CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
THIRD SESSION, HELD JANUARY 12TH, 1880.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND, BY
Short-hand Writers to the Court,
THE POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE
REVISED AND EDITED BY
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW.
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, January 12th, 1880, and following days,
BEFORE THE RIGHT HON. SIR FRANCIS WYATT TRUSCOTT , Knt., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; The Hon. Sir HENRY MANISTY, Knt., one of the Justices of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice; The Hon. Sir HENRY CHARLE LOPES , Knt., one of the Justice of the Common Pleas Division of the High Court of Justice; THOMAS QUESTED FINNIS, Esq., WILLIAM LAWRENCE , Esq., Sir BENJAMIN SAMUEL PHILLIPS , Knt., Sir THOMAS WHITE , Knt., Sir THOMAS SCAMBLER OWDEN, Knt., and Sir CHARLES WHETHAM, Knt., Aldermen of the said City; Sir THOMAS CHAMBERS , Knt., Q.C., M.P., Recorder of the said City; JAMES FIGGINS Esq., SIMEON CHARLES HADLEY , Esq., and EDGAR BREFFIT, Esq., other of the Alderman of the said city; WILLIAM THOMAS CHARLEY , 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 Justice of Oyer and Terminer and General Goal Delivery of Newgate, holdine for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
HENRY KELLY BAYLEY, Esq.,
HENRY HOMEWOOD CRAWFORD, Esq.,
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
TRUSCOTT, MAYOR. THIRD SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—an obelisk (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday and Tuesday, January 12th and 13th, 1880.
Before Mr. Recorder.
HONDSON STANLEY . I live at 26, Claremont Square, Islington—I am a Theatrical manager—I have held appointments as manager at Convent Garden Theatre, assistant manager to Mr. Charles Rice, manager to Mr. Charles Hengler, of Hengler's Circus, and Newsom's Circus, and I have also been An actor at the Adelphi, the Olmpic, and the Lyceum—I was two years with Mr. Fechter at the lyceum—I have also acted at the Opers Comique—Altogether I have been associated with the theatrical profession about 12 or 13 years—in October last year I arranged to get up a dramatic ball—a great number of ladies in the theatrical profession that I knew asked me to get up a ball—I arranged that it should take place at the Cannon Street Hotel, of which Mr. Rand is the manager—this is one of the tickets I had printed for the purpose of advertising this ball. (Read: "Great Hall, Cannon Street Hotel.—Mr. Hodson Stauley, at the request of numerous friends in The theatrical profession, has arranged to give a grand dramatic full and fancy Dress ball at the above hall on 28th October. A full quadrille band of the Orleans Club. Ladies' tickets half a guinces. Dancing to commence at 11.") For the purpose of selling the tickets I left some at Olliver's, in Bond Street, some at Lacon and Ollier's, Austin's at St. James's Hall, Bubb's Library, in Bond Street, and Hayes's at the Royal Exchange—all those Different offices undertook to sell these tickets—I gave instructions to each office not to sell them to ladies, if a gentleman wanted a ticket for a lady he could let him have them, as the gentleman would be guarantee to the lady's respectability—I have an office in Regent Street—I left tickets there for sale with the housekeeper—she was not to sell tickets to ladies—I took precauytions to prevent improper characters coming to the ball—hearing that some questionable characters might attempt to get in I engaged a pensioned superintendent of police named Limeburn, who was stationed at the door, and who was four years manager of the auditorium at the Alhambra, and
Therefore would be well acquainted with nearly all the questionable characters in London—he was stationed at the door to stop any person he might know—he with other witnesses was subpœnaed, and was here last Session—unfortunately he is not here today, nor are the gentlemen from the offices, or Mr. Villiers, Mr. Sibbald, and others who were here last Session—prior to the ball I went to the office of Mr. Ledger, who I have known for years—I sent up my name, and was requested to walk up—when I went into his room he said "What can I do for you?"—I said "I am going to have a ball, which I think will be a great success, and I want you to do me a good turn"—I handed him a gentleman's ticket, and he read it—he admired very much the way it was got up, and said "I can't come alone, can you spare me another"—I said "Certainly, with pleasure," and I gave him another—nothing further passed—he showed me a photograph of Cetewayo that he had had sent him—I did not see him again till the night of the ball—I was present at the ball the whole evening—it commenced at 11 o'clock—Limeburn was at the door in the corridor—there were 315 people at the ball—refreshments were served there—they were not included in the half-guinea—there were about 100 ladies, and the rest gentlemen—I saw the defendant there; he came with a gentleman; I don't know his name—I saw him with Mr. Clement Scott, but I don't know whether he entered with him—I did not see everything that went on; I was in and out of the room—as far as I know there was nothing in the nature of indecency or disorder during any part of the evening—there was no women there whom I recognised or had reason to believe belonged to the demi-monde—the dresses were of a decent character—there were very few costumes—they did not remind me of Zulu photographs—I saw the defendant in the ball-room shortly before supper—he congratulated me on the success of the ball—he said "You have a very nice gathering here, and I should think it would pay"—I then asked him if he would take the chair at the supper—the supper was an extra expense—he said "No, there are a great many in the room better calculated to take the chair then I am; I should advise you to ask Mr. Villiers"—Mr. Villiers is the proprieter of the Canterbury and the London Pavilion—he did not take the chair; I did—there were members of the theatrical profession attending the ball, gentlemen and ladies—the band from the Orelans Club were there, Mr. Sibbald being the conductor—after the ball I saw the proprietor of the Cannon Street Hotel and had a conversation with him with regard to it—subecquently on 2nd November I had my attention called to a letter in the Era signed "Cannon Ball"—upon reading that I wrote a letter to the editor, the defendant—I delivered it myself at the office in Wellington Street—I looked for that letter in the subsequent number of the Era—I did not find it, or any reference to it—I afterwards saw the articles on 2nd and 9th November in the Era—I bought these tow copies myself at the office—there is a letter signed "A Member of the Junior United Service Club," and underneath is an editorial comment upon it in the same paper—in the paper of 2nd November there isa comment on the ball under the head of "Gossip." (The letter signed "Cannon Ball," and the articles containing the alleged libel, were read. In substance they described the ball as an orgin discreditable to the promoters, attended by "painted harlots," and as being calculated to bring the dramatic profession into derision and contempt.)
Cross-examined. 315 tickets were not sold; over 200 were; I can't
tell you with accuracy; more than 220—I can't say whether 250 were; between 220 and 250 were sold—about 18 or 20 were sold by Olivier's about the same number by Lacon, about 12 or 16 by Austin, about 8 or 10 by Bubb's and something like 20 or over by Hayes; that would be about 16—I sold a great many myself, and I think 37l. was taken at the door—I sent some tickets to Mitchell's for sale—I did not mention that, because I had a communication from a gentleman who had applied at Mitchell's for tickets, and they said they had not got any—it is not a fact that Mitchell's returned the tickets and refused to sell them, giving as a reason the character of the women who applied for the—that comes to my ears for the first time to-day—it is a fact that they returned them—they said they had rather not sell them—they did not give me any reason—I allowed 10 per cent—I did not ask Mitchell's the reason why they refused to sell them, because I went in in a lage—I had a letter from a gentleman living in Queen Anne's Mansions—I have not got the letter with me—he is not here—he was subpœnaed on the last occasion—he had applied for a ticket, and the clerk told him I had put Mr. Mitchell's name down without asking his permission—I paid 14 guineas for the room at the Cannon Street Hotel—the supper was 4s. or 4s. 6d., wine and spirits were extra—I made rather a good thing of it—I don't know that it was in the interests of the profession; it was partly in my own interest, not entirely, but substantially, yes—the profits all went into my own pocket—there was no contribution to any dramatic fund for the relief of poor and distressed players—I sold the bulk of the tickets to gentlemen I am acquainted with—I sent them in envelopes to gentlemen I am acquainted with; having been acting-manager at three places in London, I know a great may people who are under obligation to me, that I have given orders to; and when I have a benefit, or anything of that sort, I should send them tickets; I looked on this as a benefit—there were a few tickets on sale at the Navel and Military Club in Piecadilly, Lord Palmerston's old house—the hall-porter there had charge of them—I was to allow him 10 per cent commission, and I did so—I have not yet been to see how many tickets he sold—I have not got a running account with him—one of the waiters at the London Pavilion sold some—that is place frequented both by ladies and gentlemen—I did not sell any at Evans's—I did not put any of my bills on the tables at Evans's—I swear that I did not—I caused them to be put there—I left some of these circulars with Newby, the head-waiter, to pace on the tables for me—I should not think of being my own bill-distributor, that would be decidedly unbecoming the dignity of the profession—he had no commission—I asked him to oldige me as a customer there—ladies do go there, or did go there; not for some considerable time though, I believe—at this ball thore were no members of the demimonde that I am aware of, not that I personally knew—my knowledge in that direction of socieity is not extensive, not more so than most people's I should think—I don't think there were many of that class there, or I should have had my attention called; there might be many—the waiters at Evans's gad no tickets to sell, so I could not have paid them for selling any—they have not said to me "We have sold a ticket to Mrs. So-and-so," nor have I paid them two shillings for doing so; that has happened at a former ball, not at this ball—I have not sold tickets at Evan's through the instrumenttality of Toome and Slack and paid them for selling them; that I swear, in no case—in my former ball Newby sold them—he was the only one I paid
commission to—I don't know whether Newby sold any tickets in this case—I am under the impression that I did not give him any tickets for this ball—yes; he sold five gentlemen's tickets, I had forgotten it—gentleman's tickets only—"gentlemen's tickets" is marked on them—I did not sell or cause any to be sold to women there; I say that positively; no ladies' tickets whatever—ladies' tickets were not sold at the doors—I had sent invites to I suppose 120 or 130 ladies in the profession gratuitously, without any charge; that was to be the attraction of the evening—ladies that I knew and ladies that I did not know—to Misses Marie Williams, Emily Denman, Miss Rose Fleury, the two Misses St. George, Madame Azelle, Ada premier danseuse at the Canterbury—those are the most distinguished I can mention—that is a fair specimen of the bulk—there was Mdlle. Rosa, once a premier danseuse at the Alhambra—the ballet was very strong at the ball—they are very fond of dancing—there was also Miss Ash, and numerous others, mostly chorus singers—no more actresses—my name has always been Stanley since I have been in the profession; it has not always been Stanley—my name is C. H. Hodson—I took the name of Stanley for family reasons—my relations objected to my being in the profession at all—I was formerly a solicitor's clerk—at one time I was a comic singer—I sang comic songs—my name was then Harry Don—my first venture in organising theatrical parties was at the Theatre Royal, Colchester—I was lessee of it—I engaged Charles Mathews, a very unfortunate speculation for me—I lost a great deal of money—it was fortunate for Mr. Mathews—he always got his money; he always took good care to have it—I organised a concert to be given at Tunbridge Wells and Sittingbourne last December twelve months—Madame Brooke, Mr. Cheshire, the harpist, Mrs. Cheshire, and Mr. Sidney were among the troupe—I was the manager—I engaged them at a salary—I took the money at the door—I always do when I embark in any undertaking—I had a handbag with me—the members of the Company very unreasonably requested me to give them some money before they would go on the stage—the thing did not collapse in consequence of any refusal to give them anything—they took it in their own hands—I did not before that bolt to the reilway station; it was after that that they took it into their own hands—I was followed to the railway station by the indignant husband of one of the ladies—I was not found behind the door of one of the out-houses at the station—I was waiting for the train on the platform, not behind the door—the gentleman gave me into custody as he alleged for swindling him and his wife—I was not taken to the police-station—the officer refused to take me, and I went off by the train in question—at that time I was a member of the Junior Garrick Club—that is a club that is supposed to have some representatives of the dramatic profession among its members—after the incident at Tunbridge Wells I was expelled from the club—one of the members of the company I took down was a member of the club, and he brought it before the committee—I can explain the whole of the occurrence—I gave instructions to the booksellers not to sell tickets to ladies, and I myself did not sell tickets to ladies—I supposed that the ladies to whom I had sent invites would attend, that was the only thing I intended—I expected that a few of the gentlemen would bring ladies, their wives or their sweethearts—I decidedly thought that probable—I thought that the members of the Naval and Military Club would bring their wives or sweethearts with them; ladies in their own condition
of life—I mean to say that decidedly, and so with those who bought tickets at Lacon and Ollier's and the other whose names have been mentioned; that was my idea—I think that idea was realised—the gentlemen of the Naval and Military Club brought ladies with them—I did not ask them for their certificates; I took it on trust; you are obliged to—I has only given one ball before—I have given two before—I am quite sure only two—I did give, or attempt to give, a theatrical entertainment at Tunbridge Wells at Christmas about five years ago; the company that I engaged unfortunately, I believe, were not what they should have been; they did not come up to the expectation of the audience; I engaged artists, and if they did not turn out what they professed to be it was not my fault; there was no incident on that occasion about a money bag—I don't know that the police were called in; it might have occurred when I was absent—I went in the mail cart from Tunbridge Wells to get to Tunbridge to get to Brighton; there was no train—the proprietor of the hall spoke to a friend of his, the postmaster, and got me a seat on the mail cart—that must have been about 9 o'clock—the entertainment commenced at 9 o'clock; I was entrepreneur—the house was full; there was no more chance of any money coming in, and I wanted to get to town—I did not leave the money behind me, not likely—I took that with me in the mail cart—it paid very well—I gave a ball at the Assembly Rooms at 29, Vauxhall Bridge Road last year—I cannot exactly fix the date—I don't know whether that was attended by the Elite of society—it was not a dramatic ball; it was not a ball given at the request of numerous friends of the theatrical profession; that was my own private spec for my own benefit—I don't know whether it was largely attended by the members of the demi-monde, it might have been—I know Mr. Best—I can't swear that the women who attended were principally members of the demi-monde; they might have been; I don't know; some of them might have been—I have a doubt; there may have been some unquestionably—my first ball was at the Freemasons' Tavern—Mr. Best is the proprietor—it was a dramatic benefit ball: for my own benefit; very much resembling the ball in Cannon Street—I did not take the same means of selling tickets for that ball that I took with reference to the Cannon Street ball—I took much more precaution at Cannon Street; that precaution was urged upon me by my previous experience—the Freemasons' ball was not wholly satisfactory—it was not such a very great success in point of money—there was a fair trade profit—some of the demi-monde got in there; that was my first experience in giving a ball, and I did not know how to work it, I had been advised that if I went to the Freemasons' Tavern and one or two previous balls I might find ladies there to whom I could give complimentary admissions, I went to two balls there, and I gave my complimentary admissions away to ladies I saw in the room, and a great number of them happened to turn out members of the demi-monde—I worked my ball at the Freemasons' from the Freemasons—I mean that I went to previous balls at the Freemasons' Tavern before my ball took place—I distributed my complimentary admissions to ladies I saw there, presuming they were fit to come to my ball, but a great number of them happened to turn out members of the demi-monde, so I took the precaution at Cannon Street that nothing of the kind should occur again—my complimentary admissions were distributed at the Freemasons' ball for other balls to ladies whom I had seen before, but whose names I did not know and did not ask, whose profession
I did not know and did not ask; I was taken by their appearance as likely to be attractive features at the dramatic ball; there is generally a dearth of ladies at balls—there was a large sale of tickets in that case just as there was in Cannon Strect—Mr. Best did not, in consequence of the number of ladies of that class that were let in the room, refuse to allow any more to come in; he closed the doors, but he did not give that as a reason; he gave me no reason—I had agreed to pay ten guineas—I refused to pay when he closed the doors—I asked him what the meaning of it was, but he gave me no reason, and afterwards when I went to settle with him I asked him to justify his conduct, and he said "I don't choose to justify my conduct in the least"—I heard from friends of mine that he said he did not like the people that were coming in, that they were prostitutes; they were ladies that I had met there before—I sold tickets for that ball at Evans's and also for the Assembly ball in Vauxhall Bridge Road, not always to gentlemen on those occasions—I sold to ladies at Evans's, and to gentlemen; I did not sell them, the head waiter did; I supplied them, and gave him 2s. a ticket—I did not give 2s. to any one who sold one, only to the head waiter—I can mention names of other gentlemen besides Mr. Villiers who were at this ball; Mr. Charles Tritton, who holds a very good position at the Criterion Theatre as an actor; Mr. Goldsworthy, a member of Mr. Wyndham's Pink Dominoes Company; Mr. Charles Harris, stage manager of Covent Garden and the Adelphi—I don't know whether he is here; I subpœnaed him on the last occasion—Mr. Arthur Roberts, one of the principal comic vocalists; he is playing the principal part in the pantomime at Brighton; there were no very great stars there; I cannot mention other names that you would recognise—I engaged the room of Mr. Rand; he is the manager there—I heard that he was advised that the ball was likely to be of a questionable character; that it was going to be attended by people of the class alluded to—I might have told him that Messrs. Mitchell were selling tickets for me; at that time they had not refused to sell them; I swear that—I said I had sent invites to Messrs. James and Thorne, "Our Boys," and no doubt they would attend—I said I expected they would attend—I had no reason for saying so except that I had sent them tickets—Mr. Rand did not after that object to let me the use of the ball-room—he referred me to the solicitor of the company, Mr. Mortimer—I told him I had sent Mr. Hollingshead, of the Gaiety, a ticket—I did not say he would be at the ball; I could not vouch that he would—I said I expected he would—I had no reason to say so except that I had sent him a ticket—he kept the ticket, therefore I made sure that he would come—he subsequently returned it—I have said there were about 100 ladies present; that is a guess; there might have been more or there might have been less—I had nothing to do with the fancy dresses—people came in what dresses they chose—one was a naval officer that "Cannon Ball" so animadverted on—it was a very correct dress—there were costumes, but I really cannot describe them—there were two ladies as sailors—there were two romps, I believe; I mean with skipping-ropes and short frocks; you always see them at a fancy ball—there were people in fancy costumes, but I was too much taken up in seeing that everything was going on properly to notice the dresses—one of the hotel officials was cash-taker at the door—I don't know his name or whether he is here; he was not here last Session—Mr. Rand placed him there—the great majority of the women there were certainly not of the class you have been talking
about; that I swear positively—from their appearance I should not imagine they were—they must have been either ladies in the profession—I sent invites to ladies in the profession, and if they gave them away I was not to know who they were—there were five librarians who had tickets, and the whole they sold were only four ladies' tickets each—of the 56 sold all were gentlemen's tickets but 20—I will pledge my oath that to the best of my opinion the majority of the women at the ball were properly conducted women, women of good character, and they were mostly ladies of the profession.
Re-examined. I don't know all the faces of wives with husbands who come to a ball, and am not able to form any judgment upon sweethearts, nor the exact characters of the men and women who attend theatrical entertainments as audience—I am not aware that ladies of the demi-monde come to my performances, and had I been aware of it I could not prevent it unless their conduct was outrageous—my original mane was Hodson, and I was formerly a solicitor's clerk—afterwards I became an actor and took to comic singing, and I was a walking gentleman and light comedian, the character of which is a young gentleman in an ordinary comedy who makes love to one of the prettiest young ladies—that was the department I took, not high tragedy—a great many actors think it an ascent in the profession to take to comic singing, they make more money—the Era notices music halls—I had a very favourable notice in the Era—I have only last year got up a ball, I have had various entertainments—I have had Mackney and Arthur Sketchley and various things; that was after I left acting—I have known Mr. Ledger some years, and have been in communication with him a great number of times—I have had numerous paragraphs in the Era to obtain engagements, and am able to say that Mr. Ledger was acquainted with my career very well indeed—I called upon him in reference to this ball, and was sent up into his private room, I gave him a ticket for himself and somebody else, and also sent tickets to Messrs. Thorne and James and other—the first entertainment I gave was with Charles Mathews, at the Theatre Royal, Colchester—it was a failure—then about the Tunbridge affair: Mr. Sydney, of the Junior Garrick Club, asked me if I could take himself, Mr. John Cheshire, and Madame Brooke out at Christmas—I wrote to Tunbridge Wells, and advertised a concert for Boxing Day, but could not engage a room, and the librarian advised me not to come—in consequence of that we went the next day to Sittingbourne, and when the concert was about to commence Madame Brooke's husband and Mr. Sydney came to me and said "We want out money"—I said "It is a very bad house, there is not the money in"—I told him I would give it him to-morrow at the club, being a fellow-member, and he said "Oh, dear, no; we are not going to do that sort of thing"—then I said "I will return the money to the audience," upon which Mr. Brooke said "We will take the money if you will hand over what is in the house and let us take what comes in, and we will go on with the performance"—I acquiesced, and having no further duties I went to the station—Mr. Brooke came after me and said "You are not going away like that; we want some more money"—I said "You cannot have it; Mr. Sydney shall have it to-morrow"—upon that they called a constable, and he refused to take me in custody, and I went away in the train—Mr. Sydney sent to the secretary of the club, and I attended—the committee said "If you choose to pay the money no further notice will be taken"—I
declined to do so and left—I was not expelled—a day or two after I had a letter from the secretary saying they were very sorry I was no longer a member of the club—I was ready at the place where the concert was to have returned the money to the audience—five or six years since I had a troupe of Christy's at Tunbridge—I really don't know what happened, but I went away in the mail-cart; there was no complaint made in connection with that—there were about 300 persons at this ball, and I was informed that about 25l. was realised in the drinking department, but there was nothing approaching drunkenness going on in the rooms.
ROBERT EDWARD VILLIERS . I have been connected with the theatrical profession for 40 years—I was at the Haymarket seven years performing in tragedy, light comedy, and walking gentleman—Mrs. Villiers and I carry on the entertainments at the Royal Hotel Assembly Rooms, Margate; also dances every evening during the summer season; they are admitted to be most respectable, and have had the criticism of the Times, Daily Telegraph, and Standard—I have opened the Canterbury, and latterly the London Pavilion, and in these different undertakings I have endeavoured to keep the audience respectable—I have known Mr. Hodson Stanley about seven years—he sent me a ticket for this ball and I went to it, to the best of my recollection I arrived there about 11.45, and I think there was about 150 people dancing then; they were dancing most properly—I remained till 3.45—I saw Mr. Ledger there and spoke to him; I think it was then about 1 o'clock or 1.30, it is difficult to be positive to time—he said "How do you do? you have come here," and I don't think he said anything more the first time—I think I saw him again after the supper; no, pardon me, it was before; Mr. Stanley asked me to take the chair, being the oldest dramatic person present, and I said to Mr. Ledger "I have been asked to take the chair, but I don't see any necessity, because they surely don't require speeches as they come here for dancing"—Mr. Ledger said "Oh! I certainly should not take it if I were you"—he gave no reason—I did not take the chair—I told Mr. Stanley it would be unadvisable for any public man to take the chair, because it would only entail a lot of speechifying, which was not necessary at a public ball; and I don't know whether it was taken, I did not observe—at any rate nobody spoke as chairman—I remained after the supper, but did not notice anything unusual—I have attended many balls, and I may say that the impression I formed was that it was most orderly and respectable as far as a public ball would go—I did not notice any painted harlots, but I certainly noticed seven or eight or what we politely call the demi-monde, but I see them in all assemblies that I go to; there was nothing in their demeanour or manner that was insulting or offensive—the whole thing was thoroughly well conducted.
Cross-examined. I did not go alone to this ball—Mrs. Frederici and a friend of hers accompanied me—I don't know who she was, but I believe she told me that she would be going to Gatti's, at Covent Garden, as an extra—an extra is a lady who has no particular talent for acting or dancing, and may be made captain of a regiment of imaginary soldiers—on leaving the ball I saw one lady home in a brougham, and I think I saw Mrs. Frederici home—her husband was not there; he had recently been suffering from a peculiar state, and was rather demented; he had enlisted in the 16th Lancers, and is now bought off I believe—I had known him nine months; he was in my company under the name of Butler; the last time I saw him
was about four months age—I did not dance with the ladies I accompanied to the ball—I danced with Miss Wilson and her eldest sister—I rent the London Pavilion, it is a music hall, and ladies of the demi-monde attend theres, not largely—since Evans's lost its singing licence I should say the Aquarium has been the general resort for them—I take overy means of Preventing it—I do not divide that class of support with the Aquarium—Suppers are not served at the Pavilion, refreshments are, and at all the bars And in every department we don't allow ladies to be served—I allow refreshments to be served in the private boxes; that is a source from which I derive profit.
Re-examined. I do all I can to make the place answer and carry it on respecdly—I do not encourage the presence of women of the town at my places of entertainment—I adopt the most stringent rules to prevent it, but if they are brough with gentlemen it is impossible to keep them out; as a rule they behave themselves—Medame Frederici's husband is an excellent singer—there is not the slightest ground for imputing any impropriety in the nature of my acquaintance with Mrs. Frederici that is wanted to be suggested.
By MR. RUSSELL. When I saw Mr. Ledger at the ball I did not say "If you are taking any notice of this ball, pray don't mention my name as being here," there is no foundation for saying it—it was perfectly immaterial to me whether my name was mentioned or not—I made no such remark to Mr. Ledger—if the ball had been as is represented I shold not have remained, I should have left before the end; I should not have appealed to Mr. Ledger to have left my name out.
Witnesses for the Defence.
ANNIE LAWLER . I was at this ball—I am not in any way connected with the theatrical profession—I did not see any female friends of mine there to my knowledge—I am in the habit of receiving visits from one gentleman.
Cross-examined. I went to the ball because I thought it was a public ball—I paid for my ticket at the door—Mr. Standly did not know anything of me previously, to my Knowledge; I did not know him—I am under the protection of a gentleman—there is no ground for treating me as a common prostitute; perhaps previous to now they might have done so—I was not dressed in any indecent fashion—I am not "a painted harlot," perhaps I don't understand the term—I did not by act or deed commit the slightest indecency or impropriety—I don't know Mr. Ledge—I went to the ball alone and returned alone—I believe I had one waltz—I went there for the amusement of the evening, certainly not with a view to prostitution—I have been to several public balls, and sometimes to the opera, when I am taken there—I go to the different theatres, sometimes in the boxes, sometimes in the stalls—I have never been refused admission to any of the theatres or any of the public balls—I have not been to any ball at Willis's rooms.
Re-examined. I am sometimes called "The Captain" in a lark—I believe I have been known by that name for some years.
MRS. MAITLAND. I live in the neighbourhood of Pimlico—I am not a Member of the theatrical profession, and never have been—I attended the ball in question, accompanied by a gentleman in the theatrical profession—he did not pay for my ticket, I got it at Olliver's, in Bond Street—I went there with a lady friend to get it—I left the ball alone—I wore a sailor's costume, the ordinary sailor's dress; I did not wear a hat—I am a lodger,
no other ladies lodge in the house—I saw one or two of my friends at the ball—I am now living under the protection of a gentleman, and was at the time of the ball—I formerly received visits from gentlemen—I go to the Pavilion now and then; I have never been to the Canterbury Hall—I usually go to the Pavilion with my friend, whose protection I am living under—I very seldom go alone: sometimes with a lady friend, and without a gentleman—I have never been refused admittance under those circumstances.
Cross-examined. I have not been in the habit of frequenting the Pavillion till the last week—I have been at other balls, and to most of the theatres in London—I have never been refused at any theatre.
MRS. HOLROYD. I attended this ball—I am not connected with the Theatrical profession, and have never been—my ticket was bought by the Gentleman that took me there—I sometimes go to the Pavilion, never alone, With a gentleman—I receive the visits of one gentleman at present; it has not always been so.
Cross-examined. I have always been under the protection of one gentleman, and have gone out with him—I was served with a subpoena to come here—I did not conduct myself with any indecency at this ball—I was in ordinary evening dress—I left alone, before the gentleman who took me there.
MRS. SAMUELS. I attended this ball—I bought my ticket at Ollivier's, in Bond Street—I had no difficulty in getting it—I went to the ball alone—I saw friends there, both ladies and gentlemen; a dozen, or perhaps more—I receive the visits of gentlemen—I am not connected with the theatrical profession—I was dressed as a sailor.
Cross-examined. It was a public ball, where you go in full and fancy dress, and I thought I might go in what dress I thought proper—I did not commit any act of indecency or see any—I was admitted at the opera.
MRS. GREY. I was at this ball—I went with two gentlemen; one of them bought my ticket—I did not ask him where he got it—I am not connected with the theatrical profession.
Cross-examined. I have been subpœnaed—I don't know who found me out—I was dressed in plain evening dress, made high in the neck—I was not painted; I don't use it—I did not see or commit any acts of indecency or impropriety—I did nothing but dance—I went for that purpose alone.
MRS. THORN. I was at this ball—I had my ticket sent me; not by Mr. Stanley—I asked him for one, but he would not give it me—I think it was at the Pavilion I asked him—I heard that he was selling tickets there—I had my ticket sent me by a gentleman; he sent two, one for a lady friend, and we went with two gentlemen—I am not connected with the theatrical profession.
Cross-examined. I was in a box at the Pavilion about a fortnight before the ball—Mr. Stanley did not give me any reason for refusing to sell me a ticket; he told me that no ladies would be there—I understood his reason for refusing to be in consequence of what he thought was my profession.
Re-examined. I saw Mr. Stanley at the ball—he did not ask me to dance with him—I did not address him or he me—I knew by sight, not by name.
—my ticket was sent me by a gentleman—I am not connected with the theatrical profession—I went in fancy drss; a Turkish dress, and my friend also.
Cross-examined. I noticed no impropriety in the room.
MRS. NELSON. I attended this ball—I had a ticket sent me by a gentleman, and went with him—I was in fancy costume, as Carmen from the opers.
FRANK STARN . I was a waiter at Evans's—I left this day week—I was a waiter there in October, November, and December last year—I know Mr. Hodson Stanley by coming freguently to Evans's, I should say nearly every night, six weeks before the ball—he had with him some of these printed programmes—he distributed them about the tables—I saw him do that—he did it sometimes nightly, and then it was stopped, and the head waiter gave us out these circulars himself to put round—after a certain time he did not put them round himself—there was another ball being advertised, not connected with Mr. Stanley, and they said "Don't allow any of those other circulars to be put round, only Mr. Stanley's"—the head waiter said that other circulars part of the room—Evan's licence has been discontinued—there was a large attendance of women at Evans's about that time, before the ball—they used to sit at the tables, but they were partitioned off—there was only one part allowed for the women, and the other end of the room was for gentlemen only—I have seen these bills put on the parts where the gentlemen sat and where the ladies sat—I have not seen the prosecutor sell tickets there himself—I don't know whether any tickets were sold for this ball or not; I think the head know whether any tickets were sold for this ball or not; I ence to other balls—this ball was advertised in the same way as others.
WILLIAM HENRY TOOME . I was a waiter at Evans's—I have seen Mr. Stanley there for some time, frequenting the place of an evening—I have hard the evidence of the last witness—I believe it to be correct—I have not seen Mr. Stanley himself distribute bills; I have seen them lying on the tables the greater part of the evening—I did not see them actually placed there.
HENRY IRVING . I have known Mr. Ledger about 15 or 16 years—his paper, the Era, is the recognised organ of the dramatic profession, devoting itself entirely to that branch of art—I should call it a representative paper—his character is that of a man strictly honourable, honest, and upright, I should call him a gentleman; that is the opinion entertained of him by everybody that I know—I signed a paper in common with 200 and odd members of the profession in reference to this case—I do not know any respectable person in the profession who was in any way connected with this ball.
Cross-examined. If I were asked the same question about a vast number of other balls, I don't know that I should give the same answer, it would depend. upon where they were—I know nothing of this ball—there are thousands of balls that I know nothing about—I have read the alleged libel from beginnig to end—all I know about this ball is from what I read in the Era; all I know is, that it was not at all connected with the theatrical profession—no one I know in the profession was connected with it; they would not be—what I thought on reading the article was that it was not severe enough, because I think it was infamous to connect such a calling as ours
with anything so disgraceful—a great many of the public, who know no better, believe what they read, therefore I think it a most mischievous thing towards us all, not perhaps by friends, but by outside people—it would not affect us among our friends, but strangers, country places away from London might be prejudiced, and might imagine the advertisement of a ball of this description to be a legitimate one—I should not call young ladies of the ballet members of the profession.
CHARLES WARNER . I have heard what Mr. Irving has said as to the estimation in which Mr. Ledger is held, and agree with it perfectly—I know of no one connected with the theatrical profession who had anything to do with this ball—I do not know of any members of the dramatic profession who had anything to do with it—I believe my manager, Mr. Gooch, was offered a tricket, and he certainly told me that he should not go to such a place.
Cross-examined. The prosecutor has acted with me about three or four weeks at the Opera Comique—they did not pay the salaries, and I refused to act—he had nothing to do with that—that was about eight years ago.
HORACE WIGAN . I have heard the statement of Mr. Irving and Mr. Warner as to the estimation in which Mr. Ledger has been held—I entirely agree with it—I do not know one member of the dramatic profession who had anything to do with this ball.
Cross-examined. The prosecutor has played at theatre—I was manger of the Olympic Theatre at the time—I do not know that there are many balls given in London which the humbler branches of the theatrical professsion attend—I have heard of it.
Witnesses in Reply.
STEPHEN COLEMAN . I have a large experience in public entertainments in London—I have been manager of the Aquarium and the Aquarium Theatre—I went to this ball; I paid at the door—I should not call it a dramatic ball; it was largely attended by women of the demi-mode.
Cross-examined. The Aquarium is the place that has been unfairly described in the course of the case.
EDWARD HOWARD RAND . I am the manager of the Cannon Street Hotel at which this ball was held—Mr. Stanley came to me in September last with a view of engaging the room—he produced to me a card with "Hodson Stanley, Junior Garrrick Club" on it—I did not know at that time that he had been expelled from that club—I have not got the card now—I engaged to let him the room—he represented it to be a dramatic ball—after I had to let him the room I received a communication giving me a warning on the subject, in consequence of which I wrote to Mr. Stanley—I afterwards saw him, and referred him to my solicitor—he afterwards gave me the going to attend the ball, Messrs. Gatti, James, and Thorne, Mr. Willing, the advertising agent; I think that is all I necessary for me to see Mr. Stanley again—up to that time I did not know that he was not a member of the Junior Garrick Club; I knew before I heard it yesterday in Court that he had been expelled; I knew it before this case came on, but not till after what a dramatic ball is—I have no means of saying whether it was a ball largely attended by women of the demi-monde class—I understood that 37l. or 38l. was taken for tickets at the door.
Cross-examined. I am certain that "Junior Garrick Club" was on the card; it was not erased—I am positive that there not line across it.
CLEMENT SCOTT . I am a dramatic critic and author; my profession is that of literature; I have pursued that profession for some 20 years—Mr. Ledger consulted me about this ball, and I attended it at his request—I had Personal objection to going there myself, but he said I might be doing some good to the dramatic profession if I went there and reviewed it candidly, and gave a description—I attended, and I wrote almost all the letter singed "Cannon Ball;" it was altered editorially when it went in; there were one or two rather important alterations—I never mentioned Mr. Hodson Stanley's name at all; I thought it better to treat the fact generally; his name was put in afterwards—there was no other material alteration—I had written it as a general criticism without mentioning the name, and editorially it was altered so as to appear that Mr. Hodson Stanley gave the ball—this is the letter, there was no editorial comment by me—in writing that letter I was not animated by anything but a desire to give a correct account of what I saw—it is a perfectly accurate account of what I saw—a women there was pointed out to me as Mrs. Jeffreys, of Church Street, a notorious procuress; she was holding a semi-levy of young men and young women.
Cross-examined. I did not know her—I was told about her when I entered the room—I cannot tell you who told me, whether his veracity was to be relied upon I cannot tell—this is my writing, "There was put into my had about a week ago a card bearing the following invitation"—I meant by that that Mr. Ledger gave it to me—by the allusion to "Photographed Zulus," I meant that there had been some little badinage about the Zulus in the City, and that as this ball was held in the City it might be inquired into; it was simple badinage—I did not intend to imply that there were naked figured, I meant that the Lord Mayor would have an opportunity of seeing what was being carried on in the City.
WILLIAM LIMEDURN (Examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE). I am a superannuated inspector of the Metropolitan Police—I have retired with a pension—I was requested to attend this ball, and did so—I was down at the front door till 2o'clock in the morning; then I went upstairs—I was there the most of the time then—there was no disturbance or disorder whatever—I saw no drunkenness at all—I saw one gentlemen about 1o'clock in the morning the worse for drink; that was all the drunkenness I saw.
Cross-examined. I was for four years superintendent at the auditorium at the Alhambra—I can't tell how many of the 74 persons who were admitted by paying for their tickets at the door were women—there might be 50—I am not certain; I do not know Mrs. Jeffreys, of Church Street, by name—I may know her by sight—that is not in the division I belong to; it is in the D division—no lady was pointed out to me that I remember.
Re-examined. I saw no lady who conducted herself with any indecency or impropriety.
NOT GUILTY .
The jury added, "The criticism was severe but honest."
MR. ISAACSON Prosecuted.
GRORGE BUNDY . I am anapprentice to Mr. Thomas Beauchamp, a carpenter and bricklayer, of Ealing Lane—on 31st october, about 5.30, I saw my stock and center-bit safe in the shop—I missed them at 6 o'clock next morning—I saw them at the station on 3rd November—they are marked with my name—I hadlocked up the shop on the 31st and put the key in Mr. Beauchamp's office.
THOMAS BEAUCHAMP . I was awoke about 11 o'clock on the night of the 31st October by the barking of my dog—I went down and found the door Of the workshop open and the key in it—I saw light in the shop as I Came down the stairs, and it was turned out—I saw a man jump over the Wall—I can't say who it was—the prisoner has been in my service.
WILLIAM BANNER (Police Sergeant J R 7). On the night of 31st October, About 11.15, I was on duty in the Lower Square, Isleworth, and saw the Prisoner pass the post-office and Dr. Day's house, and go towards the town wall—I followed him, and there lost sight of him—about 10 minutes afterwards from what I heard, I went to the back of the Blue School. And saw the prisnor standing there—as soon as he saw me he ran away—I followed him—he slipped up, and I took him into custody—a bargeman assisted me with him to the station—I searched him there, and found on him this stock and two bits, a box of matches, two pieces of candle, a knife, and two keys and a piece of paper with "Day, Lower Post-office, Middle—Knight, 3 I" and something else on it—that relates to the post-office, Dr. Day's and a jeweller's shop—the prisoner was sent to Holloway prison, and escaped from there on the 22nd.
Prisoner's Defence. I did not steal the tools. I brought them and Honestly paid for them. I was waiting for them. A young man went to Fetch them. I have not the slidhtest doubt he stole them. He has Absconded.
GUILTY . He also PLEADED GUILTY to a pervious conviction in February, 1879.**— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
147. JOHN BROWN (48) PLEADED GUILTY to a burglary in the dwelling-house of Robert Hutchings, and stealing a skirt; also for a burglary in the Dwelling-house of David Weedon, and steling a table-cloth and other Article.— Eighteen Months' Imperisonment. And
NEW COURT—Monday, Jan. 12th, 1880.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
149. MARY ABBEY (52) PLEADED GUILTY ** to feloniously uttering Counterfeit coin after a previous conviction of a like offence; also to Unlawfully having counterfeit coin in her possession with intent to utter it— Five years' penal Servitude.
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and LLOYD Prosecuted.
GEORGE PHIPPEN . I keep the Salisbury Arms, Marylebone—on 17th December, a little before 7, the prisoners came in, and Murphy asked for a Pint of ale and gave me a shilling—I bent it in the tester and said "This is bad; have you any more?"—he said "Yes"—I gave it back to him, and he gave me another—I tried it; it bent and was bad also—I gave them in custody with the second coin—this is it (produced)—the prisoners were taking together, but Sullivan did nothing.
ROBERT GENTRY (Policeman D 142). I was called to the Salisbury Arms, and the prisoners were given into my custody with one bad shilling, And Murphy gave me another and said "I did not know they were bad; We had them given to us for carrying a parcel to Paddington"—Sullivan said "I don't know anything about it; I was standing outside when this man asked me if I would have a drop of beer; I said 'Yes,' and came in with him"—I found 1d. on Murphy and nothing on Sullivan—Murphy said that he lived with his mother at 22, Paradise Street—I went there, and his mother showed me a box, which she said was his. The COURT expressed a doubt as to this being evidence. MR. CRAUFURD therefore called.
JOSEPH GRAMMAR (Police Sergeant). The prisoner lives at 22, Paradise Street, High Street, Marylebone—I have called there and seen him in the House—I do not know which room he occupied, but he told me he lives With his mother—I know he has been living there for some time.
ROBERT GENTRY (Continued). I searched the box, and found in it this convict's licence in the name of William Murphy—it is a conviction of larceny at Durham in October, 1873; sentence, seven years' penal servitude and seven years' police supervision—I had that paper in my hand when I entered the prisoner's room the next morning, and he said "What have you got there, my papers?"—I said "Yes"—he nodded his head, but said nothing.
Cross-examined by Sullivan. I have known you a number of years, and Never knew anything against you.
Murphy's Defence. I received two shillings from a gentleman for a job, And took Sullivan in to give him some drink.
Sullivan's Defence. I did not know the money was bad.
MURPHY— GUILTY **.
He PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Durham in October, 1873.— Eighteen Months'Imprisonment.
SULLIVAN— NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and LLOYD Prosecuted.
ANNIE DOWNING . I am barmaid at the Three Compasses, Cow Crose—on 30th November, about 9 p.m. Harris came in with a man and put down a shilling for a quartern of rum—I gave her 6d. change—the coin was rather dark, and being busy I put it in a compartment of the till by itself—
a few minutes afterwards Inwood came in and had twopennyworth of whisky—she spoke to Harris and the man, and appeared to know them very well—I think the man asked for the whisky, and while I had gone for hot water a shilling was placed on the counter—I took it up and threw it on a cabinet and found it did not ring—I tried it in the tester and it bent—I then ran to the till and got the other shilling, which bent also—the man the ran out without my speaking to him—I sent for the landlord, and the prisoners were given in custody with the shillings.
CAROLINE BRADSHAW . I am barmaid at the Two Blue Posts, Laystall Street, about a quarter of an hour's walk from the Three Compasses—on Saturday night, 30th November, Harris came in with a young man, about 6.5, and shortly afterwards Inwood came in with a man, who called for a Pot of ale and gave me a shilling; I put it into the till and gave him 8d. Change—they seemed to know each other, they all four drank of the ale—the same man then called for a quartern of rum, which came to 5d., and gave me another shilling, and I gave him 7d. change; they all four drank of the rum, and the same man called for another quartern and again paid with a shilling; I found it was bad and showed it to another barmaid, who broke it and gave it back to him, and asked him if it was one of his own make—he said "No," and paid with a good sixpence—they all four went away Together—I was too busy to notice whether the other coins were bad, but I saw Miss Farnsworth find two more bad shillings in the till.
ARABELLA FARNSWOTTH . I am the landlady's sister—on 30th November, Between 6 and 7 o'clock, the last witness brought me a shilling; I tried it in the tester and broke it in two pieces—I said to a man there "Is this one of your own making?"—he said "I know where I took it"—I saw the two prisoners and two men together, and saw them all four leave together—I then examined the till and found two more bad shillings—there were other shillings in the till—they bent slightly in the tester—I gave them to Mr. Allaway.
WILLIAM ALLAWAY . I keep the Blue Posts—Harris came in just as I went out—I don't think Inwood was there then—I came back some time after the prisoner had left, and the last witness handed me two bad shillings, which I gave to the constable—the prisoners were placed with others at the station and I picked out Harris.
HENRY DOUGHTY (Policeman G 298). On 30th November the prisoners Were given into my custody at the Three Compasses—Harris said "I went Into the Three Compasses with a man, and the prisoner Inwood; Inwood Gave me 3s. to pay for drink, and I did not know whether they were good or bad"—I told Inwood I should take her for uttering counterfeit coin; she only laughed—she heard what Harris said—Miss Downing gave me these two bad shillings (produced)—Harris said at the station "I and the Prisoners went into a public-house at the corner of Laystall Street, Mount Pleasant, where we had several drinks, and the man passed two shillings for drink, and the third one the barmaid thought was not good and broke it in two and gave it back to the man, and we all left together"—I received this bad shilling from Elizabeth Cook, and Allaway gave me two bad shillings.
Cross-examined by Harris. You said that you did not know whether' any had money was passed in the house, and that you should tell the whole truth.
ELIZABETH COOK . I am female searcher at Clerkenwell Police station—on 30th November I searched Harris, but found nothing—I found on Inwood 2 1/2 d. in bronze, two good sixpences, and a bad shilling, which I Handed to Doughty—Harris said "It is all through drink I am here; I have Previously been fined a small amount for being drunk, and I had to go to Prison in default, it is the first time I was ever locked up"—Inwood laughed and said "I know I am a bad woman, but it can't be helped." and she asked me to give her the shilling back to get something to eat, but the counterfeit shilling was the only one she had—I told her to come back with me.
The Prisoners' Statements before the Magistrate. Inwood says: "The man gave me the money to call for the drink, and I did not know it was bad."
Harris says: "I met the man in the public-house in Laystall Street. We got into conversation. Inwood offered to take me to a lodging for the night, and they would pay for our lodging and give us something to eat. I did not know the coins were bad, I never looked at them."
The prisoners repeated the same statements in their defence.
GUILTY . INWOOD then PLEADED GUILTY** to a previous conviction of felony.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
HARRIS— Eight Months' Imprisonment.
NEW COURT—Tuesday, January 13th, 1880.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
152. JAMES CLARK (30) PLEADED GUILTY to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Parker with intent to steal, after a previous conviction at this Court in May, 1878— Two Years' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and LLOYD Prosecuted; MR. DOUGLAS METCALFE Defended.
MARY RABE . My father is a baker, of 8, Museum Street—on 13th December, about 11.30, I served the prisoner with three half-quartern loaves, which came to 11 1/4 d.; he placed a coin similar to this (produced) on the counter head upwards—I gave him three farthings change, and he waited for the 19s.—I turned the coin over, and saw that it was not a sovereign; it had "To Hanover" on it—I showed it to my father in the parlour, who came out and spoke to the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I think he was drunk; he remained in the shop after my father had sent for a policeman in his hearing, but my father remained there.
HENRY BARNARD RABE . My daughter showed me this coin, and I went out, and said to the prisoner "What do you mean by this?"—he spoke thick, and I could not understand him—he had had a glass—I stood against the door, and he said "How much longer are you going to keep me?"—I said "Till the policeman comes"—I was not holding him—after the police came he said that he got it from a man outside, and then from a mate of
his—the policeman asked him who the mate was, and he could not say—I should say that he knew what he was about.
Cross-examined. The coin was quite clean then—my counter is a dark one—I went by the lightness of the coin, and when I turned it over I found it was not a sovereign—the prisoner did not move towards the door to get out, but he could not have got out if he had tried.
WILLIAM WHITING (Policeman E R 50). I was called—Miss Rabe charged the prisoner, and I said "How did you come by this kind of money?"—he said "A man out in the street gave it to me as a sovereign, and I thought it was a sovereign"—I said "I think there are not many men going about giving away sovereigns in the streets"—he said "My mat who I work with gave it to me as a sovereign in payment for my weekly wages"—I said "Could you tell me the names of your mate, and the man out in the street?"—he said "I cannot"—I said "Can you tell me the name of your employer?"—he said "No"—I found nothing on him—I had accidentally pushed against him five or six minutes before, and apologized to him for it—I took an observation of his name and appearance, and he appeared perfectly sober, but when I was called into the shop he was shamming drunkenness—I reminded him that I was the constable who had spoken to him five or six minutes before—he said "You are the constable," and he then revived, and became sober almost immediately—he said in answer to the Magistrate that he found the coin in Museum Street—he had not said that before—that was the third account he gave of it—he was sober when he was at the station—Mr. Rabe gave me this medal.
Cross-examined. I will swear he was perfectly sober in the shop, but he may have had just one glass—I said before the Magistrate, I think. "He revived, and became sober almost immediately," not "he almost became sober immediately"—I did not know him before he pushed against me—he had been employed by the parish—he gave his correct address.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I was so drunk I cannot tell where I was till next morning. I picked it up. I did not know it was bad. I did not know what I was saying."
GUILTY .— Three Months' Imprisonment.
THOMAS JOHN RYAN . I am a greengrocer, of 17, Silchester Terrace, Notting Dale—on 14th November I left home about 8.30, leaving 9l. in gold and 6l. in silver in a clothes-box under the bed in the parlour, which was not locked—the gold was in a small card bos—I returned at 11.30, and found the prisoner asleep in the front garden, and the front door open—he had been living in the house three months—the parlour door was burst open, the window was half open, and a small table with ornaments on it was knocked over and broken—my clothes-box was pulled out from under the bed, and the clothes all over the floor, and the cash-box gone—I got a constable; we found the prisoner a quarter of a mile off, and I said to him, "Frank, have
you got my money?"—he said "No, Tom, I have not"—I said "If you have got my money I won't say anything about it"—I then heard a rattle in a box which was under his arm, and said "What have you got under your arm?"—he said "I have not got your money, this is all I have got, somebody else is in it, and I shan't split," taking a small box from under his arm, and giving it to the constable—I examined it, and found nothing but silver in it—there was 1l. 15s. 6d.—the cardboard box was found on him at the station, and a quantity of gold and silver.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You have lived in my house—when you have minded the shop for me I have trusted you with upwards of 100l., and I never found anything wrong—I have lent you money several times—the front door was locked when I went home—often told you to take money which was on the table if you wanted it to buy any thing when I was not at home—you had a barrow—you always went to market with Me of a morning ever since I started—I have trusted you with my horse, Van, goods, and money, and never knew you to be dishonest, and I do not Believe you would be only for the drink—you were drunk when I saw you In the garden—I did not hear you say "Tom, I have got your money"—I Have always told you to take money when you could do yourself good With it.
Re-examined. I did not authorize him to take money from the cash-box Under the bed; that was my stock money, which I had for my business—he that he had got some money, and I said "If you give it to me I shall not lock you up, Frank"—neither the box under the bed or the cash-box were locked—he did not refuse to give me the money—he gave it to the constable, 1l. 15s. 6d., but he said that he had not got the amount of gold in the box—I referred to that when I said that I would not lock him up if he gave me the money.
FRANK HARRIS (Policeman 201 X). I was talking to the prosecutor when the prisoner passed—I stopped him, and said "Mr. Ryan suspects you of breaking into his house and stealing a cash-box containing 15l."—he said "All right"—I said "Have you the cash-box with you?"—he said "No"—I searched him, and found this cash-box under his overcoat—he said "There is another in it, but I shan't round; I am caught, and I must suffer"—I then went and examined the premises—I have heard the prosecutor's evidence, it is correct—the parlour door appeared to have been opened from onside—I searched the prisoner at the station, and found 6l. in gold, 3s. 3d. in silver, and 7 1/4 d. in bronze in his breast and in his coat pockets, and this cardboard-box in his coat pocket, which the prosecutor has identified as the box which had the gold in it.
Cross-examined. Ryan spoke to you first—I took the box from under the coat you have on now—you had been drinking, but knew what you were about.
GEORGE HYDE . I am a carman, and lodge over the shop in the prosecutor's House—on 14th December, about 9.30 p.m., I heard the prisoner Singing—he was sitting on the stairs the worse for liquor—I was in bed, and did not go to him; I thought he was tight.
Cross-examined. I did see two bushels of pears and 1 1/2 cwt. of chestnuts Behind the street-door—I believe you often put your things in Mr. Ryan's Shop when you come home of a night—you seemed jolly.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I was drunk. I went Into the passage and put what belonged to me there. I fell asleep for an hour or a little over; then got up and staggered against the parlour door, and when I awoke again I found myself lying half in the room and half in the passage. I got up and took his money, and going down stairs I was so drunk I fell into the garden, and lay there about half an hour. I had no intention to steal the money before I fell into the room."
The Prisoner in his defence stated that he had frequently borrowed money of Mr. Ryan and lent him money, and that having had a little drink he took the money to buy a horse and cart, as the prosecutor permitted him to use his money, and he had often done so before.
THOMAS JOHN RYAN (Re-examined). I found about 2l. or 3l. under the Bed—the prisoner did not tell me he had made arrangements to buy a Horse and cart—I had given him no authority to do so—he has taken Money without my sanction before—I only sanctioned his doing so in the course of my business.
NOT GUILTY .
FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday, January 13th, 1880.
Before Mr. Commissioner Kerr.
155. WILLIAM JAMES EVERETT (40) PLEADED GUILTY to breaking and entering a chapel at Sunbury, and stealing twelve chairs and a looking-glass; also to two indictments for like offences— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
BLOOMFIELD also PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at the Sessions House, Clerkenwell Green, on 17th December, 1866.— Ten Years' Penal Servitude.
FRANCIS.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
VILLA CHRISTOF (Interpreted). I live near Guanneri's in Old Brentford—on a Monday morning, I think the 20th December, we had been drinking in a public-house—I asked Guanneri what he had been fighting with my cousin for—he hit me with a knife, and I threw him on the ground—I saw the knife—some blood came on my trousers—we were in the garden—I called the prisoner out—he came out and then went back—I called him again—he refused to come—I stopped some time; then a customer came and took me away—I did not strike the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I was taken into custody, and have remained in custody since I was committed for trial—the prisoner was admitted to bail—I did not threaten to kill the prisoner—I know Lugi Salaro—he was not there—I did not see him that evening, nor all day—the prisoner did not say a word When he hit me—he cought hold of me, and then I threw him—I had a
small pocket-knife in my pocket, but nothing in my hand—I went and shook the prisoner's door, and the windows broke—I don't know how many—I had a long stick—the prisoner struck me before I hit him with a knife—I am an organ-grinder, and go out with a piano—the prisoner also goes out with an organ—I don't know whether he goes to school treats or is patronized by the King and Royal Family of Italy.
HENRY ROGERS . I live at the Fox and Hounds, Old Brentford—on Saturday, 27th December, followed Christof up the yard leading to my House—he was not sober—he met the prisoner and spoke to him in Italian—the prisoner had a knife in his hand—he caught hold of Christof's collar, but Christof was quick and got the prisoner on the ground—I did not see the knife used.
HENRY LAUGHLIN (Policeman T 448). About 10.15 on December 27th I went with Policeman T 484 to this yard in Old Brentford—I saw Christof with a wooden pole in his hand, and he was drunk and very excited—he was bleeding from a wound on the face—I went into the house and saw Guanneri, who was also drunk and bleeding from a wound over the nose—Guanneri gave Christof into custody, and Christof complained of being stabbed—I afterwards went back to the yard and found this white-handled table knife—there was no blood on it—a woman handed me this knife in the house, and I found this knife on Christof. (Three knives were produced)—I found a knife on Guanneri at the station—Guanneri said to Christof at the station "You have stabbed me"—Christof said, pointing to his left side, "You have stabbed me here"—I saw the wound on his left side.
EDWARD SEPTIMUS EARL . I am a surgeon at Brentford—on the 27th December I was called to the police-station at Brentford—I examined Christof and found under the seventh rib a small punctured wound—these Knives were produced to me before the Magistrate—neither of them is Narrow enough to have caused the wound—the wound penetrated under The skin, and must have glanced off the rib to the extent of a little more than 2 or 3 inches—I measured it by a probe—he also had a slight wound beneath the left eyelid—the wound under the rib would have been very dangerous if it had penetrated farther—I should say it was inflicted with considerable force.
Witness for the Defence.
LUGI SALARO . I know the prisoners Guanneri and Christof—I am an Organ grinder—I was examined before the Magistrate—I saw Christof outside A public-house—he said "Let me go, I want to kill them all"—Guanneri Came out of the house without a coat and no boots—Christof calls him Joe—Joe said to Christof "We have been friends a long time, we have never Quarrelled; go home and go to sleep, and I shall go home and go to sleep too"—Christof did not reply, but lifted up his hand and gave Guanneri a blow—he had something in his hand, I could not see what it was—he was punching Guanneri down—I and two other chaps took Guanneri in his own house—Guanneri was then insensible—Christof went home, but came back in ten minutes and broke Guanneris windows, and then he wanted to kill them all.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
JOSEPH GUANNERI (In custody). I am an owner of organs and live at Brentford—on the 27th December, about 10 p.m., I was in my house—I had Taken my boots off and was going to bed—I had seen Christof that evening About 8 o'clock—he came to my house about 10 o'clock and said "I want To kill you all," so I went out and said "I never had any quarrel with you and I don't want to have a row to-night; you go to bed and I will go to bed"—he then struck me with some instrument which went into my bones and knocked me down—I became insensible—when I became sensible Christof came a second time with a piece of timber in his hand and broke all my windows both down and upstairs—part of a window went on the bed where my child was—it cried and has since died—I was taken to the station and the prisoner said he was stabbed.
Cross-examined. I said what I have said to-day at he police-court—Christof had not been in the house and told me I had stabbed him—this black-handled knife is mine—it was in my house—I use it for cleaning the wheels of my barrow—I do not know where it was on this night—when Guanneri threw me on the ground I did not fall on my face—I had been drinking; I began about 7 o'clock in the morning, but I did not keep on drinking all day—I had only been in two public-houses—one was the Fox and Hounds; I do not know the name of the other—I was about two hours in the last one—Christof was not with me there—I left about 8.30 I think, but I do not carry a watch—the first I left about 2 o'clock in the afternoon—I might have been there from 7 a. m.—we were all together there.
JOHN MORRIS . I am 15 years of age—I live at Old Brentford in the same house as Guanneri—on 27th December Christof came to our house about 10 p.m.—Joe Guanneri spoke to him at the corner of the house in a language I do not understand, when he caought Joe round the neck and threw him against a cart, then the threw him on the ground and began punching him—Joe's wife came out, threw Christof off and took Joe indoors—Joe's eye and nose were bleeding—a third man was there—he did nothing—I did not see any nstrument of any kind in either of their hands.
Cross-examined. There was no light, and if Guanneri had a knife in his hand I could not have seen it—the yard is where they keep carts—it is all gravel, but that is hard.
EDWARD SEPTIMUS EARL . I saw Guanneri on the same night I saw Christof—he was suffering from a small punctured wound beneath the right eye, leading to a great deal of haemorrihage from the nose, and the bones of the nose were injured—the wound may have been caused by some sharp instrument, or by the man falling upon something sharp in the road.
Cross-examined. The bones of the nose were fractured—that is more consistent with falling on something hard than being struck with a knife, but it is consistent with a man's fist coming in contact with it—it is quite possible that the two injuries may have been caused by a fall.
HENRY LAUGHLIN (Policeman T 448). I was called to this house on 27th December, about 10.15 p.m.—Christof was in the yard with a piece of wood fence in his hand—he was drunk—I went into the house—I saw
Guanneri drunk, and bleeding from a wound on the nose, and a wound Under the eye—he made a charge against Christof, in consequence of which I took Christof into custody—Christof then made a charge against Guanneri—I found this knife in the yard—Christof said "You have stabbed me in the side," pointing to his left side—Guanneri said "You have stabbed me too."
HENRY ROGERS (Not examined in chief. Cross-examined.) I followed Christof up the yard—Guanneri was outside his house—Christof went towards Guanneri—said something in Italian—he had a knife in his hand—he had no shoes or coat on—I saw them come close together, and Guanneri fell to the ground—it was dark, I could not tell whether Guanneri used the knife—Christof had no knife in his hand.
LUGI SALARO . I am an organ-grinder, and neighbour of Christof's—I met Christof as I was coming out of the yard of this public-house on this night, and I persuaded him to go back—Buanneri came out of the house when Christof halloaed—both went close to a cart which was in the yard—Guanneri said to Christof "What have you got to halloa so for?" and he said also "You go home; I am not very well; you go to bed, I shall go to bed too"—Christof lifted up his hand, and gave Guanneri a blow—Guanneri fell on the ground—Christof kept beating him—two young women got hold of Guanneri, and took him indoors—I and these two women only were in the yard at the time the quarrel began—Christof had something in his hand—I could not say whot it was; it was dark.
Cross-examined. It was not too dark for me to see Christof strike——Morris and Rogers were there—I said so at the police-court.
ROBERT SHORTHOUSE (Policeman T 484). At 10.5 on the 27th December I was with Laughlin—I saw Christof in Morris's yard; he was in a very weird state—I went into the kitchen—Guanneri was there bleeding—I apprehended Christof; he complained of being stabbed in his left side.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months'Imprisonment.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, January 14th, 1880.
Before Mr. Justice Manisty.
161. In the case of LOUISA DURRANT , charged with the willful murder of George Durrant , on the evidence of Mr. John Rowland Gibson, surgeon of Newgate, the Jury found the prisoner to be insane, and unable to plead— Ordered to be detained until Her Majesty's pleasure be Known.
MESSRS. COWIE and RAVEN Prosecuted.
HERBERT JOYCE . I am principal clerk in the secretary's office of the General Post-office, attached to the Discipline Branch of the service—on 30th December I received this letter, dated the 29th—I have had other letters in the same hand, which have purported to come from the prisoner—I have not conversed with him about those letters.
WILLIAM HENRY FOULKES . I have been a letter carrier at Sheerness for 10 years—I know the prisoner; I have seen him write frequently, and know his handwriting—I believe this letter to be his.(Read: "December 29th. To the Secretary of the General Post-office, Mr. Joyce. Sir,—I
Must again force myself after 10 months, being discharged by a receiver of Stolen property. The last time I was at the post-office I saw a bully; He told me my statement was false, and showed me the door like a gentleman. I suppose he is a countryman of this intelligent officer; he might Think he had bullied me, but he was never more out in his life. I have yet To learn that the law is dealt out by the General Post-officials. I Have waited 10 months to get justice; I see no other course than to take it On myself. Which I will. I will shoot this thief to-morrow morning, Tuesday 30th, about 10 o'clock. I will put a bullet through the window on the right of the door of the General Post-office, and perhaps we will get it a settled another way, if I don't get what you have taken from me. Sir, I remain your obedient servant, H. Branston, 10, York Road, Battersea Park."
HERBERT JOYCE (Continued). I had seen the prisoner previously at the General Post-office in June—on the first occasion he pleaded very hard that The decision by which he was dismissed might be reconsidered and altered—he began to speak of all he said he had suffered from the Post-office officials at sheerness—I don't remember that he named any particular individual, but he spoke against those who had been in authority there, the late postmaster and the then acting postmaster—Mr. Hartigan was then acting postmaster—I told him that any reconsideration of his case was quite leading into a vestibule, and in this vestibule there is a glass care in which the hall porter sits; on the right is a side door which leads into a small office—it would be very dangerous to fire a bullet in there—Mr. Hartigan was not at the General Post-office at that time, nor yet at sheerness; I don't of my own knowledge know where he was—he had returned from sheerness to the General Post-office before December—he was clerk in charge at the General Post-office.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. Any application that you addressed to Superior authority ought to have been forwarded—your papers did come To headquarters, and were seen by the authorities, and by the Postmater-General—the paper in which you state that your liberty was not safe, was received, and said before the postmaster-General, and it is now in my hands—believe it came through the surveyor. (Read: "To the clerk in charge. Sir,—I will suspend myself, as I do nor consider my liberty safe at present H. Brauston, 3 Letter-carrier, sheerness," That was forwarded with Mr. Haritgan's report to the Postmaster-General.
Re-examined. When a clerk in charge goes down from headquarters to Take charge of a provincial Post-office, he is for the time under the Surveyor—when a report is made against a person he is always called on to explain, no one is condemned unheard—Mr. Perrin was surveyor of the south-east district.
CHARLES STEWART HARTIGAN . I am one of the officers called clerks In charge at the General Post-office—in October, 1878, I went down to Sheerness to fill a vacancy and take charge of the Post-office there—the Prisoner was a letter-carrier in that district—it was in my discretion to arrange the walks of the letter-carriers, and to apportion their duties—in the exercise of that discretion I shifted the walks; I altered all the walks, that they might be more thoroughly conversant with each other's duties—that was the only alteration I made in the prisoner's duties—I think that alteration
was made on 21st Feb.—I saw him on that evening just as the mail came in, and he threw in my face this paper, which has been read; he was leaving the office, and I called him back to explain—the mail had arrived, and it was his turn to be on duty and to go out with a portion of the mail—I asked him to explain the writing, and not be so stupid; he would not—he refused to come back, and left with his uniform on, and I had to supply a substitute for his duty that evening—U next saw him on the 25th February; he came in at the time the mail arrived, and in the presence of 10 or 12 letter-carriers he demanded a week's wages—I replied "I fear you are not entitled to any wages, you left without giving proper notice"—he then stretched his arm across the counter to me and said "You b——Irish scoundrel, I will take it out of you"—I reported his conduct to Mr. Perrin the surveyor, within an hour or two, in writing—he was the proper officer for me to report it to. (This was a report for insubordinate couduct, &c.) In consequence of a communication which I afterwards received from Mr. Perrin the prisoner was dismissed—the dismissals in such cases are made on the order of the postmaster-General; his decision is communicated to The surveyor, by the surveyor to me, and by me to the prisoner—I next Saw the prisoner about 5th April—I was assisting in the office at Sheerness, I heard a noise behind me, I turned round in my chair, and the only answer I got was screams of "Branston, Branston," and as I turned round the prisoner met me and struck me in the face and knocked me over; I was covered with blood, and my papers also—I got another blow on the chin, and he seized me round the waist and tried to rush me through a large plate-glass window into the street; I held by the table until help came and he was secured—besides the less for some time, and I felt the effects for months—I afterwards appeared at the police-court against him, and he was sent for a month to Canterbury with hard labour, and bound to keep the peace for three months—it came to my knowledge that in September the prisoner made a charge against me at the Criminal Investigation Department of receiving stolen property; I think he said eight books and a folding slate, which I had paid for; there was not a shadow of foundation for the charge—inquiry was made, and I Still hold my office—I have seen the letter of the 29th December, addressed to Mr. Joyce, and have not the slightest doubt that it refers to me.
Cross-examined. I have never been anywhere else except in the Post-office Since I left Trinity College, Dublin—I was never a shoemaker—I have been 33 Years in the service of the Post-office—I gave instructions to the letter-carriers to salute their officers in the street—there is a postmaster's book of rules—there are no instructions to that effect in that, but letter-carriers are bound to obey any instructions they receive, right or wrong, and they can object to the Surveyor—I shift the walks whenever I think right—I have done so in other offices, at Hounslow for instance—I did not stop you in the street and tell you to salute me; there was no necessity for doing so, you obeyed those instructions—I don't remember your sister, who is employed in the Post-office, reporting to me that you came into the office with your hat no—she often reported you for being late and for salamming the door.
THOMAS ROORS (Police Inspector Scotland Yard). Somewhere about 22nd September the prisoner called on me and said he wished to make a statement; I afterwards received this letter. (This was proved by Mr. Foulkes to be in the prisoner's handwriting, was dated 13th October, addressed to the chief officer, requesting to be informed if any information had been received with respect to the case Sheerness.)
BRODIE PARKHURST . I am chief clerk in the secretary's office at the General Post-office—in October last the prisoner called there and said "I Wish to renew the charge against Mr. Hartigan of having received stolen Goods"—I told him the charge had been fully inquired into, and the result Showed that it was without foundation—he seemed dissatisfied and disinclined To go—I told him I had nothing more to say and he must leave, and I showed him the door.
EDWARD BUTLER . I am a police officer attached to the Post-office—on Monday, 29th December, I went to the prisoner's lodgings in Alfred Street, Battersea, with a warrant and apprehended him—I said "Branston, you Know me, I suppose?"—he said "Yes"—I produced this letter and said "Mr. Joyce received this letter this morning; are you the sender of it?"—he replied "So, so"—I said Arm I to understand by that that you sent it?"—he said "Yes, I did"—I said "You say in this letter 'I will shoot this thief;' to whom do you refer?'—he said "Ah! That is the question"—I said "That you are not bound to answer"—he then said "I don't intend to kill anybody, but I am going to put a bullet through the glass on the right of the door at the General Post-office, and then I shall bring my case before the public"—I found in his waistcoat pocket this bullet and eight guncaps—searched his room, and between some clothes of his I found this paper of gunpowder—on the way to Bow street he said "That Irish thief is the cause of all this"—I said "What thief?"—he said "Why, Hartigan, he is a receiver of stolen property, and I have been to Scotland Yard about it."
The prisoner in a long defence alleged various acts of unnecessary severity On the part of Mr. Hartigan which had provoked him to the assault that he had committed, but that his only object in sending the letter was to bring his case before the public.
GUILTY . Recommended to mercy on account of his long public service.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
HENRY WOOLLEY (Policeman E 33). On 28th December, about half an hour after midnight, I was on duty in Holborn—I saw a Hansom cab coming from westward driving eastward at a very furious pace, galloping; I called out to the driver to stop about 30 yards before he got to me, and held up my hands—I had to jump on the footway to prevent being run over—he kept on at the same pace, holding his head low—he was on his right side close to the kerb—I followed him some distance, but failed to catch him—I took down the number of the cab as it passed me, it was 4831—shortly afterwards I was joined by two other men, I returned with them to the corner of Kingsgate Street, and saw the deceased—a constable was assisting him into a cab; he was insensible and bleeding from one ear—he was about 200 yards from the place where I had called out to a cabman,
and about 20 or 25 yards from the corner of little Queen Street—I sent the deceased to the hospital and afterwards saw him deas—about 3 o'clock on the morning of 3rd January I went to the prisoner's lodging, No. 4, Harrison Street, Gray's Inn Road—I told him I was going to take Him into custody on the charge of causing the death of Alexander Gartland, By running over him in High Holborn on the morning of the 28th ult., While driving a Hanson cab, No. 4381—he said "I don't know that I Was there I was out with a that night, but I don't know the Number of it."
Cross-examined. I did not see the driver's face so as to recognise him, he Held his head very low.
THOMAS ARCHIBALD MAJOR . I am a theatrical property maker at 12, Barber Street, Theobald's Road—on the night of 28th December I was Passing down Little Queen Street into Holborn and saw a Hansom cab Coming down Little Queen street behind me; it very nearly came into Collision with another cab; when it got near kingsgate Street the deceased Was just stepping off the kerb under the lamp, and the cab knocked him Over—I did not notice the face of the driver—he was driving very Furiously—after the man was knocked down I did not hear him call out or Give any warning.
Cross-examined. The deceased was just stepping from the kerb to cross The road—the cab appeared to be going middling fast at first, and after he Had knocked the man down he increased his pace.
HENRY LOCKET . I am picture frame joiner, of 56, Red Lion Street, Holborn—on the night of 28th December, at the corner of Kingsgate street, The deceased was in front if me, he just stepped about a foot in the roadway when he was knocked down by a Hansom cab coming from the westWard, at about seven or eight miles an hour—I did not see it until then—I did not notice the driver—he did not seem to drive any faster after the accident—I went to the deceased's assistance, and held him up, and stanched the blood.
CHARLES MANNING . I am a cab proprietor, of Dorset Mews, Dorset Square—the prisoner was in my employ as a cabdriver on 27th December—He went out that day about one o'clock with a Hansom cab—it was not his Regular cab—he had not driven it before that—the number of it was 4,831—I make a list of the drivers of the cabs, which I have here—I did not see him when he came back with the cab—my washer puts down the time and the money they pay in—I have 26 other cabs—they were not all out that day, but over 20 Hansoms were—I did not see the prisoner go out.
WILLIAM PETTIT . I am a cab washer, in the employ of the last witness—I was there on the morning of the 28th, when the prisoner came in with a cab, No. 4,831, about two o'clock—it was a Hansom—I did not take any money from him; he had not enough to pay—he was quite sober—he had been in the employ about four or five weeks—I don't know what tune he went out that day—I don't know whether he went out with that cab; all I know is, that he brought it home—he did not say how much money he had; but he did not pay any.
JOHN DAVIDSON (House Surgeon, King's College Hospital). The deceased Was brought there on the morning of 28th December by two constables—he was unconscious, and bleeding from the left ear—he died on 1st January from fracture at the base of the skull and laceration of the brain.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I was not near the place The night."
NOT GUILTY .
WILLIAM TILBURY . I am cashier to George Brittain Kent and another, Brushmaker, of Bonner's Road, Bow—I live in a house which is part of the factory—the premises are entered from Bonner's Road by an iron gate, and there is then a court or yard enclosed by a swing gate, which is fastened by bolts inside, and is about seven feet high; that shuts off the factory—formerly the safe in which the money was deposited was kept in the factory, in an office close to the door opening out of the courtyard—about 18 months ago a man named John Sparrow was a workman in the factory—he left in July, 1877—at the time the safe was kept in the office; it is now kept in my bedroom—the window of my bedroom overlooks the two yards where the gates are—on 11th July last, about 11 o'clock at night, I heard a noise in the yard, as though some one was getting over the gate—I heard a grating as though the bolt was being undone—I got got up and saw a man undoing the bottom bolt, and he stood up and undid the top bolt—the man was on the inside of the gate, on the premises—that man was Sparrow—he then opened the gate, and two men entered—the prisoner is one of those men—after they had entered the gate was shut, and bolted at the bottom by one of men—I then dressed, and went round some houses into Robinson's Road where two of our men named Warren and Newman lived—I called Them Up—warren and I went through his garden back to the house—I Lighted a lantern, and we passed through my house to the inner yard—I There saw two men crouched down behind an iron tank—they were Sparrow and the third man—I asked what they were doing there—before I could receive any answer they jumped up and sprang out upon us, and the prisoner who was hiding in a urinal, struck Warren over the head with an iron instrument which he had in his hand, and instantly felled him to the ground—I could not exactly see what the instrument was; it looked like a long iron bar—he then rushed at me, and hit me over the head with the same instrument, and I reeled against the wall—the third man then ran up the yard and opened the gates and got through—the prisoner was getting through when I recovered myself, and by that time Sparrow had got to the iron gate—I rushed up to them—Sparrow struck at me with an instrument that he had in his hand, severely cutting my hand—I hit his over the head with a heavy lantern I had in my hand—he got through to the iron gate, and they all three ran down Bonner's Road towards Bishop's Road—I followed calling "Police"—there is a public-house at the corner of Bishop's Road, where they alwayshave a very bright light—as I came up to the public-house under the light the prisoner turned round to me, and said "If you come any farther I will murder you," and he threatened me with the instrument he had in his hand—he was then under the light, and I had an opportunity of seeing him very distinctly—he is the man—I still followed to the Waterloo Road, where I saw Tierman and Field, and spoke to them, and gave up the chase—I was overcome from loss of blood—I went to a doctor, and after that went to the Police-station the same night—I there found Sparrow in charge; he seemed
to he suffering from injuries to his head—he was committed for trial and convicted at this Court for this offence—two days after I was shown three photographs—I recognised one of them as the prisoner—about three weeks ago I went to Clerkenwell prison, and there identified him as the man who had assaulted me—my head was cut open, and I was very seriously injured—I am suffering from it now—it was a very severe blow on the back of the head; it cut through a felt hat, and I lost a very considerable quantity of blood—I was under the doctor for two or three weeks, and recently, within a mouth, again.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I knew at the police-court when Sparrow was charged that I Could identify the other man, but I was not asked the question—I remembered your face well—the three photographs Were shown to me on the Sunday evening after the occurrence, and I was asked "Can you recognise either of these three men?" and I instantly picked out yours—I stated so at the police-court—I was taken to five cells at the House of Detention before coming to yours; one of the warders asked "Do you recognise this man?"—I dis did not saw "It is very much like the man"—I said "You are the man"—I did not say at the police court "To the best of my belief he is the man"—I had no doubt at all—it was dark when I saw you in Mr. Kent's yard—I had a good opportunity of seeing you by the lantern in my hand when you rushed at me, and I saw you rush out of the gate, and all down Bonner's Road, and by the public-house where you turned round and threatened me—there were a few people about—I saw your face clearly—you had whiskers then, but not when I afterwards identified you—I can't be mistaken in you; I recognise by your hair, your build, and your face generally; your hair is very peculiar.
Re-examined. I have not the slightest doubt of his being the man.
JOHN ALFRED WARREN . I live at 23, Sutherland Road—in July last I Was in the employ of Messrs. Kent, and then lived in Robinson's Road at The back of the factory—on the night of 11th July I was called by Tilbury, and went with him thought my garden to the foctory; we went into the yard, and there saw two men crouched up in a corner; I made towards them; I was hit on the back, and rendered insensible—I did not see the person who struck me—I was very much injured, and laid up for some time.
CHARLES TIERMAN . I live in the globe Road—on 11th July, about 11 O'clock at night, I was passing Bonner's Road to Kent's factory—I heard A noise, and saw a scuffle on the pavement, and saw three men run towards the Hackney Road—I then saw Tilbury with a lantern in his hand chasing a man—I did not hear him call out—I ran down Albert Road with a view of meeting the man—Field followed down with me; when we get to Bishop's Road I saw Tilbury at the corner of Waterloo Road in an exhausted state—I and Field went down Sewardston Road, and there met the three men coming up the road; they saw us, and turned back—I followed, and caught Sparrow as he was getting over a well—the other two got away over some timber—I gave Sparrow into custody.
Cross-examined. I had a full view of the three men when I met them—I do not recognise you as one of them—there was no light there—it is a road very seldom frequented.
him and Warren; I went down Bonner's Road, and there picked up this bag Containing a centre bit and other burglarious instruments—nest morning I found this bunch of keys in our yard, and these two hast and a Broken umbrella were also found there.
HENRY MONK (policeman K 385). On 11th July, about 11 p.m, I Heard cries—I went to waterloo Road, and took Sparrow into custody, and took him to the station—I afterwards received this bag from Newman, containing these things—I afterwards received this iron crowbar from a porter employed in the timber yard—Sparrow gave his address, 25, Camperdown, Snow's Fields, Bermondsey; I went there—Sparrow had no hat on When I took him.
Cross-examined. Mr. Tilbury told me that he could swear to one of the other men.
RICHARD KIMBER (police Sergeant). I know the prisoner by the name of Abrahams, Welsh, and other aliases—in December, 1878, he gave the name of Abrahams, and his address 25, Camperdown, Snow's Fields, Bermondsay—on February 1st, 1879, I went there, and saw him there; he has since then come to me, and given that as his address.
Cross-examined. I visited you on 1st February for the purpose of getting You a gratuity after your discharge from gaol—I saw you after that about the neighbourhood; I can't say where; you had a great deal more whisker and moustache then than you have now—when I saw you at Worship Street you were considerably altered; you had shaved off your whiskers and beard, except your moustache, and that was very slight, but I was positive you were the man directly I saw you.
RICHARD WILDEY (police Inspector). I accompanied Tilbury to the Prison—prior to that, last July I had shown him three photographs, one of a man supposed to be Henry Abrahams; he picked that one out—I saw the prisoner in custody at Worship Street on 2nd December on another charge; he was remanded—he then gave the name of Henry Williams—I afterwards took Tilbury to the prison, and went with him—I said "Do you identify him?" and he said "That is the man."
Cross-examined. I had not shown him your portrait that day—I showed it to him on the previous Tuesday, and asked if he knew it, and he said "Yes."
SAMUEL WELSH . I am a surgeon, of 157, Victoria Park Road—I attended Tilbury; he had a scalp wound about two inches long, upon which erysipelas supervened—he was under my care several days, and got much better—he consulted me again a short time since; a secondary abscess had formed on the wound—the wound itself was not dangerous, but the erysipelas might have caused very serious danger.
Witnesses for the Defence.
Cross-examined. I am his brother-in-law; his right name is Henry Welsh—I did not know him by any other name; in fact, he was a man I never had anything to do with; I never interfered with him; I alwayas looked after my own business, because I think relations are best apart, and
then you don't have any fanlts found; that was my reason—when I was taken into custoday I gave the name of John Welsh; that was my wife's name—after I left Kent and Co. I went in to business for myself—my brother has a shop; I asked him to lend me some money; he said he would if I would not take any of his customers, and to prove I would not I took the name of wesh—I am charged with breaking into Kent and Co.'s—I did not do so—I pleaded not guilty, and I am an innocent man, and was punished innocently—I was near the place on the night in question, within 200 yards but not on the premises—I used violence to the man that struck me, because he wanted take my hat off my head, but not to the prosecutor—I was not taken getting over a wall; I was walking along from the club-house after transacting my business in the course of the day—I had not been on the premises that night—I had some varnish on my clothes, said to be paint—I was by myself that night—I was not one of three men—I was one man that was struck by three men, and ill-used—I had not seen the prisoner that night—I had not kept company with him for some time.
Re-examined. I did not see you that night at all, and don't recollect seeing you since February—I don't recollect whether you had whiskers then; my head has been ill-treated so that I have not much memory—my skull has been frectured, and what with one trouble and another, and being in prison innocently; if I had had a fair trial I should have been scquitted.
FREDERICK JUDD . You were employed under me at Magen and Field's from 9th January to 1st March, in the name of Henry welsh—aboudt the beginning of February you shaved your whiskers off—you were honest and industrious while with us.
Cross-examined. I did not know that he had been convicted and was on ticket-of-leave.
The prisoner in a written defence asserted his innocence, and alleged that he was getting his living in honest employment.
Witnesses in Reply.
BENJAMIN BRICE . I am principal warder at Millbank prison, Wandsworth—I know the prisoner—I have a certificate of his coveiction in the name of Henry Dwyer; he was sentenced to twelve year's penal servitude; that was after a previous conviction.
HENRY WARD . I am principal warder of Her Majesty's Prison, Wandsworth—I know the prisoner in the names of Welsh, Dwyer, and May; he has been convicted in those names and imprisoned on several occasions.
GUILTY with intent to do agrievous bodiy harm.— Twenty years' Penal Servitude.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, January 14th, 1880.
Before Mr. Justice Lopes.
GOODWIN PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. POLAND Prosected.
Know him also as Chambers—I made his acquaintance at the whit Lious Public-house, Thames Street, in November, 1879, when we had a glass of Ale together—I saw him there a few days afterwards, we had another glass, And he asked me if I could do some things for him, and showed me a List of things which he wanted; they were stoves and other things in Which my employers dealt—he wanted me to get them for him, and said That we would share the proceeds together—I would not do it, but after A lot of persuasion I told him I would get them for him—I was to let Him know when the articles were ready, and he was to send a man for Them; that was in December—I then gave an order for 24 register stoves And six ranges—Mr. Kean, the warehouseman, selected them, and there Were only 21 stoves—Croxon and I agreed to put the order in the name of Williams, and I had a cheque made out for them—Mr. Macdonald, the Warehouse clerk, did that, and when they had been put one side, I prepared This delivery order: "W. Williams, six No. six No. 2 sack ranges, two Register stoves, from Carron Company, December, 1879"—I do not know The sizes—the articles were put on one side for delivery—I had no authority To put them aside without being paid for by a genuine customer—I gave The delivery order to stroud, one of the delivery warehousemen—they Must go to him to be delivered—I saw Croxon at 6 o'clock the same Day in Thames Street, passing out place, and told him to go home as The goods had gone—he was the worse for drink, and I don't know Whether he understood me—I did not see him again—I had seen the Goods loaded between 4 and 5 o'clock—the carman was a stranger to me—if the goods were paid for, the carman would bring a receipted bill—They would know that he was the carman, because he would bring a Letter from his employer—I was afterwards taken in custody—I got Nothing out of this, but received 3l. or 4l. from Croxon in November for Some sash-weights which he had; those were the only two matters in Which I had dealings with Croxon—nothing was specified for me to receive.
CHARLES KEAN . I am a warehouseman in the service of the Carross Company—on 17th December Goodwin asked me to look at some ranges And 24 register stoves for a person named Williams—I could only get 21 Stoves and six ranges—I wrote the name of Williams on the boilers of the Ranges in chalk, and then told Goodwin, and he completed the order.
Cross-examined by Croxon. I had the order for 11 ranges and 24 stoves, But I could only complete six ranges.
FREDERICK MACDONALD . I am warehouse clerk to the Carron Company—it is my duty to make out what is called the cheque when goods are Ordered—I entered these things in the cheque-book, No. 4349; there were Six oven ranges, 36 inch, and 21 register stoves; nine thirties and 12 Thirty-twos—I gave the counterpart to Dear.
GEORGE STROUD . I am delivery warehouseman to the Carrion Company—on 19th December I delivered six oven ranges and 24 register stoves to Campbell, a carman, about 4 p.m.—he brought this delivery note; I saw That it had the company's stamp upon it, and I thought it was a genuine Transaction—the stoves were on the first floor and the ranges on the Second—I lowered the into Mr. West's van, of which Campbell was the
Carman—I put my initials to this order and gave it back to the carman; I had not seen it before—I went to Peckham on 24th December, and at Some houses being built by Mr. Cooper there, I saw the stoves and ranges Which I had delivered.
HENRY FREDERICK CAMPBELL . I am a carman in the service of Mr. West, 5, St. James's Road, Bermondsey—On 19th January I received this Order from the prisoner under the railway arch at the Blackfriars end of Thames Street, at 3.40 p.m.—I knew him as Chambers, living at 2, Aspenden Road, Rotherhithe—he was in the iron trade; I had been drawing A lot of stuff for him—he said "Go down to the Carron Wharf and Present this order and get 21 register stoves and six ranges in the name of Williams"—I went at once and presented the order was initialled and I Brought it away and left it at our yard—the goods were delivered next Morning, according to orders, at Hollydale Road, Peckham—I did not Deliver them, but I knew that they were delivered—I did not see Croxon Again until he was in custody—I had taken a lot of stoves for him some time Before that, but not from this company.
JOSEPH HENRY COOPER . I am a member of the firm of Cooper and Kendak—we are building some houses at Peckham—Croxon came into one of out houses there and delivered this card: "C. Chambers, stove and range Maker, 2, Aspenden Road, Rotherhithe, dealers in general castings, dealers Supplied"—he asked if he could do anything with us with stoves and Ranges—I said "Not at present, we have sufficient, but you can quote your Prices, and if you are coming this way at any time you may call," Which he Did, and I gave him an order in October,—the goods were dellivered by him on 19th october, and I paid him 5l. 19s. 9d.—he called again on 17th November, and I wrote down a fresh order; this is it. (This was for 1 ton of sash-weights, 20 fifty-two-inch stoves, 19 thirties, 5 twenty-four-inch ranges, and thirty-six-inch oven ranges and taps, 9 eight-gallon pans and coppers.) the sash-weights were delivered on 29th November, and 15 of the registered stoves and nine copper pans and fittings, and I paid the prisoner 9l. 1s. 7 1/2 d.—on the 20th December 21 stoves and six ranges were delivered at the Houses at Peckham—they were brought in a van, and Croxon and one of Mr. West's carmen took them in, and Croxon said he had bought the stoves And handed them out of the van himself and the carman carried them in—I saw croxon in the van, rubbing out the name of Williams which was On the stoves in chalk—he handed them out with the backs towards the House and took something and rubbed the name off, but not sufficiently, and When they came in I could read it—they were delivered and we built them Into the houses—the prisoner asked me for a little money and I gave Him 5l. on account—he promised to bring the other articles before Christmas And have the balance.
Cross-examined. My partner asked you to let it run on monthly, and You said "Yes"—this order was on that system, but you had the money, And before the month expired.
JOHN WELLS (Police Sergeant L). On 23rd December I went to 2, Aspemden Road, Rotherhithe; it is a private house with a small shed at The back; there is no name up—I only saw an old stove and a second-hand Range there—I went with Mr. Brown, the manager of the Carron Company—I knocked at the door; the prisoner came; I said "You name is Mr.
Chambers, I think"—he said "No, it is not, but Mr. Chambers has got a Shed here, and I can take any message you like to leave for him, and I will Give it to him in the morning"—I sad "No, I must see Mr. Chambers Myself personally"—we then walked away and I watched the house while Mr. Brown fetched Mr. West, the carman, who knocked at the door at my Request, and brought me a negative answer—I then went over with Mr. West, and knocked at the door; a female answered it, and in consequences Of the answer she gave me I said "I am a police officer," and walked in, and As I did so I saw the prisoner's shadow, and heard the catch go—I ran and Opened the back door, and turning quickly into the yard I saw a wooden Door closing; I ran and opened it, and caught the prisoner leaving by the Iron gate in front of the house—I said "I am a police officer, come back With mw to the house, please"—I took him back into the house where Mr. West was standing, who identified him as Chambers, who had employed Him to cart the goods—I said "Now Mr. Chambers, on Friday last you Had 21 ranges and 6 stoves from the Carron Wharf, Upper Thames street—he said "Yes, I did"—I said "Have you an invoice for those goods?"—He said "No"—I said "Have you a bill or receipt of any kind for them?"—He said "No"—Mr. Brown said "Who did you transact the business with At the firm?"—he said "Mr. Goodwin"—said "When did you make the Transaction?"—he said "About a fortnight ago"—I said "Where did you Make the transaction?"—he said "At the White Lion, Upper Thames Street"—I said "It is clearly satisfactory to me that you have received these goods Well knowing them to have been stolen, and upon that you will be charge"—he said "Oh, my God, I am done!"—I took him to the station—I afterwards Took Goodwin; they were both taken before the Magistrate, and Committed—Goodwin made a statement, but Croxon was not present.
Cross-examined. I did not ask you whether you had any stolen ranges, I Said "You have had some goods from the Carron Company," and you said "Yes"—you did not tell me that the order was not completed—I don't Remember your saying there were three more stoves and five ranges to Come.
THOMAS BROWN . I am assistant manager of the Carron Company—Goodwin was the country invoice clerk—this invoice is his writing—he had No authority to write it; a cashier was the proper person—the total value Of these stoves 17l. 19s. 5d.—I was with the officer when he took Croxon, And told him the charge—he said "Good God, I am done."
Croxon in his defence stated that he was led into the transaction by Goodwin, Who offered to get him the stoves 10 per cent. Less than he could obtain Them at, stating that he was privileged to but was merely leaving the house By his usual means of exit, and that he never uttered the words "Good God, I am done."
CROXON— GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
GOODWIN Was recommended to mercy by the prosecution.—Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MR. RIBTON Prosecuted.
And a half—I was in the kitchen on Saturday, 6th December, about 7.30, And the prisoner passed through into the yard; he was not there a second Before he came back into the kitchen where I was ironing—he had been Wanting an improper intercourse with me for some time, and he closed the Door, and said "when may I know you"—I said "Don't talk to me about Such things"—he said "Now or never, you allow that—b—cow to Come near you, you won't allow me" and struck me on the head—I did not See what with, but I saw a chopper on the table afterwards—the kitchen Door in hard to open, and while I was trying to open it he fired—I Heard a report, and ran into the parlour, and about myself in, and his Wife and daughter then came down—I am a window—the police and the Doctor were sent for—I lost a good deal of blood from my head.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I am sure you fired because I heard The report, and saw the smoke—you spoke to me about young Wiltshire, The single man lodger, that is what you meant.
EDWARD BAGLEY . On 6th December, about 8 p.m., I was called by the Prisoner's daughter, aged about 18—I went to the house and saw the prosecutrix Lying on the floor, bleeding from her head—I went a few steps up Stairs and met the prisoner coming down—he said "I done it, I done it"—When I went down with him the prosecutrix, who had gone into the kitchen, Handed me this chopper, and said "This is what he did it with"—the Prisoner heard that, but said nothing—on the way to the station he said "Now she has got two single men lodgers in the house she does not want Me"—I found these two bullets in his left waistcoat pocket—he asked at The station if the pistol was found—I said "No; where did you put it?"—he said "I throwed it somewhere; I fired one shot, and the next I meant For here," pointing to his forehead—I believe he was sober—I searched for A bullet mark on the door, but could not find one.
GEORGE AYLMER MAJOR . I am a surgeon—I was called, and found the Prosecutrix suffering from profuse hemorrhage from a large wound on the Scalp, and across the crown of he head—I stopped the bleeding with perchloride Of iron, and then dressed the wound—the bone was not injure; It was only laceration of the scalp—this chopper would produce it—it was A clean cut—it must have been inflicted with violence, even if an instrument Like this had been used.
Cross-examined. When I was dressing the wound I asked the constable Whether he had the criminal—you were standing by holding a basin, and You said "I am the man," and touched yourself on the breast.
ARTHUR OWEN TYLOR . I am an iron-bedstead maker—the prisoner has Worked for my father for 28 years—I gave him this revolver two or three years Ago—it was out of repair, and utterly useless, but he did something to it About two months ago, and I saw it in his possession about six weeks ago—When I gave it to him the barrel was broken—the revolving part did not Correspond with the barrel, and it could not be fired—it has been fired since, And the bullet has stuck between the two barrels—it will go off now, but The bullet will stick.
And the wife told me that it had been between the beds in the interval—the bullet is still sticking in the breech, and therefore it cannont be Fired now—the powder would explode if it were fired now.
The prisoner produced a written defence, stating that the prosecutrix refused To renew her intimacy with him, and that in his excitement he struck Her with something, he did not know what. He then intended to shoot Himself, but the pistol would not work.
GEORGE AYLMER MAJOR (Re-examined). The wound was well in three Weeks—I feared erysipelas taking place—it was only dangerous from loss Of blood—it was four and a-half-inches long—it must have been done with Considerable violence, but it had not penetrated the bone because it would Require great force even to go through her hair.
GUILTY on the Second Count.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. MILLWOOD Prosecuted.
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, January 14 th, 1880.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. RAVEN Prosecuted.
JOHN CRICK . I am a chairmaker, of 5 13, Hackney Road—about 2.30 a.m. on Boxing Day I was passing down Tuilerie Street, when I noticed one of the shutters down, and a window abroken at Silver, No. 22, I think—I saw two constables standing at the corner of the square, and I gave Information—we went back to Silver's, and saw the prisoner half-way Across the road leaving the shop—the constables caught hold of him, and The uppers fell out from under his coat.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not see you near the shop when I First passed—you would have had time to get away before we returned.
PAUL ALLMARK (Policeman H 151). Crick communicated with me, and I went with him and another constable to Silver's—the prisoner was standing Close to the shop window—he turned to go away, and I took him into Custody, when the uppers dropped from under his coat—he said "You Have made a mistake—I am not the man"—I roused Mr. Silver—I searched Under the prisoner's clothes, but found nothing more—he went quietly—I Examined the shutter; it had been wrenched down by a jemmy, or something—one shutter was taken down, and the glass of the window was broken large enough to admit a man's arm.
SAMUEL SILVER . I am a bootmaker, of 32, Tuilerie Street—I was roused By the police—I went down and found the iron bar forced open, the shutter Down, and the window broken—I had been in the shop about 9 or 10 O'clock, before going to bed, and left all fast—I missed 24 pairs of these Tops, which I had left on the bench by the window.
Prisoner's Defence. I had been out on Christmas night, and came home Down Tuilerie street, when I saw this shop was broken into, and these things
Were lying in the gutter. I picked them up and walked away with them. The shutter had been broken open by a jemmy. I had nothing in my Pocket but a pipe and tobacco. It is impossible to break open a shop without Anything to do it with. I had only six pairs on me, and 24 pairs were Stolen.
GUILTY .** He also PLEADED GUILTY to having been convicted of felony On the 6th May last.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. POLAND Prosecuted; MESSRS. WARNER SLEIGH and RAVEN Defended.
ARTHUR BROOKS . I am a clerk to Samuel Snell, 51, Pimlico Road, Wholesale grocer—about 7.30 p.m. on the 15th December the prisoner came In and asked Mr. Clough, the counter man, if he could oblige him with Change for a cheque—Clough asked me, and I said I could not—he showed Us this cheque (Produced). (This was for 8l. 15s., dated the 13th December, Payable to Dr. C. Whiting or order, signed Geo. Potter, and endorsed, C. Whiting.) I told Clough I could let him have a part, and I let him have 1l. at a time, to the amount of 5l., and the prisoner left the cheque with us—Mr. Whiting deals with us occasionally—after the prisoner left I took The cheque over to Mr. Whiting's, which is close by, and he knew nothing of It—I ran after the prisoner and met a policeman about half a mile off, and While speaking to him the prisoner passed, and I gave him into custody—he Said I had made a great mistake, and he was gentleman—he was in out Shop about three minutes, and I gave him in charge four or five minutes After.
Cross-examined. Mr. Whiting is a surgeon, at the corner of Ebury Street And Westbourne Street—ours is a large business, and at that time a great Many people were coming in and out—I did not speak to the prisoner—I Handed the money to the counterman—the prisoner was dressed about the Same as now if he had his hat on—I swear he had dark clothes on, and a High hat with rather a broad brim—I was making out invoice, and took The money from the desk—I said at the police-court "I did not get much View of his complexion; I noticed at the time he had a billygoat on the Chin"—it has grown, I believe, since he has been on remand.
Re-examined. I observed his features, and I am sure the prisoner is the Man—I got the sovereigns out while he was there.
EDWARD JAMES CLOUGH . I AM A Counterman in the service of Mr. Snell, and was behind the counter when the prisoner came in and gave me This cheque and asked for change—I passed it to Brooks and told him I Could not oblige him as I was rather short—I handed it back, and he asked If I could accommodate him with a portion, and that he came from Mr. Whiting—I passed the cheque back again and received a sovereign, which I gave him, and he asked for more—I asked for another sovereign, which I received from Brooks and gave it to the prisoner—then he said he should Like some more, and I received another sovereign, which I gave him—I them Gave him more, another, which he asked for, and then he asked for a pound's Worth of silver, which I gave him, making 5l.—he then left the cheque—I Went out—Brook's went out to see Dr. Whiting, and the next day I went To Rochester Row Police-court and immediately recognised the prisoner—I have not the least doubt of him.
Cross-examined. I do not cash cheques as a rule—I passed the cheque to Brooks—there are no goods kept on the counter—Brooks sits to the right of Me—I saw the signature of Whiting—I had never seen the prisoner before—Snell would no doubt hold me liable—the prisoner was in the shop for About 5 minutes—I said at the police-court three minutes—nobody else had Any conversation with the prisoner in the shop—there were no others in the Shop—I did not say at the police-court "He said he should like to have Some more if he could have it; Mr. Brooks had some further conversation With him, and then gave him 2l."—it is rather out of my recollection—my Depositions were read over to me—some one else may have come into the Shop—if Brooks said other customers were in the shop that is wrong—There was Turner, an assistant, behind the counter—the prisoner had rather A high hat on, with a broad brim, and I think the same coat that he has Now—he was not put with others at the police-court when I recognised him.
Re-examined. I have no doubt as to the prisoner—we change cheques to Oblige customers—I knew Mr. Whiting as one.
BENJAMIN PAYNE . I am a butcher, of 44, Pimlico Road, nearly opposite Mr. Snell's—about 7.15 on Monday, 15th December, the prisoner came in And said "Can you oblige Dr. Whiting with change for a cheque?"—I said "Yes," and he gave me this cheque for 8l. 15s. (produced), and I gave him The money—I told him it was a country cheque, and that it would be 6d., And he "Dr. Whiting will pay that"—I followed him out, and went To Dr. Whiting's, and from what I head there I at once went after the Prisoner—I took hold of his arm and said "There is something wrong about That cheque; you must come back; I must have my money back"—he said "It is right"—I said "Mr. Whiting has denied it"—he came back and Gave me back the money, and I gave him the cheque—I had a customer Waiting, and I said "I must serve this gentleman first," and while I was Serving the customer the prisoner went—I am sure he is the man.
Cross-examined. The cheque was signed, "S. Dove" it looked like—I Thought he was not Mr. Whiting's man.
Re-examined. I did not know the cheque was a forgery—it is on the Clydesdale Banking Company, Glasgow.
HENRY WILLIAM HAYTER . My father keeps a coffee-house at 46, Pimlico Road—I saw the prisoner there between 6 and 7 o'clock on the evening of The 15th December, with another man—they had two cups of coffee, and Asked me for pen and ink and blotting-paper, with which I supplied them—this is the blotting-paper (produced)—I afterwards gave it to the constable In charge of the case—they were in the shop six or seven minutes—Mr. Snell's is just over the way.
Cross-examined. There was nobody else in the shop to serve—I had Nothing else to do—they both had high-crowned hats on and dark clothes—I did not see whether either of them wrote anything—the other man had No hair on his face—they were about the same size—I did not notice a Broad brimmed hat—I had never seen them before that I know of—my Father told me of it, and I went the police-court yard the following Tuesday Week, and identified the prisoner amongst three other prisoners—I did not Notice whether the others had hats on like his—he had a high hat on.
Re-examined. I saw both the men go out of the shop—I have no doubt As to the prisoner.
Name is outside—this cheque is not endorsed by me, nor do I know anything About it—I did not send a similar cheque to Mr. Payne, the butcher, To cash—I received no part of the money—believe my family deals with Mr. Senll—he showed me a cheque—Icannot say whether it was like this—I don't know the prisoner.
WILLIAM DIXON WHITE . My address is 8, george street, Glasgow, Which is a branch of the Clydesdale Bank—former branch was in Ingram Street, as appears on this cheque—we have no such customer as George Potter—it is a form out bank, and supplied to a customer named Sheddon, whose account was closed in December, 1878—till today I did Not know what had become of him—customers keep the old cheque books.
THOMES BANFIELD (Policeman B R 22). about 7.45 p.m, on 15th December, Brooks spoke to me, and the prisoner passed by, and the former Gave the prisoner in custody for uttering a forded cheque at his shop—the Prisoner side "You must have made a mistake, I know nothing about it"—Books side "I have made no mistake; I am sure you are the man; I can swear to you; I shall give you in charge"—the prisoner side "All right; I will go with you anywhere; I am a gentleman"—at the police-station, when I was told to fetch Mr. Whiting, the prisoner side "I know Mr. Whiting very will"—when he came the prisoner hung his head and Side nothing—I searched him, and found 4l. 10s. in gold, 2l. 8s. in silver, And 7d. in bronze.
Crss-examined. I am well know in the neighbourhood—the defendant Gave me his name and address, which were correct—there where seven or Eight present when Hayter identified the prisoner—there where more then Three—they were not all prisoner, some were fetched in form the Street—the prisoner had his hat on; another man had a peacap—he Was dressed about the same as now, except his hat—I went to his Lodgings in mina Road, Old Kent Road, but fount nothing.
Re-examined. Emma Morris pointed out the room—she side he brought No luggage there.
EMMA MORRIS . I live at 3, mina Road, old Kent Road, with my Husband—the prisoner came to lodge there in October last—he took One furnished room at 4s. 6d. a week—he did not tell me where he came Form or what he was—he was in no employment, and had registered Letters come every fortnight—I did not see him open them—he had no Luggage, just an extra shirt or two—he side he had a private income—he Lived there till taken into custody.
Cross-examined. He used to pay me—he told me the registered letter Contained letter from his relations—he always behaved honestly to me, and Was steady and respectable in habits.
Re-examined. He did not say who his relations were.
MARY WOOLINGS . I am assistant to Mr. Richard collings, cofectioner, 150, Newington Butts—the prisoner came in on the evening of the 11th December, and side "Can You cash me a cheque?—it is for Dr. Bailey"—He handed me this cheque (produced). (This was a cheque, dated 10th December, 1879, for 8l. 15s., in favour of Dr. H. Bailey, on Lloya's Banking. Company, limited, BurtonuponTrent; signed "Henry Forbes", and Endorsed "H. Bailey.") I took it in to Mrs. Goddard, and she went out And spok to the prisoner—she came bake and gave me 6l., and I went into The shop and said "We can spare you 6l. Mr. Collings is not in, and
if you call in the morning you can the remainder"—he said "Thank you, I will"—he left, and Mrs. Goddard kept the cheque—he did not come the next day—I have no doubt that the prisoner is the man.
Cross-examined. I should think the prisoner was amongst seven or Eight others at the police-station when I identified him—no one else had A hat like his—there was no one else in the shop but Mary Potter, the Other assistance—I not speak to the policeman who had him in charge Before I identified him—the detective asked for a description, which I Gave, and he side that answered the description that he had—he asked Me whether he wore a broad brimmed hat—I went to the police-station About a week after the prisoner was in the shop—I connot remember—He come into the shop between 8 and 9 o'clock—his hat onely hid his Face as hate generally do.
Re-exmined. I identified the prisoner at the police-station at once.
EDWARD NEWSON RUSSELL . I manage a corn shop in the Kennington Park Road for Mr. Colling, about hafe a mile from Newington Butts—Between 7 and 8 o'clock p.m. on 11th December the prisoner came in and Asked me to oblige Dr. Bailey by cashing a cheque for 8l. 15s.—I told him I could not, as Mr. Colling was out—I am sure the prisoner is the man.
GUILTY of uttering .— judgment Respited.
FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, January 14th, 1880.
Bfore Mr. Common serjeant.
EDWARD LEIGH . I live at norcott Farm, guildford—in October, 1878, I advertised in the Exchange and Mart for copies of the I llustrated london News—I received this letter in reply. (This was dated 16th October, 1878, and purported to come from Mrs. Harvey, offering to send The "Illustrated Londan new" for 3s. a quarter; also the "field" newspaper For 3s. 6d. a quarter, perfectly clean.) I forwarded 3s.—I only received Three Illustrated London News, of 22nd and 29th October, and 5th November—I wrote several letters—I received one answer—this is it. (this stated that Mrs. Harvey had gone to Salisbury, and had instructed her news-agent to sent the papers, but that she would return on Thursday, when the papers should be forwarded.) I never received any more papers—I expected to get them when I sent the money.
REV. CARLES SUMPTER HARRIS . I am a clergyman, living at Maple Rectory, Near Ely—I advertised in the Exchange and Mart, and on 25th February Last I received this letter. (This offered to send the "Bazaar" for 2s. 9. a Quarter, and the "Field" for 3s. 6d. a quarter, perfectly clean, on the Day of publication, and giving as a reference Messrs, Bigenden and co., Solicitors, London Wall.) On the 26th February I wrote to Mrs. Aston, At the address given, enclosing postage-stamps for the amount—on the 27th February I received this letter. (This was from Mrs. Aston, 25, Gifford Street, Kingsland Road, and stated that the "Bazaar" newspaper could not Be supplied until the end of the quarter, and that the writer found that
the "Field" had been sent away to Queen's College, Combridge.) I received one copy of the Field the next day—altogether I received three or four copies, not regularly, but generally coming after a letter—I wrote several letters—in May I received this letter. (This stated that Mrs. Aston, of 25, Crawford Street, Bryanston Square, was surprised the papers had not been sent, as she had left them with a friend, and promised to return the balance of the money she had received, deducting for the papers that had been sent.) I never received the balance—I did not hear anything more Mrs. Aston—I considered I was dealing with a respectable person, and did not inquire into the references till afterwards, when I found the people did not exist—I expected to get the papers when I sent the money.
Cross-examined. I received the papers spasmodically—all the letters appeared to be written in a female hand.
CHARLES NICHOLSON . I live at Llewyn, near Newport, in Mommouth shire—on the 29th October, 1878, I advertised in the Exchange and Mart for the Field newspaper—I received a letter in reply, in consequence of which I forwarded 3s. 6d. in postage-stamps to Mrs. Harvey, of 23, Gifford Street—I received one paper—I wrote several letters complaining of the non-delivery of the papers—I also received this post-card. (This expressed surprise that the "Field" had not been sent, as it had been posted.) I received no further answers—I never received my money back—when I paid my money I expected to get the papers—I also wrote to Messrs. Bigenden, the reference given, but received no reply.
Cross-examined. The letter I received appeared to be in a woman's writing—my letter to Messrs. Bigenden was not returned to me.
CHARLES WYN ELAND . I advertised in the Exchange and Mart in November for the Queen newspaper, and received this reply. (This was from the same address, and offered to send the "Queen" and "Graphic" newspapers, posted every Sunday, on receipt of post-office order, and referred to Messrs. Bigneden and Co., solicitors, London Wall, E.C., and was dated 20th November, 1879, from Mrs. Harriet Harvey.) In consequence of receiving that letter I sent post-office order for 7s.—I received this letter on 25th November (stating that Mrs. Harvey's sister had taken the papers to Norwood, but they would be sent)—I received one Queen on 2nd December, I never received any money back—I wrote several letters to Mrs. Harvey, and then I wrote to the Editor of the Bazaar, enclosing copies of my letters—I parted with my money on the faith of getting the papers.
Cross-examined. I supposed I was corresponding with a lady.
JANE RANSOME . I live in Bancroft Street, Hitchin—I advertised for the Spectator newspaper in the Bazaar of the 14th November, and in reply received this letter. (From Mrs. Harriet Harvey, of 25, Gifford Street, Kingsland Road, of November 14, 1879, offering to send the "Spectator" at half-price On receipt of post-office order.) I forwarded 3s. 3d. in postage stamps, and received this ackonoledgment—I only received one paper—I wrote again, and received this reply (Stating that Mrs. Harvey had only just returned from Hertfordshire, and promising papers)—I never received a return of my money, nor any more papers—I sent the money believing the papers would be sent.
HERBERT JOHN REID . I live at Milton Stephenson, in Berkshire—in December last I advertised in the Bazaar newspaper for copies of the Bazaar—I received this reply (From 23, Gifford Street, Kingsland Road, of
6th December, 1878, offering to send "Bazaar" for 2s. 6d. a quarter, reference the Rev. P. Foide, Crawford Street, Bryanston Square, and Messrs. Simpson and Co., Newsagents, Shoe Lane; also offering to send the "Daily Telegraph" for 5s. a quarter)—in consequence of receiving that letter I sent 3s. 6d. in stamps—I got one or two papers—I wrote again and got no reply—I never got my money back—I parted with my money on the faith of getting the papers.
Cross-examined. The letter was in a female handwriting.
WILLIAM TURNER SYMONS . I live at Boston in Lincolnshire. I advertised in the Bazaar for the Fortnightly, Contemporary, and Nineteenth Century Reviews—I received this letter, dated February 12, 1879 (From Mrs. Aston, of 23, Gifford Street, Kingsland Road, offering to send these papers or the "Graphic" on receipt of post-office order)—I sent post-office order for 3s. 9d., payable to Mrs. Aston of the address given—I received no papers—I sent the money believing I should receive them.
JANE PAYNE . I am in Lady Antrobuse's service, of Piccadilly, and have been so for four years—the Rev. Philip Fowle was a clergyman at Lady Antrobus's country-house at Amesbury—he has been dead two years.
FRANCES CLARKE . I am a newspaper, of No. 1A, Wellington Street—in July, 1878, I allowed the prisoner to have letters addressed at my place in the name of Harvey—one or two came every day—he used to buy the Exchange and Mart there.
CHARLES RICHARD STEEL . I live at 6, Imperial Arcade, Ludgate Hill—in 1877 the prisoner had letters addressed to my shop in the name of Simpson—in consequence of what a customer said to me, I said to him "I have been told that you are a swindler; you must not have any more letters addressed at my place"—he did not come again—he said very little.
Cross-examined. He appeared to be offended, and looked sorrowful—I will swear the prisoner is the man—I had not seen him for three years when I saw him at Worship Street.
EMILY GRINDLEY . I live at 23, Gifford Street—the prisoner lodged at my house in the name of Henry Nunn—letters came addressed, "Mrs. Harvey," which the prisoner said were his—an old lady occupied the same room—she went by the name of Mrs. Nunn—I saw no other Mrs. Harvey.
Cross-examined. I did not know the prisoner as Harvey at all—the post-office orders were made payable to Lucy Nunn—the prisoner used to take the letters away and bring the post-office orders back signed.
JOHN STRETCH . I live at 24, Tabernacle Row, City Road—I also own No. 25—the prisoner lodged at No. 25 in the name of Nunn—letters came There addressed "Harvey"—the houses are let in weekly tenements, and the lodgers not knowing Harvey the letters came to me, and I said to the prisoner "Do you know any person named Harvey?"—he said "That is my name," and he received the letters—he lived there from April to November, 1877—others letters were addressed to Mr. Nunn, which he received—an old woman lived with him as Mrs. Nunn.
HENRY JOHN OVERTON CROSS . I am a clerk to Messrs. Bigenden, Solicitors, Finsbury Square Buildings—my employers have occupied those premises for 16 months—they were previously in London Wall—I do not know the prisoner—we have no client named Harvey or Nunn.
LUCY WYNSALL . I live at 12, Essex Street, Kingsland—the prisoner Took rooms in my house in the name of Nunn in 1877—he remained there 12 months, till last November 12 months—letters came addressed, one to Mrs. Harvey and others to Mrs. Nunn and Mr. Harvey, which the prisoner owned—Mrs. Luey Nunn lived with him—he left to go to Gifford Street.
WILLIAM HENRY SKINNERS . I a clerk at the Bazaar, Mart, and Exchange office—a list of defaulters who are bought to our notice is published, Which is called the Black Book—we have received complaints from time to time of Mrs. Simpson, 6, Imperial Arcade, George Harvey, of 25, Tabernacle Row, Mrs. Aston and Harriet Harvey, of 23, Gifford Street, Mrs. Eliza Harvey and Mrs. Nunn, of 114, Leadenhall Street, Mrs. Amelin Harvey, of 25, Tabernacle Row—I have here (produced) a bundle of letters containing complaints of the parties I have named, and enclosing letters purporting to come from Harvey, Nunn, and the other names mentioned—I have examined those letters—to the best of my belief they are in the same writing.
EDWARD WRIGHT . I live at 25, Crawford Street, Bryanston Square—I have lived there nine years—I have known the prisoner 26 years—I lost sight of him for 16 years—I never let my place to the Rev. Mr. Fowle, or anybody—I never gave the prisoner leave to use my house as a reference.
JOHN O'CALLAGHAN (Post Inspector). On the 14th November I inserted this advertisement in the Exchange and Mart: "Wanted.—The Times, posted on the day of publication. Address, stating lowest terms. R. H., Post-office, Waltham Abbey, Essex"—I had previously communicated with Robert Hole, an Inspector at Waltham in reply. I received this letter. (Dated 14th November, from Mrs. Harvey, 23, Gifford Street, Kingsland Road, N.E., offering to forward the "Times" for 10s. 9d. per Quarter, and referring to Messrs. Bigenden and Co., Solicitors, London Wall, E.C., and the Rev Fowle, at Lady Antrobus's.) I wrote to the address named, enclosing post-office order for the amount, and asking for the papers to be sent—this is a copy of the letter (produced)—on the 20th November I received this letter (Acknowledging receipt of post-office order, and stating that Mrs. Harvey would not be able to send papers till the 22nd November)—I received papers on the following Saturday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, when they stopped—I them sent this letter: "Sun Street, Waltham Abbey, December 1, 1879. Madam,—Papers have been sent very irregularly, Only four having reached me so far. As you have evidently no intention of carrying out your contract, I ask you to return the money. Yours truly, R. Hole." I received this reply (From Mrs. Harvey, of 23, Gifford Street, dated December 2, 1879, and stating she had only returned from the Country that morning, leaving papers to be sent by a friend, and promising to send them regularly for the future)—no papers were sent after that or with it—on the 6th Decmber, 1879. Madam,—I must ask you to return the money by Wednesday next, or I shall put you in the County Court. Yours truly, R. Hole." I did not wait for an answer, but took out a warrant the same day, and went to 23, Gifford Street—I inquired for Mrs. Harvey, and the
Prisoner came down—I said to him "Is Mrs. Harvey at home?—he said "No, she is not at home now"—I said "When can I see her?—he said "She is in Hertfordshire at present"—I said "can you give me her address there?—he said "No, I could not"—I said "We will go upstairs to your room"—we walked upstairs to a small front room on the second floor—I and Sergeant Denman, who was with me, followed him—I say my letter on the mantelshelf, which had been posted the same morning at Waltham Abbey—the letter was in the envelop, but opened—I said "Why, This is a letter for Mrs. Harvey; if she is away in the country, how is it it Has been opened?—he said "Well, I thought it might be something urgent, And I opened it"—afterwards he said "I opened it through mistake"—I Then hold him he would be charged with attempting to obtain 10s. 9d. by False pretences by pretending to supply papers to Mr. Hole, of Waltham Abbly—I ought to have added, a newspapers was sent which reached Waltham abbey the day after the prisoner was in custody—I told the Prisoner we were police-officer when I said we should take him into custody—these were the papers sent—I have not opened them—I have examined all the documents produced in this case—to the best of my belief they are all in the same handwriting.
Cross-examined. Idid not say at first we were policeman—the prisoner May have known Denman—my letter was the only one I found relating to this trnsaction.
GUILTY . Recommended to mercy on account of his age.— Fifteen months' Imprisonment.
GERARD DE SCHMID . I live at Woodland Cottage, Wellington, Somerset—I inserted an advertisement in the Exchange and Mart in June last that I Had some light Brahma fowl to dispose of, at 3s. 6d. each—I received this Letter, dated June 19th, 1879, asking me to send the fowls, and in conesquence I sent off the six fowls by the Great Western Railway to the address Given—I received an acknowledgment—I wrote again on 16th and 19th July, but got no reply—I was never paid—I believed it was bonafide Transaction when I sent my fowls—I never got them back.
JAMES WILLIM WOOD . I live at Wood Villa, Shirley Road, Southampton—I put on advertisement in Exchange and Mart for some rabbits—I forget the date, but it was previous to the 12th June—I received this replay. (From R.W. Whitehead, offering pure bred Hambro doe rabbits at 2s. 9d. each, package included, warranted good breeders.) In consequence I sent a post-office order to the address for 9s. and 2s. 6d. for a dozen rabbit through—I never received my money back nor the rabbits or rabbit-through—I acted on the faith of the printed bill-head.
ROBERT CARR . I am employed by Carter, Paterson, ant Co., carriers—I produce way bill of hamper containing live fowls, which I delivered on 12th June at Mr. Whitehead's, Victoria Park Road—I do not know the number.
EDWIN FRITH . I live at 8, Westbury street, Plymouth, and am a tea-merchant—in July last I inserted an advertisement in the Bazaar news-paper for some gold-fish, in the same of F. Edwin—I received this replay. (From A. Reeves, enclosing card of A. Reeves, horticulturat builder, 43, Brook Road, Dalston. Poultry house, forcing-pits, melon-frames, and c.," and Offering a dozen. Gold fish for sale.) In consequence of receiving that I sent A Post-office order for 12s. 6d., payable to A. Reeves, at the address stated—in consequence of not receiving them I wrote several letters—I received this one replay, of the 5th August (An undertaking to send the fish)—I never received the fish, and receiving no answers to my letters, I put the correspondence into the hands of private friends, who made inguiries—in sending the Post-office order I relied on the truthfulness of the letters I received and the card enclosed.
ABRAHAM HENRY JUBB . I live at 35, Cromwell Street, Halifax—in November last I saw and answered an advertisement in the Live Stock Journal for pullets for sale at 21, Pratt's Road, Clapton—I received this Replay that address.(A printed heading of "George Mean and co., Importers, and c., and offering to sent the pullets at 2s. 4d. each, if all were Taken.) I wrote agreeing to take the pullets, and received this replay (Asking for one half of amount to accompany order, when 50 pullets would be sent)—I then sent a Post-office order 2l. 18s. 4d. to the same address—I received this reply (On a different printed heading;" mean and Co; London and New york, rubber type Foundry," but the same address, dated 27th November, 1879, stating that mean and Co. had so many orders that they Would have to be attended to in rotation)—I never recived and fowls nor Any money back—looking at the bill heads I parted with my money believing It to be a bond fide transaction.
GEORGE LONG . I live at brickwood cottage upper Addiscombe road East Croydon—in November last I saw and answerd an advertisement in The live stock Jaurnal of pullets for sale by George Meeans and co., of 21 Partt's Road, Clapton—I wrote to that address and recived this reply (with printed heading, that if he would have 20 pullets, they would take 2s. 6d., packed and free of carriage, and would refund money if satisfaction not given)—in consequence of receiving that I sent a post-office order for 2l. 10s.—I afterwards received this letter (With printed heading, that fowls would be sent from their country farm in Norfalk on the following Monday)—I never received my fowls not my money back—I parted with my money believing the firm was genuine.
HENRY WOODS . I carry on business at the Steam Saw Mills, Cardiff—On 14th November I saw and answered an advertisement in the Live Stock Journal of some pullets for sale by George Mean,. Of 21 Pratt's Road, Clapton—I worte, inclosing a post-office order for 16s. 6d., for 6 fowls—the order was post-dated and it was teturned in this letter (stating that Mean and Co. made it a rule never to accept Post-dated orders or cheques)—I then Fowels will be sent off to-night, will reach Cardiff to-morrow early'—I Never received the fowls nor a return of the money—I believed I should receive the fowls when I sent my money.
ALFRED THATCHER . I live at 43, Brook Road, Dalston—I wont into the prisoner's service last Easter—I knew him before—he engaged me personally, and agreed to pay me 6s. a week at first, afterwards I got 6s. a a week and my food—I was in his service five months, at 140, Victoria Park Road—he lived in the same house with his parents, and in my duties as errand-boy I went into that house—the prisoner was there alone during the day—I saw customers come in for birds—my duties were to feed the birds and run errands—the room was full of birds—he asked me if I would not mind taking in some letters for him at 43, Brook Road, Dalston—I said I would do so, and I did—a good lot came, and I gave them to him—most of them were ordinary letters, but one or two were registered—I knew him all this time as Reeves—I saw printed bill-heads in the name of Whitehead, but I did not see much of them, as they were kept downstairs—no one else gave me orders, and I saw no one else engaged in his business.
Cross-examined. I am 16 years old on the 13th of July—I have known the prisoner about five years—I knew him first in the Blackiston Road, London Fields—I do not know if he went to school then—I have left school about three years—I did not know the prisoner's exact age, but I did not think he was more than 16 or 17—I used to call for him at his father and mother's house sometimes on a Sunday, but not for long—they had not been there long—they previously lived in the Blackiston Road.
Re-examined. There is no A. Reeves at 43, Brook Road, where the prisoner asked me to take in the letters for him.
FREDERRICK CHANDLER . I am a clerk in the advertisement office of the Live Stock Journal in Belle Sauvage Yard—I produce a number of draft advertisements sent for insertion in our journal from Mean and Co.—I received complaints of Mean and Co.—I also received letters from Mean and Co. in the same writing.
Cross-examined. The advertising by Mean and Co. has been going on for about eight or nine months—I have not the books here to show it—I cannot say whether it extended further back—I cannot say that we received complaints of Mean and Co. as far back as four years ago—it may be so.
Re-examined. This is a copy of our journal.
WILLIAM HENRY SKINNER . I am a clerk in the office of the Exchange and Mart—we publish what we call a Black Book of complaints—we have received a great number of complaints of a Mr. Whitehead, 140, Victoria Park Road; of Mean and Co.,21A, Pratt's Road, Clapton; of Reeves and Co.,140, Victoria Park Road; of Alfred Stone, of Horncastle's Advertising Agency, Cheapside—I have those letters of complaints here.
Cross-examined. The Black Book is merely a paragraph which we publish in our newspaper of complaints under the heading of "Black Book"—we have published it for about nine years, and the paper about 12 years—I have been there about three years—I could not say exactly when Mean and Co. first advertised in the Exchange and Mart, nor Whitehead—I got these other letters of complaint from Inspector O'Callaghan—the defaulters forming the Black Book, vary considerably—the name is continued as long as complaints arrive—if fresh complaints are made after the name has been taken out it is reinserted.
GEORGE CHAPMAN (Police Sergeant N). I was instructed to keep an observation on No. 21a, Pratt's Road—I saw a large number of letters delivered there by post—I followed the prisoner—I saw him go to the
post-office more than a dozen times from the 13th to the 27th November—I saw him cash post-office orders in Chapsford Road Post-office—I have also seen him post many letters—I saw persons whom I now know to be bis father, mother, and brother-in-law enter the house—I saw persons come with complaints—I saw no fowls or live stock sent off—I saw some 15 to 20 fowls in the kitchen in a dying state—I asked the prisoner if he knew Mean—he said "No, he does not come here only once a fortnight," and he could not tell where he lived or anything more about him—that was about a week before he was taken.
WILLIAM CANE (Police Sergeant N). I watched Pratt's Road—I saw the prisoner going towards the post-office; when he saw me he ran away—I followed him—I was in plain clothes—he ran back to 21, Pratt's Road—I followed him—I knocked at the door, and after some time I got admittance—I said to the prisoner "What is your name?"—he said "My Dame is Harris, and I live with my mother and father in the Mile End Road"—I said "Where did you sleep last night?"—he said "Upstairs"—I then went upstairs into a small room with the prisoner; there was a table and a bed, and on them were these papers; these post-cards, addressed to different people, and signed Mean and Co., a copy of the Live Stock Journal of 28th November, with a caution inserted of complaints of Mean and Co.,21, Pratt's Road; this card, "George C. Long, Brickwood Cottage, Upper Addiscombe Road, Croydon. Fowls sent this day. yours, Mean and Co.," and the address—the two cards of the Brook Road, Dalston, address of "A. Reeves, Horticultural Builder, portable greenhouses, &c.;" this circular of "G. Mean and Co., Bicycle Agents, &c.;" this price list of pigeons and this draft for printing "Mean and Co., Insurance Commission and Bicycle Agents, patentees, machines, and miscellaneous dealers, &c.;" also this circular of "Co-operative stores for all kinds of machinery;" also in the same handwriting this poem commencing, "Cast away, thro all the silent day, his dear one far away, the fierce sun hoary beaming, the ocean round him gleaming, the shipwrecked sailor lay alone"—I saw the prisoner's father, and in the prisoner's presence I asked him "Dou you know the prisoner?"—he said "Yes, be is my son."
Cross-examined by MR. FULTON. Chapman was with me during the conversation—I did not go up and tap the prisoner on the shoulder, but went to the door, which was opened by an old woman—after the conversation I sent for the inspector—the prisoner was not then in custody—I did not watch Victoria Park Road at all—I believe the prisoner was the same person who advertised from that address—I believe that place was watched—his father came in about 8 o'clock in the evening—he lives there, and not in Victoria Park Road.
JOHN O'CALLAGHAN (Police Inspector N). In consequence of information I received I gave directions to Chapman and Cane to watch 21A, Pratt's Road—on the 5th of December I was sent for to go there—I got there about 3 p.m.—I went upstairs into the bedroom where the prisoner was—I said "What is your name?"—he said "Harris"—I said "Do you know Mean, or where he could be found?"—he said "Mean has not been here for about eight days, and I do not know where he lives"—the bed and also the table in the room were covered with addressed post cards, letters, papers, copies of the Exchange and Mart—I saw some post cards bearing the date of that day—I said "If Mean has not been here for eight days
who has written these?"—he said "I wrote some of them"—I said "Which?" and he took up this envelope addressed "Messrs. Thomas Bradbury, 140 to 148, High Holborn, London"—I said "Why they are all in the same writing"—he made no answer—I said to the officers in the prisoner's presence "Remain here till you see whether anybody comes to the house, and whether he may be Mean"—the father was not present then—I returned at 9 o'clock—the prisoner was then alone with the officers—I sent for the father and brother-in-law—I said to the father "Is this lad your son?"—he said "Yes"—I said "A number of people complain of having been swindled by a person of the name of Mean, and this lad appears to have done all the writing; do you know who Mean is?"—he said "I do not, I am engaged all day, and I do not know how he (the son) has been employed"—I asked the brother-in-law his name, and he said Stone—I said to him "Do you know Mean"—he said "I do not, I am engaged in the City all day; I know nothing about the matter"—I then produced the papers in Jubb's case and showed them to the prisoner—I said to him "You will be charged with obtaining 2l. 18s. 4d. from Mrs. Jubb, of Halifax, by false pretences"—he said nothing at that time—he was taken to the station and the charge formally read over to him—he then said "I wrote these papers for Mean" (the papers were in his hand at the time) "but I know nothing more about it"—I and Chapman had taken possession of the papers and they were brought to the station—I have been carefully through them—the draft in the name of Mean is in the same writing as all the other documents, including Jubb's papers—the 41 letters of complaint is an analysis of the Exchange and Mart Black Book—the receipt of this post-office order signed "R W. Whitehead" is also the same writing; also the signature to this way bill—I have tried to find if Mean exists and I have failed to find him—I also called at 140, Park Road—I saw a woman that I now know to be the prisoner's mother; also Mr. Reeve, the father—the first complaint of Pratt's Road was in October—the prisoner's parents left Victoria Park Road in July—in the intermediate time they were at Reeves's.
Cross-examined. It was in July when I went to Park Road—I have been since—I saw the mother at both addresses—I never said I saw the prisoner's mother in Victoria Park Road in November—if I said so it is a mistake—I saw the prisoner 21A, Pratt's Road in November.
WILLIAM CAN . I found on the prisoner 2s. 9 1/2 d.—the prisoner was taken into custody until the evening—my object was to find Mean if there was a Mean—I mentioned before the Magistrate that the prisoner told me his name was Harris.
GUILTY .— Fifteen Months' Imprisonment.
MR. CROOME Prosecuted.
ELIZA MARIA BRISTOWE . I live at 22t Wilson Street, York Road, Wandsworth—my sister married the prisoner on the 24th of August, 1847, at St. George's Church, Horselydown—I was present—my sister is still alive—she was before the Magistrate—they lived together till 12 years ago at Barking—I did not visit them—they separated and my sister came to me at 22. Wilson Street—I have not seen the prisoner for 20 years, about 1860, till I saw him at the police-court.
LUCRETIA ELIZABETH FAITHFULL . I live at 5, Ealing Road, Bromley-by-Bow—I was married to the prisoner on the 24th August, 1876, at St. George's Church, Bethnal Green—I had known him as child—I Was a widow when I married him—my husband died in 1876—the prisoner Came in 1875 to visit my husband in his illness—afterwards I worked to Support my children and had daily wages—the prisoner married me and allowed me 15s. a week to keep himself, his three boys, and my own five chil ren—he worked for a few weeks—he said his wife had been dead some time—I afterwards made inquiries and found that his wife went into the union.
JAMES HOWLETT (police Constable). I took the prisoner into custody on 30th November, at 112, Usher Road, Bow—I said "I shall fake you into custody for marrying Elizabeth Faithfull, your wife Mrs. Southey being then and now alive"—turned round—I said "Do you deny being Robert Southey?"—said "No, I cannot deny that"—he asked me if Taken you for a long time"—I had been doing so for three months, and Could years"—before whereabouts—he said "I have not seen my wife for Eight years"—before the Magistrate he said "The last time I saw her was Somewhere about two years ago at Illford"—I produce the certificated of the first and second marriages.
As there was no evidence that the prisoner knew his first wife was alivs for Seve years prior to the second marriage, the Jury returaed a verdict of
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Thursday, January 15th, 1880.
Before Mr. Recorder.
173. JAMES THOMAS ALLEN (26) PLEADED GUILTY to three indictments for embezzling and stealing several sums amounting to 88l: 5s: 10d., the property of the " Richard Green" the permanent Building Society, his masters, and to falsifying their books— Judgment Respited.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, January 15th, 1880.
Before Mr. Common Serfeant.
MR. BESLEY prosecuted; MR. THORNE COLE Defended.
ROBERT SHEPHERD . I was barman to Sarah Cakebread. at the Green Man, Bethnal Green—a partition divides the bur into two compartments. But when my face was towards them I could see every one in the bar—on 11th December, about 6 p.m., the prisoner came into the private compartment, And at the same time a man who is not in custody come in on the other Side, opposite where the gold is kept—there was a half-sovereign on the Shelf and some silver—I served the other man first with two of gin—he I saw two constables standing at the corner of the square, and I gave gin—he threw down a halfpenny, and said "That will not pay for it, will it?—I said "No," and went to serve the prisoner—he had two of whisky and cold water—I took his money, and then went back to the man who had
put down the halfpenny and took his money—I then sat down on a stool, and the prisoner said "Have you got nice cigars?"—I took him a box of threepenny cigare—he said "These are not good enough; give me a beeter one'—I tetched the fourpeuny cigars—he turned them over, and said "What makes these spot?"—I said "I don't know," and began to get out of temper with him—he kept turning them over, and bought one—I then sat down close by the gold—he said "Give me another, these are so nice," and gave me a sovereign—he kept turning the eigars over, and said "What makes them so big at the top!"—I changed the sovereign—he kept on drawing my attention, and his eyes kept looking across to the other side of the ber—I would not turn my head because I thought he wanted to take two of three cigars instead of one—Mrs. Cakebread then came in, and said to the other man in the prisoner's hearing "What are you doing with that stick? Robert, do you see him?"—he said "What?" and rushed towards the door—I said "What, is there any gold gone?—she said "Yes, half a sovereign"—prisoner rushed out also, and they both left their grog on the counter, and when I got outside the door they were both running together—I halloaed to them—they could see me with my apron on, but they would not stop—I lost sight of the other one behind a waggon—I followed the prisoner and spoke to a constable; we both ran after him; he fell just as we got to him—the constable said "Where are you going?"—he said "To catch the bus," but there was no bus in sight—gave him in custody.
Cross-examined. I ran more than half a minute, speaking to the constable as well—I do not remember whether it was foggy night, but I did Not lose sight of the prisoner—it was between 5.30 and 6'o'clock—the Salmon and Ball is the next public-house to ours—when the landlady came in the other man walked to the door and nearly knocked an old woman down—the landlady did nit accuse him of stealing a half-sovereign, because she had not time to count the money—I gave my evidence next day, and the prisoner was remanded for a week—I did Not see any one connected with the Licensed Victuallers' Society between the first examination and the second, nor did I see any one come and speak to the landlady—I gave evidence again on the 19th—there is a ground glass partition in front of the counter, and I serve underneatn it—it stands on two brackets, and the liquor is pushed under—is room for a three-pint jug to go through—the orders also are given underneath, but there is a little partition which they can look through where there is no glass.
Re-examined. There were no other customers in the bar—I did not say "Is there any gold gone?" till after they left—went out directly—the money was counted afterwards—the bar goes round in a circle—persons in one compartment can see persons in the other compartment between the ground glass—you cannot look over the partition; it is very high.
SARAH CAKESREAD . I keep the Green Man, Bethnal Green—on 11th December, about 6 p.m., I was sitting in the bar parlour, which has a glass Door frosted, and saw the shadow of a stick across the glass—I went into The bar and saw a man with a stick—he seemed to draw it over, and he Shut it up like a telescope—it made a faint clicking noise—I said "What are you doing?" and he rushed out of the house instantly without finishing His drink—I then spoke to the larman, and missed a half-sovereign—I saw the prisoner in the bar they both rushed out together—a person in the private bar can see a person in the other compartment.
Cross-examined. There had been 30s. in gold on the shelf, and I miseed A half-sivereign—my barman had given the prisoner one pound's worth of Silver in change for a sovereign—that was taken from the bar mantelpiece—I did not go outside the door—it was rather a foggy night.
CLEMENT JONES (Policeman K 164). On 11th December, about 6 p.m., I was in Cambridge Road, about three yards from the Salmon and fall Where there is a large open space—I saw the prisoner running to yards me And the barman 13 yards behind him—I chased the prisoner 100 yards Farther, and he fell accidentally—I was on him before he had time to get up—he said "What are you holding me for? I was running to catch the omnibus"—I said "You could not be running to catch the omnibue, for I saw one pass during the time; I shall take you to the station for stealing half a sovereign"—I searched him at the station, and found two pounds worth of silver on him, but no gold—he was charged with stealing a half sovereign with a pers'n not arrested—he made no answe—I said "Whare do you live?—he said "I refuse my address."
Cross-examined. It was not a foggy night; I swear that—I Pulled him Up by his collar—I did not shove my kauckles into his throat—Inspector Smith asked him where he lived, but I heard everything I have got nothing against the prisoner.
Re-examined. I did not call it foggy; I could see the prisoper running 30 yards off—the Green Man 60 or 70 yards froth the Selman and Ball—there was no omnibus in sight during the whole of the time; they de not was there at all; they pass the Salmon and Ball, which is at the junction of two roads.
NOT GUILTY .
For another indictment against the prisoner see Eessx casee.
OLD COURT.—Friday, January 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 1880.
Before Mr. Recorder.
175. FRANK WILTON (28) and EDWARD LEAROYD (25) , Unlawfully obtaining 20 pieces of cloth from James Knox Hart by false representations within four months of presenting a petition for the liquidation of their affairs, and THOMAS DUNDERDALE (31) for aiding and abetting them. Thirty-nine Other Counts, for obtaining other goods from other persons, and for conspiracy to defrand.
MR. BULWER, Q.C., with MR. MEAD prosecuted; MR. WILDEY WEIGHT With MR. SIDNEY JERROLD appeared for Wilton; MR. WADDY. Q.C., With MR. TICKELL for Learoyd; and MR. J.P. GRAIN for Dunderdale.
The prisoners, under the advice of their counsel, declining to plead to the Indictment, the Court directed a plea of
NOT GUILTY to be entered.
CHARLES RICHARDSON , M.R.C.S., of Brunswick plice, North Street, Leeds. I have been attending Mr. John Benn, of Leeds—I saw him last Night at 9 o'clock; he is recovering from an attack of bronchitis but is Quite unfit to leave his house or to travel.
WILLIAM HENRY ARMITAGE . I am an accountant, carrying on business At Huddersfield—on the filing of the petition in the liquidation of Frank Wilton, Edward Laroyd, and filing of the petition in the liquidation of Frank Appointed receiver, and on 24th October I was appointed trustee—I was Made an examination of the debtors' affairs; I find that Edward Learoyd And Wilton entered into partnership on 1st January, 1879; I have not
been able to ascertain what capital Wilton introduced—he had been carrying on business previously up to the beginning of 1879, and it was than taken up by him and Edward Learoyd; it was a colonial trade—Edward Learoyd introduced 1,952l., 12s., 8d. into the concern—the colonial business Was carried on more or less up to about June—the woollen business was Commenced on 14th February, 1879—that was when the first parcel of Goods was bought, but it was not really commenced until May—I did not Find any record of when Dunderdale was engaged by the firm only from What Wilton and Learoyd told me—I think Wilton told me that Dunder-Dale was engaged in April as bayer—Sidney Learoyd joined the firm in May with a capital of 4,167l. 11s. 6d.; that amount was advanced in different Sums from 20th March to 14th August—after I was appointed receiver I went to 66, Mark Lane, the London office of the firm—I believe they also had an office at No. 8 Rue St. Josef, Paris—I know they had a room at Huddersfield—I don't know whether they occupied it at the time they filed the petition; there was nothing in it—I found about 50 books altogether, ledger, journal, Cash-book, day-book, &c.—I found no stock-book—I found no books in which there were any entries of goods pawned at Faulkner's Canchai Dunckley, and Allen's—there was no press copy-book containing copies of transfer orders relating to goods pledged—there was no book containing invoices of woollen goods from manufactories—there were the invoices themselves upon the file, but I believe no copies—there was an entry in the ledger of one sale to James; that was the only record of any sale—there was a record of six other lots which went to Genoa, but no record of any sale in England besides that to James—the amount of that sale was 1,697l. 19s. 8d.—the total amout of parcels of woodlen goods from February till 1st October was 14,442l. 18s. 3d., of that 4,771l. 9s. 11d. has been paid in cash, and 357l. 8s. by customers bills which have been met; of those goods 6,051l. 16s. 6d. were consigned to paris—there were other goods sent to Paris, but they had been advanced upon by Mr. Allen; the total amount would be 8,410l. 8s. 3d., but of that 2,400l. belongs to Mr. Allen—Mr. Walker, one of the creditors, estimated in Wilton's presence that the amount of goods sold in Paris was 6,052l. 14s. 10d., and Wilton said that was so, and I think he explained it at the general meeting of creditors at the George Hotel on 24th October—there is a letter which gives the full explanation of the whole thing; it was written in French, and Wilton read it out in English; it appears that of that 3,152l. 4s. 8d. and 650l. 3s., 11d. were pledged to Mr. Dufourcets; he had advanced money upon them—this information was given to me before I was appointed trustee, while I was in London preparing the statement; it was told me by Wilton and Mr. Walker, and repeated over and over again—Wilton stated that there were some goods in the hand of the Magasin Generale, and that Dufourcets had redeemed those goods, and taken the whole of the 6,000l., odd upon his own shoulders—it does not appear from the statement that goods were pawned with any other person—the liabilities of the firm are 10,980l. 18s., 6d., and the assets are given as 1,004l., 2s. 6d., but I estimate pected to realise about 200l.; that is his household furniture where he was living with his wife—I have ascertained the amounts which the different partners drew; Edward Learoyd drew 709l. 16s. 8d., about 100l. of that Mr. Wilton lent to him before they commenced partnership—Wilton's
drawing were 606l. 16s. 3d., and the Sidney Learoyd's 288l., 12s. 8d.,—I have had conversation with the different defendants—Wilton told me very fairly everything—about four days from 1st October, and whilst I was receiver, he told me that he was way in Paris, that Dunderdale had bought a parcel of good from a man of the name of Robshaw, and that Dunder-dale had arranged to pay 400l. cash down, and the balance in a bill at two months—I think he said the amount of the purchase was a little over 600l. and when he came home he found Robshaw and Dunderdale in the office, Robshaw having come there to get the 400l.; that he (Wilton) said "Why, we cannot pay 400l. cash at once; we have no got it," but Robshaw then said "Well, Mr. Dunderdale knows where to get it"—that he then suspected in a moment that he meant that he was to pledge the goods, and he ordered Robshaw out of the office—he also said that Robshaw came again, and said he must have the money, and that then Dunderdale pledged the goods with Mr. Faulkner—Wilton also gave me particulars as to what goods were pledged; he said they were pledged simply because they wanted some money to be going on with, intending to get them out again, and send them over to their customers in Paris, having taken large orders there; that they redeemed as many as 6,051l. 16s. 6d., and sent those over to Paris to complete the orders, but they were too late though having been pledged in London, and therefore they were thrown upon their hands in Paris—he said that the colonial business was a nice business; that he saw that rain was coming on this woolen business, and he intended to send Dunderdale down to Yorkshire to buy from, 3,000l. to 5,000l. worth of woolen goods, make a desperate struggle to get out of the woolen trade, and get back into the colonial, when they would be all right, and make money—he said the goods were pawned at the rate of 2 per cent. Per fortnight interest, and that they got about 60 per cent. Advanced upon them—Edward Learoyed was present during this interview—he said little or nothing; he generally endorsed what Wilton said, a sort of "Yes" or "No" to anything that was put to him—I asked Dunderdale how it was that they were pawing goods in this manner, and did he not know what it would lead to—he said "Well, I have nothing to do with it; I am simply the buyer, and that is all I have to do with it"—he subsequently said that they were put there for a very short time, just to get a little money, and then they would redeem them again—after Wilton's arrest I saw him in prison and asked him for a copy letter-book containing particulars of pledgings to the parties in London—he said "I cannot do with your coming down here asking me question now; Mr. Armitage, the solicitor, is my father confessor, I will tell him everything and he can tell you what he likes"—before this partnership Wilton was in the colonial trade, and he told me he had failed in march, 1878, and paid his creditors 4s. in the pound; he did not say whether he had his discharge.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I have had before me the books relating to Wilton's business before he was joined by Learoyed—he carried it on as Frank Wilton and Co., as a colonial and general merchant—he told me that subsequent to that failure he started again in business at the same place about July, and in the same name—I can't say that he said it was with his trustee's full consent—between the time of his recommencing and the time he was joined by Learoyed he turned over 14,244l. odd, and it had every appearance of being a fair, legitimate, and profitable business—up to
the time of his arrest he answered me every question I put to him, I believe fairly and straightforwardly—I believe that he did not conceal anything form me—I have ascertained the amounts for which the goods were pledged, but I have not ascertained the value, except that the prices were the invoice prices, except in one case wilton told me that he put 6d., a yard on some portion of goods that Mr. Cacuhai had—I presume those were goods going to the paris market—about 60 per cent. was advanced upon them—afther Learoyed joined the firm the business was carried on under the name of Learoyed, Wilton, and Co.—both before and after Learoyd jained, the firm of phillipine, pellissier, and Co. were in the habit of discounting the foreign of bills of the firm, and to a considerable extent—there were legitimate transactions of considerable magnitude between then—that firm failed about march, 1879—the defendant's firm by that failure sustained a loss of 2,256l. 12s. 7d., but we cannot make out a claim against the trustee for more then half—wilton gave us those figures; they were taken out of the bill-book—I should say it is a more difficult matter to get foreign bills discounted in England than English bills—I have got everything the defendants gave up to me; there are some bankers' books, cheques, and so on—I find that all the sums obtained by pledging were legitimately paid in to the banking account of the firm; the pass-book shows that—I should take it, from the books, that the repayments were made in a legitimate way by cheque, but I have nothing particularly to prove it—Wilton told me that at one time they had a business in Genoa—I can only trace 467l. 3s. 7d. worth of goods sents to Genoa—he told me that some samples were sent to France, Italy, and Belgium—Mr. Wallker is one of the principal creditors—I have not seen him hare; he want over to Paris with Wilton at the time of the failure—I don't know that Mr. Walker has declined to have anything to do with this prosecution; he voted for it at the statutary meeting—he offered to be bail—I don't know how the goods were pledged at the Magasin Generale.
Cross-examined by MR. WADDY. I believe the Magasin Generale is connected with, and has the sanction of the Government—Wilton told me that it was very largely used by merchants in Faris—I have known Learoyd perhaps two yers, but not to speak to till just now—I have known his family in Huddersfield 10 or 12 years; his father is dead—his mother, in 1876, married a gentleman who was Mayor of Huddersfield last years, a magistrate of the west West Riding, and a gentleman of the highest position—I don't know any of the brothers but this one and Mr. Sidney; I know There are several sisters—in the course of this inquiry I have had occasion to see all the books, which were found for me, and also to have repeated interviews with Learoyd—my opinion is that he has been almost a nonentity; I believe he has known what was going on, but "Give me 20l. and you can go on as you like, I want some money"—I have had to deal with his private estate as well as with his interest in the partnership but this, nor was he ever apprenticed to any—when he came of age he had 8,000l. I believe—I only know this through him was invested in a ship called the Zanzibar—I think he spent a good lot of it on the Continent, supplying the Turkish army, etc,—I believe he lost a lot in that, the resrt I think he put Into the Zanzibar—out of the 8,000l. not a sixpence is left—in order to get
the money to put into this business he had to raise it on his shares in the Zanzibar; speaking roughly, he got about 1,500l. at first and 500l. afterwards; 1,1590l. has gone altogether, and 240l. of sidney's; there is another 300l. to came; that will have to be divided—at the time of amash he was lodging at 6, cravan street, strand—his furniture that was taken possession of was at Taylor's Repository, pimlico—the business consisted in getting goods form Yorkshire and different places and sending them up to town—as far as I know the amount put in by the two Learoyds was the entire capital with which the business was worked—the failure of pellissier would clear off the whole of their capital—it was after that that the other brother was induced to put in his money; he was involved in this bankruptcy, and was also cleared out—Edwart Learoyd was present at the canversation when wilton told me about the goods being in the hands of the Magasin Generale—that was between the 1st and the 10th October—I was present when Learoyd gave his statement to the credirors on the 24th October—he was examined by Mr. Samuel Learoyd, of Huddersfield; he is no relation—another Mr. Learoyd is solicitor to the trustee; he also is no relation—?Mr. Beaumout Taylor was at the meeting—he is a large woolen manufacturer at Huddersfield and one of the creditors—he was one of a committee of six or seven appointed to consider whether there should be a prosecution, and to consider matters in general, to perpaer for the statutory meeting—I was not aware that he told Mr. Learoyd that the committee had determined if he stated all that he told know about the business, and all that he could get to know, he should not be prosecuted, because they ware of opinion that he had known comparatively little or nothong about it—if there was such a committee I was not present—Mr. Sidney Learoyd was also examined at the statutory meeting—Wilton was represented there by a solicitor, Learoyd was not—I heard it suggested by one or two creditors that if he would make a clean breast of everything he should not be prosecuted—he was under examination by Mr. Samuel Learoyd for a considerable time, and made a very full statement—with regard to many questions that were put to him his answer was simply that he did not know—I believe that he has givan all the information that he could—with regard to both the defendants they have not held anything back from me that I know of; they have told me everything—any question I have asked them they have given me a satisfactory answer—at the time of the examination on the 24th I had not been appointed trustee, I was appointed immediately afterwards, at the same meeting—they were given into cusody about half an hour after—I never spoke to them after I was appointed until after they were apprehended—it was by the direction of Mr. Learoyd, the solicitor, that Mr. Walker went over to paris—I thing there are some entries in the bill-book in Edward Learoyd's writing, but not in any other—he told me he did not know much about the books—I dare say I have stated that there were assets, something over 1,000l. but they have turned out so badly, there has been nothing to realise except the 340l. that has been recovered from constitutes the Zanzilbar and the balance of Edward Learoyds furniture that constitutes the assets—I think 130l. was received yesterday from Dawbarne's—there was a preliminary meeting at leeds, when an account was presented showing the estimated state of the estate, upon the assumption that the goods were worth what they had been bought for—I don't thing that showed the estste to be solvent, but nearer then I show it now; that was form figures put in
by the defendants—I have had a good deal of experience in the woollen trade—I think some of these goods were badly bought—I think learoyd told me that he was in Scotland in August; he had married a young lady from Aberdeen shortly belive—he was in Scotland about six weeks, and on his return I think he said he went to Paris.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I know Dunderdale's family—I believe his father has retired, and is living at Huddersfield, a person of means and property—he has a brother an architect at Huddersfield—the amount of salary drawn by Dunderdale during his engagement with this firm was 131l.—large purchases of woollen goods were made after Sidney Learoyd brought in the 4,000l.—I have got the different items of capital from this cash-book, where they are entered—the firm had three banking accounts: at the City Bank, the Metropolitan, and the Bank of Scotland—I asked Dunderdale if he knew of the goods being consigned, and he said he had nothing to do with that, he was nothing but a buyer, but he was aware that some goods had been consigned—I asked him whether he continued to buy after he knew of the consignments, and he said he did exactly as his employers told him—he has told me more than once that if he had had any ides that he was doing anything wrong, or that the position of the affairs of the firm was not good, he would have left long before; he also said that before he made some of the purchases, about August, he had requested to know from Wilton, or some one in the firm, the position of the firm, and that for the satisfaction of the firm he suggested an accountant being called in—he said he went to Paris about a month after he was engaged, and went round with Offenbach, the agent, to the different customers there—if I recollect right he sold the goods himself, Offenbach did not sell them—Wilton and he together told me that they had sold about 4,000l. worth of goods in Paris—substantially it was after Dunderdale had been bought some before—the difference between the advances by Cauchai, Dunkley, Dufourcets, and Allen, and the invoice price of the goods, is about 3,000l.
Re-examined. Learoyd told me that he was in Scotland part of July and August, and then went to Paris, professedly on business—what was said about not prosecuting him was said in conversation between three or four of the creditors; no resolution of the kind was passed, it was a proposal of some individual creditor; the resolution come to was that he should be prosecuted—I had to make my report to the Judge of the County Court, and the prosecution was ordered—the Learoyds are a highly respectable family, and have connections and Huddersfield and in the north; I have no doubt the goods were obtained from the fact that they were partners in this firm—they had not pledged any goods at the time of Pellissier's failure—Pellissier failed in March, and they did not begin to pledge before May—a great quantity of the money that Sidney Learoyd put into the concern was gone before the pledging system began.
By the JURY. There were 133 books of one kind or another kept—entries of salary and commission were made—the 131l. paid to Dunderdale was on account of his commission only—he had 2 1/2 on his purchases, and all his expenses paid.
the proceedings in the matter of the liquidation and petition by Frank Wilton, Edward Learoyd, and Sidney Learoyd—the petition was transferred by order from the County Court of Yorkshire to the London Court of Bankruptey—the date of the petition is 30th September and the first statutory meeting was on 24th October, at the George Hotel, Hudderfield—resolutions were passed appointing Mr. Armitage trustee; "that the affairs be liquidated, not in bankruptey, but by arrangement; that a committee of inspection be appointed, and that the file of proceedings be transferred"—those resolutions were registered on 4th November—I produce the statement filed by the debtors—the liabilities are 10,980l. 16s. 1d. and the assets 4,010l. 2s. 6d.—the secured creditors and returned by the debtors as Couchai, 1,756l.; Dunckley, 1,150l.; Dufourcets, 1,800l.; Allen, 2,700l.; no surplus—on 20th October there was an affidavit and report of the trustee, and on the 25th the Judge made an order for the prosecution.
CHARLES EDWARD HOBSON . I am a shorthand writer in the employment of the solicitors for the prosecution—I was present at the meeting of creditors on 24th October, at the George Hotel, Huddersfield—Mr. Samuel Learoyd appeared for several creditors and examined Edward Learoyd and Wilton—I took a shorthand note of the questions and answers—there were perhaps 50 creditors present; I did not count them—I have my notes here—this is a correct transcript—Edward Learoyd was examined first, not in Wilton's presence; neither heard the examination of the other.
The examination of wilton was put in and rend in part. Upon MR. BULWER then proposing to read the examination of Edward Learoyd, MR. WADDY objected, the examination not being taken under the provisions of the Bankruptey Act, no Registrar being present, no oath administered, and no trustee being then appointed; it was therefore only a coluntary statement coming within the common law rule, and as it was extacted under a promise of immunity from prosecution, it was inadmissible. See Reg. v. Cherry, 12 Cox Crim. Cases. The RECORDER (assuming the facts to be as subsequently proved by Mr. Beaumont Taylor) concurred in the objection, and held that the examination was not receivable, especially dwelling on the fact that no trustee was appointed until after the examination had taken place and until that appointment was made the proceedings in liquidation had not really commenced.
RICHARD BEAUMONT TAYLOR (Examined by MR. WADDY). I am a member of the firm of J. E. Taylor Brothers, merchants and manufacturers, near Huddersfield—we were creditors of Learoyd, Wilton, and Co. just under 300l. for goods supplied about two months before they stopped payment—a preliminary meeting of the creditors was held at which I was present; several creditors were there, perhaps not far off 20—the debtors were not present—it was a meeting held amongst ourselves to discuss what was the best thing for us as creditors to do with regard to this estate; it was held at the same time; the others retired and we remained—a resolution was come to with regard to what should be the treatment of Edward Learoyd—I afterwards saw Learoyd—I can't say it was at the request of the committee, it was on my own authority—I told him if he would make a clean breast of the whole affair and get to know all he could with reference to the business, he would not be prosecuted—I
may say that was the resolution arrived at by the committee—I told him he must tell Mr. Samuel Learoyd all he knew and all he had ascertuned with reference to their business—he did go to Mr. Samuel Learoyd and afterwards made his statement at the meeting of creditors.
Cross-examined. I am a friend of the Learoyds but not related to them; I have known them from boyhood, and took an interest in their welfare—the committee was appointed to decide what was to be done, as to whether any criminal was prosecution should be taken or not, without reporting to the general body of creditors the result of their deliberations—we determined there and then, before we left the room, to the what we thought proper—the committee were Mr. Sheard, Mr. Hurst, Mr. Jubb, Mr. Brierly and myself, and Mr. Samuel Learoyd was there also—I do not say those gentlemen authorised me to make the statement to Mr. Edward Learoyd as emanating from them, that he was not to be prosecuted—what I said to him was out of my own head as a friend. I thought it would be the best thing he could do—at the same time he told me he would do everything he could—what I said to him was on my own authority and Mr. Samuel Learoyd's—I don't say I had Mr. Samuel Learoyd's authority, I had his opinion—in fact it was held out to him that he would be made Queen's evidence; I think that was the term that was used—the conclusion of the committee was that Wilton should be prosecuted, and that if Edward Learoyd would say all he knew about the business, he should not be proceeded against.
The RECORDER adhering to his opinion that upon this state of facts the examination of Edward Learoyd was inadmissible, MR. BULWER, considering that the case as to Edward Learoyd rested principally upon this examination, withdrew the case as to that defendant, who was accordingly acquitted.
WALTER CHARLES GRIFFITHS . I am now residing at Ear'ls Court Road, London—in January, 1879, I was in the employ of Learoyd, Wilton, and Co., at 66, Mark Lane—I was general clerk, till I took over the books—they first traded as colonial merchants and afterwards about May, commenced woollen merchants—there was no business carried on at Mark Lane, they simply wrote letters there and saw any persons who came—I know Cauchai, Allen, Dunkley, and Faulkner—Allen and Cauchai came there frequently, about twice a week; Cauchai perhaps oftener—I have not seen Faulkner or Dunkley there—I was not present at any of the interviews with Cauchai; he came about advancing money—I have been to the gentleman's office about advances, to take letters—Mr. Wilton generally told me to go—I have sometimes taken patterns—I never had any conversation with Mr. Cauchai; I have taken a letter and waited for a reply; that is all—I had been a clerk in the office since January—I stayed there up to the last—from what was being transacted in the office I drew my own conclusions—I did nothing; I did not write letters or see them—I was not a dummy—I received a salary of 150l.—there was nothing to do—there was no salesman, nor any attempts to sell that I know of—I never saw any order-book or stock-book—I have been to Southgate's to draw patterns—I saw goods there represented by the patterns—they were manufacturers' goods, held by Southgate's for Learoyd, Wilton, and Co.—I don't know for what purpose they required the patterns—I bought them and gave them to whoever was in; to the partners—I
have never had any conversation with Wilton about the business, or with Allen or Cauchai—I made copies of the manufacturers' invoices and put them on the file, and returned the invoices to Wilton—they related to cloth goods that they had bought in the North—they were taken on to the gentleman who advanced the money—I have not taken them—I believe I have taken transfer orders to Southgate's for Wilton, with direction to lodge them there, and that a fresh order was to be given on goods—that was to obtain money on them—I know that money was obtained on the goods—Dunderdale was always at the office expect when he was away buying—he sat in the private room—he saw customers and anybody who came in; I mean the people who came to show goods manufacturers' agents, and so forth—I know his handwriting—he used generally to sit with Wilton and Laeyord—there was a private room for him—I don't know what went on in the private room—I have not seen Mr. Cauchai go into Dunderdale's private room, but in the room in which he was with Wilton, and I was then told by Wilton to say they were out if anybody called—I think Allen was there once when Dunderdale was in Wilton's private office; I don't recollect the date—he has not had any conversatoin with Dunderdale in my presence—he has been shown into the private room, where all the partners were, as well as Cauchai—I may have been called into the office when Wilton, Dunderdale, and Cauchai or Wilton, Dunderdale, and Allen were together, but I can't recollect—I am doing my best to give good evidence—I to give every information—I have been called into the office when Wilton and Dunderdale were there; I may have been when Allen was there and when Cauchai was there, and on both those occasion I have been told to say they were out—Dunderdale has been present when Wilton has given me the invoice to copy, and told me to retyrn them to him—they were generally copied in the morning, as Mr. Wilton wished to go out with them to one of those four gentleman, as the case might be—i remember Dunderdale going to Yorkshire in August—when he returned he said he had had a devilish hard time of it, that the manufacturers were suspicion, and that he should not have gone down to the North unless he knew the firm could pay 20s. in the pound—he said it was very difficult to get the goods, as the manufacturers were suspicious—he said he told them that he should not have come down there unless the firm could have paid 20s. in the pound—this was during the period that I was going to Southgate's, getting patterns and copying out the invoices—I knew that these persons were advancing money on the goods at London Wall—Dunderdale never told me that he knew it—he was always in the private room therefore I presume he must have know—Mr. Leayord used to leave everything to Wilton and Dunderdale—during the time I wsa in the employment, from January to March, there was not a single bond fide sale of goods in England to my knowledge—I consider it would have been part of my duty as clerk to have entered it, if any such sale had taken place, there was nobody else to do it—I never made an entry of any bond fide sale during the whole time I was there—this letter of 19th May, 1879, to Messrs. Sonthgate is Dunderdale's writing. (This was a request for the bearer to take patters.) This other letter, of 20th May, is Dunderdale's writing, signed by Wilton: "To T.H. Faulkner and Co., Gresham Street—We herewith deliver to you nine bales of worsteds, and in exchange for your cheque for 390l. we undertake to repay you in 14 days the sum of 400l., and failing this you are at liberty to dispose of the goods at your discretion. Kindly give us a note acknowledge
ledging this arrangement, and sauing that on our fulfilling this agreement the goods will be given up to us.—Learyord, Wilton, and Co." I took a parcel of goods to Faulkner's by Wilton's direction—he said that I should receive a cheque in my name for the amount, and I was to take it to the bank and get it cashed and bring him the notes for it—I received this cheque for 390l., drawn by Faulkner on the Imperial Bank, payable to Griffiths or bearer—I cashed it there and gave the money to Wilton—I did not receive my salary for the last month; it only received 5l., on account of it.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. The firm had a branch house in Paris to which goods were consigned, but I never saw any orders form anybody else—I should not know the dealings of the Paris house—the goods were sent from London to the house in Paris; they would not come to the London office, they would come up from the North to the packer's, and be forwarded from there—I know there were several shipments to Paris to the amount of about 8,000l.—I have only seen about 400l. from Paris, brought over by Mr. Andre somewhere about August—some goods were consigned to Genoa; they would be shipped from Liverpool—some goods were consigned to Vanderbilt, of Brussels—Ithink Wilton wanted to get a foreign business, and to make that a speciality—he went over to Paris the cloth trade kept at the London office, only for the Colonial trade; after that was given up there was no order-book kept, not for orders that were received from abroad—I was there until the smash—I should not have stayed there if I had seen or believed there was, practically speaking, so little to do—about two months before the failure I thought perhaps it would come to a liquidation, but I never gave credence to anything else, any criminal proceeding—latterly an account was called in, I presume by Mr. Wilton, and he was occupied nearly everyday on and off for about a month going through the books—after Mr. Andre went over to Paris I took over the books, at the beginning of July, before that I was shipping clerk—Wilton made no complaint to me about the books not being well kept—I did not post circulars to the Continent of the cloth business; a monthly circular of the Colonial business went out until the commencement of the cloth business, nothing went out afterwards—I don't know of any samples of cloth being sent abroad excent to the Paris house—i knew nothing of the cloth business.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I don't know whether Faulkner's goods were subsequently redeemed—Offenbach was the manager in Paris, and there was Andre and another clerk named Marks—there was a Spanish clerk in the London Office; he left when I took the books over—Dunderdale was not there when it first went—I would not actually swear that he was present when either Cauchai or Allen were there discussing advances on the goods, because my position in the outside office would preclude me from seeing what was done in the private room—Dunderdale saw Mr. Cauchai on one occasion; it would not like to go further—I don't recollect his saying that if he had not believed the firm was solvent he would not have purchased the goods; I understood him to say that he had tool the manufactures so: I must have said so if it is in my deposition—Dunderdale had nothing to do with the books.
Re-examined. I knew that Allen and Cauchai's business was about
Advancing money on goods—no doubt Dunderdale has been with Wilton When they have called on that business—I was not persent—I thought the Thing would came to a liquidation, from really having nothing to do, nothing being shipped—wilton did not superintend what I had to do with the books; nobody superintended them—wilton may have come and looked in the books to see how an account stood, but the never made any remark about them—I have been a clerk 10 or 11 years—the accountant would come one day and check the cash-book with the bank-book. and then he would go away for a day—he would leave a clerk there—it seemed to be a long proceeding—the' books were already in arrear before I took them up—as to the ledger, throughtout the whole time I was there there was no balance taken from the preceding year, 1878; that was when the were carrying on the colonial buisness—the accountant came in while the woolen buisness was being carried on, and he was occupied with the old colonial buisness—the woolen buisness did not give him much trouble—he might perhaps have done that in an hour or two.
JOSEPH MARKS . I was an office-boy in the employ of Messrs. Learoyd and wilton—I went there at the beginning of January, and remained until the failure—I recollect Mr. Dunnderdale first coming there—he came to the office every day when he was in London, and had an opportuinity of seeing what took place—I have seen Mr. Cauchai at the office and Mr. Allen, not Dunckley or Faulkner—when cauchai or Allen called they Used to go into a private office—Mr. wilton was there and sometimes Mr. Dunnderdale—they called from about March up to the time of the Failure—have overheard conversations between wilton and Dunderdale Respecting pledging woollen goods and getting advances on them from Cauchai, Allen, Dunckley, and Faulkner—I have very aften heard that conversation—they were speaking of the quality of the goods and what would be advanced upon them—if Mr. Wilton was not there when cauchai and Allen called Dunderdale saw them—when Wilton has been leaving the office during the day I have heard him say that he was going to Faulkners's or Dunckley's—I know that woollen goods were being brought by the firm and they were pledged—I did not know of any sale of goods whilst I was there—there was no salesman employed—no patterns were sent for the purpose of sale about London, only to paris and Genos—the invoices which the manufacturers sent were first copied by Griffiths and kept in the outer office, and the originals were given back to Mr. Wilton—I recollect transfer orders being written; I copied them into the private letter-book—Mr. Wilton gave them me to copy, and sometimes Mr. Dunderdale—after copying them I gave them back to Mr. Wilton—there were two such books; one was a continuation of the other—I last saw them about a fornight before the failure—there was no other book to my knowledge which contained any record of those transfer oders—they refferd to woollen goods, and were tranfferred into the names of Alen, cauchai, Faulkner, and Dunckley.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I was in the service of Mr. Wilton Two years—I know that patterns were sent to paris and Genoa—there was One consignment of goods to Brussels—Colonial circulars were sent to France; not in connection with the woollen buisness that I know of—I Don't speak French—most of the letters and circulars that went to France Were in French—I know that consignments of olive oil, seeds, and things
Of that sort were made to the firm up to about a month before the failure—I did not hear about Wilton trying to create a barter buisness in France—there were no consignments of cloth to Spain and Algeria—some consignments would be made from Liverpool, as to which I should know nothing—I remember the accountant coming to the office about a month before the failure, and he stayed up to the time of the failure, about the end of Augest—he did not come daily; perhaps twice a week—he would send a Clerk—they were not there every day, but nearly every day, and for the greater part of the day—they seemed always busy and occupied while they were there with the books and accounts of the firm—Mr. Robshaw and Mr. Wilton had some disagreement; I did not hear it—Mr. wilton told me if Robshaw called to say he was out—I think that was about May.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. Dunderdale was away for about 10 days in June on his journey; I think it was about the middle of the month, and he was also away in July and the middle of Augest for 11 days—during the time he was away I saw Mr. Cauchai at the office—I think I saw Mr. Allen there about twice a week, I cannot say when for the first time—I have seen him speaking to Mr. Dunderdale and Mr. wilton in the private office, I cannot say when or how many times—I have seen him both in the outer and the inner office when Mr. wilton was not there and when he was alone with Mr. Dunderdale—I not hear what they said, only they were speaking of the quality of the goods—I should say I have seen Mr. Allen and Mr. Dunderdale together in the outer office about half a dozen times, speaking of the quality of the goods—I never heard any conversation between them as to pledging goods—I have seen Mr. cauchai speaking to Dunderdale several times in the outer part of the Office about the goods; what they said I cannot say, they were speaking Of the quality of the goods—I have not heard anything pass between anyone One and Dunderdale as to advances being obtained on goods—I am 17 Years of age—I was at a provision broker's before I went to this firm—I don't believe Mr. Dunderdale understood French—I can swear that I have seen Mr. Cauchai go into one of the private rooms when Mr. Dunderdale was there, I cannot say how many times; he very often called, and Mr. Dunderdale was always there when in London, and must have heard the Conversation—I was there every day—Mr. Dunderdale had a room separated from Mr. wilton's by a partition—when Mr. cauchai came he was shown into Mr. wilton's rooms—I have never shown him into Mr. Dunderdale's rooms—Mr. Dunckley and Mr. Faulkner never called at the office—I have been to southgate's to get patterns—I know Mr. Offenbach's writing; this letter (produced) is his writing—Mr. Andre was cashier and bookkeeper and correspondent; he went to paris about Augest, and Mr. Dunderdale went over about Augest or the latter part of July for about 10 days—he went to paris twice I believe, but I cannot give the dates, and on both accasions was away about 10 days—when Mr. Wilton wrote to Paris the generally wrote in English, and Mr. Andre in Frence.
Re-examined. Dunderdale's duty was to travel and buy goods, and when not travelling he was at the office every day—the buisness of Mr. Allen and Mr. Cauchai was that of money-lenders and they were lending money with reference to the woollen goods—it had nothing to do with the oil, pepper, or oranges, nor had the transfer orders, simply woollen goods—when Mr. Cauchai or Mr. Allen called at the office and Mr. Wilton was not there
They saw Mr. Dunderdale, and were together from 10 to 15 minutes—if any one called while they were there Mr. Dunderdale told me to say that he was out.
By the Jury. When Mr. Cauchai or Mr. Allen came I should tell Mr. Wilton, and show them into his office—I have seen Mr. Dunderdale there When I have passed these gentleman into the office.
JOSEPH TIDSWELL . I am a merchant, carrying on buisness at leeds—our firm is Robinson, Clay and Co.—we are creditors of the firm of the defendants' for 221l.—Dunderdale was formerly in our service; he introduced the firm of Learoyd and Wilton to us about February; we deal in general woollen goods—on 19th June I called at the defendants' in London and on the 20th I had some conversation with Edward Learoyd with reference to the position of the firm—in July Dunderdale called on me in leeds to purchase goods for Learoyd, Wilton, and Co,; he had patterns with him—I heard him say that the goods he was proposing to purchase were already sold in paris—Mr. Robertshow would sell the goods, not me—on 12th Augest Dunderdale called again—I said I was rather surprised to see him again so early, that I hoped everything was straightforward; if not, I shall be very much annoyed—he said the firm were doing a perfectly legitimate buisness—the purchase he made in July was to the amount of about 250l.; there was no purchase in Augest, as we had no goods suitable for is purpose—Mr. Wilton came to me in Septemper, two or three days before the meeting of creditors—he called in simply to make our acquaintance in passing through the town, and I had a little conversation with him I understood that the had been in Lancashire buying goods—he said that he had not sold any goods in paris with a smaller profit than 10 per cent after paying all expenses—he said he was doing a nice business.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. The first transaction. I had was in February, through Dunderdale, to the amount of about 20l.; that was paid For—I have received altogether from the firm about 300l.
WILLIAM GLEDHILL ROBERTSHAW . I am a member of the firm of Robinson Clay, and Co., if Leeds—Dunderdale called on me on 13th June—he Saw some pieces to match the patterns he had, and bought 26 pieces—He said he wanted them to supply orders in Paris, which he had taken Before coming away—the arrangement was that 100l. Was to be paid on 10th July, and the balance by a bill at three months from the 1st of August—the 100l. was paid, but the bill was not—we are a loser to that extent—We had a letter from Learoyd, Wilton, and Co., on 4th July, in reference To some patterns we had sent them, and Dunderdale called and purchased Some goods amounting to 56l. 16s. 11d.—they were not paid for—he Directed me to send them to southgate's, the packers, and we did so—home Of the items in this transfer note refer to those goods; it is dated 8th July—the goods were send on the 4th—if I had know that the goods were to Be pledged a day or two after they were purchased I should certainly not Have let them have them on credit—I have been 27 Years in the same ware-house.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. Ten of the trusses were packed in the Ordinary way in sending goods to London, and one was packed in oil cloth For shipment—the bulk of the goods came from the north—Southgate's do A large business in that way—Dunderdale was agent for our firm in London For about two years—I know the position of his family in Huddersfield; it
is a very good one indeed—before sneding the goods to Learoyd, Wilton, and Co., I made the ordinary inquiries as to their position, independently of Dunderdale—we were subsequently referres to by other merchants in the north as to the position of Learoyd, Wilton, and Co.
Re-exmained. one of the trusses referred to in this transfer order to Faulkner was packed for exportation.
HENRY CROSSLAND . I am salesman to Messrs. Crossland and James Hurst, of Longwood, near Huddersfield—I know Dunderdale—I saw him on 21st August last; he looked through some patterns for the purpose of making a purchase—he said he wanted the goods for the Paris market, that there was Paris trade—he gave me an order for 52 pieces, amounting to 246l.; they were to be paid for at 2 1/2 cash, on 1st October—they were sent off to Southgate's on the 22nd and 27th August respectively—We have not been paid for them—I sold other goods on 25th August and 3rd September amonting to 105l. 1s.—they were ordered by letter, from patterns sent—we have not been paid for those—they were ordered by letter, from patterns sent—We have not been paid for those—they were sent to Southgate's—there was a third transaction on 3rd September to the amount of 306l. 10s. 8d.—We received for that a 100l. cheque, which was dishonoured, and some foreign bills, which were protested for non-acceptances, therefore we have not received one halfpenny cash—We are creditors for 607l. 11s. 8d.
Cross-examined. I only saw Dunderdale once in our warehouse, that was on 21st August—he gave us references to W. B. Walker and Co., of Leeds, and the Yorkshire Manufacturing Company, of Leeds, and Robinson, Clay, and Co., of Leeds, and Mr. Beaumont Taylor, of J. E. Taylor, Brothers—he gave those references as to the position of Learoyd, Wilton, and Co.—We made inquiries of them.
Re-examined. The Learoyds are a very respectable family—we thought when they had introduced 5,000l. or 6,000l. it was a guarantee of the respectability of the firm.
JOHN LIDDELL . I am a member of the firm of Liddell and Brierly, wollen manufactures, at Huddersfield—on 7th June we sold some goods to Learoyd, Wilton, and Co., which were subsequently paid for—on 19th there was a second transaction, amountin to 641l. 16s. 2d.; those goods were sent on the 23rd to Southgate and Co.—We were paid 100l. upon those—Dunderdale gave that order—he said they were required for the Paris market, and they had a good continental trade; that Wilton was a clever business man, and understood the business; that the two Learoyds were partners, and the capital was about 7,000l.—this is our invoice.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. The first order we got from the firm was in May; that was paid for—we had no further order till August.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. Dunderdale came down, not only to arrange terms, but to give us some satisfactory explanation—we had received a telegram—we had previously written asking for a reference, and they sent us Hart and Co., of Hawick, and the Yorkshire Manufacturing Company, of Leeds—we made inquiries of these persons, and subsequently sent off the goods.
JAMES KNOX HART . I am a member of the firm of J. Hart and Co., of Hawick—before the 19th of May we had two transations with the defendants' firm, which were paid for—on 19th May I saw Wilton at his office, 66, Mark Lane and he then gave me an order—he said they were doing a very good business, and that he had sold the goods he was
then buying paria, and he would pay for then in half cash on rectipt of the invoice—Dunderdale was present and said that he could get a better profit yorkshire good than he could get on scotch good—before sending the good Isaw wilton again on 30th june—we had in the mean time recived a cheque which was dihonoured—he said that his customer had cancelled our order because of their being late—said that was entirely his own fault—he said he would get his customer to take the goods if we could arrange the payment of the trusuction—he also said that he had lost from 300l. to 400l. with Philliph pellisufer and Co., banker, but they would get over that he said the capital of the firm was about 10,000l. after sidney Learoyd's secrities were realised—he repeated the statement that they had done very well since they commenced business—it was arranged that he should send us some remittance and we should we should send the goods—next day we recived some bills, and the gooods were sent on 2nd July the invoice price being 554l. 0s.—we have been paid 310l. 8s.—the balance now due is 249l. 0s. 5d.
Cross-examination by MR. WRIGHT. The total amout of our dealing was about 900l. for Febuary 17th to July 2nd—we have a bill now modation bill—asummons has not been isused against the acceptor: it is in our solictor's hand—if that bill is paid we shall still he about 50l. short.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I have given our solicitor instruction to collect the billl—Faithful, cook, and co. are the acceotor, and Leauroyd, wilton, and and co.' are the drawers and endorsers—I communicated with Mr. foster, witon and co.' ssoclicitor, and his answer was antifactory—that was before we sent off some of the goods—at my interview with wilton and Dunderdale on 30th June they asked me to become areference for them—I said I required further information, and if that was antisfactory I should have no hesitation, and they referred to their solicitor for that information—Ihad a letter from him; it did not contain all the information I wated—Dunderdale was our agent in London for about two year befor he entered Learoyd and wilton's service—we have recived in cash form the defendants about 650l.
Re-examination. The 189l. bill was due at the end of septemper; payment is disputed on the ground that it is an accommodation bill, and therefore no consideration—Ihope it is worth more than the paper it is written on.
ESENZER ALEXANDER . I am a member of the firm of Alexander and co.' of Hawick—we are creditors of the defendants for 370l.; that was the only transaction—we have never been paid—it was on 7th June—they wrot for samples; I was in London at the time, and was told to call—they did so and recived the order from Dunderdale and wilton; they were together in wilton'sroom—Dunderdale had the whole doing of it—wilton was passive in the matter; they were woollen goods, scotch tweeds for paris and south of france—wilton said he had just returned from the North of Italy; that he was doing a very fine trade there and he wanted the goods, as part of his trade was got up by barter with oil and goods of the country—Icalled twice or thrice after that before supplying the goods—they made statements to me with reference to their postion—Irequried for my brother's satisfaction that they should be put in writing, and they wrot a very strong letter, saying that they had 10,000l. of working capital
—that was signed by the firm Learod, Wilton and Co., in Wilton's writing—this other letter of the 20th june, 1879, is Dunderdale's writing—these are four of our invoices—I had heard of the Learoyds before—I required references and they were satisfactory.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I called on the defendants in consequence of a letter from home, to show them patterns, and get the nature of the goods they wished and the markets they were intended for—Dunderdale was the buyer—Wilton knew nothing about wollens—Dunderdale selected the goods, as a buyer would do.
JESSE CLEGG . I am a woolen manufacture at Huddersfield—Dunderable called on me on 8th July and said he wanted goods for the Paris trade—I executed an order amounting to 116l. lts; they were sent to South gate's on the 12th July—I have not been paid—on 15th August Dunderdale gave me another order for 119l. 13s.—I asked him if they had sold the first lot—he said they had; that they were suitable for their Paris spring trade—the second lot was sent on 18th August to Sothgate's—I have not been paid for those; our credit is 236l. 4s.—this is our invoice of 18th August.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I had references in the usual way; two or three were given—Iinquired of one and found it quite satisfactory, and on that sent the goods.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I know Dunderdale's Parents and friends—they are highly respectable—I have known him for some time.
JAMES GAVTIN MATHER . I am a Member of the firm of Mather Brother, wollen merchants of leeds—on or about 4th July Dunderdale called on us, and asked to see some goods—he said they were opening a warehouse is Paris, and keeping stock there; that they had been principally selling heavy goods and he thought they could do a trade in thin goods as well—he asked us to send some patterns, which were sent to London that might—we subsequently received a letter from that he would call the following morning, which he did, and ultimately we made a bargain with him for goods amounting to 47l. 13s. 11d.—we sent them on 16th July to Southgates's in two trusees, packed in oil-cloth for expectation by Dunderdale's instructions, marked L.W. with M.B. under 71. and 72—we have not been paid.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I asked him if they were to be packed in oil-cloth, and he said they were—we do that when goods are going by sea—we had two references; Robinson, Clay and Co., and the Yorkhire Manufacturing Co.—we inquired of both, and the answers were so far satisfactory that we sent them; it was the goods—had they been otherwise we should not have sent them; it was entirely upon those satisfactory answers that we dispatched the goods.
Re-examined. The two bales 71 and 72, mentioned in this transfer order, dated July 17th, are our goods—they would arrive in London on the 17th.
GEORGE BUTTERWORTH . I am a carpet manufacturer of Highfield Mills, Leeds—on 13th August I received an order from Learoyd, Wilton and On from my London agent and on the 18th I called in Mark Lane, an saw Wilton and Learoyd—Wilton said the goods were required for the Paris marked—on 4th, 9th, 13th and 17th September we sent the goods to Mark Lane; they amounted to 273l.—we have not been paid anything—this is one of our invoices, dated 4th September.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. We got references and made inequities—I never saw Dunderdale.
ARTHUR JUDD . I am a member of the firm of Joseph Judd and Sons, manufacturers, at Batley—on the August we received on order through our London agents from the defendants firm and on 14th August Dunderdale called on me and we had a conversation with references to the on her—he dictated some tertus which were written down—he said they were doing a goods French trade and had a house is Paris—we sent off the goods; the total value was 370l. 10s.—we have not been paid anything—we received cheque for 200l. which was dishonoured—we received this letter of 14th August from the defendants firm. (Read: "We have a large Paris buyer Here who will take 50 pieces of blue cloth same quality and price but we Shall require rather longer to me. P.S. Your agent inform us that our Terms are accepted.") Mr. Besumont was our agent—this is the invoice of Our goods dated 18th August.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. In the course of the negotiated we Were told that the defendants firm had a considerable number of foreign Bills, but that they had not an easy means of discounting them, because that London bankers would not discount foreign hills, and we were asked to Take them; they sent us some down—I don't know wether they are Negotiable is London equally with English bills; I have nothing to do With them.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. The term Dunderdale negotiated with, Me were not accepted—we got a telegram the same day from London Asking terms which were better—I saw Dunderdale after the cheque was Returned and he said that we ought to have had our money at the time—Those goods were not packed for exportation.
SAMUEL AINLEY . I am a member of the firm of Ainley and Co., serge Manufactures at Longwood—in may last I met Dunderdale in London; He asked if I had pattern with me, and said he thought our good's Were suitable for the Pairs marked—I afterwards received an order from The defendants firm the total amount was 231l. 12s. 4d.—we sent them Is three lots on 16th, 21st and 24th may; the first lot was sent to Southgate's the order to Mark Lane—we were paid 115l. on that order—on 18th June we received another order, which we executed, amounting to 221l. 16s. 3d.—we were paid 115l. on that—we are now creditors for 200l.
Cross-examined. We also received a bill for 100l. at three months, but It was not paid; it was their bill we accepted it—I am not much used to Bills—it is at home—we received the City Bank as a reference—we wrote There, and after receiving an answer sent the goods.
Re-examined. We got money on the bill—we paid it away to a customer—it was dishonoured and we had to pay it.
TOM HALL . I am a partner in the firm of Hall and Dyson, woolen Manufacturers, at March—on 19th August Dunderdale called as representing Wilton and Learoyd—we required references and they were Satisfactory—he bought goods to the amount of 207l.—he said he wanted Them to supply an order from their Paris house; he directed us to send Them to Southgate's which we did on the 22nd—we were to be paid cash In a clear month, less 2 1/2 discount—we have not been paid anything—we Had a cheque which was dishonoured—that was the only transaction—this is the invoice.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. The references were Robinsion, Clay, and Co., J. and B. Taylor Brothers and Walker, of Leeds—I had not known Dunderdale before—I should not have sent the goods if the references had been unsatisfactory.
WALTER WARD . I am a member of the firm of Richard Ward and Son, woolen manufacturers, Batley—on 3rd july Dunderdale called at our office with patterns and gave an order for the Paris house, he said that he had received the patterns from their agent there, and they were very suitable for the Paris market—we executed the order, it amounted to 363l. 6s. 7d.—160l. has been paid, the remainder is owing—this is the invoice—they were packed in oil-cloth for exportation.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. We asked for references after he had Bought the goods, and he gave Robinson, Clay and Co.—we inquired of them—Duderdale said the firm of Learody and Wilton was a young firm and not very well known at present—I think he offered other references, but we said we were satisfied with Robinson's—he said that the firm had started with a capital of 6,000l. or 7,000l. that one of the Learoydsa had brought in between 3,000l. and 4,000l., and another one 2,000l., and that Wilton was to bring in 1,000l.—we made inquiries and found that that was practically correct—the terms were to be half cash—Dunderdales arranged the terms with me—I had never seen him before—he said they were going to have another salesman in Paris from the well-knnown house of Rylands—he showed me patterns which he said he had received from Paris and asked if we had goods to correspond with them, that they could be sold largely in Pairs, from whence he had recently come.
WILLIAM THACKKRY . I am a partener in the firm of Thackeray and Co., manufactures of Dewsbury—we received letters from Learoyd and Wilton, and eventually Dunderdale called and purchased goods to the amount of about 300l.; payment was to be made in a clear month—he said he wanted the goods for the Paris trade, that they had opened a branch there, that he had been over there since he had received the patterns, and had gone with their representative round the trade and sold a certain quantity of goods—we delivered to the amount of 160l. odd—he asked which I considered the best way to send them to Paris; I told him—he said he should prefer them in the usual way—it is not necessary to pack them in oilskin, they are not always—we have not been paid—we got what purported to be some bills, but we never used them—our terms were cash, and we never got any—this is our invoice—we did not complete the order.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. we took references, which we considered satisfactory—Dunderdale gave the order foe 60 pieces and said he had orders for more, but that was a big order enough for the first.
GERORGE HENRY STAPLETON . I am a member of the firm of Stapleton and Co., of Dewsbury—on 5th August I received an order from the firm of Learoyd, Wilton, and Co.,; we executed part of it, to the amount of 234l. 3s.—they weer sent on 18th and 23rd August to Southgate's—we have been paid nothing—these are our invoices.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. Our agents in London had references to Robinson, Clay, and Co.,; those references being satisfactory, we supplied the goods.
Learoyd and Co., soliciorsfor this prosecution—I was Present before the Magistrate at Huddersfield when the defendants were charged with this offence—I heard Mr. John Benn examined and cross-examined. (Mr. Benn's deposition being read that he had sold goods to Dunderdale to The amount of 55l., and had received 5l. on account.)
ALBERT ALLEN . I carry on business at 6, St. Swithin's Lane, as a general Commission merchant and shipping agent—it is part of my business to make Advance on goods—I made the acquaintance of Frank Wilton and Co. in 1878, by making advance on bills of lading of lading for colonial produce—I was introduced to them by Mr. Penny, a chemical broker, and I called on them in Mark Lane—my first advance on woollen goods was on 6th May—I advanced them money on different pledging from that time to the time of their stoppage—within the last four mouths before they stopped I advanced from 4,000l. to 5,000l. on the invoice value of the goods, 6000l.—the invoices were sent with the goods; they were principally lying at Southgate's, some at J. and T. Bailey's—I have sold the goods, but have not yet received the whole of the money—I shall lose about 800l.—I am not up is the woolen trade, but I believe they are determined by fashion—I have made a very bad bargain—my principal dealings as to the pledgings were with Wilton; I have never to my knowledge seen Dunderdale with reference to them—I know him by sight, but I have never treated with him for an advance—I only remember one instance of his being present when I was negotiating an advance with Wilton, that was I think on 8th September, but that was not about the pledging; Wilton wanted me to advance some money to renew a bill that Messrs. Walker would renew, it had noting to do with these goods—on 21st August I advanced 55l., that was a renewal—on 28th August I advanced 200l. on goods that came from Crossland's; on 2nd September 594l. on goods from Judd and Son, Robshaw, Thackeray, and Ward and Son—on 13th September 750l. on goods from Benn, Stapleton, and Co., Liddell and Brierly, C. and J. Hurst, and Hall and Dyson—these (produced) are documents which I received from Wilton and Co.—my commission on the advances was from 3 to 5 per cent—in round numbers, since May, if I had all that was due to me, it would be about 377l.—I did not hold any capital at Wilton's disposal on 27th August, 1879—when I made the advance I received a memorandum, and the original invoices and the transfer orders, and on the receipt of those documents and the goods I gave my cheque.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I have been in dustiness in the City For some time, and have had frequent dealing in advancing money on goods Consigned to merchants of high standing and respectability—it is no unusual thing for merchants to require temporary advances on goods consigned to them for sale; I believe it is very common—I never imagined that there was anything wrong about the dealing with these goods, if I had I should have ceased to have any dealings of the kind—I frequently advanced money on the goods that were sent to Paris before the loans were repaid—the arrangement was, that on the arrival of the goods in Paris the bills they gave me would be taken up—they were to be met through my bank—in no case were the goods given up first—the dealing I had with this firm in no way practically differed from the dealing I had with merchants of the highest respectability—I knew nothing of the value of the woollen goods, except from the invoices—all the loans were for short times—generally speaking the goods were redeemed.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. As a shipping agent I consign goods abrosd—I believe it is the custom for large banks to make advances on documents of title and invoices attached—I advanced cash on these their bills had to be met.
Re-examined. I think there were only two instances out of about 21 In which were the goods went to Paris before I was paid—I claim 2,700l. as sue To me, not as a creditor—that represents the difference between 2,700l. and 4,500l., the amount of the goods redeemed by them.
By the COURT. About 21 repayments were made to me by the firm from 22nd May to 18th September; but in only two case were the goods afterwards redeemed—there was a running account—I did not keep a debtor and creditor account of each parcel—the invoice value of the goods I had when they failed was about 3,155l.
MICHAEL CAUCHAI . I am a commission merchant, at 113, Fenchurch street—I was introduced to Learoyd, Wilton, and Co, by Mr. Penny on 18th March, to raise 2,000l. on the Zanzibar—on Saturday, 19th July, Mr. Penny called on me, and said "Will you oblige Learoyd and Co. with 420l.—I saw Wilton with reference to it on the 21st, and agreed to advance it on the security of woollen goods—he produced samples—he sent them to my office, I think by Griffiths—on examining the goods with the invoices I found they did not correspond, so Dunderdale called to explain it and set it right—the goods were at Southgate's—they remained there to my order—I had a transfer order, and they held the goods for me—there were seven advances altogether, amounting to 2,734l.—Wilton negotiated all the transactions with me; he sometimes came to me and sometimes sent for me when they wanted to redeem some goods—they did redeem some, and gave me cash—at the time of their failure 1,759l. 13s. 6d. was due to me—I had goods in hand as security, but they owed me 1,213l. besides—I sold them some goods myself before they failed, and that included the amount, but I did not deliver those goods—1,263l. is due to me for advances on those goods, and there were the warehouse charges—I have sold those goods; I realised 1,750l., including my goods; deducting my amount, it comes to about 1,263l.—there is another bill for me to pay—altogether I shall be either a winner or a loser of about 10l. out of my actual capital exclusive of my commission—the Pledgings were for about 30 days; the shortest was 14 days—this was the first transaction I ever had in advancing money on goods—I am not a money-lender—I did this to accommodate them.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I had, I think, seven separate transactions With the defendant's firm—they renewed some of the bills—in Two instances the goods were redeemed, and in one there was a substitution—the total of my advances from 21st July to 5th September was about 2,100l.—they redeemed goods by paying about 800l., and I delivered them goods to the value of about 1,500l.—some goods were left in my hands at the time of the failure—I don't understand selling woollen goods, but I know who I can employ—when they stopped payment I sold them condieionaily, Provided the trustee and receiver would not take them, because There were bills running—I employed Cave, of Barustaple, to sell, and he Sold them to Samuel Fletcher, of Manchester.
Re-examined. These are the invoices I received, and I gave them to the Buyer.
THOMAS HENRY FAULKNER . I am a merchant, of 32, Gresham Street—I have known Dunderdale a great many years—I have advanced him money On two occasions; two small amounts; not more than 20l. in the whole—On 19th May last I met him in London Wall, and he told me that the firm Of Learoyd, Wilton, and Co., of Mark Lane, wanted a loan of 400l. would I lend it to them—I said no; I did not lend Money—he said it would be All right if lent it; there would be plenty of money in the firm—I said Such being the case I would advance it if the security was right—I think Mr. Andre, the eashier, came to me from the firm—I don't know whether he brought this letter—I received it—it is Dunderdale's writing—it is headed, "Learoyd, Wilton, and co." (Read: "20th May, 1879. We herewith deliver to you nine bales worsted, in exchange for your cheque of 390l., the goods to be sfterwards given up to us.") The goods came to my warehouse with the invoice. And I advanced the money upon them; they remained with me six days—there were two other transactions, one on 10th June; the advance was 390l. in the same way, 400l. worth of cloth returned; They were lying at Southgate's, and transferred into my name—the Money was to be repaid to me on the 17th—I had the security for seven days—on 24th June there was another advance of 200l.—I gave a cheque for 195l.—that was for goods lying at Southgate's—I had the transfer order in the same way—this is the invoice.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. Those were the three occasions upon Which I advanced money—on the last the defendants firm were not able to Repay at the time, and they paid me 195l. and renewed for a month.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I have known Dunderdale a great number Of years—at one time I was in the same firm with him—I have always known Him as a very respectable man—I never saw him sgsin sfter meeting him in London Wall—Mr. Andre arranged all the advances with me—the goods That were to have remained in my hands 14 days were taken out in six or Seven days as being required for shipment to Paris—it is a common thing With manufacturers to require temporary advances on goods; I cannot speak As to merchants.
CHARLES DUNCKLEY . I am an export commission agent in Coleman street—in consequence of something Mr. Faulkner said to me I saw Mr. Andre—I never called at Wilton's—the first few transactions took place at Mr. Faulkner's office, and he and I were jointly interested in six jointly with Him, which were transacted at his office, and six of my own subsequently at my own office—they were all pledgings of woollen goods—the earliest in date was on 2nd July; others on 4th, 9th, 12th, 17th, and 25th; August 14th, 19th, 20th, and 25th, and September 19th, amounting in all to 3,340l.—in every instance the goods were lying at Southgate's, except one lot at Bailey'y—that was one of the first lots, I received invoices and transfers—There were nine repayments or redemption to the amount of 2,185l.—it was Not always the release of a complete parcel, sometimes of a portion—it would Release the amount of the advance; it would be a mush larger amount in Value—at the time of the failure a portion of the goods remained in my Possession, or at my disposal; I cannot tell you the actual invoice value Because I had always given up the invoices to them to enable them to sell In Paris or wherever they required them for, but I have since sold the goods, And I estimate the invoice value at about 2,000l. in round number, as
against a debt due of 1,155l.—according to my ledger account the account is still in debit 20l. 19l. 4d., but I have money to receive; I shall cover myself—I think there will be nothing the goods back from Paris which I had shipped at their request; I have freight and expenses to pay—these are the documents I received in reference to the transactions.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. It is a common thing for export houses To require assistance from banks or private individuals—I was concerned in 12 advances, and 10 of them were repaid.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I never saw Dunderdale, to the best of My belief, until I saw him at the Huddersfield Police-court.
STEPHEN LONDON Wall—between May and September we had a large Quantity of woollen goods consigned to us from manufacturers to the order Of Learoyd, Wilton, and Co., and from time to time we have received transfer Orders in favour of Allen, Cauchai, Dunckley, Faulkner, and James, and Some for consiguments to Paris—we have some goods now belonging to the Firm; I have no 100l.; it might be over 200l.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. There were several cases of re-transfer.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. Ours is a well-known firm, doing a large business—we are packers to the Government, and have been for 17 years—we receive a great number of woollen goods apecially for packing and shipment to various foreign parts—many of these goods were repacked and sent to Paris.
JHON WARD . I am chief constable of the borough of Huddersfield—on 24th October I held a Warrant for the apprehension of Wilton—I took him into custody at the George Hotel, Huddersfield—I read over the warrant to him in the prance of Learoyd—Learoyd said the statement was a false one—Wilton said, "That is what we both say"—I searched Wilton at the police-station and found some documents upon him, which I produce—I received Dundersfield in custody at the Kensington Police-office, and took him to Huddersfield—I read the warrant to him—he said nothing just at the moments—Sergeant Stroud was standing by, and he said that when he apprehended him he asked if Wilton and Learoyd were in custody, and that he afterwards said, "I believed the firm was solvent, and I acted from instructions simply as a pocket-book on him, and in it several documents. (One of these was a letter from Learoyd, Wilton, and co., engaging him as buyer at a commission of 2 1/2 per cent. On sales, travelling expense paid; the other was a memorandum of his commission on sales.)
THOMAS WHEELER , M.R.C.S., of Bexley, Kent. I have been attending Upon George Hardwick Robshaw Since Friday night; he is suffering flow Congestion of the brain—I have seen him this morning; he is not fit to Travel here to-day. (the deposition of Robshaw was put in and read; it Sontained an account of several transactions with the defendant, which left A balance due to him of 850l. Letters of 21st and 24th May, from wilton To Andre were also put in and read.)
Witnesses for the Defence.
been introduced to nim—the business was to be that of colonial merchanta—he had an office at that time at 66, Mark Lane, where we subsequently carried on business up to the time of the failure—I brought in a capital of 1,500l. at first, and afterwards about 500l.—the 1,500l. was paid in on 4th January, I balieve—I has some shares in the Zanzibar, and I had to borrow money on those shares to get the 1,500l.—ar first we did business in colonial produced—before April we experienced a loss in the firm of Messrs. Philippine, Pellisiier, and co., of 6, Lombard Street; they failed, and we lost over 2,000l.—Dunderdale married my sister about seven years since, and has one child—he was living in apartments with his wife—when I entered the firm he was an agent for some manufacurers in the north—we made several purchases of woollen goods through him before he entered our service—my brother, Sidney Learoyd, had some property of his own—when I was at the Huddersfield Police-court my brother was called as witness for the Prosecution—after sustaining the loss I have mentioned I communicated with my brother, and he agreed to put in 2,000l. at different times—the first was in March; I don't know when the last was; I was away—it was contemplated that he should ultimately become a parter, and a memorandum was drawn up—dunderdale became our traveller at the latter part of April, and bayer of woollen goods—the money that I put into the concern came from my father—I inherited about 7,000l. from him—before communicating with Dunderdale there had been a discussion between myself and Wilton as to the woollen trade—we had decided to enter into the woollen trade, and Dunderdale was to travel, and be our buyer, and to receive 2 1/2 commission—he was frequently away buying; he was in Paris towards the end of June for 10 days or more, and after his return he went to the north—I don't know who gave him the instructions to go to Paris—we had established an office there—I don't know whether the rent of that was paid in advance—Wilton arranged all those matters—Mr. offenbach was our agent there with another clerk who acted salesman—Mr. faulkner never came to our office—I don'r recollect seeing Mr. Allen there in company with Dunderdale or Mr. Dunckley—I recollect Robshaw being in the office wthe Dunderdale—I and Wilton were there—Robshaw had sold a parcel of goods to us, and the terms had been for so much cash—we told nim we had not got it, and could not take the goods, and he said he could show Dunderdale where to get the cash, and suggested going and on to Mr. Faulkner, but the goods were redeemed within 14 days—I don't remerber any other instance in which advances were obtained when Dunderdale was present—I remember a balance-sheet bring made out; I don't know when—at the latter end of september I consulted my own solicitor about the position of our affairs—previous to that we had an accountant in; I don't know when he came, I was away; I suppose it was about August—after consulting my solicitor a statement was made put with reference to the position of our affairs; that would be about the latter end of September, just before the failure—these papers produced are Wilton's writing; they were handed to my solicitor—in my opinion, at that time the business was all right, that was in July; I was away all August—I first began to alter my opinion as to my pecuniary position when I was in Paris, about the 15th September; I had gone over to see how our head clerk was getting on, Mr. Andre, who had previously been our book-keeper—as far as I know Dunderdale had not bought any goods after about 23rd August—I have
lost every farthing of my money, and my brother's money is also lost—to my knowledge Dunderdale has not received anything beyond his 131l.—on my oath I know of no money that has came into his hands in any shape or way—I consulted Mr. Nehemiah Leroyd on the position of my affairs beofre filting my petition; he was no relative of mine—Wilton handled him the documents that have been shown to me.
Cross-examined. I did not know beofre entering into partnership with Wilten that he had been a bankrupt—I did not take the trouble to inquire into his antecedents—I know nothing about business myself—I was introduced to him by my cousin—I attended at the office—I knew something of what was going on, not all; I was away most of the time—Wilton did not write me when I was in Scorlane; I don't understand book-keeping—I knew nothing of the woollen business, nor did Wilton; Dunderdale did—he had been in the woollen trade himself, and had been unfortunate—it was because of his knowledge of the woollen trade that we engaged him—the colonial trade and the woolen trade were carried contemporaneously; the two businesses were distinct—we had no house in Paris connected with the colonical produce; we had agents to whom we consigned goods—I don't know that all the goods that were bought in July, August, and September were pledged—I have said that I believed so with a trifling exception—I know that they were pledged with Allen, dunckley, Canchai, Faulkner, and Dufourcets, of Paris—the percentage was 2 per cent. commission for a fortnight, and sometimes 2 1/2—I was asked "May I take it that the whole of your goods have been practically dealt with in the same way, have been pledged with persons from whom you obtained advances upon them for a fortnight at this percentage?" and my answer was "Yes"—I said that they were pledged almost as soon as they were received; I also said as to Dunderdale that the more he could buy the more he could get as his commisson; that was his sole remuneration—we had no salesman in England—I was asked if the goods were sold to James under cost price, and I said "Yes"—there were goods of no use for the Paris market, they had been dearly bought—I don't know whether they had been sold at 30 per cent. under cost price—we were selling goods from 10 to 50 per cent. under cost price—they were we could not get rid of—the goods in Paris were first of all pledged at the Magasin Generale, and then taken out by dufoureets—I got the information about those from andre—some of the goods were sold ar a profit there to the extent 100l. or 200l.—I was asked whether all the transaction in Paris had been pledgings or sales under cost price and I said "Yes," and I adhere to that; that was so to the extent of 6,000l. or thereabouts—we left all the buyings to Dunderdale—we shipped the goods and left it to Andre and Offenbach—we took Dunderdale's advice on the price of goods; we did not go into the woollen trade at his suggestion—Wilton sold some goods when he was travelling in the colonial produce, and they were delivered and paid for—I was present on one or two occasions of the pledgings with Allen and Canchai, not with Dunckley or Faulkner—I think I knew Allen about May—I had not heard of his lending money to anybody else—the object of the pledgings was to pay for the goods we had ordered—we bought goods of A to pledge them to pay the debt of B—these letters of the 21st amd 24th May are Wilton's writinh; I have not seen them before; I was not aware of their being written—I was not aware that the state of our firm was such as is described there.
SYONEY LEAROYD . I have the misfortune to be a large loser in this concern—I put in 2,000l. to begin with 4,200l. altogether, and have lost it—I never had any active connection with this firm—I first put in capital about march, and then some in May—I went to Paris for the first time in May with my brother; they had been established the Paris house—I don't know whether the rent of it was paid in advances; there was an office and a salesman there—Dunderdale had then joined the firm as a bayer—after my return from Paris I saw nim and told him I thought the business in Paris looked very nice, and I thought they were doing a good business—I was only there for a week—I did not go round with the traveller—I saw people coming in and out—I went to Paris on pleasure; I went to Paris again a few weeks afterwards, and went to the business premises—Wilton was with me—we looked at the stock, and he telegraphed to Dunderdale to come over, which he did—he looked at the stock, and went round with the salesman to see the customers—that was about the latter end of May or the beginning of June—Dunderdale remained in Paris a week or 10 days—he went out very nearly every day to the business permises—I said he looked very busy, walking about all day long—I cannot tell whether it was after I had been to Paris on the second occasion that I put more money into the business; it may have been after—I was first acquainted with the fact that the firm was insolvent on 27th September—I got a telegram—I then went to Mr. Samuel Learoyd at Huddersfield, who is the solictor conducting this prosecution—I explained to him the nature of my transactions in the matter—I have not taken any active put in the business—I have no idea what Dunderdale received; I knew nothing of any money being paid to him—I knew that he was agent to two large firms in the North before he entered the service—I do not know at whose instance he left.
Cross-examined. I was a member of this firm, but not a willing one—I first put in the 2,000l. because they wanted money to meet some bills—they looked to busy in Paris that I was quite taken in—my second loan was 1,000l.; they told me if I did not let them have the money they would go to samsh; that was in March—my 2,000l. set them on their legs again—then I let them have 2,200l. more—I unfortnately signed my name to a paper as a partner, so they took the rest; they wanted a bank as a reference, so I signed my name to a paper to say that they had so much money of mine in the firm in order to give the bank as a reference to manufacturers—my second visit to Paris was at the latter end of May of June, I cannor recollect the date—I was scarcely ever in London, I have always been on pleasure—I know nothing of business—I heard Dunderdale and some other member of the firm talking of buying goods on credit—I could not swear it was Dunderdale—I have sworn it once, but it was a mistake, I could not swear it now—I know nothing of goods being sold below cost price and the rest being pleaged and never redeemed—I did not know that when I put in my 2,200l., if I had I don't think I should have done it.
Re-examined. I was examined at Huddersfield for the prosecution and cross-examined on behalf of Dunderdale—I then said the conversation between Wilton and Dunderdale did not alarm me—I was then speaking of about three months ago, but I was not certain about the conversation.
By the JURY. I received money from the firm—I was spending money—I always lived as a gentleman.
LEOPOLD LE BLANC (Interpreted). I live at 11, Boulevard de Belleville, Paris—I was engaged by Learoyd, Wilton, and co., as salesaman, from 1st June—I had previously been engaged in the same capacity with several firms in Paris—my salary was to be 100 francs a month—on 26th May circulars were sent out by the firm—dunring June and July I took orders amounting to about 36,000 francs—the goods were not delivered—I saw Dunderdake three times—he brought me some patteners—these (produced) are the sort goods that the brought samples of—I went was with him on two days to different customers to introduce him; Wilton was with us—he speaks French—we took orders from customers and entered them into books—that also happened in the end of July and August—Mr. Wilton was there then—some business was done—Mr. Andrs is carrying on the buysiness there now.
Cross-examined. The goods were not sold, they were put into consingnment, what you call pledged.
Wilton and Dunderdale received good characters.
WILTON— GUILTY .— Eight Months' Imprisonment.
DUNDERDALE GUILTY —Recommended to mercy by the Jury— Two Months' Imprisonment.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday and Wednesday, January 20th and 21st, 1880.
Before Mr. Recorder.
176. GEORGE FRANCIS DICKENSON , Unlawfully obtaining be false pretences from James Norris a document of title—viz., a mate's certificate realting to brandy and wine, with intent to defraud. Second Count, for incurring a debt and liability to Edwin Chaplin, with intent to defraud.
MESSRS. POLAND and HORACE AVORY Prosecuted; MR. WILLIS, Q.C., with MR. BESLEY, Defended.
JAMES NORRIS . I am member of the firm of Norris and Gilby, merchants, of 44, Mark lane—we are London agents for Morgan and Co., of Hamburgh—Mr. Edwin Chaplin is the sole partner of that firm—I have known the defendant for some time as a customer of Morgan and Co.—on 14th January last year he was indebted to them about 1,200l.—bills were runnign for that amount—on 29th January he came to my office—I had then a letter from Mr. Chaplin enclosing this copy of an order for 50 quarter-casks of brandy and 25 quarter-casks of sherry—I told him that I thought he was indebted too largely to Morgan and Co.—he said that we might hold over the order till the first bill was paid if we liked, but it would be a great pity to do so, as it was a right season to ship these goods, and if the shipment was deferred they would not go to so good a market—I said "You already owe Chaplin and Co. about 1,200l., and I cannot recomment them to extend that amount; if you wish to send them out now you can send the bills of lading through an Australian bank, who will advance you 80 per cent. on the invoice price, and Morgan and Co. will draw upon you for the remaining 20 per cent."—he said he could not do that, as the interest and charges would eat up the profit, that there was no risk in taking the order, and that I might look on the bills now running as good as paid—I said that part of the 1,200l. was consequent upon renewals of bills, that I did not like renewals, and if he did any more business with them there must be no more renewals—he then agreed to that—
he repeated several times that there was no danger in taking the order, and that the bills would be met at maturity—he said "If Morgan and Co., wish it, they can draw at a shorter date and then renew, making up the usual credit"—I said "I will agree to no renewals, but if you assure me that there is no risk in talking the order, and thar the running bills will be met regularly at maturity, I will write Morgan and Co. advising them to make the shipment, but in future your account must not exceed 1,000l., and there must be no renewals"—to this he agreed—some of the goods were to be shipped to Melbourne and some Sudney—on the same day I wrote to Mr. Chaplin, and the goods were shipped—either I or my partner had the mate's receipt—I could not say that I saw it in the office—in the ordinary course of business it would be obtained first and be afterwards exchanged for bills of lading—this is the letter I wrote to Mr. Chaplin on 29th January: "I have seen dhyhenson and had a long talk with him; he is very reasonable, and says it you don't like to ship now you can wait till the next bill runs off. He offers to accept at four months and you to renew, but I hate renewals, and said he must not expect them in any case; to this he agrees. write and let me know if you like this arrangement. I don't think there is much danger in executing his last order now, but you can leave it till after the 9th March if you like." This is Mr. Chaplin's reply: "February 3rd. I am much obliged for your report as to G. F. D. Under all the circumstances I think it would be as well to execute his order; it will therefore be sent off this week." On 20th February I sent this memorandum to the defendant: "I herewith beg to hand you mate's receipt for G. F. D.,50 quarter-casks brandy and 20 quarter-casks wine shipped per your account per Ann Duthey for Sydney." Om 25th February, in consequence of what I heard, I went and saw the defendant at his offfice—I said "I hear that one of your bills for a small amount has been dishonoured, and I have come in consequence to demand the mate's receipt sent to you a few days ago"—he said "It is impossible to give tit you, as I have already sent it to my correspondent abroad"—I said "That is unlikely, as there has been no mail for Australia. since the date it was sent to you"—that was so—he said the dishonour of the bill was a temporary affair, and he expected to put it to rights in a day or two, when all things would go smoothly as before—I said I could not believe that, as a man doing his large business must be very hardly pushed to let a bill about 80l. come back dishonoured, and I again demanded the mate's receipt or the bills of lading, whichever he might have in his possession them—he declined to have anything more to say on the subject, and I then told him that I considered it a rank swindle, and should recommend Messrs. Morgan to prosecute him—a few days after that notice of his liquidation was sent my office—these bills (produced), except the one dated 25th February, represent the outstanding liability—the last bill, dated 20th February, for 252l. 15s. 7d., was for these goods supplied—it was never accepted—none of the other bills were met—I was induced to part with the mate's receipt by the statement made by Dickenson to me at the interview at my office on 29th January—I should not have parted with it if it had not been for that. Croos-examined. I was agent for Mr. Chaplin in this transaction; the order was his and the goods were his—he finally decides whether the order small be executed—in this case he wrote me a letter stating that he had
decided to execute it—he selected the goods according to sample; I suppose he made out the invoice, I don't know it as a matter of fact, but there is no doubt of it—the goods are sent to this country by Mr. Chaplin; the invoice might go either before or after, and the goods are put on board—when the goods come here the name of the vessel by which they are to go Australia is given to me—that name is given by Mr. Dickenson or his clerk, and my clerks put the goods on board, and the mate's receipt is sent to Mr. Dickenson by another clerk of mine—the great question is whether the order shall be executed, and when we decide on that the ordinary steps are taken, among them the handing over of the mate's receipt—I did not see the defendant between 29th January and 25th February—I have known him a number of years, I could not say how long—I believe he has carried on an extensive businesss in the City for a good many years—I think it was 1,200l. that was due when I saw him in January—I attended the first meeting that was held after he filed his petition, and was appointed chairman—the creditors met and his affairs were placed before them—I believe he afterwards went into bankruptcy—I had a claim of my own against him because I discounted one of the bills; I proved on the estate, and no doubt Mr. Chaplin did—I don't know that I was invited to oppose the bankrupt and to inquire into his proceedings; everything went to Messrs. Wontner and Sons—I made to opposition to the defendant's passing in bankruptey or getting his discharge—I never went to the Bankruptey Court and did not know that he was examined—Messrs. Wontner attended; I did not; I can't say whether Mr. Chaplin did—I saw in the paper that the defandant had passed his final examination and received his discharge—he had creditors to nearly 40,000l.; some to more than 2,000l. or 3,000l.—I have never seen the trustee about these proceedings—I attended before the Lord Mayor; he dismissed my application, and I was bound over—the conversaction I have related took place about this time last year—I have no notes of the coversation made at the time—I believe I am quite accurate in all I have stated to-day—I have not stated to-day that he told me at that interview that he never did such a thing as to obtain an advance on bills of ladinh through a bank—I don't think I said at the Mansion House, "I said, 'You can send the bills of landing and drafts thorugh an Australian bank, and obtain 80 per cent. upon them, putting a margin, and they drawing for the odd 20;' he said, I never did such a thing, and the expense would be too great'"—I believe I did not say so—I said something very like it, but not that—what I said was that he could not do such a thing because the expense would be so great—he did not say, "I never did such a thing"—I signed my deposition; it is incorrect—he said, "It would not do to do such a thing"—I cannot say whether I have said in evidence before to-day that he said there was no risk—you may not take it that I never did say so; I am not sure, I believe I have said so before to-day, but I don't know that I have said it in evidence—I don't know whether I said so at the Mansion House—he said that we might hild the order over till the first bill was met if we liked, but that it would be a great pity to do so as it would lose the season—he did not say he believed that the current bills would be met; he said I was to look upon the current bills as paid—I did not show him my letter to Mr. Chaplin; it was a private letter—the solicitors called some one at the Mansion House to prove the state of his account at Prescott's; not with my kmowledge; I did
not know anything about it; I know it was done—Idid not know befores taking this order that his accound at Prescott's had been attached—I am only in the habit of advancing money on goods as brokers, if bills of lading are sent us—among persons with whome I had business were Leman Hart and Co.—the defendant came to me in reference to a renewal of some bills; I don't think it was with respect to a bill of 150l. of Leman Hart's which Had been dishonoured about the end of January; I never heard of it—I Never heard that an action had been brought against him in respect of certain Bills he had given to a Mr. Story; I never heard of the name of Storey; I One of this bills, and that Dickenson was obliged to defend an action—I Was not aware that this account was attached till quite resently; I belive at The mansion House—I did not know that he had two accounts, one at the Bank of England and one at Prescott's; I have learnt it since; I heard it given in evidence by Prescott's; clerk that the account there was kept low, and almost practically closed, because of the attahement—I should think a man in Mr. Dickenson's position would depend very much upon getting remittances from those to whom he consigned goods—I know nothing of his business except in these transactions with Morgan and Co.—I have not discounted for him—Idon't think I ever had a direct transaction with him—I knew that Morgan and Co. had renewed some bills for him; that was all I knew—that Leman Hart's were not quite in the same condition—the defendant asked me to renew a bill of Leman Hart's for him after Leman Hart had failed—I knew that the goods that were got form Messrs. Morgan's In January went to Australia; he did make away with them—I attempted to attach them; we found afterwards that they were properly in the hands of persons out there I could not do so—I do not know that the consignments signments have not all been realized; I have not inquird into that—I know that there has been a great depression in trade for the last eighteen months—I don't find that there has been a diffculty in getting returns from shipments ments to Australia—I think there is danger in any bill that is drawn, to a certain extent—before I saw the defendant I saw him that thay were not to trust him, and afterwards that there was little danger in doing it. (A letter of 18th January from Chaplin to Norris and a replay of 20th, were read; also letter of 23rd January from Chaplin to Norris.) I was to form a decision and communicate to Mr. Chaplin—I did not learn from the defendant at the interview on 29th that he had not received a remittance from Australia as he had expected—what took place at the meeting Icould not say—there was a great deal said—Idon't think he said anything at the meeting; I don't think he spoke—I was not at the bankruptcy meeting I am referring to the meeting of creditors.
Re-examined. Before I saw the defendant on 29th January I thought his Account a very risky one—from his manner, and what he said at that time I was assured that he could be properly trusted, and having known him so Many years I relid on his word—I wrote the letter of the 29th just after The interview—I had not then the slightest idea that his banking account had Been attached—the goods were shipped from Hamburg here; the bills of landing were scnt to me; the goods were put into lighters and deliverd on board, and the mate's receipt sent to the shipbrokers in exchange for the
bills of lading; that is the ordinart course of business—I did not hear from the defendant to whom the goods had gone; I ascertained afterwarde that they are a respectable firm.
EDWIN CHAPLIN . I am wine merchant, and trade under the firm of Morgan and Co. at Hamburg—I am the prosecutor in the case—I first had transactions with the defendant in 1866—between 1869 and 1876 I had no business transactions with the defendant in 1866, 1878, and 1879 I had—I supplied goods in 1878, and those bills were outstanding to the extent of 1,200l.—in London on board the Ann Duthie for Sydney—the usual credit is six months from the date of the mate's receipt—one of these six bills had been renewed in December; the nrst would become due early in March—Idrew the bill for these good after his bankruptcy, simply to give it in evidence—I came to London for the purpose of attending the meeting of creditors on 27th March, and found the meeting was postponed, and notice of postponement Ment had been given only a few hours, late the evening before—Iinstructed My solicitors, Messrs. Wontner, and returned to Hamburg—I was induced To execute the order of 14th Januray by the letter I received from Mr. Norris, dated 29th; the contrast between the letters of 20th and 29th Showed such a total change in his mind—I was unwilling to supply the Goods before, but after Mr. Norris had made inquiries at my request and Wrote the letter of the 29th, I thought it safe to execute the order—I have Not received any dividend, and do not expect any—I have been bothered To prove twice, once under the insolvency, and once under the bankruptcy; I did prove.
Cross-examined. The goods were not parted with till the mate's receipt Was received—I selected the goods in Hamburg for the performance of the Order, and his account in performance of his order—I know that they were to be Put on board a vessel to be named by him—Mr. Norrise, as my agent, shipped the goods for tim.
CHARLES JOSEPH HITCHINGHAM . I am a clerk to John brown and Co., Bankers of Abchurch Lane—I produce a bill for 87l. 8s. ld. Due 21st February, 1879; it is a three months bill from 18th November, 1878, accepted by G.F. Dickenson—it was the amount drawn out on that day to close the account; that sum had been standing to his credit from the 22nd.
Cross-examined. I know that the account had been attached—up to that Time he always had a large and good accound with us; he had a fair balance generally—he was making large payments to us in November and December, and up to the time the accound was attached; from that time it was not thought advisable to pay mors money in.
Re-examined. The date of the attachment was 8th January—43l. 4s. 6d. Was then standing to his credit.
HENRY ALFRED STACEY . I am superintendent of records in the London Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of proceedings in the liquidation of the defendant—the petition is dated 28th February, 1879, filed on that day—the statement of affairs shows liabilities 39,944l., and assets 5,143l.—there was a meeting of creditors under the liquidation, and two or three adjournments, subsequently it fell through—I produce the file of proceedings in the bankruptcy—the petition was filed on 24th April, 1879; the presentation of the petition is the Act of Bankruptcy—the adjudication is dated 12th July, 1879—the trustee was appointed on 19th August—the statement of affairs shows liabilities 40,202l. 9s. 9d., and assets 3,845l. 7s. 6d.—he passed his examination on 20th November, 1879—there is no dividend At present under the bankruptcy.
Cross-examined. It is not closed.
CHARLES FRANCIS HARTRIDGE . I am clerk to Messrs. Holder Brothers, Ship-brokers, 146, Leadenhall Street—I produce the mate's receipt for 50 quarter casks of brandy and 25 of wine, shipped on board the Ann Duthey on 20th February, 1879.
THOMAS LEWIS . I am a solicitor, and clerk to Messrs. Wontner and Sons, solicitors for the prosecution—in March last I was not personally consulted about this matter by Mr. Chaplin, Mr. Blanchard Wontner was, and the matter was put into my hands on 4th April—the proceedings were commenced at the Mansion House in December.
Cross-examined. The defendant had then passed his pro forma public examination—before that I desired to have a private examination—the trustee told me he was willing to give me any information I could desire—the process of the Mansion House was used after he had passed his last examination—Mr. Chaplin undoubtedly gave instructions to take criminal proceedings in March, when he was over here, not to me directly—I know that in the following month we were instructed; he did not instruct me personally, but I know as a fact that instructions had been given.
Re-examined. I know perfectly that instructions had been given to prosecute; the prosecution was delayed until the appointment of a trustee.
EDWWIN CHAPLIN (Re-examined). I gave instructions to prosecute immediately On receiving notice of the postponement of the meeting; that was in March last year, then I left the matter in the hands of my solicitors—I was only here a few days after I heard of the prisoner's failure—I arrived in London on 24th March, and in Liverpool on 1st April—the instructions were given on the 27th I believe.
MR. WILLIS Submitted that no case was made out on either Count. As to the first, nothing was obtained from Mr. Norris, the contract was made by Mr. Chaplin, and upon any representation of the defendant to him, but upon Mr. Norris's letters; and Mr. Norris was really acting under instruction received both from Mr. Chaplin and the defendant. As to the Second Count, there was no evidence of the contract having been obtained by fraud from Mr. Chaplin, he acted entirely upon Mr. Norris's report; and the statement made to him by the defendant was simply the expression of a confident opinion that the bills would be met, and not a statement of anything that was untrue.
MR. POLAND contended that these questions were peculiarly for the Jury. In the first place, the mate's receipt was handed to the defendant by Mr. Norris because he believed the representations made to him, and not because his principal had through him entered into a contract; and in the second the
representations were made to Mr. Norris for the very purpose of being communicated to Mr. Chaplin, and he obtained credit by those means. The RECORDER was of opinion that on neither Count was there a case of the Jury.
NOT GUILTY . The costs of the defence were ordered to be paid by the prosecutor.
NEW COURT.—Friday, Saturday, Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, January 16th, 17th, 19th, 20th, and 21st; and
OLD COURT.—Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, January 22nd, 23rd, and 24th, 1880.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
177. FREDERICK MICHELL (35) , Unlawfully failing to discover to his trustees how and to whom, &c., he had disposed of goods value 4,000l. Thirty-seven Other Counts varying the manner of laying the charge.
MESSRS. BESLEY and GRAIN Prosecuted; MESSRS. CLAY and LYON Defended.
HENRY ALFRED STACEY . I am Superintendent of Records in the London Bankruptcy Court—I produce five files of proceedings in reference to the defendant—this (produced) is his last liquidation petition, dated 28th January, 1879—it was filed the same day—he is described as of 4, Priest Court, Foster Lane, London—the first meeting was appointed for 13th March, and it was adjourned to the 25th, and again to April 1st, when a proposition of 5s. in the pound was made and rejected—the statement of affairs was filed on 4th April in liquidation—the first sheet is signed F. Michell—it purports to be a statement of affairs on 28th January, and the total debts are 2,565l. 16s. and the assets 350l.—there are no assets except under List G (produced)—among the book debts I find J. Keighley, 570l. 7s. 4d., under the word "Bad," estimated to produce nil—I produce the bankruptcy petition filed 1st April, 1879, in which he is described as of 4, Priest Court, Foster Lane, Merchant, the act of bankruptcy being the previous filing of his petition of 28th February—the adjudication was on May 1st, when Mr. Everett was appointed trustee—I find on the file a statement of affairs filed by the bankrupt on 1st August, 1879, which purports to show the state of his affairs on May 1st—he has signed each sheet—the unsecured creditors are 362l. 6s. 7d.—there are 10 names on List A—the petitioning creditors are Hyde, Roberts, and Co., of Staleybridge, Lancashire, 68l. 17s.—instead of finding Keighley or his trustees in that list as a creditor for 1,762l., I find him in List H. for 577l. 1s. 4d., estimated to produce nil—going back to the liabilities side, there is a statement of other liabilities, total 2,507l. 12s. 11d. (handing in List D.) The statement of his affairs was filed on August 1st—on the other side of the account, on List G, 450l. is the only asset disclosed—under the word "property," in List G, I find this. (This was a memorandum in writing of the executors and trustees of the late Harrington, deceased, to secure to his daughter 41l. 15s. 10d.)
Cross-examined. There are 27 creditors mentioned in the liquidation proceedings, and 29 in the bankruptcy proceedings.
CHARLES LEGGATT BARBER . I took notes of the bankruptcy examination of 3rd, 9th, and 16th July, and these are correct transcripts of my notes—the questions run up to 1,357—they are consecutive numbers from first to last.
Cross-examined. I took the examination of Mr. Reid and Mrs. Michell on 12th June; they are correct; also the examination of J.J. Keighley on 28th July, 1879, and Mr. Harfeld on 16th July—they are correctly taken—they were all taken at the instance of Mr. Michell's trustee—it is the invariable practice for the trustee to ask for a private sitting—the Court does not grant it except under very special circumstances.
ALFRED ISAAC WRIGHT . On 16th July I was the official shorthand writer in Mr. Barber's absence—I was duly sworn, and took the notes correctly of the bankrupt's examination—I have made a transcript and, saving clerical errors, it is correct.
Cross-examined. I took notes of Mr. Bowen's examination the same day.
WILLIAM JOHN CORDORON . I live at Kennington, and represented in London the firm of Mr. Smithson, a stuff merchant at Bradford, in 1878 and 1879—I have an office at 25, Gutter Lane, City—I knew Michell before, but did not do business with him till October or November, 1878—I have been in the trade all my life, and have known firms in London 10 or 15 years—I knew the old firm of Keighley and Brother, the father of the present Mr. Keighley, who I have known 12 or 15 years—I knew him just to speak to when the firm consisted of his father and uncle—he commenced three or four years ago to trade on his own account in the name of the old firm—I have not seen his uncle or his father for years—I sold him about two lots of goods about September, 1878, value 40l. or 50l. each, and a day or two afterwards I saw Michell at 4, Priest's Court—he said that they were a nice clean lot of goods, and had I another lot like them—I said yes, I had one or two lots at higher prices—he said "I should like to see them, as I can them for you"—I had some at a higher price—samples were sent, and he said that they would suit him better, as they would suit the West End, and the goods were bought and delivered to Keighley, who had made a communication to me—that lot of goods, which was the fourth lot, came to about 250l.—a week or a fortnight after the delivery I saw Michell at Keighley's place—Keighley was not there—I said "Michell, our account is getting rather large, Mr. Smithson is rather anxious. Mr. keighley has told me you are going to put 2,000l. into the concern at the end of November, is that correct?"—he said "Yes, Mr. cordoron, it is quite right," and I was satisfied—several lots of goods were bought after that, and I had frequent conversations with Michell—I used to meet him every day or every other day, and he said that he was going to put money in at the end of November—invoices were sent with the parcels, and I made a note of the sales in the order-book, which I have not got—Mr. Smithson has it—I know what goods I sold, but I do not know whether the railway people delivered them—I took about 600l. worth of orders, and Mr. Michell told me afterwards that he was very much pleased with the goods, and he had done well with them—that was early in December—I communicated what was said about the 2,000l. to Mr. Smithson—I had no power to allow the credit to run to 600l., but he entrusted me with a certain amount of discretion—I would not have trusted Keighley with 600l. before that statement because, though I knew him to be all right, I knew his trade was not large enough—I depended on the extra trade he was to bring in, and the greater outlet for the goods—Michell pulled a newspaper out of his pocket in November, and said "This is a very nice thing, Mr. Cordoron, to meet one at breakfast"
—I said "I don't know, what is it?"—he said "There has been a fire at Notting Hill, and three houses of mine have been damaged to the amount of 700l."—I said "You seem very happy" or "very comfortable over it; I suppose they are are insured"—he said "Yes, they are, but there is a very great deal of annoyance and inconvenience attending it"—I said "Are they detached villas?"—he said "No; they are in the centre of the terrace"—I said "They are not the only three perhaps that you have?"—he said "No; I have other houses on each side of them"—he ordered goods after that, and I still believed he was a man of property—I was with him and Mr. Smithson and Keighley very shortly after that at the City wine-house, Cheapside, and Michell said "The property will be sold next week, and then I shall hand over to Mr. Keighley over 3,000l."—I saw him when he stopped in 1879—he said that he was very little—he said that things would come all right—I had not supplied him directly, and had no account against him, but I had supplied him with goods which Keighley never saw—they were delivered at my place into one of Johnson's vans by Michell's directions and sent away—I did not know where they were going, but he said that they were not going to Michell's because they were sold, and were going direct to the customer—Mr. Smithson sold those cords in my presence, and I delivered them—I do not think the conversation at the City wine-house was before that—I did not know that he was getting advances on the goods.
Cross-examined. I did not ascertain that the houses he spoke of were invested in trustees for his wife; I took his word for what he said—I am certain that the conversation about the house was not in July—I do not know that they were burnt down about 20th July—I did not hear the conversation between Smithson and the defendant—what the defendant said at the City wine-house was that he should hand over to Mr. Keighley over 3,000l.; he mentioned "over 3,000l."twice—I made no note of the conversation and never mentioned it till I told Mr. Leader about it two months ago, perhaps—I was before the Alderman every day, but was not called—the invoice of the goods sent by Johnson's van was sent to Keighley and Brother at their office—I understood that Michell was acting as agent for Keighley—I do not know what part of the 600l. for which I took orders has been paid for—Mr. Smithson's business is in Bradford, and I am in London—Kinghley told me he was doing business with India, and I knew it for years—I cannot say whether any of these goods went to India.
Re-examined. I think it was November when he took the newspaper out of his pocket; I am sure it was not in July—I had the curiosity to look in the Telegraph, and the fire was in November or December—he never mentioned his wife as to the houses which were burnt down—I heard you tell the Alderman at Guildhall that other witnesses would be called at the trial—it has never been suggested before that Michell held himself out as an agent of Keighley—Michell said that when he came into partnership he would have things done in a better manner and the stock better kept—he never said either that he was a partner or agent, but that he was coming in, and he was trusted according to his representation—he never mentioned its being an order for India when the goods were put on Johnson's van; he said that he had done well with them at the West End, and told me to keep them till he had sold them, and afterwards he said that he had sold them at the West End of London.
By MR. CLAY. Michell said that Keighley was to blame, but he did not tell me he had found Keighley's position was very different from what he believed it to be; he never went into Mr. Keighley's affairs with me at all.
WILLIAM FENTIMAN SMITHSON . I carry on business at bradford, but came from Harrogate yesterday, where I have been staying on account of ill-health, and have not got my book with me; it can be here to-morrow—I first dealt with young Keighley a year ago last October—I think the first transaction was 40 pieces of serge, sold by my agent, Mr. Cordoron, value about 60l.—the second parcel was some Lamas, value 60l. or 70l.—after that second parcel was sent I had a communication from Mr. Cordoron and sent a third parcel of Russell cords in October, value 80l. or 100l.—that was after Michell's name had been mentioned—this (produced) is an exact copy of my ledger; my cashier made it, and I checked it with the ledger—these are exact copies of the invoices forwarded to Keighley—I will wire for my books, and stay in town till to-morrow.
JOHN JESSOP KEIGHLEY . In October and November, 1878, I received parcels of goods from Mr. Smithson, and invoices, which the accountant had upon my liquidation—whatever I had I sent to the trustee, and have not seen them since—I also sent my bought ledger to the trustee—it is not here; it would only be a copy of the invoices.
FREDERICK JOHN DEAR . I am agent for some cloth merchants, of 22, Paternoster Row—I have been in the trade 18 or 20 years—prior to September, 1878, who was in business as the sole representative of the old firm of Keighley and Brother—I represent Hyde and co., of Staley bridge, the petitioning creditor, and Messrs. Hertz and Co., of Bradford; I also do business on my own account—in consequence of a letter from Hertz and Co. I went to Keighley's on 20th September, 1878, and on the next day Michell came to my place—I said "Are you Mr. Michell, from Keighley Brother's?"—he said "Yes"—I said "You have come here to endorse a hill"—he said "I have," and endorsed it—I then said "Is it true that you are going to join Keighley in partnership?"—he said "Yes, and I am going to put in 2,000l."—he saw some papers of shirtings on my desk, and said "Do you deal in this class of goods?"—he said "I am; I have a connection of my own for this class of goods," and let him have patterns—he said "What is the price?"—I said "1s. 2 1/2 d."—he took the patterns, and returned on the 26th September and said "I have a customer for them, and will take them"—the invoice was about 190l.; they were invoiced to Keighley and Brother—I let them go on the strength of the representation that he was going to put 2,000l. into the business—he had another parcel a day or two afterwards amounting to about 150l., which he said he sold at a good profit—the two parcels together came to 240l. or 300l.—the terms were a four month's bill from the date of the invoices—the bills were drawn and endorsed by Michell—they were Hyde's goods—two of these bills (produced) refer to the bills fell due they were dishonoured, and the shirtings have not been paid for—I would not have credited Keighley more than 20l. or 30l.; the credit I gave him was purely influenced by Michell's statement—Michell came again about 3rd October—Mr. Hertz, from Bradford, came in while he was there, and I introduced Michell to
him as the in going partner who was going to join keighley; Michell said "I am going to join Keighley and I shall put in 2,000l. or 3,000l., and if the business succeeds well I shall put in more; my wife has a private income of 600l. or 800l. a year, and I have also a small income myself; I do not like to be idle, and that is the reason I am Joining Keighley in business"—after Mr. Hertz left I sold Mitchell 250l. or 260l. worth of Hyde's goods—this is the original invoice—they were paid for about a month afterwards by cheque—I think this is it. (This was for 64l. 12s., drawn by Michell in favour of Hyde.) Before he had that he had a second parcel—he said that he had done very well with the first lot, and he bought another—this is the invoice (Dated October 14th, 1878, for 269 shawls at 5s. 3d., 70l., 12s. 3d.)—that was a 30 days' draft, and the bill was dishonoured—this is it (produced)—in that case a month elspsed before the bill was drawn, but the original arrangement was to pay cash within the 30 days—as he did not pa I saw him and said "You had better give me a 30 days' draft, so that he got 60 days' credit instead of 30—it fell due on 18th December—he explained why he made a separate account of it—he said "Till the partnership deed is signed I am doing a little business on my own account"—I saw him in London three or four days before it came due, and reminded him of it—he said that it was all right; he was going to Bradford, but it would be provided for—I got this telegram the day after it became due: "Can you take up bill to-day, will pay you to-morrow; Keighley will tell you where to find it, perhaps he can do it for me"—I went and showed it to Keighley; he read it, and said "I cannot take it up"—it fell due on 18th September—this letter was written to Hyde and Co., at Staleybridge—it is Michell's writing. (This was signed "F. Michell, stating that he was unable to take up the bill, owing to his bank having stopped payment last month.) He afterwards called on me, and I said "I am quite surprised that the bill has not been paid"—he said "I shall pay it in the course of a few days"—I saw him almost daily; he said that he was all right, and I had nothing to fear, and all these were acceptances and endorsenments for goods—this letter is his writing. (This was date 3d. 30th September, 1878, from the defendant to Messrs. Hyde, expressing regret at not being able to meet his bill, and promising a remittance of Friday.) I saw him frequently after January 1st; he called with Keighley at my office of January 9th—I had then had the statutory paper calling a meeting of the creditors of Keighley and Co.—Keighley's had no account with Hyde apart from the defendant—of the goods invoiced by Hyde's 350l. was indebtedness represented by these two bills—the shawls were to Michell personally—when they called on the 9th he said "I am sorry for what has occurred, and that your principals are involved"—I said "I cannot understand what has happened; did you take the trouble to satisfy yourself that Michell's representations about being a capitalist were correct?"—he said "I have simply taken Michell's word for it"—I said "You, like ourselves, have been deceived"—he said "I have securities upon me now for about 1,500l.; if you would like to see them I will show them"—I said "I will see them"—he beckoned me into the outer office; I took Keighley with me, and the defendant showed me a paper purporting to represent a loan to his wife's trustees of 400l., and a will or some document which he said was worth 1,000l.—he did not say whose will it was—I said "You can put your
securities in your pocket, for to me they are useless; you cannot do anything with them without your wife's consent; I have made my own inquiries about you, and the result is very unsatisfactory; in fact, I have found you to be a liar and a rogue," and I told him to leave my office, and said to Keighley "You hear what I have said, contradict it if you can"—as they were leaving I said "It remains with me to consider what steps will be taken after what has come to my knowledge; you hear what I have said, bear in mind what I have said—they then left—I was present at Michell's meeting of creditors in March—he proposed to pay 5s. in the pound at once, but the meeting rejected it—he was examined at the meeting—there was another meeting, and on 1st April the petition in bankruptcy was filed—I acted as representative for Hyde and Co., and this prosecution was at the instigation of the creditors generally.
Cross-examined. I sold some shawls to Michell on my own account on 26th October, value 103l., which was paid—that made the second parcel that was paid for—the St. James's Bank stopped about 12th September, but there was nothing there to his credit—I may have declined to look at the securities at first, but being pressed I looked at them—I am sure he said 1,500l.—I did not know whether his wife's sanction had been given—this looks like the document which I said appeared to be a will (an indenture)—I am not familiar with legal documents—I put the 69l. bill into the hands of Messrs. Plunkett and Leader, who I have known 14 years, some time in January, and in due time received notice of Michell filing a liquidation petition—I attended the meeting, and was chairman—I took no other steps till April 1st—I do not know whether the composition was to be secured by the wife—the general feeling was that the creditors would not take less than 10s.—as the 5s. was refused Mr. Vanderpump suggested that time should be given—I do not remember hearing Mr. Waddington say that if 10s. in the pound was not paid bankruptcy proceedings would be instituted, or that a prosecution would probably take place, or that the Bradford creditors would prosecute, nor do I remember stopping him and correcting him—I do not remember a statement being made by any creditor that he would prosecute if 10s. in the pound was not paid—the committee of inspection are Mr. Newstead, who is, I think, Mr. Lovering's manager, Mr. Lovering, who is Keighley's trustee, Mr. Hopkins, one of the managing clerks of plunkett and Leader, and myself.
Re-examined. I have heard nothing against Mr. Hopkins's, or Mr. Newstead's, or Mr. Lovering's characters, or Messrs. Plunkett and Leader's—the prosecution has been undertaken on public grounds—there was a very lengthened inquiry at the Bankruptcy Court, which made an order to prosecute, and another inquiry before the Alderman, before a committal took place—I have known Mr. Lovering a great many years, he is a highly respectable accountant—this (produced) is his appointment of Messrs. Plunkett and Leader as his proxies—I never read the document which I thought was a will—the same proposal of 5s. was made on 25th March, and it was adjourned at Mr. Vanderpump's request to give him the opportunity of seeing whether he could carry it out—no resolution was passed—the proceedings in bankruptcy were left to the trustee, Mr. Everett—I never interfered in any way as to threatening to prosecute Michell—no one was present when the documents were shown me but Keighley and Michell—I did look at one document about the consent of the wife.
WILLIAM MARTIN HERTZ . I am a woollen merchant at Bradford, and have two partners—I am a creditor of Michell for 208l.—Mr. Dear is our representative in London—I knew J. Keighley and Brother; the firm was a Mr. Keighley—in September, 1878, a bill drawn by my firm on Keighley and Brother for about 160l., and accepted by them, was falling due—we drew a bill first on 20th July for goods supplied to them; it became due in September, we did not want to renew it, but we were obliged to, and it became due on 20th December, when it was renewed again, and the other bills were returned—this is the second renewal, it is drawn by us for 208l., it includes a certain amount which had been bought. (A letter was here put in from the defendant to Hertz and Co., dated 20th December, 1878, stating that Mr. Keighley had been disappointed in receiving remittances, and requesting them to retire the bill.) That bill was the renewal of a renewal, with the addition of 40l., but 39l. 7s. 2d. of it was in respect of other goods—the goods were supplied and this (produced) is our invoice—the goods were forwarded to Keighley and Brother—I was at Mr. Dear's office on 3rd October, before the last parcel of goods was supplied—I met Michell there by chance, and Mr. dear introduced him as the ingoing partner of whom he had spoken to me before of Mr. keighley—I said "I am very glad to make your acquaintance"—Mr. Dear said "You can now talk the matter over"—Michell said to me "I am going to join Keighley; I have about 3,000l. loose capital which I wish to invest in the business. My wife has 700l. or 800l. a year private income. The business will be better managed when I join it"—I said "Under those circumstances I shall be very glad to do business with you"—after that conversation I parted with these coatings amounting to 39l. 7s. 2d. on account of the representations which I had heard—on 10th December, and before I parted with the goods, Keighley and Michell came to my office at Bradford, and Michell asked me if we had any worsted coatings in stock—I said "Yes," and showed them—Keighley said that they would not suit him, but Michell said "I have a market for them, I will take them"—I forwarded them upon the understanding that Michell was going to pay money into the concern—I relied on his statement that he had loose capital—I should not have parted with them if he had not made that statement—a week after the goods were sent I saw him in Bradford, and he said "I have done very well with them, have you got any more?"—I said "No"—I have not been paid—I really believed when I parted with the goods that he dealt with them in the ordinary way of trade.
Cross-examined. I never supplied any goods to Keighley from 3rd October till 10th December—I had sent him the goods represented by the 160l. previous to June—the goods sold on 10th December were payable in a month, cash; quite independent of the draft which was running—the letter suggesting that the 39l. should be added to the draft was written on 20th December, I got it on the 21st, and the renewed bill was given on the 28th.
WILLIAM FENTIMAN SMITHSON (Continued). The first parcel delivered to Keighley was 321/2 pieces of Lama on October 10th, value 53l. 10s.—I do not think keighley owed me anything when Mr. Cordoron made a communication to me in October—I don't think we had sent a parcel of goods—he
may have owned me 100l. before the communication about Mitchell—it was one entry only—I received orders for goods after Mr. Cordoron's communication—I first saw Michell towards the middle of November in Keighley's ware-house—I may have seen him there before that, but not to have communication with him (I sent probably 300l. worth of goods at the time of that communication) in the warehouse—Keighley said "This is Mr. Michell, the gentlemen who is coming into partnership with me'—I shook hands with him and wished him every success—after that interview I sold him a large parcel of coloured Russell cord, amounting to 200l.—Keighley showed him the goods and said "Can we do with them?" Michell said "Yes, we can"—Keighley said "Will you give me a months' extra data?"—I said "No, the goods are cheap enough"—Keighley took out his drawer a book, referred to it, showed it to Michell, and said "can we pay for them in the ordinary course?' he said "Yes"—I sold the goods to him and they were delivered—I saw Michell there a day or two afterwards, I believe when Keighley was not present—he said "I am going into partnership with Mr. keighley, and am placing in the concern a sum of about 4,000l."—I said "Are you perfectly satisfied as to Keighley's position?" he said "Yes, I have gone through the books, and I find he can every creditor 20s. in the pound and have a surplus"—Keighley's debt to us then was between 300l. and 400l.—that before the Rusell cords were delivered, and they amounted to over 300l.—from the statements he made me I had every confidence in the firm of Keighley and Brother, with Mr. Michell as a partner—I would not have supplied the goods to Keighley without the statement of a partnership—some smaller parcel were sent in November, chiefly coloured cords—at the end of November we sent a bale containing ten pieces of black Alpaca, Sicilian cloth, of which this is the invoice, it is my clerk's writing. (MR. CLAY objected to this invoice as not being evidence against the prisoner)
NICHOLAS JAMES WYATT . I am clerk to Mr. Lovering, the trustee of the estate of John Keighley, trading as John Keighley and Brother—I made up the accounts early in 1879 with reference to Mr. Lovering's duty as trustee—this (produced) is one of the papers which came into my hands.
JOHN JESSOP KEIGHLEY . This is not of the invoice which reached me from Mr. Smithson—it is marked as correct—these goods came into my possession and were entered in this bought ledger at Bradford but I did not keep it—the goods were checked in London, and the invoice was sent back to Bradford for entry in the bought ledger—I swear that the goods came from Bradford to London after Michell interfered in the business—he had knowledge of the goods and dealt with them afterwards—he would be sure to see this invoice.
Cross-examined. He saw most if not all of the invoice which came into my office—I cannot swear that he saw this particular one, but he saw the majority of the invoice from Smithson, and he suggested to me that he should borrow some money on the goods represented by it, and I believe I had the benefit of it—I sold some of the goods myself to regular customers.
Re-examined. There was no banking account expect in the name of Michell, and all the money went into his account at the St. James's Bank, and was paid out again except a small balance of about 70l. (The COURT considered the invoice admissible)
October for coloured Lamas value 53l. 10s.—the next is for 66l. 19s. 7d. for goods sent on 15th October, and here is another on the same day for 47l. 2s. 9d., making 114l. 2s. 4d. (A number of the invoice were here put in for serges, Alpacas' moreens, and Rusell cord)—one of the special order—the goods were sold to me in Gutter Lane—I saw him there, and he said "I want a cheap parcel of black cords for a special customer"—I said "I can let you have what I have in London," and sold them to him, subject to 12 1/2 per cent. discount; but before deciding he brought Michell and Keighley's man to Gutter Lane to overtook the goods—he wanted them delivered at once as he had a special customer to took at them next morning—that was Tuesday, and the actual delivery was on Thursday morning, December 5th—the invoice would come from Bradford afterwards—on Friday the 6th he told me he had sold them very well, he had got the full profit of 12 1/2 per cent, which was the discount allowed—I invoiced about 1,200l. to Keighley and Brother in that month, and taking off 100l. leaves 1,100l. odd, none of which has been paid—when the stoppage took place I had 700l. or 800l. worth of spring goods which had been ordered by Michell and Keighley for January and February delivery—I was induced to part with the 1,100l. worth of goods by Keighley's statement that he was taking in a partner who would place in the concern 3,000l. at least, and before sending the large parcel of 300l. I determined to see Michell, which I did, and he corroborated Keighley's statement that he was placing 3,000l. or 4,000l. in the concern, and that he had not got the money just then, but expected it day by day—the credit had not then expected to 1,100l.—on the morning of January 5th I got information that Keighley had field a petition, and I saw him, but I held no conversation with him or Michell—I never got any information from Michell of his filing a petition there were no acceptances in my case.
Cross-examined. I was not a creditor of Michell; I had to prove against Keighley, I took it for granted that Michell was an actual partner—he told us that the deeds were actually prepared but he had not signed them until he had got the money, which was coming day by day—I know that if he had been a partner I could have proved against him—I cannot say whether Michell said in Nov. that the money he should put in was trust money—the second interview commenced at Keighley office, and we walked up Cheapside and continued the conversation at the wine-shop for half an hour—he said that there was a lot of red-tapeism about it, and that it was trust money and trust property, and he should have it certainly by the end of the year—I supposed it was coming to him in consequence of the death of a relative, but I do not know that I heard him say so—it is just possible that when I sold the 220l. worth of goods I sent a messenger to Keighley's office to say that I had some stock in London—Michell came round first, and I believe he came the next morning with Mr. Partridge, who, I understood, was Keighley's manager—the Rusell cords and the black goods are the only two parcel I sold myself; those came to 300l., less 2 1/2 discount.
Re-examined. Keighley said "I can pay on the, day," not "We can pay"—the pay day was to be 19th December, the very day that Michell was at Bradford, and as I did not get a cheque I went to his hotel and asked him for payment for all goods invoiced up to 19th November, which was 600l. or 700l.—I said "How is it that the cheque from Keighley has not come?"—he said "I have got an explanatory letter from Keighley, and will see after it; I am going there this afternoon, and it shall be sent to-morrow."
ABRAHAN WALMSLEY RAMSDEN . I am a cloth-merchant of Bradford—in october, 1878, Iknew John keighley, who was trading as keighley and Brother—I had trusted him with goods worth some hundereds of pounde—there was an open account—there was no limite of credit till about August, 1878, and then there was a limit—after that the name of Michell at was mentioned—Isaw keighley in reference to some goods about october, after which I parted with some goods—that was before I saw Michell at all—this is the orginal invoice, it is in my writing; "Oct 29, 1878. keighley and Brother, 118 pieces of black Iustre, 110l."—in the middle of November "Mr. Michell, my future partner"—Michell said that he was going aways by train, but he should be back very shortly, and would call and see me—on 17th December, 1878, he called at Broadfrod and said "I am going into partnership with Mr. keighley, and I shall put in some 4,000l. 5,000l. I said "Have you gone through Mr. keighley 's affairs, and are you satisfied with regard to his solvency?,—he said "Ihave gone through all his affairs, and I am perfectly satisfied Mr. keighley 's can pay 20s. in the pound and have a surplus left, and with the money I shall put in the cornern we ought to do a nice business"—I said "I am glad to hear it, and I think you ought with that amount of capital in the cornern"—he said "virtually I am a partner now, although the deed of partnership is not signed and future I shall take Mr. keighley's books and manage the financing"—he said "Being a stranger in Broadford, can you tell me where E. Gwilliams's warchouse is?" I said "I am going into past it, Iwill show you," and Idid so—he asked me to go in with him—did so, and we saw Mr. Grandage, who introduced himself as going went into partnership with Mr. keighley—Mr. Grandage went into a private room with him, and after Garnett's werehouse, and saw Italin cloth—after that we went to Gillies michell, from keighley's; I have called to get you to renew a hill; I am going into partnership with Mr. keighley's, and shall put in 4,000l. and I am acting now as partnership with him, although the deeds are not signed"—he further said "This money which I am interested in is in the hands of trustees, and there is some little brother about it; the property will be sold in January, and the money paid into concern"—Mr. Granett said "well, I will renew the bill; only lot me know the date to put in and I will oblige you"—that was all passed—we went next day to messrs Jones sharp's where he said "I am Mr. michell, from keighley's; Ihave called to renew a bill; I am going to put 4,000l. into the cornern, and the firm will be all right in January"—one of them said "we deeline to renew the bill"—this invoice (produced) is my writing; I supplied those goods after the statement made by keighley with reference to michell—they have not been paid for.
Cross-examined. I did not say that saw michell about 3rd Decemder—keighley introduced him in november—the named was not 3,000l. to 4,000l., but 4,000l. to 5,000l.—no doubt I said and he said "If more money is required I can find it"—distanctly recollected the conversation.
Re-examined. 4,000l. was mentioned more than once—I said 3,00l. or 4,000l. before the magistrate—michell said that in december the property he was interested in would be sold, and should recive it in January and pay it into concern.
THOMAS GARNETT . My partner is dead, and I am now the firm of Gillies, Garnett, and Co., stuff merchants, of Bradford—I never knew John Keighley, or that the firm had business transactions with him, but this bill is dated 10th October; it is due 13th December—it is a two months' bill for 184l. 1s. by us and accepted by Keighley and Brother—it was not paid when it fell due—I had heard of Michell from Mr. Ramsden before we drew the first bill, and a day or two after it was due Ramsden and Michell came—Michell had announced his arrival two or three days previously, and I expected him—when he came in I find him perfectly solvent, and I intend to take up that portion of the business, and I intend to introduce an amount of capital which will make the concern perfectly right, and I have come to ask you if you will grant us an extension of time, so that it will make it convenient for us and perfectly safe for you; I shall put 4,000l. or 5,000l. into the business, and your bill will be met when it becomes due"—I said "If you have 4,000l. or 5,000l. why do you allow the credit of your intended concern to be blasted by having these paltry sums of 100l. coming due and not being met?"—he said "I am entitled under a will be carried out, and that it may continue to lead to further business"—I agreed that there was to be a new bill from December 1, but it was not drawn, and two or three days afterwards I received this letter: "London, 23/12/78.—Dear Sir,—The arrangement made with Mr. Michell when he saw you in Bradford we shall be glad if you will carry out, but we should prefer if you would renew for three months." A bill was sent with a letter in reply to that with an explanation of what was required, and it was sent back with Michell's name on the back. (This was for 185l. 16s. 8d. Accepted, J. Keighley and Brother. Endorsed, F. Michell.) I made that new bill entirely upon Michell's representation that the goods represented by the first bill had been sold for cash—I have received 1s. in the pound from Keighley's estate through the Bankruptcy Court—I never saw Michell again till I saw him here yesterday—that was the single transaction in which Michell was concerued.
Cross-examined. The conversation was on a market day about 20th December; I have no memorandum of the date—I wrote a letter as to the nature of our case I think between July and December last—Michell said between 4,000l. and 5,000l., but I understood that Mr. Ramsden said before the Magistrate that Michell said between 3,000l. and 4,000l.—I told Mr. Ramsden that what he said to me was between 4,000l. and 5,000l., and that I should state that that was the fact—I am prepared to swear it—I believe our cashier can confirm it—we have a great many people in and out of the office on market days.
Re-examined. This is my letter to my solicitor—I have never varied in my assertion that Michell said 4,000l. or 5,000l.—I have never said that if 10s. in the pound was paid Michell would not be prosecuted, but if it was
not paid he would be; I never used such an expression to a debtor in my life, and I was not at any of the meetings in London.
H. A. STACEY (Re-examined). I produce the file in the liquidation of J. J. Keighley of 4, Priest's Court, London, residing at Clyde Villa, Croydon, made on January 1st, 1879, and dated 3rd January—the first meeting of creditors was on 28th January, when a resolution was passed for a liguidation by arrangement, and not in bankruptcy—Mr. Lovering was the public accountant, and the committee of inspection was Mr. Pentiman, Mr. Smithson, Mr. Hertz, Mr. Hughes, and Mr. Dear—I find here a statement of affairs; the creditors unsecured are 7,037l. 14s. 10d. creditprs partly secured 271l. 5s. 5d.: other liabilities, 300l.; creditors forrent and taxes 311l. 14s. 2d. liablilities in bills didcounted, 2,629l. 19s. 10d.: total, 10,270l. 14s. 3d.—the assets are, stock in trade, 1,163l. 1s. 9d.; book deddts estimated to produce 258l. 6s. 9d.; furniture, pictures, and fittings, 70l.; surplus from creditors, 62l. 0s. 2d.: total, 1,530l. 8s. 8d.
RICHARD WADDINGTON . I am a stuff manufacturer of Bradford—in 1878 Keighley owed me between 100l. and 200l., and in December, 1878, I saw him in my office; Mr. Sutcliff was present—Michell said "If you will be quiet and not push your account, you will be paid 20s. in the pound; I am going into partnership with Mr. Keighley, and am going to bring in from 3,000l. to 4,000l." as far as my memory serves me—we said that we would be quiet and not push our account—he saw our stock, and asked me to send patterns, and said that if he sold them he would pay cash if we would let him have them—we sent samples, and he paid me 30s. for one sample piece in Keighley's place—I told him we should not deliver any goods until the whole account was paid—we afterwards took out a writ—I have never said that if he would pay 10s. in the pound we would not prosecute, but if he did not we would—I introduced Michell to Mr. Robertshaw in the Liberal Club—as well as I remember, Mr. Robertshaw said "Shall we get our account?"—he said "Yes, it will be all right."
Cross-examined. I attended Keighley's meeting of creditors in London—I did not meet Michell in Cheapside and say "I mean to have 10s. in the pound out of you or Keighley"—I said just the contrary, I said that I had made up my mind to prosecute every case, as it was an outrage to commercial morality—I said nothing about 10s. in the pound—this was the same week as Michell's first meeting of oreditors—I don't remember going to Keighley's meeting at all—I went to Michell's meeting, and I was very angry; most people are when they lose their money—I do not remember saying that if we did not get 10s. in the pound the Bradford creditors had resolved to prosecute, or that some gentleman stopped me and said that it was too soon to talk of that—my solicitors are Wood and Killick of Bradford, and I think a Mr. Wood of St. Paul's Churchyard is their London agent—I think he was at the meeting of ereditors on 13th March—I did not go about among the creditors at Bradford trying to get up a resolution for a prosecution—I talked to one or two persons, and we did ultimately decide to prosecute, or there would have been no prosecution.
Re-examined. I do not believe I said anything about 10s. in the pound being paid—I said many times, "Whenever a case of this kind occurs I am determined I will prosecute," and I am of the same opinion still—it was after I was at the meeting of his creditors on 13th March that I saw Michell in Cheapside.
JOHN JESSOP KEIGHLEY . I am a stuff merchant, of 4, Priest Court, Foster Lane—I have been in business on my own account about three years as J. Keighley and Brother—they were my father and uncle—in my statement of affairs Mr. Card, of Aldermanbury, is my debtor for 1,500l., on the other hand I owed my mother 1,400l.—my total book debts were 3,378l., including the 1,500l. of Card—I first knew Michell in November or December, 1877, when he came about a bill of Card's which he had accepted, and within a few months of that he bought goods of me from time to time—previous to July and August, 1878, he owed me about 1,500l.—I held a deed of his for some time as security, but I gave it back to him; this is it. (The indenture)—I had no other security—I told him one day that I was hard up, and his large account and one or two others made me very short indeed—he said, "Why don't you take a partner?"—I said, "I don't care about it, and I do not know anybody who would be likely to join"—he said, "Why not take me?"—I said, "I will think about it"—he said, "I have a fine West-end connection, and I can bring in some money"—a few days afterwards I said, "I have thought about it, and I will take you as a partner"—he said, "I expect some money to be left me by a relation of my wife, who is expected every day to die; I have been telegraphed for two or three times"—shortly afterwards he came and said, "My relation has died"—I said, "Do you get as much as you expected?"—he said, "Yes, rather more, about 4,500l."—that was about the beginning of July, 1878—he said, "I am going to put in 2,000l. and pay you at the same time the account I owe. By the terms of the will it must be settled, and I must have the money within three months"—that would be the beginning of October—he said, "I think you had better not say anything about it tll I get the money," and I said no more about it for three months till the time came—he asked if I would mind his letters being sent to my place, and I gave him permission—he came there every day, and stopped sometimes half an hour and sometimes an hour—I supplied him with a few goods between July and the beginning of October, but not to the same extent—I drew bills on him for his indebtendness; some of them are in my box not discounted, and some were paid away and were subsequently dishonoured; these are some of them. (Seven or eight bills were here put in, drawn by the witness and accepted by Michell.) Two of those bills have the notarial charges on them of 20th April and 17th May; they are marked as dishonoured—I should think they were never paid, but I cannot swear to it from memory—these two cancelled bills of 10th October were renewed, I believe, but I cannot swear that from memory—here are two in February, 1878, not marked or cancelled, but marked "N.S.;" they were renewed—there are other bills to represent them somewhere—these two of 15th and 19th March were renewed—this bill of October, 1877, would be due in February, 1878; that was paid—the oter were, I believe, all subject to renewal—after the beginning of 1878 his bills came back or were returned—they are bonafide bills given by him as the purchaser of our goods—I told him in October that I was very hard up, and he knew I was—he saw two or three writs that I had, and I showed him papers showing that I was pressed for money—I referred to the time being past when the legacy was to be paid, and he kept saying that the lawyers could not get the property realised, that it was principally housed, but there was 500l. in Consols—I said, "I cannot go on as I am going on; I have been dpending on your money coming in"—he
said, "It will be all right; it will be sure to be settle in a short time; I am expecting it every day"—he said that more than once, and said he would go down to Bradford and try and get the bills renewed, and put his names on the back for additional security because he was coming in as a partners—just before the goods mentioned in this invoice of 14th October were delivered I heard Michell say to Mr. Dear, "I am coming in as a partner, and I am going to put some money in"—I don't think he said how much then—I said, "I should not say anything until the money is in"—he afterwards tole other people in my presence, and then I told other people, but he did not tell me to go and repeat that statement. (MR. CLAY objected to this evidence, and the Cournt did not think it admissible.) Michell spoke to me many times about ordering goods—if we had the pattern of a cheap lot he would say "You had better order those, I could sell them"—I very often acted upon those statements—I remember this invoice of 14th of October for coloured lamas—I ordered those—I cannot call these parcels to mind of 15th October I had a conversation with Mr. Cordoron in the prisoner's presence—I remember the subtance of it—it was simply that I was about to bring in a partner who would find the money—I believe Mr. Cordoron let us have the goods on the strength of that statement—I recollect this parcel of serges in invoice F.S. 4,102'. 16s.—we had samples first—Michell saw them—I consulted him—he said they were cheap, and we offered a lower price than that at which they were delivered—I know what the goods were of F.S. 5,66l.—they were ordered under the same circumstances—as to F.S. 6,301l. 18s. 5d., I said to Michell "Can you pay for these goods? you know what I mean; I am dependent on your money coming in to pay for them; you know I cannot pay for them myself, and unless you will give me your word of honour that your money will be in before the money is due I shall send every piece back to Cordoron's"—he said "You need not be at all frightened, my money will be in long before it is due"—on the strength of that I did not send the goods back, but we kept them—I cannot say the value of the goods I ordered separately—Michell was party to the buying of the majority of them—F.S. 7, of 26th November, 24 pieces of alpaca blacks, 73l. 13s. 4d., I bought myself; also F.S. 8,34l. 10s., F.S. 9,24l. 10s. 5d.—we had samples of F.S. 10—he said he knew where he could sell them; he could sell a lot—after that statement I gave an order for forty pieces, 58l. 13s. 6d.—F.S. 11 and 12, December 9th, did not come intomy place at all—Michell told me he was going to order them—I understood they were going to Bowers and Co.'s, a customer, of Covent Garden, whom Michell introduced—this invoice of 53l. 4s. 8d. I ordered myself—there were no patterns—they were delivered—they were sold to different houses in small lot, every few of them—the others wee sold when my stock was sold—they from part of the assets of my estate—I had a few transactions with Hert before the defendant came—I had not paid anything for two or three months before—I said to Michell that we had no sale for these things, they are worsted—the amount is 39l. 7s. 2d.—he said "Oh, I can sell them; they are cheap"—that was in Mr. Hertz's wareshouse—they were sold to a Mr. Card, at 1d. a yard profit—I do not remember his making a statement to Mr. Hertz—Michell went to Hertz to get a bill renewed—I think that was the first intimations Hertz got of the partnership—Michell went to Bradfore about twice alone in October or November—I first knew that Harfeld had transactions with Michell at
the last sessions of this court—that was the first time I had seen Harfeld—I knew of about half-a-dozen pledgings by the defendent—the first was about October, when the money did not come in as Michell promised—he said, though I forget the exact words, "We must get some money on the goods to tide over till the money comes in"—I knew where they went—I consented—I expect they went to Harfeld—I connot say that he mentioned the name of every parcel—an invoice went out with the goods—some porter fatched them—the goods were not measured, they never are; the manufacturer's measure is taken—this was Michell's banker's book—I had no banking account of my own from October 15—some moneys I paid into his bank and some I paid away in other things without banking—the moneys received from Harfeld would be used in the business, or paid into this account—I kept my own cash account—I carried on the business till the last day of the year—I filed my petition on the 3rd January—I had two or three conversations with Michell before stopping—I said "It is absurd going on like this"—the last thing I said was, that if he could not tell me something definite the next day I should put my affairs in my solicitor's hands—that was the day before we closed—I did so—up to that time I believed he had power to put money in—he then owed me about 1,600l. or 1,700l.—I recollect from my books—I did not receive from the bank more then I paid in—there was a small balance left of about 50l. or 70l. upon that account belonging to me—Michell told me so—I handed over to Michell these five bills of exchange with my initials and numbered J J K 22 to J J K 26, because he said I ought to give them up as he had endorsed a lot of bills for renewal at Bradford: they are dated 17th September, 87l. 13s. 11d., 129l. 10s. 7d., 52l. 11s. 2d., 134l. 2s. 1d., and 76l. 4s. 4d.—some of them represent The bills which you have shown me—they all represent goods that Michell had of me to the value of them—the original bills were given up for goods—I never consented to his putting my name in the list of persons owing him 740l.; he never consulted me about it—I banked at the Union Bank before the account was opened at the head office of St. James's Bank—I did not know the defendant was pledging the goods he bought of me—I had no account with E.G. Williams and Co.—I did not know of the purchase on 17th December from Mr. Grandage—I saw a sample of the goods at our place—those goods were not sold; they became part of our assets—when I found out how things were going I kept the goods in the place intact—Gillies, Garnett, and Co.'s bill for 185l. was renewed—I had a conversation about it—Michell said he would endorse it, to induce them to renew it till his money came—not endorsing it was an oversight—I do not know what Michell's travelling expenses were—he was absent when he went to Bradford three or four times during the period, but not more then three days—I went with him once or twice—I saw Mr. Waddington, Mr. Hertz, Mr. Borisson, Mr. Robertshaw, and several others—they were all my creditors—I know One or two cheques were dishonoured in December—this one of 9th November For 50l. 16s. was—I cannot say if it was paid the next day—it is cancelled—the bank stopped about the 12th December—I knew then that Hall Well's cheque was dishonoured for 50l., and 40l. was afterwards paid; also a cheque in favour of William Blake Williamson, of 10th December, 1868—I had none of the money—I remember an application being made with reference to Hall Well's cheque in favour of J. Keighley and Brother for 50l. which was marked "N.S."—the letter of 20th November, 1878, is my Writing—I
conversed with Michell about it before writing; I am sure he knew of it—I cannot say that he authorised it word for word—these invoice refer to goods sold bu me to Michell, and the invoices were delivered to Michell eith the goods—J J K 1,64l. 10s. 2,7l. 14s. 11d. 4,62l. 5s. 4d.; 6, 8l. 3s. 1d. 8,12l. 11s. 9d.; and 10,27l. 14s. 3d. J J K 12,197l. 16s., was not for my goods, but for goods delivered at our warehouse for a party who could not pay his bill, as security—I have explained that—J J K 16, for 130l. 5s. 11d., and 18,163l. 10s. 5d. were for my goods.
Cross-examined. I remember the goods bought from Mr. Herts, at Brad-Ford—Michell sold them to Card; I was not with him when he sold them—I cannot say whether he paid part on account—I had the money—it would be after the 10th December—the entry in my ledger of 14th December of 30l. credited to Card would be it—he it Browers, of Govent Garden, paid the 65l. for his goods—the money ernt into the business—I asked Michell to sell the goods in invoice J. J. K. 12—he told me he could sell them, and I put them into his hands to sell—I debited them in my ledger as goods sold to him—the 13th June, 1878, is the entry—he did sell them for me and handed me the money—I credited him with the full amount of 154l. 16s., which I paid him for them—the 197l. 16s. on the invoice is what I got for them—I cannot point out the entry because there are different dates—I will swear I did credit him with the amount—I do not remember saying that I did not know whether the amount was 125l. 15s. 6d. or 154l. 16s.—I do not recollect now what the sale was reported at—I do not see any entry of 125l. 15s. 6d. on one amount—the goods were of two qualities, and I believe they were sold in two lote—I do not remember the name of the buyer—I will not swear they were not sold to Harfeld—I will not swear I credited Michell with the 154l. 16s., but the chaces are that I did, for I always did so—I believe J. J. k. 18,163l. 10s. 5d., were goods sold to Michell—I cannot say what my opinion was before the Alderman as to that invoice if I said "I think this was another cheap lot, it was a similar tra section to that on the 13th June, 1878," I alter my opinion now—I think it was not so—Michell was in Little hampton—I cannot say when—no doubt I wrote to him there—I cannot remember his coming up from Littlehampton between the 17th and 30th July, in consequence of my letter to him—I never copy my letters—I believe Michell came up for a day or two and went back again—I have no recollection of his then selling a parcel of goods for me—I see this entry in my cash book of 17th July of 100l. paid to Mr. Sutcliffe—it is imposible for me to say where the money came from—I swore what I thought was correct at the police-court, but my impression is different now—goods are entered against Michell for 163l. 10s. 5d., and there were goods credited for 100l. of goods, and Sutcliffe's cheque—I sent Sutcliff a cheque on the 17th July, 1878, for 100l.—I did not receive one on that day for 100l. from Sucliffe—it us ebtered ti the credit of my banking account—Michell began to have his letters addressed at my place in Novermber, 1877, when I began selling him goods—3rd Novermber, 1877, is the first transaction—I had no transactions with Michell in June, 1877—he came in pretty frequently—about July the conversations began about the partnership—I have made statements of account between myself and Michell whenever I bothered him for money—
I cannot give you the dates—the last entry in this statements is the 13th August—I sold Michell six or seven parcels since that one on September 3rd for 53l. 9s. 6d. for black Italians—my impression is that he did not sell those goods on my account—the goods sold to Michell after 3rd September amounted to about 500l.—I will not swear that a parcels was sold out and out to Michell—I cannot point one out—the payments in my ledger in October are 3rd, 50l.; 8th, 60l.; 15th, 15l. 7s.; 25th, 20l.—those are all cash credicted to Michell—it was paid to me by Michell—also November 11th, 171l. 6s. 6d.; 20th, 98l. 16s. 8d.—some of the goods were not sold to Michell, but these entries were made at his request to make up what were short, and after I had done it I told him what I had done, just before I failed—I have not received any money from Michell that it not credicted there——the entry of the money I received from Harfeld for goods sold on 14th December does not appear there—the five bills I gave up to Michell amounting to 470l. were not given because my books showed that I had sold goods to Michell to a much larger extent than was really the fact—I swear that Michell did not say that my ledger was incorrect, and therefore I ought to give up those bills yo him—I swear Michell owed me more than 1,200l.—my accountant know better than I do—I cannot say which entries represent bond-fide sales—I cannot swear to more than I did before the Alderman—I did say before the Alderman "To the best of my belief of my defendent paid me for all goods sold on my account"—I was examined in bankruptcy—I made similar statment there—Michell endorsed and accepted a large number of bills—some were renewals—I could not tell wether they amounted to 2,300l.—they were for my benefit for the time being, but for Michell's prospective benefit—I drew the bill on Michell for 95l. 15s. 6d., which was subsequently handed to Robertshaw—I had a bill-book—my trustee has it—I will swear I did not destroy it—as the bills were paid the leaves were torn out—Mr. Waytt had it—I cannot say how manty leaves were left in it—I do not remember Mr. Waytt's asking me where the leaves were—I will not swear he did not ask that—I told him I had torn out the leaves when the bills had ceased running—it was simply kept for my own firm to know when the bills became due—Robertshaw's bill was in it when I handed the book to Mr. Waytt if the bill was not due then—I know that the bill has been proved against myself—I will not swear the bill was entered in the bill-book—it would become due tin December—I did not consider it a running bill—I cannot swear whether I tore it up or not—the amount of the bill was due to Robertshaw—Michell was liable—I forget whether I drew a bill for 51l. 3s. which I owed to Mr. Sutcliffe of Bradford I dare say I did—I belive it was accepted by Michell—I think it was part of another bill for money which Michell owed me—on 30th December I drew upon Michall a bill for 155l. 14s. for a debt which I owed to Mr. Turner of Bradford—I accepted a bill for 176l. 3s. 10d., and paid it away for a debt which I owed to Mr. Toodler of Manchester—about the 12th of September I drew upon Michell a bill for 147l. for a debt which I owed to Mr. Richard Waddington of Bradford—those fove bills amounting to 622l. 16s. 4d. were all for money which Michell owed me—neither of these bills appears to Mr. Michell's credit in my ledger, because they were all old bill renewed—I owed the money to creditors—in addition to those five bills Messrs. Gillies, Garnett, and co. drew upon me for 185l. 16s. 8d. on 1st December—I accepted it—Michell endorsed it—Hyde and co. drew
upon me two bills for 353l. 6s. 2d.—they were not renewed; also Herty for 208l.; James Sharp for 138l. 13s. 11d.; Webb and Co. on 5th September, 87l. 2s. 4d.; and Mr. Wood for 99l. 16s. 3d.—those are accepted by me and endorsed by Michell—not one of those endorsements are placed in the ledger—Wood's bill was for goods supplied—I cannot say from memory from whom—I will not swear Michell had any of the money received for goods sold which I had from Wood—they were not all sold—I did not draw a bill upon Card at the time of my stoppage—Card owed me 1,500l. when he stopped—I drew a great many bills on Card—I never sent John Wilcock and Co. of Bradford, Card's acceptances for 150l. and 100l.—I belive I gave two such acceptances to W.H. Wood—they were endorsed by Michell—I paid them for my debt for which Michell was not liable—I do not remember giving wood another acceptance for 90l.—I dare say I did—I sent Borisson a cheque for 174l. 11s. drawn by Michell on the St. James's Bank—I gave him the money for it—a cheque was also sent to Mr. williamson for 50l. on 10th December, 1878, signed by Michell—I forget if 10l. was due to Mr. Halliwell when I stopped—I do not remember if a cheque for 40l. was sent to him—Michell did not give me 50l. to meet this cheque of Halliwell's when ti was not honoured—I expect I sent the 40l. to Halliwell's and very likey in notes—I cannot say that he did not—I have not the slightest recollection of his handing me 40l. in notes and 10l. in gold late one afternoon, or of my saying "It is too late to get notes for this 10l. I will send the 40l. to Halliwell's and send the 10l. another time"—I cannot say that it did not happen—Michell told me that when the St. James's Bank stopped there was a small balance to my account, from 50l. to 70l.—I suppose I was not asked that before the Alderman—the Union Bank stopped my account about the beginning of October—it was understood when the defendant opened an account at the St. James's Bank that it was to be for the convenience of Keighley and Brother until the partnership was complete; my money was paid in to his account—money was paid in and drawn out from time to time—I do not suggest that there was more than from 50l. to 70l. due to me on the balance—I do not say that I paid in all I reveived; when I wanted a cheque to pay any of my creditors I went to Michell, and said "I want so much," and when he signed a cheque it was against money which had been paid in—a cheque may sometimes have been drawn before the money was paid in, and I paid the money in afterwards—I never paid Michell any commission or salary, he had nothing out of the business—sometimes he got money for me, and handed it over—I never got Card to obtain advances for me, or any one else—I belive Card is in London—my bought ledger was kept at Bradford, and I did not see it—I closed the office at Bradford about the end of the year, just before I failed—I swear I saw Mr. Wyatt, my manager, there in October, and I feel perfectly certain I saw him there in December—he came to London at the beginning of the year, and made the book up then—he made entries in the bought ledger after he came to London, and looking at it would enable me to tell very nearly when he was last at Bradford—I also got some goods from Rendle—I should say I had between 2,000l. and 3,000l. represents the goods I had between August and
December, all the rest of the goods I dealt with in the regular way—I had an Indian Connection—Michell's was going to be a West-End Connection—he did not ask me what my position was when he asked me about going into partnership—I did not tell him I owed about 4,000l., and that my stock amounted to about 4,500l.—it was my opinion about July, 1878, that I was 400l. or 500l. to the good, not reckoning the 1,400l. I owed to my mother—I went down to Bradford in July or August with Michell to see Mr. Wood, a manufacturer, and other people—that is not Mr. W.H. Wood—I wanted him to discount bills, and roughly made a statement to him of what my position was—I believe Michell had just gone out, but I should not like to swear he did not hear it—I gave him two bills of 760l. each which I wanted him to cash, but he refused—I do not think I had discussed my position with Michell—he knew the object of my going—I made a memorandum of my affairs on a piece of paper for Wood, and I never saw it afterwards—I will swear I never showed it to Michell, but I will not swear he never saw it; I don't believe he did—I did not ask Michell if he would endorse the bills, I belive he suggested it first—they were to be drawn on him, and he was to be the acceptor—I perhaps left the bills with Wood, but I got them back again—I Kow Michell left the office directly we get the bill stamps the first thing in the morning—I made the writing to get the bill stamps the first thing in the morning—I made the writing when I was down there, not in London—I had it in my head—I will swear I did not make it in London and show it to Michell in the train—I will swear I told Wood what I owed my mother—I was never asked that before the Alderman—I was solvent up to the end of December if I had my mother's money, at least I believed so—I made two or three large bad debts, one of 1,600l., and two or three more of 500l. each—I owed 11,000l. when I stopped, the bad debts would very nearly bring it to that—I do not know whether I made a mistake or not, it was a very rough thing—my cash book will show what payments I made after July, 1878—I should say I did not pay between 1,000l. and 2,000l. for goods previously had, and for goods supplied during that time—I can tell by the cheques what I paid while I was at the Union Bank—I think I paid Sutcliffe about 300l., I don't think it was 500l.—I did not pay Borisson 300l.—on 28th November he sent me 290l., half of the bill, and we were to find the other half to take the bill up, (Several entries in the cash-book were read to the witness, which, he stated he could not remember.) I know 163l. 5s. 10d. was sent to Borisson to meet a bill—I do not see it here, but I am sure that was not a cash payment to him; there was a bill drawn by him on me coming due, and they sentme up the money. (MR. CLAY read a large number of items from the cash-book, geveral of which the witness rejected as being for charged cheques and the return of borrowed money, and agreed to 64 items for goods up to the time of the stoppage of the St. James's Bank) After the St. James's Bank—I cannot say who to—I will not swear it was not more—I banked with the Union Bank before the St. James's but the one was closed before the other was opened—I think the defandant opened an account before mine was closed, but that had nothing to do with me—this cheque for 50l. 16s. was not paid on presentation—I do not know how it was provided for, but it was paid in some way—I remember paying Toodler and Co. 25l. in
cash—that was not for goods supplied; he used to discount bills for me—he has been my creditor all the while I have been in business, and for my father before me—it may have been several small bills lumped into one—I believe it was a payment for some cloth which Toodler had supplied; he had an interest in some cloths which I had advanced money on, and I sold them—Toodler did not threaten me that if I did not pay he would make things unpleasant—they were Toodler's goods, which he had deposited in my warehouse six months before, I dare say—I had sold them perhabs a month or two but not three months I think—I forget what I sold them for, but it was between 300l. and 400l., and I paid that in cash—I had his permission to sell them, and very likely he took bills of mine—I paid cash to other creditors which I dare say would not appear in the book—I cannot give you an idea how much—when I went to Me sts. Plunkett and Leader on 1st January I knew that I was insolvent, but I did not know what my liabilities were, I had not gone through them—we discussed the matter, and I think we came to the conclusion that it was about 7,000l.—by my statement of affairs my liabilities are 10,900l. I think—I do not recollect Mr. Leaoer saying that Michell really was a partner with me, or saying that the deed had been drewn, though it was not signed—I will not swear that nothing of the sort was said—I am not sure some gentleman there did not say "Are you a ware you are liable? the deed of partnership is drawn up, though it is not signed"—I had given them instructions about October to draw up a partnership deed from the time his money came in—I don't think Michell was there, but I had his authority—he was not to be a partner until he brought his money in—Plunkett and Leader were my father's solicitors—Mr. Cordoron owed me 70l. or 80l. when I stopped—I sold him about 80l. worth of goods in 1878—perhaps 150l. or 200l. worth of the goods I had from Smithson were for the Indian market—the lost were very small—the cheque for 128l. received from Harfeld and Co. at the beginning of October was some money which Michell got me from Harfeld, and there is an entry in the ledger in red ink on October 2, "Sundries 128l."—that was posted by the trustee from my cash-book—the cntry of those goods is in my day-book; it is included in this 195l. 1s. 7d.—I never sent Harfeld a piece of goods myself—I might have very likely credited the cheque and not received it at all.
Re-examined. I kept no account of the money I supplied Michell with to feed the account opened at the St. James's Bank, nor did I know that he was keeping an account of moneys he had from me—this (produced) is his writing; it is a debtor and creditor account from 15th October to 21st November, in which he has entered 1,099l. 2s. 6d. for sums suplied by me, and claims to be cridited with 1,048l. 2s. 11d., leaving a balance of 59l. 19s. 7d., which I have overpaid him—I have no means but the cheques which have been called over for testing whether the charges on the crodit side are correct—I did not know that he kept a paying-in slip counterfoil book on the St. James's Bank, but I find that it represents ten occasions of paying in up to 12th Dec.—it is in Michell's writing to the best of my belief—the counterfoils refer to nine credite, and in the account 28 credits are given—I have never had the means of testing the account in anyway—I went on supplying him with money up to the stop—my cash-book account is imperfect, but I believe I went through every item with Mr. Wyatt—the account marked "J.J.K. 20 and 21" is the account of the state of things between me and
Michell, quite irrespective of any backing of bills or ordering goods in my name—this (produced) is a copy of my ledger; that account is quite independent of Smithson's goods—there were five or six transactions where I let him have goods to sell on my account—one transaction is marked R.M., Which means "ready money"—I let him have the 516 yards of coating to turn into money for me, and I do not think I have charged him 1d. more than he received for it—that was the first tansaction of the kind—the invoice is June 13—he had dishonoured this bill of 110l. 10s. 11d. (produced) on 18th May—it had been taken up be me out of my funds before he had the goods—they were sold to him in the ordinary way of business—on 22nd June he dishonoured another bill of 151l. 16s. 2d. and another on 10th August of 163l. 13s. 10d.—he had not, I believe, provided any funds for any of those bills—the five bills were given on 17th September simply to balance up what was owing on the dishounoured bills—that is why they were all of one date, and when his money came he said he would take them up, so I did not discount them—that represents the total amount of goods he had of me—these accouts, J.J.K. 14 and 15, were always on two sheets of paper, debtor and creditor—I charge him as a debtor. (Upon MR. BESLEY proposing to go into this account, MR. CLAY objected that after the witness had stated that he would not pledge his memory to the correctness of the entires, the prosecution had no right in re-examination to put those entires specifically to him. THE COMMON SERJEANT admitted the evidence.) The first item is 154l. 16s., June 20, 1878; that appears in the ledger as if all the previous goods had been paid for—prior to the date when this statement appears to begin the account is ruled off level by giving credit for the balance is cash (Reading the figures)—statements 14 and 15, which are in my writing, deal with goods sold to him down to August 13,895l. 16s. 3d.—on the other side credits are given and cash paid amounting to 350l. 19s.—I think that is all cash—it shows a balance of still further indebtedness of 342l. 9s. on 13th August, as three bills which had been treated as cash were dishonoured—when I made the statement of affairs I set out the particulars of the bad debts; the first is Austin 12l., then Burness 112l. 0s. 5d. (Reading the list, the total of which was 3,354l.)—I do not know that any of them were paid when I went down to Wood; two-thirds of the goods had been sold then—although I did not know it I had 2,000l. of bad debts when I went to wood—I told him that my liabilities were 4,500l., and my assets 4,800l.—I simply wrote to Bradford for an account of what I owed, and I took it out from there—I believed I was stating accurately—that included the 2,000l. worth of goods which I never got paid for, and the 1,400l. of my mother's—it did not include the amount I owned my mother, and he said "That does not matter, you can have it as long as you like"—I had not been sued or pressed by creditors before I had any transactions with Michell—he never examined my books, nor did I state to him that I was perfectly solvent—I mentioned the capital lent by my mother more than once—I had no motive in destroying the leaves of the memorandum book in which I put down the amounts of the bills after they had been met—I used not to discount bills at my banker's; I paid them away to manufacturers—I kent an account in the bill book of bills payable by me—92l. 15s. 6d. was
all I owed Robertshaw; a bill was given to him, and I dare say Michell accpeted it, and it was handed over to Riobertshaw, but he has never had the money, and it does not affect the 1,762l. in the ledger at all—as he has not paid it, he has no right to charge it against me—the bills ranking against him do not affect the firgures in any way—this (produced) is Halliwell's 50l. cheque, it is not cancelled, it is marked "Refer to drawer"—it came back, and I see by this letter (produced) that I sent him down 40l.; that was my money—I do not remember whether it came out of michell acccount, at the St. James's bank—there is no cheque at all which would account for my getting that 40l.—I do not know were it came from—it was my money—I did not ask any one to pawn for me—I only know of two or three parcles being pawned, and that was from the time of Michell suggesting being a partner till his money came in—I cannot say how much was raised by pawning, there were perhaps half a dozen parcels; none of them were redeemed by me, and to the best of my belief, they were not redeemed—they amounted to perhaps 400l. or 500l.—he took the things to Harfeld—there was no pawning between his statement of the relative being dead, and the money coming—Mr. Wyatt, my representative in Bradford, was paid weekly—I can find out when his payments were stopped—I handed over all my property to my trustee, Mr. Lovering—the aggregate of the assets was about 2,000l.—he has realised—Michell suggested my raising money by drawing two bills of 760l. each on him—I think that was before the suggestion of pawning—Cordoron's bills have been paid away or discounted, one is for 35l. 3s. 4d., and the other for 79l. 8s. 4d.
ABRAHAM GRANDAGE . I am one of the firm of E. G. Williams co., of bradford, merchante—we are creditors of Keighley and Brother for 156l. 18s. 3d.—in November, 1878, we delivered them samples of 34 inch Italian cloth, and received this memorandum from them, dated 2nd December—we did not know till them on whose behalf the samples been sought—we sent another sample piece, I do not remember the date, and received this order (produced).
J.J. KEIGHLEY (Re-examined). I showed the sample to Michell, and has a conversation with him before the order was sent—these two memoranda of December 2nd and 6th are my clerk's writing—this letter (produced) is in Michell's writing. (This was from Michell to W.H. Wood, and MR. CLAY objecting to it, it was not read.)
ABRAHAM GRANDEGE (Continued.) Two pieces were sent—I did not see Michell before the bulk of the goods were parted with—Mr. W.H. Wood came to me and made certain statements, and we sent on the samples, and before the bulk were sent, between 15th and 20th December, 1878, I saw Michelle with Mr. Ramaden at our office—Michell said he had called about an order we had received from Keighley and Brother, and which we had refused to send unless the cash was forthcoming; that he was about to become a partner and introduce capital, and he wished us to for the amount—I consented to send the goods, believing that he was about to introduce capital—I would not have parted with the goods if I had not seen Michell—we sent these two invoices. (For thirty-two pieces 109l. 16s. 5d., and for seven pieces 20l. 15s. 7d.) Mr. Wood handed me this letter, it is in reference to the goods we refused to send, and then we saw Michell. (This was dated 14th December, from Michell to Wood, stating that the
Order was off, but that he thought he could dispose of five pieces.) We never Got the cash or the goods back—I came to London a few days after and saw Michell with Keighley—I think that was early on January—a Sheriff's Officer I was told was in possession—I saw Keighley and asked him in Michell's hearing for the cash or the goods, and that I would prosecute one Or the other or both—I don't think Michell made any reply, but he called At our office in London the same day I think, and said that he had been Keighley's affairs were much worse than he expected, and he made himself, Responsible us to send on his previous visit to Bradford, and that he proposed To pay for the goods, but had not the money, and would give me a promissory Note at three months—I said that that was of no value without some Security, and he offered to deposit some security with some solicitor—I Agreed to go with me to deposit the security, but he declined going with me To deposit it, as he had some appointment—he said he would call next lay But did not, and I never saw him again till I saw him here—I believe we Had a notice of liquidation from him, and the promissory note is a piece Of paper still.
Cross-examined. The conversation in London was early in January—I do not know whether that (produced) is one of the documents he brought—I wore my eyeglass in the warehouse—Mr. Pluukett met me by appointment And told me that there was a difficulty about giving up the goods.
JOHN JESSOP KEIGHLEY (Re-examined). I had never had dealing with Mr. Grandage before these samples were obtained; I think it came about Through Mr. W.H. Wood, who I had known some little time, but had not Bought the goods of him—after the two samples came Michell said that he Thought the goods were cheap, and they were coming up on the Following Sarurday—before I wrote this letter I had a conversation with Michell, and I think he wrote it while he was down there—I did not show Him a copy, of it, I told him I did not know he was going to make arrangements to buy, the goods for cash, I thought it was at the regular monthly account—he said that he had made arrangements to pay cash on delivery, and I had no further conversation with him as to the disposal of the goods—they were delivered at my place not more than a week or 10 days Before I stopped—I told him I would not let a piece go out—I was expecting The cash to be found to pay for them every day, and asked Michell How it was he same as he always did about his money not coming in—the Goods were kept on the premises unpacked, and when Mr. Grandage came Mr. Plunkett would not allow them to be returned.
Cross-examined. I thought they were a cheap lot.
CALVEN ROBERTSHAW . I am in partnership at Bradford, under the style Of J. Robertshaw and Sons—we are owners of the bill referred to in No. 15 of Michell's statement of affairs; it is dated 27th September, at two Months, for 92l. 15s. 6d., for goods delivered some months before—we had Had a bill form him from before, and it was renewed—Mr. Keighley brought Michell
To our place before 27th September—Keighley said that he had come in to Ask us to withdraw a writ which we had served on him for the 92l.—he introduced Michell and said "This is my future partner"—Michell said that he Was going to pay in a few thousand pounds, I think he said 3,000l. or 4,000l., Into the business, and in consequence of that I agreed to take a bill from Keighley, drawn on Michell, for the amount, at two months; it has never Been paid.
Cross-examined. That was in September—I am quite clear that I saw Michell before December—I was in Court yesterday but very little—I was First spoken to about the conversation four or five months afterwards—I did Not put it down in writing—I made no written statement until I made it to The solicitor in December.
Re-examined. My recollection is clear as to what I have spoken to.
EZRA HALLIWELL . I am a stuff manufacturer at Bradford, and am a Creditor of Michell for the balance due on a dishonoured cheque on the St. James's Bank in favour of Keighley and Brother—that was in respect Of a transaction in July, 1878—I had had previous transactions with Keighley, but not since—nothing was due in July when he ordered the Goods; they were 50 pieces of Russell cord, in two parcels, amounting to 163l. 14s.—there were two delivered; one was to be paid for in September, and the other in October I saw Michell in my office in the middle of November with Keighley, who introduced him as his future partner, and Said he was likely to come into between 3,000l. and 4,000l.—I asked him how long he thought it would be before they got the money—Michell said about three weeks or a month—I pressed them for the money; I wanted 103l. then—Keighley had paid me 60l. out of 163l., and I was pressing For the 103l.—he said the Michell had some property to he sold before they Could get the money—I fancy I afterwards received this letter of 20th November. (Mr. Keighley here stated that the letter was in his own writing, After a conversation with Michell. The COURT considered that the letter was Not evidence.) I afterwards received this cheque (Dated December 10, 1878, On the St. James's Bank, in favour of J. Keighley or order, drawn by F. Michell and marked N.S.)—that was dishonoured—I then wrote, and Keighley sent me down two 20l. notes on the 12th or 13th September——that 40l. came off the 103l., leaving 63l., and I received a 20l. note our 23rd December, and a balance remains of 43l.
Cross-examined. I still hold the dishonoured cheque.
ELLIS HARFELD . I am a commission merchant, of 5, Milk Street—I Have been in business 29 years—I have known Michell six or seven year; I knew him when he had the use of Mr. Card's office, 37, Aldermanbury—he was introduced to me in 1875. (MR. CLAY submitted that no evidence of transactions with Harjeld prior to July, 1878, were relevant to the inquiry, but the COURT considered it was admissible.) The receipt to this of F. Michell's writing: "London, 15th January, 1878. E. Harfeld bought of F. Michell 1,390 yards of cord, and 1,5451/2 yards of cord, total 2,9371/2 yards, 60l. Received by cheque. F. Michell." He did not bring an invoice to show Me where the goods were bought—that was an actual sale through me—There were one or two transactions in which he would not accept the price—(18 other receipted invoice were here put in relating to serges, Russell cords, And Italian cloth, and 258 shawls, some signed "by cash," and others "by Cheque, F. Michell.") I did not know where the shawls came form, three
Or four samples were submitted to me: I would not buy them, as I had no Particular market for that class of shawls—I had the sample two or three Days before the transaction—I agreed to advance him 51l. 10s. on them, And if they were not redeemed in 14 days they were to be ours—he was not To bring us more money, but the same sum—I advanced at the rate of 4s. a Shawl, and they were sold for 4s. 6d. with his sanction—I had a trifling balance to pay him, as I had to give 2 1/2 per cent. Discount to the purchaser at the 4s. 6d.—I think I kept them a month; I told him that 4s. 6d. was the best price I could get with 2 1/2 off—he refused at first, and gave it to some other people to try and sell them, and get more money, but ultimately told me to take the price—they were sold before his petition in liquidation—they must have been sold about November—he received a balance of 2l. after my commission—these invoices are in Michell's writing—I had no transactions with Keighley.
Cross-examined. There are 30 pieces of Estemaine on the last invoice; They were taken away and sold—I sold them myself—I remember being asked in my examination "What has become of the Estemaine?" and I very Likely said they were taken away, but I am quite sure they were not taken away—I have my books, and know who I sold them to two or three months afterwards—I should have allowed Michell to take them away if I could have got my money back—I advanced more than the value, because the state of trade was very bad—the Bradford trade was getting worse—all through 1878, in fact, we bought goods at almost any price, and prices were falling from day to day—it was very much less than I can give for them—Michell once found a purchaser, and bought his own goods back from me at the same price, and I was glad to get rid of them—it was my habit if the man who sold them to me came back with a purchaser before I had sold them to let him have them, charging him a small commission, and letting him make what profit he could; that is my business—I buy the goods, and if I get a purchaser I submit the price to Michell, and if he accepts I let them go and give him the balance—I do not know that Michell had any warehouse—there were 150 pieces of flannel, which he took an advance on, but they were not deposited with me for his convenience—I did not charge him a regular commission, sometimes he gave me 1l., and sometimes 10s.—there were no bargains—I gave the bond-fide worth; it is a common thing with people who have stocks to get an advance on them, and try to sell them in the meantime—the price of shawls depends upon the season; the second lot was in the height of the season—I think 4s. 6d. was the full value; they could be manufactured to sell for 4s. 6d.
Re-examined. It was 40 or 50 pieces of serge which I had bought of him Which he sold, and I gave him back the money I had given him—I complained Of other goods which were not according to sample; they were dirty And soiled, and he brought me a customer, who gave me the same price as They were sold to me for—I buy direct from the manufacturer—I did not Know that Michell had the use of Card's office—he gave his address, 37, Aldermanbury—I did not know that he was only there on sufferance—I Knew of his change of address to Foster Lane, but I did not go there—my Business as a rule is not making advances on goods, but to buy them out And out; the shawls could not be a surplus stock; flannels and shirting are
synonymous terms—he showed me samples of flannels—I made an offer for them, and he would not take it—those are the shirtings that Bowers bought afterwards—this is the memorandum (produced)—upon that I delivered the property—I advanced about 200l. upon them—Mr. Bowers paid me—I don't know what price Michell sold at—I gave them up on the same day that I got my money back—I had been out of my money two or three weeks. (The shorthand notes of the bankrupt's examination of 1st March, and 3rd, 9th, and 16th July were here put in and read.)
EDWARD PRIOR EVERETT . I am a public accountant, of 105, Cheapside—I have experience in the liquidation of bankruptcies—I was concerned for Mr. Webb, a creditor, in Michell's liquidation—a statement of affairs was Prepared in our office from figures given to us by Michell, and he gave us The list of creditors—there were no books except the bank book and this Little Private memorandum book; they were all loose papers, the memorandum book contained not the slightest information—there was a paying-in book—the loose papers were all invoices, and receipts, and cheques, and counterfoils of the St. James's Bank only—what amounts there are were got from cheques on a banking account, which had been closed six months, at the British Linen Company's Bank—some of the acceptances were to be presented To that bank—we got the figures of Hyde and Co., creditors for 421l. 3s. 2d., from Michell; a great deal was from his memory, there were very few papers to throw light upon it—in the first statement are the names of Gillies, Gaarnett, and Co., Hertz, Hyde, Sharp, Turner, and waddington as creditors—he gave an explanation that those were liabilities on account of his acceptances to Keighley—I mention that because if I had understood that they were liabilities, which they appear now to be, they would have been in List F instead of this list—he mentioned Bentley, 32l. 12s. 2d.—I got no information from him as to when that debt was contracted—there is no record of it, but the statement is very imperfect, in some instances the date of the debt being contracted being given, and in some not—he gave no statement as to Card, to whom he owed 20l.; Mander, 80l.; Rowley, 40l., and Shannon, 25l. Total, 217l. 12s. 2d. I have no means of Telling when any of those debts were contracted, I have no invoices of any Of them—he gave me them from memory—he endeavoured to explain List G, and I asked him to see Mr. Vanderpump and get this list made out—he did so, and we copied the statement—there were securities in Mr. Vanderpump's hands which were pledged for his bill of costs, which we estimated at 60l.—there was property on the list to which no value was attached—he has entered "stock in hand" nothing; "cash in hand," nothing; "bills of exchange and furniture," nothing—I always go through those items with the debtor and ask him—he described himself as of 4, Priest's Court only—I did not know at that time that he had the use of Card's room in Aldermanbury—he was a perfect stranger to me, I had not seen him before he came to me—I did not know that that statement of figures referred to the time when he was in Priest's Court only—the heading was drawn out at Mr. Vanderpump's—it is "Priest's Court, late of Aldermanbury and of Woodbine Cottage"—I got the amount of book debts in List H from Michell—he made up the amount of 507l. 7s. 4d. himself, there was nothing else to go by—on 1st April, when the bankruptcy petition was filed, I was not acting for him, I was acting for the creditors, and Messrs. Plunket and Leader asked me to take
the trusteeship; the adjudication was on 1st May, and my appointment on 21st may—I had not actel as receiver before that, there was nothing to receive—the statement of affairs in bankruptcy was filed on 1st August—I prepared one statement, which was not field, and this one was altered from it afterwards—the meeting was adjourned from 1st May to 24th August because the debtor did not prepare the statement—the statement filed on 1st August professes to give the state of his affairs up to 1st May, it is signed by him on every sheet—I went through it with him—the list of creditors "A" was reduced to ten, and the others were put into List D as liabilities—List D includes creditors not only against Keighley but against Michell—there are creditors there who are creditors of michell and not of Keighley—I have prepared a list of them—the creditors on list D who ought to be transferred to List A are, Borisson, 144l. 11s.; Bolton, 50l.; Halliwell, 10l.; and Webb, 42l.; making 276l. 11s.—the book debts to Keighley are 577l. 4s. 4d.—he takes it in the same way under the bankuruptcy—List G is altered in value to the extent 100l., it is 450l. instead of 350l. the order two are unaltered—about two months ago I got into my possession about 360l. on account of list 1—that is the sole asset that has been realised—there is no other asset to be realized and before that Mr. Vandefpump had been satisfied with his bill of costs at 41l. 15s. 10d. Instead of 60l.—he insisted upon being with his bill of costs at 41l. 15s. 10d. They were entitled to that—I have made no efforts to sell this reversion, I left It to Mr. Leader—I know nothing of it, it has not brought in a penny—I inquired in to the state of accounts between Keighley and Michell and the two papers J.J. and K.K. 20 and 21 were corrected by Mr. Wyatt and myself as there was some delay in getting the books from Bradford—Messers. Lovering made them out against the ledger—I have complied a statement of those alleged monthly purchase of goods from the commencement of the account—the account begins on 3rd November, 1877, with 260l. 19s. 1d. (Reading the amounts)—the total is 3,323l. 12s. 2d.—J.J.K. 14, and J.J.K. 15, give the goods from 13th to August 13th—that is the Only statement I found as delivered by Keighley to Michell except that Which had been settled beforehand—that account amounts to 895l. 16s. 3d. Subject to 2 1/2 discount, and subject to the credit payment 530l. 19s. that leaves a debit balance on the goods account of 12th and 13th August of 342l. 9s.—I found that the goods account up to May has been written off by three bills of exchange for 176l. 2s. 10d., 74l. 3s. 9d., and 101l. 3s. total 351l. 10s. 7d.—these bills, I believe, have never been paid, they were drawn by Keighley on Michell—I have not seen them in making up the accounts with Mr. Wyatt or Mr. Lovering—those bills were brought in afterwards as debits because they has do not been taken up—taking it down to the August delivery there would be the liabilities on the three bills of that were 693l. 19s. 7d. indebtedness—the goods after August amounted to 608l. 4s. 7d. that brings the account to 1,352l. 4s. 2d.; but there are payments from Michell to Keighly of 240l. 7s. quite separate from the St. james's Bank payment; that with the discount of 22l. 8s. 3d., makes a total of 1,282l. 11s. 5d.—these bills, dated 17th September, were handed to me by Michell when he filled his petition in liquidation—he told me he had asked Keighley for them, and that Keighley had given them up the day before he filled his petition—I think he said Keighley gave them to him
because he told him he had given them for Keighley's benefit or accommodation—these bills are added to the 1,282l. 11s. 5d. that brings the grose indebtedness of Michell to Keighley to 762l. 13s. 6d. up to Keighley filling his petition—this (produced) is Michell's pass book with the british linen Company's bank—it commences on 4th February, 1878, and ends on 15th April—the last payment in was on 11th April, 1878—I have no knowledge of any banking account before that in the St. James Bank on 12th October—I have compiled from the cheques, the counterfoils, and the two books, a statement of the figures as originally drawn out by Michel, and as drawn out by Michell's cheque, and by the figures of Keighley, they are all Michell's cheque—if you refer to the counterfoil book you will find that Keighley's cheques are marked J.K. (Reading a number of amounts from the margin of the cheque book)—I went through that with the defendant last night, and there is a very little differences as to payments out—Michell for his own purpose got money from the banking account to the amount of 437l. 3s. 11d.—I do not say that amount exactly, but there is not much difference—I have no means of knowing what the monkeys were that were paid into the bank—I know the amount, but I do not know where it comes from—Michell has said that is was a private banking account of himself, but not his own money—he said that moneys of his moneys of Keighley were paid in, and I asked him last night and neither he nor Mr. Keighley can do it—I asked Keighley whether any of Michell's money went into the bank, and he said he did not know, but Michell's said there were several payments in out of his private money—I found no trace of Keighley and Brothers's cheques—the banks—book will show the total paid in—Michell pointed out one payments which he thought was his own: the first item in the book 64l. 11s.; he said he thought so, but he could not speak positively—he also pointed out a loan of 100l. in the paying in book, but I did not understand it—the total is 447l. 3s. 11d., including one of Mr. Dear's acceptances for 99l. 11s. 1d. 13th November—the amount paid out under keighley's name is 1,616l. 6s. 8d., and Michell says it is 100l. more—there was a credit balance 14l. 19s. 3d. when the bank stopped—amongst the papers delivered to me as trustee were several invoices from Keighley to Michell—these (produced) are two invoices delivered up to Michell—amoung the invoices delivered up by Michell I find reference to the identical goods which are in Harfeld's Recepits—I find no instances of a sale at a profit at Harfeld's—correcting the statement of affairs by my evidence now, the total gross deficiency in Michell's bankruptcy statement is 4,222l. 18s.—that is the differences between the debts and credits—I first had knowledge of sales at Harfeld's at the examination in bankruptcy—I had often seen Michell before the sales commenced; he was in and out of our office twice and three times a week during the liquidation—he did not explain to me where the goods had gone; only the shawls to Dear—he said there was a parcel of goods which he had sold at a loss, but Harfeld's name did not turn up in any other instance—I believe he mentioned Harfeld's as the person to whom Dear's shawls were sold—he said that he had had great traveling expenses and living expenses, and had not made much profit out of his transaction—I don't think he gave me any explanation of the expenses he spoke of or the profits he had made—he said that they had made very little profit, and in some instances made a loss—he did not mention to me three journeys to
Bradford amounting to 21l.—the deficiency for by the first sales at Harfeld's; they are only the ones that I can trace; they are the only invoices that came into my possession—I had no books to go by—I had nothing to do with Keighley's invsolvency.
Cross-examined. I have never found Michell Backward in answering any question as to the figures—I think he has given me the best answer he could—I do not think any of the information he has given me has been willfully false as to facts and transactions, but he has given me such a little information—after the petition in bankruptcy was filled he told me of the transaction of Harfeld with regard to Dear's shawls as the only transaction of the sort—to the best of my knowledge I never heard Harfeld'd name till then—I was at the meeting of creditors on 13th March, and I believe Harfeld's name was mentioned—I think a question asked him by Harfeld was the only Michell answered—I know he had one dealing with Harfeld—I never went to Harfeld—I asked Michell several question, the same as I ask bankrupts to account for the deficiencies and he said that he could not give me a account, that he made very little profit, and on some transaction a loss—I reckon his deficiencies to be 4,229l. 18s. which he has to account for—2,271l. 6s. 11d. is accounted for his acceptance to Keighley, which reduces the account for by 2,000l.—I account for the largest part of the deficiency at once—there are three cheques besides to Borisson, to Bowers, and to Halliwell—I do not know whether he received anything for them—he said that he never had a sixpence for them—I have never asked Keighley about it—I did not apply to the Bankruptcy Court for an order on the defendant to file better accounts; we did it in another way; we had him privately examined—I think he has passed his public examination; I was not there—he enters his liabilities in bankruptcy at about 400l. or nearly so; that is in consequence of the amounts due to the creditors being correctly ascertained—he told me then almost entirely from memory—I do not suggest that he kept anything intentionally back from me—he did not omit the names of any creditors which I afterwards found out—the substantial differences was between his account and Keighley's and there was 400l. more liability—he told me that Keighley had a claim for 340l.; that was his first statement, but he did not tell me anything about the bills that were ruining—he said that he had endorsed a considerable amount beyond the value of the goods or he would not have made him debtor for so much—I could only prepare the accounts from what he told me—I saw Mr. Vanderpump; he did not ask how it was that Keighley was put down as a debtor instead of a creditor—Michell's explanation to me was that it was in order to make the account Balance properly, because though Keighly and Brother were creditors of his, still he had accepted a large amount beyond the amount of his goods—having no books, I could only get it from his mouth until I saw Mr. Wyatt—I did not then know that Keighley's claim for goods was 1,200l., he said 300l.—I did not discover before the meeting in liquidation that the actual amount Michell admitted was 1,200l., I took his figures entirely—he insisted that Keighley was his debtor for 500l. in respect of the balance of account—he told me he had endorsed and accepted, and made up the account in his own way, and claimed credit for what he had not, and had made himself liable for about 2,000l.—I did not advise him only to put Keighley down as a debtor for 560l., if Mr. Vanderpump says that I did he
Has made a mistake—I never told him that as Michell had endorsed bills to The amount of 1,200l. Keighley ought to appear as a debtor, and not as a Creditor; I expressly said that that was the amount Michell made it, and According to his figures it was correct; all those endorsements are figured As unsecured creditors to this day, and we did not know, except from the Debtor, that they were unsecured creditors—at that time Michell himself Did not know the exact state of affairs—I must have understood that Michell had taken up the endorsements—Michell was so foggy about his Books, having only his memory to trust to, that I can distinctly state that I did not understand it, and I may have concluded that Mr. Vauderpump Thought from the debtor's statement that the claim against Keighley was Correct—I have not got the original draft from which I prepared the Debtor's statement, I have an office copy—the figures were taken down From Michell's dication by one of our clerks, but I have not got it; most Probably Michell took it with him; it was of no use after I had made my Copy—I do not think Michell came to me on Card's recommendation, he Came of himself—I have known Card as long as I have known Michell—I Cannot say that Michell did not tell me that Keighley's claim against him Was considerably larger than 350l.—he might have said that he owed Keighley about 1,200l. for goods, but if he did I do not see how that can Make him his debtor for 560l.—in all probability he claimed that the Difference between 1,200l. and 2,000l. should appear on the other side of His account—it was very important to wipe out his debt and make him a Debtor; we have always recognised that as accounting for the deficiency to That extent—if he did not take up drafts he would be a debtor for them, But not to Keighley—none of the bills were taken up—Michell said that He really could not tell what the state of his account was without seeing Keighley's books and I sent him to see them; I did not go personally—I think Mr. Lovering refused to show them once, and on two other occasions The books were at Bradford—I applied for an order of the Bankruptcy Court on 8th August to see them, which is on the file—it was made in a Day or two—that was after I had examined Keighley on 29th July at considerable Length in Michell's bankruptcy—we wanted to get at the fact, And see if we could elicit the truth—we had not seen the books then to Take extracts from them. (MR. CLAY proposed to give evidence of statements Made by Keighley in July, 1878, in the witness's presence, to show that Keighley's books were not to be depended upon, and that Keighley's claim Against Michell's estate was less than appeared by his books, to which MR. BRSLEY objected as the witness could not be cross-examined upon the contents Of a paper which had been read at length, and the COMMON SERJEANT did Not think it permissible.) I made up Keighley's claim, partly from invoices Which Michell handed to me from 18th August, which I believe is the date In dispute—they correspond with entries on the debit side of this ledger—there is, I think, an invoice in every case for the goods which appear on The debit side; they are all in Court—these are some of them: August 13th, September 23rd, and September 27th—the defendant handed Them to me at the time of the liquidation—I suppose I have Not seen any other invoice of goods to the defendant after August Except these two; I thought there were some more—I have made Out my claim entirely on those two invoices, and the entries in The ledger and day-book—I referred to every entry in the day-book, and
Found every item posted to the ledger—these invoices are for 44l. 6s. 8d. And 50l. 1s. 11d.—in the original ledger here are two entries crossed out in Pencil, 171l. 6s. 6d. and 98l. 6s. 8d.—they were like that when I saw them—I have not credited them, as they are acknowledged to be fictitious on all Sides—I am not aware that I asked Michell why they appear there—I Hardly think I have seen him since I investigated this part of the thing—I am aware that he has alleged that many of the items with which he is Debited were not originally sold to him, and I asked Keighley to give me Information, and endeavoured to go through the accounts with him, but Never could get him to explain it—he said that he was not good at figures, And he could not make it out, and then I applied to Mr. Wyatt—Michell Said that if the entries on the debit side did not represent sales to him they Ought not to be debited to him—I did not ask Keighley whether that was True; but I knew what Keighley had stated—I traced the entries, and was Satisfied that they were fictitious—I am Michell's trustee, and I wish to cut Down the claim if I can—I am not dealing with Keighley, but with his Trustee—I must make up my mind that it is correct and admit it, or else fight Him upon it—I made inquiries to get better information from Keighley's Trustee—I had Michell's oath that the claim was incorrect; but in spite of Anybody's oath I go through the books myself, and I must either admit it Or reject it, and Keighley could not understand his own books—Lovering First of all proved for 1,400l.—I objected to it at the meeting, because I Thought it was incorrect—I did not take steps because the proceedings fell Through—I believe he proved in the bankruptcy for 1,736l., but I do not Know that he proved at all—I have been here for the last few days, and I Still believe that Keighley's trustee's claim is right—I admit it at the same Amount now—I found five bills in Michell's hands when he stopped—I Know that they had been given up to him voluntarily by Keighley—I asked Keighley whether that was correct, and he said that he gave them up to Michell under pressure from Michell—I have got them, they are in Court—I allow them to rank against his estate although I hold them, because they Were given up improperly to me as trustee, and though I hold them I am Bound to set them down on the other side—the two credit entries of 178l. and 98l. are acknowledged to be fictitious by Keighley's trustee and by Keighley Himself; who said that they were put in at Michell's request for losses which Ought to have been credited to him—as I understand it, it is a balance of a loss Upon some transactions Michell had for Keighley, who said that it represented The difference of money handed over by Michell, and therefore ought to be Treated as credit—I still treated them as fictitious—I am appointed to take Care of his estate, but I cannot protect him wrongfully—I was not bound To believe Keighley; I Used my own judgment—Messrs. Plunkett and Leader appointed me trustee as wished by the Bradford creditors—no Dividend has been paid on Michell's estate—I have had 360l. in hard cash; My solicitors have it—I have never pretended to pay a dividend; there is Nothing to do it with—I think the dividend is payable upon the whole Amount of claim, both for Keighley's debts and acceptances for which the Defendant has made himself liable; but it is hard on the estate I admit—I Must do it, I am bound to pay on all liabilities—if the estate was able to Pay 20s. in the pound, I might deal with the acceptances and endorsements In another way, by relieving the estate of them; but I cannot do anything With them, they are in the hands of third parties—until I can get the whole
20s. in the pound I am bound to pay upon the whole—I have not put in a Claim as trustee against the trustees of William Downer's will—my solicitors Have instructions to do all the legal business—I have not made a claim in Respect of any interest under Joseph Downer's will—I do not know the Interest of the defendant's wife under it—I have not asked my solicitor yet About getting an order under the Act—I have not endeavoured to find out The contents of Mrs. Masters's marriage settlement—when my solicitors are Read they will consult me; everthing necessary will be done by-and-by—I Know nothing about a claim against certain trustees in respect of the proceeds Of the Bull Inn, Rodendon—I wait for Plunkett and Leader to come And tell me about it—I consider it my duty to hunt up all the assets I can, And to pay the creditors, but I cannot do solicitor's work—I should make The claim if they instructed me what my claim was—I have not asked Them—I do not know what the Bull Inn sold for—Michell told me that The relative, in consequence of whose death he was coming into the property, Was Mrs. Masters, and I have no doubt Messrs. Plumkett and Leader Are finding out what property he or his wife are entitled to—I am not a Lawyer—I do not think it was an unfair thing not to make inquiries before The prosecution was instituted; we go upon the figures that are put Before us—Michell does not say in his balance-sheet that he has rights In consequence of Mrs. Masters's death—I believe be has said in my hearing That his claims were in consequence of Mrs. Masters's death—my solicitors Have inquired what the property was to which he said he was entitled—I Have not asked them the result at present of what they are doing in the Matter—I cannot say yea or nay whether the defendant has any claim Under the will—I cannot say whether Michell has any interest under Certain wills in consequence of Mrs. Masters's death—I have never read the Wills or settlements—Mr. Vanderpump asked me to prepare the accounts In the bankruptcy—the delay in filing the accounts was not in consequence of My not having prepared them, it was in consequence of an error one of My clerks made, which caused some little delay—the trustee in bankruptcy Prepares the accounts, but they are the debtor's accounts—I did not tell Mr. Vanderpump after I was I was appointed trustee that I could not Undertake to prepare the accounts; what I said was in the interregnum Between the liquidation and the bankruptcy; when the liquidation fell Through Michell was adjudicated bankrupt, and it was 21 days before The appointment of a trustee, and between those times I suggested to Mr. Vanderpump that perhaps it would be as well to draw up the statement Before the trustee was appointed—I drew up one statement, but it was Incorrect, and Mr. Vanderpump drew it up afterwards; a certain Correction was suggested, and Mr. Vanderpump adopted it—my clerk prepared The bankruptcy accounts, and they were produced at the examination In July, and Mr. Knight objected to them—this (produced) is the statement I handed to Mr. Vanderpump—this comes from our office—Mr. Vanderpump or Mr. Knight suggested that it was incorrect because Sheet A Contained all the liabilities—that was just the mistake which was In the liquidation proceedings—that was not Michell's fault—it contains The 400l., it is 400l., more than the liquidation, we had got the amounts Corrected then—I have been ordered to prosecute by the Committee of Inspection; As trustee I am only a servant—the Court of Bankruptcy put Me in motion and I put it in motion—I have not said that this is an
Improper prosecution, or that it was unnecessary after the examination in Bankruptcy—I have not said to any one that the prosecution was only Commenced for the purpose of compelling the debtor's friends to secure a Composition of 2s. in the pound—I did not say to Mr. Vanderpump Between the time that the summons was taken out and the committal that I thought the prosecution was a very improper one; nothing of the sort—I may have said that I had rather not have been called upon to prosecute—I did not say in Guildhall Yard that it was for the purpose of obtaining A dividend of 10s. in the pound; nothing of the sort, I could not Say such a thing because I knew the creditors would not accept 10s. or 15s.—I may have said that it was a pity Michell could not pay 10s. originally—I did not add "And then the prosecution could not have taken place"—I was present at all the meetings—the first meeting was no doubt adjourned Was for the same purpose—Mr. Vanderpump was instructed To see Michell's relatives and see if they would find 10s. in the pound—I may also have said to Mr. Webb that it was a pity Michell did not pay 10s. in the pound originally, but I did not say that the prosecution was Instituted because he did not do so—I did not say the same thing last night To Michell; not a word passed between us except behind you, and there Was, at your wish, not a comment—I had not seen Michell between the Examination before the Alderman and the prosecution, and I did not speak To him before the Alderman except to say good morning—I went through The banking account last night with Michell, and he insisted that there was Money paid in which was his own private money—I did not understand Him to say that he had paid 95l. which was the balance of 495l. which he Had received—he certainly took the first item and said "That is my private Money"—he may have referred to 495l. just as I was going, but I saw That he could not get at any figures.
Re-examined. The items struck through, 178l. 6s. 6d. and 98l. 6s. 8d., Are those which Keighley spoke of in his evidence—there is no other Instance of two items of those amounts being struck through; that would Reduce the actual account 270l. if that were true—a trustee, who objects To a proof and fails, had to pay the costs—up to the time of my cross-examination There has not been the slightest imputation on my conduct as Trustee that I am aware of—in going to the Bankruptcy Court I acted on The Committee of Inspection at the request of the Bradford creditors, not one Of whom dissents form it—5s. in the pound composition was suggested at The first meeting, but the creditors would not listen to it—the meeting was Adjourned from the 13th to the 25th—Mr. Vanderpump suggested that he Might possibly induce the friends to offer 10s., and the meeting was adjourned To see if he could carry that out, but no proposal of 10s. was made—the Liquidation fell through on 1st April, and the bankruptcy petition was filed On the same day—the proceedings have been conducted in the usual way—We got not information from Michell with regard to the dealings with Keighley until after the commencement of the bankruptcy proceedings—There was never to my knowledge anything like a bargain made with Michell that if his friends did not pay 10s. he should be prosecuted, and if They did he should not—no proposal to annul the bankruptcy has come to my Ears—on 13th March he said that all his property was described in List G, And I never heard that there was any more until I came here—I heard of
The document Mr. Clay speaks of, and I heard of the name of Masters, but I first heard this morning that property had been omitted from List G—I Directed Mr. Leader to make inquiries with respect to List G, but only as to legal Matters from 3rd October, 1879, which was before the examination before The Alderman—I have not had the slightest power or control over the prosecution—Michell never presented to me any books but those I have stated—I had no means of searching him by means of books; my hands were Tied—I had no data to go on—all the invoices I have taken out were supplied By Michell, and all that I have seen here are in his writing—I have not Take out the whole of the goods under cost price—there is no other invoice On the same footing as this one of Hyde's for shawls—these are some of the Invoice which came from Michell, but not all. (A bundle of invoice were Here put in, some of which were read.) Some of those documents have marks On them, (The witness went through 11 invoices of goods purchased made By Michell, giving the amounts for which they were sold to Hayfeld—vix, 98l. 10s. sold for 60l.; 53l. 9s. for 52l. 13s. 3d.; 50l. 3s. 10d. for 35l. 8s. 6d.; 62l. 5s. 4d. for 43l. 18s. 9d.; 65l. 15s. 11d. for 45l. 5s.; 8l. 3s. 1d. for 5l. 15s.; 12l. 11s. 9d.; for 8l. 18s.; 31l. 5s. for 19l. 7s. 8d.; 27l. 14s. 3d. for 19l. 10s. 4d.; 27l. 6s. 1d. for 19l. 10s.; 130l. 5s. 1d, for 106l. 16s.) Those amounts represent purchases by Michell for 567l. 16s. 1d., which Were sold for 397l., 12s. 6d.; that is a loss of 170l. 3d. 7d.—are cases In which I identify the goods sold as the goods bought—I have invoices of A number of others, but cannot trace them, and whether they were sold at a Loss or a profit I do not know—they start from 22nd July—I received no Information from Michell to account for the 4,000l. deticiency, except that It was partly by selling under cost price.
MARY LEADER . I am one of the firm of Plunkett and Leader, solicitors—We have clients in Bradford—before the petition was filed by Hyde and Co. We simply acted as solicitors for the Bradford creditors to recover the, Debts—Mr. Hopkins has been our clerk nine years; he was appointed proxy One Manchester creditor and one Bradford creditor to represent them in London—no objection has been made to him—the others are Mr. Dear and Mr. Newstead of Lovering and Co., who represent Keighley's estate—Mr. Dear Represents Hyde and co. for about 418l.—we were the petitioning Creditors' solicitors on the adjudication, receiving instructions from Mr. Dear, Hyde and Co., and the Bradford creditors—we were concerned for Keighley In his liquidation, and have never ceased to act for him, but there have been No active proceedings since his meeting of creditors—he has liquidated by Arrangement, and the creditors have wound him up—we were acting For the Bradford creditors up to the stage of getting the order—no offer was made that if 10s. was paid there should not be a Prosecution, but if not that there should be—I was never a party to any Such statement—I have here the original letter from the Treasury authorizing Us to conduct the prosecution, under which we act—from the time the Matter went before the Alderman we had no discretion as to entering into Any compromise, we are simply acting as agents for the Treasury—I do not Know of any Bradford creditors who dissented—I do not know that I ever Had any full knowledge of the transactions between Michell and Keighley—I have never been able to get it; the examination at the Bankruptcy Court Gave me the only information—it has never been suggested to me that Michell had other property than is contained in List G, but I had personal
Communications with him—I have received an intimation of further property Subject to the wife's claim on equity of settlement; that is of doubtful value—I should not like to say that I admit it, because it might prejudice the Claim—I know nothing about Downer's will—this (produced) refers to the 1,000l. contingent reversion on the death of Mrs. Michell, aged 35—I received A communication from the prisoner's solicitor as to the value of it; they Took the opinion of an actuary, who valued it at nil—those are the legal Points upon which I have been acting—I have no expectation of other Profits, and have no idea where to look for further assets—I think the Examination of Michell's books was necessary, and they were attended by Expense—all the expenses were incurred long before any money was received—from the time of the Treasury taking it in hand there was an end to the Liability of the estate—all the examinations were under the order of the Bankruptcy Court—I have no motive whatever in regard to the prosecution.
Cross-examined. I did not attend the meeting of creditors on 13th March; My partner did, and had a shorthand-writer there—I have read the notes he Took—I think the examination was continued, and the impression on my Mind was that it was no earthly use following it up further—I was acting Originally for Keighley, and he came to me when he found himself in extremis At the end of December—I did not attend the meeting of creditors at The end of January, on the day Michell filed his petition—the estate is Winding up, but there have been assets recovered—it is doubtful whether There will anything further—there was a first dividend of 1s.—the Bradford creditors were naturally angry with Keighley to some extent—his Deficiency was about 11,000l., including several had debts; his liabilities Were 10,900l.—we are not concerned Keighley before he went into liquidadation Since that we have had nothing to do with it—Mr. Wood is the Solicitor—Keighley's trustees have had him examined privately—I do not Know whether they have had him examined in the Bankruptcy Court—I Examine him under Sec. 90 of the Bankruptcy Act to see if he could throw A light upon Michell's transactions—the object was not to get the wherewithal Upon which to ground a prosecution, but that was the result; the Object was first to see if there was any property hidden away or concealed, And to recover it, not to cut down his claim against the defendant's estate; The claim had not then been definitely made, there was only a provisional Proof in for 14,000l.
Re-examined. Keighley was in business four years—there may have been Some friendly loans besides the sum lent by the mother—his position was Explained by had debts and had trading—I cannot tell whether there has Been any application for Keighley's prosecution.
N. J. WYATT (Re-examined). I had two or three conversations with Michell as to what he owed Keighley, and that Keighley owed him—he Said there was some mistake—I asked him whether it related to goods or Cash—he said the goods he believed to be correct, but there were some late Transactions of cash which he did not think he was given credit for—I asked Him to tell me the amounts—he could not do so then, but he said he would Refer to his books which he had at home and let me know, and I think he Afterwards brought me 20l., 8l., and 5l.—he never suggested that the account Should be corrected to more how it was three items—I think the account Was corrected—I asked him how it was he got those bills from Keighley—
He stated two reasons, one that he did not want Keighley's creditors to know That he was indebted in such a large sum to Keighley, and that he had also Endorsed and accepted bills for something over 2,000l. for Keighley—I said "That is nonsense, you have not paid those bills, you have simply endorsed Them; are you in a position to pay them?"—he said that he should Be—I told him I could not take his endorsements as a set-off against Keighley's claim, which was very nearly 2,000l. for the open account and Acceptances running—neither he or Keighley could give me the particulars Of those bills, but I got them subsequently—think the conversation about The 171l. 6s. 6d. and 178l. 6s. 8d. which were struck out was in Michell's Presence, but I am not positive—it is impossible for me to say by the examination Of the day book whether those items are fictitious or not—i only Know why they are omitted on the information given me by Keighley—There has been no insisting on the restoration of those two items—in January, 1879, when Michell told me he was liable for 2,000l., I said "How is it if You are able to pay this 2,000l., you have not paid a bill of something like 80l., which I heard you speak of yesterday as having written to a creditor At Bradford about?"—he said that he had a large sum locked up in conesquence Of the stoppage of the St. James's Bank—I said "I understood all Along from you and Mr. Keighley that the money at the St. James's Bank Belong to Mr. Keighley, not to you"—he said "That is of no consequence, It was an understood thing that the bill was to be paid from the proceeds of The bank."
By MR. CLAY. That conversation was between 3rd and 21st January Last year, before he filed his petition—I went into the ledger with Keighley—it was open before us—it had two or three entries there in red ink—I Think there was a sum of 3l. which he said he remembered having paid; That is the 20l., 8l., and 5l. I have mentioned—I had written up the ledger At that time—I do not think any items have been entered in the ledger since Michell went into the accounts with me—the 168l. and 178l. 6s. 6d. were Standing to his credit as they are now; they were penciled through—I did Not make up the proof against Michell's estate Mr. Lovering possibly did—I did not go back to Keighley's office last summer after April, not for the Purpose of making up any proof—I think the books must have been in Bradford in March of April—I have not entered anything them either in Pencil or ink since january, 1879, I ccannot say wether any one else did—all the red ink marks were made by me or in my presence by my instructions, And the pencil marks—I have seen the ledger since, and there Are no fresh marks—the balance is 1,898l., 18s. 8d., reckoning the fresh bills—I know the amount of the five bills, but the other bills are held by other People (Reading the amounts)—some of those bills are renewals—I have only Got my own drafts—I am not speaking from original documents.
MR. BESLEY put in the British Linen Company's bank pass book, and then Formally tendered he file of proceedings in the defendant's former bankruptcy in 1875, to which MR. CLAY objected, and the COMMON SERJEANT considered That it was not admissible.
This being the case for the prosecution, MR. CLAY went seriatim through The Thirty-eight Counts of the indictment, objecting to several that ther was No evidence upon them for the Jury and the COMMON SERJEANT so held with Respect to Five Counts. MR. CLAY also objected that the second Count was Bad. It was in these words, omitting the formal parts: "That the said
Frederick Michell, on the date of the appointment of the trustee, did not Fully and truly discover to him all his property." He submitted that the First sub-section of the 11th section of the Debtors' act created one offence and Not two, and, therefore, that the exception should have been set out, viz., "That The said property had not been disposed of in the ordinary way of his trade, Or laid out in the ordinary expenses of his family."
MR. BESLEY contended that the said sub-section created two offences—one, The not fully discovering all his property; the other, not fully discovering any Part disposed of before the appointment of his trustee. That with regard to The first offence the exception had no operation, and there was therefore no Necessity to negative it.
The COMMON SERJEANT held that the exception was applicable to the whole Of the sub-section, whether one or two offences were created, and as the exception Was not negatived the Count was bad.
There were several other points taken of some complexity, many of which Turned merely upon the admissibility of evidence.
Witnesses for the Defence.
HALL EDWARD VANDERPUMP . I am member of the firm of G. J. and P. E. Vanderpump solicitors, of Gray's Inn—we are solicitors for The defendant—we acted for him prior to his bankruptcy—he called On me at the latter end of December, 1878, and brought with him these two Documents, one the appointment on his marriage with Miss Harrington, and The other a receipt for 400l. signed by the trustees of his wife's father—he Had promised to hand me a cheque, partly for money I had advanced, and Partly for costs, and he asked me whether I could get him 300l. upon them And pay myself, and give him the balance—I read them in his presence, and Said "This is a contingent reversion, and not an absolute one; and it is Certainly not of the value of 300l.," pointing out to him that he would have To pay a large premium, his age being the same as his wife's—I told him I Thought I could get 100l. from the Law Union upon it, but I must take an Actruary's opinion; and the opinion was that it was worth nil, as the premium Would make it too large to make it worth anybody's while to advance upon It—the bankrupt called on me with Mr. Everett his trustee and I instructed Mr. Everett to prepare the usual statement of affairs—they called Again together on the morning of the first liquidation, and brought the statement That had been prepared pursuant to my instructions—I looked at it, And called Mr. Everett's attention to the statement under the head of book Debts, where Keighley and Brother appeared as a debtor instead of a creditor—he said "It is the balance after taking the full amount of aceptances And endorsements by Michell, against the amount due from Michell to Keighley for goods sold and delivered"—at that time Michell believed that The amount he was indebted to Keighley was 1,200l., but that he had no Means of checking the exact figures—they must be taken at an approximate Amount—Mr. Everett said that the statement had been made up from the Documents given him by Michell—no inspection was to be made of the Books at that time—Michell told me that he had been to Keighley for the Purpose of seeing the books on two occasions in March, and that the inspecttion Had been refused—I paid Mr. Everett for preparing the account, and Pointed out that it appeared wrong to put him in as a debtor instead of a Creditor without seeing how it was arrived at—he said that it was a statement Of affairs, and not a balance sheet—several months afterwards it was
necessary for another statement to be prepared for the meeting in bankruptcy, and I believe Mr. Everett's clerk copied the exact statement that had been made in the liquidation—Mr. Everett pointed out to me that as trustee he ought not to prepare the debtors' statement—there was some delay in the filing of those accounts, and on, I think, the fourth of fifth day of the private examination Mr. Everett handed me across the table the statement of affairs in his clerk's writing—I looked at it at once, and saw that it was exactly the same as before—there had been no alteration whatever—Mr. Knight, the Counsel, being there, I put the question to him how it was To be framed—he advised that it was not in the proper form, as the bills Endorsed and accepted should have been under D instead of A—he did not disapprove of any other matter, but I think it might have been framed very much better now; but the defendant did what I advised him to do—the accounts under the liquidation were fully gone into at that meeting of creditors—they were read out and discussed, and Mr. Lovering tendered a proof for 1,400l., and on behalf of the bankrupt I disputed it, acting under Mr. Everett's advice—I think I explained publicly at that meeting the way in which I arrived at the balance—it was explained and thoroughly understood by all the creditors—when Michell consulted me first he told me how he had got into his difficulties—I procured an office copy of Mrs. Master's will—this (produced) is Mr. Joseph Downer's, original will from the Probate Court—it is dated the 12th of February, 1835 (This was put in and read)—Thomas Harrington died before Mrs. Masters, childless and intestate, and she was only between William Downer and Mrs. Michell as representing her mother—I cannot Prove Mrs. Thomas had any other child but Josephine; but Josephine represented her dead sister or brother—William Downer and Josephine Michell divided the estate between them, and they have already divided the money—they have each taken their share—it was 1,000l. Consols—Mrs. Michell's share was 500l., and after payment of solicitors' charges she received 493l. 7s. 9d., and I received 40l. of it from Plunkett and Leader—the land was not sold, but it is estimated to be worth 3000l.—I also produce Mrs. Masters's marriage settlement (This was dated the 5th of June, 1839, and Was partly read)—the money was paid over in Mr. Read's presence to the Bank of England—he is here and will prove it—it was exactly 1,000l. Consols—I first obtained particulars of Josiah Downer's will within the last Three weeks, and of the marriage settlement within the last fortnight, at any Rate since the case was set down for trial here—I found out these two documents through Mr. Read's solicitor—the 505l. mentioned in the marriage settlement has never been handed over to any one, it is now in dispute—that does not relate to the Consols at all—758l. 11s. New 31/2 per Cents. Was originally settled by the marriage settlement—that is the total Amount—I know it from the trustee himself—the endorsement relates to What is paid under the will—I also produce an office copy of Mrs. Masters's Will—it was sworn under 600l., and the terms of that will are the beginning Of all the trouble—there purports to be a real estate passing by that will, But there is none, the prior document having directed where the real estate Should go—it does not pass under that document at all but under two other documents—the amount passing under that was 400l., and a small amount of the plate and furniture, which was not valued, but it was sworn under 600l.—here is also a declaration of trust of 2,500l., of
Mr. Harrington in favour of Mrs. Michell before her marriage, an appointment of 1,000l. Consols, part of the 2,500l. Consols settled under a declaration of trust of trust of November 6th, 1865—it is left first to the wife and then to the defendant if he survives her; she has an interest in the whole 2,500l. until her death. And then 1,000l. goes to him absolutely if he survives her—the actuaries' opinion has been given since the bankruptcy—Mr. Leader said that it would give the defendant's friends the option of purchasing, and they have offered to sell it to me for 25l.—the defendant's age is 35 I think—I think it would be a very good speculation for 50l.—the reason it is not worth more is that you are obliged to take one premium, and therefore it is really worth nothing at the present time—I have seen Mr. Everett repeatedly since the commencement of the prosecution—there is 100l. a year under Mr. Harrington's will; this is an office copy of it; under it the trustees are to pay Mrs. Michell 200l. a year for her separate use until certain claims on the estate are paid off, and then it is to be increased to 500l., and the balance invested for the benefit of the children, in whose favour there is a trust of the whole of the estate with the exception of 100l. a year to Mr. Michell for life on the death of his wife, subject to some very strong contingencies; he cannot charge or continue it—it is voidable in bankruptcy, but I do not think he has lost it by the present bankruptcy—I think it means bankruptcy subject to this taking effect—I have put in all the documents—I prepared Sheet G after a careful examination of all the facts Mr. Michell put before me, and after a careful examination of him as to what property he had—did not know of Joseph Downer's will or of the settlements of Francis Downer at that time—the trustee is here and he will prove that he did not know of it, it has all come out since this inquiry—whatever was given was for the wife's separate use, not subject to the control of the husband—I do not know of any other property that passed under that—the defendant also handed me this receipt for 400l. from the trustees, dated 10th December, 1878, and the original document bears the same date—I heard Mr. Everett cross-examined by Mr. Clay, and heard him deny that he had made certain statements to me—that denial is not true—Mr. Everett said to me that this was an improper prosecution, that he was simply trustee in the matter, that he personally considered the prosecution was not a proper one, as it was for the purpose of compelling the bankrupt's friends to come forward, and he should not have gone on if he had not been compelled by the Committee of Inspection.
Cross-examined. That took place in Guildhall Yard after Mr. Everett's examination—I knew at the time that he had no control over the prosecution—he considered that it was an improper prosecution; that is what I said—he and I walked from the Court together; there was no one with us; this was privately spoken to me in answer to something I said to him—I have been instructing your learned friend in this matter—I have made no inquiry whatever about Keighleys—I supplied them with materials I did not suggest that he had been insolvent before—I was his solicitor first in 1876, I think—I was never concerned in paying his creditor—I never acted for him in reference to any composition—I don't think I acted for him before the beginning of 1877—I should disclose or compel a client to disclose any contingent interest in property, most decidedly—I know as a fact that the defendant did not know of this half interest—I know that no
one knew it except Mr. William Downer—that was under Mrs. Masters's marriage settlement—I first had knowledge if it two or three weeks ago, and that was the same time that Michell had knowledge of it—the omission of that property from Statement G was most decidedly from ignorance—had I know it in January, 1878, I should have inserted it—the other property does not all come under the headings 1,2,3, and G—there is no mention of the 1,000l.—there is no non-disclosure except under G, which I only I known that the defendant had any interest in it in the right of his wife I should have mentioned it on the statement—I believe he gave me the fullest information in his power, and I filled it up myself—there is only one contingency, and that is of 100l. a year—I have written "a hundred a year, &c., until he becomes bankrupt," but that does not relate to Downer; that is under Harrington's will—when he brought me this parchment and I found it was worth nil I temporarily gave him a cheque for 13l., which he promised to bring me back—he did not, but brought me this security, and asked me to get him 300l. on it and pay myself, and I said it is not worth it—the 300l. was not borrowed on the statement that it would be paid again in a day or two; it was not sent to him, it was sent to some one else—I think that was about December 30—I cannot tell whether Card stooped in 1878 or 1879; he had as early as 30th July dishonoured a cheque given to Rowley, and I say here in my books "Writing to you to take cheque up, and dishonoured cheque, 3s. 6d."—that is true—the property was really the property of Mrs. Josephine Michell's father—it had not been invested in houses, it was a very long row of freehold shops, which brought in between 500l. and 600l. a year—it is worth 1,000l.—I cannot say whether it was old Mr. Harrigton's property time out of mind but it was his before his death—under Mr. Harrington's will he takes 100l. a year—I am speaking of the property at Notting Hill—it represents more than that, because she was to have 250l. a year, and there was another 250l. to pay mortgages, and the remainder was to be laid out in trust—it is all to her private use and benefit; there is only a charge of 100l. to Michell on his surviving his wife—I think his saying "What a thing for me to find my property burnt down" was a very reasonable observation if it was his wife's—he had never the control of a single tenant—I knew nothing about his business affairs before he came to me to consult me about keighley having stopped and his affairs being in confusion—he did not then show me the little bank-book of the British Linen Company; if he had I should not have looked at it, because I had arranged with him to employ a professional accountant—I did not know he had an account there till I heard it at the Mansion House—the whole of the books and papers were handed to Mr. Everett, and he attended to them solely—I do not know of his having any banking account between 15th April, 1878, and 12th October, 1878, when the other account was opened.
Re-examined. I am positively certain that the defendant knew nothing about Mr. Downer's will and Mrs. Masters's marriage settlement—he told me something about his expectations, and how they came—List G discloses 100l. coming under a marriage settlement, but with no statement about bankruptcy—I prepared two office copies of the two wills, and satisfied myself by the will of Mrs. Masters that the property was bound to Mrs. Michell's separate use—at the meeting of 13th March, after the debtor's
examination, one of the creditors, Mr. Waddington, I believe, but I do not identify him, said he for one should take nothing less than 10s. in the pound; that the Bradford creditors resolved unanimously that unless it was paid the debtor should be made a bankrupt, and should be prosecuted, but before he could finish the word "prosecute" Mr. Plunkett, who had examined the debtor, stood up, and held up his hand, and said "We need not go into this here"—he did in fact finish the word "prosecute."
By MR. BESLEY. That creditor was very angry—he did not say that it was a swindle, nor was it pointed out by one of the creditors that Michell had got rid of 3,000l. of indebtedness by getting his friends to pay 2s. 1d. in the pound, or that this was another attempt after 12 months' trading nothing of the kind was said in my hearing, and I was there the whole time.
MR. READ. I live at 1, Earl's Court Gardens, and am a brewer, of Kensington—I am one of the exectors of the will of the late Mr. Harrington Under which Mrs. Michell has an income of 250l. a year, which is to be Increased to 500l.—she also has 80l. a year, which is the interest of 2,500l. Consols—Woodbine House is let furnished for the benefit of the estate; The trustees of her father's will have taken it at 2000l. a year; the rent and taxes are about 160l. a year, and the surplus 40l. goes to Mrs. Michell under her father Mr. Harrington's will—there is a surplus to educate the children, and in the event of the mother dying, 150l. is left to the father for the support of the children—there is no special fund for the maintenance of the children, but it accumulates till they come of age—the property under Mr. Harrington's will consists of houses on a terrace at Notting Hill. Which are in the hands of trustees, out of the rents of which Mrs. Michell's income is paid, and the defendant's income if he survives her—on 9th July, 1878, a fire took place there, injuring two or three of the houses—they were insured, and the insurance was laid out in rebuilding them—I first heard of the fire by Mr. Michell's calling on me early one morning, and showing me the account in a daily paper—it mentioned this terrace—I have known the Michell family 40 Years, and have known Mrs. Maters very well—I know that she received the rent of the Bull Inn, at Rodenden, direct from the tenant for some Years—I did not know that there was a mortgage on the Bull Inn till July, 1879—so far as I know, Mrs. Masters was entitled to it unencumbered—I know that it was part of the property settled by Mrs. Masters's marriage settlement—Mr. William Downer and Mrs. Michell are entitled to the property on Mrs. Masters's death in moieties—I do not know the details of the marriage settlement—I never saw it till Yesterday or the day before—I know there was one—this is the first time I knew of its provisions—the copy has been lost for some time—I knew of the cottages at Westborough Green, and that Mrs. Masters received the rents of them—I thought they were hers absolutely—I did not know the provisions of Joseph Downer's will—she only had the 1,000l. Consols for life—I did not know originally that the sum settled under Mrs. Masters's marriage settlement was 750l.—I do not know how the Bull Inn came to be included under a settlement—when Mrs. Master's died I knew that I was one of her executors—I proved the will about 22nd October, 1878—I remember the receiving from Joseph Downer's trustees the proceeds of 1,000l. Consols—I was present, at the request of Mr. William Downer, when the cheque was handed over, but I did not receive it—I think it was on 25th or 26th November, but I have nothing to fix the date—there was
an arrangement by which the money was to be temporarily handed to Harrington's trustees—consent was given before it was lent to them—I did Not believe at the time I paid it that the money came under Mrs. Masters's Will; I thought it came from the 1,000l. Consols—I am executor to both Mr. Harrington and Mrs. Masters—I knew that there was a will if Joseph Downer existing before July, but I did not know the provisions of it—I Knew there were Consols under it, but having nothing to do with it I did Not interest myself in the matter—Mrs. Masters was willing that Michell Should have this money—there is no other person who is as intimate with the financial affairs of Mrs. Michell as I am—she has no brother, she is the only surviving child—I know it was intended that the Bull Inn should be sold at the end if December, 1878—I believe six months' notice had been given to the mortgagee—negotiations were proceeding for the sale as early as January, 1879—there was considerable delay in selling it on account of the missing deed, Mrs. Masters's marriage settlement—the deeds were supposed to lay with Mr. William Downer—I have had rendered to me an account of the proceeds of the sale, 855l.—certain claims were made for costs by William Downer and his London agent for about 140l. which I dispute as trustee, And contend that I am not liable—I understand that the trustees of Michell's bankruptcy had made a claim to it—what Mr. Vanderpump said yesterday as to the relationship between Mr. Downer and Mrs. Masters is correct.
Cross-examined. I was examined at the Bankruptcy Court in June, 1879—Mr. Harrington died on 18th September, 1877—Michell and Josephine Harrington have been married seven or eight Years—I was acquainted with the family most intimately—Mr. Harrington had two sons, but they both died some years ago, one quite a child—Josephine was the only child when Michell married her—you will find my name on the second appointment of trusts, on 13th August, 1873, and I have acted from that date as additional trustee—I paid her money to her and took her receipts; the money had been on mortgage, it is now invested in Consols—up to her father's death she was getting the simple dividend on 2,500l. Consols—I took the dividends and paid the whole to her every half-year—in september, 1877, a new state of things occurred. Her father died—up to that time the contingent property in Michell was 1,000l., in the event of his surviving his wife—I had no notice from any one in 1873 or 1875 not to pay the money over to Michell in the event of anything happening—I was never applied to to be examined in the Bankruptcy Court about it—I was Mr. Harrington's executor—Mr. Harrigton rington had a lease of Woodbine House, Turnham Green, which is described as the bankrupt's residence; he lived there and permitted his daughter and her husband to live with him—Mrs. Michell has two children; the whole property became vested in her for her separate use on her father's death, and if the furniture had been sold I should have had to apply the money for her use—the house is in trust under Mr. Harrington's will for the purpose of forming an income for Mrs. Michell free and distinct from her husband's power and control, and up to June, 1879, I permitted Mr. And Mrs. Michell to occupy the house and use the furniture—I was liable to Pay Mr. Harrington's liabilities under the trusteeship, and it is a fact that there Was 1,800l. still to be paid off in June and July, 1879, as liabilities which Will take six or seven years to pay off—up to January, 1879, the time of the bankruptcy, I had paid Mrs. Michell her private income—she had the house and the furniture, and no rent to pay—I paid her 62l. 10s. a quarter,
notall at onec, but ouly as she asked for it; I paid nothing to michell—after the payment of existing liabilities I was, with Mrs. Michell's consent, to pay back the 400l. within seven years; that was thoroughly well known to michell—the cheque for her half share of the 1,000l. was 493l. 7s. 8d.—I went with him to the Bank of England on 25th or 26th November, 1868; he cashed the cheque there and gave me the 400l.—the memorandum of December 27th shows the way I was to have the 400l.—I know nothing about his having dishonoured some bills, or about his business affairs—Mrs. Masters died in July, 1878—was at the funeral; the will was read; the 1,000l. was not to be free from her husband's control—everything but the 1,000l. was tied with the condition that she was to have the enjoyment of it as a feme sole, as I understood, but I am not a solicitor—Michell did not apply to me to advance him 4,000l. to put into the business—I never heard of it till these proceedings—I saw him there or four times a week—he know I was the executor of Mrs. Masters's and of Mr. Harrington's wills, and the also the trustee under the original thrust of Joseph Harrington—I cannot say whether the six months' notice to the mortgagee was given of the sale of the Bull Inn—I nothing to do with that trust; Mr. William Downer managed that, and I only know what he tells me—I have said that Mrs. Michell's interest was only one half of the 1,000l., and that was my belief at the time—no question was put about any other property—I know nothing about the marriage settlement, I only know about the 1,000l. Console—I was asked whether there was any interest upon any other property—if the question had been asked I should have answered that there was a marriage settlement—the cottages are under the grandfather's will, which I never read, and know she became possessed of them—I thought they were vested in her absolutely—I leave the succession duties to my solicitor—I have got the 650l.; that is in Mr. Badham's hands, the trustee of Mrs. Masters, if he has not paid it into the Court of Chancery—Mrs. Michell has instructed my solicitor to claim a settlement of it—Mrs. Master had been ill eighteen months or two years, confined to her room, if not to her bed—I do not know of Michell using Card's rooms in Aldermanbury, or a room at Keighley's—I know he did something in the city—I believe this letter is in his writting—I know nothing of any affairs between Mr. Harrington and Michell—I heard that money had been lent, but I had Nothing to do with 418l. lent in 1875—I know nothing about his affairs in 1876—it is rather an expensive house, we pay 120l. a year rent—we cannot let it unfurnished, so we let it furnished—it was given up about 5th or 6th October, 1879—I did not give any portion of the rent to Michell—it is Mrs. Michell's property.
Re-examined. I pay her the balance between the rent I pay for the House and that which I receive—I attended Mrs. Masters's funeral—I was not present when the will was read, but it was read over to me privately by Mr. Downer—I know that Mrs. Masters possessed an interest in cottages at Wisborough Green, and also in the Bull Inn—I had no reason for not mentioning that Michell has often asked me when the property was to be sold—he asked me in November and December, 1878—Mrs. Masters received 250l., and there was 15l. ground rent and property tax deducted—all the surplus goes to pay the mortgage, amounting to about 400l. a year—it will be finally paid off in six or seven years, but the interest will be decreasing—I have not gone strictly into figures.
NOT GUILTY on the 2nd, 6nd, 7nd, 8nd, 21st, and 35th counts.
GUILTY on all the other counts.—Judgment Respited.
Before Mr. Recorder.
PLEADED GUILTY to having been convited of felony on the 29th October, 1874.— One Month's Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. BESLEY Prosecuted; MR. THORNE COLE Defended.
GEORGE WATSON KIDD . I keep the Farmers' Arms; Stratford—on 3rd December about 3 p.m. the prisoner came in, and at the same time a man who I have seen in custody this week came into the other compartment—a little cripple on crutches named Winter, who is there everything day, was there, and Mr. Williams, who belongs to the Great Eastern Railway, came in some time after the prisoner—nobody was in bar but me—I served the other man with two of ginger-brandy, and the prisoner with two pennyworth of port wine; he then asked for a threepenny cigar—the cigars were kept in a glass at the back of the bar on the each other side of the door where the gold is kept, and there is cabinet work on each side of the door—the other man was nearly opposite where the cigars were, oppsite where the gold is kept for change in a small grog glass—I showed the prisoner the cigars, he took one, and while he was smoking it he said "These are vary nice cigars, but they are hardly in season." and asked me to feel them—I put my left hand across the bar and said I thought they were all right—after he had finished that he had another two of port wine and another cigar—during the time he was smoking they both went out for a minute or two, and both returned into their separate compartments—it is about 7 feet 6 inches form where the other man stood outside the bar to the place where the glass was—on their coming back I served the prisoner with two more of port wine and another cigar, but although it was a cold day the other man only had two of ginger-brandy, and did not smoke—they when out twice—I did not serve the second cigar, the barmaid served it, as I went out of the bar for five minutes—the prisoner tried to draw my attention in several ways; he asked me to give him a sheet of paper to write an address on, and he turned his back to me, looking out at the window on tiptoe—he said "who is over at 64? is Mr. willoughby? the place with the red curtains"—I did not take the trouble to look at the curtains, but the cripple and Williams recommended him to go to the next street, where a Mr. Willoughby lived—if I had looked out my back would have been to the other bar—I left the bar in charge of my wife, and she left if in charge of the barmaid—I was not absent five minutes; I hard my wife shout, and when I came back both man had bolted—I rushed into the street, but saw nobody—I informed the police an hour afterwards—before the man went out they looked very knowingly at one another, they gave a quick glance—I was afterwards taken to worship street to a room with a lot of men—I was asked if I saw anybody I knew,
and picked out the prisoner immediately from about 25—I went before the Grand Jury on Tuesday and after that I saw the second man, and gave him in charge—he was remanded to Ilford—a half-sovereign was taken from my place.
Cross-examined. After I had the half-sovereign and the glass stolen I gave information to the police at Strarford, and about 10 days afterwards one of the detectives said that there was a man in custody at Worship Street who answered the description and would I go up—his name is Lloyd—I accompanied him there—he did not go into the room with me where the man were; one of the officers of the Court, a police officer, took me in—it was a small room and it was full—there were any in plain colthes—I did not know any of them—I knew perfectly well what I went in for—trousers on, but my impression was that there were some detectives there—I have a notion where Cambridge Road is; I should say it is about three miles off, it may be only a mile and a half—I do a pretty good business—I have three compartments—I did not see the half-sovereign and the glass taken, but I saw the person who was attested for stealing it at Stratford Police-court yesterday morning before the Magistrate—he was remanded till Sturday and I believe he is at Ilford—I have identified him as the person who was there at the time we lost the money, and I am sure be is the man—the prisoner was in the house about an hour—he came in about 2.40. into the compartment on the left-hand side, where there was a fire—I was behind the bar alone—the two men came in at the same time, within a second.
Re-examined. There is also a compartment at the back where there was no five; it is 6 feet 6 inches across (Drawing a plan of the bar)—you can get in at the back; there is a side entrance; it is a corner house—I had just taken 3l. 10s. out of the glass, which I paid for tobacco and cigars, and 1l. I gave for 1l. worth of silver—that only left a half-sovereign, which I missed when I came back and found the glass on the floor outside the har, just agaiust the door—the prisoner came in where we had a fire, and the cripple was in the same compartment sitting by the fire, and Williams was there—the wooden partiton between the compartments is 6 feet high—the third compartment is a little passage—the priosner kept on the move continually he did not sit down at all, and he was always on the talk—a man at one bar can see a man at the other bar.
HENRY WILLIAMS . I live at Stratford, and am a constable of the Gteat Eastern Rialway—I was in Mr. Kidd's public-house from 3 to 4 clock on this day, in the compartement where there is a firepalce—the prisoner was there when I went in—the barmaid served me—I saw Mr. kidd talking to the prisoner while I was sitting down reading the paper—I was there shout an hour—I did not notice another man in another compartment—the prisoner was very talkative—the prisoner was showing some pictures to a little cripple, who cannot come here unless he is carried here—I did not take much notice, as I was intently reading the paper, but I noticed the prisone's face so that I should know him again—a man came in and stooped down to warn himself and said "Oh! look, that galss is going"—I looked up and saw the glass at the end of a stick going from a shelf in the other compartment, the stick being by some held by some one there—the
moment the prisoner heard that he ran away—I heard the glass fall and the landlord went out—I did not see the other man—I went to Worship Street separately from Mr. Kidd, saw about 20 men in a room or call, and pointed the prisoner out directly.
Cross-examined. Lloyd fetched me but did not go in with me; he hamded me over to a gaoler—I knew noboby else in the room—I am a private detective belonging to the railway company—I do not know whether any plain-elothes constables were in the room—the prisoner was placed with rather a rough lot—he was the only man of respectable appearance—I went up to him at once—it was a railkman named Saunders living in my neighbourhood who said "Look at that glass moving."—he is not here that I am aware of—I saw the glass moved; I did not, though I am a constable, rush out to see who had taken it, because I was taken by surpriee, and I have been sorry for it ever since—it was an ale galss with a foot to it.
Re-examined. Nobody gave me any hint at Worship Street to enable me to identify the man.
CLEMENT JONES (Policeman K 164). I saw the prisoner runing away near the Salmon and Ball, he fell, and I took him in custody on another charge—the inspector asked his address at the station—he said "I deeline to give it"—he gave his name.
The Jury inquired whether there was any evidence that the man who used the stick at both houses was identicat, and as none was forthecoming, they found the prioner
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. POYNTER Prosecuted; MR. RIBTON Defended.
AMBROMS EDWIN HONE . I live at 66, Baildon Street, New Cross Road—on Friday night, 26th Deceraber, about 10.30, I went into the Lien and Wheataheaf public-house, Deptford—I remained there about five minutes—when I came out I crossed ever to the Duke of Cambridge to see if a friend of mine was there—when I found he was not there I had two pennyworth of gin-and-water there—my coat was buttoned up—I walked down to the botton of High Street and came down, and not meeting my friend I went into the Lion and Wheasheaf again, and come out and did not stop to have anything—I then saw the three prisoners by the lamp-post—Ryan bid me a merry Chriatmas and asked me whether I would treat him—I said "No"—he immediately seized hold of me by the coat and said, "If you won't treat me I will treat you"—the moment Ryan seired me by the coat Charles Rutherford struck me on the hat, and some female called out, "Come away"—Ryan kept puling me down Charles Street, when Samuel Rutherford, drove his hand into my right-hand coat tore—he got me against a door, and pulled out my watch and handed it to Samuel, and he ran away—Charles went away the moment I was struck on the hat, when
the woman called out, "Run away"—the chain was left hanging—when I saw a club-mate of mine I asked him to get me a policeman—the prisoner ran away, and I went into the Duke of Cambridge—I was quite sober—I should not have liked to take 5l. for my watch.
Cross-examined. Charles was not present when the watch was taken—I might have said before the Magistrate, "I was sober; Ryan seized me first by the cost because I would not treat him; he might have laid hold of me to take me back to the public-house"—I have been in Maidstone, and was charged, but acquitted; I was with a woman for keeping a brothel—she got four months—she had been keeping the house about two years—I am not living with her now—that is four years ago—at first I thought this was a lark, but not when he knocked my hat to pieces—I had been to a funeral that day—I have been married nearly four years—I had only had a glass og beer after the funeral—I went to the police-station with the officer to charge Ryan and Charles Rtherford—Samuel was taken next day—I did not offer to take 10l. as compensation—I know Mrs. Cooke—I swear I did not tell her I would take 10l.—I got 5l. from Mr. William Sinee, timber merchant, for the damage to my coat—I never said anything about 10l.—(Two females stepped forward)—they are Mrs. Cooke and Mrs. Froud—these was a remand, and after I got the 5l. I did not attend the next day—the coat was lent to me by a friend to go to the funeral (coat produced)—the prisoner have never insulted me before—I had a couple of pounds or 30s. in my pocket; I lost none—when I went home I broke a pane of glass to get in, and one of the curtains came down, because it was loose—I had this old watch case in my jacket pocket (produced)—it was found the next morning—my other watch was gone—I saw it an hour before I lost it—I saw my watch passed to Rutherford—my hat was over my forehead.
Re-examined. My silver watch was never found—I got home about 12.15—my wife was in bed—the prisoners knew my name and where I lived.
Cross-examined. I put it in my pocket, and gave it to Hone.
WILLIAM LEFLEY . I keep the Lion and Wheatsheaf at Deptford—I saw Hone a few minutes before 10 o'clock on Boxing night and the Rutherfords—Ryan came in; he had the appearance of having been drinking a little, but was not intoxicated—I had given orders that if he came in he was not to be served—they went out about 10.30 or 10.40—I saw Charles again about 11 o'clock.
Cross-examined. I would not serve Ryan because he does not know how to behave—the prisoner were not the worse for what they had.
WILLIAM GILL (Policeman R 221). I was in High Street, Deptford, just before 11 o'clock on Boxing night—I saw Ryan leave the Duke of Cambridge, where he had been served—I he spoke to me, and I advised him to go home—he said he would do so, but he went over to the Lion and Wheatsheaf—I waited for some time expecting to be called to eject him—as all was quiet, I went over to the bar and saw him and the other priserners there, and a man named Bennett—I then went as far as the Broadway, Deptford, and was returning from the Broadway to the Lion and Wheatsheag when I met a man who made a communication to me—I went down the road and saw the prosecutor talking to Ryan—he had his hat
battered and his coat torn, and the chain of a watch hanging over it attached to his waistcoat—Ryan went into the urinal of the Duke of Cambridge—I went after him and said I should take him into custody for assaulting and robbing a man of his watch—he said "I don't know anything about it"—I advised him to go quitely with me to the station, which he did—I afterwards went to Hale Street and saw Charles in bed, and told him I should take him into custody for being concerned with others, and he said "I don't know anything about it."
Cross-examined. There was another man with Ryan—he was not in their company at the Lion and Wheatsheaf—he stopped till I took Ryan—Ryan had been drinking, but was none the worse for drink—the prosecutor made no charge against the other man.
HENRY GOODWIN (Police Sergeant R). On the morning of the 27th December I went with Sergeant Francis in search of Samuel Rutherford, and took him in a lodging-house in Deptford, dressing—I told him wanted him for being concerned with to others in custody for stealing a watch from the prosecutor—he said "I have just heard something about it, and was going to ask the prosecutor what it meant?"—"Old Am. Hone" I think he called him—I said I should take him to the station, and he said, "I was at home by 11:30; you know me; of course I should be a fool to do a thing like that to a person who knows me."
RYAN and SAMUEL RUTHERFORD— GUILTY .**
CHARLES RUTHERFORD— NOT GUILTY .
SAMUEL also PLEADED GUILTY to having been convicted of felony on the 19th October, 1870.— Two Years' Imprisonment.
RYAN— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
Before Robert Malcom Kerr, Esq.
MR. FULTON Prosecuted; MR. CECIL CHAPMAN Defended.
FRANCIS PATRICK MURPHY . I am a private in the Royal Artillery—on the 27th of December last I went in the barrack room No. 65 at Woolwich—the prisoner, myself, Baldwin, and Dewdney were there—the prisoner was sitting by the fire—words occurred—the prisoner took a sword from a shelf, drew it from its scabbard, and stabbed me twice, once in the right breast, and once in the left—Dewdney left the room previous to the sword being drawn, but came back—I was conveyed to the hospital—I did not draw my sword.
Cross-examined. I have heard the prisoner has been in America—soldiers usually chaff one another, and they may have chaffed him—I was not in the habit of chaffing him—we passed the joke between ourselves—I was in drink.
WILLIAM DEWDNEY . I am a gunner in the Royal Artillery—I was in the barrack room at Woolwich on the 27th of December, about 6.30—I saw Maher, Murphy, and a civilian named Baldwin there—I left the room but returned—when I returned gunner Maher had a sword in his hand trying to stab Murphy—I tried to take the sword from Maher—before I could do so he stabbed Murphy, and then stabbed me in the neck in the breast, and under the left arm—Murphy left the room, and I asked the prisoner to put the sword nor see any one use one except Maher.
Cross-examined. I had been drinking, but I was sober, so was the last witness—I did not see any table moved.
GEORGE MOORE . I am a gunner in the Royal Artillery—on the 27th of December last, about 6.30, I was passing the barrack-room; I heard a noise, and opened the door—I saw the prisoner with a sword—he stabbed Murphy once, and, making a second attempt—I went for assistance—when I came back the disturbance was at an end.
Cross-examined. I saw a table on one of the beds—Baldwin was there drunk, and looking like a man waking out of a horrified sleep—I could not hear any distinct words—the door was shut, but not locked.
ROBERT SMITH . I am a surgeon at Woolwich—on the 27th December I was called in to see Murphy and Dewdney, about 7.15 p.m.—Murphy had an incised wound in the neck; and another incised wound in the side of the month on the left cheek—they were serious at one time, but not the next morning—there were no after symptoms of crysipelas, or anything of that kind—Dewdney had three wounds, one in the neck at the top of the breast bone, another in the chest, and a third on the shoulders—Murphy I detained in the hospital, Dewdney I sent out the same night about an hour afterwads—his wounds were not dangerous.
Cross-examined. Wounds to the same extent would not have been made simply in defence—Dewdney's wound was three inchesdeep, but went upwards under the skin against the chest wall; it could not penetrate—I noticed the condition of the men—Murphy was considerably the worse for drink—Dewdney was less so, but more excited.
JOHN BALDRY (Police R 27). I was on reserve duty at the Woolwich Police-station on 27th December, about 10 p.m.—the prisoner was brought in, and charged with feleniously cutting and wounding Murphy and Dewdney—the prisoner said "What I did, I said in self defence."
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. POLLAND Prosecuted; MR. SPRATT Defended.
JAMES CARPENTER . I am a painter by trade, and live at 42, Baleman Street, Deptford—I have known Stephens for about four years—I was formerly manager of a running ground at St. Helena Gardens, Rotherhithe—during that time Stephens was in the habit of coming there to run—he told me that he was something in the chemist's line—after that I lost sight of him for about three years till last November, when I met him at St. Helena Gardens again, and I undertook to train him for a race that was to take place in january—no particular arrangement was made between us as to how I was to be paid—he did not come to me; I went to him at his house in Theobald Street, New Kent Road—he first took me there to show me where I should call for him every morning; that was in November—I was to call for him, and take him, and take him to the Lambeth Baths to train him—he said 'I shall soon move from here, as there are so many D's, meaning detectives,
coming to live about here"—I thought that a strange remark to make—I called for him every morning—on Monday, 1st December, as we were walking up the road from his house we met Harbord—that was not the first time I had seen him; I had seen him once before at St. Helena Gardens in November, where I was four years ago—I knew he was a companion of Stephens—there was another man speking with Harbord when we met him, and that man went on one side, and took Stephens on one side, and had some conversation—he then came back to Harbord, and the other man went away—Stephens said to Harbord "What do you think, he offered me 16s. a dozen for them bottles that are worth 96s. a dozen"—Harbord made some reply which I did not catch—we walked up the road, Harbord and the third man left us at the Elephant and Castle, and Stephens and I went on to the Lambeth Baths to train—while we were there Harbord came, and had a little conversation with Stephens—I did not hear what it was—we then all three left—in consequence of what had occurred on this day I went to try and see Inspector Phillips at Greenwich, him—on Tuesday morning I called at Stephens's house as usual; he showed me a bottle of pepsine, and said "This is one of the bottles that that man offered me the 16s. a dozzen for"—I looked at the bottle, and saw the name of Morson on it—he also showed me a bottle of castor-oil or something to that effect—we then went out together, and called for Harbord at his house in some buildings called the Palatinate in New Kent Road—I stayed at the corner, Stephens went to the house, and Harbord came with him, and joined me, and we went on to the Baths, but Harbord left us again at the Elephant and Castle—after I had done training Stephens that day I parted from him, and went to Morson's, the chemist's, in Southtmpton Row—I saw Mr. Morson, and made a communication to him, and they telegraphed for Mr. Phillips—on the following day, Wednesday, the 3rd, I again called at Stephen's house—Harbord was there, and we three left together—when we got outside, Harbour left us—as we were walking along, Stephens said "I cannot go to the baths to-day, as I have got to go and meet a pal of mine in Holbourn, of the name of mott, to get some morphin, he works at Morson's," and in further conversation he said "We have got another pal, a night-watchman at Messers. May and Baker's. Battersea, where we can get red pricipitate and white calomel"—I said "How do you manage to get get it?"—he said "We get it when the police are changing between nine and 10 o'clock" that was all he said then—I left him—Iwent to his house in the evening, and he gave me a bottle of pepsine as a sample, and asked me if I would try and sell some—I took it away and showed it to Inspector Philips; that was not far off—next day, Thursday, I called on him again—I gave him back the bottle, and told him I thought I could sell some—he said "I shall be frightened to have anything to do with it, as the D's turned my pal Mott over yesterday, and, as luck would have it, he had nothing on him, as there is not a night that he comes out but, as a rule, he brings something, little or much; now we will let it lay by for three or four months, till it gets blown over, as we have cleared everything out with respect to that"—we then left the house; Stephens put a bottle of pepsine in his pocket, and a bottle of pepsine lozenges—as we were going along, he said he was quite at a standstill for money, and could not go on with his training—he said "You can have any amount of red precipitate and white calomel, as we can get any amount
of it; we have already filled up our customers"—we walked up to Harbord's house, and he left me at the corner a few doors away—he returned to me, and brought me a sample of red precipitate and white calomel; there was a very small amount, a little sample, in separate papers—he gave them to me, and said "These are samples"—Harbord had come out, and was standing by—we then all three walked down the road together—something was said about the price, and how much they could get by to-morrow morning, Friday; this was Thursday evening—Stephens said they would go to Batter-Bea that evening, to Messrs. May and Baker's—Harbord said "I don't know how much we shall be able to get you to-morrow morning, as I do not know whether Tom will let us have two or three runs or not"—we walked up and down the road—Stephens could not go to the baths that day, because they Were shut up, and an arrangement was made about the morning—Harbord said he did not think they would require a cart, as they would manage to get just as much as they could nicely carry, but by Monday they could manage to get between two and three cwt.—I said "Well, it was arranged that 1 should meet them on Friday morning at the Waterloo station at 8.30 with what they could bring—they said they left the stuff at a place at Battersea, but they did not say where; I can't exactly say which said that, it was in conversation—they said they were to give a shilling a pound for it—on this occasion Harbord told me about the Greenwich affair—he said "We were charged at Greenwich last summer with having the same sort of stuff in our possession one night as we were going home, we were remanded for a week, but I talked to the Magistrate like a lawyer, and we regularly gulled the police by telling them that it was white lead; old Francis the detective got into the witness-box, and asked the Magistrate to keep it for another fortnight, and on the very day the fortnight was up we went and fetched it away; we sold it"—I told Inspector Phillips of the appointment I had made for the Friday morning—I went that morning about 8.30, just outside the station—Inspector Phillips was there and a police-sergeant—Stephens came out from the station alone—I said "Where is Harbord?"—he said "He is not quite so quick as I am"—the police then came forward and took Stephens into custody—he was carrying a black bag—I did not see Harbord come up; I went away at once as soon as the police took Stephens.
Cross-examined. The St. Helena Gardens have been closed on several occasions since I have been away from them—I don't know the reason of their being closed; it was after I left—Harbord told me that he had worked for May and Baker—they told me the watchman's name was Tom King—I gave information to Inspector Phillips because I thought there was something wrong—when Stephens said "I shall soon move from here because of the D.'s" I thought it was a curious remark for a respectable young man to make; that sort of opened my eyes—it may have been a fortnight after Wards that I gave information to the police; it was in November—I did not do so before because I did not know as a fact that there was anything wrong—I had my suspicion—I went to Morson's on 2nd December; thats was when I really knew that there must be something wrong—I did not know know before that that they had these bottles—I knew they were speaking concerning bottles on the Monday, but I did not know for a fact that they bad any till 2nd December—that was when I went to inspector Phillips, and he was not in; I did not go to some other person—I thought I would wait for him; I thought I should like to have his information first—I
knew there was an Inspector Phillips at Greenwich—I had never spoken to him before to my knowledge—I won't swear I had not; I may have spoken to him perhaps once before: nut to my recollection—I knew nothing about the prisoners having been charged last June with having chemicals in their possession till the Wednesday or Thursday, when they told me with their own lips about it; that I swear—Stephens did not tell me About it before I went to Inspector Phillips—I don't beleive he told me before Wednesday; I won't swear it—I was nut expecting to get something out of this from the police; I swear I did nut expect one farthing if the prisoners are convicted I do not expect to get anything—I did it because I thought it my duty; because I did not think it safe to be in their company—I did not know that Stephens worked at a jam manufacturer's—I will swear that Harbord said they were going to May feud Baker's at Battersea to get the stuff—I said so at the police-court, and also that he said they had gulled the police—I may not have said "gulled," but I believe I said a word amounting to that—I mentioned at the police-court about Tom the night watchman—I told the police of it, and left them to act—I was to have given 1s. a pound for each article, calomel and red precipitate, whichever they could get—I did not taste the pepsin, I only saw the label on the bottle.
Re-examined. I communicated to the police all the statements made to me by the prisoners from time to time as they occurred—Inspector Phillips is the inspector of the Greenwich district—I live 200 or 300 yards from there, and when I went home I went to him—I knew him by name before.
By the JURY, I never saw Harbord have possession of the articles.
HENRY PHILLIPS (Police Inspector R). I know the witness Carpenter—he made a communication to me on Tuesday, 2nd December, and I gave him certain directions—I met him in the street at Greenwich; I knew him before—he did not keep the St. Helena Gardens; he was engaged them as a running man, I believe—I did not know him there; I only knew him at Greenwich—afterwards from time to time he communicated with me, and I continued to give him directions—on Friday morning 5th Dec, about £.30, in consequence of an arrangement I had made with him, I went to Waterloo Station with Sergeant Wheatley—I saw Carpenter there—I saw Stephens come out of the station and come into the Waterloo Road, followed by Harbord—Stephens was carrying this black bag—Carpenter spoke to him, and then I came up and Carpenter went away—I touched Stephens on the shoulder and asked him what he had in his bag—he said "White lead"—I said "Bring it over here and let me see it"—he put it on the pavement, and at that time Wheatley came up with Harbord, who had baaket in his possession—I said to both of them "You know me"—Harbord said "Yes"—I said "Whew did you get this stuff from 1"—he said "I took it from a man for a debt"—I said "That tale won't do this time; it is the same you made use of last time when I saw you"—I then took them into custody, and took them to Kennington Road Police-station—I took a sample of the powder to a chemist's in the Westminster Bridge Road, and found it to be white calomel—it has been shown to Mr. Baker and to Mr. Tyrer—there is about the same quantity in each parcel—this is the bag Stephens was carrying; the stuff was in a white bag inside the black one—at the police-court Harbord said to me "Did not I tell you
when you stopped me that this was the same stuff that I had at Greenwich"—I said "No," but he did make that statement at the police-station—I saw them in custody in June last, when they were charged with having 56lb. of white powder called white-lead unlawfully in their possession—I saw the stuff, but did not examine it—the case did not come particularly under my notice—they were remanded for a fortnight and afterwards discharged, and the stuff given up to them by order of the Magistrate.
Cross-examined. Carpenter first came to me on 2nd December—I suppose I had known him about 18 months—I have had conversation with him before, but not on this subject—the bags are similar to those they had in June last.
By the JURY. We did not know that it was white calomel that they had in their possession; then it was spoken of as white lead, and was entered in the books as white lead—I did not keep a sample of it—I don't know whether anybody did.
GEORGE WHEATLEY (Police Sergeant E). On Friday morning. 5th December, about 8.30, I went with Inspector Phillip's to the Waterloo Station—I there saw Carpenter and Stephens, and afterwards Harbord coming in a direction from Waterloo Station carrying this basket—I stopped him, and told him I was a police-officer, and said "What have you got in that basket?"—he said "White lead"—I said "Where did you get it from?"—he said "I had it from a man for debt"—I said "Who and what is the man?"—he said "I don't know"—I said "What are you going to do with it?"—he said "Sell it if I can"—it was in bags, one white and one coloured—there was about 50lb. in weight—they were taken to the station—Harbord there gave his address 34, Mountain Street, New Kent Road—I went there in company with Inspector Phillips and searched—I found a paper bag containing about 8lb. or 10lb. of red precipitate, and empty bottle marked "Sulphate of Quinine," a small bottle containing quinine, another small bottle containing a small quantity of red precipitate, an another little empty chemist's bottle—after that I went to 39, Theobald Toad, Old Kent Road, the address given by Stephens—I there found five bottles; two of them had the name on them of Morson and Son, Southampton Row, one empty and one full; one contained pepsine—a hamper was also found there.
WILLIAM GARROD BAKER . I am a member of the firm of May and Baker—I have several partners—we have a manufactory at Garden Walk, Battersea, by the side of the river—persons can get from the river on to the premises—there are two entrances from the roadway as well—Harbord was in our service for about 10 years—he worked at he factory—he left about three years ago—I hardly seen him since—I have heard of him—I have been shown this white stuff in this basket and bag, and have examined it—there are two bags in each—it is white calomel—we manufacture such—it unfinished; that is, it is not in the state in which it goes to the trade—it exactly like the stuff we were manufacturing since November last—since 1st November last we have missed about 103lb. of it—the wholesale value is 3s. to 3s. 2d. a pound—that is the present value; it varies according to the price of quick-silver.
Cross-examined. I am sure we are short about 100lb. since 1st November
—I can identify it from its peculiarity; it is a plain white powder, but it is unlike other manufacturers'; no other manufacturer makes a powder similar to that—we should not have kept Harbord for 10 years if we had thought he was dishonest; I cannot speak very highly of him—jour premises were always fastened up at night—sometimes workmen are there nearly the whole of the night; we always have a watchman on the premises, Tom King—I believe him to be an honest man—I am not quite sure whether there were men at work on the nights of the 4th and 5th December—the watchman was on duty there, and I believe others were at work as well, but I do not take any account of the men's time, and I cannot speak positively—this calomel was finished except the sifting—I did not notice that we were short of calomel until a communication was made to me—I know a firm of Davey and Yates, of Bermondsey; they may turn out calomel in the same way, but their article and ours are distinctly different in appearance.
Re-examined. I have been in the trade nearly 40 years—I have been in the habit of manufacturing calomel ever since 1839—each manufacturer has his own mode of manufacture—I have carefully examined this, and have not the slightest doubt it is our manufacture—we discharged Harbord three years ago, he had taken to drink—we never sell calomel in this state.
THOMAS TYRER . I am a member of the firm of May an Baker—when the communication was made to us by the police on 5th December I looked at our stock of Calomel to see how much was missing, and I missed about 100lb. in weight; the value of it roughly would be about 15l.—I have looked at this stuff, and in my judgment it is our manufacture, unfinished—you can get from Battersea, where our premises are, to the Waterloo Station by railway.
Cross-examined. I discovered our deficiency in stock either on the 8th, 9th, or 10th December, I can't quite say which.
Re-examined. This lot was being made in November—the 100lb. I missed must have been taken after about the 8th or 9th November.
THOMAS KING . I am night watchman in the service of May and Baker—I have been in their service about three years—I knew Harbord when he was in their service—I go on duty at a quarter to 6—it is my duty to walk about the premises all night and look after the property; I go about different parts of the premises—I am there till half-past six in the morning—sometimes I am by the river, and sometimes by the building—since I have been there I was not at all cognizant of any property of my employers being carried away during the night; I have not been a party to anything of the kind—the premises are open to the river.
Cross-examined. I have never given any calomel away—I believe it is kept in different parts; I am not concerned in the manufacture—I believe the calomel is kept under lock and key.
ROBERT TAUBMAN . I am manager to Morson and Sons—I have been shown the things produced by the police from Stephen's place—this bottle has out label on it of pepsine lozenges—there are two empty pepsine lozenge bottles and one full bottle of pepsine.
Cross-examined. I do not know either of the prisoners—I cannot swear that these bottles have not been sold in the ordinary way—one of the empty bottles is finished off in a manner in which we do them for export only; that would not be likely to be purchased or sold in the retail trade;
we only send them out in that form when specially ordered by our customers for exportation—of course we cannot say whether he exports them or not—this hamper has our private mark on the bottom.
By the JURY. These bottles are not necessarily packed into cases for exportation by us; they are kept loose in our premises until ordered; unless we have orders to pack them we sent them out loosely to out customers.
THOMAS FRANCIS (Police Sergeant R). On 13th June last I took the two prisoners into custody in Kender Street, New Cross—they were each carrying a flag basket—the one Harbord was carrying contained two small bags, and the one Stephens was carrying contained one bag—I did not put the stuff on any scales, but the total weight I should think was about half a cwt.—the prisoners said it was white lead; I could not tell but what it was—they said they got it from a watchman at Battersea—I did not have it analysed—I have examined this stuff now in Court, it was similar stuff to that, but it was not in the same sort of bags.
Cross-examined. One of the baskets they had resembled this; there are four now—the white bags were not similar to these; the couloured ones are similar; the white ones are not—Harbord gave his correct address—the explanation that he gave at the police-court in June was that he took the stuff of some man for a debt—I was called for the prosecution in this case by Mr. Wontner—I was telegraphed for by Inspector Phillips at 4 o'clock one afternoon.
Re-examined. Harbord did not say who the man was from whom be got the stuff—at that time the prisoners were both living at one address—the weight of the stuff was spoken of as 56lb. and entered as such on the charge sheet.
Witness for the Defence.
WILLIAM HARBORD . I live at 53, Hope Street, Battersea—I am an engine driver at a quinine factory—I am the brother of the prisoner Harbord—I know this bag and basket; they were brought to my house at the latter end of July or the beginning of August, and they were there till the morning of 5th December, that was the morning the prisoners were arrested—my brother came down on a visit to me perhaps once a fortnight or once a mouth—the bags never left my house; they remained there till the morning of 5th December, when my brother and the other prisoner came down and took them away, the bag and the basket.
Cross-examined. The quinine factory I work at is Mr. Whiffin's, London Road, Bermondsey—the place where I live is from 8 to 10 minutes' walk from Messrs. May and Baker's—I have lived at that address 18 years—I know Stephens; he has been to my house several times with Harbord—I do not know where he was living in July last—I believe my brother was living at New Cross—the bag and basket were left at my place in July last—the two prisoners brought them in the evening—they said they had been out with them to try to sell them, and had not sold them—I don't know why they brought them to my place—they were in the same state as they are now; they were heavy—they said they had been in trouble with them before, and I said "It is getting rather late to-night; don't take them home, leave them"—they came to my place with them, and spent the evening with me—my brother and I very often had an evening together; they told me it was stuff they had had from the Greewich Police-station that
they had been charge with—they did not bring it to me the same day, a fortnight after—I have got a lodger—I never had the curiosity to look and see what the stuff was.
Re-examined. If I had looked I should not have known what it was—my brother said they had been out to try to sell it, and could not—we spent the evening together, and I said "Well, as you have been in trouble before about it, don't take it home, you can leave it here."
CHARLES THOMAS . I lodge with the last witness at 53, Hope Street, Battersea—I went to live there somewhere about 10th August last—on or about 11th or 12th August I saw a bag and basket on the landing similar to these, exactly the same—I saw them there morning and night as I passed in and out; they were there till about 5th or 6th December—they were on the landing on my right hand, as I passed in at the door on my left.
Cross-examined. I married Harbord's niece—I have been lodging with William Harbord since 10th August—I don't know Stephens—I have not seen him there—I did not see this stuff brought in; I saw it on the landing on the top floor; there is only one story, but two flights of stairs—William Harbord occupies the back room—I first saw these on 11th or 12th August—I leave home at 5.10 from Clapham Junction, the workman's train—I generally get home about 6.15, and go to bed between 9 and 10 o'clock—I was not examined before the Magistrate—I have not seen any other things at this place; only these two—I had not the slightest idea of what was in the bags, or how they came there, or who brought them—I last saw them about the 4th or 5th, or 4th December, I think; I can't exactly remember—the 4th December I can be certain of.
Re-examined. I did not hear anything from William Harbord after the arrest of his brother; he told me that his was arrested.
WILLIAM GARROD BAKER (Re-examined). We had not missed any property before—we manufacture tons of this stuff—small quantities would not be easily missed unless we checked the books; a hundred weight is a small quantity to us—any one conversant with the premises would know where to get at it—some part of it is locked up—we do not keep it under lock and key when it is in the course of manufacture.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude each.
MR. RAVEN Prosecuted; MR. LILLEY Defended.
JOSEPH GEORGE CLARKE . I am Court keeper and usher at Lambeth County Court—I produce this certificate which I have compared with the original at the church of St. Mary, Lambeth—I have endorsed it 15th December, 1879 (This certified the marriage of Mary Ann Young with Thomas Rayner on the 28th October, 1855)—I also produce this certificate which I have compared with the books at the Registry Office, Camberwell (This certified the defendant's marriage with Thomas Kingsbury in 1878).
HARRIET ROWLAND . I live at 2, Belgrave Terrace, Peckham Park Road, and am the wife of Thomas Rowland—I am the sister of Jane Davis, one of the witness to the first marriage—I have known the defendant since she was about eight years old—I have known her living with Mr. Rayner for sixteen or seventeen years—I think they ceased to live together about 1875
or 1876—she made no statement to me about it then except that they lived unhappily together, and she said she thought she should separate from him—they often used to quarrel and part—I think she became acquainted with Kingsbury in April, 1878, and was married to him about a fortnight or three weeks after—she spoke to me in a joking way one morning when we were our getting the things—she sighed and seemed as if she were in trouble, and I said "Never mind, it will soon be over, don't think anything at all about it; are you certain, Mary Ann, that Thomas is dead?"—she said "Yes, I am"—I said "Are you sure you have got a certificate of his death?"—she said "Leave that to me, that is all right," and nothing more was said about it—I have since seen Rayner at the police-court—a few weeks after she was married to Kingsbury I called on her and told her that I saw Rayner on Saturday night—she said "Here is an upset."
Cross-examined. I think the defendant and Rayner lived once in Pea-body's Buildings, and also in Charlotte Street, Blackfriars Road—they visited me—I did not say at the police-court, "About four years ago she told me that she and Rayner were not living together"—that is a mistake in hearing—I do not know that there was an agreement for separation in 1867, or that the last time they separated was May, 1873—when we met our conversation was always about Rayner—about four years ago she told me that they were not living together—it is only just a slight idea I can give as to the time.
Re-examined. Up to that time from the defendan's own statement they lived together on and off.
JOHN THOMAS KINGSBURY . I live at 5, Holly Road, Lordship Lane, East Dulwich—I was present at the Registry Office on the 2nd May, 1878, when the defendant was married to my father, Thomas Kingsbury, and am one of the attesting witnesses.
Cross-examined. About the time the defendant was given into custody I was not summoned for an assault on the parties.
Re-examined. I was afterwards, but it was dismissed.
WILLIAM YOUNG . I am the defendant's brother—about two or three years ago I met the defendant on Waterloo Bridge, and she asked me if I had heard of the death of Rayner—I said "Yes"—I asked her if she had sent down to ascertain by letter—she said "No"—I asked her if she were going down, and she said "No."
Cross-examined. I might be a little more than two or three years ago.
CHARLES ROBERTS . I am secretary to the Journeyman Hatters Benefit Society, 65, Commercial Road, of which Thomas Rayner is a member—the defendant came to me about three years ago and asked me if I had heard of the death of her husband—I said I had heard of it, but not officially—she said "Shall I be entitled to the funeral money?"—I said "The rules of the society require a doctor's or registrar's certificate of death to be produced, and until that is produced the application cannot be entertained"—after a little further conversation she left, and we had no further application for the money.
THOMAS KINGSBURY . I live at Camberwell, and I am a chimney-sweep—I became acquainted with the defendant in the middle of April, 1878—she came to visit my daughter, and then I met her at Gospel Hall, New Cut, and we kept company for a fortnight, and were then married at the Registry Office, Camberwell, on the 2nd May—she represented herself to be a widow,
and gave me a letter and a memorial card—this 10 the letter (Read: "Madam, I take the liberty of informing you that Mr. Thomas Rayner, your husband, is dead, and was interred at Wakefield Cemetery. I obtained your address from a letter which was found upon him. Tours sincerely, J. W. E." (The memorial card represented thai Rayner died in October, 1876)—I was satisfied with that letter—about a month after the marriage I became aware of Rayner being alive, and I said to the defendant, "You had better leave me, Mary, and go and get a place as soon as possible," because I didn't want to have my character disgraced—she said she would as soon as possible—I have since seen Rayner.
Cross-examined. Mrs. Rowland first gave me information—it might be five weeks after the marriage—I continued to live with the defendant till December last, begging her day by day to go away and get a place—I gave her into custody; I could not get rid of her—she broke my windows, and broke my door down, and smashed my place up—I am not aware of a summons being out against my son and myself for detaining her goods—she would say anything—I delivered up her money to her, 140l.—she says I owe her 12l.
GEORGE DUNLEARY (Police Inspector P). I apprehended the prisoner on the 10th December at Tiger Yard, Camber well—I said, "I have come to apprehend you for bigamy; Kingsbury says your former husband is alive"—she said, "Yes, I know he is, and he knew it last Midsummer"—at the police-court I saw a man whom I afterwards knew to be Rayner—the prisoner saw him in the passage of the Court, and said, "There is my first hnsband".
WILLIAM YOUNG (Re-examined). I think it is seven or eight years back when my sister finally separated from Rayner—I heard of a formal separation—there have been several separations—I should say they have not lived together since 1873.
GUILTY .— Three Months' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Commissioner Kerr.
184. GEORGE WESTBURY (49) PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of Ann Edmunds, and stealing a clock, a paper-knife, and other goods, and to a previous conviction at this Court on 19th September, 1870.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. And
MR. A. B. KELLY Prosecuted.
JOHN KEPER . I am a baker, living at 407, Wandsworth Road—on the night of the 24th to 25-th December I went to bed a little after 12 at night—I left the door leading from the kitchen into the yard firmly closed, and the fanlight was covered with two sacks—I came down a little after 8 in the morning—I found the kitchen door wide open—I missed eight bottles of spirits, one of brandy, and one of German wine, and a sack from the front of the fireplace marked "H. Louden"—the yard outside the kitchen door is enclosed, and there is a gate 6 feet high, which is kept closed and barred inside—the sacks from the fanlight were thrown into the yard—I had employed the prisoner for one week about 11 weeks before this occurrence—
this is the sack which I missed (produced)—this bottle is like one which I missed.
CHARLES BERGMAN . I am employed by Mr. Keper, the prosecutor—I went to bed about 11 o'clock—I placed the sacks on the fanlight the previous night—they were not there in the morning—the kitchen door was also open.
THOMAS LEWIS (policeman W 119). On the 25th December I saw the prisoner in Larkhall Lane, Clapham, about half a mile from the prosecutor's house—he was carrying this sack—I asked him what he had in it—he said, "Only bottles of gin"—I asked him where he got them—he said, "From my master, Mr. Vinerdon, a baker in the Wandsworth Road"—I asked him: if ho worked for him—he said, "Yes, on Saturdays and busy days"—I asked him to show me what he had in the sack—he did so, and I found two bottles of brandy and one bottle of gin—he said his master gave them to him to take to his cousin at Stoke Newington—Mr. Vinerdon subsequently came to the station, and said in the prisoner's presence that he knew nothing of the prisoner—the prisoner then said that he had been drinking with a man near London Bridge, and he gave him the sack and contents to carry to Clapham, and that he did not know the man.
Prisoner's Defence. At Christmas I went oyer Westminster Bridge. A man came to me and asked if I wanted money, and he gave me 48 farthings. He then asked me if I wanted to drink. I said I did, and he gave me some brandy. We went over London Bridge, and he gave me this sack to carry. He left me on London Bridge, and as he did not come back in an hour I wandered along Thames Street and I fell asleep. I went along the Wands-worth Road, and the constable came and asked me what I had got, and I told him a man had given me something to drink, and I felt very tired and I lost myself.
GUILTY . He also
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction for felony on 17th December, 1877, at the Sessions House, Westminster, in the name of William Gerloff.—Two Years' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. POLAND Prosecuted.
GEOEFE IRBEN (Police Inspector). On 24th December, about 1 p.m., I was with another constable in the Blackfriars Road—we were in plain clothes, and saw the prisoner and another man—I stopped the prisoner and said, "I want to speak to you"—he faced me and I said, "We are police officers. You answer the description of a man who passed a florin at a coffee-stall the other night. Have you any bad money about you?"—he said, "No, not as I am aware of"—I took hold of his right hand and said, "I shall see what you have got about you"—I put my hand in his outside coat pocket, and took from it a piece of thin brown paper with a florin wrapped in it—I said, "This looks like bad"—he said, "Yes, it is; I picked it up last night"—I said, "Have you any others?"—he said, "No, not that I am aware of"—I unbuttoned his great-coat—the other constable put his hand in his right-hand waistcoat pocket, and took out a piece of paper with three bad florins in it, all wrapped separately in a long slip of newspaper—I said, "These are bad also"—he said nothing—I said, "I shall take you to the statio"—he said, "All right; I picked them all up last night in the road in a tin box.
I knew they were bad, but I did not know what to do with them"—I said, "Have you the tin box?"—he said, "No, I throw it away"—I took him to the station—he said that he did not know where he lived, but it was in a lodging-house—I said, "Do you know what has become of the other man?"—he said, "No; I was only just speaking about the weather; I just overlook him as you came up."
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not use you very roughly; you did not offer to get away, you stood still and let me search you—you gave me a reference at Brentford, but I did not go there; you never referred me to Croydon—I inquired of your reference at Hounslow, and it was not satisfactory at all—I found that you had been charged with receiving, and were remanded and discharged; that you had been fined for assault, and that you had passed an Hanoverian medal in a public-house.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . These florins are all counterfeit, and these two in paper are from the same mould as the one taken from the prisoner's coat pocket—the coins are blackened over after they are finished, and then packed up in paper to keep them from rubbing, and before they utter them they rub the blackness off.
Prisoner's Defence. I was going over Waterloo Bridge, and picked up a tin box containing these coins wrapped in paper. I thought they were good, but afterwards found that they were bad, and did not know what to do with them.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. POLAND Prosecuted.
HENRY TAYLOR . My father keeps the Earl of Chatham, Chatham Street, Walworth—on 1st January, between 10.30 and 11 p.m., the prisoners came in together—Shea asked for a pint of four ale, and gave me a half-crown—I put it aside on the counter and gave him the change, and then looked at it, and tried it with my teeth, which marked it—this is it (produced); it is bad—"I said to them "Have you any more like these?" giving it back to Shea, who said "Are you sure this is the same one I gave you 1"—I said "I am positive of it"—he then gave me back my change without my asking him—I took it, and said "How about the ale?"—Wilson said "I will pay for that," and did so, saying "If it were my case I would take it back to the parties who gave it to me, and chuck it in their eye."—Shea pretended to bite it, and put it in his pocket, but there is no other bite on it but the one I made—they left together, Shea taking the half-crown with him—I spoke to Green, who was in my house, who followed them out—I heard shortly afterwards that they were both in custody—I saw them that night at the Carter Street station, and am positive they are the two men.
Cross-examined by Wilson. I took the half-crown into the parlour—I am positive this is it.
Cross-examined by Shea. I did not hand it round to the company in the bar, you did that.
Re-examined. When I took it into the bar I did not lose sight of it; I
took it there to test it with my teeth—I nerer lost sight of it—I did not part with it—I am positive it is the same.
SARAH HOLLAND . I keep a general shop, at 1, Henshaw Street, Look's Fields, about five minutes' walk from the Earl of Chatham—on 1st January about 10.45 Shea came in alone for a pennyworth of tobacco, and gave me a florin—I put it in a drawer, and gave him three sixpences and five pence change—there was no other florin there—a policeman came in at 11.30, and in consequence of what he said I went to the drawer and took out the florin—it was still the only florin there—I marked it, and gave it to the policeman—I saw Shea at the police-station the same night, and am sure be is the man who passed the florin—I did not see Wilson.
Cross-examined by Shea. I have not made a mistake in you.
FREDERICK GREEN . I am a horsekeeper at 110, Rodney Street, Walworth—on the night of January 1st 2 was in the Earl of Chatham, and saw the prisoners there—when they left, Mr. Taylor spoke to me, and I went after them—Shea left Wilson and went into Mrs. Holland's, while Wilson stood about 50 yards away—Shea came out, went to Wilson, and said "It's all right, come on," and they walked away together towards the Elephant and Castle—I pointed them out to a constable, who took Shea; Wilson got away, but another constable took him, and he said in Carter Street that he would make it too hot for me.
Cross-examined by Wilson. You meant violence by that, not charging me with perjury—I followed you more than half a mile it may be.
Cross-examined by Shea. I am sure you are the man who went into the tobacconist's shop—the barman did net give the half-crown into my hand to look at it—I had it in my hand in the station, but not in the public-house.
Re-examined. I am certain the prisoners are the two men I followed.
WILLIAM RUGG (Policeman). I was on duty in uniform on the night of January 1st by the Elephant and Castle, and saw the prisoners—Creasy was there before me—I took hold of Shea, and on the way to the station saw him trying to pass something to somebody behind him—I said "What have you got here?"—I heard something drop, which sounded like money, and saw something white on the footway, which Wallington picked up, and I saw him bring a half-crown to the station and give it to Creasy—I found on Shea two sixpences and 10 pence.
Cross-examined by Shea. When I said "What have you got in your hand?" you did not say "A bad half-crown, as I have been told"—you did not ask me to take it, you never spoke about it.
HENRY JAMES WALLINGTON . I am a commercial traveller, and live at 71, Southampton Street, Old Kent Road—on 1st January I was in Walworth Road, and followed the prisoners—I saw Shea put up his arm and put it down again, and a coin dropped, but I cannot say from which hand—it seemed to drop from the sleeve of his coat—I found it on the pavement, picked it up, and gave it to Creasy.
Cross-examined by Shea. It did not drop through your trousers leg, but from your sleeve.
JOHN CREASY (Poiceman P 195). Green pointed out the prisoners to roe—I took hold of an arm of each, and said "I shall take you in custody for passing bad money"—Wilson said "Take me in custody!" and lifted up his fist as if to strike me—he said "I am a gentleman; I passed no bad
money"—they both tried to get away, but Rugg came up, and I handed Shea to him, and kept hold of Wilson—I searched the prisoners at the station, and found one sixpence, seven pence, a piece of lint, and some tobacco—Wilson said to Green at the station "I will give it to him hot"—I am sure he said "him," and not "you"—Green had pointed them out to me—on the road to the station I heard something drop when I was walking in front of Shea—I turned round, and at the station Wallington gave me this half-crown—I afterwards showed it to Taylor, who identified it—the inspector said to Wilson at the station "Where do you live?"—he said "I have no home"—Shea said that he had no home, he lived wherever he could get fourpence to pay for his lodging—Mrs. Holland gave me this florin—one of the prisoners said that he came from Leicester.
Cross-examined by Wilson. You showed you arm to the Magistrate, but I did not see that it was bad—I have kept the lint ever since—I told the Magistrate that you used it for an illegal purpose—there was some acid on it, as if it had been used to rub the coin up—if it had been used for a plaster, I think you would have put the salve in the centre.
Wilson. I had my dinner, and wiped my knife on it.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . The half-crown and florin are bad—I cannot say whether this lint has been used for wiping a knife—this black is used to blacken coins, and they rub it off before they utter them, but that is generally done on the coat.
The Prisoners' Statements before the Magistrate. Wilson says: "That lint I had for my bad arm. I had eaten my dinner, and wiped my. knife on it I know nothing about the charge." Shea says: "The two-shilling piece I know nothing about I own to having the half-crown. I did not know it was bad."
Wilson's Defence. I met Shea, who I knew; and as we went along he said that he had earned 1s. 6d. for taking a gentleman's boxes from a cab into a house. He took me into a public-house, and tendered a half-crown, and the man said it was bad. I said, "If it was my case, I would take it back and throw it in their eye." We went out, and a policeman seized me by the collar, and used me a rough way. When I said I would make it hot for him, I meant I would give him up for perjury if he did. not speak the truth; and I mentioned perjury before the Magistrate. I am a hard-working man I travelled to Leicester and back looking for work, and the blisters are on my feet now.
Shea's Defence. A gentleman paid me eighteenpence for carrying some luggage. I gave him one shilling and he gave me the half-crown. I met Wilson, and we went into a public-house. They said the coin was bad, 'and I gave the change back. I offered to go and find the gentleman in the morning. I did not know the florin was bad.
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment each.
MESSRS. POLAND and LLOYD Prosecuted.
THOMAS HOWES . I am a labourer, of 4, Chatham Road, Walworth—about five years ago I was office boy to Mr. Hartz, a builder in the Dover Road; the prisoner was in his employ, and I left two or three weeks before him—I met him again 1st December, at the Elephant and Castle, and we
went to 93, Trafalgar Street—he asked me to call on him on the following Sunday—I said I would if I could, but I met him accidentally on the Friday, at the Elephant and Castle, about 4.30—we had some conversation, and when a friend who was with me had left us the prisoner pulled out a shilling—he did not say that it was bad, he said "This would easily pass on top of a tram, or at a coffee-stall early in the morning"—he afterwards said in New Kent Road "I can pass them like hell; I have passed about 20 in one day, but I have had an accident, and broke the b——mould"—I made no answer—he said "Will you come down on Saturday night about 5 o'clock in the evening; it will be a busy time, and if you will carry the stuff I will give you 3d. in the 1s."—he was to pass it, and carry only a shilling at the time—he said "If I am caught you are to run away; they can't hurt me for carrying one"—I said I would try and come if I could next night, but I told my mother, and she went to the police-Sergeant Reed came to me on the Saturday, about 12 o'clock, and I went with him to Richmond Street about 5 p.m., and in consequence of what was said to me I went to fetch the prisoner at 93, Trafalgar Street—he was in the back kitchen, and said "I have had bad luck and can get no silver, and I will not come out"—I said "Come along, let us come out;" he pulled out about two shillings, and said "I cannot make them very well; this one is a good one, you take it"—that was a sixpence—I said "No, keep it, the children might see it"—he then took four moulds out of the oven, took them out of the back door, and came in again in about three minutes—I believe these are the same moulds (produced) (when I knew him before he used to make leaden rings with forget-me-nots on them)—we went out together, and Reed and Puttick took him in custody at a concerted signal which I gave to show that he had got the money on him; a half-crown mould was broken.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. This was about six weeks ago; you said you had no work—I went home with you to see your wife and children, and had something to eat and drink—you did not say "I want you to take this parcel home to-night" nor did I say that the old woman will kick up a row—I should like to punch your head—I did not give you a decided answer about coming round to you.
WILLIAM PUTTICK (Detective P). On Saturday evening, 6th December, I was with Reed about 5.15, and saw the prisoner come out of 93, Trafalgar Street—I followed him into the Walworth Road, and saw Howes with him—we both stopped him—I said "We are police officers, and we shall take you on suspicion"—he put both his hands in his trousers pocket, and outside the station door he handed me these two shillings separately, wrapped in brown paper, and five sixpences loose, saying "That is all I have got"—I searched him in the station, and found two shillings in hit trousers pocket separately wrapped up, and a piece of paper with some lamp-black on it and a long knife—I asked how he got the counterfeit coin—he said "Some strange man gave it me at the Elephant and Castle last night"—I went the same evening with Sergeant Reed and Inspector Hunt to 93, Trafalgar Street, and saw Hunt find Some stuff in the grate—I took away a portion of the cocoa-nut matting, which has splashes of white metal on it—I did not see the mould found, but I saw Reed find a piece of a broken mould on the hearth.
Cross-examined. I received my instructions from Inspector Hunt.
EDWIN REED (Detective P). I was with Puttick, and saw the prisoner and Howes come out of 93, Trafalgar Street—I have heard Puttich's evidence and agree with it—I was on the other side of the prisoner, who was on the kerb, and he took out a coin and looked at it—I said "What bare you got there?"—he said "Nothing," and put it in his pocket again—I said "Oh, that won't do for me"—that was before he gave the coins to Puttick—I went to the house the same night with Puttick and Hunt, and saw all these articles found, four moulds and a quantity of broken moulds.
Cross-examined. Puttiok took you, and I told Howes that he had better come over to the station—I did not arrest him or search him—I said "You feel in his pockets," because I though you might have put something into his pockets, but he found nothing.
DANIEL HUNT (Police Inspector P). I went with Puttick and Reed to 93, Trafalgar Street—the landlady pointed out the back kitchen and a small room upatairs as occupied by the prisoner and his wife and children—I found nothing upstairs, but in the kitchen I found a small packet, what I believe to be plaster-of-Paris, that is used in coining; also some small pieces of white metal, which appeared to be the chippings or overflow of moulds—there were splashes of white metal on the fender, and also on the cocoa-nut matting in front of the fire—this piece of an old mould defaced was lying near the fire—I found a large quantity of broken moulds in the dust-hole—they were scattered throughout the dust-bin—the fractures were old—they must have been accumulating several weeks by the quantity of dust—here is one bearing the impression of a shilling, and lour others and half-crowns—I also found four moulds in the yard about a foot below the surface of the ground in a piece of dirty rag and quite warm—here are two for shillings and a doable mould for sixpences—next morning I found a considerable quantity of white metal on the front of the prisoner's trousers and a small portion on his boots—he said "I am working at Blackfriars Bridge; a man gave me this money yesterday, 4s. 6d., and I showed them to a lad who called for me to-night, and he must have put the police on to me"—after the charge was read over to him he said "The lad and another man brought them to me yesterday; they were both together" but when he became aware that we had found the moulds he said "Yes, I know they were there; they gave them to me last night at the Elephant and Castle and asked me to take care of them, and I put them in the dust-hole."
Cross-examined. The landlord did not tell me that they were in the dust-hole, nor was I told.
FELICIA ANN SNOW . I am the wife of Charles Snow, of 90, Trafalgar Street, Walworth—the prisoner and his wife occupied the back kitchen and a bedroom upstairs; they have been there about 10 weeks—he went by the name of Jepson—his wife did Dot come until about a fortnight after him—they had two children—I used to go into the kitchen frequently for water, but noticed nothing.
Cross-examined. No one washed there but you—you used to turn the mangle for me there—you worked Clapham Common way and on Blackfriars Bridge—you were always home early of an evening.
they are the worst I have ever met with—one of them has been tried, but the get is so bad that using it would account for the overflow of the metal which was found, and that would also account for the bad impressions—the coins fit the moulds, but I cannot say that they came out of them because they are so badly taken—the other three moulds have not been used—here are three bad shillings, but not out of those moulds—they are so bad I cannot say whether they are all from one mould—this is part of a mould for half-crowns—this plaster-of-Paris is for making the moulds—this is lampblack, which is used for blacking the coins over after they come out from the battery; they are then wrapped up separately; the object of it is to deaden them—this metal is the same kind as the coins are made of, and it may have been in the using of that mould that it went there.
The prisoner produced a written defence stating that Howes had betrayed him to the police out of spite, and had stated that he would have his revenge if he waited 100 years for it.
GUILTY .— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9TH, 1880.