CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
HANSON, MAYOR. FOURTH SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—Two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—a dagger (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad character—the figures after the name in the indictment, denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, January 31st, 1887.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MESSRS. CRISPE and MUIR Prosecuted; MR. BESLEY Defended.
LUDWIG LICHWITZ . I am a zinc manufacturer, carrying on business at Tavistock Crescent, Westbourne Park—on 26th August the prisoner came to my place of business and brought these two letters, and showed them to me. (These purported to come from a Mr. Quick to a Mr. stanskey with reference to a loan of 310l. and had sold them for 380l. and would reference to a loan of 310l. and had come from Mr. Quick, a solicitor, and had bought some cigars for 310l. and had sold them for 380l. and if I could help him to get the money to get the warrants he would give me 10l.—he said the cigars were lying in the office of the East India Docks—I then asked him who had introduced him to me—he said "A friend of mine, Mr. Stanskey, a solicitor," and asked me if I could advance 310l. for half an hour—I said I knew a gentleman who would do it if it was legitimate—I knew the name of Stanskey—I did say that I would lend it—said "Go and see Stanskey, and under his advice I will do it if he says the warrants are good"—he went away and came back again, because Mr. Stanskey was not at home—I then said "I am going to the City, and if it is a legitimate transaction I will do it"—he said "It is quite legitimate; you can have your money back in half an hour"—said "Will you take a cheque?"—he said "No, I must have cash"—I said "If you don't keep me long I will take a cab and go to my bank and draw the money"—I went to the bank with him and drew the money out, and then went in the cab with the prisoner to cheapside—
he got out, and said "I should like to go to my office to see if there are any letters there"—I waited below, and when he came down I said I wanted to go with him to 150, Finsbury Pavement, to Mr. Choppin, the man who had bought the cigars, but he said "No, it will look bad; he will see what profit I have made"—I then said "I will go with you to the solicitor who sent in the dock letters"—that is Mr. Quick—he was not at home, and then he said "We are near Fenchurch Street; we had better go to the docks," and we went to the East India Dock's cigar warehouse in Fenchurch Street—we went up in a lift to the tobacco stores, and saw the cigars in boxes, and a gentleman standing among them—the prisoner said "There is the official who holds the warrants"—I afterwards discovered his name was Macnamara—the prisoner went up to him and spoke to him, and after saying "Good morning," he took some papers out of his pocket, and said "Have you got these warrants in your pocket?" and called out several numbers, and Macnamara said "Yes"—we then went down to an office, where there were 40 or 50 clerks, to pay the money and get the warrants—there was an office where you transact the business, and Macnamara went into the office where the clerks were, and came out with pen and ink, and asked Gurney to endorse the warrants, and he did so—these (produced) are the warrants—I took them in my hand, and passed my money to Macnamara, who like snapped the money out of my hand—I said "You had better look at it"—as I was going away Gurney said "There are two warrants in those seven worth all the money"—I said "It makes no difference as I shall have the money back in half an hour; let us go to the purchaser now who bought these cigars"—each of these warrants purports to be for one case of Havannah cigars—we then went to Mr. Choppin's, but the clerk said he was not in—the prisoner said "He knew I was coming; has he left an open cheque?"—the clerk said "No, he has gone to lunch, and will be back at 3 o'clock"—I and the prisoner went there again at that time, but he was not there—the clerk showed me this telegram, "I am going to Colonial Exhibition; if Gurney calls ask him to call at 1 o'clock to-morrow, sharp"—I went there next day at 1 o'clock without the prisoner, and saw the clerk downstairs, who said he had sent a telegram to me—in consequence of something he said to me, I went to the docks and had two of these cases opened; one was Japanese cigars, all laid loose in the box, and the others old mouldy cigars of 1879—Stanskey went with me there, and I also had the warrants with me—I then went to Choppin's, he was not in, but the clerk handed me another telegram—I left a note there saying that I was going out of town, and also that all the warrants lay in my solicitor's hands if he liked to complete—I went abroad then, and returned in about a fortnight, but found the transaction had not been completed—I then went to Mr. Stanskey, who introduced me to a Mr. Noemark, and I went with him to 9, Union Court, where I had seen the prisoner go upstairs—Macnamara came downstairs, and Noemark said to me "Is that the man?"—I said "Yes, he is the one I gave the money to"—he had had his whiskers cut off, but I recognised him—Noemark then went with me to 62, Leadenhall Street, where I tried to get information about the cigars, but I did not succeed—I asked them to give me the address of Macnamara, but they would not—I went there again next day, but
could not get any information—one of these warrants is for a case of cigars shipped by the Gem, from Yokohama, to be delivered to G. Gurney and it is endorsed "G. Gurney"—the prisoner said they were old Havannah cigars of the best brand—I believed that and also that he had sold them for 380l.—I should not have parted with my money if I had not believed these representations.
Cross-examined. I did not enter into the transaction on account of the value of the cigars, but to earn 10. commission—I did not say before the Magistrate that it was not the statement a. to the value that influenced me; I know nothing of the value of cigars—I had no conversation with the prisoner about cigars—I did not know that the cigars were in bond and that the duty had not been paid; I did not know that I had to pay the duty before the warrant were issue—I Can't say that the prisoner called out the numbers from this paper—Macnamara did not sign the receipt, he ran out with the money, the prisoner was signing the warrants when I gave it him—I have never advanced money on cigars before—I thought this was a legitimate transaction—Mr. Quick is a solicitor, and as I thought a respectable man—he is not here to-day—the prisoner did not tell me that macnamara was carrying on business in the City Road—I have never seen this invoice; I have seen no paper at all—Mr. Stanskey is a friend of mine—I did not say to the prisoner that I should want 20l. he said that he should give 5l. to Quick, and 5l. to Stanskey, and 10l. to me out of the 70l. profit—I did not ask him whether Choppin was all right—Mr. Stanakey has gone to the Cape—I have been in this country 26 years—I did not look at the contracts between the parties, I saw no paper.
Re-examined. Mr. Stanskey went abroad about three weeks after I arrived from the Continent, and before the commencement of these proceedings—he is in business in Kimberley—Macnamara has not signed anything.
MORRIS SAMUEL RUBENSTEIN . I am a solicitor, of 20, Regent Street—I am solicitor to Mr. Lichwitz—on 28th August he lift with me seven warrants—on 2nd September the prisoner called at my office—I had previously recieved instruction from Mr. Lichwitz—the prisoner commenced by asking me if I had the warrants—I asked him why he asked that question—after a few words he said because he wished to go with me to the City to get the money—I said "Certainly I have them, and I went to my safe to get them—immediately I produced them he said "I don't think we will go to-day"—I then took off my hat, which I had put on to go with him—he said "Let us say to morrow at I o'clock"—said "Very well"—I did not go next day, I handed the warrants to Mr. Slesinger, who took up the matter for me—he brought back the warrants—on 6th September I received this telegram: "From Gurney, Barnet, to witness, 6th september., '86 Cannot do anything to-day"—I did Not see the prisoner again until he was arrested.
Cross-examined. Choppin was summoned before the magistrate—there is a warrant out against him and Madcnamara—they have never been found—when the prisoner came to me he wanted to know if I had the warrants—I have no recollection of his saying he should require to have them produced when Choppin was ready to settle; I can't say he did not.
----SLESINGER. I live at 6, Bailey Street, Tottenham Court Road, and am manufacturer of cigarettes—on 3rd September Mr.
Rubenstein handed me the warrants produced—I went with them to 115, Finsbury Pavement, where I found that Choppin had an office—I there saw Choppin and Gurney—Gurney asked Choppin whether he was ready to take up the cigars—Choppin said, "No, not to-day; we missed the last mail, by which I could have shipped them, and I shall have to wait till the next ship goes in about a week's time"—I asked him to give me the name of the ship or the particular line of steamers, but he did not do so—I then left with Gurney and went downstairs—Gurney then said that he had had previous transactions with Choppin, and that he had always paid him cash—I said, "I wish he would do so this time, and pay me the money"—he showed me the contracts between himself and Choppin—I said, "I don't think they are worth anything, they are not worth the paper they are written on; it seems to me that the whole affair is a swindle"—I do not know what remark he made on that—I said, "The cigars are 1879 cigars, consequently they would not be worth the money that has been advanced upon them"—that was practically all that was said on that day—I went to Choppin's again on the following Wednesday; I then found he had gone, and there was a man in possession of the place—I did not see Gurney again till he was arrested—I subsequently went to the dock warehouse and saw the cigars referred to in the warrants—I saw five cases—I took the warrants with me—the cigars were in bad condition—I did not see the Japanese cigars.
Cross-examined. The last five warrants I always thought referred to Havannah cigars—those I inspected were of bad quality—I know nothing about cigars—there are 100 boxes in a case—there is a separate contract for the Japanese cigars; they are two cases of 30l. a case; putting those and the Havannahs together, Choppin would have to pay 380l.—he did not show me Macnamara's receipt for that amount, he only showed me the two contracts—I fancy I know Macnamara's handwriting, I will not be certain that this is his—I find on this invoice a description of the cigars sold to Choppin, I think that corresponds with Choppin's bought note—I never went to Macnamara's place of business—I did not hear Gurney say to Choppin, when at his place, "Are you prepared to take up the warrants and pay the 380l.?"—he asked whether he was prepared to take up the cigars, not mentioning any amount—Choppin said, "I can't do it today, the mail went out two days ago by which I intended to ship, but I shall be prepared to pay the money on Wednesday next"—I believe Gurney said something to this effect, "It is very unfortunate, I should never have had the money to take up the warrants if I had not relied upon your paying"—he did not ray he knew nothing about cigars himself; he said he had had several transactions with cigars.
Re-examined. I knew one Macnamara whose handwriting is similar to this; I know nothing of him or his history, I do not know whether he is the same person.
WILLIAM ELSOM . I am ledger clerk at the East and West India Dock Warehouse in Fenchurch Street—I recollect the prosecutor coming to the office with two men—one of them came behind the counter where the clerks were; he was not an official.
Cross-examined. We did not receive any instructions from Macnamara about these warrants, but we did from John Meyer and Co.—they are very respectable persons—it was by their direction that the warrants were made out in Gurney's name—the warehouse charges accrued from 1877—the
numbers were correctly described and the name of the ship—Meyer and Co. were the dealers, not the importers—warrants are negotiable documents—we charged Meyer and Co. with the warehousing—it is very usual for persons to attend for the purpose of transferring—payment of dock duty is often made at the office—I did not see payment made to Macnamara—I did not see him sign the receipt, or see Gurney endorse the warrant—I saw Macnamara come and borrow a pen—payment may be made to the seller in the place—I should have no knowledge of it.
HERBERT HALES . I am a clerk in the National Bank, Bayswater branch—I cashed Mr. Lichwitz's cheque, and gave for it three Bank of England notes of 100l. each, Nos. 32259, 32260, and 32261, and one 10l. note, No. 60281—these produced are the notes.
Cross-examined. The name of Macnamara is written on the back of one of the 100l. notes, and "J. Meyer and Co." on one of the others—there is nothing on the 10l. note.
THOMAS COTTER GASH . I am an inspector of bank-notes at the Bank of England—I have produced the four notes referred to—one of them purports to have been changed by a Mr. Macnamara, 153, City Road—that was changed over the counter for gold on 26th August, 1886—the 10l. note was received with three other notes, and this other 10l. note, with two fives, was changed for silver on 27th August, 1886, by a person who gave the name of Henry Harrison, 49, Aldersgate Street.
WILLIAM RADCLIFF . I am manager to Henry Harrison, pawnbroker, of 49, Aldersgate Street—I reside on the premises—I know Gurney as a customer—he took out some goods on 26th August to the amount of about 39l., and he bought a gold Albert chain—we frequently change our notes at the Bank of England for silver or gold—I do not remember whether I received a 10l. note on that day, I have no record—the 10l. note produced was sent to the bank; it is endorsed by one of my assistants, I know the writing—notes are sent pinned together, with an endorsement on the top note—I could not tell that I received that 10l. note from the prisoner—I was present when the money was received from him; to the best of my belief he paid in gold.
Cross-examined. There are hundreds of transactions at our establishment in the course of a day—I have known the prisoner as a customer for some time—I distinctly remember seeing a quantity of gold in front of him—it was about midday on the 26th—I have no recollection of this particular 10l. note.
SAMUEL NOEMARK . I am a cigar dealer of 110, Shardelf Road, New Cross—I knew Macnamara—I went with Mr. Lichwitz to his address in Union Street, and saw him coming downstairs, and I pointed him out to Mr. Lichwitz—I did not know whether he had been in any trouble—I then went with Macnamara and Lichwitz to Mr. Meyers (The RECORDER held that no conversation with Macnamara could be given in evidence until conspiracy between him and Gurney had been proved.)
Cross-examined. I do not know Macnamara's writing—I heard he had a shop at 106, City Road.
(The RECORDER ruled that evidence as to the value of the cigars would not be material.)
SAMUEL LYTHAL (Detective Sergeant). On 13th September a warrant was issued against the prisoner, who was arrested on 10th December at 86, Morton Road, Islington, where he was living—I read the warrant to him—he said "I did not have any of the money."
Cross-examined. The name of Main appeared on the warrant—Choppin's name was not in it—I got the warrant against Choppin about 15th or 20th December—I did not see Macnamara after 13th September—I tried to do so—I was unable to find Gurney; I did not look for him.
MR. BESLEY submitted that there was no evidence of false pretences or conspiracy to go to the Jury. The RECORDER concurred, and directed a verdict of
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BESLEY Prosecuted; MR. HUTTON Defended.
The prisoner had pleaded a justification, but during the evidence of the first witness he stated that he wished to withdraw his plea of justification, and to offer an apology. GUILTY . Discharged on his own recognisances in 50l. to come up for judgment when called on.
MR. PURGELL Prosecuted; MESSES. KEITH FEITH and HUTTON defended Buckner.
FRANCOIS PETITEVILLE . I am captain of the steamship Obok, lying in the London Docks—at 9.30 a.m. on Friday, 21st January, I missed my watch and chain from my cabin—I had seen them safe at 11 p.m.—these are they—I know neither of the prisoners.
CHARLES CROSS . I am manager to Mr. Tarrant, pawnbroker, of Cable Street—on Friday, 21st January, Buckner brought me this watch and chain between 10 and 11 a.m.—I asked him whose it was—he said he had a French boarder in his house and another French gentleman had come to see him, and it belonged to him, and they wanted 3l.—I lent him 3l., and took the watch and chain in pledge—in the evening Long came to redeem them—I asked him where he had got the ticket from—he said he had bought it—I asked him how much he had given for it—he said a sovereign—I knew Buckner before, and knew his boarding-house was in the next street—Buckner pledged in the name of James.
Cross-examined. Some people pledge in names other than their own.
ARTHUR HART . I keep the Telegraph beer-house, Stratford—on 21st January, between 2 and 3 o'clock, a man came in and showed me a pawn-ticket of Mr. Tarrant relating to a watch and chain—I had served that man in the bar before; he was not either of the prisoners—a few minutes afterwards Long came in; I was looking at the ticket—he said
"That is all right; if you like I will go and get it out for you"—I gave him 3l., and he went and got the watch out with a young chap I sent with him—they brought the watch back—I had known Long before—on the Monday I gave Long the watch and chain again to pledge—he came back, and told me they would not lend him 4l. on it, and that they would not take it unless they saw me or had a letter from me—I went with him then to Withers, a pawnbroker's, and I and Long were there detained and taken to the station—we were afterwards released.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I do not know Buckner.
Cross-examined by Long. I only knew the man who sold me the ticket by serving him in the bar.
ANGELO BUTCHER . I am assistant to Mr. Withers, a pawnbroker—Long offered me this watch and chain in pledge on Monday morning, and having seen the watch mentioned in the police list I asked Long where he got it—he said he had fetched it for Mr. Hart, of the Telegraph, at New town—we told him we could not advance anything on it unless he fetched a note of hand from Mr. Hart, or Mr. Hart himself—he left; I sent to the station for a policeman—afterwards Long and Hart came—Long said Hart had bought the ticket and he had taken it out of pledge on the preceding Friday—a constable came and took Hart and Long to the station.
Cross-examined by Long. You did not say you pawned the watch on the Friday morning; you said you took it out.
HUGH BRADFORD (Policeman K 357). I was called to Mr. Withers, a pawnbroker, where I saw Long and Hart—I asked Hart in Long's presence where he got the watch from—he said he bought the ticket for 2l.—I asked Long if he knew anything about it—he said all he knew about it was that he saw Hart buy the ticket—I took them to the station, and then made inquiries—in consequence of those I went to Buckner, and asked him if he had pawned the watch—he told me he had, and a man had given it to him to pawn—I asked him if he knew the man—he said he did not—I went back to the station—Long and Hart were discharged—in the evening I and White and Newman went to see Buckner—when he was charged at the station next morning he said he knew the man that gave him the watch by the name of Longey.
Cross-examined by MR. KEITH FRITH. Buckner is a boarding-house keeper I have heard—he is 71 years old I heard—he was admitted to bail—he did not say he did not rightly know the name, it was something like Longey or Long—I did not know Long before—I had not seen him enter Buckner's house previously—he said he knew the man by the name of Longey.
Cross-examined by Long. It was 10 or 11 a.m., at the station, when Buckner said your name was Long—two or three men and police officers were there.
STEPHEN WHITE (Police Sergeant H). From what the last witness told me I went to Buckner's on the Monday at 8 p.m.—I told him I was a police officer—he said "Yes, I know you are"—I said "I understand you pledged a watch last Friday morning at Tarrant's, the pawnbroker's, a gold watch"—he said "Yes, I did"—I said "Can you tell me where you got that watch from?"—he said, "No, I cannot; oh! I got it from man who came to see me on Friday morning; he asked me to pledge it
for him; I did, and gave him the money"—I said "Can you tell me who this man is?"—he said, "No I cannot; I do not know any more about it"—I said "What explanation do you give of the pledging the watch in a false name?"—he said "I cannot say"—I said "Well, you don't satisfy me with the answers you have given me, I must take you to the station, where you will be charged with receiving it knowing it to be stolen"—he was taken to the station—the prosecutor came there and identified the watch, and then the prisoner made a further statement—when put into the dock to be charged he said "I got the watch from a man named Longey; he is a river-side labourer or a waterman."
Cross-examined by MR. FAITH. He spoke in English; he can speak English as well as I can—I had not the slightest difficulty in understanding him—he is 71 years old, and was admitted to bail by the Magistrate in two sureties of 25l. each.
JOSEPH NEWMAN (Police Sergeant H). On the 21st I went with White on board the steam ship Obok—from what I heard Buckner was arrested and charged—I afterwards went to Nightingale Lane with Klein, Buckner's brother-in-law, while White and Bradford went down the Tower side of St. Katherine's Docks in order to scour the neighbourhood—Klein made a sign to me and I saw Long—as soon as he saw me 10 or 12 paces behind Klein he moved off as fast as he could—I ran after and caught him; I put my two arms round his neck—he looked over his shoulder and said "What is this for, Mr. White?"—I said "I am going to take you into custody for stealing a gold watch and chain, some foreign money, and a quantity of pearls from a Spanish steamboat, lying in the London Docks, late last Thursday night or early on Friday morning; I mean the watch and chain that you gave to old Buckner to pledge"—Long said "I know nothing about it"—I said "I am told you do"—I took him to the station, where Buckner was brought out of the cell and confronted with Long—Buckner said "That is the man" (pointing to Long) "that gave me the watch and told me to pledge it and ask 3l. for it, which I aid, and gave him the money and the ticket"—I wrote that statement down and read it to Long, who said "Thank you"—they were then charged.
Cross-examined by Long. At 10.30 or 11 Buckner told me your name—his brother-in-law was in the charge-room—he said you were at Buckner's house at half-past 6 on Tuesday morning inquiring for the old man.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. Buckner lives at 20, Wells Street, Leman Street—he has lived in that immediate neighbourhood for 20 years—he was admitted to bail—people frequently ask respectable people known in the neighbourhood to pawn things for them, as pawnbrokers will sooner advance money to people they know.
Re-examined. I have not seen Long with Buckner, but I have heard of his taking boarders to Buckner's.
Long, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said that he had met a man named James, who asked him as a favour to pawn the watch and chain for him, and that he took them to Buckner, who pawned them for 3l.
BUCKNER received a good character— NOT GUILTY .
LONG— GUILTY .**†— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Monday, January 31st, 1887.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and WILKINSON prosecuted.
MARYANN FARRANT . I live at Mr. Hopkins's a tobacconists, 19, villiers street, strand—on 18th September, between 10 and 11 p.m., I served the prisoner with a box of cigarettes, price 3d.—he gave me a half-crown—I tried it in the tester, it bent, and I took it a constable, and the prisoner was given into custody with the coin—this is it (produced).
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I gave the constable two half-crowns—I had taken one of them a week before, but I had not accused you of tendering it.
JOHN IRELAND (policeman E 183). the prisoner was given into my custody at Mr. Hopkins's shop; he was standing in a corner, smoking a cigarette out of the packet—the last witness said "This man has tendered a bad half-crown for a threepenny box of cigarettes, and this is the second we have taken this evening"—he said nothing—I searched him in the shop and found a florin a sixpence, and a penny, all good—at the station the inspector said "Where did you get it from?"—he said "I got it from a coal carman in Gray's Inn Road, in change for a half-sovereign," whose name he did not know—he was taken before a Magistrate on Monday morning, remanded for a week, and discharged on the 27th—this is the coin—the prisoner gave his name John parker.
MARK WERTMAN . I live at 406, Euston Road, and assist my brother, a cigar manufacturer—I am a German—on a Saturday night in this month, about 9 o'clock, the prisoner came in for a twopenny cigar, and put down a half-crown—it was greasy, and I bent it in the tester, and called my sister-in law, who said "That is the man who gave him in custody—I marked the coin; this is it—I think it was on the Saturday after New year's day.
Cross-examined. My sister-in law told me she had got a bad shilling on Wednesday, and described the man to me, and said that he had a red mark on the bottom of his nose, and I called her to see the prisoner, and said "Emily, is this the man who gave you the bad shilling?"—I did not say "This is the man," because I had never seen you before—I fetched a policeman, I gave you in charge.
EMILY WHARTON . I am the wife of Otto Wharton, and sister-in-law of the last witness—about six months ago the prisoner came in with another man—one of them asked for a twopenny cigar, and gave me a bad half-crown—I gave it back, and they left—on January 5th or 6th
the prisoner came in alone for a twopenny cigar, and gave me a shilling—I sounded it on the counter, put it in the till in an empty bowl, gave him his change, and he left—I afterwards found it was bad, put it in the fire next morning, and it melted instantly—I described the prisoner to my husband—I noticed that ho wore a broad plain ring—on Saturday, the 8th, my brother-in-law called me into the whop, and I found the prisoner there and identified him—he had not the ring on then—this is it (produced).
FREDERICK GATRELL (Policeman 548). On Saturday, January 8th, the prisoner was given into my custody—I told him it was for passing a bad half-crown, and he said "If I had known they would have detected it I should not have tried to pass it here"—Emily Wharton said "When he came here on Thursday he was wearing a silver ring or imitation silver"—I searched him in the shop and found this ring, which she identified, and a shilling—she gave me this half-crown on the evening of the 8th.
Cross-examined. You never opened your mouth after you left the shop, but you made that statement before leaving.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I wish to be remanded to call a witness." Second Statement, after the remand. "I got that halfcrown in change for a half-sovereign."
The prisoner called
HENRY BEAN . I am a coal agent, of 146, Oslington Street, St. Pancras—the prisoner has worked for me five or six weeks—on the night he was taken in custody I paid him a half-crown and a sixpence, and he had other money of me in the week—the prosecutor says that it was 9 o'clock when the prisoner was in his shop, but he left my place at 9, and the constable says that it was 9.30 when he took him, a mile away from home—I gave him the half-crown half an hour before he was taken—I take a lot of silver on a Saturday, and I have an idea that this may be the half-crown I gave him, but I cannot say whether it was good or bad—if it had been two shillings or a florin I should have had nothing to do with it.
Cross-examined by MR. CRAUFURD. It was as near 9 o'clock as possible when he left—I did not look at a clock, but it would be the time he would get his supper—it would take him a quarter of an hour to walk to Westman's—I do not think any man in business can swear that all his money is good till he has done business and looks over it—I am likely to have a bad coin and not know it—I believed the coin I gave him was goad—I cannot tell whether he had other coin in his pocket—his real name is Bean; he is my son.
Prisoner's Defence. In the first case I got the coin in change for a half-sovereign. I got a week's remand, and was let off. I got the second from my father.
GUILTY . He Then PLEADED GUILTY**†to a conviction of uttering counterfeit coin in January, 1885, at this Court.— Two Years' Hard Labour.
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and WILKINSON Prosecuted.
Ludgate Hill—on 22nd January, about 11 a.m., I served the prisoner with a half of four-ale—he then said he did not want the ale, he wanted change for a half-crown, and put it down on the counter—I looked at it, and tried it in the tester, and it bent—I asked him where he got it, and he said "Over at the butcher's," and I told him to take it back—Sewell was in the bar, and followed the prisoner, who was afterwards brought hack by a policeman—this is the coin (produced).
DANIEL COCKBELL . I am a butcher, of the Broadway, Ludgate Hill, opposite the Blue Last—the prisoner came into my shop on the 22nd, a little before 11 o'clock, and picked up fourpenny worth of pieces from the front, and brought them in, and tendered a half-crown—it looked very bad, and I said, "I can't take that," and gave it to him back, and he left—a postman brought him back, to see whether ho got the half-crown from us—I did not notice him come in again before the postman brought him in—the coin was very similar to this one, it was dark and very leadeney.
Cross-examined. I saw the coin on the slab.
EDMUND SEWELL . I live at 5, Wickwood Street, Loughborough Junction, and am a postman—on 22nd January, about 11 a.m., I was in the Blue Last public-house, Broadway, Ludgate Hill, and saw the prisoner come in—I heard him say, "Half a pint of beer"—he put a half-crown on the counter before the barmaid; I saw that it was bad—the barmaid took it up and went away; she came back and asked him where he got it; he said, "From the butcher's"—it was bent when she brought it back—I said to him, "Where did you get it from?"—he said, "From the butcher's"—I replied, "Will you take it back there?"—he said, "I will"—I asked him to do so—he left the bar, and I held the door ajar and watched him, and saw him go just inside the butcher's shop door and out again in an instant; he then passed the door where I was, and I followed him and asked him if he would come back and apologise to the barmaid for tendering a bad half-crown—he said, "Let me see my friend"—I said, "Where is. your friend?"—he said, "My friend has promised to meet me outside this door, I can't see him here, he must be at the other side of the court"—I went to the other side of the court with him, and he said, "I can't see him, let us go back again, he may be at the other corner"—I went back with him, but he could not find his friend, so I left him in the care of another postman, and fetched a policeman, and gave him in custody.
HENRY BABNETT . I am in the service of the Post-office, and was with Sewell in the Blue Last—I have hoard his evidence, it is quite correct—I kept the prisoner while he went for a constable, and he wanted to get away from me, and said ho wanted to see his friend—I said, "You don't go from me, wherever you go I go too"—I stood in front of him, and he made a move once, and I caught hold of his arm, and gave him in charge.
WILLIAM NATION (City Policeman 448). On 22nd January the prisoner was given into my custody for uttering counterfeit coin—I asked him how he came in possession of it—he said, "A pal of mine gave it me to go and get fourpennyworth of meat"—I said, "Where is your pal?"—he said, "He was here just now; you will find him at 12, Short's Gardens, Drury Lane"—I said, "Can't you see him now?"—he said "No"—I took him to the station, and alter the charge he made the
same statement—he gave his address, 12, Short's Gardens, Drury Lane, which is correct—I received this half-crown from Barnett—I searched him at the station, but found no money on him.
The Prisoner' Statement before the Magistrate. "About a quarter to 9 on Saturday morning we were having breakfast. My mate said to me, 'We will go and get some meat for our dinner.' While we were going towards Cockrell's, the butcher's, he said, 'Here you are, here is the money,' and he put a half-crown in my hand, and I went to the butcher's."
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, February 1st, 1887.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. P. PAYNE Prosecuted.
RODNEY EDEN . I am a captain in the army, and am now staying at 27, Ashley Place—on 14th January, a little past 7 in the evening, I was in Ambroseden Avenue on my way to Ashley Place—when close to the Army and Navy Stores, near a bare piece of ground, I was spoken to by Williams, who showed me his arm without a hand—when I saw it was a bond fide amputation I stopped and spoke to him—he said it was caused through an accident, and that it was very hard to get work—I said I could not do more for him than give him a couple of shillings, which I did—I then went on a few yards when I felt a hand on my left shoulder—I had heard footsteps, but did not notice them—I turned round, and Gilbertson looked up—I must then have passed eight or nine yards away from a gas-lamp, but there was sufficient light for me to see—he said "You had better give me all you have about you"—I said I would call for the police—I stepped back a bit, and said "I have nothing to give you,' or something of that kind—he stepped after me, and made the remark to the other prisoner, "We will have his watch and chain anyhow"—I then received a slight push in my chest, enough to make me lose my balance a little, and I felt a snatch, and my watch and a part: of my chain was gone; a part was left hanging in the button-hole—Williams took no actual part in this assault, but he was close by—they then ran away in the direction of the waste ground—there were no people about the place then—I went in that direction—my brothers place is at the corner of Ashley Place—I talked the matter over with him, and then we drove to Scotland Yard and eave a description-about a quarter to 8 next morning a police officer came and asked me to go to Rochester Row with him, and I there identified Williams from five or six others—about a quarter to 11 I went there again, and identified Gilbertson among fire or six others—I have no doubt about him—the value of my watch was 16l.
Cross-examined by Gilbertson. You pushed me in the chest—I did not fall down—the blow was enough to make any one lose their balance.
14th January about 11.30 p.m. I went to Statton Bow, Westminster, and remained about there till 12.30—I then saw Williams came out of a common lodging-house—I told him I was a police officer, and I should take him in custody on suspicion of stealing a watch and chain from a gentleman in Ambroseden Avenue—he said "I have not got the watch; you can search me"—I took him to Rochester Row Station, and gave him a seat there, and he then pulled some pawn-tickets out of his pocket and began to eat them, but they did not relate to this watch—next morning at 9.30 I arrested Gilbertson in the same lodging-house concealed under the bed—I pulled him out, and told him I should take him in custody for being concerned with another man in stealing a watch in Ambroseden Avenue—I also mentioned the other man's name—he said" All right, governor, I will go quiet"—I found nothing on him—he was placed amongst others and identified.
Cross-examined by Williams. You did not say "I do not know anything about this robbery."
Cross-examined by Gilbertson. I could not see you until I looked under the bed—you had your clothes on—you did not seem to have been asleep or drinking—I did not say to you that I saw you in Beeches's last night, and that you were well drunk; if I had seen you there I should have taken you.
WILLIAM WHEATLEY . I am Secretary of St. Giles's Christian Mission—when you came from, a lunatic asylum, where you had been for eight months, we took you in our home for a day or two because you were in distress—you then went away, and we heard no more of you.
GUILTY . WILLAMS then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in 1883 at Southward Police-court.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour , GILBERTSON— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
228. MARY CATHERINE BRUCE PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully and maliciously writing and publishing certain libels of and concerning William Hill Collingridge. Mr. Collingridge stated that the defendant had persisted in systematic annoyances by post-cards, letters, and personally, for upwards of two years.
The COURT directed her to find too sureties for her good behaviour, but at the close of the Session, no sureties being forthcoming, she was committed to prison, and judgment was respited till the next Session.
229. ELLEN ALEXANDRA SILK, Unlawfully obtaining by false pretences from Charles Edward McLewen 20l., with intent to defraud. Second Count, incurring a debt and liability for 20l., and so obtaining 20l. by fraud other than false pretences.
MR. BESLEY Prosecuted; MESSRS. POLAND and GILL Defended.
CHARLES EDWABD MCLEWEN . I am assistant to George Attenborough, pawnbroker, of 72, Strand—on the evening of 30th July the prisoner came in wearing this bracelet; she took it off, and asked it' I would lend her 30l. on it—I told her I could not lend her 30l., because the light was bad, but I would lend her 20l.—the gas was alight—she said she wanted 25l. very badly, and pressed me to let her have it, but I said I could not do it by that light—ultimately she said she would accept the 20l.—I then filled, in the contract note, of which this is the counterpart left in the
book it was torn from—I gave her the corresponding half—she signed her name "N. Addington," and I filled it in the other part—she put the address "2, Kent Terrace"—I said "Where is Kent Terrace?"—she said "Regent's Park"—I said "The interest must be paid in three months, if not the bracelet will be sold"—she said she would redeem it before that time—I gave her the 20l., and she went away with the 20l. and the contract note, leaving the bracelet with me—subsequently an action was brought by Louis Symonds against Mr. Attenborough to recover the bracelet, or 50l. as its value—I was not at the County Court—after the action we gave the bracelet to Symonds, and he gave us a receipt for it.
Cross-examined. I did not read the contract note to her—I turned the back round and she signed it, and looked at it—when I mentioned it was a three months' contract she said "I shall redeem it before that time"—I lent 20l. because I could not see by the gaslight—I think I may have said to her that if she came next day I might perhaps allow her more on it—I do not think it is worth a good deal more than 20l. now that I have seen it by daylight—I might lend 25l. on it now, no more—it would not fetch 30l.
Re-examined. I had never seen her before—I believed it was her property by her taking it off her arm when she came in.
LOUIS SYMONDS . I am a money lender, of 7, Wells Street, Oxford Street—I produce a bill of sale of 12th May, 1886, executed in the name of Ellen Alexander Silk, the prisoner—when she applied to me for this money two other bills of sale existed not fully satisfied—I said "If you wish me to lend you another 150l. then I shall want you to give me your jewellery as security"—she said she would not give it—I said "Then I cannot lend you the money"—that was a week or two before the execution of the bill of sale—she came again in the interval, and, I think, asked me whether I could not do without the jewellery, and lend her 150l.—I said "I don't see any harm in giving me your jewellery, you can wear it the same as usual; it will not prevent you wearing it"—she was anxious that something omitted from a prior bill of sale should be protected in case a bill of sale was put in by Mr. Dutton—I think on that occasion I offered to lend her 100l. or less without the jewellery as security, but she wanted 150l., and could not do with a less sum—she said she would consider it, and send me a telegram whether she would give the jewellery or not, and she would then let me know when she would call, and I was to wire whether I would be ready for her at the time—she telegraphed, and arrived at my office at the appointed time, on 12th May—I said I would not interfere with her wearing the jewellery—the bill of sale was not ready, because I had not got a list of the jewellery—she only had one or two articles of jewellery on her, and she described the rest for me to put into the inventory—among the articles was this bracelet—after the inventory was completed the bill of sale was executed, and I gave her a cheque for 150l.—she was to pay 10l. a month; the first payment being on 12th June—between 12th May and when I took possession she had paid me about 60l.—up to 30th July I had had perhaps 20l. or 30l.—the landlord distrained for a quarter's rent in at the end of October or beginning of November, and he appraised the goods on 3rd November, when I bought the greater part of the goods under the appraisement—she continued to live there up to the time the
landlord distrained—as soon as I lent her the money she went away—the house was closed, shut up—she owed me at the time of the appraisement nearly 300l., I should think—nothing had been paid off the appraisement because I put the money she paid me after 12th May to the credit of two former bills of sale on which something was owing—on 26th November I sued Mr. Attenborough for this bracelet—I secured the attendance of the prisoner at the County Court—judgment was given against Mr. Attenborough in my favour—the 50l. was to be reduced to 1s. on the bracelet being given up—Attenborough gave the prisoner any authority to obtain any loan of money on it.
Cross-examined. I believe 50l. to be the value of the bracelet; you could not buy it for that, and I would not sell it for less—the county Court action was tried on 17th December—the prisoner was there as a witness—I claimed it as being in a bill of sale, he as having been pawned—I did not call the prisoner to give her account of the matter—she was subpoenaed, but not called and had no opportunity of giving her understanding of what the arrangement was—the two former bills of sale were about 18 months prior to this—I think the three were within 18 months—during 1885 I had received about 150l., in part payment—she had paid very considerable sums—I always found her a very good payer and very honourable up to this—I found her very straightforward in my dealings with her—she paid 10l.—she paid 110l. in 1886, I think—about 260l. she repaid altogether, I think—practically all the property in the first and second bills of sale were in the third bill of sale, with some few trifling additions: so that as money was paid off it made the security more valuable—my interest is 5 percent. per month, 60 percent. per annum, at the rate of—the whole of the principle of the first two bills of sale was paid up, and part of the interest—I had seen the jewellery—she was very unwilling that it should be in the bill of sale at all—there was only one execution, a Country Court execution—she herself was anxious to have certain things protected by being in a bill of sale—I said she could wear the jewellery, I should never interfere with it so long as she made her payments—I had not the least doubt she would—the result of the action was that Attenborough had to hand the bracelet to me—it was known that she was ready to be called at the County Court.
Re-examined. I secured her attendance there—I have not recovered possession of all the articles mentioned in the bill of sale—I have only got possession of this bracelet and one or two trifling articles—of every payment she made part went towards the principle and part towards the interest in proper proportion—more than 220l. has been paid—the last payment on the first bill of sale was two or three months prior to the distraint, in August or September last—I should think there would be owing on the first two bills of sale when the third was made over 100l.
ALFRED STEPHEN FRAYLING . I am clerk in the Bills of Sale Registry—I produce a filed copy of the bill of sale between Louis Symounds and Ellen Alexandra Silk, with the affidavit attached—the bill of sale was duly registered on 13th May.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, February 1st, 1887.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted.
MATILDA GROVES . My husband is a grocer, of Hertford Road, Edmonton—on 14th January, about a quarter to 8 p.m., I served the prisoner with half a pound of sugar and half an ounce of tea, which came to 1 3/4 d.—he gave me a half-crown; it felt greasy; I sounded it on the counter, and it seemed good; I then tried it in the tester, and it bent very quickly—I said, "This is bad"—he made no answer—I tried it again, and told him it was very bad—he made for the door, leaving the change on the counter—my husband came into the shop, took the coin out of my hand, and called for his cap—the prisoner heard that and started off in a running way, and my husband followed him.
SAMUEL GROVES . I am a grocer—on 14th January I was in the parlour, and heard my wife, who was in the shop, say, "This is a bed half-crown"—I went into the shop and saw the prisoner—I asked my wife to get my cap, and while she went he ran away—I got my cap and went after him—he was out of sight then, but I afterwards saw him running 300 or 400 yards off—he then stood still, but when I spoke to a constable he ran away again, but I came up with him, and gave him in custody with the coin.
ISAAC SPINKS (Policeman N 293). I was on horseback on Edmonton Green, and saw the prisoner running, and Mr. Groves running after him shouting "Stop him"—I galloped after him and caught him close by the railway-station; he jumped on the footpath; a young gentleman stopped him, and Mr. Groves came up and gave him in custody for trying to pass a bad half-crown—he said nothing to that—I got off my horse, took the prisoner to the station, and found on him one shilling and seven pence—he was asked his address, and gave no answer—the inspector said, "I think I have seen you in St. Luke's"—he said, "Yes, I live at Cannon's Lodging-house, Golden Lane, St. Luke's"—Mr. Groves gave me this half-crown.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I wish to say I got the half-crown in change for a half-sovereign last Tuesday week at 9 a.m. I got three half-crowns and 11 pence, and some rum-and-milk, at the Cock at Highbury. That was the last half-crown out of the three."
Prisoner's Defence. I got that half-crown given me by another chap, Bendigo, to get tea and sugar with, and that is why. I did not buy the tea and sugar with my own money; the 1s. 7d. was my own.
GUILTY *.— Four Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WHEATLEY, of the St. Giles's Christian Mission, undertook to look after him when he comes out of prison, having done so after his former sentence.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted; MR. KEITH FRITH Defended.
SUSANNAH COCKERTON . My husband keeps a general shop at 46, Fanshaw Street, Holborn—on 22nd January, between 2 and 3 p.m., the prisoner came in for a loaf, price 2 3/4 d., and gave me a half-crown—I rang
it on the counter, it sounded good, and I gave him two shillings and 3 1/4 d.—after he left I thought it felt light, and weighed it; it was very light—I wrapped it in paper and put it on one side, as he had been there two or three times before; this is it—on 24th January, at 5 o'clock, he came again, and asked for a halfpenny candle—I lit the gas, and sent for my husband, and shut the front door, and said, "Do you know you gave me a bad half-crown on Saturday?"—he said, "Yes, I beg your pardon, if you will allow me to go I will fetch a good one, I am one of your customers, I live at No. 50"—he gave me a halfpenny for the candle—he had been there three or four times before, and on each occasion we found bad money at night—my husband came in, shut the door, put his back to it, and said, "I will give you in charge if you do not bring me good money"—the prisoner said, "You won't lock me up? give me a chance"—my husband opened the door, the prisoner went out, and my husband followed him—my little boy took the coin to the station.
Cross-examined. When I spoke to him about the half-crown he said "Yes, I beg your pardon"—he did not say "If it is a bad half-crown I am very sorry"—I know him well by sight; he is blind with one eye—I could have described him very easily.
JOHN COOKINGTON . On 24th January I went into my shop and found my wife and the prisoner there—I closed the door, and my wife said "What made you bring that bad half-crown in on Saturday?"—the prisoner said "If you will allow me to go over to No. 50 I will fetch you another, give me a chance"—to get to No. 50 you go across the street and across Short Street, which parts Fanshaw Street—I let him go out—he did not go over to No. 50, but went up the left side of the street towards Hoxton—I followed him—he ought to have gone to the right, but went to the left and turned into a court leading into Wellington Street walking, but as soon as he saw me turn into the court after him he started to run up Wellington Street as fast as his legs would carry him—I followed him into Kingsland Road—a young man stopped him and I caught hold of his collar—I was only a few yards behind him—I took him to the station and gave him in charge to a constable who was coming out—my son brought me the half-crown in Albert Street, and I gave it to the constable—I had marked it when my wife gave it to me—this is it.
HENKY ISAAC TUDOB . I am a tobacconist of 3, Victoria Chambers, Paul Street, Shoreditch—on 24th January I served the prisoner with a pennyworth of tobacco—he gave me 1s.—I gave him a sixpence and fivepence—while he was there I looked at it, it being a King George III.—I thought it rather funny, and when he went out I tried it with my teeth and bent it slightly—my teeth left marks in it sad it felt gritty—I went after him, brought him back to the shop, and told him it was bad—he said that he did not know it—I asked him for the change back, he gave it to me and a penny for the tobacco.
EDGAR COOK (Policeman G 38). The prisoner was given into my custody as I was coming out of the station—I took him inside, and said "You will be charged with uttering a false half-crown to Mrs. Cockington"—he said "I know nothing about the half-crown; I have only got 2 1/2 d.,
you can search me"—I did so, and found 2 1/2 d.—I afterwards received a counterfeit shilling from Mr. Tudor, and a half-crown from Cockerton.
Cross-examined. Only good money was found on him—he gave a correct address, but they did not know him by name—he told me he was not in employment—I did not go to St. John's Road or to East Street.
Re-examined. He gave his address, 23, Kingsland Road, a common lodging-house—he had been living there about nine days.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "The witness, Mr. Cockington, speaks falsely. I went into his shop last night to get a candle. I went to Hoxton, and was taken short, and commenced to run, and the prosecutor then got hold of me."
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
232. CHARLES PAUL **†(21) PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of John Samuel Howard, and stealing two coats and other articles, his property; also to burglary in the dwelling-house of George Harris, and stealing a coat and other articles, his property.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. And
233. THOMAS SMITH to stealing a purse and 1l. 14s. 7d. from the person of Phillibert Martin after a conviction at Clerkenwell in March, 1882, in the name of Thomas Mahoney.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
GIACOMO DE METTA . I am manager to Madame Guiseppa de Bolla, restaurant keeper, of 137, Oxford Street—on 12th December, about 6.30 a.m., a policeman called me up; I went downstairs, and found the street door open—I missed 18 forks, 6 spoons, 12 knives, an opera glass, 200 cigars, and a silk handkerchief from a cupboard behind the bar, and 4s. 4d. in copper from the till, which was broken open—I had locked the street door at 11.50 the previous night—that leads into the restaurant—the prisoner had not been a servant there, but I had worked with him—I identified the cigars, knives, and forks 14 days afterwards.
Cross-examined. I know the box in which the cigars were; they are 4d. Havannah cigars—we had two or three boxes at a time—the mistress buys them of a firm in Westminster, who sell the boxes by the 100—our forks were wrapped in green paper, and, half a dozen were quite new, and marked as made by "E. H. L.—A."—that is a common mark for plated goods—I had noticed that mark, because I cleaned them every morning—when we buy them they are in green or pink paper—they were in a box, which I know very well.
Re-examined. These cigars are similar to what we lost—six forks were wrapped in green paper, and the rest were open—the number in the box is the same and it is the same box—the knives are quite new, and similar to what we lost—the spoons have not been found.
5, James Street—I was not present—it relates to the knives and forks before me.
SAMUEL VINCS . I am employed by Messrs. Best and Boyce, of 66, Theobald's Road—this box of cigars was pawned there for 5s., in the name of John Blunt, Hatton Wall—this is the duplicate—I was present, but I do not identify the prisoner.
ROBERT SIZELAND (Policeman T 403). On 18th December I searched the prisoner and found these two pawn-tickets, one relating to forks and the other to cigars—a man named Byaggio was charged with him before the Magistrate on the 18th—I found this chisel on Byaggio.
EDWARD KITCHIN (Detective C). On 12th December, about 9.30 a.m., I received information of this burglary, and on 26th December I received from Sizeland two pawn-tickets and a chisel—Crockett and I arrested Byaggio on the 18th—he was taken to the station, and I told him in the prisoner's presence that he would be charged with being concerned with Pratasia in committing a burglary on the night of 11th December, at 137, Oxford Street—he said "I know nothing about it"—later on the prisoner mentioned the pawn-tickets, and Byaggio said "I bought the pawn-tickets of a Frenchman; I do not know his name, he has gone to France."
Cross-examined. What he said was "The pawn-tickets belong to me, I bought them of a Frenchman, he has gone to France."
DAVID CROCKETT (Detective C). I was with Kitchin on December 22nd, and saw the prisoner and said "You will be charged with committing a burglary at 137, Oxford Street, on the 12th instant"—he said "I know nothing about it; there was a chisel found on me"—I compared this chisel with the marks on the till drawer at 137, Oxford Street, and it corresponded, and also with some marks on a cupboard behind the bar which was broken into—the entrance had been effected by a false key, and there were no marks.
Cross-examined. The till drawer was about half an inch thick—the chisel had been inserted above the drawer, and the marks of it from the point to two inches down were across the ledge.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. CROFTON Prosecuted.
LAURA MARY ANNING . I live at 2, Holly Terrace, Drayton Gardens—on 20th January, about 5.30, I was walking with my aunt in Beaufort Street, and was carrying a bag containing a purse, a handkerchief, and about 15s.—a man jumped up in front of me and snatched my bag—I did not let go of it, but the handle came off—I ran after him across the road and saw him round the corner in custody—I cannot identify the prisoner because it was so sudden, but I only saw one man.
WILLIAM DEAN . I live at 24, Milman Street—on 20th January, about 5.20, I was in Beaufort Street playing with other boys, and saw the last witness running after the prisoner—I kept my eyes on him till a policeman stopped him—I was a quarter of an hour running after him.
Street—I chased him through two streets, stopped him, and said "What are you running for?"—he said "I don't know; oh, I am running to catch the thieves"—the prosecutrix came up in about two minutes, and complained of losing her bag—the prisoner said nothing—I took him to the station.
THOMAS MANLEY (Police Sergeant). On 28th January the prisoner said to me at "Westminster Police-court "That young lady," meaning Miss Anning, "is quite right, but I did not steal the bag; I was with the other man that did; I know nothing about it, but he put me up to it."
Prisoner's Defence. I am not the man who took the bag. I did not have nothing to do with it.
GUILTY of larceny from the person.
MR. CROFTON Prosecuted.
KATE HOLDER . I live at 60, Reedsdale Street—on 19th January I was walking with my mother in Walpole Street about 8 o'clock, and carrying a sealskin bag on my right arm, containing a purse, a handkerchief, some spectacles in a case, a pencil-case and button-hook, and about six shillings and two farthings in a purse—I, had a parcel in my other hand and a large bottle under my arm—a man suddenly appeared before me in Walpole Street—he appeared suddenly before me like a drunken man—he crouched before me and swayed—I stepped aside to get out of his way—he stepped before me again, and as I went to the left he went to the left—he took hold of my right arm, on which the bag was hanging, and wrenched the bag, but failed to get it—I resisted, and he held my shoulders with both hands, and threw me down, took my bag, and ran away—I did not feel any blow—it was very dark—my bottle was smashed, and I fell on it—I went to a shop; I was too upset to go to the police till next day—I felt very stiff and shaken, but I was not bruised—I think my nerves were shaken—this is my purse, pencil-case, and button-hook—the man brought was like the prisoner, but he was not upright.
THOMAS MANLEY (Police Sergeant). On 20th January, about 7 p.m., I saw the prisoner at King's Cross Station in custody on the previous charge—I found on him this purse, four shillings, a small pencil-case, a steel button-hook, and two farthings, and laid them in front of me—he said "They are mine; they belong to me"—the prosecutrix identified them the next morning.
Prisoner's Defence. I bought the purse that day for sixpence, and the penholder or whatever it is was in it.
GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at Limerick in September, 1881, of stealing a watch, He was proved to be a deserter from the Army, and had been several times convicted, and after re-enlisting, was discharged with ignominy from Her Majesty's Service,— Five Years' Penal Servitude and Twenty Strokes with the Cat.
FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday, February 1st, 1887.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
237. GEORGE ALBURY (34) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing two cheques for the payment of 7l. 8s. 9d. and 4l. 16s. 1d., the property of the Scottish Imperial Life Assurance Company ; also to forging and uttering an endorsement on a banker's cheque for the payment of 4l. 16s. 1d., and to forging and uttering a receipt for the payment of 7l. 8s. 9d .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WILMOT Prosecuted.
FREDERICK HENRY BARKER BOLLON BRYANT . I am a student and writer, and live in New Oxford Street—on 10th January I was going into my house about half-past 12, and was placing the key in the door, when I was set upon by three men, two of whom held me and held my arms up while the third man rifled my pockets—I struggled half-free and grappled with the prisoner; the other two got off while the prisoner prevented me going after them—I held him till three constables and a gentleman came up—I received a severe blow on the head and bruises about the face.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I had previously been to a place of amusement, and stepped into a public-house for a glass of ale; as I turned to go I noticed three men with very dubious faces—I stood them a glass of drink—I paid about 1s. for what they wished, and the nest I knew of them was when they seized me—I did not throw any money on the table to the men who were drinking before I was spoken to—I did not sit down and drink in your company for an hour—I only used money when I paid for the drink—that was about half-past 12—I did not wait till the public-house was shut up—the public-house was about two streets up from the junction of New Oxford Street and Holborn, in New Oxford Street—I have no recollection of any of the men passing any remark to me in the public-house—I was sober—I drank alone—I only paid for four drinks—I swear I did not drink all the time I was there.
SAMUEL LEE . I live at 2, Rose Street, Soho, and am a frame-maker—on 11th January, about 12.30, I was going home and saw three men pushing the prosecutor about and struggling at his door—I heard him call for help, and fetched a constable—when I came back with him Mr. Bryant was still holding the prisoner; the other two men got away.
Cross-examined. There were two others besides you when I came up—you were all three pushing the prosecutor about—I do not know if any of you were drunk or sober.
ALEXANDER ROSS (Policeman). I heard cries, and went in the direction they came from—I saw the prosecutor there; the prisoner held him by the throat at the door, and struck him in the face—I blew my whistle and seized the prisoner, who behaved very violently, seized me by the belt, and tried to throw me to the ground three or four times—he knocked my whistle out of my mouth and loosened my teeth—I got him to the station eventually.
The prisoner in his defence stated that the prosecutor came into a public-house where he was, threw money on the table, and sat in their company; that he commenced shoving about, that the landlord put them out, and there was a scuffle in the street; that the prosecutor caught hold of him and they struggled, and somehow got into the doorway, and that then the gentleman and policeman came up.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted.
EVAN HUMPHREYS . I live at 14, Ella Road, Crouch Hill, and am a student—on 11th January I went in the Birkbeck Literary and Scientific Institution in Bream's Buildings, Chancery Lane, about half-past 2, and into the study, and stopped till about half-past 4—I hung my light-brown overcoat on the third hook close to the door in the study; a black coat was beside it—about half-past 3 the prisoner came in—I had often seen him there before—he was wearing a black coat, and no overcoat—he walked to the other side of the room to where I was sitting, and looked out at the window into the street—I went on reading, and took no further notice of him—you are not allowed to speak in the study—Mr. Hall and two other gentlemen sitting by the fireplace were the only other persons in the room—I left the room about 4 o'clock to get another book in the basement—I was absent about five minutes—I left Hall, the two gentlemen, and the prisoner in the room; when I came back I found Hall and the two gentlemen, but the prisoner had gone—about 10 minutes afterwards, when I went to get my coat, I found it was gone—the three people were still in the room; I spoke to them—no one had left the room except the prisoner—I gave a description to the police—a week afterwards, on the 18th, I was called out from the reading-room to speak to a detective, and as I was describing the person to him the prisoner opened the reading-room door and came out—I said to the detective "That is the very man," and he was arrested on the steps—I am positive the prisoner is the man who was in the study and who had gone away when I returned; I remember a peculiarity in his eyes; I could not possibly mistake him—I am certain no one left the room from the time I left till the time my coat was missing—the study is a private room for subscribers; there is a notice on the door saying that no one but members are admitted.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not say before that I was away for an hour.
Re-examined. There are no newspapers in that room.
FRANK FOSTER HALL . I live at 18, Wheathill Road, and am a Civil Service student—I was at the Birkbeck on this day from about half-past 10 in the morning till about a quarter-past nine at night—I remember the prisoner sitting down by my side—I don't remember having seen much of him before—when he got up to go he took a light coat off a peg, put it on his arm, and wont out of the study—there was only one other coat, a black one, on the pegs—the prosecutor was then out of the room—I had not seen him go—there were two others besides myself there—I did not see whose coat the light one was, but I knew Humphreys's was a light one, and I looked to see—I can swear that during the time Humphreys was away no one entered the room—I was present on the 18th
January when the prisoner was given into custody—Humphreys recognised him at once without any hesitation.
Cross-examined. I did not give you into custody, because I did not know Humphreys had even put his coat there—I did not know he had not taken his coat with him—I did not even know he had left the room, and when I saw you taking the coat I looked at where he had been sitting—I did not see Humphreys come in and put his coat there—I did not know the coat did not belong to you.
BAXTER HUNT (City Detective). About 5.40 on Tuesday, 18th January, I was at the Birkbeck Institute with the prosecutor and Hall when the prisoner left the reading-room and went downstairs—Hall and the prosecutor said "That is the man"—I went after and caught him at the bottom of the stairs—I told him I was a police officer, and that he, would be charged with stealing a coat from the Institution last Tuesday—he said it was a mistake—I turned to Hall and said "That gentleman saw you take it"—ho said "It is a mistake, and a conspiracy got up against me"—I conveyed him to the station.
Cross-examined. You gave me three names, of whom I made inquiries—I can tell you what they told me.
JOHN ROUS (City Policeman 677). On Tuesday, 11th January, about 4 o'clock, I saw the prisoner at the Birkbeck—he had no overcoat on then—I was on duty when he came in—I saw him sitting in a room in the Birkbeck.
WILLIAM HENRY CONGREVE . I am Secretary to the Birkbeck Institute—it is necessary, to use the reading-room, to become a member by a payment quarterly, half-yearly, or annually—there is a notice on the door that no one but members are 'allowed into the reading-room—the prisoner is not a member—I have searched the books for seven years, and cannot find his name.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he was suspected because he was rather shabbily dressed, and that he had only gone there to see the newspapers in order to get a situation.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
HUGH HUGHES . I am a seaman, of 8, Star street, "Wapping—on the evening of 17th January I was going down Old Gravel Lane—I had 7l. in gold, silver, and copper, having been paid off on Monday—four men tackled me; the prisoner was one—I pushed him down—they took 7l. from me, and cleared away—I went to the police-station and gave information.
JOSEPH MARRIOTT (Police Sergeant E). On 18th January, at 10 a.m., I went to Engel Gardens, where I saw the prisoner in bed—I said "You will be charged with begin concerned with three others in stealing money from a man last night"—he said "I was at work at the docks last night"—I said "I am told you were knocked down on to your back at the time in the struggle"—I then noticed the prisoner's clothes hanging on a chair turned to the fire to dry, and they were all wet and covered with mud—I took him to the station—the prosecutor was sent for—ho was placed with eight others similar to himself, and the prosecutor picked him out.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he had got his coat wet and muddy at his work in the docks.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WILMOT Prosecuted.
ROBERT BULLEN (Policeman W). On 20th January, about 2 a.m., I was on duty in Harrow Road—I heard a smash of glass, and went in the direction—I met Ward, and asked him if he had heard the smashing; of glass—I went back with him, and found that a large pane of glass had been broken of the shop window, 41, Harrow Road, belonging to Mr. John Trowbridge, a boot maker—I saw the prisoner running away across the road from the shop 50 yards from me—he had a bundle under his arm—I ran after and stopped him—I asked what he had got under his arm—he said "Boots," and that a man had given them to him—I said he must come back with me, and we went back to the prosecutor's shop—I found half a brick lying immediately under the shop window and boots gone from the window—Ward was asked by the sergeant to accompany him to the station, and did so.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You were about 60 yards from the shop when I saw you going from the shop.
CHARLES ORPWOOD (Policeman X 22). I was in Harrow Road on this morning, and saw the constable with the prisoner—I saw Ward standing near the shop door—he gave me his correct name and address—he was discharged by the Magistrate—the prisoner said first of all he picked the boots up, and afterwards he said he had them given to him by another man.
JOIIN TROWBRIDGE . I keep a boot shop at 41, Harrow Road—about 2 o'clock I was awoke by the smashing of glass—I got up, went down and opened the street door, and found the glass in the shop window was broken—I missed four odd boots from the window—they were the boots the constable afterwards gave me—I identify them.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I hope you will sentence me, and not send me for trial."
The prisoner' in his defence stated that he heard a crash, and saw a man running, who dropped something, which he picked up.
GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of felony in November, 1884.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WILMOT Prosecuted.
LEWIS LILLEY . I am assistant at the post-office at 174, Shirland Road—on 12th January the prisoner came in and produced a deposit-book in the name of Robert Gilbert, and said he wished to withdraw 7l. 10s.—I furnished him with this form, which he signed "Robert Gilbert" in my presence—having got that he would go to the chief office in London, and receive there a warrant for that sum—on the Friday he came back with this blue paper for 7l. 5s. and I paid him the money—he signed this receipt in my presence—I did not know Mr. Gillbert, and presumed the prisoner was he—I am sure the prisoner is the man who came in.
of the General Post-office—I produce this document marked "A," giving notice of this withdrawal of 7l. 5s. in the name of Robert Gilbert, and purporting to be signed by him—having received it I signed the notice of withdrawal, and it was sent off in the ordinary course.
ROBERT GILBERT . I live at 46, Osborne Road, Acton, and am a bootmaker—the prisoner is my son-in-law—he came to stay with me from the 8th to 11th January—I had a deposit in the Post-office Savings Bank, and kept my deposit-book in the parlour on the shelf—I missed my deposit-book—I saw the prisoner on the following Saturday, and spoke to him about my loss—he said he had not seen it—I have seen the prisoner's writing—I cannot say if he signed this "Robert Gilbert"—I did not sign it—he lives at 26, Harris Street, and this is signed "Robert Gilbert, 26, Harris Street"—I live at Acton—he had no authority from me to withdraw that money—he has never paid the money over to me—I asked him about it afterwards a good many times—he said he had not had it—the police communicated with me, and I saw the prisoner the same night; he said then he had not had the money, and that he had not even had the book.
DANIEL MORGAN (Police Inspector X). On 17th January I went to 26, Harris Street, Queen's Park, where the prisoner lived, in consequence of information—I saw the prisoner there, and showed him these documents—he said he knew nothing at all about them—he took 7d. out of his pocket, and put it on the table, and said "That is all I have"—I asked him what bank-books he had—he produced this one—I asked him if this was his handwriting—he said "Yes, this is my handwriting"—he handed me this Post-office Savings Bank book from among papers in a desk—I also found this pocket-book and card—I asked him whose that was—he said "That is my handwriting"—that is Mr. Goodwin's, and overleaf is Robert Goodwin—he said that was not his writing—he handed me a key of a black box locked; I opened it, and found there 5l. in gold and 8s. in silver—he said that was sent him by his uncle that afternoon in a letter—I took the letter; there was nothing in it about the money, and it was not a registered letter—I told him so—he said it came in another envelope, which he had burnt.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I signed my name to the paper."
The prisoner in his defence stated that his uncle had sent him the 5l. 8s.; that he could not write, and that the people at the post-office had written his name in his own bank-book.
GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in May, 1886.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, February 2nd, 1887.
Before Baron Pollock.
243. In the case of ISAAC JOSEPH MAUERBERGER (36) , indicted for feloniously sending a letter to Lord Rothschild threatening to murder him , the Jury, after hearing MR. WILLIAM FRANCIS GILBERT , surgeon of Holloway Prison, and DR. GEORGE FIELDING BLANDFORD , found the prisoner insane and unfit to take his trial .— Ordered to be detained until Her Majesty's pleasure be known.
244. SAMUEL HENRY BARROW (43) PLEADED GUILTY to four indictments for embezzling various sums of money and valuable securities of the Major, Commonalty, and Citizens of the City of London, also to making false entries in certain books.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour . There were other indictments against the prisoner. His defalcations were stated to amount to 355l. whilst employed as collector of tolls in Billingsgate Market.
MESSRS. POLAND and MEAD Prosecuted.
GEORGE KENT . I am a bricklayer, of 45, North Street, Knightsbridge—I had a child named Mary Ann about 3 years and 7 months old—my wife died on 12th September last—I had four children, Mary Ann was the youngest—I did not know the prisoner when my wife died—I knew her two or three days afterwards by her coming two or three times and wanting to have the child—she was living with a man named Neal—I was given to understand that they were married—she was living in St. Clement's Road, Notting Hill—they both took a very great fancy to the child—after two or three times coming I let the child go and live with them; that was near the 23rd of September—I know nothing of this paper (produced)—I first saw it about ten days ago—the child was in good health as far as I could see when I parted with it; there were no marks on it—I afterwards saw the child dead—I received this letter (produced) from the prisoner by post.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You had the child before my wife went into the infirmary, but not to live with you till afterwards—we never beat the child.
GEORGE LETHERBY . I formerly lived at 29, St. Clement's Road; the prisoner and Neal occupied the next room—they were there before me—while they were there, about a week before Christmas, I could hear the child beaten about twice a day, and the prisoner screaming and using very vile and disgusting language to it—that went on the whole time; it stopped on 15th September when I complained of its being beat—I could hear the child as though being beaten with the hand, and it was thumped on the floor and shaken about—I only heard the child just moaning as if it was gagged, as if she had her hand over her mouth to keep her from crying—about three weeks after they came there I saw a bruise on the child's arm and she seemed in pain; that was on 15th November—I told the prisoner she had better stop beating the child or I should complain to the father of the way it was being treated—she abused mo and said I could do as I liked—I did go to whore the father lived and saw his mother—the beating did not continue the following week—on one occasion, early in the morning, I heard the child being beaten very severely; I don't know what with—one day I was in her room and she took down a strap and said "I will beat you with this," and she said she had beaten her with it before—one day, the day I summoned her husband to Hammersmith for assaulting me, I saw a bruise on the child's left cheek.
By the COURT. The language she used to the child was very filthy, she called it a w—, a cow, a mare, and other names—it had diarrhoea
the first week and it certainly was very dirty, after that it appeared very clean—it was a fine healthy child when it came.
ANN DONOGHUE . I live at 57, St. Clement's Road—about three weeks before Chirstmas the prisoner Neal came to lodge there with the child in the room below—I used to hear her beat the child every morning—in the christmas week I used to hear her beat it against the boards very severely—I did not hear any language, the door used to be shut and I used to be doing my work—I heard the child cry—this went on every morning—I have been in their room—I one saw the child with a black eye; I could not say on what day; in was in the Chirstmas week—the prisoner said it had it had fallen out of the chair bedstead.
By the COURT. I never spoke to the prisoner about this, I had my children to look after and it slipped my memory—I don't know why the child was beaten; she said it was very dirty—she told me that once or twice.
EMMA BRAY . I am a dressmaker, of 55, St. Clement's Road, next door to 57; I occupy the front room as a workroom—before the end of last year I heard the sound of a woman illtreating and scolding a child in the corresponding room to mine in the next house, and the child crying very much; it cried till it was completely exhausted—I could not tell whether she used anything to beat it with—I could only tell by the sounds that she was illusing it, sometimes only once in the day, sometimes more—I heard most of it in the early part of the week after Christmas Day—I could not distinguish what the woman said; it was in very cross tones.
ROSINA GARDEN . I live on the top floor at 59, St. Clement's Road, next to 57—during Christmas week I heard a child being beaten next door most unmercifully, and I heard it moaning and crying it sounded as if it was beaten with a stick or sometimes twice a day—on Tuesday, the 28th, I heard the child beaten most unmercifully a few minutes after 8 o'clock in the morning, and I knocked at the wall, and the knocking was returned, and she told me to mind my own business—the beating that day continued quite half an hour; on other occasions it was only a few moments.
JAMES DUFF MILLER , M. B., and Master in surgery. On Thursday, 30th December, I was called to 57, St. Clement's Road, to see this child, about four years old—she was in bed, unconscious, the pupils were dilated, the breathing very feeble and stertorous—I saw several bruises on the forehead, the left cheek, and chin; the arms were slightly swollen, the elbow a little scratched, discoloration on the left hip, bruises on the buttocks and down the thigh; the pulse very feeble—I formed the opinion that the injuries were not all accidental—I saw it again next day—I spoke to the prisoner about the injuries—she said the child had fallen about and so caused them—I was not present at the death—on 3rd January I made a post-mortem; I found the body well nourished, well developed, and strong looking—I found the marks and bruises which I have described, and a few more—on removing the scalp I found effused blood on the inner surface over the temple region; I found portions of ecchymosed blood in both hemispheres of the brain, corresponding with the external injury—the brain substance itself was quite healthy—the
cause of death was effusion of blood on the brain, caused by injury to the scalp—I cannot say positively how that was done, the probabilities are that it was not accidental, but it is possible that it was—Dr. Skelton assisted me in the post-mortem—he saw the child first, and requested me to see it with him.
JAMES SKELTON , M. D. I was called on 30th December to see this child—the prisoner brought it to my place wrapped in a shawl—I asked Dr. Miller to see it with me—I quite agree with his evidence and as to the cause of death—it is difficult to say what degree of force would have caused the fatal injury to the head; a fall downstairs might have caused it, I do not think tumbling about in a room would.
ROBERT MARKHAM (Police Sergeant X). On Saturday, 1st January, I went to 57, St. Clement's Road, and saw the prisoner in her room—I told her I should take her into custody for causing the death of Mary Ann Kent, and I cautioned her that anything she might say would be taken down and might be used in evidence against her—she said "On Tuesday last the child Mary Ann Kent dirtied herself; I slapped her, but I have not laid my hand on her since; I am sorry for what I have done, Mr. Markham"—when the charge was read over at the station, she said "God knows I did not intend to do it; my heart was good towards the child"—I have been to the houses next door, the top rooms of 55 and 57 adjoin—I was at the police-court—I there received a letter from Kent; it was put in at the prisoner's request—she said she had written a letter to Mr. Kent informing him about the child—this is the letter. (Read: "November 17th, 1886. Mr. Kent,—Having heard you was over here on Monday evening, I write in reference to your child. You know she is a very dirty child, and therefore I must correct her in a proper manner, so when she messed my clean bed I slapped her for it, then she done it again on the floor and messed all her clothes, not only once, but three or four times. On Monday morning she done it again, and I slapped her, and the woman in the next room abused me about it, and said she should fetch you over to take the child from me, as I was not a proper person to have the care of her, so you had better come and take her away. When I told her I should send her over to her father, she said 'I won't go home.' I have no more to say. With best respects to yourself and mother.")
By the COURT. I have known the prisoner four or five years—I did not know she was taking care of the child—I saw her with it once when going to Hammersmith Police-court.
MARY ANN BENNETT . I am female searcher at Notting Dale Police-station—on 1st January I searched the prisoner—she was very excited—I had great difficulty in searching her—I asked her why she was so excited—she said "I beat the little child and caused its death; I was too harsh, and may God have mercy upon me"—she said the child was dirty, and had dirtied itself.
Prisoners Defence. I can only say I never beat the child hard enough to cause its death; I should be very sorry to do such a thing. I had the mother's blessing with it, and did my duty as far as it lay in my power. She was a good little thing, and the very morning it had the fit she was singing about the room.
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury .— Three Months' Hard Labour.
MESSRS. POLAND and gill prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN defended.
EDWARD APPLETON . I am the manager of Messrs. Lilley and Skinner's retail branch business, boot manufacturers, at Paddington—the prisoner was manager of our branch at 347, goswell road for six or seven years—he lived on the premises with his wife—some months ago he gave way to intemperance—early last December his wife died—he had not then died he had not then received notice to go, but had been allowed to continue manager on account of his wife's illness—after his wife's death I went to him and gave him notice—that was one or two weeks before Christmas—I found the shop in an upset condition—I was vexed at its being so, and I said our firm had decided not to put up with it any longer, and he must make arrangements to leave; that in consideration of his wife's death we should show him every leniency, and he must let me know when he could get out of the premises—the arrangement come to was that he should go out on Wednesday, 29th December—he wrote to me the week before Christmas, but he did not speak to me about his furniture—he was supplied with the ordinary stock—a balance-sheet was furnished every week, which came into my hands—I produce the prisoner's statement of goods and cash to 17th December, which shows the balance of stock in his possession to be 816l. 14s. 7d.—the next account ought to have been furnished on the 28th December—the longer interval would be on account of Christmas—he was to give up possession on the 29th Mr. Hann was appointed to succeed him—arrangements were made to take stock on 29th December—there is a basement beneath the shop with trap-doors, one near the front and one near the back of the shop, 12 or 14 feet from the front door—there are two gas-meters, one for the house and one for the shop, nearly under the front trap—a wall in the basement is partly broken away—the house-meter was the prisoner's—I went to Hornsey on 1st January and saw some furniture—a servant handed me 4l. 1s.—the day after the fire I looked through the house; I did not see any furniture—I saw that the fire had been right underneath the trap at the rear of the shop—you could not get underneath from the place of the fire to the gas-meters, because the space was blocked with packing cases.
Cross-examined. There were sweepings or the shop below—the cellar was the proper plane for the packing cases—I have been over the shop far more than a dozen times in nearly four years—I cannot speak to difference in size of the trap-doors—the shop floor is covered with kamptulicon, in which a slit is cut for the trap-doors to be raised—I am looking at an account made by a clerk—I Have not referred to it in my examination—the prisoner could not go through the stock every week—the last stock-taking was over a year ago—in the weekly account to us the prisoner would take the statement of stock to balance the preceding week, taking credit for what he had sold and charging himself with what he had—further stock required would be sent from the manufactory at paddington by carrier—a warehouse clerk would make out the invoice—we had once employed a man named horn—the invoices sometimes did not arrive with the folds I cannot say as a rule—the prisoner has waited two or three days for an invoice, but
not as a rule; not frequently—Horn was a ledger-clerk—he left on his own accord through illhealth three to four months ago—we have a great number of shops in London—it is not a rule for our shop managers to be behind in their accounts—many robberies take place from the shop—the prisoner has prosecuted persons for stealing from the shop—Thompson and Strange are connected with our business—I do not know that they visited the prisoner at the request of our firm.
Re-examined. The robberies were of goods exposed—the return pro duced. is a return of the sales each day, with the wages and other expenses—it is made week by week—the prisoner has not complained of any one defrauding him by not sending the stock in, nor of a quantity of stock being stolen from the place—he has only complained about the pilfering.
GEORGE HANN . I am manager of Messrs. Lilly and Skinner's shop in Goswell Road—on the afternoon of 29th December I went to that shop to take over the stock left by the prisoner—I knew nothing of the fire—I went through the stock with Mortimer and Bradnam, and put it down—I cannot tell the amount apart from the book debts—Bradnam called out, and I took it down.
Cross-examined. I saw no books there.
FREDERICK MORTIMER . I am a clerk to Messrs. Lilly and Skinner—on 29th December I assisted Hann and Bradnam to take stock—I examined each pair of boots, and the prices were marked on the soles—I entered them in the book produced—the value of stock without book debts is 551l. 13s. 4d.
THOMAS WILLIAM KILMINSTER . I am a clerk to Messrs. Lilly and Skinner—on 24th December I called on the prisoner at the shop in Goswell Road—I asked him for his cash; he said he had not got it—I said, "Send it down the first thing Tuesday morning," that is follow. ing Christmas—he said it was at his own house at Hornsey, that he had moved the night before and had taken the cash with him, as it would not be safe in the shop.
Further cross-examined. I have spoken to Jane Downing—I went to her with an inspector—I did not tell her I had come for the money found in the prisoner's pocket—I did not hear the inspector say that the prisoner gave me 4l. 1s.—that was the money found in his pocket.
BENJAMIN SNELLING (Policeman G 284). A few minutes past 12 on the 28-29th December I was on duty in the Goswell Road—I saw smoke issuing from between the shutters of No. 347—I went down the passage to the back door, which I found open; I entered, and found the prisoner standing at the back of the shop—not knowing his name I said, "Mr. Lilly, do you know your house is on fire?"—he said, "No, where?"—I then proceeded to extinguish the fire—smoke was issuing from beneath the trap-door in the back of the shop; the prisoner was about three feet from it; he had his great-coat and hat on—Bonner came in afterwards, and we extinguished the fire by hand-grenades—I tried to get the flap up, but was unsuccessful; there was no ring, there was the place where the ring had been broken off—I blew my whistle, and Constable 182 came in response; I sent him for the fire-engines—I smelled the smoke, which was very dense—I saw the trap-door opened—underneath it were
several feet of paper, straw, and wood from broken boxes—this is a sample of the wood.
Cross-examined, The Red Lion public-house would be 12 to 15 yards from the back door, and in St. John Street Road—the night was slightly hazy—the hand-grenades were in the back of the shop in a wire rack; there were three—the trap-door was prized up with an axe—there was a desk about six feet from where the prisoner was standing; a few loose papers were on the desk—the prisoner was standing—he was not very drunk, he was not sober.
Re-examined, I saw the smoke coming from the front.
FREDERICK BONNER (Police Inspector G). On 29th December I went this shop about 12.5, having seen smoke issuing from the shutters and heard the alarm of fire—I saw the prisoner with Snelling—I said, "Where is the fire?"—the smoke was so. dense I could not see it—the prisoner said, "There is no fire, you are making a fuss about nothing, there is nothing"—I saw the trap and said, "Where is the fire?"—he said, "It is in the basement"—I then noticed a slight fire through the cracks of a trap-door—Snelling handed me three hand-grenades, which I broke on the trap—the prisoner was still standing by the side of me—there was a great smell of gas—the smoke became so dense I was obliged to leave—Inspector Burnham came up—after the fire-engines had arrived I examined the premises with the engineer—on the staircase I found the small lead gas-pipes were cut—Burnham questioned the prisoner, who said he had cut them, and when asked if anybody else was there said, "I do not wish to get anybody else into trouble"—there was one light in the shop—the prisoner was afterwards taken to the station—the trap I saw was in the center of the shop—underneath was a deep cellar filled with rubbish, card boxes, and that sort of thing—the prisoner had on a tall hat and a long, thick Ulster coat, being dressed about the same as he is now.
Cross-examined. There was one gas-burner alight in the shop, very low down—I did not hear every word of the conversation with Purnham—the prisoner was asked why he cut the gas-pipes—there are two meters, one for the shop and the other for the upper part of the house where the prisoner had been living—the gas-pipes have been flattened as if to prevent the gas from escaping—I heard the prisoner say to Burnham that he had used some of the governor's gas upstairs—I saw some of the rubber tube which had been used—I had no reason to doubt the prisoner's story—Burnham and I had to pull the prisoner out of the shop—I am quite sure the prisoner had been drinking, he was certainly dazed, drunk.
WILLIAM BURNHAM (Police Inspector G). I examined the shop and shutters a little after 12 o'clock on the 29th—I went in at the side door—I found Bonner, the prisoner, and Snelling there—the shop was full of smoke, suffocating—I also smelled a strong smell of gas—I brought the prisoner out, and advised the others to come out; they were nearly suffocated—I heard a dog bark upstairs, and went up—the dog would not allow me to touch it, and I got another man to go up, who brought the dog down—fire-engines arrived—I afterwards looked at the cellar underneath the trap-door at the back part of the shop—I saw a quantity of packing-cases—I produce a piece of the charred wood of the packing-cases—I asked the prisoner several times where the gas-meter was;
I wished to turn the gas off as I was afraid of an explosion—I went along on my hands and knees and tried to find the meter, but could not find it, and had to return, the smoke was so dense—I afterwards examined the house—Bonner called my attention to the piping being broken and the gas escaping—portions of the pipe were missing—I asked the prisoner if he could account for the fire—he said, "I cannot"—I asked him if he could account for the gas-piping being" cut—he said, "Yes, I cut it"—I asked him why he cut it—he said, "Because I have been using some of the gas supplied by the governor for my private use, and as I was going away I cut it off"—I asked him if any one was there with him—he said another man was there—I asked him who he was—he said he did not wish to get anybody into trouble—I found these three pieces of gas-piping—the gas-piping had been pinched together—the pipe ran from Sir. Lilly's gas-meter—I also found 18l. 7s. 9d., which the prisoner said belonged to the firm, and 8s. 1d. his own money, which was given up to him, and with his sanction the firm's money was given up to the firm.
Cross-examined, I know the Red Lion—I made the plan produced—by the side of the shop there is a public passage—there is a back entrance leading to the Red Lion, which was very much used—the public-house closes at 12.30 on a week day—the prisoner was drunk and confused.
Re-examined. The plan is a quarter of an inch to a foot—roughly I should say it would be about 10 feet between the passage and where the fire was—there is no means by which a person outside in the passage can put a lighted substance into the shop—the whole of the cellar was blocked up with packing-cases—you could not get down without pulling out the burning ones—the handle of the trap-door looked as if it had been broken for years—it was prized up—we had to use a fireman's axe—it was easily prized.
WILLIAM HARMAN . I am engineer at the Paddington Fire Brigade Station—about 12.24 on 29th December I received a call, and went to this shop in the Goswell Road—I found the smoke very dense—I could see the fire was somewhere under the floor—I closed the door, got a hand pump and buckets, and the fire was put out—I afterwards examined the cellar, and was shown another trap-door into the cellar—there were no steps leading down the trap-door where the fire was—I did not go through the other trap-door; the firemen did—I did not find the trapdoor difficult to open—the man who was with me lifted it up with his fingers—I saw a piece of flexible tubing in the back room on the first floor hanging to the gasalier—from the outer court to where the fire was it would be about nine feet—there was no fire in that space of nine feet—the fire was immediately under the hatchway—I lilted some of the wood.
Cross-examined. There would be a drop of about five feet into the cellar—you would not require a ladder when the boxes were there, as you would have two feet less.
JAMES CHAMBURY . I am an errand boy at 347, Goswell Road—I had been there for some time before Christmas—the trap-door at the back of the shop was opened for putting things into it every morning when we were cleaning up the shop—there were no steps into it—if we wanted to go to the gas meter we would go down by the other trap-door near the front of the shop—on the 28th December the shop was shut between
9.30 and 10 p.m.—the prisoner was not there then—I saw him in the morning, and I did not see him till I went up and fetched him from the public-house—when I fastened the shop up I went to the Red Lion to tell him—he went back with me to the shop—he used to keep the key of the side door; he told me he had left it in his coat pocket, and he could not get it—I went and asked the people next door if they would let me go up their steps, and on their roof, and I did, and went over the roof, and got on the top of our roof, and opened the door—then I was on the top of our staircase, and I came down and let him in—I smelt the gas escaping—I told the prisoner I smelt the gas, and he said he would have to go down in the cellar and torn it off at the main—I told him it was on the staircase—I then left him at the side door—that was about 9.40—during the day I had noticed that a piece of the pipe was broken off—I bit it with my teeth so as to close it—the prisoner was not there then—I saw the gas-pipe in the same same condition when I came down the stairs—I did not tell the prisoner I had been to the pipe to close it up—I spoke to Bradnam about it—he sent me for a plumber.
Cross-examined. It was in the afternoon when I saw the pipe was broken—between 2 and 3 o'clock—I was not about the shop all day—I was in and out of the warehouse.
JOHN BRADNAM . I had been at this shop some days in December—I was sent from another shop—before the 28th December the prisoner had been drinking—on the 28th the prisoner was not there during the day; I do not know where he was—Chambury called my attention to the gas. pipe being broken—I told him to go for a plumber—I did not speak to the prisoner about it—when I shut up the shop at night I sent the boy to fetch the prisoner—I assisted in taking the stock.
The prisoner received a good character.
The Jury strongly recommended him to mercy on account of his trouble, his previous good character, and his unfortunate habit of intemperance.
MR. GEOGHEGAN said that he held a petition from about 45 trades people in the neighbourhood testifying to the prisoner's good character, and saying they thought he was out of his mind at the time on account of trouble, he also stated that when the prisoner was at Holloway he had to be kept in a room.
Ten Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday and Thursday, February 2nd and 3rd, 1887.
Before Mr. Recorder.
The prisoners, by the advice of their Counsel, declined to plead to the indict' ment, upon which the RECORDER ordered pleas of NOT GUILTY to be entered for them.
MESSRS. BESLEY and GRAIN Prosecuted; MR. FRITH appeared for Mauchline,
MR. GEOGHEGAN for David Day, MR. POLAND for Alfred Day, and MR. HUTTON for Henry Reuben Day.
JAMES STOCKER . I live at 32, Palmerston Road, and have been in the service of the Great Northern Railway 17 years last November—I was 10 years ticket-collector at Finsbury Park—I first made Alfred Day's
acquaintance five years ago, at Doncaster races, in September—he came to me at the barrier at Finsbury Park Station, asked me to have a drink, and I went with him to Finsbury Park Tavern; we had a chat there and he said "I am going to Doncaster races to-morrow, can you give me a few tickets to come back with, all you can get?"—I said I would try, and we arranged to meet there the next night—we did so, and I gave him 10 or 12 tickets from Doncaster to King's Cross which had been used that day—it is my duty when I collect tickets to cancel them and send them to the audit office at King's Cross—that is the invariable custom all over the line—Alfred Day gave me a sovereign, and said that he could always do with a few when there was a race meeting on our line—I said "I will see what I can do"—between September, 1881, and the following spring I saw him continually there or at other places in the neighbourhood, and tickets sometimes passed for small meetings—in 1882 I gave him tickets several times both for Huntingdon and Doncaster, which are both on our line—30 or 40 of the tickets were for Doncaster—the same thing continued up to the end of 1885—I made David Day's acquaintance a year after his brother's—he came to me at the station and asked me to go and have a drink—we went to the Blackstock public-house, close by Finsbury Park—he said he was going to Doncaster races; it was in September, and he said "Will you give me some tickets? you have got some for Alf"—I said "I will try"—I met him at the Clarence, Seven Sisters Road, on the Monday night before Doncaster races, which begin on Tuesday—I took with me 10 or 12 spent tickets which I had collected that day—he asked me how many I had got, and I handed them to him, and he gave me a sovereign—I saw him several times after that, year by year, and supplied him with one or two tickets for some racing places on our line—I have seen Alfred and David frequently together up to 1886, sometimes two or three times a week, and then not again for a month—they have been together when I have given tickets to one of them—I have known Henry, or Farmer Day about four years—he came to me in the Clarence alone one afternoon and asked me to have a drink, and said he had got some friends coming from Leeds, and could I get him some tickets for them to come up with; he did not mention any names—I knew him before by seeing him with his brothers, and knew he was one of the Days, but he had not been present before when I handed anything to the Days—I got him two return half tickets from Doncaster to Finsbury Park—from that time year by year I have continued to give him tickets for the race meetings over our line, about 100 or more each year—on 23rd March, 1886, I saw Alfred Day in a public-house in Finsbury Park; he asked me for some tickets from Lincoln, and I got him five or six return halves from Lincoln to King's Cross, for which he gave me 10s.—I next saw him at his house by appointment on 19th or 20th August, the Sunday before York races, and he said he was going to York for a week's holiday, and asked me to get him all the tickets I could—I gave him about thirty spent tickets available from York to King's Cross, and on the following Sunday morning he gave me three sovereigns—prior to the Doncaster meeting in September, on Monday the 13th, he came to my house and brought a fowl for my wife and said he was going down to Doncaster and I was to save all I could and meet him on the St. Leger night at the Earl of Essex—I did so, and gave him about thirty tickets from Doncaster to King's Cross—an appointment was then made
to meet on the next night, and I did so—his brother David was with him then—he said he had got no money for me, and made an appointment to meet me at his house the next Sunday morning—I went and found him alone in his front room, and he gave me two sovereigns—I again saw him about 29th September at the station—he asked me to go and have a drink, and we went to the Earl of Essex—I handed him two tickets available from Cambridge—I gave no more to Alfred after that—in 1886, about a week before the Stockton races, David Day came to me at the barrier at Finsbury Park Station, and drink—I went with him and he said he was going to Stockton, and nipped ones would do—tickers that I collected at Finsbury Park which were legitimately handed up would probably be snipped with a machine before they into York Station—a ticker collector goes along a platform and snips the tickers and then there is no more snipping until you get to Finsbury Park, but they sometimes look at them on the road—he would satisfy the officer at York by producing the ticker from Stockton to York—these are tourists' tickers, they last from 1st May to 31st December—I gave him seven or eight tickers from York to London—about the time of the St. Leger meeting last lest year I saw farmer Day—I had received a letter from him asking me to meet him on the St. Leger night at Pool's Park Tavern, leading out of the Seven Sisters Road, and I was to give him all the tickers I could, from Doncaster to London—I met him on the 15th and gave him about twenty tickets from Doncaster to London and he said he would forward the money to me next day—he said he was going to Doncaster and would order for 1l., and cashed and signed it now appears at the Finsbury park Post-office—it was sent in a letter with just a piece of paper saying "I send you what I promised. H Day"—about 12th October I received a registered letter from him from Edinburgh—I had not seen him in London prior to that—I have destroyed it—it asked me to do something, and after I had received it on 12th October I sent a registered letter to him—in his letter was enclosed a canvas envelope ready addressed to Henry Day, care of miss Thompson, somewhere in Edinburgh—I put in it some return tickers from York to London, and registered it at the Finsbury Park Post-office—there was no transaction with farmer Day after that—on 16th October I was away at St. Note's on leave—Alfred Day had promised to meet me before he went away and give me some Note's, and I received back therewith this postal order for 10s. payable to Mr. Stocker—Mauchline was a railway policeman at Finsbury Park, and occasionally tickets—he was there five or six years, and left in September, 1886—I have been with him and Alfred Day together to Finsbury Park Tavern, and also to the public-house opposite—he knew David Day, and with both of them, but I only saw him once in company with farmer Day—we call these tickers "Briefs" and "Yorkshire Hams"—a person using the York tickets which were sent to Edinburgh would have to take a ticket from Edinburgh to York, and then ho would have the other ticket in his pocket—a tourist's ticket could be used all the way back from Edinburgh.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I am sure I have seen Mauchline in the company of the others—he is a most respectable man as far as I know.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. During the season there are a great many race meetings on our line, and I know a lot of the persons who travel year by year to those race meetings—I spoke sometimes to others besides those in the dock—a return ticket beyond 50 miles is avail. able for a month—the tickets I speak about are for a month—the public. houses in which I was with David Day are all close to Finsbury Park Station, being a ticket collector I cannot go far away—money is sometimes left with the landlords by passengers fur the ticket collector to have a drink if we cannot get away—I have a bet on races occasionally, and I have tips now and then by persons travelling on the line, and then I have a drink with them—I don't mean that all the persons travelling on the line are defrauding the Company of tickets—these are the only persons to whom I sold tickets; I am sure of that—race meetings occur on our line sometimes twice a week, and sometimes there is a month between—Scarborough and York are in the same week—I have drunk with David Day in various public-houses in the neighbourhood of the station—seven or eight times in a year.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. It is true that I have been systematically stealing these tickets from my employers—these return halves of tourist tickets enable a passenger to come from some distant place to London—he would have to pay the full single fare to the place before he could use them—cheap excursion tickets are only issued to Doncaster and Huntingdon; they are the same price as the full single fare—tourists' tickets are not always clipped when they are given up at Doncaster; for instance, they never cancel the tickets before leaving, nor on the way—I was not taken in custody; Detective Rogers told me I was to go with a clerk from Mr. Parish's office to King's Cross, and I was detained there six hours as a prisoner—I was told some people were in custody, and what their names were, but I did not make a statement for some time—I was told that I was to stop till Mr. Parish came home—I then made a statement, and I was released, and taken as a witness—I also stole excursion tickets from Doncaster in the race weeks; they had not been clipped—I can't say whether there is any person here who can show me one of the tickets which I stole—a man could not use 20 tickets himself on a return journey—my wife had just been confined when Alfred Day gave me the fowl—it was on a Monday; he brought it himself—I knew he was employed at the poultry market—that was the only occasion.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I know a man named Manley—during the six hours I was under arrest I was told that he had made a statement—that was before I made mine—I met Farmer Day first at the Clarence, Seven Sisters Road, four or five years ago in April or May—that was the first time I had any dealings with him.
Re-examined. I was constantly seeing Alfred at Finsbury Park—during my wife's illness she was attended by a Mrs. Hipkins, the wife of a collector, who used to be on the line—I have received many money payments from Alfred Day in addition to the fowl.
Rinsbury Park, and Mauchline asked me if I could get any return tickets available for Lincoln, as he knew a customer who he should be able to dispose of them to—tickets used by passengers coming from Lincoln would come into my possession—I gave aim four or five returned half tickets which had been used from Lincoln—he did not give me any money then, but said he would see me later on, and two or three days afterwards he gave me a half-crown or three shillings—he afterwards asked me if I could get any tourist tickets available for long journeys from any part of the line. (MR. FRITH objected to this evidence, contending that the tickets must be produced. The RECOBDER admitted the evidence, but took a note of the objection.) I collected tickets from passengers seated in trains from Manchester, York, Leeds, and Scotland, and handed them to Mauchline; it may have been four or five at a time, and it may have been 10—I may have given him 80 or 40 in May and June, 1886—I gave him 130 or 140 tickets in the summer of 1886, up to the time he left—he sometimes game me five shillings for them and sometimes half-a-sovereign—he gave me altogether about 2l. for the 130 or 140 tickets—he used sometimes to collect tickets himself—I first knew Alfred and David Day about two months before Mauchline left—I saw them at a public-house opposite the station before the Doncaster meeting, and Mauchline said of David Day "This is the old friend who has the briefs," which means used tickets—David Day did not speak to me then, but afterwards at a public-house he asked me if I could get some tickets available for different parts of the line—I said that I would do so—that was while Mauchline was away for a holiday—I gave David Day 20 or 30 tickets in September, the Doncaster week, available for Doncaster—Mauchline had then left the service—about that time David Day asked me where Mauchline was—I told him he was on leave—he said "Give him that; he will know what it is for,' and gave me a sovereign—I also got a sovereign from him in Doncaster week after the 20 tickets were given—on 16th September I saw David on the main line departure platform—we went into the lavatory, and I handed him the 20 or 30 tickets—he made an appointment with me to meet him that night at the Earl of Essex—I did so, and found Alfred and David there and Stocker, but I did not speak to them—I saw David next morning, and went to the lavatory with him—he asked me why I did not meet him the night before—I said that I saw Stocker with him—he said 11 He was supplying my brother Alfred with briefs," or "Yorkshire hams"—I handed him 10 or 12 used tickets from various parts, and some from Doncaster—he gave me a sovereign—about a week afterwards David asked me if I would get any tickets available for Edinburgh, at he was going to the Scotch meeting—I said that I did not think I could, as they were generally cancelled, but I gave him four or five for York—about a week afterwards Alfred Day came through the barrier at Finsbury Park Station—he made a motion to me to come and have a drink, and we went to Finsbury Park Tavern—he said "I have got a letter from my brother, asking me to ask you if you have any tickets available for Edinburgh?"—I told him I had not, but handed him four or five available for York—he said "Don't you tell my brother I have had these tickets," and then he said "I am employed in the market, and I can always make things right with you; at any time if you have a few tickets I can get rid of them"—about 10 days after that I saw
Alfred at the railway station, and gave him two or three tickets which I had collected from passengers—on a Friday in October, when I was on my holiday, I went to Farringdon poultry market, and found Alfred Day at Brooks and Co.'s stall—he said "What are you going to have?"—I asked him how fowls were—he said "You had better have a pair and there will be five shillings off the account," meaning the ticket account, but there was no account between us—I took the two fowls, and was to meet him the following Tuesday at Finsbury Park Tavern to see if I had any tickets for him—I went, but he was not there, and I did not see him afterwards—before that Alfred said "I have noticed Great Northern detectives hanging about, and I think we are watched"—I said "I don't think so"—he said that he was at Brooks's—I did not know that it was Russell and Brooks till I saw the stall, before I got the fowls—I wrote this down in Alfred's presence: "Russell and Brooks, 314"—that is the number of the stall where he gave me the fowls.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. I have only been stealing these tickets for six or eight months, not for several years—my wages are 23s.—Alfred Day lives at Finsbury—I got the fowls from him on a Friday morning in September, after the Doncaster meeting—he said would be 4s. 6d. off the account, not 5s.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I had known Mauchline three or four years when he made this proposal, but not intimately—I did not know where he lived till I was shifted to Finsbury Park—we were always good friends—up to the time I had the first communication with Mauchline I was a thoroughly honest man; he suddenly came to me and without any preface made a suggestion that I should steal tickets, and I said "I will see what I can do"—I cannot mention the name of any human being who was present when the money was paid, or who can corroborate me when I had dealings with Mauchline.
WILLIAM NEWTON . I live at Palmerston Road, Finsbury Park—I have been in the service of the Great Northern Railway since 1874—I was ticket collector at Finsbury Park in 1881—I made Alfred Day's acquaintance at the time of the Doncaster September meeting of 1881—he was hanging about the station, and asked me several times to give him exhausted tickets which I had collected from passengers; I refused to do so—he asked me several times to have some drink, and I refused—in consequence of his speaking to me I applied to the Company to remove me from the station, and they sent me to Lincoln, where I remained till 1885, when I was removed back to Finsbury Park—I left in 1882—before I left, Mauchline was in the Company's service as a policeman, and I had seen him with Alfred Day and with several of the collectors—I came back in November, 1885—in the early part of 1886 I saw Alfred Day at Finsbury Park—he asked me if I would give him some tickets, but I refused to have anything to do with him—he came to me several times in 1886; he came just before the St. Leger week and asked me to give him some tickets—he said that he was in very poor circumstances and things had gone wrong at home, and asked me to get him some tickets from Doncaster to London on Wednesday night, as he was going down there, and he could make a good bit of money and put things right at home—I refused—he asked me to meet him at Finsbury Park Tavern at 9 o'clock on "Wednesday night, but I did not go—as I went off duty that night at 11.20 I found him standing at the corner
opposite the station—collector Bowen and Fordham were with me—he stopped me and told me I had not kept the appointment at 9 o'clock; I told him I did not intend to—he said again "I am in very poor circumstances, and I want to get down to Doncaster on Wednesday night"—I then gave him two return halves from Doncaster to King's Cross—I got no money, but he said he would see me all right—I have since seen him several times outside the station but have kept out of his way—I have never received any money or present from him.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. I stole the two half-tickets for Doncaster belonging to my employers and gave them to Alfred Day for nothing, because I was afraid of him—I suppose he would pay his fare there—the return ticket is one fare on the St. Leger day, and if he paid his fare there the return ticket would be the same price, and bring him back—the first time I mentioned his name to any of the officials was the night he was apprehended, although he had asked me for tickets over and over again, and I had got shifted to another place—I do not know that he has been fifteen years in the same employment, Messrs. Russell and Roach, but I know he was employed in the market—I do not know that he has been employed there since he has been out on bail.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I have known Mauchline since I went to Finsbury Park in 1881; all I know of him is seeing Alfred Day speak to him and the other collectors.
Re-examined. After I had taken the tickets I ran across to the Blackstock to get a glass of beer, and I had the tickets in my pocket which I gave to Alfred Day—I did not take them there for the purpose of giving them away; I simply yielded to his solicitation—it was in consequence of his asking; me for tickets in 1882 that I asked to be moved away—I applied to go back, but not to Finsbury Park, and after I came back there I was solicited again—I was afraid of him, because there was him and a gang of betting men, and it would not have been safe for me to go about—the tickets were dated for Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday—the return tickets at a single fare can be used either on Wednesday or Friday, but these halves could only be used on the Friday night—they could be used to bring up another passenger on Friday.
HENRY HOLMES . I have been 14 years in the service of the Great Northern Railway, as lad, porter, and collector—I have been collector seven or eight years—I went to Finsbury Park in 1881, and lodged with a foreman named Monnington, who went out of his mind—in August, 1882, I gave Monnington three or four tickets from York, which had been given up to me by passengers—shortly afterwards I saw David Day at the box at the bottom of the subway at Finsbury Park Station—he brought me a note from Monnington, which is torn up; it was in Monnington's writing, asking me if I had any tickets—I said to David Day "I don't think it is right that he should ask me for tickets like that"—David said "It is all right, no one will know anything about it; will you meet me at the Blackstock in the evening?"—I said "I will see whether I can come at 9.15," and I did so, and took him three or four used tickets from York, which had been delivered up by passengers—two or three weeks afterwards, about 5.30 a.m., I saw Alfred Day at the barrier going away by train; he asked me if I could get him a few long journey tickets—I said "No, I shall not lay myself open to get into trouble"—he said "You have served my brother David, why can't you serve us both alike?"—I said
"I shall not lay myself open to any thing more"—he said "I hope bad luck will come to you"—at the time of the Lincoln race meeting in March, 1883, David Day asked me if it was any good asking me again for a few long journey tickets for the Lincoln Handicap—I said "No, I shall not do any such thing any more"—I was paid no money at all.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. I stole the tickets I gave to David—that was in 1882, and about a fortnight afterwards Alfred asked me for tickets—I first mentioned Alfred's name in this matter after he was charged—I did not know anything about it before.
GEORGE WILLS . I am a passenger guard on the Great Northern Railway—I commenced as ticket collector in January, 1881—I was then living with Monnington—I became acquainted with David and Alfred Day at Finsbury Park some months after I was there—they asked me if I would go and take a glass of ale with them, and I went to the Clarence and had one, and then Alfred asked me if I would get him a few returned halves as he was going to some races, and I said no, I could not—he said it would be all right, and I replied that I could not do it, as I should lose my situation through it, and he never asked me again—I have met him accidentally once or twice since then, and he has asked me to have a glass of ale with him—I became guard in 1882; he only spoke to me about tickets once.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. My evidence was taken a week last Thursday—I then remembered I had had a glass of ale with him.
WILLIAM PROSSER . I am manager to Mr. Gow, of Honey Lane Poultry Market, Cheapside—I know Alfred Day; he was a fellow-servant of mine at Mr. Gow's—he entered that service 10 years ago, and was there about four years; he left over five years ago—twice during that time I saw him with some railway tickets in his possession—I know the other Days by sight, by seeing them visiting their brother at my master's, and once I saw Alfred give a ticket to one of his brothers—I have never purchased any railway tickets from him, and have never had any talk with him or his brothers about them.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. This may have been ten years ago; I can't tell you what month it was in—I saw him take the ticket out of an envelope and go outside and give it to his brother—they took my statement just before Christmas.
Re-examined. I was in their service before he came—I cannot say how soon it was after he came into the service that I saw him give his brother a ticket.
WILLIAM SHAW . I am barman to Mr. Collins, the proprietor of the Earl of Essex Arms, close by Finsbury Park Station—I know David and Alfred Day, but not the other Day, they are frequenters of that house, I serve them frequently—I have seen them come in and out together, and Stocker has come in and joined them—Alfred Day has also come to the bar and asked me if the railway collector has been in, because he wanted to see him, and then he has waited and Stocker has come in, and I have seen them talking together—I saw Alfred Day after this case was started at the police-court, coming out of our place—I shook hands with him and said "I hope you will get on all right with your case"—he said "Yes, I think I shall get off"—I made a statement to Mr. Parish which I do not think was taken down—I do
not remember all the conversation that took place with Alfred—he did not say a word about his brother.
LOUISA WEIR . I live at 9, Greenside Place, Leith Walk, Edinburgh, and am in partnership with Mrs. Turner, who keeps a lodging-house there—I have known Henry and David Day about two years, and Henry has stopped at our house, and David visited him there on several occasions—about 2nd October last, the day of Musselburgh Races, Henry Day came with three other persons, not the defendants, and engaged a room and remained one week—Henry Day asked me if a registered letter came, to keep it and give it to him privately and not let the others see it—a registered letter was delivered to me in the morning—it was addressed to "H. Day: Turners, 9, Greenside Place"—I receipted it and gave it to him—it was rather bulky—I have heard them converse about betting matters, and took them to be betting men.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. He has called at our house before, but he was by himself then, and he has had letters there before—he has always conducted himself well.
CHARLES HIPKINS . I am the husband of Amelia Hipkins—I was employed at Finsbury Park Station as a ticket collector, I left in Feb., 1881—I knew Alfred Day before I left—Mauchline was in the service at the same time as I was—I continued to reside in the neighbourhood after I left—I know Stocker, we lived close together—my wife is a monthly nurse, and two or three months back she was at Stocker's—while I was in the service Alfred Day asked me to supply him with tickets which I had collected from passengers—I did so once or twice—I had no transaction with David.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. It was over six years ago—I have been away six years—I had collected tickets—I got money and drink from them. but I can't tell you what—I don't know where they were to—I was discharged from the service, being charged with receiving excess fares and not accounting for them—Mr. Parish took my statement after these men were in custody—I don't want to get back into the Company's service; I am doing brewers' dray work now—Rogers, the detective, came to me first, and then Mr. Parish.
Re-examined. I was discharged in consequence of my being suspected.
AMELIA HIPKINS . I am the wife of the last witness, and am a monthly nurse—two or three months ago I attended Mrs. Stocker in her confinement—while I was there I opened the door once to Alfred Day; he had a small fish-basket, and asked for Mr. Stocker, who was lying down—I called him, he came down, and Alfred Day gave him a small fowl—I had not seen Alfred Day about the neighbourhood before that.
Cross-examined. The fowl was cooked for Mrs. Stocker, she being an invalid—I asked him his name and he said "Day."
GEORGE HENRY FRY . I am a detective in the Confidential Inquiry Branch of the General Post-office—I produce a postal order for 20s., and one for 10s., both payable to and signed by Stocker—the 20s. one was issued at Doncaster on September 16th, and cashed at Finsbury Park on the 20th; the 10s. order was issued at Crouch Hill on 15th October, and cashed on 16th October, at St. Neots—I produce a registered letter from Edinburgh delivered at 9, Greenside Place.
close upon six years, but I only knew Henry by sight, and that he was one of the brothers—Mauchline I knew longer than six years, and I knew him as Mocklington; he was a policeman on the railway—I know Stocker and Mauchline by sight—I have seen Alfred and David in company of ticket collectors at my hotel, sometimes two or three times a week, and then perhaps not again for a month or two; and also in the company of Manley and Newton—I have also seen David with the collectors, sometimes one and sometimes another—I have seen Farmer Day with them at the same time, although I didn't know his name—I have seen Alfred Day come into the house and stay a moment and then Stocker would come in and have a glass of beer, and then he would go out and another collector would come in—I have also seen Mauchline with them—this has been going on during the five or six years I have been there—I do not know Monnington—on the evening when Mauchline was out on bail on this charge Alfred Day came into the private bar of my house with a stranger, who I should suppose came from the market, by his dress, and my barmaid came and said that Alfred Day wished to speak to me—I went to the bar-parlour and shook hands with him; he began to cry and said "Have you heard what has happened?"—I said "Yes, I have read it in the papers"—he asked me if I had been asked anything about it; I said I had heard many people speak over the bar—he then began to cry; I told him to cheer up, and he said "I am innocent, I am innocent; I have been brought into this through my brother, and I shall be a ruined man, I have a character to lose"—I told him I was sorry to see a man in his position placed as he was—he said "You will do all you can for me;" and he said that more than once; and he also said "You will say nothing against me," and I said "I know nothing against you, and I can't say anything against you."
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. My house is opposite the station—the officials have been told by the station-master not to use the house—I believe Mr. Webb did not like them to come in the hours of business—after working time they come in just as they like—it would take me about a quarter of an hour to walk from my house to where Alfred Day lives—he was at my house at different times, and with different people, and sometimes he would be with one of his brothers, and sometimes with Stocker, or Manley, or Newton, and would be chatting in front of the bar as customers do—he was very much affected when he said "I am innocent"—I knew he was at the market—I have bought poultry of him when it was cheap—he brought it to the house.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I have known Mauchline five or six years as a respectable man, and have seen him in company with many of the officials, and with strangers over and over again, and on no occasion have I seen him do anything wrong—I never heard him say anything about this case.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. Passengers occasionally leave money for a glass of beer for the officials—I only know Farmer Day by his coming in there with his brothers.
Re-examined. I only knew Farmer Day by sight—I did not know where he lived—I was told Henry Day lived in Hanley Road—I know nothing of tickets being handed over by the collectors.
tickets of the passengers in the express train from Edinburgh to London; there had been racing at Musselburgh, six miles from Edinburgh, on that day, and there were a great many passengers—I was assisted by detectives and inspectors and ticket examiners, and I found in the possession of passengers four first, one second, and one third-class tickets which had already been used—they had been issued from King's Cross, and I found on them the mark of cancellation at Finsbury Park, which was very much rubbed out—the little instructions pressed out the pulp of the cardboard, and there were indications of putting it back—I have not the tickets with me; I sent them up to London—I took the names and addresses of the persons from whom I took them, and on the following night I did the same thing to the same train, and found three first and one third-class return half tickets which had been previously used; they had been issued from King's Cross, and bore indications of the marks of the collectors, and had been dealt with in the same way as to putting in the dent—I took the names and addresses, and they all had to re-book from Edinburgh to London—I recognise a man here, Harry Harrison, as one of them—I can't find the other persons; they were all fictitious names—Harrison gave his names as "Harry Harrison, bookmaker's clerk"—I directed Allen to report the matter at King's Cross.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. This was in October, 1883—I was not examined before the Magistrate.
HENRY HAMMOND . I live at 45, Bacchus Walk, Hoxton; I have got no work to do—in 1883 I was a bookmaker's clerk—I have known all the Days for six years or more, and knew they attended races, and I saw them at pretty well all the north racing meetings—I was at Musselburgh Races in 1883, but I did not lodge with the Days—I have seen the Days at Rutherford's Tavern, Leith Walk, in 1882 and 1883, and have asked them if they had got any briefs or tickets for London, and Farmer Day said they had not got any then, but they would have some—I asked how much, and they said 1l.; that was first-class—I said "Oh, that is too much!"—he said "That is the price," and that he could not take less, as they belonged to his brother—I had bought briefs of Henry and David before, from Edinburgh to London, and paid 2l. or 2l. 10s. for three—I gave David the sovereign; that was in 1882—in 1883, a day or two before the Musselburgh races, I saw Farmer Day, and asked him if he had any briefs—he said "Yes"—three were purchased when I was not there, and I received one of them from a man named Clare, and we went on the Saturday to Edinburgh Station to leave for London by the 10 o'clock express train; when we had got into the carriage we heard "All tickets ready!" called out—Clare was with me, and we each had our own tickets—when they were examined I was asked to walk out, and I was stopped, and the train went on without me—they then asked me if I had the money to pay—I had, and I paid, and came up by the next train—Clare had to pay also, and came with me—my name was asked for, and I gave the name of Harrison, 45, Bacchus Walk, Hoxton—a week or two after that I saw Henry Day, and asked him for my money, as I had paid for a ticket which was no good—he said "All right, I have not got it now, I will give it you another time when I get it"—I said "You might have got me run in; you gave me a ticket that had been used before"—he said "It was all right, it had not been used before"—I said "No, it was all wrong, yon could see where it had been clipped and made level"—he
said "No such thing, it was all right, and you had no business to pay"—I told him I had given my address, and that a policeman had been round to my house—he said "What can they do? they can't do any thing."
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. Alfred Day was at the races sometimes with his brothers, and sometimes with other people—I have seen some of the aristocracy at the races, and the Prince of Wales.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I did not get the tickets from Farmer Day; I don't know where they were obtained except what I have been told.
Cross-examined by MR. CROFTON. I did not say before the Magistrate anything about David Day buying a ticket.
HARRY CLARE . I live at 17, Carlton Road, Peckham, and am a bookmaker—I came up with the last witness from Edinburgh, after the Mussellburgh Races in 1883—I had given him a ticket; I don't know the man from whom I got them—I have seen the three Days at race meetings—I heard the tickets called for at Edinburgh, and I handed my ticket to the inspector—I was then asked to walk out, and my ticket was taken from me, and I had to pay my fare to London—Harrison was drunk, and I was annoyed with him all the way home—Mitchell was not with me; I gave him a ticket—I bought the tickets against the station, but I swear I did not buy them of the Days.
Thursday, February 3rd, 1887.
WALTER SOOTT (Great Northern Railway Detective). In consequence of instructions I received early in September last, I commenced to watch Alfred and David Day, and I also had instructions with reference to the ticket collector Manley, and watched his movements, and I continued to watch those three persons till the end of October—from time to time I reported to my superior officer, and I put down in writing in this book (produced) day by day what I noticed as regards them—the first date I speak to is September 10th, 1886—I only saw David on that day at King's Cross—I followed him by train to Finsbury Park, but I did not see him take any ticket to there, or hand one up as he passed through the barrier—he went to the Railway Hotel outside the station, and I saw the ticket collector Manley follow him—they had some drink and conversation, and then parted—on 16th September I saw Alfred and David Day about 11.15 p.m. at the Station Hotel, Finsbury Park—they appeared to be looking for some one—Manley joined them—I had watched him before—the two Days went to the Earl of Essex, Stroud Green Road, and in a few minutes I saw Manley looking in at the door, but he did not go in—the two Days then left, and walked to the corner of Hanley and Regina Roads, and as they parted in the road David said to Alfred "Shall I take tickets in the morning?"—Alfred answered "I don't think I shall go down in the morning now"—Manley had walked towards the station—Doncaster races were then on—on 23rd September I was waiting outside Finsbury Park Station about 7 a.m., and saw Alfred Day arrive at the station from Stroud Green Road—he went up on to No. 2 platform and into a room marked "Private"—that is where the ticket collectors sit, so far as I know—he stopped there about two minutes, and then came out and got into a Moorgate Street train—on September 29th I saw Alfred Day arrive at Finsbury Park
Station about 8.10—he walked to and fro in front of the station for about half an hour, and then went to the Blackstock Tavern, looked in there, and came back to the booking-office of the station, and waited there about 20 minutes—he then went to the Duke of Clarence, Seven Sisters Road, and walked back to the station and spoke to the collector Stocker at the barrier, and then he went under the railway arch in Stroud Green Road, and in about two minutes Stocker joined him—they had some conversation in a dark spot there for two or three minutes, and then went to the Earl of Essex—Day paid for two drinks for Stocker, and wished him good night—this was nearly 11 o'clock—on October 5th I saw Alfred arrive at Finsbury Park Station about 8.50 p.m.—he spoke to collector Manley in the cloak-room, and then went to the poet-office opposite the station and posted a letter, and then went to the Station Hotel, where Manley joined him—on October 9th I saw Alfred Day at the station about 8.50 p.m.—he spoke to Manley outside the station, and they went together to the Station Hotel—Day paid for two drinks—Manley then left him, and Day went to Bishop's, the pawnbroker's in Stroud Green Road, and from there to the Earl of Essex, where he stopped 30 minutes, and then he went home to Hanley Road—on 13th October, at 7.50 p.m., I saw David Day waiting outside the station—he spoke to Manley, and then went to Finsbury Park Tavern, where a short man joined him—they left the house, went to the tramyard, and spoke to the man on duty in the box, who I don't see here—I have since heard that was where Mauchline was employed—they then returned to the Finsbury Park Tavern, where Manley joined them—Day wont away then to the Earl of Essex, leaving Manley with the short man, but Manley only stopped out a minute after he had gone—on the 14th, about 7.50 p.m., I saw Alfred Day outside the station speaking to Manley—he then went to the Station Hotel, and then went to the Duke of Clarence, Seven Sisters Road, and in 5 or 10 minutes Manley arrived—he stood outside the house looking about him, and then went in and joined Alfred Day—he stayed there two or three minutes, and then left—Alfred Day stopped about half an hour, and from there I followed him to his home in Hanley Road—on October 22nd I saw Alfred Day leave Brooks's shop in the poultry market where he was employed, with a man—they went to the Victoria Tavern, Farringdon Road, and from there to Ludgate Hill Station, where they took tickets for Esher, for Sandown Park—about 7.15 Alfred and David Day arrived at the station—they went to the Station Hotel, and in a few minutes Manley left the station and looked in the Station Hotel, but could not see anybody, as the Days had gone towards home, and he then went towards Holloway—on October 29th I saw Alfred Day speaking to a man near Brooks's shop in the poultry market—they went to the Victoria Tavern, Farringdon Road, where Day took a railway ticket from his pocket and showed it to the man, who wanted to keep it, but Day said "No, I can't let you have that, as it is the only one I have got, and I can't get another."
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. I was not examined before the Magistrate—this is the first time in the presence of the prisoners that I have told this story—I have not been getting close up to them and hearing what they had to say—I have been in the same compartment with them and have called for beer, pretending to be there as a customer,
but I was not listening to what they said—I occasionally put some wool into my ears—I went into the same compartment purposely not to hear, that I swear—I found out that Alfred Day worked at Russell Brooks, a poulterer's in Farringdon Market, but I don't know that he has been employed there for twenty-five years—I first went to the Poultry Market during the Doncaster week—David shouted the words across the road "Shall I take tickets in the morning?"—Alfred said "I don't think I shall go down now"—I imagine there is a great crowd and a bother in getting tickets going to races, unless you get them early—I made this entry in my book on the day of my watching after I had left them, from a piece of paper upon which I had made my notes during the day—I don't know where that is unless it is at home, I don't keep them—in some of my reports I called Alfred Day "the poultry man;" that was because I did not know his Christian name—I knew one was Alfred and one David, but I did not know which was which—I believe I knew his Christian name on 29th October.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I saw David Day in the neighbourhood of Finsbury Park—he lived in Fonthill Road.
Re-examined. The only entry in pencil is on 29th October, "Kept observation on poultry man"—I swore this information at the police-court.
GEORGE DOMINY (Detective Great Northern Railway). I was at Clerkenwell Police-court ready to be called on behalf of the Company—I was to watch David Day in particular, and I took notes in this book (produced) at the time of my observations—on Sept. 11th, at 6.50 p.m., I saw David Day at the Victoria, opposite King's Cross Station; he left there and came to Finsbury Park Station, but I did not see him speak to anybody there—on the 16th, at 10.40 p.m., I saw Alfred and David Day arrive at Finsbury Park Station and go to the Station Hotel opposite; they then went to the Earl of Essex, Stroud Green Road, and in a few minutes Manley came by and looked at the house but did not go inside; he then went back to the station and I watched the two Days, and saw them separate at the corner of Regina Road—on 22nd September I saw Alfred Day in the poulterer's shop—on 5th October, at 8.50 p.m., Alfred Day arrived at Finsbury Park Station and spoke to Manley; they then went to Finsbury Park Tavern and separated there—on 8th October, at 5.30 p.m., Alfred Day arrived at the same station with the last witness, by the same train; he spoke to Manley, they went to the Station Hotel for a few minutes, and then to Colman's, a pork-butcher's, and then home—on 9th October, at 8.43 p.m., Alfred Day came out of the station and went into the Station Hotel by himself; in about two minutes Manley followed him in, and Day paid for drinks for Manley; they stopped there about two minutes and then separated, Manley going to the station and Day to a pawnbroker's and other places—on the 13th I saw David Day at 7.30 p.m., outside the station; he went to the Finsbury Park Tavern, and was joined there by some man who I have no knowledge of; ho then looked into the Tramyard Company's box and spoke to somebody; that is where Mauchline is employed—he then went back to the station and joined Manley and another man, and paid for some drinks; they then parted—on the 14th, at 7.50 p.m. Alfred Day came to Finsbury Park Station and spoke to Manley, he then went to the Station Hotel by himself and stopped there a few minutes
and then went back to the station and looked inside to see if Manley was still there; then he went back to the hotel again for a couple of minutes and then back to the station and looked in just as Manley was coming out—he then went to the Clarence Hotel, Seven Sisters Road, Manley following, and after Manley had looked outside two or three minutes to see the road clear, he went inside—on 25th October I saw Alfred Day join Manley when he was on duty at the station.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. On some of these dates I was with Walter Scott—I went to watch and listen, and went into the same compartment with them and called for beer—I did not go in purposely for that—I did not keep my ears shut; I went to hear what they said about these tickets—I did not inform them why I was there—I was not called before the Magistrate.
JOHN ROGERS (Great Northern Railway Detective). I have seen Alfred and David Day and Mauchline—between the end of August and the time the Day's were arrested I have seen them with Stocker and Manley and other collectors at Finsbury Park Station—after the people were taken out of the train at Edinburgh, I went to Hammond's, but I sent another man to Clare's.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. I am always in plain clothes—I was always in the next compartment to the prisoners; I went out purpose to hear what was said.
CHARLES DODD (Police Inspector Y). I received this warrant from Clerkenwell Police-court on 16th November for the arrest of David and Alfred Day and Mauchline—from information I received I went to Northampton Race course on 18th November—I first saw David Day, and read the warrant to him. (For conspiring with others by subtle devices to acquire large sums of money, with intent to defraud, from the Great Northern Railway Company.) He said, "I don't Know anything about it"—I searched him, but found nothing on him relating to this matter—I then came across Alfred Day, and read the warrant to him—I believe he said, "I am innocent"—Chief Inspector Parish was with me.
RICHARD PARISH (Chief Inspector, Great Northern Railway Police). I have had the whole conduct of this matter—I was at Northampton Races when David Day was arrested—he was taken to the temporary station on the course, and he said, "Mr. Parish, do you want my brother Alfred?"—I made no reply, and he said, "If you do he is in the big ring"—I then went with Dodd to the big ring, and pointed out Alfred Day to him, and he was arrested—on the way up he said, "I have a character to lose, I shall make the Company pay for this, it takes three to form a conspiracy."
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. David said "Do you want my brother Alfred?" after the warrant had been read containing his name.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. It was under my guidance that Dominy and Scott had been watching the men—I have only known Sergeant Ham since this case began—I believe I went to him first—I asked him to assist me in the case, but he did not—he said he had given certain information about the case before to Inspector Clare—Sergeant Ham was not at the police-court, and is not here to-day.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I believe I saw Farmer Day at the races but there was no warrant against him then.
JOHN TAYLOR (Policeman Y). At 6 p.m. on 18th November I arrested Mauchline at the Tramyard, Finsbury Park—I told him there was a warrant for his arrest and I should take him to the station—he said nothing then, but afterwards he said, "I do not belong to the Railway Company now"—at the station the warrant was read to him, and he made no reply.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. He was admitted to bail at the police-court in two sureties of 50l. each.
JOHN OTWAY (Police Sergeant Y). I received a warrant for the arrest of Henry Reuben Day on 7th December, and went to Gloucester, and then to Cardiff—on 8th December I was outside the post-office in St. Mary's Street, Cardiff, and saw Reuben Day enter and receive two letters, which were in his hand when I arrested him—I told him I was a police officer, and he would be charged with three others with defrauding the Great Northern Railway Company—he said, "I am not the man you want, my name is Mr. Fanner"—he showed me the letters; they were addressed "Mr. H. Farmer"—I had called him "Mr. Day"—I said, "I shall take you for Day," and took him to the station and read the warrant to him—he said, "I know nothing about it," and again showed me the registered letter with "Mr. H. Farmer" upon it—I had some trouble with him at the station—when I told him I was going to take him to London he wanted me to have one handcuff on as well as him, but I refused—on the way up he said, "My name is Henry Day, but I know nothing about the charge; those who have given evidence against them ought to be in the dock with them"—he was quiet all the way up—he was then brought to the station and charged in London.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I am certain I said about the handcuff at the police-court, but the Clerk said it was not necessary to take that down—I knew Henry Day as Farmer Day—I know all the Days—I knew he was a betting man, and that he was known on the racecourse by the name of Farmer Day—that is nothing unusual, he might have half-a-dozen names in the course of a few months.
FRANCIS COCKSHOT . I am superintendent of the Great Northern Railway—the first-class single fare from King's Cross to York is 27s., second-class. 21s., and third-class 15s. 8d.—the single fare from King's Cross to Doncaster first-class is 23s., second-class 17s. 6d. and third-class 12s. 11 1/2 d.—the return fare in each case is exactly double the single fare—we run a special train to Doncaster during the races, going down early on the morning of Wednesday, the St. Leger day, and the third-class return fare then is 12s. 6d. and the tickets are available to return by the special train at 6.25 p.m. on the same evening, or on Friday evening, the last day of the races—this (produced) is one of the bills of the Doncaster meeting.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. If you went to Doncaster by an ordinary train you would pay 12s. 11 1/2 d. single fare, but if you went by the excursion train you would only pay 12s. 6d. for a return ticket.
Alfred Day and Mauchline received good characters.
GUILTY . MR. GRAIN stated that the Railway Company had been defrauded to the amount of some thousands a year.— Eighteen Months' Hard labour each.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, February 3rd, 1887.
Before Baron Pollock.
MR. BESLEY Prosecuted; MR. PURCELL defended, at the request of the Court.
SIDNEY ERNEST HOLDER , M.E.C.S. I am resident obstetric assistant at the North London or University Hospital—one of its objects is the delivery of poor married women at their own habitations—on 18th October the prisoner applied for some one to attend her in her confinement, and gave her address—on the 26th Mr. Laing, a pupil of mine, went to her place—he is not in London now—on the 27th I saw the prisoner at 83, Aldenham Street, Somers Town—I had received a communication from Mr. Laing—she was confined of a male child at that address—it was a fairly healthy child considering the class it was born in—I never saw it again—she went through her confinement in a perfectly normal way—Mr. Laing visited her till the tenth day, and I had a daily report from him.
Cross-examined. There was only one bed in the room—I gathered from her appearance that she was in very distressed circumstances, and that to a large extent she was lodged there on charity—she said her husband was away at the time, and had left her dependent on her work at fur sewing.
SARAH LYONS . I am a widow, and lived at 83, Aldenham Street last year—the prisoner also lived there with Mr. and Mrs. Izons—a day or two before the prisoner was confined she went away for two or three days to St. Francras Workhouse, I believe, and when she came back I consented that she should be confined in my room, and a Mr. Laing from the Hospital attended her—I was present at the birth—after her confinement the prisoner was very unkind and cruel to the baby—it was a very healthy and fine baby—I then left the house, and did not see anything of her, but I was there about a month or five weeks after she left my room, and I saw her on the 12th December, when she went away taking the baby with her—the child had improved in health from the time of the delivery to the time of the mother taking it away—it was getting on very nicely—she was in my room a week and two days.
Cross-examined. She gave me 5s. for that—she had no money to pay, but she gave me a dress to pawn to pay me—she told me she was a fursower, and could earn 30s. or 1l. a week—after she left me she was with Mr. and Mrs. Izons, who occupied the next room, and I believe she remained as servant, as she could not afford to pay anything.
GEORGE IZONS . I am married, and have two boys and a girl, and I get my living as a hairdresser at 83, Aldenham Street, Somers Town—I occupy the parlour and shop—the prisoner came to lodge with us first in August last—she did nothing for a living—I remember her going away for a few days and coming back—she went to Mrs. Lyons's room to be confined, and about six days afterwards she came to live in our room—she did not pay anything—she told my wife that she would pay her so much a week, but she never paid anything—my wife supplied her with food—this woollen shawl belonged to her—she left on Sunday, 12th December, between 10 and 11 in the morning—I bad told my wife that
she must go, and she told her so; that was about a week before—I saw her go out of the house with the baby on the Sunday; it was wrapped in this shawl—I didn't see her again till she was in custody.
Cross-examined. Her trade was that of a fur-sewer—I knew she had got a sister in London—it was a very cold afternoon on Sunday—my wife lent her some clothing when the child was born—she came back to the house about four weeks afterwards, and I then accompanied her to the police-station.
Re-examined. Sergeant Cox had come to us every day after she left, and troubled me to know where she was, and when she came to our house again I took her to the station.
KATE IZONS . I am the wife of the last witness—the prisoner came to us in August last—she paid nothing; I kept her; she was to pay five shillings a week if she got any work—she came to us about five days after the baby was born—it was a very nice baby, and in very good health—she went away from us on Sunday morning, 12th December, between 10 and 11—she didn't say where she was going, but I thought she was going to her sister's—she had nothing for the baby, and I gave her everything for it—the shawl belonged to her, and she wrapped it round the baby—it had on a small bedgown, a shirt, a flannel, and the shawl—this (produced) is some of the clothing, and are the things I gave her—the inspector came late in the evening to know where she was gone—she came on the 12th January, and I told her she had been wanted, and she was taken to the police-court.
Cross-examined. I had been very kind to her—she said she had no money, but when she got all right she would pay me—she pawned a frock for four shillings to pay the woman where she was confined—she told me she was a furrier—I know nothing of that trade—I told her she must go to her sister—she said her sister's husband was not rich, and could not afford to assist her.
EMILY WOODS . On Sunday, 12th December, I was in King's Road, St. Pancras, about 4 o'clock in the afternoon—I saw a woman carrying a bundle or a baby wrapped up in this shawl—about 20 minutes afterwards I saw the witness Yarnold with a child in his arms wrapped up—I spoke to him, and went with him to St. Pancras Workhouse, where he gave the baby to Curtis.
Cross-examined. I didn't see the prisoner go into the Fortune of War public-house, she went towards it—she was loitering about, I didn't see her go into the urinal.
HENRY YARNOLD . I am a card-edge gilder—on the afternoon of Sunday, 12th December, about 20 minutes past 3 o'clock, I was near the Fortune of War, and saw a group of children outside the urinal—in consequence of what they said I went into the urinal and found a little child lying in a puddle of urine and a pile of human filth; it was wrapped in this shawl, it was crying most violently—I took it up as it was and took it to the workhouse—prior to my picking up the child I had seen the prisoner carrying a bundle, and her singular manner attracted my attention; she was not carrying it like a mother would carry it, but like a woman carrying something that she wanted to get rid of, just as if she meant to drop it—I watched her for a minute or two, she stood in the center of the bridge looking at the water, I then lost sight of her.
Cross-examined. It was a miserably cold day—the woman seemed
extremely distressed and agitated—this urinal is a very small stone place in a little corner—it was getting a little dark—the child was on the flooring just inside—as I came up to the urinal there was a crowd of young girls begging me to go in.
ELIZABETH SWINSCOE . I am superintendent of the receiving ward at St. Pancras Workhouse—the prisoner came there on the 19th November, in the name of Rebecca Goodman—she went out on the 24th—on 12th December Mr. Yarnold, in the presence of Curtis, gave me a child wrapped up in these clothes, the shawl being outside—the child was very cold and very wet and dirty—it cried very much—I fed it before changing its clothes, and it ate ravenously—it was attended by Dr. Dunlop—it died on 12th January.
WALTER MACKINLAY DUNLOP . I am a duly qualified practitioner, and have an appointment at St. Pancras Workhouse—I first saw this child on Sunday, 12th December, at 4.30, the day of its admission—it was suffering from the effects of exposure, and was very cold—on the day following congestion of the lungs developed, and then pneumonia, from which it died on 12th January—it had proper care and medical treatment—the placing of it in a urinal exposed would be very likely to affect its health prejudicially—its life was endangered by its abandonment.
Cross-examined. Being about all day in its mother's arms on a cold day would cause it to suffer—that might sow the seeds of congestion of the lungs—I made a post-mortem, there was no disease about it.
FREDERICK COBB (Police Sergeant Y). On the night of 12th January, about 11.30, the prisoner came to the station in company with Mr. Izons—I told her I should take her into custody for unlawfully exposing her child and causing danger to it—she said "I did it, Mr. Izon told me to do it"—when the charge was read over it stated that the child was 16 days old; she said "It was 16"—I went to this urinal about 5.30 in the morning; it has a stone floor, and is about three feet long and a foot and a half wide; it was in a most filthy state.
Cross-examined. It is in a wall at right angles to the public-house—a lamp at the corner would throw a light—the 12th December was a bleak, inclement day, and it had been raining.
FLORENCE COOK . I am superintendent of the nursery at St. Pancras Workhouse—this child was received by me on 12th December, and I had it until it died—on the 13th I called the doctor's attention to it; its eyes and nose were running, and it was very stuffy at the chest, breathing hard—those symptoms continued—when I first examined it it had two marks round the neck, as if from dribbling—it appeared to be well nourished.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "What I have done is not my fault, because I have been seven weeks at Mr. Izons' as a lodger, and I paid 5s. a week; afterwards when I got no money he did not want to keep me in the lodging. I said. I would stop as a servant, and did not want money, if he would keep me and the baby. He said he did not want me. That was in the middle of the week. On the Friday I said to Mr. Izons, 'Don't chuck me down, for I have got no home if I don't atop here.' He told me to go and do this with the baby and I should be all right; he asked me to do it on the Friday. I stopped two days longer; he was cross and stopped in the shop and did not want to come up to the room for dinner or to sleep. I told Mrs. Izons I would not stop longer;
she said, 'I can't help it, when the husband don't want you you must go.' On Sunday morning I took the child and went. Mrs. Izons said, 'I am very sorry, but I can't help it.'"
GUILTY on the Second Count. Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury .— Seven Months' Hard Labour.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday and Thursday, February 2nd and 3rd, 1887.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. BAGGALLAY and GILL Prosecuted; MR. MUIR Defended.
THOMAS GOLDING . I am a post-office receiver at the Lupus Street office, Pimlico—on 23rd June the prisoner came in to make a deposit of 1s.—I handed her a declaration form, and requested her to fill it in with her name and address and occupation—she wrote on it, and handed it back—I noticed she had only written Ann Dean, and her signature at the bottom "Ann Dean"—she asked that the acknowledgment should be addressed to the post-office, Lupus Street, and she would call for it—I said "I see you have not filled in your address on the declaration," and I asked her for it—I wrote that in myself—she said "10, Grant Road, Battersea"—I thought it strange that she should ask for the acknowledgment to be sent to my office, the address being so far away, and that fixed the matter in my mind—I entered the number of the book and the number of the deposit on the sheet, and handed the savings bank pass-book to her, and asked her to put her signature in it—she then gave the book to me, and I entered the deposit of 1s.—the book was number 6100, with the name of the Lupus Street office on it, and her name—I am not sure if I put her address on the book—I saw her write the name of Ann Dean on it—I made the entry in the book of 1s., and put on it the office stamp and my initials—she said she was a widow, and I entered that on the declaration sheet while she was writing her name in the book—this is the ordinary deposit-sheet for the 23rd June—ordinary deposits are those paid where the account is opened—the sheet is not in the same state now as when I made the entry, my figure of la. has been tampered with, and apparently 30l. has been written by the side of it—there were only three deposits on that day; 1s., 1s., and 12s.—I put the total 14s. at the bottom of the sheet—since it has left my place 30l. has been added, and the "1" has been tampered with—30l. is the limit, of the amount of a deposit on one day—the prisoner never paid me any other sum—I have no doubt whatever she is the woman—when the matter was being inquired into I gave a description of the woman who made the deposit, to Mr. Everett—a depositor can draw out money standing to his credit at any office he likes, by simply sending up a demand note, when a warrant is sent to pay it at any office.
Cross-examined. She was dressed in dark clothing—I think there was no crape about her—when I identified her she was dressed in black, and as I should expect a widow to be dressed, but without weeds—I suppose she was in my office about ten minutes on that day—I gave my description to Mr. Everett on 11th October, and it was about that time I was
first spoken to about this fraud—my description was "neither stout nor thin, probably between 40 and 50 years of age, dark hair, dressed in black, wore close-fitting black bonnet, height 5 feet 3 or 4 inches, accompanied by another woman also in black; cannot give further description"—I saw the prisoner again at the latter part of October going along a street at Battersea in the evening—there was no daylight, but the shops were all lighted up—I was asked by Mr. Everett or Mr. Shaler "Do you see anybody in the street you have ever seen before?"—I passed her several times quite close—I used my own judgment about walking backwards and forwards—Mr. Everett was some distance away from me then—he directed me to identify any one in the street whom I had seen previously—I followed the prisoner into one or two public-houses to have a better look at her—I had no doubt I had seen her before—when I have seen a person I can pretty well carry her in my mind—I was on the other side of the road, and nearly opposite to the prisoner when Everett said "Do you know any one who is in the street now?"—there would be a good many persons in the street then—I could not pretend to say how many answering my description of the prisoner or anything near it—there might have been a dozen or so in her neighbourhood.
Re-examined. I identified her from my recollection of the woman I had seen—it was a busy street—I walked up and down two or three times before I fixed on the woman—she was strolling up and down with another woman—she went backwards and forwards and into two public-houses.
LEWIS ARTHUR NEWTON . I was a clerk in the Savings Bank department of the General Post-office in June last—I have left now—I wrote acknowledgments chiefly—the Lupus Street Savings Bank deposit account of 23rd June was signed by me—I made out three acknowledgments, one for 12s. and two for 1s. each—the amounts are ticked off, and in the ordinary course I should do so—I see there is an erasure, and the figure 30 has been entered in the pounds column—I did not do that—after the acknowledgments were prepared they would be examined by another clerk, handed back to me, and I would put them together on cardboard with an elastic band round them, and in the evening they would be sent to the letter branch of the Savings Bank Department.
FRANCIS HERBERT BRAZIER . I am a clerk in the warrant section of the Savings Bank department—this Lupus Street deposit account for 23rd June was submitted to me by Newton—there were three items on it, making a total of 14".—I initialled it, and gave it back to Newton—I saw the acknowledgments were for a total of 14s.—I cannot tell how the 30l. came there; as far as I remember it was not there when I had it.
GEORGE GOSHAWK . I am a clerk in the bookkeepers' branch of the Savings Bank—I enter withdrawals and deposits in the Lupus Street office ledger—I made the deposit entry there for the acknowledgment of the deposit, taking the description, name, and address from the declaration—when I made this entry of 30l. I must have had before me an acknowledgment for that amount—I have no recollection of the acknowledgment in question—it came before me with the acknowledgment of 30l. as having been entered by Ann Dean, and I entered it—I know nothing of the prisoner—that is the only deposit entry.
not there when I saw it—in taking up the account I should see the erasure—I should see whether the three entries made a total of 14s.
ALICE RUSH . I am a clerk in the warrant section of the Savings Bank department—on 29th June this document came before me, asking that it should be paid at Pimlico—I compared the signature on it with the declaration, "Ann Dean," and initialled it, being satisfied that the writing agreed—it would then pass to another department for the warrant to be made out by some one else, and then it came back to me, and I initialled it—the warrant was for the payment of 29l. 15s., in accordance with the request before me—that would be dispatched by post in the ordinary course to Ann Dean at the Lupus Street office, and made payable at Pimlico, the district head office—a depositor may request that the warrant shall be payable at any office he wishes—next morning I received this duplicate notice—to the first one I added "Duplicate" and my initials and "R.O."
Cross-examined. My principal duty is to compare the signatures of the declarations with the warrants—I have done that since October, 1885—there was only one warrant; it and the two withdrawal requests were signed—I compared the signatures, they are the same—both the with-drawal requests are dated the 29th—the second one might has been written on the 29th if posted early; I received it on the afternoon of the 29th—the date of the declaration is the 23rd, and the warrant 29th June—they are all the same signature—I think there is no substantial variation—I have no hesitation in saying all the signatures are written by the same person.
Re-examined. The warrant signed "Ann Dean" was issued in blank when I had it—I should not see the receipt again—I should say this is the same signature; I do not think it is so good as the other.
CHARLES RICHARDSON BOYLE . I am clerk in the bookkeepers' branch of the Savings Bank department—this notice of withdrawal signed "Ann Dean" came before me, and I looked at the account to see whether it would stand the demand that was made—there was 29l. 15s. standing to her credit then—I entered in the ledger the amount and date, and initialled the notice of withdrawal—I entered in the ledger 29l. 15s. as withdrawn against Ann Dean, and then the notice of withdrawal would go down for the warrant to be written—I know nothing of the prisoner.
STEWART MACINTOSH . I am a writer in the Savings Bank department in Queen Victoria Street—on receiving this notice of withdrawal for 29l. 15s., signed by Ann Dean, initialled and dated, I made out the warrant for the payment of the money, and sent it out—it would go back to Miss Rush.
WILLIAM ACLAND MAY . I am a clerk in the South-West District Post-office—on 30th June last this warrant for 29l. 15s. was presented to me about three or four minutes past 4—we stop paying at 4 o'clock—I opened part of my office to see who it was—it was a woman, the prisoner to the best of my belief—I told her she was too late to get the money, it was past the time—she said, "I must have the money to-night as I am going abroad"—I said, "It is a common excuse for people to make when they come too late"—she said, "If the warrant had been made payable at the Lupus Street office, where it ought to have been, and where I am well known, it would have been paid at any time"—on her saying that I consented to pay her—the name of "Ann Dean" was on
the warrant—she also produced her deposit-book—I compared the signatures in them; they corresponded—I saw in the book that the account was opened with a shilling, and then came 30l. in the next line—I handed the book back to her and gave her the money—I entered it as a withdrawal on that day; it is the last entry in the book that day—some time after I saw Mr. Everett, and told him what I knew about the matter, and gave him a description of the person who had withdrawn the money—after that I learned that some one was under suspicion, and I went on 22nd October with Mr. Everett to Battersea, where I was asked whether I could recognise anybody—I walked about the street and went into one or two public-houses about 7 or 8 p.m.—I saw the prisoner in Falcon Road, who answered the description, with the exception of her dress—she was dressed in black when she came in the post-office, and she now had a light dress, and feather in her hat—she was alone, as she was also when she came to withdraw the money—I saw her on several occasions in the street—I went behind and had a good look at her, and heard her speak before I came to a conclusion.
Cross-examined. It was dark; the gas was alight—I was by myself, having left Mr. Everett—I looked about; she walked past me on the pavement as I stood on the kerb on the same side, when I thought I recognised her, and I followed her into one or two public-houses, and came to the conclusion it was she—she was dressed differently altogether to the person who took the money out—when she came in the post-office I pulled down a board off the counter to look at her—that only left a wire-screen between myself and her—she had no crape on then—I do not know that she was described as a widow—she was about seven or eight minutes in my place—I could not help comparing the amount in the warrant with the account in her deposit-book—there should be a post-office stamp against every deposit—I cannot say if there was against the 30l. one; I did not notice—I think I paid the 29l. 15s. all in gold and silver, but I could not swear.
By the COURT. I swear the prisoner is the woman who came in.
THOMAS DEAN . I have lived at 10, Grant Road, Battersea, for between 11 and 12 years with my wife and children—I am a carpenter—the prisoner lodged with us for seven or eight weeks, from May till July in 1885—she went by the name of Elate Roe—there is nobody in our family named Ann Dean—I know nothing about this declaration of Ann Dean, of Grant Road, Battersea.
Cross-examined. I saw the prisoner occasionally at different times after July, 1885—I did not know how she got her living when living with me—she had no husband who lodged there.
Re-examined. She came to my house as a married woman; she stated she was so—I never saw her husband—I don't know that she ever told me anything about her husband—she said when she came to take lodgings, that she was a dresser at a theatre—I gave her notice to leave through my wife, because of the time at night she came in—I had not a very good opinion of her.
EMILY ELIZABETH DEAN . I am the wife of Thomas Dean, and we have lived at 10, Grant Road for 10 or 11 years—no member of our family is named Ann Dean—I know nothing of this Post-office Savings Bank account—one of my daughters is 20 and the other 6 years old.
Cross-examined. I should think the prisoner is about 32 or 33—she,
said she was a dresser at the Avenue Theatre—she said she should be late at night—I don't know how the prisoner could know my Christian name—she always kept her own room—she was never together with me and my husband—my husband always called me "Em"—she and her two little children occupied one room.
Cross-examined. My mother only has one lodger at a time as a rule—we have had four since the prisoner left, man and wife always.
CAROLINE HUNT . I live at 20, Orville Terrace, Green Lane, Battersea—I have known the prisoner about two years—when taken into custody she was living with me in Green Lane—we had been there then between two and three months—I had lived at Khyber Road, Battersea, about 2 1/2 years, and the prisoner had lived with me there about a month—she lived by herself at 14, Khyber Road, and from there went to 10, Grant Road—I don't know of any other address she had—I know her writing—this notice for the re-direction of letters is in her writing—these two notices of withdrawal for 29l. 15s. resemble her writing, but I cannot swear she wrote them, because I did not see her do so—I believe them to be her writing; they resemble it.
Cross-examined. She lived with me five months, and I have seen her write very often—this writing is like and unlike hers; it is not so good as her writing—the "D's" are not the same shape as those she makes—I should not take this (The second application to withdraw) to be the prisoner's writing at all.
Re-examined. I should take the writing on the blue paper to be in her handwriting.
GEORGE ROBERT EVERETT . I am a senior clerk in the Savings Bank department of the General Post Office—in consequence of the discovery of this fraud I was instructed to make inquiries—descriptions were given to me by May and Golding, and also this declaration, which gives the address 10, Grant Road—I made inquiries at Grant Road, where I found Mr. and Mrs. Dean lived—the following day, 22nd October, May and Golding went down with me to Battersea, and subsequently, after further investigations, the prisoner was arrested on 4th January—I saw her at 117, Earl's Court Road—I said "I am an officer of the General Post-office, and have been instructed to see you; you are a person who has been identified as having committed a fraud in connection with an account opened with the Post-office Savings Bank, and I shall be glad if, without going further into the matter here, you will accompany me to the General Post-office"—she came with me—when at the Poet-office I asked her for the several addresses at which she had resided—she told me, but did not mention Grant Road—I told her she had been identified as the person who had committed a fraud by opening an account in the name of Ann Dean, at the Lupus Street office on 23rd June, and making a deposit of a shilling, and withdrawing from the same account on 30th June the sum of 2l. 15s.—I asked her for an explanation—she said "I don't know what to say about it; I once resided with a person named Dean in Grant Road, at No. 9 or 10, in May and June, 1885"—I showed her the notice for the re-direction of letters—she said "This is my writing"—I asked her whether it was written
by her—she said "It is"—she then wrote this (produced) in my presence—she was then told that Mrs. Hunt had identified the writing on the two notices as hers—she replied "Probably Mrs. Hunt knows more about the matter than I do, but I should not like to say anything more for fear of dragging a relative of mine in"—I asked her where she was living, and she gave the address, 82, Highfield Road, Fulham—I went there; her room was pointed out to me—I found in a drawer in the room this book.
Cross-examined. I have conducted investigations like this before; it is my duty occasionally to do so—I first went to 10, Grant Road, and inquired for Ann Dean—I inquired about the persons who had been staying in the house—Golding and May had given me a description, and I asked the Deans to give me a description of the persons who had resided there since 1880—five or six women had done so; only two answered the description—I made inquiries first about the other woman and then about the prisoner—I had difficulty in finding the prisoner's address—the Deans did not know it—I traced her first to 18, Khyber Road; then while I was conducting the inquiry she moved to Orville Terrace with Mrs. Hunt—those were the only two addresses I traced her to—besides not mentioning that she had lived at Grant Road, she did not mention Eccles Road—I first spoke to her at her brother's, a draper's shop in Earl's Court Road, where she was employed as a skirt-maker—she was at her work when I went in—this is the copy of May's description (the original was destroyed): "5 ft. 4 in. high; 30 or 40 Years of age; medium build; hair probably dark brown; dressed in black; wore a black bonnet he can identify"—on 19th October May supplemented that by saying the woman had a very red face as if from drink—May went with me first—I asked him if he could identify any one, because I saw the prisoner coming along the road—I had gone to the place where I expected to see her—it was night; the shops were brightly lighted—the same thing practically occurred with regard to Golding, only in Golding's case he was across the street—we had been waiting some time—I think the woman was pointed out on the other side of the road—he was told to go over and see if he could identify her—she was in Mrs. Hunt's company—I pointed, and said "Go and see if you know either of those women."
Re-examined. I ascertained that Eccles Road was the place where she was living at the time the fraud was committed in June—she did not mention either that address or Grant Road—at the time of her arrest she was living at 82, Highfield Road—she had been living for two months previously to her being; given into custody with Mrs. Hunt at 21, Orville Terrace—she had two addresses—I found the other person, who to some extent answered Golding's and May's description, had not been in London since June, 1885—I made inquiries in Yorkshire.
By MR. MUIR. The prisoner wrote these documents in the post-office of her own free will and willingly.
THOMAS LATMAN . I live at 82, Highfield, Road, Fulham—the prisoner took a furnished bedroom at my house on 1st November last year—she kept it up to the time she was arrested—24th December was the last time I saw her—she slept there occasionally, about six times—she sent me post-cards—after her arrest I pointed out the room to Mr. Everett, and he got this washing book from there.
Cross-examined. Letters came there for her, no visitors—she took the lodging herself—she said she had two children, and she referred to her late husband.
GEORGE SMITH INGLIS . I live at 8, Red Lion Square, and am a professional expert in handwriting—I have compared the writing of document B, which the prisoner wrote at the post-office, with the two notices of withdrawal, the declaration, and the warrant for the payment of 29l. 15s., and I believe the two notices, the declaration, and the warrant, are in the disguised handwriting of the person who wrote these test writings "B" and this re-direction notice—I can give my reasons if necessary why I consider the writing similar, although to a certain extent disguised.
Cross-examined. The re-direction letter, dated 12th May, 1885, is not in a disguised hand—the declaration and the warrant and requests of 29th June are—all the post-office notices are disguised in the same way—a person comparing one of the Post-office documents with another would say they were in the same writing, because disguised in the same way—a person can always disguise in the same way. (The witness further described the similarity of formation of certain letters throughout the various documents.)
GEOEGE ROBERT EVERETT (Re-examined). Knowledge of the fraud came to me on 25th September—I discovered where the prisoner was living on 20th or 21st October, and she was arrested on 4th January—between those dates I and a constable were watching her movements.
NOT GUILTY .
There were three other indictments against the prisoner, on which no evidence was offered.—NOT GUILTY.
MESSRS. GEOGHEGAN and SALTER Prosecuted.
MORRIS KLEIN . I am an upholsterer, of 301, Brick Lane—on 21st Sept. the prisoner called on me and asked me whether I wished to be insured—I said "Yes, what insurance company?"—he said "I am an agent for the Patriotic Fire Insurance Company of Ireland; you will have to give me 1l. 1s. as a deposit"—I said "Very well," and I did so—he wrote out and gave me this receipt—on 29th October he called on me and said "The Patriotic Fire Insurance Company has accepted you, and if you pay a balance of 2l. 9s. you are insured, and will receive a policy a month afterwards"—I paid him 2l. 9s. and he wrote this receipt on the back of the former one which he had given me. (This was of the Patriotic Insurance Company of Ireland, dated 21st Sept., 1886, for 1l. 1s., paid as deposit by Mr. Klein for an insurance of 400l., signed Henry Vivian Howard, endorsed "Received from Mr. Klein 2l. 9s., balance of premium. Henry Vivian Howard, Oct. 29th, 1886.") I paid that 2l. 9s. on the faith of his statement that my proposal had been accepted—I received no policy—on December 6th, 1886, I received this letter from the prisoner. (This expressed surprise at just hearing that the prosecutor's insurance was declined, and stated that it was the first intimation he had received of it, and that in the Company's letter to him they stated to the contrary; that he would communicate with the office, and that in the meantime, until the amount paid had been returned, the prosecutor would be held insured upon the receipt he held; that until his appointment as agent
was cancelled all moneys received by him were matters of account between the Company and himself; that he would communicate further with him, and it requested him to keep the letter, as he might desire its production.) On 18th December I received this letter from the prisoner. (Requesting him to produce the former letter at the hearing of the summons against him at Worship Street.) I had in the interval taken out a summons at the police-court—I did not know the prisoner before he came to me the first time.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not know the Patriotic Company—some five weeks elapsed between your obtaining the 1l. 1s. and the 2l. 9s.—I did not go to the office between those dates because you told me the policy would not be issued for a month, till I paid the 2l. 9s., and I thought it would not be issued till quarter-day, and I left it standing till I heard of other people being defrauded, and then I went to the office and inquired, and they told me I was declined on 2nd October—when you came on 29th October you told me distinctly that I was accepted, and I paid you the 2l. 9s.—had you come to me at any date after 2nd October and told me I was accepted I would have paid you the balance—you never attempted to obtain the balance before the 29th; I never saw you—I never knew of the Patriotic Company before I saw you—I left it to you to get me insured, I thought you were a proper agent and an honest man—you quoted me a rate of 17s. 6d. in 100l.—I should not have taken your advice about not paying the 2l. 9s., I take my own—I believe a surveyor called on me from the office, I do not know exactly—I know the proposal must have been sent in to the office.
Re-examined. Before I paid the 2l. 9s. he told me I had actually been insured in the Patriotic Company.
ELIZA ROWLANDS . I am a bedding manufacturer, of 133, Essex Road, Islington—on or about 29th October the prisoner called on me—he had called previously, and he said, "Are you insured?"—I said "No"—he told me he thought I ran a very great risk, and advised me to let him insure me in the Patriotic—he called again on 29th October, and wanted a deposit of 10s.—I gave him 5s. on account, and he gave me this receipt—on 3rd December he called again—between those dates my premises had not been surveyed; no one had called on me—I mentioned the fact to him—he said a surveyor must have been—he then told me my proposal was accepted, and he had called for the balance of my premium—I gave him another 5s., and he gave me this receipt on the back of the original deposit note—when I gave him that I believed I was insured in the Patriotic Insurance Company, and that was what inclined me to give him the 5s.—he said the policy would come in a fortnight; I have never received it, and so far as I know I am not insured at all. (This receipt was in the same terms as the last, and endorsed in a similar manner.)
Cross-examined. I thought I should have to pay a trifle more than 10s.—you told me after you had taken the money that 10s. was not the full premium, and you were not certain what rate I should be charged at, but from 7s. 6d. up to 10s., and that there would be a trifle more to pay—you had called five or six times previously.
EDWARD JOSEPH POPLAR . I am a cabinet-maker, of 9, New Inn Road, Shoreditch—on Saturday, 16th October, the prisoner called—I had seen him before—he asked me if I wished to be insured; I said "Yes"—he said he came from the Prudential Insurance Company, and if he could not get me insured in that office he would have me insured in another
good office—that was before 16th October—on 16th October I paid him two guineas, part payment of deposits for two insurances in the Patriotic, one on my house and shop for 300l., and the other for the effects, 400l., one guinea for each—he gave me these two receipts—on a subsequent Saturday in November he called again and said, "Your insurance is all right, and you will have your policy within a month"—he asked me for the balance of the insurance, and I paid him 3l. 9s. and 1l. 4s.—he endorsed the amounts on the back of the two receipts, and dated it the same day—I paid him those two sums on the faith of his statement that my insurance was all right and that my policy would reach me in about a month—I have never received my policy. (These were interim deposit receipts of the Patriotic Company, in the same form as the others, and endorsed on 11th November in a similar manner.)
Cross-examined. Very likely you called on me early in August—you told me then a Company had declined me, I cannot say which it was—I gave you a proposal in August to insure me in some office or other—I believe you tried to get me insured in several offices; more than once you came and told me an office had declined me, and once you gave me the receipt of another office in exchange for the one I first had—I remember having those two, and the one you took when you gave me the two—you did not send me back two by post—you had informed me previous to coming about the Patriotic, that I had been declined by another office, and you had your receipt back, and gave me these in lieu of it—you called on me with a gentleman, who you represented to be the surveyor, and went over my place on the Tuesday or Wednesday after the first guineas were paid—the surveyor pulled down one of the blowers, and said it was dangerous, and said I was to put up a tin or iron blower in its place—I judged by that that I was accepted by the office—they ordered a structural alteration in that blower—I know now that the building I rent had been offered to the Patriotic—I did not know then—you told me it had, and you told me if they did not take the buildings they would take my contents—I do not know that they have not insured the building—I don't know what rate I was under—I said if you could get it done under a guinea you could do it, but I would not pay more than a guinea—I bound you to no office, so long as it was a right one—it was not convenient for me to pay you the first time—I paid you the balance three weeks later, I should think—I can't say how I paid you—you did not worry me for the balance—I said "Come in three weeks or a month and I will pay you"—I met you in Worship Street at the end of December—I said "I have not received my policies yet"—you told me to write to the office for them, and I wrote—from the conversation with you I believed I had been accepted by the Patriotic—had you come to me any time after paying the first guinea and told me I had been accepted I would have paid you the balance—I told you when to come, and then you had it, but if you had come in the meantime very likely you would not have got it—up to that time I had had some little difficulty in getting insured—the Prudential wanted 5s. in a 100l., and I would not pay it—there had been a fire in the neighbourhood, and the rate went up to 5s. per 100l.—I wrote to the Patriotic Company, and received these two letters in reply. (The first was dated 28th December, and requested him to let them see his receipt, as Mr. Howard had been giving receipts, broadcast. The second, dated December 30th, stated that his proposal
was declined on 16th October, and that if Howard had taken money since that date he had obtained it under false pretences, and was amenable to the criminal law.) You received the money on the date which the receipt bears—I said paid you the two guineas on 16th October—I said you came on the Tuesday or Wednesday after with the surveyor, but I paid you on the date of the receipt—this letter says my proposal was declined on 16th October—you called on the Tuesday or Wednesday after that with some one you called the surveyor, but whether he was or not I don't know.
Thursday, February 3rd.
EDWARD JOSEPH POPLAR (Cross-examination continued). The first receipt you gave me was one like this of "The Fire Insurance Company"—I then paid you the guinea—it was in August—you afterwards gave me a Mutual Company's receipt and took this away—then you subsequently came and gave me two Patriotic Company's receipts, and I paid you a second guinea—you wrote asking me to attend at the police-court and bring my receipts—I am not the prosecutor; Klein is.
Re-examined. I thought the prisoner said he represented the Prudential when he first came—when I paid the second guinea he said he the hearing of the summons, on one occasion I asked you whether you would return the money.
By the COURT I put the law in motion against him.
RICHARD CHARLES KENDAL . I am a clerk in the office of the Patriotic Insurance Company of Ireland, 49, Cornhill—the prisoner was for a short time one of our agents from 8th September, 1886—his agency was cancelled on 7th December—he submitted to the office a proposal received on 27th September for insurance on behalf of Morris Klein—that was declined on 2nd October, 1886, by a letter of which this is a copy from our office to the prisoner—in that I mention five policies which are declined, including klein's, and four which are accepted—on 11th October I wrote again to the prisoner a letter of which this is a copy. (This referred to certain proposal, saying, some should be surveyed, and that others were declined.) On 11th October I received a letter from the prisoner referring to my previous letter—on 6th December, the day before we discharged the prisoner, Klein came to our office and made some inquiries—the prisoner had never told me he had received 2l. 9s. from Klein in certain cases agents have a right to receive deposits, but the prisoner would have no right to do so in Klein's case; he had been told not to do so in hazardous cases such as Klein's was—if a proposal was declined his duty was to return the deposit at once; he would have no right to receive any further money after the proposal had been declined—we pay our agents 15 per cent. on the premium of accepted cases—we send policies through the agent unless he desires one sent direct to the proposes; so that if Klein had been accepted his policy would have been forwarded through the prisoner—in this case the agent would have given us notice to make out the policy, and we should have forwarded it to him—Poplar's proposal received on October 16th from the prisoner—it was declined verbally on the same date by the manager, Thomas Henry Owens—the prisoner did not tell me that he had received a deposit of two guineas from Poplar, or
that he had received 3l. 9s. or 1l. 4s. from him after his proposals had been declined—Poplar came to the office about 28th December—we received Mrs. Rowland's proposal on 24th November in a letter from the prisoner—it was declined on the same day by a letter sent to the prisoner, of which this is a copy—Mrs. Rowlands did not come to the office, but some one came for her in January and communicated what had happened—that was the first time the office had heard of any sums having been obtained from her by the prisoner—the same thing holds good as to Poplar, till 28th December, when we received a letter from him—these are the counterfoils from the prisoner's book—across this counterfoil of Klein's receipt is written "Declined" in the prisoner's clerk's writing, I believe—I have seen letters written and signed by him—the writing all through is the same as that on Klein's counterfoil; it looks the game writing as on the counterfoil itself—across Poplar's counterfoil, dated 15th October, is written "Declined"—Mrs. Rowlands' name does not appear on any counterfoil—this (produced) is not one of our receipts, it is an authorised form—we received Poplar's proposal on the 16th, and declined it the same day—the prisoner wrote to us on 11th October mentioning certain names which he could only have obtained from the letter I wrote to him declining Klein's proposal.
Cross-examined. I have not seen these receipt-books of yours before to-day to my recollection—in the letter of 2nd October five proposals are declined and four accepted—some of those declined were subsequently reconsidered, I believe, at an interview between you and Mr. Owens on 16th October lasting upwards of an hour—I was in and out during the interview; I was called to produce proposals, plans, and reports referring to some of these and others you had sent in as well—I do not know of my own knowledge that Peek's was subsequently surveyed again—I believe some of the rates were then altered, Mr. Owens will tell you—I cannot swear whether Klein's proposal was reconsidered or not, it may have been—I can produce the policy book, showing the rates people now pay—we probably received about 30 proposals from you from first to last, it may have been between 30 and 40—we probably accepted seven or eight of those; I think I can swear we did not accept 19—Watts, Lee, Nicholls, Miller, Wood, Lefevre, Blake, Smith (two proposals), Kinderlight (two proposals), and Schofield were accepted—I called on you after 2nd October, you were out—I may have seen your clerk—you complained to me of the way your proposals had been declined—I said you had better come and see Mr. Owens and talk to him, and that you should not give up your agency—I may have said, "Take Mr. Owens out to lunch"—I thought you would get on better with him after you had seen him—you came on 16th October, the declined proposals were reconsidered then—I remember going round to the Bell and leaving you at the office—Gray, your late clerk, was there; Williams, the money-lender, may have been there, I know I saw him one day, I cannot say the date—I had made application to him for a loan through you; you recommended me to him, and I saw him there with reference to a loan—I do not think I said, when you came into the Bell, "I told Howard if he came down, matters would be all right with the governor"—I will swear I did not make you stand drinks on the strength of Klein's and other proposals being accepted—I did not say, "I told you if you came down and saw Owens the matter would be all right"—I admit on one occasion saying if you
came and had lunch with Mr. Owens things would be all right—after I had seen Owens we met at the Bell—I did not invite you to stand drink on the strength of the proposals—I once borrowed 10s. of you, that was all; I have not returned it—I do not owe you between 3l. and 4l. now—I asked you to return me an I O U for 2l., and I had it back, I never had the 2l. for that—I sent to ask you to lend me 2l., and put an I O U in my pocket—I did not ask you to put it away; I asked for it back, and it was destroyed—I do not owe you the money for it—it was a private matter—I asked you to lend it to me—I did not have a bottle of whisky on that occasion—on Saturday evening I got home and found you had left a bottle of whisky for me—I asked you to buy me some more, and you gave me some more—I did what I could for you in the office; we were friendly—I did not tell you to take money—I did not more frequently come to your office and tell you of business than write—I often came, but only on the Company's business two or three times—I did not call on you about the date of the rejection of Kelly's proposal—on 14th September you were instructed not to take deposits on hazardous risks—I believe one insurer called at the office, and showed his receipt after the 14th; none before—Mr. Baines and Mr. Woodhouse called after the 14th—I received Woodhouse's proposal on October 2nd—I knew he had a receipt—these are the printed terms of your agency and your appointment—the terms are 15 per cent. on the first year and 15 per cent, on each subsequent renewal—you were paid solely by commission—an account was to be rendered to you each quarter if you went on straightforwardly, and would include all proposals accepted during the quarter—I believe an account was rendered to you on 5th November for the Michaelmas quarter—if they had been accepted we should possibly have sent you the account in December—an account received and accepted after September 25th would be sent in in the December account, I suppose—Klein's money you received on 29th October, Poplar's on November 11th, and Rowlands' on December 24th, I believe—you were our agent on each of those dates, but you had no right to receive the money—E. Rowlands was trading as Rowlands Brothers—her proposal was never surveyed—I believe the manager had a letter from you asking us to produce the surveyor here—we received a telegram some time after Poplar's proposal asking our surveyor to meet you at Shoreditch Church, not stating what for—he started to meet you—he is Mr. Belcher, of Adelaide Chambers, London Bridge—I do not know the number—I did not say at the police-court that I did not know the number; you asked Owens then—I still say Poplar's proposal was received and declined on the same day—I don't know that Owens has stated that if he did not accept Poplar's building he would accept the contents—we had a proposal on Poplar's before you came in, and then you sent in one on Poplar's stock—we were insured on the building; we are not now—our agent did not cover the building by deposit—Mrs. Flowers declined to pay the rate—we had accepted the proposal and held the building covered—we very rarely accept a proposal and survey a building on the same day; sometimes we do—you may have taken the surveyor anywhere—there are three telegrams of yours here—it is not because the fourth one, asking the surveyor to meet you at Shoreditch Church, would prove that Poplar's proposal was not declined on the 16th that I do not produce it—it may have been handed to the surveyor—Poplar said at the police-court that the surveyor did call—I did
not hear his evidence here—Poplar's proposal was declined verbally on the 16th, and never reconsidered—it is not usual to decline verbally—I cannot show anything in writing that we declined it to you—at the time it was declined I entered in red ink in this book "16, 10, 86, declined verbally"—I swear that was entered on the 16th—I did not say I could not swear it was made within seven days—you questioned me about it at the police-court—across Poplar's proposal is written "Declined verbally, 16th October"—I could not swear when that was written within a few days—I did not swear at the police-court that was written on the 16th—I could not swear when it was written; it would be somewhere about the 16th, in all probability within seven days, but I cannot swear it was—I would swear it was within 14 days—you have in some cases suggested at what rate a case should be taken—we look to our surveyor for guidance—I do not find that you got the deposit notes back in the other cases declined in the letter of the 2nd October—I can't say that you did in Peek's case—I went with you to Peek's, and he said so—I don't know that Cole's and Lovell's covering notes are not in their hands—neither they nor Bailey have complained—the only person who has been to complain is Klein—I don't know that you have taken a penny on behalf of the Patriotic Company since 8th December; I cannot say—I did not tell you Mr. Owens would forget in a few hours what had happened—I said that the business all went through my hands—nothing in declining or accepting risks was done without my knowing it—I did not know you were agent for other offices at the time you began as agent for us—I believe you became agent for others—I advised you myself to submit proposals rejected by us, to other offices—I was your referee—I inferred that you were a gentleman then, not a convicted felon—I am certain this "declined" across the proposal is in Gray's writing—I was on terms of intimacy with him; he was always with you—I have come to you without asking you for money—I said you had better pay the Michaelmas account to me instead of to the office—I did not want to use it for my own private purpose—we have not yet had it at the office, and I don't think we shall now.
Re-examined. Immediately a proposal was declined it was my duty to enter that in this book—I entered it in pencil when it was declined to save time, because I was entering others, but afterwards I went carefully through, and entered in red ink, and rubbed out the pencil—I hate no power to reconsider proposals, being only a clerk—Mr. Owens had nothing to do with anything I have had to do or say to the prisoner—I did not lead him to suppose that any of the three proposals charged had been reconsidered after they had been declined—other persons who made proposals were at the police-court, and I believe some are here to-day—I heard from them at the police-court that they were treated by the prisoner in a similar manner to the three prosecutors, because the prisoner called them, and they were cross-examined.
THOMAS HENRY OWENS . I am London manager of this Patriotic Company—on 27th September I believe Klein's proposal was made to us and declined by letter on 2nd October—occasionally I reconsider proposals, but I rarely reverse my decision, except in reduction of rates—I believe I did not reconsider Klein's proposal after we declined it—I have no recollection of the prisoner suggesting that it should be reconsidered—we issued no policy, and the prisoner was not entitled to receive any money
from Klein after that time—it was contrary to his instructions to take in advance any deposit of money and give a receipt for it except on certain. non-hazardous risks—this was a hazardous risk—Klein came to our office and communicated to us on 6th December, and that was the first I had heard of the prisoner having taken these sums—next day we cancelled his agency—in Poplar's case the proposal was declined verbally on 16th December, by myself, at the office—I did not, to my recollection, reconsider that—in the case of Rowlands, the proposal was made on 29th October, declined on 4th November, by letter, and was not reconsidered, that I can speak positively to.
Cross-examined. You were with me for an hour and a quarter or an hour and a half on a Saturday, on the subject of the proposals contained in the letter of 2nd October—I probably rang for the proposals to be brought in, and you may say I reconsidered them—I believe I did resurvey Peek's under the circumstances that I met you by appointment one day to survey another risk, and then you took me—you telegraphed me to meet you at Shoreditch Church, and we went and surveyed Tate's—on 6th October I think that was—I have no recollection of reconsidering Bailey Brothers, I may have had the proposal brought in—I do not know you got the covering note away in that case—I can't say if we have ever been applied to by Bailey and Coles—probably I refused to reconsider Coles and Lovell's—Nichol's rate was altered from 21s. to 17s. 6d.—Lee's appears here at 15s.—those are ones that were rejected—Miller is 15s., and Watts, quoted at 21s., is 10s. 6d.—I may have done so at your suggestion if it would help your agency—I say Klein's proposal was declined, and always declined; I am very clear that I never accepted it—when I refuse a risk I rarely accept it afterwards—I don't think any of the other people have applied to the office—that does not show that you obeyed my instructions—I have been applied to about several of your receipts—the surveyor is not here—he is not my surveyor, but a professional man; I gave you his address, and you could have summoned him—I don't know his number in Adelaide Place, my clerk always addresses letters, but there are only five houses in Adelaide Place, and there would be no difficulty in finding him—I told him he was wanted as a witness—I believe the telegram was lost or destroyed; it merely made an appointment—in answer to a telegram, the surveyor met you at Shoreditch Church—I had one proposal in Poplar's name, and one through another agent in the name of flowers—I took the proposal on the bricks and issued a policy on them, which was paid for a short period, then there was a dispute about the rate with Mrs. Flowers—if a fire had occurred on Klein's premises it is a legal question whether we should have been liable—I never accepted Poplar's; as far as I remember his premises were never specially surveyed by my surveyor—I do not produce him, you can—I believe we did not survey Mrs. Rowlands'; it is a class of risk we decline without survey—sometimes we receive, and decline, and survey a risk on the same day; very rarely—Poplar's risk was received and declined on 16th October, because I had a report of Mrs. Flowers's building before me—I declined Mrs. Flowers's building and Poplar's contents—I believe Poplar stated that some one called with you on the 20th and looked over his place—he may have suggested a structural alteration—I have communicated with the surveyor, and he said he had no recollection of it—I gave you the surveyor's address at the police-court—I did not know that
Klein frequently saw you—matters in connection with your agency only took place on one or two occasions—I don't know if you complained in October about the manner in which your proposals were accepted—I altered the rate in each accepted case—you took me to Peek's under false pretences—I told you before I went the risk would not be accepted—I went for your satisfaction—I cannot say if I objected generally to your risks before 26th October—probably that is the first time I wrote objecting to your risks—the Patriotic was comparatively unknown in London 12 months ago—several persons called at the office to inquire about it, and produced their receipts—we were probably not in ignorance that you were issuing these receipts, although it was contrary to your instructions—these books contain 20 receipts each—you obtained a second book by saying you wished to leave one at your office and carry the other one with you—I did not say that if you had taken a deposit in Tate's case I would have clinched them—I did not say a deposit clinched a case—I did not say so when we had refreshment—very likely I said a survey put us to expense—it is not part of my commission—I did not tell you not to send me more surveys than you could help—I may have said do not send proposals that you do not think will be accepted, as it put the Company to the expense of survey fees—"Interim receipt" means pending the ultimate decision, and it is a legal point whether it would protect if a tire occurred—I certainly did not tell you to take a deposit for the purpose of saving a survey—a person who pays a deposit is probably more likely to be accepted than a person who only gives a proposal—it was open to you when Klein's risk was declined to propose it to another office—I have nothing to do with your dealings with other people—I do not know whether it has been proposed to another office—your duty was to return to Mr. Klein on 3rd October the guinea he had paid—I have a fairly good memory—I am very clear as to Klein—I do not impute fraud; I am only a witness;—I have found no money for this prosecution directly or indirectly—if these three proposals had been accepted I should have had to render you an account on them from December—an account was rendered and not paid, and we rendered no December account, because you had not paid the Michaelmas—I cannot say if you ever received a penny on behalf of the Patriotic since your appointment, ceased—I had written asking you to return all the deposits you had accepted—I have no recollection of any particular letter—it is a legal question whether you are entitled to 15 per cent. on all who do pay—I hold that when an agency is cancelled the late agent is not entitled to commission on old policies—we only render accounts for policies issued—we were under the impression in December that you had returned all deposits—we had not found you out then.
Re-examined. I gave the prisoner Belcher's address at the police-court on Tuesday week or fortnight—Belcher had no recollection of having surveyed Poplar's—an interim receipt is a receipt from the time of payment of deposit till the decision, of the office is known—it is no cover after the proposal has been declined, and the deposit should then be immediately returned—the prisoner has received 4l. 15s. as deposits and balance in these cases—I have never received any part of that—I went with the prisoner to Peek's to oblige him; I knew I should not do it—I have never been surveyor to the "Mutual"—if he represented to Peek that I was it would be an untruth—what the prisoner says in his letter
to Klein of 6th December, that he had that night received a letter from the Patriotic saying the insurance was declined, is untrue—I never wrote to him stating that Klein's proposal was accepted.
THOMAS PEEK . I am a marine store and wardrobe dealer, at 121, Virginia Road, Bethnal Green—the prisoner called on me, and represented himself as an agent for the Patriotic Company, and obtained a deposit of 1l. It.—the next Saturday he called again, and told me I was accepted by both the Patriotic and Mutual—I asked why he had sent to the Mutual, as I had only authorised him to insure me in the Patriotic—he said he thought the Patriotic was rather exorbitant—he came with Mr. Owens, whom he represented as the Mutual surveyor—I did not see him, but I saw the surveyor from the Patriotic when he came—he took my second guinea on 12th October—I have not got my money back—I have not been insured.
Cross-examined. I was away at work when you came with Mr. Owens—I gave you back the Patriotic receipt and you gave me one of the Mutual—I found my note was expiring, and I wrote and told you to wake them up—you told me the Mutual had also declined me—you asked me to return the Mutual receipt and gave me a receipt from the Fire Insurance Company which I now hold—I have since had a letter from them that I am not accepted at all.
By the COURT. I have not got back my money and I hold no policy.
Re-examined. My wife was there when the prisoner came with Mr. Owens and referred to him as the surveyor.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he had no intention to defraud, but that he did not understand the proposals in question had been declined, and that when proposals were declined he always tried to get them accepted by some other office,
GUILTY. He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction in April, 1879, at this Court.—Judgment respited.
MR. MUIR Prosecuted; MR. PURCELL defended Franklin.
EMILY ADELAIDE MAKINS . I am a widow—on 13th January I was at Liverpool Street Station with my three children, two of whom were going by the 3.20 train—my brother-in-law was with us on the departure platform just outside the barrier—he opened this bag which hung on my left arm, took out my purse and put two sovereigns into it, then put the purse back into the bag, and I clasped it, having first seen the purse in it—we were then facing the barrier, my brother-in-law and children being a little to my left, and in front of me; the two prisoners were between us and the barrier—we advanced to the barrier, and as my brother-in-law spoke to the ticket collector I was pushed back by Webb, and then Franklin at my left pushed me at the side forward again—they were in front of me, and passed to my right—my bag was in front of me at my left side—they then ran back quickly to the booking office, from where you can get into the street—we passed on to the platform, and not half a minute afterwards I noticed my bag hanging open on my arm—my purse could not have dropped out, there was nothing else but it in the bag—I noticed no other person on the platform but my brother-in-law and the children and the two ticket inspectors at the barrier—I went
to the police-office on the arrival platform and made a communication to Inspector Robinson—I was with him possibly ten minutes—when I came out on to the arrival platform I recognised the two prisoners; I watched them go the whole length of the platform and down again, and then up and down again, very quickly, as if about to run from the station, and then slowly up again, pushing in and out of the passengers—a lady was standing to my right; one of the prisoners pushed between me and her, and opened her hand-bag hanging on her arm—I put my hand over the top and cautioned her; the prisoner could not hear me—then I went back to the police-office—Robinson came with me on to the platform, and I pointed the prisoners out to him—the prisoner did not know I had cautioned the lady; he had passed away from her before I put my hand on her bag—I pointed out the prisoners, who were together, to Robinson—they were taken in custody.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I had been waiting at the station perhaps five minutes before my brother-in-law came on the departure platform—the train was going to Norwich; other passengers were going by it, 12 or more had passed me—there is only the one entrance that I know of to the platform—a ticket-collector stands on each side of the barrier—I might have been 20 yards from the barrier when my brother-in-law put the two sovereigns in my purse—the children were standing round me—I saw no one standing about or waiting to go through the barrier, no one else was there—I was late for the train—the prisoners were strangers to me—they were standing between me and the barrier; when I advanced to the barrier they were between me and the ticketcollectors with their faces towards me—I should say the collectors would have me and them under their observation—I was hustled at the barrier—I am clear those are the two men; I absolutely swear to one of them, and I swear to both of them being on the arrival platform; beyond all doubt the prisoners are the two men who were at the barrier—I said before the Magistrate, "I would not like to swear; to the best of my belief those are the two men;" and on the second occasion I said, "I could not swear Franklin was at the barrier; I swear Webb was there, and to the best of my knowledge Franklin was there"—I say as I said then, that to the very best of my knowledge those are the two men that were there, and that I have no doubt—my impression is, those two men were both at the barrier—I got through the barrier before I discovered my purse was gone—I recognised the two prisoners on the arrival platform at once—I watched them for five or six minutes—they were walking together—once they passed close to me, touched me when they opened the lady's bag—they faced me; I was looking down, I thought the men would recognise me—they opened the bag as they passed—I instantly put my hand on the bag to prevent them taking anything—I was not a second with Robinson the second time—I came back with him and Power to the prisoners about two minutes after, and found them where I had left them—there were a number of passengers arriving at the station—I heard the prisoners charged on suspicion of having stolen my purse—the superintendent did not say, "But as she is not sure of that, you are again charged with opening another lady's satchel"—I have never had a shadow of doubt as to the prisoners—I positively swear to Webb as being at the barrier, and I have no manner of doubt
as to Franklin, but I did not see his face as well as Webb's because Webb was directly in front of me.
Re-examined. The prisoners were nearer to the barrier than to me—when they passed between me and the barrier their faces were towards me—I never said I could not swear to them—Webb said at the police-court, "She said last night she could not swear"—I made no answer, and I assume my saying nothing gave assent to it, and that is how it appears on the deposition—I did not hear the word "swear" used at the police-station the night before—I have not the least doubt as to Franklin—I gave Robinson a slight description of the two men; the prisoners answered that description—when I put my hand on the lady's bag the two prisoners were both behind me, my back was to them—I could not say I prevented them from robbing her; the prisoners had passed away from her then—I said at the station I had no doubt whatever as to the identity of the prisoners; to the best of my knowledge they are the men—I think Robinson took down the description I gave him.
WILLIAM ROBINSON (Superintendent of Police, Great Eastern Railway Company). My office is on the arrival platform of the Liverpool Street Station—at 3.13 Mrs. Makins came in and made a communication to me, occupying 5 to 7 minutes—she left and returned in 5 or 6 minutes as near as I can guess, and made another communication—I went out with Power (neither of us was in uniform), and Mrs. Makins pointed out the prisoners to us; standing together talking—I put my right arm into Franklin's left, and said "I want you to come to my office with me"—he made no reply, but turned with me, and we walked to my office—I put a very slight pressure on his arm, sufficient for him to understand what I wanted him to do—we had gone about 40 yards, and were about 10 from my office, when he said "Where is it?" alluding to my office—I said "Just here," or "here it is"—nothing else was said—we went in—Mrs. Makins came in after me, and Webb was brought in—I said to both of them "I want you to answer me some few questions; please answer me truthfully"—to Franklin I said "What is your name?"—he said "Franklin"—I asked his address—he said "8, Borough Place, waterloo Road"—my chief clerk took it down as I asked the questions—he said in answer to my questions "I am a painter; I am married; I went into the railway station to meet a man named Mr. Nicholls, who was coming by train from Norwich"—I asked Nicholls's address—he said "I don't know it"—I said "What is he by trade?"—he said "A painter"—I said "What is your place of business, and for whom do you work?"—he said "I decline to give you my place of business, or any further information"—Webb being cautioned, I asked his name—he said "Henry Webb, of 80, Crampton Street, Newington Butto"—he said he lodged with a man named Walker, a traveller and dealer in dogs, and his business was clerk to a betting man; that he came into the station at the departure entrance at 20 minutes to 3 o'clock—he declined to give me the person for whom he was clerk, or any further information—I told them Mrs. Makins charged them with stealing her purse, and attempting to steal from another lady's bag on the arrival platform—Franklin said he knew nothing at all about it, and that he did not do it, and that he was not on the departure platform at all—the departure platform had been mentioned—I think Webb made no reply—I sent for a policeman, and gave them in custody—I afterwards followed them to
the station, and heard them charged—there is a train due from Norwich at 8 minutes to 3 o'clock, and the next is at 6.10—I arrested the prisoners at a little over 3.30, and Mrs. Makins came to my office about 3.20—I had never seen the prisoners before to my recollection, and so far as I know they had never seen me.
Cross-examined by MR. FURCELL. My clerk took down all that was said—I did not tell Franklin I was an officer of police, or that I was about to charge him with an offence—Franklin said he came on the station at 3.25, and on to the arrival platform, and was certain he was not on the departure platform—after they were charged Franklin said something which I am not certain if my clerk took down—as far as I can remember it was "I don't know anything about it; I was not on the other platform at all."
Re-examined. There is nothing in my office to show what it is.
GEORGE DEACON POWER (Great Eastern Railway Policeman). I went with Robinson on to the platform from the office—I went up to Webb, and said "You must come to our office, please"—I put my arm in his—he said two or three times "I don't want you to catch hold of me"—he did not ask why he was to go to our office—he walked there with me.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. The prisoners were taken into the superintendent's office, and I went on with my work in the outside office—nobody was there but Robinson, the lady, and the prisoners—I was not in uniform.
ALFRED JAMES (City Policeman 966). The prisoners were given into my custody at the police office of the Great Eastern Railway Company—I took them to the station, where they were charged by the prosecutrix with stealing from her handbag and attempting to steal from another lady's handbag—when I was called into the office at the railway station Franklin said that was the first he had heard of it—Webb made do answer—I told them they would have to come with me to the station—they both refused to go at first, and said they had done nothing and should not go, but afterwards they went—at the station Franklin said "We were there to meet a friend"—I searched Franklin, and found a watch and chain and 2s. 1 1/2 d. and on Webb 1l. in gold and 3s. silver.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. Franklin said at the railway station, when the charge was made, "This is the first I have heard of it;" and then when I told him to come to the station, he said "We have done nothing, I won't go"—Mrs. Makins came to the station a few minutes after us—the prisoners were charged when she came—I cannot say if any statement was taken from her before the prisoners were charged—usually an officer listens to what a prosecutor has to say—Sergeant Cauldry would listen in this case—I found the address Franklin gave was correct, and that he had been there two years.
Cross-examined by Webb. Nothing was said at the police-station about the charge being attempting to steal the lady's purse, but that she was not sure—I searched you; I was not paying attention to what was being said.
Re-examined. There were no signs of Franklin's being a painter at his lodgings—he only occupies a very small bedroom—I tried to trace where he was employed, but could not succeed—I was told he was married.
was taken against the two prisoners at the police-station—I heard some portion of the charge.
Cross-examined. The sergeant asked the lady whether she was sure of the men's identity—she said she had no doubt, she was quite positive.
THOMAS BAINES . I keep the times of the arrival of trains of the Great Eastern Railway Company at Liverpool Street Station—I see the trains come in myself and time them—I know where a train comes from by the guard in charge of it—on 18th Jan. the train due from Norwich at 8 minutes in 3 arrived at 1 minute to 3.
GUILTY (WEBB*)— Six Months' Hard Labour each.
OLD COURT.—Friday, February 4th, 1887.
Before Baron Pollock.
GUILTY of the attempt .— Twenty Months' Hard Labour.
MESSRS. POLAND and MEAD Prosecuted.
WALTER SCHROEDER . I am clerk to Dr. George Danford Thomas, Corner for Central Middlesex—on 9th January an inquest was held on Ada Neale, and I was present taking the deposition before the Coroner, and among others I took the deposition of the prisoner William Joseph Neale; this is it (produced).(This stated in effect that his wife was constantly out drinking, neglecting the child, which led to quarrels between them, and that, being out of work, he had very little money to purchase food.)
DR. GEORGE DANFORD THOMAS . I am Coroner for the Central Division of Middlesex—I held the inquest on this child on 14th January, and at the end of the evidence the female prisoner was called—I cautioned her before she gave her statement—she was then sworn, and made a statement, which I took down—I have the original notes here.(Read: "I am the wife of William Joseph Neale, an osteler I wish to say that the Reason I left my child was because my husband had been away from me a whole week. This occurred about five weeks ago. He had as much right to look after the child as I had. Since then he has been away day after day. Sometimes I have received 3d. a day, sometimes 8d. a week, sometimes nothing at all. He kept the house himself. I have had food generally to eat, not always I have been out all day sometimes, sometimes late at night. I have been living a very unhappy life, and my husband has frequently assaulted me. On one occasion he left me in bed with the baby without food of any kind except water. He frequently came home drunk; I have at times also. I left the baby became I wanted to make my husband responsible.")
healthy—I attended her nine days, and the child was healthy during that time.
HANNAH WARREN . I live at 9, Cheston Street, Kentish Town, and am the landlady of the house—the prisoner and his wife came to lodge with me four or five months ago—they first had two rooms, and then only one—there were three children, one 5 and one 3, and the baby four months—when they first came it was a nice plump little baby, and she nursed it for about two months after she came—up to the time it was weaned it was a nice plump baby, but it was not very well cared for—she used to go out and leave it very often when it had the breast, and leave nothing for it—after it was weaned she used to go out and leave it all day, and I have bought milk and gone upstairs and given the baby the bottle—she used to go out about 9 in the morning and return about 1 or 2 next morning—the man used to come home sometimes in the day, not thinking his wife was out, and he has brought some victuals for his children when he could get it—I have given the children food very often—they would be alone in the room all day, unless I was at home and let them come down with my children—the baby has taken the bottle very often as if very hungry—she would leave them alone all day about two or three times a week, and I have asked her whether she would stop at home and look after the children—she has said she would, but when I have gone out to work she has gone out the same, and never come home to look after them, and she told me it was the company she got into—I saw the baby get very bad, and I told her she ought to stop at home and look after it—on 20th December I made a complaint to a constable—the father used to bring home bread and butter for the elder children, and used to send for milk—sometimes the baby had a little red frock on, and sometimes it lay in the bed with a bit of flannel wrapped round it; it was not well clad—I was not present when the child died—I was in the house on 2nd January, and I had not seen it then since Christmas morning—I saw no ill-usage or violence to the child by either of the prisoners.
Cross-examined by Alice Neal. I have seen you on Sundays, but not much all the week, and when you have been at home you have never been sober.
LYDIA ROSE . I am the wife of Thomas Rose, and lodge with my husband in the same house as the prisoners—I knew the little baby, it died between 8 and 9 on Sunday, 2nd January; I saw it dead—I noticed before it died that the mother used to go out every day about 9 and leave her little child, and return late at night; that went on week after—I have heard the baby cry for hours while she has been out, until we gave it some food—if the father came in and found the baby had not got any milk, he would go out and get some and give it to the baby—the child was in a very filthy state, it used to lay in the same things from Sunday till Tuesday, and everything was sopping wet—I have spoken to the female prisoner about it, and asked her how dare she go out leaving the baby crying and in such a state; but she took no notice—the other children were left in the same room with the baby, which was kept very dirty—they were very badly off—she has been out as late as 4 and 5 in the morning, she was more out than at home.
Cross-examined by Alice Neal. I know nothing about your father coming Sunday after Sunday and bringing you grub.
Re-examined. When the child was ill she stopped at home with it, and Dr. Deviston was called in—she used not to go to work.
EDWARD GIRARD . I am relieving officer for their district of St. Pancras—on the 27th November the male prisoner came to me in great distress, and said his wife had left him and there was nothing for the children, and asked me for relief—I then visited him and he said she had been seen with another man for relief—I then visited him and said he said she had been seen with another man in Fleet Road, and that the baby was in great want because it was at the breast, and his wife had left it—I visited the house, and milk for the baby, and told him the relief committee would meet on the following Tuesday, when he could apply—he came on the Tuesday, and said that his wife had returned to him, and he had made it up, and he did not require anything more—in spite of that I applied to the relief committee, and an order was made for their admission to the workhouse, and it was ready for them if he or she had applied—on 6th December, the following Monday, a police-sergeant brought the prisoner to me and told me his attention had been drawn to this cases, and he wished me to charge him—I said there had been already an order for the benefit of the children—I called next day and saw the female prisoner—I asked her how the children—I called next day and saw the female prisoner—I asked her how the children were she said they were all right, and that she could get on very well without my interference, without relief—on the house again about half past 8 in the evening—the prisoners were not then there; the child was in the bed asleep with the other two children—when he heard my voice he woke up and began to cry very much—I sent a boy for some milk, and he brought a large joyful—after some time I found the feeding bottle, in a most filthy condition—I cleaned it, and left enough milk to last him next day—I wrote an order For the medical officer to come and see the child—I took the order myself And accompanied Mr. Warne, the medical officer, on the 20th—I went Next morning about half past eleven and saw children—I saw there Was some food for the elder children, but I saw nothing for the younger One—I made inquiry, and went next day, the 22nd, about the same time; I didn't see the parents then—I didn't go on the 23rd, but on the 24th I went—I found a boy there, and gave him a message; neither of the prisoners were present—the relief committee met on the 28th—I brought the case before them, and obtained another order—on the 3rd January I heard of the death of the child, and the mother applied to me for a burial order, producing the certificate of death—she was in a state of intoxication, or a semi-state of intoxication—that was at half past 10 in the morning—I reported the matter to the Coroner.
JAMES WARREN . I am the son of the landlady of this house—in Christmas week the relieving officer spoke to me, and about 12 the same night I saw the male prisoner—I said to him "Mr. Neale, the relieving officer, has left an order; if you want anything else you have to go to his house, and you can get what you want"—he said "All right."
MARY ANN JOHNSEN . I live at 119, Malden Road, near the prisoners—at the beginning of December I saw the male prisoner coming from a public-house with a child in his arms, and a little boy running by his
side—I asked him whose baby it was—he said "Mine"—I said "Where is the mother?"—he said "Out"—the child had no boots or stockings on, only a little bonnet with a white veil, a coloured frock with a little piece of black rag, with a shawl round the neck—it was a bitterly cold day—I took it into a shop and gave it the breast; it emptied one breast and I had to give it the other to satisfy it; it appeared to be very hungry, starving—I told him if I could see a policeman I would tell him—he said he could not help it, when he went out to go to work his wife went out too—I took the child home with me, and kept it by the fire, and wrapped it up, and it went to sleep—the police-sergeant came and said I was to give it up to the father, as he had an order to go into the workhouse—the mother came and snatched it out of my arms without thanking me for what I had done—I had seen her before in the public-house—the child only weighed 7 1/2 lb.; my children weighed a great deal more at that age.
GEORGE MOON (Police Sergeant Y). On 6th December I was fetched to a grocer's shop, where Mrs. Johnson was nursing a child—I took it to the relieving officer—I saw William Neale; I warned him that if anything happened to the child he would be held responsible, and it was possible a criminal charge would be preferred against him—he made no reply.
Cross-examined by William Neale. You did not say you would take the child to the workhouse.
PETER MCLEAN (Policeman Y 96). On 20th December I was fetched to No. 6, Cheston Street, by Mrs. Warren—I saw the baby in a bed about 3.30 p.m.—neither of the prisoners was present—two other children were in the room—a feeding-bottle was lying by the side of it and some milk in the bottle—the child was not crying—it was in a very filthy state—Lawrence, another officer, was with me—it was a cold day.
MILWARD EDMUND DEVISTON . I am a member of the Royal College of Surgeons—on 30th December, about 9 p.m., I was called by the male prisoner to his room—I saw a child being nursed by the mother by a small fire; it was breathing with very great difficulty—I told the mother I thought the child had required medical attention before, and I ordered medical treatment, and brandy and milk to be administered to it—the child was dirty and extremely emaciated—the mother was not giving it the breast, but merely nursing it on her lap—I was of opinion that it was suffering from some obstruction in the passages—I went the next day, the 31st; the child was still in the same condition—on the 1st Jan. I sent some medicine but did not see the child—on 2nd Jan. Mrs. Neale came to me and told me that the child had died that morning—I gave a certificate of death—I afterwards made a post-mortem examination—I found the body extremely emaciated, with hardly any superficial fat—on the surface of the body were marks of excoriation on the upper parts of the thigh—the skin was very flabby and wrinkled—the muscular tissues were very flabby—I weighed the child; it weighed 6 3/4 lbs.—the normal weight of such a child would be about 12 lb. at that age—I attribute the excoriation to neglect and want of cleanliness—the air passages were generally inflamed—in the stomach there was about a tablespoonful of milk, and the intestines were slightly coated with digested milk—they were shiny and glazed externally—there was no fat in the intestines—the weight of the child, the character of the skin and the intestines,
were attributable to inanition, resulting from want of nourishment—the cause of death was the exhaustion primarily which followed on the want of nourishment—it had also inflammation of the air passages, but not enough to account for the death—the other organs were healthy—Mr. Warne was with me when the post-mortem examination was made.
REUBEN THOMAS WARNE . I am medical officer to the parish of St. Pancras—on 20th December, between 9 and 10 p.m., the relieving officer fetched me to the prisoners' child—I found it in bed in a dirty condition, very wet, and with a cloth of some sort wrapped upon the lower part of its body—neither of the parents were there—the bed itself was wet—the child was very emaciated—I told the relieving officer it was caused by want of nourishment—I did not see the child again till the post-mortem examination—I have heard Mr. Deviston's account of that—I agree with it.
The Prisoners' Statements before the Magistrate. William Neale said: "I went out to look for work, and my wife went out with bad women. At my last employment she used to come and kick up a row because I would not give her any money." Alice Neale said: "My husband went out and left me without food, and I went out to get it."
William Neale in defence said that he had to go out to get work; that his wife got him out of his employment, and he had to go and find her to see to the baby, when she would not come home, but told him to look after the children himself, and that the police had seen her drinking about.
Alice Neale in defence said that she had to go out to get food; that her husband illtreated her; that she had had four children; had been turned out in the street three times in a year; that she had had the brokers in, and her husband had been away, and she did not know where to find him; she was starved when she was carrying the child and had starved since, and that her husband had only done four months' work last year.
WILLIAM NEALE— NOT GUILTY .
ALICE NEALE— GUILTY .
The Jury adding that they considered the husband to some extent deserving of censure for not insisting upon the child being taken to the workhouse.— Eight Months' Imprisonment.
NEW COURT.—Friday, February 4th, 1887.
Before Mr. Recorder.
255. ALBERT HESSE, Unlawfully forging and counterfeiting certain trade marks, with intent to defraud. Other Counts, for conspiring with Odille Moncier, to counterfeit the trade mark of Moet and Chandon and others.
MESSRS. POLAND and GILL Prosecuted; MR. GRAIN Defended.
DANIEL COHEN COLEY . I trade as Coley and Co., wine merchants, Hart Lane, Great Tower Street—about 26th October, 1885, I received from Messrs. Moet and Chandon 12 cases of champagne, sent direct from Epernay—I see by my stock book that I sold one case to Leon Fossett, of 83, Regent Street, and sent it by Parcels Delivery Company—it was
paid for in cash—on 26th August, 1886, I bought 11 dozen of Moet and Chandon's champagne at 41s. a doz. at Messrs. Southard's sale, and employed Trott and Challen's carman to fetch it for me—I bought it as Moet and Chandon's second quality—I sent Mr. O'Donnell a sample bottle, and have got the rest still, less one bottle, which I sent to Moet and Chandon's representative—on 2nd December last I bought at Messrs. Scott, Wright, and Co.'s, wine brokers, a parcel of Cliquot's champagne, which I was told was the second quality, which has a white label—I bought that on the broker's guarantee, without having a sample—I received a communication regarding it, and did not deliver it.
Cross-examined. I have been in business 20 years—brokers generally sample wines, but not these brands; they are taken on the brand itself—they are on show before the day of sale, and the buyer has to pay for a bottle to taste them—I tasted the Moet and Chandon—I am my own taster, and I believe I have a pretty good palate—having tasted the wine I purchased it—there are 10 or 12 brands of Moet's; they put the vintage on the extra qualities, but not on the inferior—the lowest price in the market of any of their real wine is 46s. or 47s. duty paid, and the higher from 70s. to 80s., according to the vintage—all their inferior qualities are labelled now, but they used not to be—I have never purchased any of Moet's wines which were not labelled and put "Moet" on them—I do not think their lower qualities are sold in public-houses.
Re-examined. I obtained a sample—I do not know whether it was the same as the 11 dozen, but I tasted it at Messrs. Southard's placebuying a recognised name and description, I knew what it was worth within a few shillings.
JOSEPH O'DONNELL . I am one of the firm of Osborn, O'Donnell, and Osborn, of Fenchurch Street, wine shippers and merchants—on 27th November I received this memorandum (produced) from Coley and Co., dated the 27th, and on the 29th I received a sample bottle of the wine mentioned in it—the cork when drawn did not appear to be "old landed" as described—that means landed some time in this country—it was a very course, inferior wine, tasting of apples—I could not find any trace of Moet's wine, and I sent them the label—afterwards, at the request of Messrs. Simon, I obtained another bottle, and took it to the agents of Moet and Chandon, and from what they told me I declined to take the wine from Coley's.
Cross-examined. The wine was represented to me as Moet's second quality.
FAULKNOR AUGUSTUS SYMONDS . I am one of the firm of Symonds and Co., of the Old Trinity House; we are the agents for, Moet and Chandon in this country—on 29th November I received a communication from Mr. O'Donnell, and he gave me a label, purporting to be that of Moet and Chandon's second quality, which I examined and found it was forged—I sent it to Moet and Chandon at Epernay—Mr. O'Donnell afterwards brought me the bottle—I also examined the cork, and it bore a forged brand—I tasted the wine; it was not Moet and Chandon's—this mark on the back of the label "6 v. 6" is a private mark of the firm, by which the date of the champagne can be fixed; that was the mark of the labels for October, 1885—from what I heard at Messrs. Southard's I went on 7th December to 3, Angel Court, St. James's; we rang several times, but could not get in—the place appeared
to be fastened up, and there was no appearance of genuine business being carried on there—while making inquiries my attention was attracted by an advertisement of old landed champagne of Moet and Chandon's to be sold at Debenham's—I went there, and saw Mr. Hall, the auctioneer, who showed me a sample bottle purporting to be Moet and Chandon's second quality—I examined the label, found it was forged, and also the brand on the cork—I stopped the sale, communicated with my solicitor, and attended at Marlborough Street—this is a genuine label of the firm, and this is a forged one.
Cross-examined. I talked to Mr. De la Cert, the manager of the Cafe Royale, about the defendant, and he said that he looked upon him as an honest, respectable man—his shop was nearly opposite the Cafe.
ROBEET BILLINGS . I have been Mr. Symond's clerk some years—in October, 1885, we sold Mr. Coley a parcel of wine, some which we had received direct from Moet and Chandon—the labels had their private mark on the back, "6. v. 6"—about December 3rd I went to Angel Court; no name was up, and there were no signs of business being carried on—the place appeared to be closed and empty.
Cross-examined. While the police proceedings were pending I went to the prisoner's hat shop to look over the cellars, and he assisted me frankly and without hesitation in showing me over his place—it is a large shop—you have to go up a little passage to the cellar, which is under the pavement of the street—there were over 100 oases of wine there.
Re-examined. There is no cellar flap—there was some of Moet's genuine wine there, and also some of Cliquot's, but the 100 cases contained wine of an inferior character, probably Ai Mousseau—I do not know the brand.
EDWARD HERMAN HBLLER . I am a clerk to Mr. Southard, a wine broker, who holds periodical sales of wine—before 26th August a man named Moncier called and inquired when the next sale would be, and gave me the particulars of some wine which he desired us to sell—I wrote it down, "139 bottles Moet and Co.'s champagne mosseux, 20 cases, one dozen each, O. Moncier and Co. old landed dry champagne, more or less"—I asked him whether the Moet was old landed—he said that it was, and I wrote "Old landed" on it—he said that the Moet was at 83, Regent Street, and the other at his address 3, Angel Court, and that his own wine was in cases, but the Moet was loose—it is not usual to have a large quantity loose; it is generally sold in cases—I asked for samples, which he supplied next day—the Moet was sold to Mr. Coley at a public sale on the 26th, and I gave him a delivery order—he had it, and I paid Moncier a cheque for it, which was paid to our bankers, and came back through the London and Westminster Bank, St. James's Square branch.
Cross-examined. I may have seen Hose in sale-rooms, but I do not know him—Moncier was at Marlborough Street Police-court, and has absconded—I fancy I tasted the wine, and I have no reason to doubt that the sample was what it was described to be.
JAMES DOLBY BENHAM . I am a builder and house agent—I was agent for 3, Angel Court, and let it to Odille Moncier in April, 1886—he gave as a reference Leon Fossett and Co., which was satisfactory—he said that he was a wine merchant—no name was painted up—I have got possession
since he absconded—the rent was paid up to September, and I found the premises empty.
Cross-examined. I got a written communication as to Moncier's stability—I do not know by whom it was written.
GEORGE LEWIS ENSOR . I am clerk to Surman and Clark, solicitors, of Lincoln's Inn Fields, agents for the premises in Angel Court, King street, St. James's—we heard from Mr. Benham, and applied to Leon Fossett and Co., of 83, Regent Street, as to the character of the applicant for the premises, and received this letter. (From Leon Fossett and Co., stating that Moncier had been their tenant for two years, and had regularly met his engagements, and that his Continental bills had been punctually paid, mostly on their premises.) This agreement was signed by him in my presence.
ALFRED WILLIAMS . I am a clerk to Deullion et Fils, Continental carriers, 22, Great Tower Street, and of Epernay—in May last I received from our branch at Epernay a notice of a consignment of some cases of tools and machinery—the name of the consignee was not disclosed—about 25th May I received this post card: "83, Regent Street, 28-5-'86. Dear Sir,—We are expecting the nine oases on Saturday as early as possible, as promised. We are in great need of them. Moncier and Co." Moncier had called shortly before, and asked about the cases—they afterwards arrived, and were forwarded to him at Regent Street; Taylor was the carman—this is the consignment note. (This, being translated, stated that the cases contained apparatus for drawing corks and re-corking bottles, also for stringing and wiring them, and a supply of tin foil and pink paper.) On 6th July I had another case through the Parcels Delivery Company, also for Moncier and Co, at 3, Angel Court, consigned by Victor Pardy and Co., of Ai, near Epernay—that contained with bands, which are strips of bark to put round the cases—on 20th August I had a case of wine consigned to Leon Fossett and Co., Regent Street, from Le Blanc, Gerrard and Co., of Epernay, and forwarded it to that address the carman brought this receipt, signed "Leon Fossett and Co."—on 15th October I had a consignment of 12 cases of champagne to Leon Fossett and Co., 83, Regent Street, which I forwarded, and received this receipt. (Signed "Leon Fossett and Co.")
WILLIAM JAMES MARSHALL . I am carman to Samuel Taylor and Co.—I took some nine cases of machinery from Bricklayers' Arms Station to 83, Regent Street, and saw the defendant, who said that his brother was not in, and I should have to wait—I did so, and Moncier came and told me to take them to 3, Angel Court—I went there, saw a third man, and delivered part of them, but one was a big, heavy case, which would not go in—the third man gave me the receipt.
Cross-examined. The third man was not the prisoner—some were cases and some bales—I could not see the contents unless I unpacked them.
Re-examined. I unpacked some of them, and saw some straw envelopes, which would enclose champagne bottles, also a machine covered with a wrapper, and a long table—there was a large flap outside the cellar, and the third party in the cellar took the straw envelopes as I passed them down.
HENRY JOHNSON . I am a clerk to Walton and Tosetti, Continental carriers—on 27th October I received this advice note for 112 cases of wine to Moncier and Co., 3, Angel Court—I advised Moncier twice, but got no answer—I afterwards received a letter signed Ab. Hesse, asking
me to forward 12 of the cases and keep the rest in bond—we delivered it at 83, Regent Street, and Mr. Taylor's carman brought the receipt—I know Moncier by sight very well as a wine merchant, coming to the office of Messrs. Duelling, where I was, and have received verbal instructions there from Moncier to deliver hundreds of cases at 83, Regent Street, which I have done.
GEORGE MILLS . I am carman to S. Taylor and Co.—on 25th Nov. I delivered 100 cases of wine to the prisoner—they were addressed to O. Moncier, 83, Regent Street—he gave me this receipt (Signed: Albert Hesse for 0. Moncier and Co.) and a cheque for 17l. 10s.—I did not notice whether it was his cheque—I took the cases into the cellar—I had delivered wine there before, and at Angel Court—I know Moncier by sight.
GEORGE MATS . I am a carman in the service of Messrs. Trott and Callis—I received instructions in August last to go to Angel Court to bring some wine away; I had an order for it—I went there and saw a man—on 28th August a man named Barnes went there, but nobody was there then, and then I went—I saw a man there with a dark moustache who took me to 83, Regent Street, down into a cellar, and I saw the prisoner in the kitchen there—it was the ordinary coal cellar under the pavement—some bottles of wine were lying loose in the cellar, and I took them to Mr. Coulay, of Harp Lane.
LEWIS PROSPER MIDY (Through an Interpreter). I am a carpenter, of 123, Wardour Street—I have worked for the prisoner at 83, Regent Street, and by doing so I know Moncier his brother—in May last Moncier engaged me to make some doors and shutters for the cellar of 3, Angel Court—the cellar was shut off, so that it could not be seen from the top from the outside—it consisted of two compartments, and in the inner part there was a large machine covered up—a champagne case was brought to my place as a pattern for me to make some; it was similar to these produced—I was to make twenty-four exactly similar to it of poplar wood, which is not commonly found at a wood merchant's—I made twenty-four, but no more, because Moncier found my price too high—I got the order to make them from Moncier, and Mr. Henson.
Cross-examined. I never received any instructions from the prisoner in any shape or form, as to the manufacture or imitation of these boxes or as to payment or anything else, nor was he ever at my house when I was making them.
FREDERICK HALL . I am an auctioneer, employed by Debenham, Storr, and Co., King Street, Covent Garden—I have had transactions with O. Moncier and Co. in selling wine—in January, 1886, we had their wine in our catalogue, but I do not think there was a sale—the address was 83, Regent Street—I think we sold some for them in March, and the money was paid to them—we received instructions to sell some in October—we awaited samples, which did not come, and no sale took place-between October and 30th December we had some wine of theirs described as old landed champagne; we included it in our catalogue, and advertised the sale in the Morning Post and other papers—two sample bottles were brought to the sale, one of which was put into the sale room, and the other into our cellar and given to Mr. Seymour—this is it—he expressed his opinion on it, and the sale was forbidden—I thought it was Moncier who I had to do with, but I hear to-day that it was Henson.
JOHN FREDERICK KNIGHT . I am ran auctioneer in Messrs. Debenham's employ—in January, 1886, we had some of Moncier's wine for sale, and a man, who I believe to be the prisoner, bid for it; it was knocked down to him at 17s. a dozen—he gave the name of Moncier, and I assumed that it was bought in—it was called champagne, and the brand was "Le Marquis de Parma."
Cross-examined. I am sure in my own mind that the prisoner is the person, but not sufficiently so to swear it—I have seen Moncier twice since, and it was not Moncier—there were a great many people in the rooms at the sale—the rooms are very light.
Re-examined. I saw the prisoner with Moncier at the police-court—Moncier is an entirely different person—I could not be mistaken between the two.
HARRY WEBB . I keep the Lord Nelson Tavern, Old Windsor—I have known the prisoner since last June—on 10th December he came there, and brought a tall man, who had a moustache and whiskers, who was afterwards seen by Mr. Cadart—Hesse brought him to have some fishing and to look round the neighbourhood—I afterwards noticed that the other man's beard and moustache had been taken off, but the colour of what was left was dark—I do not know his name—he went with Mr. Fossett(The defendant) to Windsor station, and came back alone, and then asked for a newspaper, and stayed at the house—I have never seen the prisoner since—he fished very little while he was there—I knew nothing of a charge going on at the police-court.
Cross-examined. It was very bad weather—the other man was dark; he had whiskers and moustaches, but they seemed to have been shaved—I do not call the prisoner dark—Hesse had often been down to me in the summer on Saturdays—I do not know whether he had his own punt.
Re-examined. The other man's beard appeared to have been taken off and he had dark whiskers and blue lips.
CHARLES CADART . I am a licensed victualler, of 27, Heddon Street, Regent Street—I know Hesse, and I have seen Henson at my place; I know him just enough to identify him—on Sunday, December 12th,"I went down to Windsor by chance, went to Mr. Webb's house and saw Henson there—I did not know his name, but I had seen him several times before—I did not expect to see him there—when I knew him he had a full beard, but I did not notice his beard that day, or the colour of his whiskers—I left him there—I did not know that there was a charge pending at that time—he was a fair man when I saw him in London.
Cross-examined. I know Hesse as having a large shop in Regent Street trading as Leon Fossett and Company—it seemed good business—I know nothing against him; he was a customer of mine and I looked on him as a friend and an honest man—I met him at Windsor once on the Thames—Henson was not exactly a fair man, but not dark—previous to my seeing him at Windsor he had a moustache and a full beard; it was not like the prisoner's except in colour.
JOHN LANGRISH (Police Inspector C). On 9th December I received a warrant for the arrest of Moncier, and about 8.30 the same night I saw him in Regent Street and arrested him on a charge of fraud in connection with the forged labels of Moet and Chandon's wine—at the station he gave his address 3, Angel Court, King Street—after he was charged I went there and searched the place; the upper part of the house was
empty, and in one of the cellars I found several empty wooden cases and straw wrappers for champagne bottles, the other cellar was completely empty—the stones in the brickwork of the floor of one cellar appeared to have been removed as if something had been placed there, and new shutters had been fixed to both windows—I entered the cellar through the cellar flap with a key which I found on Moncier—that is the only entrance to it—there was no name up or any appearance of any business of any kind—I after that went to 83, Regent Street, the prisoner's premises, and went down into the cellar—I found there 100 dozen of champagne in cases, and the prisoner said "That wine belongs to me, I bought it of my half-brother, I will show you the cheque I gave for it," which he did—he did not say when he had seen his brother last—I do not know what brand the wine was, but two bottles were submitted to a gentleman now in Court—I found this paper (produced) on Moncier with the impression of the Clicquot cork stamp upon it—the prisoner was afterwards summoned on a charge of conspiracy with Moncier—on 10th December Moncier was brought up at Marlborough Street, and the prisoner tendered himself as bail for him—I did not then know where Henson was, I have a warrant for his arrest, but I have not been able to execute it—I did not know of his being at Windsor till some time afterwords—the case was remanded till the 17th, and the prisoner appeared to the summons—it was again remanded to the 24th, and on that day I wrested the prisoner—I read the warrant to him, which charged him with fraud in connection with the Clicquot case—he said "I must see my solicitor about it"—he was brought up and required to find bail; and at the next hearing Moncier did not appear; he has absconded—they were both there on the 24th, and were bailed—I don't know anything after that, because I was in Birmingham.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I first went to Regent Street about this case on 9th December—at that time Moncier was in custody—I saw the defendant there—he offered no opposition to my going over the premises; on the contrary, he gave me every facility—I confined myself to the cellar only—I suggested that I might want to come again, and he said "All right"—I only went there twice—the labels on the bottles were not Moet and Chandon's—I am no judge of champagne; I have tasted it more than once—I found nothing in the Regent Street cellar relating to this charge—I can't say what rent he paid for this shop, but I should say about 450l. a year.
Re-examined. I went there once with Mr. Jones and Mr. Seymour to see the cellar—he refused to admit them, but he gave me every facility.
WALTER ANDREWS (Police Inspector, Scotland Yard). I hold a warrant for Henaon's arrest, and have endeavoured to execute it, but without success—Moncier was arrested on the 9th, and on the 10th he was brought up and admitted to bail—the case was then remanded to the 17th, and I then served a summons on the prisoner for his appearance—he attended on the 17th, and they were both admitted to bail on the 18th in 50l. each, and remanded to 6th January, and in the meantime the prisoner was arrested on the Cliquot charge, and his bail was increased to two in 100l.—he was there on the 6th, but Moncier had absconded—I had a warrant for him on the Cliquot charge.
Cross-examined. When I served the summons on the prisoner he said I am surprised at this; I shall now have a chance of bringing an
action against Moet and Chandon"—when his bail was increased two men, named Mills and Ranhope, became bail for him, and he was released on the 18th—he had had an opportunity of going away between 25th December and 6th January—on that day the Clicquot case was gone into, and he was committed for trial, and his bail was increased to two in 500l., and he was not able to find it—he has been carrying on business these four years—I searched his place under a warrant on the 18th, and he put no obstacle in my way—his name has appeared in the directory for two or three years.
Re-examined. None of the house is let off—his shop-people and himself occupy the house.
GEORGE ALBERT BROWN . I am an engraver, of 17, Miranda Road, Highgate—about October, 1885, I became acquainted with the prisoner, and got on friendly terms with him, and on 14th April I received this letter from him. (This was on the printed form of Leon Fossett and Co., signed by the prisoner, and stated: "Dear Sir,—Kindly call to see me without fail, for I have to ask you to make me something in a very short delay.") In consequence of that I went to Regent Street and saw the prisoner—he said his brother was agent for Clicquot's, in France, and wanted some Clicquot labels done, and he showed me one of Clicquot's labels—I don't think he said anything about a plate, but it could not be done without a plate—I told him I could do it as cheap as any one—he said he wanted it done by the Thursday before Good Friday, as he wanted to take the labels to France, or Paris, with him, I don't know which—I took the original label away with me, and went and saw Mr. Baxter, a friend of mine, an engraver, who had worked for Parkins and Gotto, and who is now a member of the firm of Langstrong and Co., of 40, Gerrard Street—I showed the label to him, and employed him to make a plate for me—he executed it and gave it to me—the prisoner had told me to get 50,000 labels printed—when I had got the plate I went to the firm of Willis, and bought paper to match the label, and then I took it with the plate to Martin, Hood, and Co., of Newport Street, St. Martin's Lane, and ordered them to print 50,000 labels from it and deliver them at 83, Regent Street—after they had been delivered, and while the prisoner was away in Paris, I called at his shop, and saw Moncier sitting at a desk, but I merely said "Good day" to him—before he went to Paris he had paid me 5l. on account of this—when he came back I went and saw him at his shop, and he said there was a mistake made in the plate; that the letter "A" before the name of the firm had been left out—as he had just got home from Paris he was very tired, and he asked me to call again in a day or so—I did so, and he then gave me the plate back, and asked me to get it altered, and gave me an original label, and asked me to get him 10,000 labels printed—I took the plate to my friend, and got him to alter it, and then went and got the paper, and then took it to the printers again, and got them to print 10,000 labels, and asked them to send them to his shop as the last were—I saw the prisoner again about a week after that—altogether I was paid 9l. 19s. 6d.—the prisoner has a banking account at the St. James's Branch of the London and Westminster Bank, at the corner of St. James's Square—he gave me a cheque for the balance, and I cashed it there—I paid Baxter and the printer
out of that—I made about 4l. profit on the whole thing—these (produced) are the three different labels—the prisoner had employed me before to print some business cards for him, and I had done business for him in that way.
Cross-examined. Martin, Hood, and Co. is a very old established firm—they are lithographers—there was no concealment by the prisoner from beginning to end, and I did not think anything was wrong—I have known the prisoner for some time; he always appeared to be actively engaged in the business of his shop.
Re-examined. I believed what he told me about his brother being agent for Clicquot's, and that he was going to take them to Paris.
JAMES TAYLOR . I am a warehouseman to Martin, Hood, and Co., printers, of Great Newport Street—they printed the 50,000 labels for Mr. Brown, and delivered them to Leon Fossett and Co.—this (produced) is the counterfoil of the delivery-book, signed by the prisoner—on 25th May we delivered 10,000 labels—this (produced) is the counterfoil of the delivery note. (This bore part of the stamp of Leon Fossett and Co. instead of the prisoner's initials.) Printers always keep specimens of what they have printed, and I handed some of these labels to the solicitor, some without the A and some with.
Cross-examined. I have printed labels for wine merchants before—I can't say from memory for what firms—they were not for champagne houses—they were various kinds of wine labels—I don't think we printed any foreign labels.
Re-examined. The man came to us with the plate, and we did the printing, thinking it was all right.
ALFRED WILLIAMS (Re-examined). In November last I received a consignment note for 245 cases of champagne consigned to Monsieur Moncier, of 3, Angel Court, St. James's, London, and the consignor was Moncier, of Rheims—it is dated 24th November, so I should have received it about the 26th—about 29th November Moncier called with reference to that consignment, and gave me instructions—he called again on 1st December—I knew him by sight; he had been in my office before—the cases were to have been forwarded to 3, Angel Court, before 1st December, but in consequence of what he said to me on 29th November they were not forwarded—he called again on 2nd December, and wanted them delivered that day as arranged beforehand, but I had received notice to stop the cases, as there was going to be an injunction—they were lying; at the Bricklayers' Arms Station, the good department of the South Eastern Railway.
Cross-examined. I never saw the prisoner in this matter, from beginning to end.
GEORGE WALLACE . I am the London superintendent of the goods department of the South Eastern Railway—these 245 cases came by way of Boulogne and Folkestone to the Bricklayers' Arms Station, and they were there stopped by injunction—I afterwards, with Mr. Hitchcocks, clerk to the solicitor of the South Eastern Railway, and Mr. Parrott, the agent to Messrs. Clicquot, had some of these cases opened, and examined the labels.
CHARLES HITCHCOCK . I am clerk to Mr. Stevens, the solicitor to the South Eastern Railway—after the injunction had been served, on 30th November, I went to the Bricklayers' Arms Station with Mr. Parrott,
and had six cases opened, and a bottle taken out of each; they were labelled, and I produce them here to-day—I also took a second bottle out of one of the cases, and Mr. Parrott opened it and tasted it to see if it was Clicquot's wine—I did not taste it.
HERMANN PARROTT . My address is 124, Fenchurch Street, and I am the sole agent in this country to Alfred Burleigh and another, who are the successors to have Clicquot, at Rheims—they have two sorts of wine, the dry and the sweet, and the English label has "Dry" on it in English—this (produced) is the genuine label, which is always put on the dry Clicquot which is imported into this country—I saw these cases opened at the Bricklayers' Arms Station, and have compared the labels on these bottles with the genuine labels; they are forged, and are part of the 10,000 produced by the printers—I am able to say that the flourishing or scroll part is forged, although it is a close imitation—I also tasted the wine, and am quite sure it is not Clicquot wine; it is very inferior—the corks are also branded on the side "England," and at the bottom there is "V. Clicquot, Veuve"—I cannot distinguish any difference between the brand on this cork and the genuine cork—I saw Moncier at the police court—he has nothing to do with Clicquot's.
Cross-examined. I could not say from the brand that this is not a genuine cork, but I know it comes out of a bottle that is not a genuine Clicquot, and which has not a genuine label; it is a very inferior wine—we have only one quality of Clicquot, but two styles, the dry and the rich—I have never had any communication with the prisoner—I understand a man named Henson was employed in Clicquot's cellars in France—Mr. Nicholla, of the Cafe Royal, told me that he looked on the prisoner as a respectable man and an honest tradesman.
Re-examined. Henson never was agent—the agents in Paris are Messrs. Deigus.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I had these labels done innocently, without any fraudulent intention whatever, and only to oblige my brother Moncier; he is my step-brother. I never made any profit out of it. Monsieur Moncier and his partner, Mr. Henson, represented themselves as agents for Clicquot. Moncier asked me if I knew any one who could do these labels in London, and I asked Mr. Brown to do it."
The prisoner received an excellent character.
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Friday, February 4th, 1887.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. METCALFE Prosecuted; MESSRS. BESLEY and BODKIN Defended.
THOMAS EDMUNDS . I am a draper at 38, Chapel Street, Clerkenwell—in June last I entered into partnership with Mrs. Michaels, the prisoner's wife, under this deed (produced)—the partnership lasted till 12th November—the prisoner was appointed manager from the start, and as manager he would buy goods for the shop from persons like Roberts and Glave—before he went out he would ask me for the money, and I would advance it to him—the receipts he would bring back with him, and if there was any money to return he gave it to me, and I would enter it in my book—if
the account was above 10l. he would not pay it at all, but would have it sent in by the firm—having filed these receipts with me it would be his duty to enter the amounts of the receipts in his book, and for the sums mentioned in these receipts he would get credit—he gave me all these six receipts—all he brought back I kept—at the dissolution of partnership they were still in my possession—we did not go through the books when we dissolved—nothing was said about the books, but he stipulated that all these receipts should be burnt, and the books destroyed—I said I could not do that, as perhaps some one might come on me again, and I should wish to refer to them—the dissolution was in writing; we mutually dissolved—it was signed by Mrs. Michaels and myself on 22nd November—we dissolved on the 12th, but I called at the solictor's office to get it put into writing, and we signed it that day—after the dissolution I went into the books, and put them into an accountant's and then discovered on these receipts what I allege are forgeries.
Cross-examined. I once lived in Liverpool Road, and Mrs. Michaels lived within 200 or 300 yards—she had a draper's business—I had a confectioner's shop in the Liverpool Road, and I had a coffee stall in the street outside the Angel, which I went out to at 5 a.m., and afterwards I went and attended to my shop—my wife helps me in business—I bought the lease of 38, Chapel Street on 16th April, and got possession then, and opened it as an eel-pie and stewed-eel shop; that only lasted a week—we opened the drapery shop about 18th June, and this agreement was signed about two days after, or the day before it was stamped,—the date on the stamp is 22.6—I knew nothing about buying draper's goods—my wife and I lived on the premises—Miss Shand was employed as assistant, and a young man Turle, whom I have now—I did not originally offer to take Mr. Michaels as partner—he had been to me a dozen times when I had the other shop—his wife's name was not used, because a previous landlord would not let him off the liability of a house, and because if his name appeared the landlord might put an execution in—I never heard anything about that—the Michaels put 40l. of goods into the business, but no money—I did not notice that the partnership deed says the partner shall give all his time—Mrs. Michaels carried on the business in the Liverpool Road in her own name at the time—there is a provision about her banking account, and that the partners shall pay by cheque anything above 2l—we never opened a banking account—if we had gone on we should have done so—the prisoner put down 6l. a week under the word "partner"—he did not do it every week—Mrs. Michaels took 3l. a week—I have paid her myself, but mostly the prisoner paid her—I think we did not draw the first week, but the second week I believe we did—sometimes she sent for her money at the beginning of the week—she used to borrow money from me—I have paid her 3l.—I have several times given her a sovereign when she has sent over for it, and at the end of the week when the prisoner made up the books I was given credit for that—here is an entry of 13s. that she had; I might have entered that "Michaels" and not "Mrs. Michaels"; it was not for goods, it was only as a memorandum for myself—I find that most of the payments of 3l. are in Mr. Michaels' and not Mrs. Michaels' name—I did not always
put down the payments I gave her like that—I never took a receipt from her, nor from the prisoner—I never paid her by cheque—I have paid her 3l. on Sunday night in her own house for one week in respect of partnership money, in her husband's presence but no other witness—Michaels did not object to my going to the Angel with the coffee-stall, he advised me to sell the goodwill of it and put the money in the business—I sold it in July, two months I think, after the business commenced—I objected three or four times to Mrs. Michaels being at the Liverpool Road shop—I asked her to come to 38, Chapel Street—she said she would not unless she was paid extra for it, as otherwise there would not be enough to keep her family—we bought job lots of drapery—I believe Michaels had been buying job lots for many years, and was acquainted with it—he never asked me to have a petty cash book for his expenses of omnibuses and cabs ingoing about to buy goods—I did not suggest that the actual sum should be put on the face of the invoices—all these invoices have had at their back carbonised paper, which shows what was originally written on them and where they have been altered—on 4th July 1l. has been altered to 1l. 2s., the 1l. is shown at the back but not the 2s.—it was certainly not with my full consent and knowledge that the 2s. was put on by the prisoner for expenses; I should not have known where the expenses were, I had no cash book—on 16th July the receipt was 1l. 15s., which has been altered to 1l. 16s. 3d. on the face—the prisoner had no cabs or omnibuses he had my pony and trap; when my pony was ill for seven weeks we hired one—he has used a cab—Mrs. Michaels has come to 38, Chapel Street to see goods the prisoner has bought, and she has bought them back from us—part was not bought for us, and part for her; I have always objected to that—I swear I never knew she was supplied by her husband's purchases—I never brought out what the profits of a month's trading had been—I believe the prisoner has done so for himself—I do not know what we made in the first month—I know since the accountant went through it we paid 53l. more than we received—I was head of the shop; it was my money; I had control of the entire sales—the prisoner did not complain that goods had been sold by me and not entered—Miss Shand left for an hour each day for dinner—she said nothing to me her return about finding I had not entered a single sale—I never sold anything—my wife was there while Miss Shand was away, and my wife is at the business now—the shopman was away at dinner at the same time as Miss Shand—everything sold was entered in this book, it shows the takings—the prisoner put about 44l. of goods in the business that was not agreed to be treated as separate from the capital of the business—it was arranged they should put 100l. in; I never saw it—this 140l. to be paid for all claims was written by the prisoner on the last day pretty well, when we dissolved, when he had the books—we never settled up between us about the 40l.; I never came to terms with him about it—neither I nor my wife ever sold milk or eggs at 38. Chapel Street, after Mrs. Michaels entered into partnership—I might have had a cup of coffee that was left over for a friend—the prisoner was not my partner—he may have spoken of me as his partner to his friends without my taking much notice, because I did not think it would interest any one, but in business matters I always acknowledged Mrs. Michaels as my partner—I never heard the prisoner speak of me as his partner to Selwood, Eaton
and Co.'s manager; I did not acquiesce in it to him; nor to French nor Eaton: he may have done so in a public-house, and I should take no notice of it—I don't think I ever interfered with his business of selecting goods—he bought where and for what price he pleased—I objected about a month or six weeks before we dissolved—I don't think I said to Tamil I could not engage Williams, the errand boy, till my partner, Mr. Michaels, had seen him, I could not swear I did not—I do not think I said, before engaging Turrell, that I could not engage him before I had seen Mr. Michaels, my partner—I never said a word about Mr. Michaels being my partner—I don't think I ever spoke to Turrell, about him as my partner, I could not swear—Mr. Michaels brought Williams to me—I believe in several weeks it occurs in the book that Michaels' wages are entered 2l., and then there is a cross entry, so that he gets none of it—I explained it at the police-court—putting down the wages was not part of the plan to prevent judgment and execution being levied on Michaels' goods by using Mrs. Michaels' name—this book is all in the prisoner's writing; he received 2l. a week—the cross entries on pages 11 and 12 against the 2l. wages are for goods that were sold—he used to sell job lots, that we could not sell to another job buyer, with my knowledge—I never before heard of any complaint that goods were taken out of the shop—no partition was put up in the shop—I signed this which the prisoner wrote: "12th November, 1886. In consideration of your having this day dissolved partnership with me I hereby agree to pay all debts and outstanding expenses due by the said partnership to any person whatever;" and I signed this also: "12th November, 1886. I hereby agree to pay you 144l. as follows, for your share in the partnership: 60l. cash, 40l. on 16th December, 1886; 22l. on 16th March, 1887; and 22l. on 16th June, 1887; the payment of the above two last sums to be paid by bills"—I paid him 60/. cash, and gave him a bill for 40l. at a month, and two bills for 22l. each at four and seven months—the bills were addressed to Mrs. Michaels—I think the prisoner, Mr. Faulkner, Mr. "Woolf, Mr. Cook, and Mr. B as witch were present when the bills were signed—on my oath I did not on that occasion say, "Some of these invoices have been altered"—I did not know it—the prisoner did not say, "Yes, you know the expenses were added'1—I did not say, "Then that is all right"—the arbitration was on 12th November, that was the night we settled up—they were all the prisoner's friends there—Cook is a solicitor's clerk, he is my friend—I diet not fetch Mr. Baswitch; he and Woolf are the prisoner's friends—I went to Baswitch's office, not to fetch him—that was after I had fallen out with the prisoner—disputes were going on between us for pretty well six weeks I should say—Cook only acted for me on that night—he did not prepare the dissolution—he might have written out the partnership and the bills—I have no recollection of saying there had been mistakes made on both sides with regard to bills and invoices—neither the books nor anything were gone into when Baswitch and Woolf came; they said they would not go through the accounts; I think they put aside the books altogether and heard our verbal statements, and then awarded that I was to pay 144l. in the way mentioned, and I consented to that—I did not know that before they said they would throw aside the books and papers, the invoices, then having additions to them, were mentioned; they were not mentioned—I swear that in the presence of Miss Shand I have never
stood by while the prisoner put in the pencil figures on the documents—I paid the prisoner the 60l.—I gave notice that I should dishonour the 40l. bill which became due on 16th December—I sought an interview with Mrs. Michaels before the bill became due, but did not see her—I sent over to her only once—my wife wanted me to see her the night before I gave the prisoner in charge, which was a day or two before the 40l. bill became due—I swear I did not say I would not go on with the charge if the bills were given me—they have been to me a dozen times and asked me if they gave up the bills would I give up the prosecution—I should say. I first consulted any one about charging him about a fortnight or more before the 40l. bill became due—I found it out about a week after I had paid him the 60l.—Mr. Cook gave me advice—I went to Mr. Morris—I got no summons or warrant against the prisoner, but told a constable—I charged the prisoner with falsifying the accounts and forgery—I did not leave Mr. Morris to find out what it was, we had found it out before—I charged him with what I was told to—I did not say anything to the constable or inspector about forgery; it was the Magistrate first inserted forgery, I believe.
Re-examined. I gave Mrs. Michaels these bills, to pay her out of the business when we dissolved—the prisoner's name was not on them at all—on this invoice for 1l. 16s. 3d. not only has the total, but the amount for each bonnet has been altered—I bought a pony and trap for the prisoner's use when he was out buying—once when the pony was ill I hired another one; that appears in the book—when cabs were necessary, as the trap was not available, he charged for them.
ADAM MURRAY . I am assistant to Henry Glave, draper, of 60, New Oxford Street—my invoices are made out in duplicate—looking at these two I can say that they are duplicates of one another—it is not my writing.
Cross-examined. Miss Chesmere was serving on this occasion I think.
ALFRED ULES . I am assistant to Mr. Roberts, draper, of Upper Street, Islington—this is my writing on this invoice, and this is the duplicate of it—since it left my hands the 1l. has been altered to 1l. 2s.—the 1l. here means that 1l. was taken in payment—these are two duplicates of 24th July; they were both originally for five bonnets at 7s., amounting to 1l. 15s.; and one has since been altered to five bonnets at 7s. 3d., amounting to 1l. 16s. 3d.—on 29th June this 10s. has been altered to 10s. 6d.—this 6l. 4s. 3d. has been altered to 5l. 14s. 3d—that is a transaction of bonnet forms, which we sell by dozens and 12th of a dozen—I find 13-2-12th dozens has been altered to 13-10-12ths.
Cross-examined. I cannot tell who served this on 30th June—I can swear this is the duplicate corresponding with the bill—with regard to the 10s. a head is made to the "0"—no attempt is made to alter the other 10s., which means cash taken, and is larger than the other figures—I have only known the prisoner as a customer about three years, clearing out our job lots—I sold him sunshades—he bought keenly, as cheaply as he could—he had no pony and trap with him that I know of—on some occasions he took goods away with him—we should send the goods if he did not pay for them, so that they might be paid for on delivery—the goods I sent were to the half-price shop in Liverpool Road, Mrs. Michaels', about half a mile from our place.
I went with another officer to 20, Liverpool Road—I saw the prisoner, and told him I should take him in custody for robbing Mr. Edmonds, his late employer, by altering the amounts on several bills—he said, "Have you a warrant?"—I said, "No, I don't require one"—he said, "He is a thief," pointing to the prosecutor, who was in the shop, "and I don't know anything about it"—at the station, before he was charged, he called me to him and said, "I will tell you the truth; I acknowledge altering amounts on the bills, but I did it to pay expenses, and he knew it," meaning the prosecutor—there was about an hour between the two statements he made.
Cross-examined. He was very angry when he called the prosecutor a thief—I knew nothing about the dissolution—I have seen the prisoner in Edmonds' shop; I did not know him before—I do not know if he bore a good reputation or not—I had only seen him once or twice—I knew his wife had a shop in the Liverpool Road—the prisoner said he had altered the bills, but it was to pay expenses, before the charge was written down.
Witnesses for the Defence.
HENRY WILLIAMS . I live at 20, Albion Street, King's Cross—in consequence of seeing an advertisement, I went about six months ago to 38, Chapel Street, where I saw Mr. Edmonds, who told me he could not engage me till his partner came, and that if I called in half an hour his partner would be there. [MR. METCALFE submitted that it was irrelevant whether the prisoner was a partner or not. MR. BESLEY contended that it was very material as to the question of intent to defraud. (See the Queen v. Evans, Law Times, December, 1862.) The COMMON SERJEANT admitted the evidence.] I came back in half an hour, and saw the prisoner there—Mr. Edmonds said "He is here now; you can see him"—I was to be engaged if my character suited—I was engaged from the Saturday at 9s. a week to take out goods and keep the shop tidy—Miss Shand attended to the sales; Mr. Edmonds was there sometimes—I never saw Mrs. Michaels at the shop until the bother came about the dissolution of partnership—I knew of no one being partner except the prisoner—when Miss Shand was absent from the shop, sometimes Mrs. Edmonds would sell goods and sometimes Mr. Edmonds—I believe they entered the sales in the book—I know Mrs. Michaels had a place of business in the Liverpool Road; I don't remember goods being taken there—I was in the service a fortnight, and left the day after the dissolution—at the time of the dispute arising the prisoner said the stock was short—I believe Mr. Edmonds said he did not know—a carpenter put a partition up to divide the shop from the house, to divide the old staircase from the house—that was done during my fortnight—on several occasions I saw the prisoner with invoices with Mr. Edmonds, altering figures—the prisoner did it with Mr. Edmonds.
Cross-examined. I was present, but was not called at the police-court—I could have given this evidence then—I don't know that the expenses of the partition were charged to Edmonds—the partition allowed anybody to come down the stairs without being seen by anybody in the shop—Edmonds always spoke of the prisoner as his partner, not as his partner's husband—I did not know Mrs. Michaels as his partner—when I saw the prisoner altering documents in Mr. Edmonds's presence I was in the shop within perhaps half a dozen yards of them—I wear glasses
because I have bad sight—I did see Mr. Edmonds altering figures; I can't say what figures—I believe the documents to have been invoices sent in with goods—the prisoner first spoke to me about coming here—they did not show me any of the invoices—I have not seen them since this charge has been brought—I can't tell whether the alterations were made on these invoices or on others, or whether they were alterations or additions, or what the figures were that were put on or on what part of the document—I believe I was discharged because I was so very short-sighted that I was no use at all.
Re-examined. During the fortnight I was there I saw the partners close together when the figures were altered—they stood in the center of the shop, and I at the end.
ROBERT WILLIAM SELWOOD . I am cashier and manager to Eaton and Co., 23, Old Change, wholesale mantle manufacturers to the wholesale trade only—I have known the prisoner since about June, 1886—I have seen him in Edmonds's presence is the shop at Chapel Street, and in our warehouse—I first saw him at Chapel Street where I went—he introduced Edmonds to me as his partner; I am quite sure of that; Edmonds heard it—afterwards I took some goods there—I saw Edmonds—he said the prisoner would be in shortly, and nothing was settled about the price till I saw the prisoner—I sold mantles, for which Michaels paid me—I had several transactions with the firm—I supplied goods to Mrs. Michaels at Liverpool Road; that was a distinct account—I supplied goods to Edmonds and Michaels amounting to about 250l., and sent them to 38, Chapel Street—for every separate debt an invoice was sent there—the first time the amount was 38l. 10s.—we supposed it to be sold to Michaels, but afterwards we heard he had gone into partnership with Edmonds, and all the other things were invoiced to Michaels and Edmonds—Michaels was a judge of goods; he always bought as cheaply as he could—he bears the character of an honourable man, and had a good reputation as far as I know—I have heard nothing against him.
Cross-examined. The firm sued Mr. Edmonds for the debt of Michaels and Edmonds—we did not sue the prisoner.
Re-examined. The 38l. 10s. was brought into this account, and was included in the whole statement—at the date of the partnership only 11l. would be due—we sued the prisoner for 63l. 18s.—with the discount the whole of the 38l. 10s. order was paid for—the action for the 63l. 18s. was in respect of indebtedness accruing since the first time—the goods of the 7th June went to Liverpool Road.
LEWIS WOOLF . I am a tailor, of 41, High Street, Islington; Edmonds and Michaels are neighbours of mine—I have known Michaels 12 or 14 months; I knew him in business in Chapel Street, and knew his wife had a separate business in Liverpool Road—on 12th November Mr. Edmonds' son called on me—they sent a second and third time, and then I went to Chapel Street, where I saw Mr. Edmonds—he said "I want you to act on my behalf as arbitrator"—I said that I would—in the room upstairs I saw Mr. Baswitch, Mr. Howes, Mr. Faulkner, and the prisoner—I asked Mr. Edmonds if I was to act as arbitrator for him and try to settle the case—he said "Certainly"—Mr. Howes was arbitrator the other side, Mr. Baswitch was stocktaker, and Mr. Faulkner was umpire—the books were brought forward; they were kept so badly
we could make nothing of them—I saw neither of these books looked into—we put them and the papers and invoices on one side; Mr. Edmonds quite agreed to that—Edmonds said nothing about the invoices in my hearing, but I had to go back to my business—we ultimately arranged that Edmonds was to pay out the prisoner, not Mrs. Michaels, with half the money that the stock was taken for; 144l., I believe—60l. was paid in cash, and the rest in bills—I think the cash was paid a few days afterwards at the Piebald public-house; Faulkner, Baswitch, Edmonds, and another gentleman were there then; he gave him three bills and gold—the conclusion was come to that 144l. should be paid after Mr. Edmonds and the prisoner had been heard and stock had been taken—nothing was said about the invoices in my presence, but when it was all over, and we were having a friendly glass, Mr. Edmonds said to me that Mr. Bastwitch had taken stock, but he, Mr. Edmonds, had got the better of him; he said "He thought he was a better man; I had him for 1501."—on 7th or 8th December I saw Edmonds again—he said he had charged the prisoner—I was surprised to hear it, and said I thought everything was settled quietly and amicably—he said there had been some bills altered.
Cross-examined. I represented that I was Mr. Edmonds' friend—I am a Jew—he selected a Jew to represent his interests against a Jew—Faulkner is not a Jew—Mr. Edmonds paid the money to Michaels, who, I think, wrote out a receipt there and then, and it was handed over for the cash and bills—Mr. Edmonds signed the bills there; I did not see Mr. Michaels sign the receipts.
Re-examined. The dissolution of partnership is signed by Mr. Edmonds—the bills were taken away and signed at the house—it was agreed that the 40l. should go into a third bill, at the public-house on the day we met there; it was on a Saturday after 12 o'clock—the bills were filled up at the public-house and taken away to be signed by Mrs. Michaels and the drawer—Mrs. Michaels' place is about 20 yards up the street—Mrs. Michaels was not at the public-house—I can't say whether this receipt is signed by her; I did not see her sign it—I believe Mr. Edmonds produced it—I saw the 60l. actually paid at the same time as the receipt was given—the prisoner took the receipt away and got it signed by Mrs. Michaels after it had been drawn up in the public-house.
HERMANN BASWITCH . I am an agent of 7, Grocers' Hall Court—I have known the prisoner for three or four years or more, and Mr. Edmonds for some time; the prisoner introduced me to him as his partner, at my warehouse in Manchester Avenue—since June I have had considerable business transactions with the prisoner—I had a conversation with Edmonds as to the relations between him and the prisoner; he said he had had a row with the prisoner, and had charged him with the stock being 150l. or 180l. short, and he asked me to come up at 4 o'clock and take stock—that was on 8th November—I went and took stock—Mr. and Mrs. Edmonds called them out and gave me the prices, and sometimes they appealed to the prisoner as to the price, and he decided—I found there ought to have been about 160l. more stock there—Edmonds said he could not understand how it was short, but they said it was arranged that Edmonds should buy the business—a few days after Edmonds, the prisoner, Woolf, myself, Faulkner, and Howes met in the shop at Chapel Street about 7 o'clock, and they said they intended to settle the business,
that either the prisoner or Mr. Edmonds would buy it, and it was arranged that Edmonds should take the business over for 144l., 60l. to be paid next day, 40l. in one month, and two bills at three or seven months—books and invoices were produced, but they were put aside as they intended to settle it amicably—Edmonds brought the invoices from a safe and said he wanted some explanation from the prisoner about alterations and different things; Eaton's account and other things were mentioned, explanation was given and mistakes were admitted on both sides, and they came to the arrangement that Edmonds would pay the prisoner out—Edmonds said he could not let the house go, and he was determined to buy it—I was at the public-house next day when the money was paid over—a receipt signed Fanny Michaels was given to Edmonds for the 60l.—Faulkner left the public-house and took it over to her to sign—three bills were handed over—the prosecutor promised to pay me 2l. or 3l. for taking stock—I called every day, but only got 1l.—I heard the prosecutor say that he would withdraw the charge if he had the bills back; some one mentioned about the public prosecutor, and Edmonds said he would put away the books and everything used that no one could find them—one day when I came into the shop, Edmonds said to me, "I want to ask you a question about book-keeping; is it right for Mr. Michaels, about his commission, ought he to enter it separately, and not put the expenses on the invoice?"—I said, "Most decidedly not, you ought to have, an expenses book, but so long as you both know, it does not make any difference"—afterwards when Michaels came in Edmonds said, "Well, Mr. Michaels, did I not tell you you were wrong? you ought to put the expenses separate, and not in the invoice"—on the evening they intended to dissolve, the prisoner said Mr. Michaels could not carry on the business, and Cook proposed that it should be done in Mrs. Michaels' name.
Cross-examined. This conversation about withdrawing from the charge was a few days before, when the prisoner was taken—I heard it proposed on the part of the prisoner that the bills should be withdrawn, and 50l. paid to the prosecutor—Mrs. Michaels refused it; I do not know that the prosecutor refused it, or that 50l. was brought here—I said to Mr. Edmonds that commissions and expenses had been put on the invoices instead of keeping them separate, perhaps a week before they were dissolving partnership—he never spoke about my commission—I had a commission of 9s. or 10s. paid me from the firm by the prisoner and Edmonds, because I introduced them to firms in London—I only knew on the evening they dissolved partnership that Mrs. Michaels was the partner—Mrs. Michaels was upstairs then on the Friday night.
Re-examined. About a week before the charge of deficiency of the stock, the prosecutor spoke to me about the question of book-keeping—I had no idea until the dissolution that Mrs. Michaels' name occurred in the deed of partnership—the prisoner explained it then; he said he was in trouble for something, and had a large family to look after, or something like that, and that Cook suggested it could be managed by putting in his wife's name—it was stated in Edmonds' hearing that the prisoner was his partner in June—it was arranged that I should have commission on all the customers I brought.
first knew Mr. Edmonds in October—I hare known the prisoner about two years and a half; they first entered my office in October, and the prisoner introduced Edmonds to me as his partner—I then sold them goods, understanding they were partners—the goods were all returned to me after having been kept a week—I did not know of disputes then—Edmonds called at my office afterwards and asked me to go to his house to attend the dissolution of partnership—I went; Baswitch, Faulkner, Edmonds, and the prisoner were there, and then Woolf came—I had no sympathy with side side or the other—I looked through this book—I was asked to be arbitrator for the prisoner—the books were kept in a muddle—invoices and bills were brought in, small amounts were put different in some of the bills, there were differences of 3d., 6d., or 9d.—these were brought to Mr. Edmonds' attention at that time, and he acknowledged that there were mistakes on both sides, and that the books were kept very irregularly—the prisoner said the invoices were altered—I don't remember that he gave any explanation why—they agreed to put the books on one side, and Edmonds said he would buy the prisoner out—I understood Mr. Baswitch had already been through the stock—a sum was fixed to be paid, which was written down and signed by Edmonds; that took place on 12th November—he was to pay 144l., 60l. down, and three bills—I was not present next day—I only learnt for the first time that day that Mrs. Michaels was in the deed of partnership; it was arranged that she should draw the bills.
Cross-examined. I saw two or three invoices—I did not go into all of them—the only differences were 6d. and 9d.; not such a heavy amount as 10s.—I don't know what the prisoner said the alterations were for—I thought he was the partner, and that there was nothing remarkable in the receipts being altered; it would depend under what circumstances they were altered—I never heard of a similar case.
Re-examined. I can't see that if the alterations were with the knowledge of both partners it would be a fraud.
WALTER FAULKNER . I am a draper, and have known the prisoner for 18 months or two years—I have known Mr. Edmonds for some time—they came to me, and asked for advice, as they could not get on very well together—they spoke of each other as partners—I saw Mr. Baswitch taking stock—I was passing by the shop on the Friday night when Edmonds called me in, and said they intended to dissolve that night—the prisoner and his wife, Woolf, and Cook were there—we went through the books, but they wanted so much explaining—then Edmonds brought out a lot of papers, and said this and the other was altered, and Michaels said "You know that you thoroughly understand it, do you not?"
Cross-examined. The bills were with and without headings—I could not swear where they came from, ten in number—the goods were bought from people who hawk things round—I cannot say if they were from Glaves and Roberts—the differences were only a few pence—it would be impossible for me to swear to an alteration of 10s.
ADA SHAND . I applied for a situation at 38, Chapel Street, and saw the prisoner, who engaged me on 3rd July—I assisted in the shop—Williams and Turrell were there, each for a short time—Mr. Edmonds said to each of them when they applied "Call again when my partner is in"—after I had been there about five weeks the prisoner increased my salary—I went home every evening—I have seen the prisoner altering
invoices when Mr. Edmonds was with him at the desk; expenses were added on, and they were made clearer for Mr. Edmonds to understand—no expenses book was kept—the prisoner complained of deficiency of stock—Edmonds did not deny it; he did not say anything—after that a carpenter was employed to put up a partition, which prevented people from the upper part of the house having free access to the shop—about a week before the prisoner was given in custody, Mr. Edmonds sent Turrell over to Mrs. Michaels saying he wished to arrange a meeting between her and the prisoner and himself—Mrs. Michaels said "I have nothing to do with Mr. Edmonds, Mr. Michaels is not at home"—Mr. Edmonds said he had given Mr. Michaels three bills for his half of the stock—during the time the pony was unable to go out a pony was hired once or twice—Mrs. Michaels was present on 12th November when they went upstairs—Michaels sometimes brought home goods when the pony was laid up—Mr. Edmonds said he was paying the prisoner 2l. a week out of his partnership money—I saw him going into the accounts sometimes—I was absent at dinner-time, and when I returned entries had been made in the cash book—no goods were gone when I returned, and not entered except once when the prisoner accused Mr. Edmonds of not putting down 1s. that was paid in for something—I entered the amount of the invoice and the expenses in one sum in the book; that was known to Mr. Edmonds—Mrs. Michaels has come to the shop in Chapel Street and taken away goods that have been bought by her husband to the knowledge of Mr. Edmonds—on 12th November Mr. Edmonds said to the prisoner that he was quite satisfied with him, that he was quite straightforward and honest—that was before the books had been put aside and the value of the business ascertained—I was not there when Howes and the other gentleman were there—nothing was said at that time about the invoices being altered so as to carry expenses.
Cross-examined. I was in Mrs. Michael's service for a few weeks—I am now living at home doing nothing—I was at the police-court, but did not give evidence there—I was serving a customer, and moving about when the alterations were made—I could not see what they were—they were figures written on documents.
LAURENCE BARRETT . On November 9th I heard Mr. Edmonds say that the prisoner had altered an invoice, and he showed it to me—I can't say which it is—he told me unless the prisoner was going to return the bills he would have to take the consequences.
The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY . There were other indictments against the prisoner for similar offences.— Eight Months' Hard Labour.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr Esq.
MR. WILMOT Prosecuted.
sale and fastened, and when I was returning home about half-past 12 with Samuel Stanton I saw in Wilson Street a few yards from my house two men, of whom the prisoner was one, coming from the direction of my shop—when near me they crossed to the opposite side of the street—they stopped a minute, and then went away, and then returned, and the prisoner came and said to me and Stanton "Have you got an apron or a wrapper or anything you can lend me?"—I said "What do you want it for?"—he said "Can't you, don't you understand anything?"—he then rejoined the other man on the other side of the road—I said something to Stanton, and stood while he went and looked at my door—he said "Charlie, your door is open"—I went across to the prisoner, and then went back to my shop, where I found the door open about a foot—Stanton went for a policeman—I saw my boots all gone—I shut the door and ran back to where I saw the prisoner and another man—I found them both on their knees trying to tie something up—they jumped up and swore at me—I asked them what they were doing—I then went and found my boots gone, and when I came back I found the policeman had got the prisoners—they had got my boots.
CHARLES BRADSHAW (Policeman A 46). Shortly before 1 a.m. Stanton came up to me in the New Cross Road, and gave me some information—I ran up the road, and in Wilson Street saw the prisoner tying up boots in an apron on the ground—I told him I should take him into custody for stealing the boots from a shop—he said "What for? I am only looking on; you cannot take me up for that"—I had a severe struggle with him—we fell down twice, and then we got into the middle of the road—Stanton came up, and eventually the prisoner was taken to the station—there were 11 pairs of boots.
GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in December, 1885.— Two Years' Hard Labour.
HENNESEY PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. WILMOT Prosecuted.
JOSEPH WALKER . I have a shop at 50, Artillery Place, Woolwich, where Mr. Phillips lives—on 1st January, about 10 p.m., I left my shop all locked up safely, and was aroused about half-past three and went back to my shop, and found it had been broken into, and a quantity of jewellery worth about 45l. stolen, partly from the window and partly from cases—an entrance had been effected by breaking a pane at the top of a little window, and the latch had been then pulled back—they had come along the passage and forced the door—an attempt had been made to get in at the front by pulling down one of the shutters.
RICHARD HAMMOND (Policeman R 15). On the morning of 2nd January I heard a policeman's whistle near this shop, and went to Wellington Street and saw Adams—he made a complaint, and I saw Hennesey lying on the ground, and also a gentleman.
for being concerned with Hennesey in custody at Greenwich for a burglary—he said "I did not think I should be brought in for that job"—I took him to Woolwich, and then to 9, Charles Street, the address of the injured constable—he was placed with four others, and was then taken into the room, and was immediately identified by Adams—I searched him at the station, and found on him a newspaper cutting of the report of the case of Hennesey when he was brought up.
Cross-examined by Fisher. I first saw you in Park Place, Greenwich, on the Sunday night—this having been done on the Saturday, I did not speak to you—I don't know how you came to have my name and address in your pocket when you were arrested—I saw you again on Tuesday morning sweeping snow away, but I had no conversation with you, and I did no give you food.
GEORGE ADAMS (Policeman R 205). I was on duty near this shp on this morning—I heard whispering inside—I peeped through a chink in the shutters, and saw matches lit and put out again—I saw two persons in the shop, men I believe, one was a man I am certain; one appeared to be taking goods from the window, and the other to be breaking open drawers and boxes at the back—I waited a moment, and then saw someone coming up the lane from the back of the shop—I went and met them, they were the two prisoners—I said "Hulloa, what is up down there?"—Fisher replied "Nothing, sir"—I said "What are you doing down there?"—he smiled and said "Oh, all right, I have been down there with a woman; I gave her 1s. 6d. and took her down there, and my mate has been watching for me"—I said "Where is the woman?"—he said "Just gone up there, you must have seen her"—I said "No woman has gone up here for 10 minutes, that tale won't do for me"—Fisher said nothing, but threw up his arms—I was about to seize him when Henessey threw me by the shop, and Fisher ran off—afterwards Fisher was brought to my house in company with five or six other men, and I picked him out—I am quite sure of him—I saw him face to face when he spoke to me about the woman.
Cross-examined. There was a chink through the shutter—I could not recognise you when you were in the shop—it was 20 yards from the back of the shop to where I met you—I did not search you, you threw up your arms to be searched—I gave a description of the man—I don't know why you were not apprehended before—a man was brought next day to me named Galloway, I said at once he was not the man—he was only taken on suspicion, I had not given a description then.
GERGE TREVERTON (Policeman R 378). I went off duty at 3 a.m., and going down Trafalgar Road with Berger I met Fisher coming from the direction of Woolwich—I said "Why this is Fisher"—we stopped and searched him, and asked him what he was doing; he said he had been down to Charlton with a woman—we found nothing on him, and I cautioned him and let him go—that was about half-past 3.
Cross-examined. We met you at the corner of Marlborough Street, Greenwich, two or three miles from Woolwich—I did not say I must report myself, and we did not walk together towards the station, you left me a little higher up the road—I did not shake hands and bid you good night, nor did I go with you as far as the Victory—I heard of the robbery the next day, but I could not find you—I was on night duty—I
found nothing on you—I have not heard of you having any jewellery or anything from the rohbery.
The prisoner in his defence said he never saw Hennesey before, and he produced an address which he said he had written from the detective's dictation.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
HENNESEY PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction for felony on January 7th, 1886.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. GRAIN Prosecuted; MR. HORACE AVORY Defended.
WILLIAM TYTHERLEIGH . I am a builder—about June, 1886, I acquired part of a property called the Clock House Estate at Clapham, and I commenced erecting some houses there—I employed the prisoner the foreman and manager at 2l. 5s. per Week, which he retired every Friday night—this book (produced) is called "The Men's Time-both"—it was kept entirely by the prisoner—it was made up every Saturday morning calculated the hours the men worked at so much per hour, and I gave him the amount necessary to pay the workmen every Saturday morning About 11 o'clock, and he apportioned it—on Saturday, 11th December, here is entered: "George Goss, 54 1/2 hours, 2l. 10s. 2d.; John Webb, 54 1/2 hours, same; and George Coombs, 60 hours, 1s. 2s. 6d. December 18th, George Goss, 51 hours, 1l. 18s. 3d.; John Webb, 52 hours, 1l. 19s.; George Coombs, 58 hours, 1l. 1s. 9d. On 21st August, Roberts, otherwise Hardy, 60 hours, 2l. 5s.; on 28th August, 60 hours, 2l. 5s.; 4th September, 60 hours, 2l. 5s.; 18th September, 59 hours, 2l. 4s. 3d.; 2nd October, 58 hours, 2l. 3s. 6d. November 20th, George Miles, 54 hours, 2l. 0s. 6d.; 27th November, 60 hours, 2l. 5s.; 4th December, 54 1/2 hours, 2l. 0s. 6d.; 11th December, 54 1/2 hours, 2l. 0s. 1 1/2 d.; and on 18th December, 51 hours, 1l. 18s. 3d."—on those days I handed to the prisoner those amounts—I believed the hours and amounts were correct.
Cross-examined. I swear that the prisoner was my servant, and that as such. I paid him 45s. weekly wages—I still swear that, after my attention was called to an agreement produced at the police-court—I gave him into custody for stealing the money and falsifying the books—I first associated myself with the prisoner in business about 12 months ago—I entered into this agreement with him dated 25th January, 1886—this is my signature—I believe I understood it. (By this the two parties agreed to assist each other in erecting six houses, the prisoner to receive 21. per week and the witness 30s. per week, the profits to be equally divided, and if there should be any dispute, to be settled by arbitration, six months' notice to be given by either of dissolution of partnership.) The prisoner had all his money; I never had mine—I drew up that agreement myself—I think he was my servant under that agreement—the six houses were finished; neither of us then gave notice to dissolve the partnership—I agreed with him to go on with other buildings on the same estate—there was a written agreement as to
that; this (produced) is it, dated 9th August, 1886—by this each of us was to receive 45s. a week; I never had a penny; I was to have it if there was any after the building was finished; it is not finished—I also entered into another agreement at the same date with regard to the Woodside Estate—these are the three agreements under which the prisoner and I were carrying on these building operations—I still swear he was my servant at weekly wages—nothing has ever been removed off the estate since the prisoner has been in custody, only from one house to another—I do not know that the prisoner called in the assistance of the police to stop the removal of property; he had no right to stop it—there was a quantity of plant branded with the initials "T. & N." that belonged to us as partners until the agreement was abandoned—I bought a new brand nearly 12 months ago; it was not last September—no profit was made on the Abbeville Estate, it was a loss; about 100l. is owing to me, I never had a shilling—I know that the prisoner says there was a profit; I have not heard him say that he is entitled to half, I do not know that he claims it—there is an account to be opened as soon as I have time to make it up—there is an action pending in the High Court of Justice for an account to be taken between us; I have been served with a writ for it—as to the Clock House Estate, it was left to the prisoner in a great measure to engage nearly the whole of the men; I was sometimes consulted, and sometimes not—the prisoner arranged with the men what wages he should pay them—the men knew me; I was there several times a week—on some occasions one asked me 6 1/2 d. an hour, and I refused him—I have not refused on other occasions to allow 8 1/2 d. an hour and said I would only allow 6d.—I have been told since that there were two Union men there—I know that Union men will only work at a certain price and for certain hours—those two men are the prisoner's relations, Allen and Mackay; one is said to be a brother-in-law, and the other a cousin—I believe they are to be called as witnesses—I refused to let men have advances during the week, but it has been done—I refuse a man more than he is worth—a memorandum was made of advances, you will find "Sub" in some places; about two, I think—I found all the money—it did not all come in the shape of advances from the freeholder; I am responsible for it; the bulk or it came from the freeholder—the Abbeville speculation is not commenced, only bought the land—the Clock House Estate is not finished; nothing has been made on it, not a penny; the building is still going on—the prisoner would be entitled to half the profit if he was a partner; is he a partner? that is the question—on 10th November a plan for building four houses in Cavendish, Road was sent in to the Board of Works of the Wandsworth district in the names of Tytherleigh and Napier, but that was sent in without my consent; I say that positively—there are two more houses to be built in Cavendish Road; they are not commenced; that is part of the Clock House Estate—I went and saw the men who are to be called before calling them as witnesses, every one of them—one of them, Hardy, left on his own account some months ago; I do not know that the prisoner discharged him, I never heard it—the day I gave the prisoner in custody I discharged four men; Allen and Mackay are two of them; that was in consequence of stealing—I also discharged Marsh; he was an accessory; I do not know whether he is a relation of the prisoner—I have never had any wages; I never
drew my 45s. a week; I never had a penny—I have no account here but this book; this is the prisoner's book.
Re-examined. I brought the books to the police-court, and they were there for examination—they were never called for—I have not been asked to bring them here, nor has my solicitor, to my knowledge—I gave the prisoner in custody on 21st December—no writ was out then, as far as I know—before I gave him into custody I had made a careful inspection of my pay-books, and had also inspected my plant at the different places—I did not find it correct; I have lost a lot of things—in the building trade the foreman, not the master, usually engages the men and as a rule dismisses them—I think the prisoner did find 2l. or 3l. at the first start of the Abbeville Estate; that was the extent—I went on in the ordinary way; as the surveyor measured up the buildings I borrowed money on mortgage, and when there was not any I found it myself; there as nothing unusual in that—on the Woodside affair the prisoner had to find 25l., and I lent him a portion of the money, and I have paid considerably more since on his account, more than over-balances it—that estate is not yet commenced, I could only get the land—there is nothing due to the prisoner from me at this moment.
By the JURY. If a man did not work all his time on the Saturday he would put the money into his pocket; he ought to return it to me; he has not returned one penny.
MR. AVORY here submitted that upon these facts no charge of false pretences could be maintained, the money being as much the money of the prisoner as the prosecutor, and the fact of a partnership existing was established by the agreements: see Reg. v. Evans, Lee and Cave, p. 252, and Reg. v. Watson, Dearsby and Bell, p. 348. MR. BESLEY contended that it was unimportant whether the prisoner was a partner or a servant, if the facts of the case amount to a larceny the prisoner would still be liable to a conviction on this indictment; at all events the case should go to the Jury. The RECORDER held that it would be better to take the opinion of the Jury upon the facts, and, if necessary, the question of law could be reserved.
GEORGE GOSS . I was in the employ of Mr. Tytherleigh for the week ending 11th December, 1886—I had worked 54 1/2 hours that week, and received 1l. 15s. 5d.—I was also at work on the week ending 18th December, and received 1l. 15s. 5d.—both those amounts I received from the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I have no book or memorandum to show what I received—Mr. Tytherleigh first asked me what I had received—he did not come to me with a book in his hand—Mr. Napier engaged me and settled what my wages were to be—I never asked for any advances during the week; I never heard of money being advanced in the week—there was a man named March on the works; he kept our times—I always understood when I was working there that the defendant and Tytherleigh were partners; that was well understood on the works.
Re-examined. The building was going on on the Clock House Estate—the prisoner was a carpenter by occupation; he was always at the works—Marsh used to ask us the time on Saturday the same as Napier did—I got 8 1/2 d. an hour; that was what the prisoner arranged with me—there was not another pay-day between the time of my getting the 1l. 15s. 5d. and the time Mr. Tytherleigh spoke to me on the following
Monday—I am quite sure 1l. 15s. 5d. was the true amount the prisoner paid me; no more than that.
ROBERT HENRY HARDY . I was at work on the Clock House Estate in the week ending 21st August—I keep a book; I received 2l. 3s. 10 1/2 d. for that week—on the 28th August I received 2l. 3s. 6d., on the 4th September 2l. 2s. 6d., on 18th September 1l. 19s. 7 1/2 d., and on 2nd October 1l. 11s. 1 1/2 d—all those sums were paid me by the prisoner on those respective dates.
Cross-examined. I generally put my amounts down in this book on the Sunday, as I took my money on the Saturday, or probably it might be Monday or Tuesday, as a rule it was Sunday—I am sure a great many of these amounts have not been written up at one time—Mr. Tytherleigh first asked me what amounts I had received—he had a small book with him at the time—I worked for 9d. an hour—I left before the prisoner was given in charge, that was because I was not satisfied with my work, and the way I was being treated—I was put to do other peoples' work—Mr. Napier put me to other work—Mr. Tytherleigh did not tell me he had charged his partner with obtaining money; he told me there had been an upset—I said before the Magistrate "He afterwards told me he had charged his partner with not paying his men all the money"—it was a common thing for men to receive subs during the week—they are not down in my book; they were so little—if we had advances we should get our full wages at the end of the week, and then we should pay him what money had been advanced.
Re-examined. The largest amount I had advanced to me at one time was half-a-crown, but that was not all for myself—I can't swear whether that was on a Friday, I think it was—I began work there on 14th August, and left on Monday morning, October 4th.
GEORGE MILES . I was employed on the Clock House Estate in the week ending 20th November, and received 1l. 15s. 5d. on that day—on 27th November I received 1l. 15s. 5d.; on 4th December, 1l. 15s. 5d.; on December 11th, 1l. 11s. 10 1/2 d.; and on December 18th, 1l. 15s. 5d.—I recollect the 21st December, when the prisoner was given in custody; just before that he called me into his office, and said "If the old gentleman should say anything to you as regards what time you have made, tell him you don't know, but if pressed say that you make nothing less than 54 1/2 hours a week"—I understood the old gentleman to mean Mr. Tytherleigh—for the first two weeks when I went to work there I only got 9d. an hour—Napier took me on, and he altered me afterwards to 8 1/2 d., he said by Mr. Tytherleigh's orders my money would have to be 8 1/2 d., as no man would be paid more than 8 1/2 d. on the job—I agreed to go on at that rather than be out of work.
Cross-examined. The case was once before the police-court before I was called as a witness—I had been there on two occasions before that—I heard nothing about the Magistrate dismissing the case—I can't say exactly what day it was when I had this conversation with the prisoner, but I believe it was in the middle of the week, in the afternoon—he did sot tell me I was not worth 9d.; I have always been worth 9d. before—I received 1l. 15s. 5d. all the time we were making the number of hours—Mr. Tytherleigh asked me after Napier had been arrested what money I had received; he might have had a book with him—I had one sub from Napier, and two or three sixpences from a man named Marsh; he used to calf out the time for us to start in the morning, and the time to stop in
the evening—he made advances through Napier when I have asked him.
Re-examined. I asked Napier the first week I started for an advance, and he gave me a shilling, but I did not ask afterwards, as he did not want to give it—I asked Marsh on three occasions—I paid the shilling back to him—Napier said it was a winter's work for me, and all the men, by Tytherleigh's orders, were only to have 8 1/2 d. an hour.
JOHN WEBB . I was in the employ of Mr. Tytherleigh on the week ending 11th December, and on that day took 1l. 10s. 4d., and on 18th December I took 1l. 12s. 8d.—I received both those sums from the prisoner—I was paid 8d. an hour.
Cross-examined. I never kept a book or memorandum of the number of hours I had done—I did not say before the Magistrate "For the week ending 11th December it is true that I worked 54 1/2 hours; no, I did not work 54 1/2 hours, I worked 45 1/2 hours."
GEORGE HOWE . I went by the name of Coombs on these works—I was there on the week ending 11th December, and on that day I took 18s. 9d., and on 18th December I took 19s. 10 1/2 d.—both those sums I received from the prisoner.
Cross-examined. The time I made came to 18s. 9d., but I received 1l. 0s. 6d.—he gave me 1s. 9d. out of his own free will as a present, and on the 18th he gave me a present of 1s. 1 1/2 d.—I never knew anyone to keep the time—no one asked me but Napier, and then they paid me; they trusted to you entirely.
Re-examined. I am quite sure I worked 50 hours up to the 11th—he gave me 18s. 9d. first, and then he pulled that back and gave 1l. 0s. 6d., and said "There is a present"—on the 18th he gave me 1l. first, and then he gave me another 1s. and said "There is a present"—I supposed that was for going errands for him.
By MR. AVORY. If a man was worth 9d. the prisoner could not increase him by asking my opinion, but he could reduce him without asking my opinion—he represented himself to be the judge of their value—Marsh asked me to increase his wages, he was working at 6d. and he wanted 6 1/2 d., and I would not give it to him—he was a labourer—none of the other men asked me about wages—they all dealt with the prisoner.
By MR. BESLEY. I expected a true amount to be entered in the book, and I thought it was correct.
CHARLES TOWNER (Detective Sergeant). On 20th December, at 7 o'clock, the prisoner was given into my custody, the prosecutor was not present when I arrested him—I told him that Mr. Tytherleigh had made a charge of embezzlement against him—he said, "Oh, what is the charge?"—I said "Receiving money to pay the wages, but you have not paid them so much as you charged Mr. Tytherleigh"—he said, "I can call the men on the job to prove different to that"—when the charge was read at the station he said, "I hold a deed a partnership between me and Mr. Tytherleigh which has never been cancelled"—the Clock House Estate is Cavendish Road, Clapham.
MR. TYTHERLEIGH (Re-examined). By this book Marsh was paid at the rate of 6d. per hour all through, but there are more, hours mentioned than he worked; Mackay and Allen were paid at the rate of 9d.—I
advanced 10l. on the Woodside property, and I advanced other money besides, the prisoner advanced the rest; it was borrowed, he paid 25l. and I lent him 10l., he did not advance the whole 25l.
The following Witnesses were called for the Defence.
ALEXANDER MACKAY . I am a carpenter and joiner of 38, Kimberley Road—I entered the employment of Tytherleigh and Napier in August, 1886—I did not know Mr. Tytherleigh when I went there—I did not see him for a month afterwards—Mr. Napier engaged me, at the rate of 9d. per hour—from the 4th September I had 9 1/2 d. an hour until I was discharged—Mr. Napier wished me to try and look after the job and push it along, because they had advances—I was never with speculative builders before, I said I was not going to do it unless he paid me extra for it—I asked 9 1/2 d. and after that I was paid regularly, and sometimes he gave me 2s. or 3s. extra when they were putting on roofs and very heavy doors—I was discharged by Mr. Tytherleigh on the Tuesday after Mr. Napier had been given into custody—he ordered me out of the shop, he gave no reason for discharging me further than his asking me where Mr. Napier was—I said "I suppose he is at home"—he said "No, he is in custody"—he never made any accusation against me—I am not any relation to Mr. Napier.
Cross-examined. Before this job I was at work at Kensington; I had 9d. an hour there—before that I was at 36, Drayton Gardens—I never kept any book of my wages, I don't know whether Marsh did—I could not from memory tell you what I received on 18th December, I know I took my money home to my wife—I once carried a cheffonier to the prisoner's house; that was in broad daylight—I made part of it—it was not Mr. Tytherleigh's mahogany to my knowledge; I got it from Mr. Napier, he brought it to the shop where I was working on the Clock House Estate—several of us helped to make the cheffonier, Allen was one, under my directions—it was not done in the ordinary hours of work—I worked at it till 10 o'clock, and till 1 in the morning; it was after hours—the prisoner paid me extra money for it; he always told me to keep my overtime separate—I never put it down on paper—I told Mr. Tytherleigh that I had made up this cheffonier along with others—I told him I didn't know where the mahogany came from—he said that it was his mahogany and that Napier had been stealing it.
Re-examined. I have not the slightest ground for supposing it was his mahogany; it was not of the value of 4l., it was nearly finished before it was brought to me—Mr. Napier told me that he had started it some years before and never got it finished, and if we would finish it he would pay us for it.
THOMAS WILLIAM ALLEN . I am a carpenter and joiner in Falcon Road—I entered into the employment of Tytherleigh and Napier about April last year; Mr. Napier engaged me, he was my employer—I did not know Mr. Tytherleigh for some time after—I was paid 9d. an hour, the latter part of the time I had more—about September I applied to Mr. Napier for it, and he offered to pay me 9 1/2 d. besides a shilling or two extra when we were pushing the work on—I was discharged by Mr. Tytherleigh the morning after Mr. Napier was given in custody—he gave me no reason—he took my name and address to give me a job after this case was settled, that was the same day when I applied for my money—he
made no accusation of dishonesty against me—I am no relation to the prisoner whatever.
Cross-examined. Mr. Tytherleigh saw me at work on the cheffonier, he had the same opportunity as others—it was done at after hours—I made about sixty hours that week—we do not always work eleven hours a day "I kept no account, we never do in the building trade—we are paid 10 1/2 d. as a rule, and sometimes 12 1/2 d.—I never took 1l. 18s. for a full week yet; I sometimes took 2l. 5s. or 2l. 6s., and a shilling more sometimes—I got 2l. 5s. or 2l. 7s. after I got the rise—Marsh kept the time, not in a book, on a slip of paper—the cheffonier was taken home about 8 in the morning—it was never put away—the work was done in the shop, it was partly finished when I worked at it.
WILLIAM MARSH . I am a labourer, at Brixton—I entered the service of Tytherleigh and Napier in January last year at the rate of sixpence an hour—I got more at the latter end of March—I asked Mr. Napier for another halfpenny per hour—I then asked Mr. Tytherleigh, and I told Mr. Napier that Mr. Tytherleigh would not give it, and he said he would see about it—I went on that week at sixpence, and next week I said I should leave if I did not get the other halfpenny, and from that time he paid me the other halfpenny up to the time I was discharged on 22nd December; that was the day after Mr. Napier was given into custody—Mr. Tytherleigh discharged me; he did not make any accusation against me—I am no relation of the prisoner—it was part of my business to keep the men's time, and give it in to Mr. Napier on the Friday—I kept it on a slip of paper.
Cross-examined. My son-in-law was also employed at sixpence per hour—it was at Abbeville Road, before I went the Clock-house Estate, that I threatened to leave—I went on at sixpence an hour at Abbeville Road—I did not remove any stone from the Clock-house Estate to Mr. Crawford's, or any timber to Mr. Baker's—I loaded some bricks in a cart to be taken to Mr. Cleveland, a builder in Abbeville Road; that was by Mr. Napier's orders—it was only one load—I can't tell when that was—I kept an account of my time, not what I was paid—I was paid 1l. 13s. 8d. the last week in December; that was for so many hours, so much for Sunday's watch, and so much for carman's money, that was 1s. 2d. a week—I used to give the carmen money every time they brought in timber or lime; that was part of my 1l. 13s.—I also had watchman's money; I was watchman—I was allowed extra for night watch; that was part of the 1l. 13s.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY . There was another indictment against the prisoner for larceny, upon which MR. BESLEY offered no evidence the facts being the same. NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
260. GEORGE EDWARD WILKINSON (34) PLEADED GUILTY to embezzling the sum of 38l. 5s. 8d., of the Southwark and Vauxhall Water Company, his masters; also to making false entries in certain return sheets, with intent to defraud the said Company.— Five Years' Penal Servitude . There were four other indictments against him for embezzling other sums.
Before Baron Pollock.
MESSRS. KEITH FRITH and ARTHUR GILL Prosecuted; MR. BESLEY
STEPHEN LEACH (Detective). On the evening of 7th January, about 8.30, I saw a brewer's dray with a pair of horses driven by the prisoner across the circus at the rate of about seven or eight miles an hour; it was coming from the Obelisk to the Borough Road—people were crossing from Blackfriars to the London Road side and back again—I saw people run to get out of the way—an old gentleman was crossing the road; he was not able to get out of the way; he was struck by the pole, knocked down, and the wheels passed over him—the prisoner went driving on; he made no effort to stop—I ran after him by the side for about 40 yards—I called to him to stop, and put my umbrella up, and he stopped—I told him to get down—he said "What's the matter?"—I said "Do you know you have run over a man and knocked him down?"—he said "No"—there was another man with him sitting by his side—the prisoner was driving—they both got down; they were both drunk—the prisoner was taken to the station; another constable took the deceased to the hospital.
Cross-examined (Plan produced). As far as I know this is correct—I did not see the van till it was coming past the Obelisk; it came on the river side of the Obelisk—I saw it for about 20 or 30 yards before the accident, and for about 30 yards after—I am sure it was going more than six miles an hour; it was going at a full trot—I have been to the spot since, at night—I know the urinal; there are two lights on it—I do not know whether a driver coming from the Lambeth Road would pass on the south side of the Obelisk or not, some come one way and some the other—the urinal would not shut out the whole of the roadway from a driver coming from Lambeth Road; it would be more awkward to see a person passing—passengers pass on the west side of the urinal—two boys were crossing the usual way; they stepped back—the other passengers had passed before—the two boys and the deceased were all I saw at the time—the van belonged to the City of London Brewery Company—the man not driving was seated on a barrel on the near side of the driver—the horses were trotting very fast; it would make a noise—Ellis was the man with the prisoner; his name and address were taken at the station—he was sent to the brewery to state what had happened; the prisoner was detained—he was drunk, not fit to have charge of horses, or Ellis either—he denied it—the doctor said he was drunk, and not fit to have charge of horses—the urinal throws a shadow on the roadway—I don't call it a deep shadow.
By the COURT. The coming of the van first attracted my attention, and seeing the passengers trying to get out of the way—there was no shouting from the driver—the old gentleman did not seem as if he could get out of the way.
GEORGE TOMKINS . I am a bricklayer and bricksetter, of 4, New Street, Borough Road—on the evening of 7th February I was standing at the corner of the Borough Road looking towards the Obelisk—I saw a brewer's dray coming across the Square—I could not see on which side of the road it was—it was going at the rate of about 7 miles an
hour as near as I could tell—I saw an elderly gentleman in the road, and I saw the chain or reins from the pole on the horse's breast catch him and knock him down; the horse went over him, and the wheels passed over him—he was going towards the urinal—his back was turned to me—he was crossing from Blackfriars Road—the driver drove on about 45 yards; two constables went after him, called to him, and stopped him—I went and helped to raise the old gentleman along with two youths—a constable called for a chair and fixed him on it—I went down to where the van was stopped—I saw the prisoner after he got down off the van, standing there; he was the worse for drink.
Cross-examined. I described him as not beastly drunk, but had enough to make him merry or lively—I did not take notice of his condition till after the old gentleman had been run over—I did not go to the police-station—I heard the rumble of the van as it came across, and saw it coming—I didn't see it till it passed the Obelisk—I was standing on the path on the Blackfriars Road side, about a yard from the policeman—I saw no other vehicle there at the time—it had been snowing and frosty, and there was a good deal of slush in the road—I saw two boys crossing, one was very nearly under the van; they were passing behind the old gentleman, going the same way—he was in the center of the road when I saw him; the chain seemed to catch him and swing him round, and he fell under the horses' feet; he was down in an instant.
GEORGE HUGHES (Policeman M 395). I prepared these plans of the spot where the accident happened; one is a perspective view—I understand perspective; I have passed examinations under the Government School of Art—I have also a ground plan—the measurements are correct and according to scale.
Cross-examined. I have not been educated as a surveyor, but as an artist—I say these plans are correct by measurement—the width from Blackfriars Road to the London Road is 63 yards according to my measurement by stepping; I didn't measure the width—the width of the pavement is 19 inches on the south side of the urinal; the north of the urinal is about 10 feet, I didn't measure it—I have been there at night; it casts a shadow, but not a deep one.
WILLIAM SMALL . I am a bookbinder, of 36, St. Mary's Square, Kennington Road—on this evening I was crossing the road from Blackfriars towards London Road with Lewis—I saw an old man about 2 yards in front of me going in the same direction—I saw a van coming from the direction of the Obelisk—I pulled Lewis back and the van passed, and I noticed the back wheel of the dray pass over the old gentleman; that was the first I saw of the accident—the pole-chain struck him and turned him round and he fell, and then I noticed, the back wheel pass over him—I left Lewis with the old man, and ran after the van—I saw Leach running, and I then went back to the old gentleman—the van was going about 7 miles an hour—I never saw the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I am 15 years of age—my experience of pace arises from driving a pony 12 months a year ago—I was going across to the corner of the urinal, not going to it—I was in the middle of the road when I first saw the van; it was half-way between the Obelisk and the urinal.
man about three yards in front of me—Small pulled me back, and I saw the front part of the horse knock the old man down, and then we went and picked him up—I should say the van was going between seven and eight miles an hour, I could not say exactly—I did not see the prisoner till he was at the station.
Cross-examined. My experience of horses is having been driving out with my brother about twice—I went across the foot-pavement where passengers cross—I did not see the van till Small put his hand on me.
THOMAS EVANS . I am divisional surgeon of police—I saw the prisoner on the night of 7th January about 9 o'clock; I examined him—he was slightly intoxicated; his uttering were rather thick—I did not consider him in a fit condition to take charge of a horse and van.
Cross-examined. This was after the accident, when he was brought to the station.
SIDNEY WATCHER . I am house surgeon at Guy's—on 7th January, about 9.30, the deceased was admitted there—I examined him—both bones of his left leg were broken; there was a great deal of bruising about the upper part of the right thigh, and he was suffering from severe shock, the result of the injury—he died on the 10th from the effects of the injury.
Witnesses for the Defence.
WILLIAM DEWHURST . I am a surveyor—I was directed by the City of London Brewery Company to go to this place—I went about the same hour of the evening—it would be impossible for a person driving to the Borough Road to see anything on the roadway to the urinal until he got beyond the Obelisk; the urinal is thrown out and blocks the way—I was there about half-past 8—the public-house was lighted and the urinal lights—a deep shadow was cast from the urinal on to the kerb of the pavement—I have measured the height of the urinal; it is 9 feet 9 1/2 inches from the road level to the lamp-burners—there is a red glass, which somewhat deteriorates the light, and the light from the public-house would also tend to increase the shadow—the width of the pavement round the south side of the urinal is 20 inches, and the north side 19 inches; the paving extends 4 feet to the east and 4 feet 3 inches to the west—there are two entrances to it—I prepared this plan (produced) from the ordnance map; it is 20 feet to the inch, about four times the size of this small one—there are tram lines running down the Borough Road. (The witness pointed out on the plans the positions of the various places.)
THOMAS COLEMAN . I am a horsekeeper, of the City of London Brewery—I have been in the service 20 years—the prisoner has been there about three years—I have the superintendence of the dray-horses—his general character is that of a sober, steady man and a very careful driver—I never saw him the worse for liquor—Ellis is the man who went out with him on this evening, he is a sober man; I never saw him the worse for drink—on the night of 7th January Ellis came to the brewery in Thames Street about a quarter to 10—in consequence of what he said I went with him to the Southwark Police-station, Borough Road, where I found the van—I walked with Ellis all that way; he was perfectly sober—I did not see the prisoner.
about two years end nine months; I have seen him going out and coming back daily—I never saw him the worse for liquor; he is a perfectly sober man, we should not keep him if he was not; I have never had reason to find fault him in respect of his. horse—Ellis, went out as his assistant—I never saw him the worse for liquor.
Cross-examined. The Company think so highly of the prisoner that they have defended him; he, is still in the service—he has been out on bail and has surrendered to-day.
ALFRED ELLIS . I went out with Hart to assist with his dray on 7th January—we were coming from a public-house in Pratt Street, Lambeth; I was sitting on a barrel fixed upon the dray—we had fifteen empty barrels in the dray—the prisoner was driving on a proper dickey—we drove the Elephant and castle side of the Oblesik—I saw the old gentleman just as the pole touched him, where he was knocked down—I have been to the spot since—there is a deep shadow thrown from the urinal on to the roadway at that point—I said to the prisoner "Stop," and the policeman also said "Stop," and he pulled up within ten yards—I think we" were going about six or seven miles an hour—I am not a driver—our names and addresses were taken—I was sent to get somebody to fetch the van and horses—I walked straight to the brewery and back—I was sober, and so was the prisoner.
Cross-examined. We had been delivering beer all the afternoon—we were only offered drink once—we had a pint each after we had done, between 6 and 7 o'clock—we stopped at a public-house in Lambeth Road, and had two half-pints there—nowhere else—it is not customary to drive on the river side of the Obelisk from Lambeth Road—the tramway goes that way—we leave the Obelisk on the left—I did not see the old gentleman till he was struck—the shadow was where he was.
WILLIAM HALE . I am a member of the firm of Young, Hale, and Co., solicitors to the brewery—I have been instructed by the Company to defend the prisoner—on the Thursday after the accident, at 8.30, I went to the spot where it happened, and made a careful survey; while I was there more than half of the traffic coming from Lambeth Road to the Borough Road went on the south side of the Obleisk—I am accustomed to drive—I should certainly follow in that path, because the other is a great detour—the lights of the urinal are a great obstruction to the sight, and there is a great shadow thrown by the urinal—there is a wide crossing to the London Road, and I noticed that almost invariably the flow of traffic was across that long crossing on the west side of the urinal—I only saw two or three come the other way.
Cross-examined. We have not had an accident for some years—when accidents are brought against the Company for negligence we conduct the defence—we generally manage the business of the Company—I have not heard of an accident for 12 years—the Company has 70 or 80 horses, and therefore a great many drivers.
GUILTY. Strongly recommended to mercy on account of his good character .— To enter into his own recognisances and find sureties to come up for judgment if called upon.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. LYNE Prosecuted.
JOHN BROGAN (Police Sergeant). On 12th January, about 11.30 a.m., I was in Kennington Park Road, and saw the prisoner carrying a bag containing something—I stopped him, and said "What have you got there?"—he said "I have got some brushes"—I said "How came you in possession of them?"—he said "I make brushes"—I said "Where do you come from?"—he said "From Marylebone," and that he was a hawker—I said "Did you make these brushes?"—he said "No; I bought them at a sale in Regent Street"—I said "What did you pay for them?"—he said "6s. a dozen"—I said "How long since?"—he said "About a month ago"—I said "How is it you have not sold them before?"—he said "Trade is bad"—the other man answered in the same strain—they both consented to come to the station—we went about 300 yards, and Day wanted to go into a public-house—I refused, and Day threw the bag at me and nearly knocked me down—they both ran away in front of a passing carriage—I chased them about 400 yards, and when about to catch Day a constable stopped him, who he threw down, and was getting away when I laid hold of him—the other man got away—the inspector asked the prisoner at the station what account he gave of the brushes—he said "Find out the best way you can"—I stopped him two miles from Oxford Street.
WALTER EDWARD BARRETT . I am manager to my father—he keeps a brush warehouse at 372, Oxford Street—on Tuesday, 11th January, I closed the warehouse about 11 p.m.—I went again about 8 a.m., and about 10 o'clock I received information, went upstairs, and found that a slate had been taken off the roof and a hole made, through the ceiling, large enough for a man to get through—I missed brushes, value 7l. 10s., from the third floor front—some of them are, mother-of-pearl—there is a private mark on them—I identified them at the station.
GUILTY of receiving . He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at this Court in May, 1886, in the name of John King, of housebreaking, after a previous conviction, and several other convictions were proved against him.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. POLAND Prosecuted.
EDWIN JAMES LOCK . I keep the Masons' Arms, Lambeth Road—on 15th January, between 1 and 2 p.m., a man named Simpson, who was before the Magistrate, came to my bar, and soon after the prisoner joined him and called for two cigars and tendered a half-sovereign to Moore, the barman, who showed it to me and said it was bad, in the prisoner's presence, and he ran out without waiting for his change—Simpson afterwards went out, and I went out and saw them both arm-in-arm—a constable arrested Simpson and Brown ran away—going to the station Brown threw away this envelope rolled up—I picked it, up
(Addressed "Mr. Henry Brown, 11, Deacon Street, Great Chapel Street, Westminster")—it contained a visiting order for visiting Pentonville Prison, 3,212, Alexander Kelly—at the station Brown said, "You have brought an innocent man into this matter," referring to Simpson.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. There were two bad half-sovereigns: the barman gave me one, which was not the one you passed.
Re-examined. When the barman showed me the sovereign Brown tenndered, Simpson was present—I went out after Brown—I gave the coin to the constable—this is it.
THOMAS MORE . I am barman at the Masons' Arms—on 15th January, about 1.30, Simpson came in, who I knew as a regular customer—he called for half a pint of beer, and gave me a half-sovereign, which I put into a glass—there was no other half-sovereign there—in 10 minutes or a quarter of an hour Brown came in, and Simpson said "What will you have?"—he said "Half of mild and bitter"—Simpson put down 1 1/2 d.—Brown then called for two smokes, price 4d., and gave me a bad half-sovereign—I showed it to Mr. Lock—Brown ran out without his change, and Mr. Lock ran after him—this (produced) is the coin—as soon as I found it was bad I went to the glass and found somebody had put another half-sovereign in; there were two then, one good and one bad—I cannot Bay which of them Simpson gave me—other people were serving in the bar who had access to the glass—the bad half-sovereign was taken out of the glass and given to the constable—I had seen Simpson in there earlier in the day—he had some drink and I changed a sovereign for him—there was a half-sovereign among the change I gave him, which was good as far as I can tell.
ARTHUR MARDLE . I am a hawker, of Wells Street, Blackfriars—on 15th January, as I went into the Masons' Arms about 2 o'clock, the prisoner came out—I went in, and heard some talk between the landlord and the barman about a half-sovereign, and Simpson went out—I went out, and saw the prisoner not quite 100 yards off—Simpson made signs to him, and they walked together through the railway arch—I went back and spoke to Mr. Lock, who followed them, and gave them in custody.
JOHN TANDEM (Policeman A. 533). I was in uniform—Mardle pointed out Brown to me, saying "There is one," and went after him, and he was stopped—I took Simpson; he was the worse for liquor—I found on him 12s. 3d. and a cigar and a 1/2 d.
SAMUEL HAMPSHIRE (Policeman Z 229). Mr. Lock gave Brown into my custody—he said, referring to Simpson, "That man is an honest, hard-working man; he is being dragged into it"—I said "Do you know him?"—he said "No, I judge him by his appearance"—I found on Brown a half-crown, a florin, three sixpences, and a penny, all good—when asked his address he said "You have it there"(On the envelope)—that is a common lodging-house—I produce two bad half-crowns and one good one—I do not produce the bad one out of the glass.
Cross-examined. You were smoking a cigar, and one was found on Simpson.
WILLIAM TURRELL . I am a warder at Pentonville Prison—this paper is an admission order, dated 14th January, it relates to prisoner 3212, Alexander Kelly, and was written by the governor and sent by post—when
a man in prison wishes to see anyone an order is made out—Alexander Kelly was in prison under under a sentence in September, 1885, for uttering counterfeit coin.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I hope and trust this man being innocent. I had rather have my head out off than an innocent man should suffer."
Prisoner's Defence. Simpson was drunk. He ought to have been here as a witness. If I had asked for two cigars I should have had one of them found on me, but the man who called for them had them. I went about my business, I had no change to wait for. I had changed no gold, and had no gold on me.
GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction in November, 1882, of unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin. He had also been sentenced to seven years' penal servitude for church-breaking and 10 years' penal servitude for larceny.— Five Years' Penal Servitude .
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28TH, 1886.