, neither on the Saturday, Sunday, or Monday—he did not see them; he was at Hastings—he was there when Mr. Arm-strong was there—if any order was given to him for pigs, he did not tell me.
Re-examined. He is a miller and sometimes works elsewhere—he goes where he is wanted, he is not generally at home—the first I have heard about a sucking pig was from Mr. Powell to-day—we had a good many lodgers at the Red Lion, generally men; we seldom had couples there.
HANNAH DOBBS (Re-examined by the COURT). I wrote the MS. of the pamphlet, but have not seen it since, I gave it up to the gentleman—there is not so much in the pamphlet as I wrote down, but I did not see anything struck out by anybody—I gave some to Mr. Moore and some to Mr. Birley—I told the defendant I was with child, and the fact was so—he was the father of it—he gave me something to take and I had a miscarriage—I know of a Frenchwoman and two children of Mr. Bastendorffs.
The following witnesses were called for the defence:—
Knight, and Clam Green, were the three servants living with us—I had three children—the eldest was a daughter 12 years old, the next, Harry, a boy of 7, and the third, Willie, of 15 months—Clara Green was the nurse-maid, and had charge of the children—the two younger children slept in my bedroom, and my daughter in a separate room—Hannah Dobbs came into the service, as near as I can tell, about the end of January or beginning of February, 1875; she came to me during Lent—I used to attend the week-day services during Lent, and when Hannah Dobbs first came she went with me to the evening Lent services—Selina Knight entered the service in May—a man was engaged to clean the windows, Selina Knight distinctly stated when slie took the situation that she would not clean windows, and I told her we had a man to do so—during the year 1875 I only went out of town once, that was in October; I went to my mother's in Norfolk—I received a telegram of her illness and I went and took my youngest child with me, my baby—the little boy and girl were left at home, and my husband was also at home—I went on the Thursday and returned on the following Monday evening—I did not see my husband while I was away, he was at home all the time; he did not come down to me—the order was to have the area gate locked at night, and it was done so to the best of my knowledge at all times, and the key was kept in the dining-room on the mantelshelf at night—during the day it was kept hanging on a nail in the kitchen—it was brought up at dark every evening to be put on the mantelshelf—I gave Dobbs notice to leave.
Cross-examined. The kitchen was the place for the key during the day-time, I could not say that it was always hanging there; I was not there every minute, but in my presence it was there—they always brought it up at night; I am prepared to say that; a key waa brought to me, I did not go to try it—I can't positively say it was the area key, there were five lodger boarders in the house when I went to my mother's—it was not the business of the servants to clean the windows, if they did it it waa not in my presence; I never saw them do it, that is all I can say; whether they were cleaned in my absence I don't know—before Selina Knight accepted my service she said it was not usual to clean windows, and I said she would not have to do it—she asked had she to clean the windows, and I said no, it was always my custom to have ami to clean them—I was called as a witness at the police-court—I have not been called as a witness in this case before to-day.
Re-examined. I usually sit in the dining-room in the daytime, that over looks the area and the gate, and I could distinctly see into the square and see persons passing along—I did not not at any time take up the key to see that it was right, I believed that it was; I never suspected that my servants were passing a false key upon me.
By the COURT. I had only those three servants in the house; they occupied one bedroom, in the basement—I always went down stairs in the morning, and in the evening also to draw my supper beer about 9.0—I went to live in Torrington (Square in September, 1874—something had occurred which made me give the order about the area key—I had me old lady living with me in 1875 who was very particular about it; he was there until I left in 1877—my husband is a medical man.
that Mr. Bastendorff, of 4, Euston Square, was in want of assistance from a servant, I went there on Friday morning, 4th August—I recollect the 6th) being Monday, and it was Bank Holiday—Hannah Dobbs was not there went I went; she had gone—there was a charwoman, Mrs. Smith; I had my sight at that time—I stayed there till the 4th September—I saw Mr. Bastendorff on the Friday that I went there; he was at 4, Euston Square—I remember the next day, Saturday; he was then all day, and night too—he carried on his business there; he had a workshop at the back—Mrs. Bastendorff was there that Saturday, and in the evening Mrs. Pearce, Mrs. Bastendorffs mother, came—Mr. Bastendorff was there at dinner-time on that Saturday; we generally used to hare dinner at 1.0, 1.0 to 1.30—I saw him after dinner—the last time I saw him on that Saturday was between 11.0 and 12.0, when I went to bed; I saw Mr. and Mrs. Bastendorff, and they wished me good night—they were in the back parlour, going to bed; they slept there—I remember the Sunday morning, the next day, the 5th—Mr. Bastendorff was then all day; I saw him all day—the children were at home at that time; the eldest daughter was ill with the measles, and so was Peter, the eldest little boy—I saw Mr. Bastendorff all day long on the Sunday—he was in the house; I don't remember him going out at all—Mrs. Pearce and her daughter Margaret were there at supper-time, and they left the house about 11.0, or between 10.0 and 11.0, and about half an hour after that I wished Mr. Bastendorff good night and went to bed, and left him in the dining-room—on the Monday morning, the 6th, I first saw Mis. Bastendorff about 7.30—I went into her bedroom to take her a cup of tea; that was my custom every morning during the time I was there—Mr. Bastendorff was not there—a conversation took place between ml and Mrs. Bastendorff—I next saw Mr. Bastendorff in the evening, coming in the hall, between 7.0 and 8.0, and of course he had some tea; then I did not see him till bedtime—I was the only servant at that tune—I slept in the third floor front room, a small room—the first time that I ever saw Hannah Dobbs was when I went to engage with Mrs. Bastes dorff, that was before the 3rd August; the third week in August she came back—I cannot recollect the day—she did not come back into the service that day—I never knew of her or anybody being let into the house at night to sleep during the months I was there—Mr. Bastendorff remained at home throughout that month; he was not away from home in the week days at all—the next Sunday after the Bank Holiday he was away shooting; he left on Saturday evening I am almost sure, and he returned on the Monday morning—Mrs. Bastendorff went out of town twice during that month, but not that Sunday—it was after that I think; it was the following Sunday she went away, but she went to Mr. Bastendorff—I could not say the date; it was the Sunday after the Sunday I have spoken of—no one went with her; she went to meet Mr. Bastendorff at Erith—that was what she told me—he had left on the Saturday night; she went at 10.0 in the morning—the last Sunday that I wtf there Mr. Bastendorff went to Erith, and Mrs. Bastendorff went and met him; that was not the Sunday I have been speaking of, it was the last Sunday I was there—I left exactly at the month; I can't say to the day.
Cross-examined. I went there on 3rd August, Friday, and I remained one month—I was examined as a witness when Hannah Dobbs was tried for murder—I swore then "In the middle of August, 1877, I went as
servant to Mrs. Bastendorff. and left in the middle of September"—I said that was as near as I could remember—when Inspector Hogan came to me my son had a memorandum that it was something to that; but after that I found a letter that I received from Birchington-on-Sea, and it was different—it was the 3rd; it was my mistake—I must have made a made a mistake; but Inspector Hogan told me it was near enough if I could say that I remembered about the Bank Holiday then—but you must remember, my sight being bad my memory is bad as well, and I have to think a great deal before I can remember things air. Bastendorff went away on the Saturday afternoon after the work was over, about 5.0 I should think, and he did not return till the Monday morning—he went shooting; he did not tell me so, but he brought a rabbit early on the Monday morning.
Re-examined. on Hannah Dobbs's trial I was asked when I went into Mr. Bastendorffs service, and I said the middle of August, because I had a memorandum to that effect—my son had written that memorandum—he generally puts down little things in his pocket-book, and he happened to have this memorandum when Inspector Hogan came to me, and hie looked in the book and said it was the middle of August, and at the time I was in Court I believed it was the middle of August, otherwise I would not have taken my oath—I know now that it was the 3rd August, because I found a letter sent to me from Birchington-on-Sea, and it was dated that day, the 4th; it was a private affair, which I cannot explain—I received that letter on the second day, on the Saturday when I went to Mr. Bastendorffs, the second day I was there—I saw that-letter after I had given my evidence on Hannah Dobbs's trial, and that brought to my recollection that it was not the middle of August, but on the 2nd or 3rd—I was only at Mr. Bastendorffs a month; I have never been in any other employment—I have had nothing to do with them since that month—the first Sunday I was there he never went out; he was at home—it was after the second Sunday I was there that he brought back the rabbit.
ELIZABETH PEARCE . I am the mother of Mrs. Bastendorff—I recollect being at the house of Mr. Bastendorff at the early part of August, 1877—I recollect Hannah Dobbs leaving on 2nd August—I was there the Saturday after—I saw Mr. Bastendorff there that day; I was there until about 10.30; I saw him there until I left—I could not say he was there until I left, but I saw him during the evening—I was there on Sunday, 5th August; the children were at home ill with measles—I saw Mr. Bastepdorff on thai Sunday at 4, Euston Square; I went there in the evening, some time after tea—I generally stayed till about 10.30 or 11; I could not say exactly what time I left—I saw Mr. Bastendorff there during that evening with Mrs. Bastendorff—I recollect Mrs. Hodson; I could not say when she came; I saw her there on these occasions, the first Sunday and the first Saturday in August.
Cross-examined. This is the first time I have given my evidence—I was frequently in the habit of going to see my daughter—I frequently went on Saturdays and Sundays; I think I can say I have always been there on Saturdays and Sundays since they have been married—I was attending to the children at that time; they had measles—I mostly go there, or my daughter comes to me, one or the other; we have always visited each other—Thursday, the 2nd August, was the eldest boy's birthday, and on that
Thursday I went to fetch a person, as Hannah had left, to come and work for Mrs. Bastendorff; that was Mrs. Smith—she is here, and she came on Friday morning.
By MR. POWELL. During the time I was there I never saw a French-woman or any other woman at the house claiming to have a child by Mr. Bastendorff—I never heard of anything of the kind till to-day.
JOHN HACKFORD . I live at 170, Weedington Street, Kentish Town, and am a gilder—I remember the Bank Holiday in August, 1877—I went fishing with Mr. Bastendorff—on the Saturday before we made up a party to go fishing; it was at Johnson's public-house, at the corner of Seymour Koad—the party was fornled of Mr. Anthony Bastendorff and myself, and when we met on the Monday Mr. Sewerin Bastendorff and his three brothers came with him—Mr. Bastendorff was at the pubiic-house on the Saturday, but he did not make up the party with us—it was in the afternoon; I could not say the time; the arrangement was made for the Monday morning—we met at 5.30; I ought to have been there earlier—we went to Wood Green and fished—there was the defendant, Mr. Anthony Bastendorff, Mr. Peter Bastendorff, and Joseph Bastendorff, four of them, and myself—I fished there till it was nearly dusk—Mr. Bastendorff and his brothers left me about 4 in the afternoon—I was first in the defendant's company that morning about 6, and he was there up to about 4 in the afternoon.
Cross-examined. I have fished a good deal in my time; I very often go fishing for my holiday; I don't shoot—I was not called as a witness before the Magistrate—I have never given my evidence before to-day; I gave it before Mr. Bastendorffs solicitor—we did not have any sport at the fishing; we only caught one fish.
MARY ANN SMITH . I am a charwoman, and live at 9, Beal's Place, St. Pancras—in 1877 I was for a time employed at Mr. Bastondorffs, 4, Euston Square—it was on 3rd August—I did not see Hannah Dobbs then; I saw her afterwards—she was not there on the 3rd—Mrs. Hodson came that day about 11 in the morning.
Cross-examined. I have not been examined as a witness in this matter before to-day—I was told to come here By Mr. and Mrs. Bastendorff—I came here to speak the truth—I did not know what I was coming to say, only what you asked me—I did not know that I was going to be asked whether it was the 3rd of August that Mrs. Hodson came, but I know it was on that day—of course I knew I was coming here to prove that—I did not know for what purpose I was coming; I knew that I was coming to say that I worked there on 3rd August—I did not give my evidence to any solicitor; I saw a gentleman at 4, Euston Square two or three weeks ago—he asked me some questions, and I told him what I knew about the case; I told him about the 3rd of August, because I knew I was there.
Re-examined. That gentleman (Mr. Freston) was the gentleman I saw; I told him it was the 3rd of August, and it is true that it was the 3rd of August; it was on a Friday—I know it perfectly well, because I was robbed that day while I was there, by a person at the house where I was living, 63, Middlesex Street, but the house is pulled down now for the railway.
JOHN RICHARDS . I live at 39, Brook Street, Northumberland Heath, Erith, Kent—I am a master plasterer and builder; I know the defendant; I first knew him Saturday, August 11th, 1877—he came to my house
that day with a German of the name of Krigger that was staying at my house, an invalid, who is now dead—he went hack on the Sunday evening about 9.30—he stayed at my house on the Saturday night—I saw him again on the following Saturday, the 18th August, and he brought his eldest girl with him, Christina, I believe, and his wife came on the Sunday, and brought the eldest boy, Peter—they left on the Tuesday morning following to catch the 10 o'clock train, I think—I saw the defendant again in August, not the following Saturday, but the following Saturday; he missed one Saturday—no, he was there all through August; he was there every Saturday and Sunday through August and September, with the exception of 22nd September, and again he was there on 14th october.
Cross-examined. I was examined on the trial of Hannah Dobbs—I can't say whether I then swore that it was in September that he came; it was in August; his wife might have come in September—I don't say she did not—I will swear now that she was there on 22nd August; the 18th rather, on the Sunday the 19th it was when she came—she came on the Sunday, Mr. Bastendorff came on the Saturday—I don't know that she came in September; I can swear that she came on that day—I don't know that I swore at tho trial of Hannah Dobbs "his wife came with him on the Sunday in the first week in September, 1877"—I won't swear I did not, but I will swear that Mr. Bastendorff was at my house the Saturday after 11th August, and with the exception of 22nd September he was there every Saturday until 14th October, and he was there that Sunday—I never knew him before the 11th August, 1877, and from that time he was at my place every Saturday and Sunday through August, September, and October—I can tell you two reasons I have for fixing on 11th August; Mr. Krigger, the invalid that was staying at my house, could not come on Bank Holiday; he was going to Beaufeast with his men—I belong to a benefit society, and it was the anniversary, and we had a feast, the only day me and my wife had been able to get away together, and I remember it very well; Mr. Krigger and Mr. Bastendorff came on the following Saturday, because the appartments were put aside expressly for Mr. Krigger; Mr. Krigger said he could not come on the following Saturday, that he was then going somewhere in the country with some of his men, a shop or something of the sort, so Mr. Bastendorff brought Mrs. Bastendorff down—that is one reason for fixing the 11th; the other reason is, I can remember it remarkably well, he generally came on the Saturday and went away on the Sunday night; he went away on Sunday evening the 12th, and the" next week he went away on the Tuesday.
Re-examined. I have not been accustomed to be pulled about in a Court of Justice, and I don't like it, hut I speak what I know to be correct; the dates I have given to-day are accurate—the 11th August is fixed in my mind by my wife and I intending to have a holiday that had been a long time due—Mr. Krigger had been there ever since May—after the 11th August I saw Mr. Bastendorff on the following Saturday, the 18th, and I saw him every Saturday in August and September but one in September—I am positive of that, and I have proof that I can show; writing and things that he did while he was there—I have a little hill that I paid with some of the money that Mr. Bastendorff paid me on one occasion (producing it); that bill was contracted on 24th August; I made a payment of 1l. that day in rospect of some goods that are mentioned there—Mrs. Bastendorff and him paid us the money that I paid it with—it relates to some furniture that.
was bought on 22nd August, and was delivered on the 24th, Friday—the bill is in the writing of a gentleman named Loveless, who went with my wife to pay the money—the goods were brought home on the 24th, and my wife paid 1l. that same day, and that pound I got from Mr. and Mrs. Bastendorff.
Cross-examined. Mr. Loveless is a rent collector—I had the goods from Mr. Jones on Bexley Heath; if I had had time this morning, I would have got him to give me the original bill—these items were written at different times as far as I know.
By the COURT. I said at Dobbs's trial that the defendant came down in 1877—I don't remember that I said in the beginning of 1877—I said "He has come down on Saturdays and Sundays for two years from this time"—he did not come down till August—I can't say whether I said "He began to do so in June or July 1877, when the fruit was about;" if I did say so it must have been wrong.
J.A. DICES (Recalled and further Cross-examined). I remember the Bank Holiday in 1877—some friends had come to my house that afternoon, which I was not aware of till I came back from the Welsh Harp in the evening—I went to the Welsh Harp with a friend or two on Bank Holiday—I can't exactly remember the time I got back to my house, it might have been 8.30, or 8 or 9 in the evening; I can't say it was not earlier than 8.30, I fancy we left the Welsh Harp about 7 or 6.30, or it might have been 5.30; it was between 5.30 and 7—I am quite sure it was not earlier, because we did not go till the afternoon—I think we went straight home from the Welsh Harp, we might have gone in and had a glass after we left the station—I don't think it would take me an hour to get home; I might have been at home at 6—my friends were there when I arrived—they were Mrs. Hoffman and her children, and the charwoman who was left in the house made them some tea—there was Mr. Hoffman and Mr. Gersthausen and his present wife; they went with me to the Welsh Harp and returned with me—the defendant might have been there, as I have said before, but I am not certain, he might have been there or not, he has been so frequently at my house—I should not swear he had been there, he might as well have been there as not—I never took any notice of it, he has been so frequently—I fancy we had a game of cards; yes, I think we had on that night, not for long.
By MR. WILLIAMS. I can't really say whether he was there that night or no; he might and he might not—he was in the habit of coming to my house pretty frequently, and we have had a friendly game of cards very often.
ANN CARPENTER (Re-examined by the COURT). I have no means of telling the day that Hannah Dobbs and the man came to me—I could not tell you the day of the month, only the day of the week; I am sure it was on Saturday, and I believe it to be the beginning of August; I could not say to a week, but I know it was about two months before I left the business—I kept no book or memorandum of the rooms or beds I let; they pay as they come in and go out—I do not remember anybody who came down that same day, or the day before—my husband was to and fro at his work at Hastings for four years—I have no means of fixing the date nearer. Hannah Dobbs (Re-examined by the Court). In page 5 of the pamphlet it says "I left 4, Euston Square, for a short time on Friday, 2nd August,
1877, as letters still in existence prove"—that refers to letters that I sent to Peter Bastendorff—I think it was on the 2nd August; it was in the beginning—I am sure it was in August, and I think it was the 2nd; it was the Saturday following that Friday that I went to Redhill; that was the only time I went there with the defendant.
PERCY PEARCE . I lived at 42, Torrington Square, and am an assistant to the medical profession; a doctor's assistant—I was living at that address in 1875—I remember my wife going out of town in that year, in October, I think—she took the youngest child with he?—I think she left on the Thursday; I am not quite sure—she returned on the Monday—on the Sunday between that Thursday and Monday I was at home and the other children were at home also—I was at home all that Sunday; that was the only Sunday that my wife was absent.
Cross-examined. I very seldom go out on a Sunday—I am at home part of the day nearly every Sunday, according to what my business duties allow me to perform; I have business duties to perform on Sunday—I was not called as a witness before the Magistrate.
Re-examined. I have a particular reason for remembering this particular Sunday—I was unwell at home all that day.
By the COURT. I do not keep a diary; as near as I can say it was about the second Sunday in October that I was at home; I won't be sure on that point—the two children would be about the house; they were not with me all the time—they were in my bedroom a portion of the time; in and out of my bedroom; that was at the top of the house—when they were not in my bedroom they would be in the dining-room downstairs—I could not specify any particular time of the day when they were downstairs; they were downstairs that day—I was not downstairs to see, but I believe they would be there as long as they were not with me—the second eldest child would go to bed probably about 7 o'clock, and the other probably a little later; I do not remember on that particular occasion—I really can't say what was the usual time; I should think about 8 o'clock; I can't say for certain—I was very seldom in the habit of going down into the kitchen—I did not go down on that Sunday.
WM. ANTHONY FRESTON (Re-examined). I was present when the defendant was committed for trial at Bow Street—I heard Mr. Flowers offer to postpone the committal until after the action was tried—I think Mr. Poland chose to accept the committal at once.
PIERRE GERSTHAUSEN . I am a tailor, and live at 43, Foley Street—in August, 1877, I was living at 4, Gower Place—I remember the Bank Holiday in August, 1877; I could not say what day of the month it was—on that day I went to the Welsh Harp with Mr. Dicke, his wife, and my present wife—we went in the middle of the day, in the afternoon, just after dinner—when we returned we went to Mr. Dicke's in Charlton Street, Edgware Road—I could not exactly say what time we got there; it was towards the evening—we found Mr. Hoffman, his wife, and children there; Mr. Hoffman was known to me—the defendant came in soon after we were there—I could not exactly say the time; it was about 8 or 9 o'clock in the evening; I can't say nearer—he remained there till about 18 o'clock—he left us—it was a very wet night; it rained very fast, and we had to take a cab home—we left together about 12 o'clock—I have known the defendant four or five years as a respectable, moral, truthful man.
Cross-examined. I don't know where I was on the Bank Holiday in June—I cannot remember—I recollect the only Bank Holiday in August because Mr. Hoffman, his wife, and children were at Mr. Dicke's, and I had never met them there before.
JOHN HOFFMAN . I live at 16, Gerard Street, Soho—I am a messenger at the German Embassy—I have been employed there 10 years—I remember the Bank Holiday in August, 1877—I think it was on Monday, but I am not quite certain—I think it was the 6th of August, but I remember the Bank Holiday in August—on that day I went to the bouse of Mr. Dicke, in Charlton Street, with my wife and children—we went there about 7 or 8 in the evening; I don't know the hour exactly—I saw Mr. Gersthausen there—I was there first—Mr. and Mrs. Dicke were out, and Mr. and Mrs. Gersthausen were out—I was told they would come back in a few minutes, and I was waiting for them—I saw the defendant that evening—he came in I should say about 8, and he was with us till closing time, 12 or 12.30—I am quite sure that is the day I am referring to—I have known Mr. Bastendorff about three years—he has always borne the character of a respectable, honest, truthful, decent man.
Cross-examined. I have not thought over where I was on the Bank Holiday in June—I know where I was in August; I have thought over that—it was about 8 in the evening that I saw Mr. Bastendorff at Mr. Dicke's—I can't say exactly how far that is from the Euston Road.
Re-examined. I am quite sure that the occasion I am referring to was on the Bank Holiday in August—I have several reasons for that—my wife and Mrs. Dicke made arrangements to go into the country, and that was the first day my wife and children went to Mr. Dicke's.
The evidence of Henry Bush was, for reasons which MR. WILLIAM said were satisfactory to him, withdrawn from the consideration of the Jury.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
THIRD COURT.—Monday, December 1st 1879.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. FRERE Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
WILLIAM BIBBY (Detective Sergeant B). I produce two certificates, accurate copies of the registers—the first is dated 26th December, 1855, and is the certificate of marriage of Isaiah Brightling, bachelor and plumber, to Ann Lang, spinster, at the parish church of Battersea—J have compared it with the register—this other, dated 25th December, 1876, certifies that Ezra Messingberd, widower, was married to Ann Lang, spinster, at the parish church of St. Simon, Chelsea—on 18th October I went to Chelsea and saw the prisoner—I said "I have to take you into custody for bigamy"—she said "What?"—I said "I am informed that you have married the second husband"—she said "What, a plumber?"—I said "I did not say a plumber, I said a second husband; that constitutes bigamy, and you will have to go to the station with me"—at the station I detained her while I fetched the first husband, in company with the second, and the first husband identified her as his wife—I received the second certificate from the prisoner
—it was given to her in my presence by Mrs. Brewster—the prisoner was living with Messingberd at 39, First Street, when I apprehended her—Brightling lives at the mission rooms, Marlborough Square, Chelsea, about five minutes' walk from First Street—I know he has been living there 11 or 12 years.
Cross-examined. I do not know that she has been an out-patient in the hospital, or that she is in delicate health—the second husband gave mo the information upon which I took her in custody.
MARY ANN SLACK . I am wife of Benjamin Slack, 3, Angel Place, High Street, Borough, and am sister to Isaiah Brightling—I was not present at his marriage—I have seen the prisoner before—she is my brother Isaiah Brightling's wife, and I knew them as living together on man and wife for many years—they were so living together in 1861 and 1862, the year of the exhibition, when I went to see my brother—they had always lived together to my knowledge since their marriage—they lived in Smith Street, Chelsea—I do not know the year they ceased to live together, but I know my brother went to this situation at the London City Mission, and has held it ever since—he has slept there many years—he is alive—he is servant to Mr. Curtis, the city missionary—he has continued to live at Chelsea up to this moment.
Cross-examined. My brother was rather weak-minded and in delicate health at the time of his marriage—I know they lived together for more than two years—they were married in 1855—when they parted my brother was very poor, and actually in want of food—this situation was offered him and he took it, and his wile was agreeable that he should take it—that was 14 years ago—I cannot say what year it was, but they did not live together afterwards—he is an indoor servant, and slept there—it is 14 years ago since I saw the prisoner—I never saw her at my brother's house—I did not meet her when I visited him while he was ill, but I knew she was there—I have seen her at my parents' house.
Re-examined. I once met them together at my parents' home, and she was known as their daughter-in-law.
EZRA MESSINGBERD . I live at 39, First Street, Chelsea—on Christmas Day, 1876, I went through the form of marriage with the prisoner at St. Simon's Church, Chelsea—I knew her as Lang, and did not know abe was a married woman—I had known her personally about 15 years front the first, but did not even know her name; I had only seen her—I did not know Isaiah Brightling, but I know him—I was engaged to the prisoner four or five months before Christmas, 1876, but I never know Isaiah Brightling till this case came on—I saw him and passed him on several occasions when the prisoner was with me during our courtship, and on one. occasion when I took her to a teetotal lodge he was the doorkeeper, and we both gave the password to. him at the door—she herself gave the password to him, the same as I did—they were Good Templars—I cannot say on how many occasions I met him, but she did not tell me he was her husband.
Cross-examined. I first found out in June last that they were married—I did not give information till I went to the Magistrate on 16th october because I did not wish to punish her—I have no animosity against her—I have not punished her—she never went to the hospital on my Account, and I never assaulted her—when cross-examined before the Magistrate I will not swear whether I said that "I married the prisoner the following
Christmas—I do not recollect breaking the prisoner's ribs—I do not know if she went to the hospital—she has not been in the hospital for fractured ribs"—I do not know that—I had four children—she was not a good wife to me—that is not the reason why I want to get rid of her—I said at the police-court "I gave her in charge because I did not see any way of getting rid of her but by these steps"—all I want is to let her know that she is not to stand against the laws of this country—I believe I also said "I will not swear that she has been in the hospital—I do not know how many times I have assaulted her"—I have never beaten or assaulted her—I did not say that when I gave her into custody she screamed and ran into the street—I said she might have done so—she did not to my knowledge—I have before to-day mentioned the fact of our going to the teetotal lodge—I do not recollect speaking of it at the police-court—she was not in the hospital in August or September—I do not know that she was ever there, except to see me when I was ill—I do not snow where she has been or where she goes—I do not swear that I did not assault her—I bring these proceedings to vindicate the outraged majesty of the law.
Re-examined. Before the Magistrate I was not asked whether I had seen Brightling.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted.
MARY ANN DORRY . I am a saleswoman to Mr. Blackrock at 252, Tottenham Court Road, and I sleep in the bouse, and other persons sleep there—I take my meals there—on 23rd October, between 2 and 3 a.m., I was aroused by a constable ringing the bell, and from what he said I went outside and found one of the shop windows broken, and I missed two sewing machines—a man could get through it, but could not get inside the shop without breaking some glass doors which were bolted inside—the machines which were taken were in the window between the glass door and the window—I last saw them safe at 8 p.m. on the 22nd, when I closed the shop—this machine (produced) is my employer's property—it is worth four guineas retail—I remember securing the window, and saw it safe.
ALFRED ANDERSON (Police Inspector E). At 2.40 am. on 23rd October I was called to Mr. Black rock's premises, and found a large pane of glass broken; a man could get through—I saw the prisoner at the station, and when I charged him with the burglary he said "I did not do it"—Soho Square is two or three minutes' walk from Blackrook's—there are no shutters to the shop windows, and the gas is left burning at night, and people could see through.
WALTER SQUIRRELL (Policeman C 91). About 2 a.m. on 23rd October I was on duty in Soho Square, and saw the prisoner carrying something on his shoulder; it was not wrapped up—I watched him—he turned down Bateman's Buildings about 20 yards, and seeing Tomkins, 84 C, he turned back again—I ran towards him, and when he saw me he turned down the buildings again, and dropped something in the doorway—I went up and turned my lamp on it and saw the machine—the prisoner walked away as
fast as be could—I ran after him, and overtook him at the bottom of the buildings—I said "Why did you leave the machine in the doorway V he said "Not me"—I took him back and showed him the machine—he said "I did not leave it there"—I said "You must come with me to the station"—he said "I know nothing at all about it; it was not me"—on the way to the station he put his hand in his pocket, and threw away this Brahma key.
Cross-examined. I was 40 yards from you when I first saw you carrying the machine across Soho Square—you had dropped it when I followed you—Tomkins stood about 100 yards from the Queen Street end of the buildings, and I was at the Soho Square end—the machine was found about 20 yards on the left of the buildings.
Re-examined. The prisoner passed the doorway where the machine was found—it is 500 or 600 yards from Mr. Blackrock's.
JAMES TOMKINS (Policeman C 84). At 2 a.m. on 23rd October I was on duty at Bateman's Buildings, and saw the prisoner coming towards me, and another constable following behind him—when he got opposite me the constable took hold of him and said "Why did you put the machine down in the doorway?"—he said "I do not know anything about it—I assisted in taking him to the station, and then went back with the constable and picked up the sewing machine in the doorway.
Cross-examined. It was about 100 yards from where I stood to the other end of the buildings—I was 60 or 70 yards from you—I noticed you coming, but did not see you turn back again; you passed me, and the constable caught hold of you—you had nothing in your possession—you came from the top of the buildings, and Were 30 or 40 yards from the top when I first saw you—I did not see you come in.
Re-examined. He was not carrying any thing—Squirrell arrested him and took him back to the door where the machine was—he could have seen me when he first came in, but I was not looking that way.
The Prisoner,'in his Statement before the Magistrate, protested hie innocence.
GUILTY of receiving. He further
PLEADED GUILTY to having been before convicted of felony at Clerkenwell, on 10th March, 1879.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, December 3rd, 1879.
Before Mr. Recorder
MR. W. SLEIGH, for the defendants, having stated that they believed they were speaking the actual truth, and that they never intended to make any. imputation against the Prosecutor, and the defendants stating that they wished to retract the statements they had made, Mr. Besley offered no evidence against them.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Baron Huddleston.
59. WALTER SMITH (17) and SYDNEY TERRETT (17) Stealing 19s. of Henry Walter Chapman in his dwelling house, and by menaces and threats putting Mary Ann Chapman in bodily fear. Other Counts for demanding money with menaces.
MESSERS. POLAND and MONTAGU WILLIAMS Prosecuted; MR. A. B. KELLY appeared for Smith, and MR. W. SLEIGH for Terrett.
MARY ANN CHAPMAN . I am the wife of Walter Henry Chapman, carver and gilder, of No. 1, Florence Terrace, Kingston Vale; our shop is also the post office—on Saturday evening, 25th October, between 7 and 8 o'clock, I was in my shop—Terrett came in for two 1/2 d. stamps—I gave them to him, and he paid for them and went out—he came in again and asked if a letter would be delivered that night in London—I said, "No, not before Monday morning"—whilst I was speaking to him a man came in with a mask on—it was dark—it was moonlight outside, and the oil light indoors—the man with the mask presented 'a pistol at me—he said nothing at the time—I became alarmed and moved up and down the counter—he held the pistol as if it were to my breast, pointed at me—I said to Terrett, "Do you know this man?"—he said, "No, I have never seen him before"—the man still came near to me, and I said, "What do you mean"—he said, "Money or your life"—I said, "What is it?"—he said, "Money"—I said, "What do you mean"—he said, "Money or your life, quick"—Terrett was standing in the shop at the time only looking at him—I said, "If it is money you want, spare me," and I ran into the parlour and locked the door, and jumped down 12 steps into the kitchen—I ran out into the yard and called, "Murder"—there Were some flower-pots there, and I threw them at the neighbours' doors to call their attention—some people came to my assistance, and I returned to the shop, and found that the two men had gone—the postman was coming for the 8.15 to take the delivery, and I got him to go with me to see if the post-office cash box was all right—I looked at it and found it was all right—I then examined my private till—I had 19s. in silver in it, some coppers, pence, halfpence, and farthings—I 'don't know to what amount—I had seen that safe before the man came in, and I found it was all gone except three farthings, a penny, and a halfpenny—this mask produced by Inspector Shaw is the kind of mask that the man had on—the man was about the height of the prisoner Smith.
Cross-examined by Mr. Kelly. It might be about 15 or 20 minutes from the time the boys had been in until I examined the till—I can-not say exactly to a few minutes—I cannot say how long they were there altogether—it might be a quarter of an hour after they left that I missed the money.
Cross-examined by Mb. Sleigh. When the man said, "Your money or your life he looked at me and pointed a pistol or revolver at me—I was on the other side of the counter when he first presented it at me—I was the side of the counter where I serve customers—I did not get up and go round the shop—I thought it was fun at first—I became alarmed before he said "Your money or your life," and before I asked what he wanted; I became inwardly alarmed, and asked Terrett if he knew the man—he did not say "Your money or your life "until I asked what he wanted—I cannot tell how long it was after I jumped down the steps before I went back to the shop, it was not half an hour, or a quarter—I did not go back till I thought I was safe, but I went as quick as possible—I had not to go round to the front, I went out at the
back door—I found people at the front door of my shop when I came back, and the door open—I cannot tell how many people there were there, there were several—I don't think" there was an opportunity for any of them to take the money; I cannot say—the first thing I did Was to examine the post-office cash-box—there was no lady with fie when I examined it—there was when I examined the till—that was Elizabeth Kimber—he is not here—there were no other people in the shop' at the time I examined the post-office cash-box, or at the time" I examined the till—she came into the shop at the call of," Murder "with the other people.
Re-examined. Mrs. Kimber is living in the same terrace as me—at the time these men were in the shot) there was nobody in the house besides Myself.
HENRY MOWBEN (Policeman V 85). I live at. No. 15, Florence Terrace—on Saturday, 25th (October, between 7 and 8, I was at home—heard cries of "murder"—some one came to my house' and took the two prisoners, they were together—they were in the mam road, going in the direction of Wandsworth—I went up to them and said, "I am a police constable, have you been, in the shop at the bottom and demanded money, and threatened the woman?"—they said, "No"—they both spoke—I said, "Are you, not carrying a revolver?"—Terrett" replied, "No, we don't carry firearms," and he immediately fired—we neither of us stopped—he fired across to me—I should think, he was, three or, fouryards from me at the time—Smith was between the, two of us—neither of us had come to. a standstill. (There being another indictment for shooting at the constable, Mr. Sleigh submitted that, the facts relating to that case ought not to be gone into on the present indictment. Mr. Poland proposed, to use, the evidence for the purpose of identity. Baron, Huddleston was of opinion that the evi dence was material as showing concert between the prisoners). I heard a shot fired, and both the prisoners ran away—Terrett ran in the direction of Roehampton, and Smith went on in the main road towards Wandsworth—J pursued Terrett, and when I got within 10 yards of him he turned and fired a second shot—it passed over my right shoulder—I heard' the bullet—at the first shot it seemed to pass by the centre' of my face—I saw the pistol in his hand the second time, and he pointed it straight at my face—I lost sight of Terrett, he got into Borne high furze bushes near Wimbledon Common and escaped—I then ran across the common to Tippett's Corner, in the direction in which Smith had gone—I bad been there about two minutes when I saw Smith coming on the run, between a ran and a walk, he was not running, he was in a hurry—I went towards him—he saw me and ran in the direction of Putney—I ran after him some distance on the road, and he took to the common—I saw another constable, and I called out to him—I followed Smith and ran him into a bush close by—I found Mm crouched down in the furze, bushes, and took him into custody—I asked him who the other party was—he said he knew, but he would not tell—it was a moonlight night—I took him to the police-station at Putley, and assisted in searching him—this mask was found in his greatcoat pocket—we also found a half-crown and three farthings—On the Way to the
station he said, "I thought I was shot at first"—I did not know either of the prisoners before—I am quite sure Terrett was the other one.
s Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. The first time he fired at me I was about three yards off I think—I saw the pistol as he dropped it by bis side after he fired the first shot—I saw him in the act of firing; Smith was between the two of us, and Terrett on the outside—I could see the pistol at the time it was fired, because we were not straight in a line; we were sideways—I heard the whistle of the bullet the first time; the bullet passed by my face—they were coming across the road when I went to meet them—I did not turn to go across the other side of the road after speaking to them; we wore all in the centre of the road at the time—neither of us had stopped—I went off the footpath into the road—I distinctly saw the pistol at the time it was fired; I saw Terrett fire it and drop it at his side the second time he fired—Smith had gone on in the other direction—there was then nothing between my face and the pistol.
ALFRED SMALL ARNOLD (Policeman V 33). On Saturday night, 25th October, I was in uniform, on duty near Tippett's Corner—I saw two persons running—I could not recognise them until I got up to them; I afterwards found it was Smith, and Mowben running after him—I assisted in the pursuit; we lost Smith among the furze, and I after wards found him there, crouching down, and took him into custody—on the way to the station he said "you cannot say I have fired at you, for I have not any pistol; but I know the man who did, and where he lives, but never mind"—when I first arrested him he said "All right, policeman, I will go quietly with you"—I did not know the charge at that time.
WALTER SMITH . I live at 10, Wood Street, Lambeth, and am a machinist—the prisoner Smith is my son; I know Terrett by sight—on Saturday, 25th October, Terrett came to my house about 10.30; I opened the door—he said "Is your son come home?"—I said "No, I am expecting him every minute"—he said nothing else—I believe he did make a remark about a club, but I did not exactly take particular notice what it was—my son did not come home that night—I believe Terrett and my son have been acquainted from about the month of July, as far as I know.
EDWARD SHAW (Police Inspector V). About 9 on Saturday night, 25th october, I received some information about this matter—I went to the Vauxhall Station and watched there for some time, and ultimately, between 1.0 and 2.0 in the morning, I went to 22, Saville Place—a woman opened the door to me, and I went in; a constable in uniform was with me—I saw Terrett in the passage—I said "I am an Inspector of Police," and I asked him what rooms upstairs he occupied—he said "Don't make a noise; "he took me upstairs to a back room on the first floor—I said I should arrest him for being concerned with another, in custody, for shooting a policeman, and I said "Where is the pistol?"—he jumped upon a chair, and took this pistol from a cupboard—I produce it; it is one of Colt's—I examined it at the time; there are five chambers to it—three were loaded; it appeared to have been recently discharged—I told him I should charge him with being concerned with another man in stealing some money and attempting to shoot a policeman at Kingston vale—he said "I know nothing about it"—he had his trousers on at the time—I took him to Kennington Lane, and then conveyed him to Putney—the constable, who was with me then searched the room, and 1
saw him find 19 cartridges, a mould, and a screwdriver—I afterwards fired off two of the chambers, and had the other drawn; it was loaded with cartridge—I have the bullets Here; these are the two bullets I discharged myself, and the third is the one that I had drawn by a gun-maker—the bullets were not made for the pistol, they were rather too-large.
A number of witnesses deposed to the good character of the prisoners.
NOT GUILTY .
The prisoner stating in the hearing of the JURY that he was guilty of firing the pistol with intent to prevent his apprehension, the JURY found him
GUILTY on the Second Count. — Six Months' Imprisonment.
MR. VENNELL Prosecuted; and MR. WARMER SLEIGH Defended.
CATHERINE TOOMER . I am a widow, and live at 36, Lancaster Street, Borough—the deceased was my only sister—on Saturday night, 8th November, at 8 o'clock, I went to the Duke of York public-house with the prisoner and my sister—there was a lead on there, a friendly meeting for myself—I lost my husband in nine days, and he left me 1s. 3d. when he left the world—there was a subscription for me to get up a few halfpence—the prisoner was there almost the whole evening, from 8 till about 11.30—a man named Harrington was there, my nephew—he came there about 9.30—the deceased was not drinking with me and the prisoner—I never wetted my lips that evening with my sister—Harrington did not drink with anybody else that I am aware of—he brought some beer into the room, and I drank out of it, and so did the prisoner—the deceased went downstairs two or three times with my nephew and Mary Ann Thatcher—she might have gone down a third time—I think not more—the prisoner noticed that—when we were leaving the room he looked sulky, and said to me "There she goes again n—I said "Never mind, Charlie, take no notice"—I don't think he seemed annoyed at the time—he did not appear angry at the deceased going down with Harrington—there was no threat used at that time—we left at 12 o'clock—when the house shut we wanted a quartern of gin—they would not serve it,—and we had to come out—we did not come home—the prisoner put my money that was gathered for me, 15a. 3d., into his pocket with the paper, and wo went towards home—before we left the house the prisoner said, "You b——, I will murder that one before I get home"—I said "Charlie, don't disgrace me"—I did not think for one moment that he meant it—the deceased did not hear it—we walked along Southwark Bridge Road about 12.5—my sister was inside, the prisoner in the middle, and me outside, nearest the kerb—no quarrel took place going home—there was never a word said one way or the other further than he said to her "You made yourself a b——foo," and he up with his list and struck her violently, as hard as he could, on the fore-head—I could not say how many blows, about three or four on the head—she reeled back right round and said Kate, help me"—she did not fall—I broke her fall—she laid on my lap—as she came against me I sat down with her—she bled very violently from the nose and mouth—she did not
speak a word afterwards, not a murmur—I don't know who came up afterwards—I was nearly out of my mind—I called out. murder and police, when the prisoner said "Kate, she is dead"—before he said that I said, "Charlie, help me"—he took her off my lap, and put her on his own knee and wiped the blood from her nose and mouth with a handkerchief—I called to her "Lizzie, do answer me"—there was no reply—some gentleman went for a doctor—she was taken to Dr. Wilson's, in the Borough—the prisoner and deceased had been living together six years—they had not been living on friendly terms—nine weeks ago he struck her, and knocked the blood out of her ear.
Cross-examined. I do not know Catherine Lambert—I did not speak to some woman after I came out of the public-house—my sister was not in the habit of drinking very freely—she would take a glass now and again, mostly of a Saturday, when they were by themselves—I was in the habit of being in her company in the daytime—I was not in the habit of going into public-houses with her in the daytime—now and again we went in,' but not to make ourselves blackguards—we would take a glass of beer and a bit of bread and cheese once or twice in the week in my husband's time—I have no pay for drink now—they lived happily together till she found out that he was a married man—he used not to complain of finding his home in a state of confusion, and she drunk when he came home of an evening—that I swear—I do not know that woman (Catherine Lambert)—I have never seen her, except I saw her in, the doccor's shop—I did not speak to her that night before my sister fell to the ground—I never saw that woman in my life before—I was not speaking to her in the Southwark Bridge Road a little after midnight—I did not see my sister fall on'the kerb, nor did that woman say "Look at that woman?"—I did not say "Good gracious, it is my sister"—I did say "Help me lift her up, Herbert"—I did not say to Catherine Lambert" She if subject to fainting fits; she will be all right if we can get some vinegar and water"—the prisoner was not three or four yards in front of her at the time she fell on the kerb; he was by the side of me—he said "Lizzia"—I said to him "Charlie, is my sister dead?"—he said "She is dead"—he did not say "She is dying"—he helped to carry her into Mr. Carpenter's, the surgeon—he was going away until I stopped him, and said "Charlie, don't go away"—with my assistance he took her into the room at the doctor's, and laid her down on the hearth-rug, and Mr. Carpenter came in and examined her—she died while she was in Mr. Carpenter's house.
Re-examined. The prisoner was sober—I saw the woman Lambert at the doctor's shop, and likewise at the station house, not before.
HENRY HOLT . I am a cabinet-maker, of 13, Greenfield Street, Commercial Road East—on Saturday night, 8th November, about 12.5,1 saw a congregation of persons on the other side of the way; they were very quiet—I went across to see what was the matter—there were two or three females, and two or three men, five or six altogether—a woman was lying on her back on the pavement, bleeding very much at the nose and mouth—previous to that I said "What is the matter"—a woman said "It is only a family matter; nothing at all to do with you"—another woman said "What is it?"—I stood neutral for half a minute till I saw a piece of paper lit; then I saw the woman bleeding—I said "Who has been ill-using a woman like that?"—the prisoner said "I am her husband and I have punched her"—I said "Has not the poor woman got a drop of water or vinegar?"
—I said that to all those who wore standing round—they said "No, we can't get any, the houses are shut up"—I said "I will go and get. some water, "and I went and got some from a private house—I then went and knocked Dr. Wilson up and fetched him, and he ordered her to he removed to the surgery, and that was done; I helped to carry her—the doctor pronounced her to be dead—the prisoner was there.
Cross-examined. The prisoner helped to pick her up and said "-oh, Lizzie, Lizzie"—I heard a party say that she was dead, and then the sister asked the prisoner if she was dead—he said "She is fainting; she is subject to fainting fits"—I don't recollect Mrs. Toomer saying that she had had two fainting fits in the room that night—I heard them say something about being up in the room, but not about her fainting there—Mrs. Toomer said "She will be all right if we can get a Little vinegar and water"—she did not say she would be all right; she said it would do her good, and I went and got it—Mrs. Lambert was there, standing over the woman, who was lying down—she was there when Mrs. Toomer said that her sister was subject to fainting fits, and when she asked me to go and get some, vinegar and water.
GEORGE WILSON . I am a licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians, and live at 92, Borough Road—on the night of the 8th inst I was called to see someone in the Southwark Bridge Road—I there found the deceased; she was insensible, but not dead—there was blood on the pavement—she was bleeding at that time; I could not see the state of her face and head, it was too dark; I ordered her to be removed to my surgery—I examined her there; she was dead; she must have died on coming into my place, ox in being brought there—I made a post-mortem examination; there was a large contused wound on the right side of the cheek, and a smaller one on the left, a slight cut on the right side of the Hose—there was no injury to the temples; the bruise went up above the eye and eyebrow on the right side; that was. the large contused wound—they wen such blows as might have been caused by a man's fist—there were no other external wounds—I examined the inside of the head; the brain itself was in a healthy condition; there was a slight clot of blood on the surface of the brain, under the frontal and parietal bones in front of the head; that was a recent deposit, and I believe was the cause of death—I should say that that clot of blood was caused by the bruise rupturing one of the small vessels; I don't think it could have been occasioned by drink.
Cross-examined. If she had fallen on the kerb with sufficient weight that would account for the clot of blood—the wound on the nose see med like an incised cut—there was an injury on the cheekbone and an injury on the eyebrow—I don't think an oblique fall on the kerb would have occasioned, the injuries—I am prepared to say it would not? because the cheek itself would have been cut; it was not cut; it was simply bruised—it is possible the injuries might have been caused by a fall; everything is possible; but I don't see how it could have been done in that way—I don't think so; if she had rolled over on to a small stone, it might have caused the bruise—the body was well nourished; she had not a weak heart; every organ was healthy except the lungs; they were slightly diseased by consumption—drunkenness and excitement might predispose to faintness—I don 't think she had been drinking very much—I saw the prisoner; he did not say anything he was very quiet; he helped to carry her in; he did not help
to lift her up for the purpose of my examining her—I saw him in the surgery.
Re-examined. I have no doubt that the clot of blood on the brain was the cause of death—the probability is that the injuries were inflicted by blows, and not by a fall on the ground.
----SPARROW (Policeman M 69). I was called to the Southwark Bridge Road about 12.20 in the morning—I found the deceased sitting on the doorstep of a warehouse—I asked what was the matter; and when I turned on my light I saw the marks of bruises on her face—I asked who had been knocking the woman about—the prisoner said nothing—I heard Mrs. Toomer say "Charlie, Charlie, why did you do it?"—I did not hear him make any reply—a woman, whom I afterwards found to be Catherine Lambert, said "It won't make matters better getting him into trouble, and do her no good"—I went with the deceased to the doctor's; the prisoner said nothing while there—I charged him with causing the death of the woman; he made no reply—I took him to the station; he went quietly.
The name of Catherine Lambert being on the back of the bill, MR. SLEIGH requested that she might be called. MR. VENNE declined to call her, as she was not present when the blow was struck. BARON HUDDLESTON considered that the notion which existed that the prosecution were bound to call a witness merely because the name appeared on the back of the bill was a mistaken and exploded one. The practice in this respect was not uniform, and, in his opinion, it was a matter entirely in the discretion of counsel MR. VENNELL, however, placed the witness in the box.
CATHERINE LAMBERT (Not Examined in Chief). I live at 103, Mint Street, Borough—on the night in question I saw the witness Toomer—I was speaking to her—as I was speaking to her in the Southwark Bridge Road I saw the deceased fall against the kerb stone—the prisoner was 3 or 4 yards behind her at the time—I said to Toomer "Good gracious! look at that woman!"—I saw the prisoner go up to her and try to lift her up—Toomer said "She is subject to fainting fits; she had two up in the room to-night; she will be all right if we can get her some vinegar and water"—I did not see any person strike her any blow—when I saw her stagger and fall down, I thought she was drunk.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of the provocation received. — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
MR. ISAACSON Prosecuted; MR. WARNER SLEIGH Defended.
ELIZA ROGERS . I live at 14, Kenning's Buildings, Rotherhithe—the prisoner is my husband—on Saturday night, 18th October, he came home at 9 o'clock very much in liquor; he asked me if I was in—I said "Yes"—I was upstairs; I brought the lamp to the landing to show him the way up—he came into the room and began quarrelling—a short time after he laid on the floor on his hands and face, then getting up he attempted to strike me—in leaning down to save my face I caught a kick at the lower part of me, which caused blood to flow—he accused me of being drunk—after that he pitched down on his hands and face across the foot of the bed on his stomach, and I laid down by the side of the table on the floor
—I then went for Mrs. Wand; she was not in—she afterwards came to my assistance, and that disturbed him; he said to her "You go out; what business have you here?"—he had then been asleep over three hours, and was getting towards being sober—what occurred between them I don't know; I was not capable of taking any notice; I still kept bleeding, and I was insensible from loss of blood—when he first began quarrelling, Mrs. Holland came in, and he ordered her out of the room and shut the door, locked it, and placed the key on the washstand—after he had fallen asleep I got to the washstand and got the key and unlocked the door, and asked the little girl Holland to fetch me a cup of water, which she did—I don't remember the prisoner saying anything about that.
By the COURT. He did not kick me more than once—I said "You have done a line thing now," and with that he lay on the bed—he may have said something after I received the kick, I can't say—he made a second kick at me, but it did not touch me—he was very much in liquor—a better husband and father could not be when sober, but he is half mad when in drink—we have been married 11 years—after I had bled he did not make any further attempt to kick me—a constable was sent for.
Cross-examined. I believe he did it without any intention to inflict any particular injury—he was very much in drink.
MARY ANN WAND . I am the wife of Joseph Wand, and live at 11, Kenning'8 Buildings, Rotherhithe—on the night of 18th October I was called to Mrs. Rogers's room—she was lying on the floor bleeding, she could scarcely lift her hand to her head—the prisoner was lying on the bed, he was not sober—he got off the—bed and said he would throw me down the stairs, and asked his wife what she was making all those faces about, at the same time lifting his foot to kick her—he did not kick her again; I prevented him—I stayed there till the police came—the prisoner endeavoured to push me out, having a vase in his hand—the blood was flowing from the bottom part of her person—the prisoner was not sober—I should hardly think he knew what he was doing.
BENJAMIN BROWNING, M.D . I am surgeon to a division of police, and live at Union Road, Rotherhithe—on Sunday morning, 19th October, after midnight, I was called to 14, Kenning's Buildings—I found Mrs. Rogers lying on a bed which was saturated with blood, and her clothing was saturated with blood—she was bleeding from a wound just inside the vagina—there were marks of kicks on the inside of her thighs—she had been kicked all about that region—the whole of the structures of the vagina had been divided by some violence, probably a kick from a boot—the wound reached to the bone, and was still bleeding—very great violence must have been used to produce such a wound—the woman was in danger of her life; it was two days before she was pronounced out of danger at the hospital, and a fortnight before she was able to leave her bed—it was scarcely possible to step along the room without putting your foot into a pool of blood—she was pulseless, and as near dead as possible; the place looked like a shambles—she is getting on since she has been attended by the hospital authorities.
JAMES ROSE (Policeman R 95). On the night of the 18th October I Was called to 14, Kenning's Buildings—on going to the door I saw Mrs. Wand, and the prisoner holding an altercation with her and telling her she should not enter his place; he had a vase in his hand—I asked him what was the matter—he said "Nothing"—I said "What have you done to your wife?"
—he said "Nothing, my wife is all rightu—I went upstairs to the first-floor front, and saw Mrs. Rogers lying between the door and the table in a pool of blood, nearly insensible—I asked her in the prisoner's presence what her husband had done to her—she said he had kicked her—lacked her where—she said she could not tell me, but in the lower part, of her body—I ordered her to be moved, and as they lifted her up I heard the blood trickling from her—Mrs. Wand and her brother lifted her up—the prisoner was excited, and appeared to have been drinking, but appeared to know thoroughly what he was about—he tried to get away—I asked him to walk to the station quietly—he said he would not for any b——policeman in the neighbourhood; knowing him to be a very strong man I had to send for assistance—I believe he was quite capable of knowing what he was doing—we had a very severe struggle to get him to the station—I asked what matte him do this; he would not make any answer—I sent for Dr. Browning, who ordered the woman to be removed to the hospital.
GUILTY on SecondCount.— Seven years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. POLAND Prosecuted.
ANNIE CRASK . I am servant to William Hill, a fancy dealer, of 37, New Out, Lambeth—on Friday evening, 17th October, the prisoner came in for a set of studs, price 6 1/2 d., and he gave me a florin, which looked more like lead than silver—I sent the boy who minds the doer for change, and the prisoner took it from his hand and said that he would get change—he went out, taking the florin with him, and did not return that night—he left the studs—he came again on 28th October, about 0.0 p.m., for a glass, price 3 1/2 d.—I knew him again directly—he put a florin on the counter—my master's daughter went to fetch her father, who came in while I was putting the florin in the trier, and took it and gave the prisoner into custody.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I do not know whether the first florin was bad—you did not say that you were going to the tobacconist next, door for change; I had no trier then.
CHARLES CHISLBTT . I am 11 years old, and mind Mr. Hill's shop-door—on Friday, 17th October, Crask gave me a florin to get change; but the prisoner took it out of my hand, and I said "I will go and get change"—he went out, and I watched him; I don't think he mentioned the tobacconist's—he turned round when he got to the next shop, and I saw no more of him—the florin was of a dullish colour.
WILLIAM HILL . I keep the shop at 37, New Out—on 28th October, about 5.45, my daughter came to me, and I went into the shop, and saw the prisoner put a florin down on the glass case—Crask took it up; I took it from her, and found it was bad—I said to the prisoner "You are the chap I have been looking for; now I have got you—he said "What does it mean, what is the matter?"—I gave him in custody, with the florin—I have seen him in the shop before, and had given Crask directions if he came again.
ANNIE HIGHBORE . I am barmaid at the Northumberland' Taverni, Strand—op 2st October, about 9.45, I served the prisoner with 2d. worth of gin—he gave me a bad half-crown—I defected it directly, and said "What do you call this?"—he said "What do you mean?"—I called my master, and the prisoner paid with a good florin, and said that he had as many shillings as he had quids, and if he charged him he would have his licence off—he was given into custody with the coin; I marked it in the trier—this is it.
HENRY STEWARD (Policeman 235.) Oh 21st October, about 10 p.m., the prisoner was given into my charge, with the half-crown—he said "Charge me, charge me"—I searched him there, and found 6e. 11 1/2 d. on him, in silver and copper—he gave his name Edward Doyle—he was taken before a Magistrate next day, and remanded till the 27th, and then discharged, about 12.30, the half-crown being the only case against him.
Prisoner's Defence. The florin was not bad, for I changed it at a tobacconist's within a door or so.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. POLAND Prosecuted.
GEORGE ALEXANDER HICKS . I shall be 11 next birthday—I live with my father and mother, at 35, Lant Street, Borough—on 20th October, in the evening, I was in Southwark Bridge Road, and the prisoner came up and said "Go and get me a quartern of flour, and I will give you 2d. When you come back"—he gave me a half-sovereign wrapped in paper—I went to Downs the baker's, and gave it to Charlotte Hunt, Who felt it and said that it was bad—I came out, but could not find the prisoner; I had left him next door to the shop—I saw the prisoner in a cell at the station, with a number of other men a few days afterwards and picked hint out—I know he is the map.
CHARLOTTE HUNT . I live at Mr. Downs the baker's—remember Hunt coming in in October for some flour, but I only take money—he gave me a bad half-sovereign; I rubbed it and went to the shop door, but saw no man—the boy had gone but first—I gave the half-sovereign to a policeman next night; I cannot say whether this is it—I had not bent it, but I pressed it in my hand, but did not find that I bent it—I find I can bend it now.
ERNEST SMEATH . I shall be 10 next birthday, and live at 263, South-wark Bridge Road—I was in Newington Causeway, on a Thursday evening, about 9.0 p.m., and the prisoner said "Little boy, will you run over to the World's End and get me a quartern of the beat gin in a bottle, and I will give you 2d. when you come back?"—he gave me a half-sovereign wrapped in paper; I did not open it—I went to the World's End, asked the barmaid for the gin, and gave her the paper the prisoner had given me—she looked at it, and I went out with the potman to see if I eould find the prisoner, but could not; but I saw him next morning at the police-court, with three others, and picked him out—I know him by his face, and am sure he is the man—I noticed his coat.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. Nobody called at my mother's house or told me what sort of man I was going to see.
into the World's End, Newington Causeway, for a quartern of gin in a bottle, and gave me a coin in a piece of paper, which I found was a had half-sovereign—I asked him about it; he made a statement, and the landlord followed him out—I gave the same coin to Moore; I did not mark it.
GEORGE LONGMAN MOORE . I keep the World's End, Newington Causeway—I saw the boy there on a Thursday night, and the barmaid showed me a bad half-sovereign in newspaper—the boy left the house, and the potman followed him—I went out immediately, but could not see the prisoner—I informed the police; this is the coin.
EDGAR MASON . I am 9 years old, and live at 37, Union Street, Borough, with my parents—the prisoner spoke to me in the Borough on a Thursday night; he said, "If you go over the way to the baker's shop and get me a quartern of flour I will give you 2d."—I said, "Yes," and he gave me a half-sovereign, wrapped in two pieces of paper—I went to Mr. Bird the baker's, and asked a young woman for the flour, and gave her the half-sovereign in the paper; she gave me the flour and the change—I left the shop with them, and gave them to the prisoner, who was on the other side of the road—he gave me 2d. for myself—the young woman then came out to me, and as soon as the prisoner heard her voice he ran down Union Street, but was captured—I saw him at the station the same night alone.
KATE BIRD . My father is a baker, of 108, High Street, Borough—on 30th October Mason came in for a quartern of flour and gave me a half-sovereign in two papers; I gave him the flour and the change, four florins, a shilling, and four pence, and he left—I tried the coin with my teeth, it bent, and I went out and saw the boy coming towards the shop, and the prisoner at the corner with the flour under his left arm—I had spoken loudly to the boy—the prisoner ran across the Borough and down Union Street—he was wearing an overcoat and had an umbrella; Hurley ran after him—I went back to the shop, as there was no one there—the coin was given to Keenan.
Cross-examined. The shop is five or six doors from the corner where you stood—it was dark; the flour bag was of white paper, with the name printed on it.
CHARLES HURLEY . I am a porter, of 2, Earl's Place, Horselydown—on the night of 30th October I was with James Ratcliff in the Borough, and saw the last witness running in the road—some one cried, "Stop thief!" I then saw the prisoner; he ran across the road and down Union Street with a bag of flour under his arm; we gave chase and the prisoner threw the bag of flour against a wall nearly in my face—we chased him round two or three streets, and a constable stopped him and took him—I am sure prisoner is the man I saw running.
Cross-examined. You ran about 200 yards before you threw the flour away—you ran at a good rate.
JOHN KEENAN (Policeman M 141). On the night of 30th October, I was on duty and heard a shout of "Stop him"—I saw Hurley and Ratcliff running after the prisoner; I stopped him and said, "What is the matter?"—he said, "Nothing, I will give you my name and address"—I kept hint till the witnesses came and then took him to the station, searched him, and
found four florins, three half-crowns, and two pence—he had an umbrella—I received this coin from Miss Bird—the World's End is six or seven minutes' walk from Mr. Bird's shop.
Cross-examined. You stood at the corner 10 or 15 minutes before anybody came to accuse you—I saw no flour on your coat.
Cross-examined. On the morning of 30th October from 12 to 14 boys were brought into the station to identify you as having sent them to shops with half-sovereigns, and they all failed to do so but the last one—I did not close the door and then send them in again—seven or eight men were in the cell with you.
Re-examined.. I had received information about the passing of bad money, and took several boys to the police-court to see if they could recognize anybody; Hicks was one of them, he identified the prisoner—Smeath was there at a different time and picked him out, and another boy did so also—those who failed to identify him were young boys.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . These half-sovereigns are bad, and those passed to Parsons and Bird are from the same mould, they are very soft; they are never thrown down, they are put down; they are coloured to catch the eye, they are made from a genuine half-sovereign.
Prisoner's Defence. The first boy says that he saw me in the dark, if so he must be very keen in his memory to recognise me fifteen days afterwards. The second boy only knew me by my coat and my face. In the third case it would be difficult to run 200 or 300 yards with a tissue paper bag of flour under one's arm. The only evidence against me is that I had an umbrella. Twelve children on one day and five or six on another failed to re-cognise me. Men go about distributing these half-sovereigns, but I am not the man. I had just left London Bridge Station and stood at the corner, and one of the witnesses came up and said, "That is him." I offered to give my name and address.
GUILTY . He was also charged with having been convicted at Clerkenwell in November, 1876, in the name of Wood, of stealing from the person, to, which he
PLEADED GUILTY.**†— Two Years' Imprisonment.
MR. POLAND Prosecuted.
JANE BROWN . I am barmaid at the Equestrian, 124, Blackfriars Road—on 31st October, about 8.30 p.m., I served the prisoner with 2d. worth of rum; he asked for change for a sovereign; I gave him a half-sovereign, 9s. 6d. in silver, and 4d.—I then went to serve a customer, but he called me back, and said "Miss, will you give me silver for this half-sovereign?"—I said "Yes," but directly I took it I saw that it was bad—I am certain it was not the same as I had given him; it was much lighter, but I gave him the change to catch him—he was talking to a man and woman in the bar; they all three left together, and I went after them—a policeman was at the door, and I gave the prisoner in custody in the middle of the road, with the coin—I noticed it because I had taken two bad open a fortnight previously.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You did not ask for all silver when you gave me the sovereign.
WILLIAM GILBERT .(Policeman L, 197). On 31st October, about 8.30, I was opposite the Surrey Theatre, and the last witness pointed out the prisoner to me in the middle of the road, and gave me this bad half-sovereign—I took hold of his hand—he had 19s. 6d. in it in silver and 4d., and in his left waistcoat pocket a sixpence and 2d.—this is known as "ringing the changes."
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I gave her gold and a sovereign, and she gave me a half-sovereign, and the remainder in copper and silver. I told her it was a half-sovereign I gave her over the counter."
The Prisoner in his Defence repeated the same statement.
JANE BROWN (Re-examined by the JURY). I gave the other half-sovereigns which I had taken before this to the police—I am sure they were not in the house at this time; the police had them—I gave the bad half-sovereign the prisoner gave me to the governor.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
67. JOHN FOULSTON HUNT FOULSTON (33) PLEADED GUILTY . to stealing the sums of 242l. 3s., 448l. 15s. 2d., and within six months 574l. of the London Tramways Company, his masters.— Three Months' Imprisonment.
There were seven other indictments against the prisoner for forgery, upon which the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, for the prosecution, offered no, evidence.
70. JAMES KING (35) to feloniously forging and uttering an order for the payment of 2l. 13s. 6d. with intent to defraud, having been convicted at this Court in March, 1877, of unlawfully obtaining money by false pretences. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] Recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor. — Four Months' Imprisonment.
MR. BESLEY Prosecuted.
ALFRED BASSETT . I am a grocer and cheesemonger, of Deptford—the prisoner was in my service three months, and left about two months before 24th September—he used to go out to get orders—Mr. Davis is a customer of mine—when the prisoner had been out of my service two months he called and said that he had an order from Mr. Davis for me for five American cheeses, a jar of honey, some sugar, and 1 cwt. of sugar candy—he called again on 26th September, and said that the lump sugar and the sugar candy, were wanted the first thing in the morning—I made them up, the value was 1l. 19s. 10d., and sent them by my brother-in law, Arthur Thomas, and another boy, he was to bring back the money—that was
cash price, and no credit—I did not give the prisoner authority to take the money—my brother-in-law did not bring back the invoice or the money—on the 29th the, prisoner came and handed me my bill, saying that he wished the cheese and the honey to be put on it—nothing was whether it was paid or not—the cheese and honey were to be delivered at the end of the week—he called at the end of the week, and said that Mr. Davis was oat of town, and the cheese and honey would not be wanted till next week—I went to Mr. Davis, and found him at home, and that the prisoner bad had the money—I went to the prisoner's house, and said "How about the money for these goods?"—he said "Come inside; I will soon settle, you"—I would not go in, and some time afterwards be came to my house and insulted me, and said "You can only county, court me for it, and I will pay you 2s. a week"—I made no reply—he laughed, and I went to the police-station, and on the next evening, having laid the. case before a Magistrate, I gave the prisoner in custody—he has never given me the 1l. 15s. 10d.—this (produced) is his, receipt—I never gave him authority to take the money—I believed that the cheese and honey had been ordered by Mr. Davis.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You, gave me the order on the 24th—you never had any goods to pay me and. account for them—if you gave me an order, I sent it in after you left one—you took a collection on yourself, and a fortnight after you worked the "round "you sold it to me with all the persons' names who you bad been serving. before—you have been paid for that "round"—when I called at your house I asked you if you could soon settle for the goods, and you said "Come inside, I will soon settle you," and being afraid of you I turned it off and said "I can put 'paid' to the bill here."
Re-examined.. There was no agreement by which I trusted him—I never debited him with the goods taken to Davis's.
THOMAS DAVIS . I keep the Earl of Beaconsfield at Rotherhithe—I was not aware that the prisoner had left Mr. Bassett's service, and gave him an order for 1 cwt of loaf sugar, and asked him the price of candy—he said "I don't know; but you shall have a cwt at 28s."—I said "I don't want a cwt.; send me a quarter," but I never gave him an order for five cheeses, or a jar of honey—he came after the goods were delivered and said "How are you, old boy; open the gates, and I will help the boys; what are you going to have, old man?"—I said "It is rather early, but I will have a glass of ale"—he gave me some from outside—he produced the bill—I did not look at the heading, but paid him 1l. 15s. 10 1/4 d.—he said "I shall get into a devil of a row with my governor, I sold you the candy too cheap"—I knew of no governor but Bassett—I was dealing with Bassett, and believed the prisoner to be his servant—he never showed me this other bill on a printed heading.
Cross-examined. When you called I said "Mr. Bassett has been over; you have left him, have you not?" but I did not know you had left him when I gave you the order.
ARTHUR THOMAS . I am Mr. Bassett's brother-in-law—I went with another lad to take some sugar and sugar-candy to Mr. Davis, and on the way the prisoner overtook us and said "Have you the bill?"f—I said "Yes"—he said "Show me"—I showed it to him, and we went on a little way, and he gave me a glass of ale at the Merry Cricketers—he was absent
there long enough to write this receipt—we then went on to Davis's, and he delivered the goods—I asked if they had paid—he said "No; they will pay when the cheese comes in"—he asked me what I would hare—I said "A glass of ale"—my age is 17—we left the public-house together, and before he left me he gave me 7s. 11d. for Mr. Bassett, which was some other customer's money.
Prisoner's Defence. It was my wish to pay for the goods as I had paid before. I was locked up three weeks, and the case was abandoned, but they got another case. It was the last of my thoughts to do Mr. Bassett out of a farthing. We were like brothers together. He gave me a good character when I left.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor. — Nine Days' Imprisonment.
MR. BIRON and MR. D. WALKER Prosecuted; and MR. BESLEY and MR. SAFFORD Defended.
WILLIAM JAMES GARDNER . I am a surveyor, of Great Russell Street, Bloomsbury—this is my appointment as arbitrator between the School Board and the defendant (produced), and this is a counterpart of the other—it is my appointment by Hay ward—this is the declaration I made. (To hear and determine fairly)—I appointed July 16th for the arbitration, and the parties appeared before me at the Surveyors' Institute, Great George Street—Counsel appeared on both sides—I took notes for the purpose of forming my opinion of the value of the premises and the amount the School Board were to pay Hay ward for the premises—Hay ward was in the room—I heard Counsel state the principal facts which he meant to prove—he claimed 1,062l. 10s. for the value of the lease; loss by compulsory sale, 1067.4s. 6d., that is 10 percent; trade loss, 1,805l. 2s. 6d.; and for forced sale of effects, 91l. 5s.; total 3,065l. 2s.—Hay ward was then called and sworn by me; these are my notes of his evidence (The notes were put in and read)—he was recalled on the 23rd, when I took these notes (produced)—I did not put down everything that passed—Hayward said that he had an income of 600l. a year; that he kept a memorandum book and ledger—he produced on cross-examination, a ledger, two day books, and some vouchers—he was asked if he kept a banking-account—he said "Not now; I kept one formerly" and that he had had no pass-book since 10th October, 1873—he had the ledger before him, and was asked if the transactions took place on those dates, and he said "Yes"—he was asked if the entries were correct; he said "Yes"—he was next to me and the book was between us, so that I could see—I remember his attention being called to the entry "Topp's Trustees," and he was asked whether he had any dealings with them between 1869 and 1878, and he said that dealings took place on those dates—I cannot recollect his particular words, but his general statement was that the accounts as appeared in the ledger were
correct—he said that tie date 1870, on page 340, bad been altered to 1878—he was further pressed as to whether the payments had been made in that year, and he said that they were—it was suggested to him that there had been an alteration in the date, and he said on the first day that he had not altered it—his attention was called to folio 442, "Hubbard," and the entry 1876—he gave a similar answer that he had not altered the date; he also said that he had not made any alteration in the dates for the purposes of this inquiry—at the request of the School Board I adjourned the arbitration till the 23rd, a week afterwards, when Hayward was again in the box; his attention was again called to Topp's trustees, and he again said that the entries were correct—his attention was then called to the entries in the pass-book, and that under date of June 6th, 1870, there was an entry of "Topp 50l.," and that the pass-book showed a cheque paid on June 6th, and the ledger showed some date or other with an equivalent amount; there had been an alteration—I think he said that it might be the same cheque—he was challenged with another cheque for 57l. 19s. on 11th July, and gave a similar answer—he said "The dates were altered; I will not swear that I have not altered them"—his attention was called to 749, Damon's case, where 1876 was altered—he said "The date may have been altered; I can-not swear"—he was challenged whether the cheque of July 12th, 1871, was not for the same amount as that appearing in the ledger on July 11th, 1876, and he admitted it—he was taken through each of these entries of six different cheques, and I believe the question was put to him about them all—his attention was called to there being no pages in the ledger from 585 to 600; his reply was that he did not remove them.
Cross-examined. I have acted as arbitrator in many cases—my experience of arranging values has been very great—it is usual in a claim of this kind for a witness to estimate the matter before the claim is sent in, and for an accountant to estimate the loss by forced sale and removal. (The schedule of claim was here put in, which was for 3,065l. 2s., solicitors' and accountants' charges to be added.) I think I have known Mr. Kempster before; 1 believe he is a respectable solicitor—following the schedule of claim comes the inability to agree to the amount—Mr. Young acts for the Board in this matter—he would negotiate before the breaking off of the treaty—the first time I saw the parties was July 16th—I believe Mr. Kempster came to the first meeting—I do not know whether he was represented by Mr. Chaplin, who held Mr. Nasmith's brief—I do not think it was a different man on the first occasion to the second—Mr. Nasmith was there on the second occasion, but I think not on the first; there was only one Counsel on the first occasion—I am not quite clear whether the ledger and pass-book were brought into the room by Hayward or by the accountant, Mr. Jackson—it was my duty to sift the claim and the figures—I have very likely often awarded compensation to a man who had no books at all—the value of the evidence is for me, whether oral or written; I use my independent judgment—I can say that page 240, Topp's trustees, was put before me on the second occasion certainly, and I have very little doubt about the first, but I have no note of it—it was clear that there was an alteration—Hayward did not at once say when his attention was called to the 8, that it was an alteration—he said that he could not explain it—he did not say that the act of writing the alteration was not his act—he said that he did not alter, but he said afterwards that he would not swear anything—the banker's pass-book was
produced at the same time in Damon's case—the alteration is a palpable one, and there are six accounts, I think, which correspond in their six dates to the banker's pass book—the defendant said that he could not account for the alteration, and that he would not swear that each entry under the date of 1870 were not the real entries—Mrs. Hay ward was examined on the first occasion as to the trade profits—Mr. Kennedy, an accountant, was called and swore "I hare had no information personally from Hayward"—Kennedy is Jackson's master, and was, I presume, employed by Hayward—Mr. Vulliamy, the surveyor, was examined as to the claim, which was for 1,168l. 14s. 6d. for the lease, and 10 per cent. added—I allowed 227l., including the 10 percent.—the lease was produced, and it having 12 1/2 years to run, it was the basis of the calculation—Mr. Vulliamy valued out the amount, and then said 200l. a year for the receipts—I did not disagree in that—he deducted ground-rent 75l., and multiplied it, and brought out 1,062l. 10s.; that is how it was done—I not only had Mr. Vulliamy's reckoning of the supposed value, but the evidence of Hayward himself with regard to the letting, and I took the two together—the profit rental of Mr. Vullamy's calculation was, I think, one of 125l. a year—the basis of the 200l. was this: I took the rental at 100l. a year, from which I deducted 75l.—Hayward said that some things were put down and some not—Mr. Nasmith withdrew the claim for trade losses after the cross-examination after the second day.
Re-examined.. This is my award (produced)—this pass-book was produced on the first occasion—I cannot say what Hayward said about it except that no further account was kept—on the second occasion his attention was drawn to the entries of payments to Damon and to Topp, and to the alteration of the dates—at the end of the cross-examination on the second day Mr. Nasmith said that he was satisfied the books had been altered—he said "After this I cannot ask you to look at these books, and I withdraw so much of the claim as refers to the trade"—Mr. Young was examined before me.
ANDREW YOUNG . I am assistant surveyor to the School Board for London—all the claims come to me before they are gone into by the Board, and 1 report on them and advise the committee what to do—when I advise a settlement they adopt it; if I am not satisfied they act on my report or refer it to a Jury or to arbitration—I remember Mr. Hayward's claim coming before me; it was a lump sum of 3,065l. 2s.—I saw Mr. Vulliamy (Mr. Hayward's surveyor) about it, after which I put Mr. James, who is in the accountant's office, in communication with Mr. Hayward, and instructed him to examine the books and make out as far as he could a trade account—I ultimately received a report from him, after which I advised that the Board should contest the claim—it was referred to arbitration, and I was present at the meeting at the Surveyors' Institute on 16th July and heard the opening statement of the claimant's Counsel, who claimed 1,805l. as the net profit for the three years prior to 1878—Hayward was sworn, and the ledger, day book, memorandum book, and vouchers were produced—the pass-book was eventually produced, and Hayward then said that it had nothing to do with this claim, it was too far back—his attention was drawn on the second occasion to the entries of cheques to Damon and Topp, first in the ledger and then in the pass-book, and he was asked if they were the same transactions—he said that he supposed so—his attention was called on the first day
to the lodger, and he was asked if the books were correct—he said that they were—his attention was called first to the entry "Topp's Trustees," and at tint he said that the date was accurate—he was asked whether he had any dealings with Topp's trustees between 1869 and 1878, and he said that he had had none, but that he had in 1878—with regard to the 1876, I cannot say whether it was as to Topp's trustees or Damon, bat he said that there had been an alteration; he had made an error at the time, and had corrected it at the time—I am speaking of the first hearing—he at first said that it was accurate, but he was under cross-examination for nearly an hour, and at the end he did not speak so positively as at the beginning—he was asked whether he had done business with Damon in 1876; he said "Yes," but I do not remember his being asked whether he had made payments to them—on the second occasion his attention was again called to the page in the ledger with "Topp's Trustees," and he was asked whether he made the alteration himself—I cannot say his exact answer, but he was afterwards pressed if he would swear that he had not altered them, and he said that he would not—the entries in the banker's book were then shown him, and he was asked whether they did not show a payment in respect to the very sums in the ledger—he did not appear inclined to answer at first, but afterwards he said he presumed they referred to the same transactions, and in like manner with regard to Damon—his Counsel said that he was satisfied there were alterations, and abandoned the claim after looking at the book with a magnifying glass.
Cross-examined. Mr. James met Mr. Kennedy, who would give me a statement upon which I should act—that was with regard to the trade claim entirely—Mr. James told me very soon after he had seen the books that he had noticed the alterations, and was going minutely through the books—I presume Mr. Kennedy had handed them to him—that was not before any notice to treat was given; it was before any arbitrator was appointed, and I told Mr. Vulliamy it was a very fishy case, but I could not come to any agreement with him—I did not refer to Mr. Kennedy with reference to the trade claims; it is not the custom—I did not communicate with Hay ward; when they appoint an agent it is not right to communicate with the principal—Mr. Vulliamy was appointed agent on September 19, 1878—I told him that it would have to go to a Jury or arbitration—Mr. Kempster, the solicitor, did not give evidence on the books; it was Mr. Jackson—Mr. Kempster was exonerated at the meeting from all blame because he had acted on instructions, but I do not know who from—the alterations were palpable upon the face of them—Mr. Nasmith said that still there was a trade, but he could not persist in that part of the claim because the books. had been altered—I did not hear Hay ward thereupon say "You need not take my word for anything, the books have been out of my hands; but I will call before you the farmers with whom I have done business"—I recollect Mr. Gardner saying "How do you prove you have a profit income of 600l. a year?" and Hayward said "There are lots that I never put into my books at all. I will give you every farmer's address. I don't ask you to take my word, I will give you their addresses," but he did not say that he would call them—the Arbitrator said "I understand the claim for compensation for loss of business is given up." (MR. BESLEY here read parls of Mr. Nasmith's speech from the short-hand writer's transcript, to which the witness assented.) Mr. Nasmith was there on the first occasion and opened the case,
and Mr. Chaplin continued it—Mr. Vulliamy, a surveyor of good reputation, valued the claim at 1,100l., hut it was cut down by the Arbitrator to 225l., including 10 per cent for forced sale—it very frequently happens that claims made on the School Board are cut down in that proportion, hut this was rather a large one—it is the business of the School Board officers to test every fact put before them.
Re-examined.. We settle 90 per cent of the cases after investigation—Mr. Kennedy was called in the first place, but he knew nothing about it, and then his clerk was put into the box—he vouched his clerk Jackson.
MR. JAMES. I am a cashier in the employ of the School Board—I received instructions from Mr. Young to examine Hay ward's books—I went to his house and asked him for his books, and saw him and Mr. Jackson; he produced the ledger, day-book, and some vouchers—he did not produce the pass-book to my recollection—he opened the books and proceeded to explain them to me—I said that I could not examine them then, and wanted to take them home—he said "I don't like parting with the books"—I arranged with Jackson that the books should be sent to me, and went home—they were not sent, but I sent for them and got them—I made a note of 15 pages, between page 585 and 600, on which there were alterations; those pages were there then, and there were 50 pages altogether upon which dates were altered—I had the books about three weeks—he did not give me the pass-book with the other books—I returned them to Hay ward at Trigon Road; the pages were all there then, but on 23rd July pages 585 to 600 were missing—I have notes of alterations on those pages.
Cross-examined. This is one of the books I received—at page 426 hen is an account of Alderson in 1878; there is no alteration in that—the fink time I went to see Hay ward, Jackson was there; the conversation was carried on with them both—the vouchers were on the table; they were a order when I got them; they were delivered over with the books about a week or eight days after I met him at Trigon Road, Vauxhall, which was on 15th February, 1879—there are among the vouchers some receipts of the London and South-Western Railway Co.—they are not altered at all—I generally take three years in making an inquiry, and strike an average; I took 1876, 1877, and 1878—I had vouchers of the South-Western Railway of 1875 and 1876, and I had vouchers of the sales of horses at Barbican Re-positroy in 1876—they are nicely put up; they came to me in this way—they amount to several thousand pounds within the period I prescribed for my inquiry, and they do not show all the transactions—I do not impute anything in the figures with regard to the horse accounts—I consider them genuine debtor and creditor accounts—I have a great many Barbican papers here, but not half the vouchers that are recorded, and I cannot go by the vouchers only—I have dealt with them fairly—assuming all the vouchers correct, my estimate of the annual profit is about 389l.—I went into the matter thoroughly when I had the books—I do not think Mr. Jackson showed me the banker's pass-book—he did not know what limit I took—we did not agree to examine as to three years—Mr. Hay ward said that he did not like parting with the books, because they were in such state, he did not expect they were to be publicly examined—there are blue figures on every page of the ledger—they are supposed to be an accountant's figures—I do not know whether Hayward has had a penny.
Re-examined.. There was a profit on the horse sales account—I can trace
every horse as bought at a certain figure and sold at a certain figure—the hay account is an estimate—I treat the different entries as being genuine on the dates appearing in the ledger, but I leave out Topp's Trustees' and Damon's matter entirely on account of the alterations—having made my investigation, I reported to Mr. Young.
By MR. BESLEY. I kept the books three weeks, and next saw them on the table at the arbitration—he was only at his house from Saturday to Monday—I was there on 15th March when the books were returned—he did not say bow long he had been away at Aldershot or what he had been getting.
By the COURT. Jackson was supposed to hare exactly the same materials to estimate from that I had—supposing he overlooked the alterations in dates he would take those matters and calculate accordingly, but I thought right to reject something for the alterations—as a rule I keep to three years, unless one is experimental—the rule is, the last three years; but if they are bad, I should take four years.
HENRY VULLIAMY . I am a surveyor, of 122, Newgate Street—I acted for Hay ward in his claim against the School Board—I have corresponded with him, and know his writing—the signature to the claim for 3,065l. 3s. it his writing—I saw him sign it—I made the estimate of the value of the building, and as to the trade claim I relied on the figures furnished by the accountant—I never saw the books, I left them to the accountant entirely—this letter (produced) bears Mr. Hayward's signature, and it looks like his writing.
Cross-examined. When I find the name of any person who has property scheduled by the School Board, I sometimes find that persons, having got access to the fact, solicit their employment—he was a stranger to me, and my clerk solicited him to employ me—Mr. Gibson was my clerk—the first date that I had any sight of Hayward was about the beginning of September—on 6th August I expressed my opinion that the temporary absence of the horses and of the stuff would not prejudice his claim—I introduced Mr. Kennedy—I was the person to communicate with the School Board to act as surveyor—I told Hayward to send ail papers to me direct, and not to the School Board—I said, "Ton had better not have anything to say yourself"—that was my duty as I was the agent—I told him not to interfere—I went over the premises—he had got them on very advantageous terms, for they were very well situated, with 125l. profit rental for the business—considering the juxtaposition to Nine Elms and the river, I considered the premises valuable—I did not know that all the time he was getting 2l. a week at Aldershot, but he was there except from Saturday to Monday—the School Board officers understood their business thoroughly—my claim is separate from Mr. Kennedy's claim for costs, I had nothing to do with him—my claim for costs is 19l. 19s.—I do not know what his is, and I do not know what the School Board knocked off—I was examined as a witness.
MONTAGU CHARLES WESTON . I am a solicitor at Dorchester—I was solicitor to the late Robert Damon, who died in 1874—I acted for his executors after his death, and up to the present time—the last transaction with Hayward appearing by the books was on 12th October, 1871.
farm which I now occupy—after his death it whs carried on by trustees, Mr. Nutting and the Rev. Henry Mold, up to 1872, when they handed it over to me—I helped to manage it for them—they were not dealing with Hay ward in 1871 that I am aware of, nor were there any dealings with him after 1872, when I took possession—this letter dated 16th July, 1879, came to me in course of post—I did not answer it.
Cross-examined. About 1878 he brought Mr. Tennie to me to buy some hay (This was stated in the letter)—I did not sell him any—he did not seak about buying hay for Aldershot when he came down last year.
MR. BESLEY submitted—1st. That the indictment was bad, as the date in the first count, "in the year of our Lord 1879," wan not sufficiently definite, and that the date was material, as it would enable the prisoner to plead autrefois acquit if again charged with the same offence. 2nd. That the total omission of any kind of date in the other four counts rendered them invalid. 3rd. That the false pretences were too remote, inasmuch as the evidence showed that the false pretences alleged were made by the prisoner in the course of his examination as a witness before an Arbitrator appointed to determine between the parties the amount of compensation, and that as such representations could not have the effect of obtaining either money or an award, except after the silting and investigation of an independent mind in the person of the Arbitrator, the prisoner could not he said to be attempting to obtain money thereby. That if after the Arbitrator's investigation any representations were found to be false, they would be dealt with by him in his ultimate award. That all that had been made out was at the most an attempt to affect the mini of the Arbitrator by false representations with the view of increasing the amount of an award which might be set aside or never be proceeded with, and that therefore an attempt to obtain money by false pretences had not been made out, and that an attempt to obtain by false pretences an award, the outcome of which might be money, was too remote to support the allegation in the first count (See Reg. v. Evans, 9; Cox, C. C., 238). It was further contended that a ledger used in the private business of an individual vans not a document of a sufficiently public nature to be the subject of a forgery or uttering at Common Law (1 Hawk. P. C, c. 7l.; Rex v. Wheatly, 2 Burr. 1125; Reg. v. Young, 3 T. R. p. 104).
THE RECORDER, after consulting MR. JUSTICE HAWKINS, left the case to the Jury, but reserved the points for the consideration of the Court for Crown Cases reserved if desired by the prisoner.
The prisoner received a good character.— GUILTY .
Recommended to mercy by the Jury.— Four Months' Imprisonment without hard labour.
MR. MILLWOOD Prosecuted.
SAMUEL ROAN . I am the father of the deceased, and live at 40, North Street, Kennington Road—I am a carpenter—on Sunday evening my son Samuel came to me, and from what he said I went with him to a house kept by Mrs. Barnett, where both my children had lived for six years—I saw the deceased sitting in a chair, I saw that he had a wound on his head—I saw him every day for the next day or two, and on Thursday he was very bad—ho complained of his head being very bad, and a swelling round the neck—a doctor saw him on Thursday and another doctor saw him on Friday—
on Saturday he was very bad and was taken to the hospital, and I saw him there under chloroform—he died on Sunday evening, 2nd November—I did not see him when dead.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I have not heard it said that the wound was not properly looked after or was neglected.
ALFRED SHIERS . I live at 1, Guraby's Buildings, Broad Street, Lambeth—on Sunday afternoon, 26th October, I was with some boys outside Albert Buildings, when I noticed the prisoner and a woman pass—I then noticed a lot of boys running to Boyce's dust yard—I ran after them to see what they were going to do, and when I got there I see the prisoner come out from behind a cart—he was the other side of the yard—he searched for a stone and picked up a brick, and threw it at the deceased, who was standing on the wheel—there was also a boy in the cart—it hit the deceased on the back of the head and knocked him down off the wheel—the prisoner said nothing and walked away—when he threw the brick he was 15 or 20 yards off—I don't know whether he saw the hoy fall—it was light—I don't think he did see it hit him, because there were carts in front—he could have seen him, but he turned round and walked away—it was not quite half a brick (produced)—the deceased walked a few steps and began laughing—he did nut seem much hurt, and we all laughed at him—he couldn't cry, he was half laughing; but when he was walking out of the yard some blood ran down from the back of his head on to his coat—he went up to a constable on the Albert Embankment—that was about 100 yards from the yard.
Cross-examined. I don't know whether there is a public thoroughfare through the yard, but there is a gate one end, and no gates the other—I have seen people go through; I have never been through—I appeared twice at the police-court—after you threw the stone you walked quietly away.
By the COURT. The deceased was standing on the cart wheel laughing—there was a woman with the prisoner—I did not hear the boys say anything to the prisoner—nothing was thrown before the brick.
HARRY ALDOUS . I live at 21, Albert Buildings, Vauxhall Walk—I was standing outside Albert Buildings on Sunday afternoon, 26th October last, with the last witness, when I saw a man and woman pass—I saw everything that took place, and what the last witness has said is correct.
Cross-examined. I don't know how long you were going from one end of the thoroughfare to the other—you were searching on the ground for a stone and came across the old brick and aimed it—you threw the stone—it hit Roan on the back of the head, and you walked away quietly.
By the COURT. I did not hear anything said by the deceased or the other boys—the woman was up against the fence and the man was in front of her.
By the Prisoner. The boys were" not throwing stones and laughing—I did not say so at the police-court.
FREDERICK GRAY (Policeman L 176). I was on duty the Albert Embankment at the time in question, when the deceased and another boy came up to me—I went with them to Boyce's dust-yard, where I saw the prisoner in company with a woman—I saw a large wound on the back of the deceased's head, and blood was running down on his coat—I told the prisoner he was given into custody for assaulting the deceased—he said, "I did not do it; they were throwing stones at each other"—I took him to the
station and he was charged—he was taken before the Magistrate on the following morning and remanded; in the meantime the boy died.
Cross-examined. I don't know whether the boys threw stones at each other or not—they passed by me.
ROBERT ISHERWOOD WILLIAMSON . I am house-surgeon at St. Thomas's Hospital—Roan was brought in about 9 p.m. on Saturday, 1st November—he was suffering from tetanus—I examined him, and there was a wound at the back of the head—he answered to his name; that is all—he died at 6 p.m. on Sunday—his breathing stopped at 11 o'clock the previous day, and tracheotomy was performed—the cause of death was tetanus, the result of the injury—this brick would be calculated to cause the injury—there was a fracture of the skull also, I should say—I made a post-mortem examination—the fracture was not enough to cause death—I ought also to say that there is a good deal of tetanus about—he sunk from the injury to the head.
Cross-examined. I don't know that he was neglected before he was brought in, or what treatment he had—he was properly treated at the hospital.
The prisoner in his defence said that he met the woman referred to, who asked him to give I her a dinner, as she had tramped all the way from Manchester, and had had nothing to eat for two days—that he was ashamed to take her home, she looking so deplorable, and took her round a back street, where a lot of boys came shouting and throwing stones; that he picked up a piece of brick and pitched it towards them, not with the intention of hitting any of them, and then walked away; and that he had a blind mother at hom, whom he helped to support.
Six Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. BESLEY and HORACE AVORY Prosecuted; MR. LILLEY Defended.
GEORGE SMITH . I live at 18, Sturdy Road, Peckham, and am a cheesemonger's assistant—on Saturday, the 9th November, at 12 p.m., I was outside the shop (Mr. Tobitfs, 142, High Street, Peckham), serving customers—there were some 12 or 16 persons outside, most of them in the road—I saw a one-horse cart coming towards Camberwell from the direction of New Cross—there were two men and a female in it—I could not see who was driving—it was coming at eight or nine miles an hour, but I am no judge—I should not call it a slow pace—it is a very narrow, thoroughfare; the width of the road is 25 feet, I think—there is a single line of tramway—Baker was standing with others in the road, some three feet from the kerb, looking towards the shop—as the cart came up Baker seemed to throw his body back or take one step back—I could not see whether he was sober—the wheel or the step of the cart struck him, and he was thrown to the ground and run over—the cart proceeded on its way—I afterwards saw it stoped—I don't know whether it stoped itself or was stopped—I did not observe any slackening of speed—a cab was
passing at the time from Camberwell towards New Cross, on the other side of the tramway—I afterwards saw Baker dead at the Coroner's inquest on the following Friday—there was a good light where the accident happened—all the jets were burning—I should think a man driving along there in a cart could see 80 yards—I did not hear any one call out.
Cross-examined. I was attending to my duties—there was not a man named' Richardson talking to me—he is a cheesemonger's assistant—he was standing some little distance away, looking on—he is an acquaintance of mine—he might have passed some remark to me before the accident—some of the shops were shut up—the cab was passing on the opposite side of the way—it would undoubtedly cause the cart to go near the kerb—I cannot say how a cab coming in that direction might affect a cart—I said before the Coroner that the pace of the cart was eight or nine miles, and I think I said eight or nine miles before the Magistrate—the horse was what they term a cob; it was not more than 12 hands high, if so much—I bad not seen Baker before I noticed the cart—the other persons moved towards the pavement—as soon as the accident happened there Was a crowd—I started to run after the cart—I did not notice a tram-ear pass along the line at the time of the accident.
WILLIAM JOHN RICHARDSON . I was a cheesemonger's assistant, of 43, Marlborough Road, Peckham, but have been discharged through having to appear as a witness, and am now living at Chelsea—I was standing near Mr. Tobitt's shop at the time in question with some others—I saw the cart coming from the direction of New Cross—I did not see who was driving—there were three men and a female in it—I saw it about 150 yards off, and remarked at the time it was coming rather fast—I did not notice Baker—I was in the road, and rushed on to the pavement as the cart passed—it passed about two or three feet from the kerb—they did not alter the pace as far as I know—after the cart passed I heard a cry of "Stop"—I saw the cart going on—I saw it stop 50 or 60 yards from me; I also saw a man lying in the road who had been run over—I afterwards found he was John Baker—I heard no cry before the man was run over—as the cart passed there was a Hansom cab also in the road passing in the opposite direction—the off-side wheel of the cab was about the middle of the tram lines—there was nothing to prevent those in the cart seeing the people—I am no particular judge, but I should say the cart was going nine or ten miles an hour.
Cross-examined. I know how to drive, and have driven—my back was not turned to the cart when I stepped on to the kerb—I stepped backwards—the kerb is very low indeed—I believe it is not two or three feet; less than a foot—I have not measured it—I was in the road talking to a person when the cart came along—some of the shop lights had been put out—I had been in employment that evening, and my shop was closed—I did not see any tram-car pass along the line—it may have passed before.
WILLIAM PHILLIPS . I live in Clayton Road, Peckham, and am a pensioner from the Metropolitan Police—I was standing at the corner of Clayton Street, when I saw the cart in question coming towards Camberwell at a rapid rate—I saw three men and a female in it—I did not see it until it was within 10 or 12 yards—I saw Baker sitting in the road after he was run over by the cart which had passed me—I went up and saw him sitting in the road in the arms of a constable—he was insensible, and
blood was oozing from the left temple, a very small streak of blood—I assisted him to the station—I heard no one call out before the accident, nor did I know any tiling of it until I saw the people running.
Cross-examined. It is about 60 yards from the corner of the Clayton Road to the front of Tobitt's shop—I was with my wife marketing—the road runs a little narrower just there than it dots farther down by the (police-station—I did not see a tram-car pass at that time.
GEORGE LEWIS (policeman P 170). At 12.12 a.m. on the 9th Not. I was called to High Street, Peckham, where I found Baker insensible in the road, bleeding from a wound on the left temple—I did not see the occurrence—I conveyed the deceased to the station, where he was seen by the divisional surgeon—he was afterwards taken to the infirmary, where he died—I saw the prisoner at the station—the cart was brought to the station by another constable—the prisoner appeared to be sober—I have since measured the road, and find it is as near 24 feet as can be—the deceased said nothing.
HERBERT CHABOT . I am a surgeon of Camber well, and medical super-intendent of the infirmary—at about 1.30 a.m. on the 9th November the deceased was brought in—he was insensible and in a dying state—I noticed a cut under the left eye, what the other witnesses have called the temple; also a contusion on the back of the head—he died in an hour and a half after his admission—I made a post-mortem examination and found the skull was fractured on the right side, and nine ribs broken on the right side; also two wounds on the right lung, caused by the fractured ribs; also a recent rupture of the liver—all those signs were such as might have been caused by the accident—his breath smelt of drink—he remained insensible—I cannot say whether he was intoxicated or not—there was some fluid in the stomach, which smelt of beer.
Cross-examined. I said before the Magistrate that he smelt of beer—the wounds were, in my opinion, the cause of death.
CHARLES STEVENS (Detective P). From information I received, I went on the morning of the 10th November to 2, Victoria Place, High Street, Peckham, where I found the prisoner in bed—I told him I should have to take him into custody for causing the death of a man unknown by running over him with a horse and cart the Saturday night previously in the High Street—he said "It is a bad job, and I am very sorry"—I then took him to the station.
Cross-examined. All the witnesses were examined before the Coroner's Jury, and by them a verdict of accidental death was returned.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate read: "I merely say it was a pure accident on my part."
Witnesses for the Defence.
HENRY CHARLES BIRT . I live at 2, Basing Road, High Street, Peckham—I was with the prisoner on the early morning of the 9th November, coming from New Cross—the cart was drawn by a pony—there were in the cart besides the prisoner Joseph Sheppard and his wife—the police-statioa is a little past the Clayton Road towards New Cross—we had passed a tram-car, and then a cab came along—I know Mr. Tobitt's shop—I saw a crowd of persons there, standing in the road—I should think we had been going between six and seven miles an hour—the pony was a quick-going one—as we approached the persons standing in the road we slackened—there were
three men standing in the middle of the road—two backed on to the kerb, and the other one in going on to the kerb stepped bark And fell on to the stock of the wheel—the stock of the wheel caught the man as he was stepping back, and threw him down, and that frightened the pony, and we could not stop for 10 or 20 yards—the prisoner stopped as soon as be could—the road was very greasy—it is a wooden pavement—just before the accident a cab met us going towards New Cross—one wheel was in between the line, and the other on the near side—after the cab passed we got more in the middle of the road—we had pissed the cab before the accident occurred, perhaps about 30 yards—we were three or four feet from the pavement when it occurred—the immediate cause of the accident was the man stepping back and falling against the wheel—it happened suddenly—if he had taken a step forward instead of backward he would have been on the kerb—he faced towards the shop—we were all sober.
Cross-examined. The prisoner had been driving all the time—we had come from the Queen's Road, Peckham—we had not come more than 200 or 300 yards—I suppose we were 10 or 15 yards off when I first saw the crowd—the road is nearly straight there; there is a wind by the police-station—we did not say anything about the people in the road—no doubt the prisoner could have pulled up if he had known that this man was going to fall on the wheel; I could not say whether the deceased was intoxicated—we slackened when we came to the crowd, because it was dangerous—we were about three feet from the kerb when the man was knocked down—he would have been out of the way if he had not fallen back on the wheel; the stock pushed him on and then pushed him down, and the cart went over him—I would not say oh my oath that it was not the step that caught him—the stock caught him and knocked him down, and the step caught him as he fell and knocked his head, from what I could see—these were four of us in the cart—I sat partly on the side of the cart and partly on Mr. Sheppard's knee—there was not exactly a seat in the cart—one sat behind a sack of chaff—the prisoner was sitting, driving, on the offside of the cart—I was on the near side; we went 15 or 16 yards after the accident before we stopped—I will swear it was not 50 or 60 yards—the prisoner stopped the cart—I heard three or lour people cry, "Stop," after the accident—the prisoner could not have pulled up sooner—it frightened the pony—he had command of it.
Re-examined. A person standing at the door of Tobitt's shop at mid-night with the lights all round him and the lights of the neighbouring shops put out, would not see more than 40 or 50 yards—we could see Tobitt's lights from the Queen's Road—about 60 or 70 yards—if the man had not stepped back the accident would not have occurred.
By the COURT. I saw him step backwards—he tried to go forward, bat instead of going forward he stepped back—I did not see him take any step before that—his face was then towards the shop—there was no calling out from our chaise—the place was very slippery and the off-side wheel skidded along the metals—I can't tell you the width of the cart; quite 6 feet I should say—the lights were burning brightly in Tobitt's shop—this occurred a few yards past Tobitt's.
JOSEPH SHEPPARD . I was in the cart on the occasion in question, coming from the Queen's Road—I sat on the left-hand side—we were passing the police station on one side and Clayton Road on the other, at about 8 miles
an hour—as we went through Peckham I should think we were going about seven miles an hour—about eight or nine people were standing in the roadway, and we had just passed a cab and were getting on a side line; we were about four feet off the kerb—the road was rather slippery; we tried to pull off the metals to get more in the road, and the wheel skidded along the line and the prisoner halloaed to the people, and they got out of the way of the cart—the deceased rolled up against the cart and the wheel went over him, and the prisoner said, "My God! I have run over a man"—he pulled up as quickly as he could—I suppose in about 25 yards—the man fell against the butt, and the step seemed to me to catch him somehow or other, and the man was knocked down by the butt—he reeled back suddenly as we were passing hint, or the accident would never have happened—the prisoner was perfectly sober.
Cross-examined. Birt whs sitting on my knee—I could see all the side of the cart and by Birt—I saw the crowd in the road, about 20 yards off—the tram lines project on to the asphalte, and you cannot get into the middle of the road all of a minute—we men all halloaed once or twice before we came up to him, I am sure sufficiently for them to hear us—the pony was rather fresh and a kicking pony—when the wheel went over the man the pony was startled—I noticed the deceased before we came up to him—he was the outside man—he seemed to me to be reeling about before we came up to hinr as if he was drunk—I made no observation to those in the cart.
LOUISA SHEPPARD . I was with my husband and the others in the cart on the night in question—we had started from the Queen's Road, and on our way through High Street I don't think we were going unusually fast, as I am nervous, and it would have disturbed my nerves, which it did not—as we approached Mr. Tobitt's shop I saw a crowd of persons in the road outside—it is common to see a crowd on a Saturday night—the prisoner called out to the mob to get out of the way—I don't remember saying anything—I saw the deceased reel and fall against the cart—when the prisoner called out the other people went up on the pavement—the deceased made a step towards the pavement, but reeled back and seemed to come in contact with the step of the cart—the prisoner seemed to pull up directly—directly he found the accident had happened he stopped the horse—the pony would not stand still—the prisoner and the others were sober.
Cross-examined. I was sitting next to the prisoner—there was a basket covered over for me to sit on—I was not sitting lower than the prisoner—he called out to the people "Hi, hi!"—I don't remember people calling out "Stop!" after the accident.
Re-examined. The prisoner has lived in Peckham all his life, I think—I am sure he called out as loud as he could.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Baron Huddleston.
WILLIAM COLLIER ANGROVE . I live at Forest Hill, and am superintendent in the service of the P. and 0. Company—about 2.30 in the afternoon of 21st October I was standing on the quay of Victoria Dock—I saw Mclntyre on a dummy between two vessels, the Pekin and the Denmark; I saw him in the act of taking Akook Ali up and swinging him into the water; the boy was passing him at the time on the dummy; he picked him up by the arms, gave him a swing, and threw him into the water, as he would have done a dog—I can't describe it in any other way—I think the boy was thrown out quite 12 feet from the dummy—he rose in the water—he was fully clothed, as you see him now—the water is about 28 feet deep in that part—I was standing probably 6 or 8 yards away from Mclntyre, on the quay, and I rushed down and took him by the collar as he was making his way to get on board his ship, which was just about to leave the dock—the boy was rescued by some other persons—I had not heard him say anything to Mclntyre before this occurred—I called some of my men and the quartermaster on board the Pekiu to come to my assistance, and I held the man until assistance was sent for—Hay ward was the quartermaster—I then saw Murphy take a knife from his pocket—I think he could have seen what the other man did; I don't exactly know where Murphy was standing at the time, he could not have been far away; when I first saw him he was by the side of Mclntyre, on the dummy—I saw him try to rescue Mclntyre on the dummy—he said "I will clear the way. for you to get on board your ship;" those were the words to the best of my recollection—the Denmark was about leaving the dock, and Mclntyre's effort was to get on board to escape; the Denmark was the ship to which he belonged—Murphy produced the knife at the time he used the words that I have stated; he pulled it out of his pocket—he was secured by some of the men—the lad was taken to the doctor on board the Pekin and examined by my orders.
Cross-examined. I cannot say I observed the condition in which the men were—the first thing I noticed was Mclntyre seizing the boy and throwing him into the water, that attracted my particular attention, and I prevented Mclntyre from going on board his ship—I have not said that they were both drunk; I don't believe they were—Mclntyre may have been, but Murphy was certainly as sober as I am now—I did not know the state the other man was in—I did not then know Mclntyre was a sailor on board the Denmark, I afterwards learnt that he was once a fireman on board.
WILLIAM JOHN HAYWARD . I am quartermaster on board the Peninsular and Oriental Company's ship Pekin—she was lying in Victoria Dock on 21st October—a little after 2 o'clock I was standing on th) quarter of the Pekin, from where I could see the dummy on which Mclntyre was, quite plainly—I saw him take the boy up by the two arms and throw him in the water—I could not say whether there was any conversation before he did that; the boy had not been on the dummy exceeding three minutes—after throwing him into the water, Mclntyre made for the vessel first of all; he made a mistake, he ran up the accommodation ladder belonging to the Pekin instead of the Denmark—I saw Captain Angrove run on to the dummy; he made a communication to me and handed Mclntyre to me—at that time the boy was being taken out of the water—I held Mclntyre, a mob got round, I dare say there were nine or ten people—I did not see Murphy at first, till he asked me to let Mclntyre go; I told him to stand
still and be quiet, and speak to the superintendent, but he became restless, and he stooped down and put his head underneath my chin twice in succession for me to let him go—Murphy came towards me with a knife; he did not do anything with regard to Mclntyre, he only came towards me and Mclntyre; I then let Mclntyre go—Murphy did not say a word when he came towards me—I have seen the knife produced, I could not swear to it, it was a knife similar to that; by the handle I should think that was the same knife—Murphy held it in this position by his side, underhanded—he ran off the dummy as soon as he found I had released Mclntyre—several people belonging to the Peninsular and Oriental Company then came to my assistance—Mclntyre tried to get away—he attempted to get up the accommodation; it was put over to the Denmark, and I called out to them on top of the Denmark to haul the ladder up to prevent his going on board—they did haul it up—both prisoners were then taken into custody and taken to the police station—I accompanied the constable on the way at his request—Mclntyre got rather restless on the way, he asked me on one or two occasions what he had done—I said "You will know more about it by-and-by ":—he said he did not know what he had done—at the police station, when I told him what he had done, he said "I did not want to do any harm to the boy, I did it out of a joke"—he was the worse for drink.
Cross-examined. I said at the station that he was the worse for drink; he burst out laughing after he had thrown the boy into the water—Murphy did not strike me at all; all he did was to try and assist Mclntyre on to the vessel—I have not seen Murphy before—Molntyre would not have been so restless as he was had he lot have been provoked by a number of other men who were there belonging to the same ship; they seemed to be all accomplices together—they were seafaring people; they were about to leave the dock—this mau was rather the worse for drink, and the other men were not only encour ging him, but carrying on'their pranks as well.
MATTHEW FLIWN . I am a labourer, and live at 17, Model Cot'ages, Victoria Dook—on 21st October it was my business to look after the dummies—I saw Mclntyre throw the boy into the water; I helped to rescue him—his face was towards the dummy when I thrnw the line to him, but he did not appear to me as if he could swim—he caught hold of the line, and I saw that he was all right; I saw Mclntyre after I got the boy out—the quartermaster had hold of him, and I saw him draw baok and butt the quartermaster under the chin; he let him go, and he went up to the gangmen's ladder—I did not see Murphy at first, but I saw him open a knife; he had it in this position (describing)—I was close to him; he said "If you don't let him go I will stick you"—that was after the ladder was hauled up from the Denmark—I did not see him do anything with the knice before he said that; I did not see where he got it irom—I saw it in his hand.
Cross-examined. I cannot say whether Molntyre was the worse for drink or not.
JOHN PRATT . I am a policeman lit the service of the Midland Railway, and live at 40, Acre Lane, West Ham—I was standing on the quay as Murphy was leaving the dummy—after he had got off the dummy some 12 or 14 yards I saw him take a knife from his pocket as he was going past a vau of pota'oes and throw it on the top of the load—I went and put my foot on the wheel and got up and picked the knife off the bag of
potatoes—I handed it to the sergeant of the Victoria Dock Police; I believe this is the knife.
Crosx-examined. The first I saw of Murphy was when he came off the dummy and was making for the dock entrance—I was in uniform at the time similar to the Metropolitan Police.
GEORGE LUCAS (Policeman K 222). I was on duty at 3 0 on Tuesday afternoon, 21st October—I was called to the Victoria Dock, and there saw the prisoners; they were given into my custody at the police-office—Mclntre was drunk, Murphy was sober; this knife was handed to me by the police-s rgeant in the presence of Pratt—Melntyre said "I did not mean to drown the lad; I threw him over in a bit of a joke"—Murphy said "I can call witnesses to prove that I never carry a knife"—with some assistance I took them to the Plaistow Police-station, and they were charged.
Cross-examined. Murphy was not quite sober—he said at the police-station "I can call witnesses."
AKOOK ALI (Interpreted). I am a punka-bearer on board the Poonah, which was lying in the Victoria Dock on 21st October—I was employed that day in carrying passengers' luggage on the dummy; Mclntye caught hold of me and put me in the water—I had not said anything to him before that; I have never known him before—I was in the water about five minutes; I can swim a little.
The Prisoner's Statements before the Magistrate. Mclntyre: "I recollect catching hold of the lad, but don't recollect him being in the water; I am sorry for him." Murphy: "I never carried a knife."
NOT GUILTY .
PLEADED GUILTY .
McINTYRE— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MURPHY— Six Months' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Recorder.
SCOTT also PLEADED GUILTY to two other indictments for burglary.
SCOTT**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
WILKS— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. And
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, DECEMBER 15TH, 1879.
In consequence of the serious illness of the short-hand writer who took the notes in some of the cases during the present Session, the publication of those cases will appear in a supplement to the following number.