CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
FOURTH SESSION, HELD JANUARY 30TH, 1888.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND, BY
Short-hand Writers to the Court,
ROLLS CHAMBERS, No. 89, CHANCERY LANE.
THE POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE
REVISED AND EDITED BY
EDWARD T. E. BESLEY, ESQ.,
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW.
STEVENS AND SONS, 119, CHANCERY LANE,
Law Booksellers and Publishers.
On the Queen's Commission of
OYER AND TERMINER AND GAOL DELIVERY
The City of London,
AND GAOL DELIVERY FOR THE
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, AND THE PARTS OF THE COUNTIES OF ESSEX, KENT, AND SURREY, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,
Including cases committed to this Court under Order in Council pursuant to the Winter Assize Act of 1879,
Held on Monday, January 30th, 1888, and following days.
BEFORE the RIGHT HON. POLYDORE DE KEYSER, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir HENRY HAWKINS , Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice; Sir THOMAS GABRIEL , Bart., Sir JAMES CLARKE LAWRENCE , Bart., Sir FRANCIS WYATT TRUSCOTT , Knt., Sir ROBERT NICHOLAS FOWLER , Bart., Aldermen of the said City; Sir THOMAS CHAMBERS , Knt., Q. C., Recorder of the said City; JOSEPH SAVORY , Esq., GEORGE ROBERT TYLER , Esq., and JAMES EBENEZER SAUNDERS , Esq., other of the Aldermen of the said City; Sir WILLIAM THOMAS CHARLEY , Knt., Q. C., D. C. L., Common Serjeant of the said City; and ROBERT MALCOLM KERR , Esq.,LL. D., Judge of the Sheriffs' Court; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer, and General Gaol Delivery, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
WILLIAM ALPHEUS HIGGS, Esq.,
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
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 characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, January 30th, 1888.
Before Mr. Recorder.
240. ALFRED CALDCOURT (25) to stealing, whilst employed in the Post Office, two postal orders, the property of the Postmaster-General.— Twelve Months' Hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
243. WILLIAM HENRY SMITH (29) to five indictments for forgery and embezzlement.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. (MR. H. AVORY, for the Prosecution, stated that the amount of the prisoner's embezzlements was 1, 000l. in the last year.) [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. HORACE AVORY Prosecuted.
GEORGINA PIKE . I am a widow, and am barmaid at the Anchor and Hope public-house, Fore Street—on 19th January, about half-past 8, the prisoner came in and asked for twopennyworth of whisky—he gave me a half-crown; I put it in the tester, found it was bad, and returned it to him—I asked him how it came into his possession—he said he took it in the course of trade—a gentleman present asked his name and address; the prisoner gave it him—I sent for a constable—he heard me do so, and said he thought it was very arbitrary of me; he would wait till the constable came—he did not wait, he went out in a minute or two—he was
brought back by the constable—the half-crown was produced at the station, and I identified it—this is it.
GEORGE TREVIS . I was in the Anchor and Hope on the evening of 19th January—I saw the prisoner tender the half-crown—the barmaid handed it back—he was asked his name and address; he would not give it—he went out; I followed, and saw him stopped just by an area—I afterwards pointed out the spot to a constable.
FREDERICK FUNNELL (City Policeman). I received information, and found the prisoner in Lower Whitecross Street, leaning against a wall, with his hat off—I asked him if he had been into a public-house in Fore Street—he said "No, you have made a mistake"—I took him to the Anchor and Hope, and Mrs. Pike identified him, and gave him into custody—I afterwards examined the area pointed out to me by Mr. Trevis, and in it found this half-crown, bent as it is now—on the prisoner I found two separate shillings and 5d. in bronze, good money.
JAMES CLIFFORD . I am assistant to Mr. Redding, a tea-dealer, in Watney Street, Commercial Road East—on Wednesday, 18th January, the prisoner purchased 7 lb. of sugar, which came to 1s.—he gave me a bad half crown in payment—I broke it, and gave him a portion and kept a portion—he said he was not aware it was bad; he would go and get some good money, and come back and take the sugar—he went out, but did not come back—I have the piece of the half-crown.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You had purchased sugar at our place once or twice, and paid good money.
Prisoner's Defence. I get my living by standing in the public market selling candy, and am well known there. I have often purchased sugar at Mr. Redding's. On that day I had three half-crowns and some coppers, and went in to Mr. Redding's to get some sugar to make candy. I did not know the money was bad. The other half-crown I paid for refreshment at the Hope and Anchor, and when it was refused I offered the barmaid another, and offered my name and address, but they sent for a constable and told me to walk out.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HORACE AVORY Prosecuted.
EDWIN BUCKLAND . I am a conductor on the North Metropolitan Car Company—I know the prisoner by sight—on the evening of 18th January he got on my car in Commercial Road, between the George and New Road—I collected his fare, it was a penny—he gave me a two-shilling piece—I told him it was bad, and accused him of giving me a half-crown on the Monday—he did not answer—I moved towards the door, and called a constable in Cannon Street, and gave him into custody—I said "This man has given me a bad florin, and he has also given me a bad half-crown, "Idid not say when—the prisoner said nothing—I had seen him on the previous Monday, the 16th—he then got on my car about half-past 8 in the evening, between the George and the New Road—the fare was 1d.—he then gave me a half-crown; I gave him 2s. 5d. change—I put the half-crown in my bag—when I got to our station I paid in
my money, and found this bad half-crown—I had no other half-crown—I had seen the prisoner as a passenger besides these two occasions—as we were going to the station I told the constable that the prisoner had given me the half-crown on the Tuesday; that was a mistake, I corrected it at the office; it was on the Monday—the prisoner said he was not riding on the Tuesday—I gave the two coins to the constable.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I told you at the time that the twoshilling piece was bad—I moved to the door and looked at it, and I handed it to a Mr. Mead, a passenger, to look at—I did not state that at the police-court—you said you had the two-shilling piece in change for a sovereign.
Re-examined. I handed the two-shilling piece to Mr. Mead to look at, and to assist me in seeing that the prisoner did not go out—he looked at the two coins and gave them me back—I merely showed them to him.
JEREMIAH SULLIVAN . About half-past 11 on the night of 18th January the prisoner was given into my custody by the last witness in Leman Street—he charged him with passing two coins, a half-crown and a two-shilling piece, one last night and one to-night—he showed me the coins—the prisoner said "I was not aware the half-crown was bad, but I know where I got the two-shilling piece from. A man owed me a sovereign and he paid me to-day in silver"—I searched him there and then on the car, and found 10 1/2 d. in his trousers pocket and 1d. in his waistcoat pocket, in bronze—I then took him to the station—nothing was said on the way to the station; at the station he said "I did not ride last night"—the witness said "I made a mistake; it was on Monday night"—the prisoner made no answer to that.
Cross-examined. I put no questions to you, I merely told you the charge—I did not say to you "Are you aware the half-crown was bad?"—you said "I was not aware it was bad"—it was at the station while the charge was being written down that the conductor said he had made a mistake.
Witnesses for the Defence.
WILLIAM HOPKINS . I am a fitter—I know the prisoner—on Monday evening, 16th January, I was with him from between 7 and half-past 8 or 9 o'clock in my own house, in the kitchen—I was repairing a pair of boots when he came in between 7 and 8—he is one of my tenants—after sitting with him a considerable time, he asked me out to the Crown if I would like a liquor—we went out about twenty minutes past 8 and returned, a knock came to the door and he left me, getting on towards 9.
Cross-examined. I live at 27, Severn Street, Shadwell—the prisoner occupies a back room in the same house—it is about five minutes' walk from Commercial Road, where the trams run—I know the George and New Road, it would take twelve or fifteen minutes to go from my house to the New Road—I have only known the prisoner since he has been a tenant in the house I occupy—I do not know that he uses the tramcar—I speak to the time we left the public-house by their clock—I did not ask him who it was that came and knocked for him, but I believe it was one of his friends—he went into his own room where his wife was.
I saw him at 8 o'clock at his lodging—I went upstairs to his room and he joined us there—I stayed there till 12 o'clock with him—he did not leave the house.
Cross-examined. I live next door—when I went up to his room his wife was there—she said he had gone out and would soon return, and he did very soon after—I did not see Mr. Hopkins, but I heard him—I heard their voices coming in—they came in together—I did not knock at the kitchen door, I knocked at the house door—I saw him on Wednesday the 18th—I was there about 8 and stopped till about 11—the prisoner was there all that time—I went out with him a little after 11; we went to my house—he said he was going to see a friend, he did not say where—he did not say he was going on the tramcar—he does not go often on the tramcar after 11—I see him very often in the evening.
Re-examined. When you left the house on Wednesday night, you asked your wife for some money, she said the money was on the mantelpiece, and you took from the mantelpiece a two shilling piece, and you told her that you had taken it—I could not see what other coins there were, I know there was money—I am quite sure this was on Wednesday, the 18th January.
Cross-examined. I went there to see him, he is a friend of mine—I found him in his own room—his wife and Rosenfeldt were with him.
Cross-examined. I did not look at the money before I gave it him—my husband gave it me to pay the prisoner; he was indebted to him 2l., he gave him one sovereign and would give him the other next Monday—it looked good; I took it out of my pocket and gave it to him, I had no other money; I counted it, there were three two shilling-pieces, half-crowns, and nine shillings.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted.
WILLIAM COOPER . I am a cab driver—on the morning of 1st January I was driving my cab in Arabella Road, Westminster; the prisoner hailed me and told me to drive to the Abbey; he stopped me in Tothill Street and got out, and handed me a bad two-shilling piece; I gave him two sixpences, the fare was 1s.; I looked at the florin by the light and found it was bad, I got down off my cab and ran after him and told him it was bad, he mumbled something and went on; I had to run back to my cab and then went after him, he turned into Victoria Road—I stopped him and said "Give me my two sixpences back, this is bad money;" he said "Oh, it's all right; "Isaid "No, it is not, I want my good money;" a plain clothes constable came up, he saw the two shilling-piece and told me to drive to the station, and I gave him into custody—the constable kept the coin, this is it, I marked it with my teeth at the station.
said to the prisoner "You have given me a bad two shilling-piece, give me my two sixpences back;" the prisoner said "No, it's all right"—I said "I am a police constable, I shall take you into custody"—before that I looked at the florin and found it was bad—this is it—I searched the prisoner at the station and found on him a counterfeit half-crown, also two sixpences, a shilling, and 2d. in bronze, and five pawnbrokers' duplicates—he was asked his address and he gave the Army and Navy Lodging House, Strutton Ground, it is a common fourpenny lodging house.
Prisoner's Defence. I had a half-sovereign sent me on Friday. I changed it, and that was all the money I had; if I had known the coin was bad I should not have given it to him. I did not hear him call out to me.
GUILTY . — Six Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Monday, January 30th, 1888.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant
The police stated that the prisoner had been the companion of coiners for two years, and that his name had been frequently mentioned in this Court in coining cases. A number of previous convictions were proved against him.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. (THE COURT commended the conduct of the police.)
For other cases tried this day see Surrey cases.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, January 31st, 1888.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. WILMOT Prosecuted; MR. BURNIE Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
253. EDWIN JAMES DENT (33) to unlawfully obtaining money and goods by false pretences.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. (There were other indictments against the prisoner for forgery and larceny, to which he pleaded Not Guilty.) And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted.
the prisoner some considerable time—on 20th December I received certain instructions to go to Bishopsgate Street Station, and there received a van of goods and also the delivery notes referring to them—among them was a case consigned to Foster, Porter, and Co., and was marked "F P 44"—this (produced) is the delivery note referring to that case—on driving away from Bishopsgate Street, and when in Jewin Street, I met the prisoner, and asked him if he would assist me in unloading, as I could not manage it myself—I then went on to Foster Porter's in Wood Street, and the prisoner and I got the case off the van on to the pavement—I then asked him if he would get the case delivered and the sheet signed while I went to Hamsell Street, Jewin Street, with another case, and I gave him the sheet to get signed—I went to Hamsell Street, and when I came back I saw the prisoner had moved the van up to Morley's, where I had my next delivery—he then handed me the delivery sheet signed in blacklead pencil—he remained with me till the van was unloaded in the afternoon, and then I gave him 3d., and he left me—he went away with the case before I left the van for Hamsell Street—he took it on a hand-barrow, and went round to the side to put it down the slip.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You did not get on the load—you must have followed me round to Wood Street—I afterwards went to Alder manbury, and you met me there.
JOHN WALTER HENWOOD . I am foreman at the goods entrance of Messrs. Foster, Porter, and Co. 's—it is my duty to receive all goods that are sent in—neither on 20th December nor at any time subsequently was any case delivered there marked "F P 44"—on 20th December nobody was in that employment named W. Manning, nor has there been anybody of that name before or since—the signature to this delivery sheet is not signed in the usual way; the usual way is to sign them in ink—I also produce an invoice marked "B," which is an invoice of ribbons consigned from Bâle to Foster Porter's, value 49l. 14s. 9d.—they are the ribbons supposed to have been contained in this case—the mark "F P 44 "on the case is referred to in this invoice—those ribbons have never been received by our company.
BENJAMIN PRIOR . I am foreman to Messrs. Fairclough and Co.—Stephen Clark has to act under my orders—a claim has been made by Messrs. Foster, Porter, and Co. against Messrs. Fairclough and Co. in respect of these ribbons—I know the prisoner; he was a carman with us at one time for about two years.
THOMAS JARMAN . I am foreman to James Townsend, a carman, of Osborne Street, Whitechapel—the prisoner was in his employment, and I have had occasion to notice his writing—I produce some of his writing—the signature "W. Manning" to this yellow delivery sheet is, I believe, his handwriting.
CHARLES DORDEN (Detective H). On 7th January I received certain information, and in consequence arrested the prisoner, and told him he would be charged with stealing a case containing ribbons value 55l., which ought to have been delivered at Foster Porter's—he said "I delivered them, they went down the slip, and I got the receipt for them, which was signed by a man whom I should know again"—at the station he said "I delivered them at the side door,"
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I delivered the case. I had no barrow; I had to roll the case myself."
The prisoner in his defence stated that he worked the case round to Foster Porter's door, and there saw a man with a piece of canvas over his knees, whom he thought was in their employ; that he delivered the case to him, and he signed the sheet and gave it back to him.
GUILTY *.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. SIDMAN JONES Prosecuted.
GEORGE HAMMERSLEY . I live at 85, Aldgate Street, and am a caretaker—about 7. 30 p.m. on 10th January I was in High Street, Whitechapel, and when at the corner of Commercial Street I was assailed by a number of men, who got in front of me and behind me, and made a noise as though there was a block—they kept doing that and knocking me about, and at last I said "What the devil are you up to?" and directly I said that my watch was pulled away—they had pulled my overcoat and undercoat open—I at once turned round, and they had all run away—you could not see three yards in front of you, it was so thick—I valued my watch at 5l.; it was a keyless watch; I had only had it five months—I have not seen it since—I at once went and gave information to the police—I cannot identify the prisoners.
Cross-examined by McCarthy. I was not struck at all, only shoved about.
WILLIAM FROST . I live at Rodney Buildings, Pitfield Street, and am a lamplighter—on 10th January, about 7. 30 p.m., I was down in Whitechapel and saw a lot of men hanging about outside Webb's, and my suspicions being aroused I watched them, and saw them get hold of Mr. Hammersley, and saw Kaylor pin him against the wall, and then saw him give McCarthy a watch, and then they all ran away—the prisoners are strangers to me; I am sure they are the two men.
Cross-examined by Kaylor. The person who stole the watch is not in custody, but I saw you there.
Kaylor's Statement before the Magistrate. "I am not guilty; I know no more about it than a child."
GUILTY . Kaylor then
PLEADED GUILTY** to a previous conviction of felony at the Middlesex Sessions in 1879.
KAYLOR— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
McCARTHY**†— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted.
WILLIAM KINGSTON . I am nine years old—I live with my father and mother at 88, Rushmore Road, Clapton Park—I know Mr. Allen's jewellery shop in Chatsworth Road—on 3rd December, about 5. 30 p.m., I was near that shop, and saw the prisoner—he broke the window with a stone, and tied the door with a rope—one end of the rope was tied to the outside handle of the door, and the other end was tied to the window-sill, so that you could not open the door—the prisoner took some Jubilee money which was in the window of the shop, near where the hole had been made; it was in a box—he then ran away—I afterwards picked him out at the police-court from four others.
MARGARET EMMETT . I live at 4l., Brunner Road, Walthamstow—the prisoner was lodging with me on 3rd December—he gave me two Jubilee threepenny pieces—the sergeant has them now—I had them made into earrings.
MARGARET EMMETT, JUNIOR . I am the daughter of the last witness—I was keeping company with the prisoner, and on New Year's Eve he gave me a Jubilee five-shilling piece and two Jubilee threepenny pieces, which had been made into a brooch and a pair of earrings.
ELIZABETH WALKER . I live at 45, Sidney Road—the prisoner is my nephew—about six weeks ago he gave me a Jubilee five-shilling piece and two Jubilee threepenny pieces, which I had made into a brooch and earrings.
ALFRED BARNES (Policeman J 23). I produce some Jubilee coins made up into earrings and brooches, which I have received from the two Emmetts and Elizabeth Walker—I received information of this case on 5th December, and the prisoner was taken into custody on the 9th, early in the morning, by a constable in another case—I find he has been lodging at 45, Weston Road, Homerton, and also at Mrs. Emmett's, 41, Brunner Road, Walthamstow—at those lodgings I found some things relating to another case, and in a box in his room I found this chisel.
WILLIAM SIM ALLEN . I live at 104, Chatsworth Road, and am a jeweller—on 3rd December, about 5 o'clock in the evening, I went to answer a knock at the door, and when I opened it I found a rope attached to the handle—I picked the rope off the door, and went downstairs again, having shut the door—in the course of a few minutes I heard a crash, and went upstairs, and found a hole in the shop window, and a box containing money had been taken away—it contained two crown pieces, two four-shilling pieces, three half-crowns, three two-shilling pieces, three shilling pieces, and ten threepenny pieces, all Jubilee coins—the box was close to the glass—a hand put in through the window could have taken it out—I gave information to the police—I produce a stone which I found on the window-sill.
The prisoner in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence stated that he did not do it, and that the two threepenny pieces which he gave to Mrs. Emmett he had given sixpence for.
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted.
January, between half-past 4 and 5, I was aroused by the police, and was shown the shutter of the shop, the panel of which was broken—it was secured by a bar right along, and the bar was bent—I found the prisoner in the custody of a constable when I got down.
THOMAS BARNETT (Policeman J 458). On the early morning of 9th January, about 4. 15, I was on duty in Victoria Park Road, and saw the prisoner there—he had what appeared to be the head of a pick on his shoulder—he then walked away, and was absent about 10 minutes, and then returned, looking carefully around—he then approached Mr. Frankell's shop, and inserted the end of the pick behind the bar of the shutter, and gave a leverage and smashed the shutter—he was then disturbed by a constable approaching, and walked rapidly away—I kept observation on him, and saw him enter a mews at the back of the Alexandra public-house in Victoria Park Road—in about two minutes he emerged from there, having left the pick behind, and came back again and tried a second time the shutter of Mr. Frankell's shop, and I then took him in custody—I have not found the pick.
Prisoner's Defence. I know nothing at all about it.
GUILTY . — Nine Months' Hard Labour concurrent on each indictment.
MR. COLE Prosecuted.
JOHN PALLATTO STRACHAN SMITH . I am a journalist, and live at Mount Pleasant House, Dartford—on 14th January, about two in the morning, I was walking up Fleet Street with a friend, and there was a slight hustle, and then I felt a snatch at my waistcoat, and saw two persons as I thought running away—I called out "Stop them," and when I saw them next they were in custody—at that time I was wearing a watch and this chain, part of which was taken from me—I cannot identify the prisoners.
WILLIAM SOAMES (City Policeman 320). On 14th January, about two o'clock, I was on duty in Fleet Street, and saw the last witness with a friend walking up Fleet Street on the south side towards Temple Bar—shortly after that I heard a cry of "Stop thief," and turned round and saw May running across the street and Winn following him—I stopped May and caught hold of him by the shoulder and right arm, and he threw the watch out of his left hand—I picked it up and took him to the station—Cheeseman stopped Winn.
GEORGE CHEESEMAN (City Policeman 516). I was in Fleet Street, and saw the two prisoners standing at the corner of Bouverie Street watching the prosecutor and his friend—they then followed them along to Ser jeants' Inn, where I lost sight of them—a few minutes later I heard a cry of "Stop thief," saw Winn running, and caught him in Crane Court—he said "I have not got the watch"—that was before I said anything to him—I then took him to the station, where he was charged, and said nothing.
Winn in his defence stated he was walking down Fleet Street, and saw five or six men and a woman surrounding the prosecutor, and heard the prosecutor say "I have lost my watch;" that the men then ran away, and he ran away also, but that he had nothing to do with the watch.
May in his defence stated that he was walking down Fleet Street, and saw the prosecutor being hustled by five or six men and a woman, that the woman then got away from them, and put the watch into his hand, and he ran away, thinking it was all right.
GUILTY . — Nine Months' Hard Labour each.
MR. GREENWOOD Prosecuted; MR. HUTTON Defended. CHARLES ADAMS (Policeman J 34). On 21st December, about three a.m., I was in St. Peter Street, Mile End, and heard a dog barking—I went towards the noise, and saw the prisoner standing by the side front door of No. 53 in the same street—I asked him what was the matter—he said "Nothing"—thinking something was wrong, I pushed the little gate open in front and went in—as soon as I did so the prisoner and another man who was standing behind him made a rush towards the gate—I caught hold of the prisoner, and we had a violent struggle for a minute or so, my helmet being knocked off in the struggle—whilst struggling with him the other man struck me with some sharp instrument at the back of the neck—he then got at the front of me and made a blow towards my face—I put up my left arm, and the instrument went through my coat tunic and shirt into my arm—I then let go the prisoner and struck that man with my truncheon—as I did so the prisoner dealt me a very heavy blow on the right side of the head, which felled me to the ground insensible—when I came to I was taken to the station and seen by the doctor, and I am now under his care—I next saw the prisoner at Bishops gate Station on 22nd January, and identified him from a number of others—he was then clean shaven, as he is now, but he was wearing full whiskers at the time—during the struggle three keys got knocked from the prisoner's hand, and I picked them up by the side of my helmet, which was lying on the ground, and handed them to the sergeant at the station—at the police-court, after I had given my evidence, the prisoner asked to be allowed to see these keys, and after examining them he said "They were taken from my room by the man who fetched me out there," meaning the detective who apprehended him.
Cross-examined. The prisoner never cross-examined me; he did not say a word to me—the gate is about three or four yards from the house—I only saw the prisoner at the door at first, and when I opened the gate they both rushed towards it—the prisoner was wearing a beard then, and when I picked him out at the station he was like he is now.
Re-examined. I have not the slightest doubt that he is the man—I also identified him by his voice.
PATRICK QUINLAN . I am deputy divisional surgeon of police at Bishops gate Station—I was called to the station to see the last witness on the morning of 21st December, and found he had a wound at the back of his neck and another at the back of his left forearm, and his clothing was cut corresponding to the wound in the arm—he had also a contusion over part of the right parietal bone—I saw him home myself—they were sharp, clean cut, incised wounds, and were inflicted by some sharp instrument—the wound on the head was a contused one, and might have been inflicted with a blunt instrument—after he had been home about four hours I saw him again, and he was then suffering from compression of
the brain—he has been on the sick list ever since—his life was in danger for some time, and he may never be able to resume duty again in consequence of these injuries—he has sudden attacks of giddiness.
EDMUND CHILDS . I live at St. Peter's Road, Mile End—about three on the morning of 21st December I was called by the police, and next morning I went to my side door, and saw marks on it as of a chisel—I think the sergeant had a chisel, which was found in the prisoner's pocket when apprehended, and he compared that instrument with the marks, and it tallied with the marks on the door.
WILLIAM WALLER (Police Sergeant J). About 1 o'clock in the morning of 22nd January I went to a house in Lisburn Street, Bishopsgate, and there took the prisoner—before taking him to the station I searched him, and in his breast coat pocket I found this chisel—in the morning, about 7 o'clock, Sergeant Adams came, and the prisoner was placed among a number of others, and he identified him readily—at the station the prisoner said "I never struck a policeman in my life, I have always treated them civilly"—he then turned to Adams, and said "I never saw you before in my life; "Adams said "Now I have heard your voice, I am positive you are the man"—these three keys were given to me on the morning of 21st December, at 5 o'clock, and they have been in my possession ever since—at the police-court, after Adams had given his evidence, the prisoner said "May I be allowed to look at those keys?"—by the order of the Magistrate they were handed to him, and he said "These keys were taken from my room on Saturday night, when they took me away"—I found that this chisel fitted the marks exactly on Mr. Child's door, close to where the lock is.
CHARLES PEARN (Police Sergeant J). I produce the keys—at 4 a.m. on 21st December I was in charge of Bishopsgate Police-station, when Sergeant Adams came in, accompanied by a policeman; he handed me these three keys, and I sent for Sergeant Waller and handed them over to him.
GUILTY . He then
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, January 31st, 1888.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
261. EDWARD COSGROVE (20) PLEADED GUILTY to burglariously breaking and entering a certain dwelling house, and stealing three coats and other articles, after a conviction of felony at Hammersmith in April, 1885 .—Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
263. SYDNEY MONTAGUE LAWRENCE (40) to forging and uttering a bill of exchange for 64l. 7s. 6d., also a bill for 86l. 4s., also an order for 5l. 16s., also an order for 6l., also to unlawfully obtaining 4l. and 3l. by false pretences.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
264. GEORGE STUTCHBURY (32) to stealing seven gold chains from James William Benson and others, his masters, also to obtaining the same by false pretences.— Judgment respited. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
REUBEN JACOBS . I am a tailor, of 10, Spelman Street, Whitechapel—on Saturday, 5th November, about 12 p.m., I shut my windows and shutters, but did not bolt or fasten the windows—about 1.30 a.m. I was aroused by the police, went down and found the window and shutters wide open—I was shown three books, a desk, an antimacassar, a tray, and an album, which I identified (produced)—they had been on a tray in front of the window when I shut the shutters.
CHARLES SMITH (Policeman). I was on duty in Finch Street, at the corner of Spelman Street, and saw the two prisoners at Mr. Jacobs', with the shutters and parlour window wide open—I watched them two or three minutes, they saw me, dropped these articles, and ran away—I ran and caught Murphy; he said "What do you want?"—I said "You come back with me to the window, I will show you what I want"—I took him back and showed him the window, he said "That is notthing, I can't get many months for that"—I took him to the station.
Cross-examined by Murphy. I was about thirty yards from the window, and saw you taking the things out and depositing them on the pavement—I took you 50 yards off, not 150.
Re-examined. I can swear to both prisoners; I saw them both reaching the things out at the window from a table inside, and putting them on the pavement.
AARON HAYES (Policeman H 113). On 8th January, about 1.40 a.m., I saw Smith running after Murphy, and I ran after Foss, caught him and took him back to Mr. Jacobs', he said "What have I done?"—I said "You will have to come back with me and see what you have done"—the shutters were open; I aroused Mr. Jacobs, who identified these things at the station—I found them just outside the house.
Cross-examined by Foss. You were walking very fast.
The prisoners in their defence stated that they met accidentally, and the constable immediately arrested them; they denied knowing anything about the charge, and stated that they were hard-working men.
GUILTY . — Nine Months' Hard Labour each.
266. JANE WARD (32) , Breaking and entering the dwelling house of Charles Albert Statham, and stealing a clock and other articles. Second Count, for harbouring and maintaining a man unknown who had committed the said housebreaking.
MESSRS. POLAND, MEAD, and PARTRIDGE Prosecuted; MR. PURCELL Defended.
CHARLES ALBEBT STATHAM . I am a master carman, of 4, Frederick Place, Mile End—on Christmas Day, about 3 p.m., I locked up my house securely and went out, leaving no one inside—I returned about 1. 30 or 2 o'clock next morning, and when I got inside, the drawing-room door was open and the room in disorder; I missed a marble clock, a silver cruet stand, 13 silver spoons, and other articles, worth about 15l.; some
were taken from other rooms—they were all safe when I left—I have seen them all since.
EUGENE BRADSHAW (Police Sergeant K). I saw Inspector Griggs yesterday—he has broken his leg and cannot get out of bed—he gave evidence before the Magistrate—the prisoner had the opportunity of cross examining him. (MR. PURCELL objected to the Inspector's deposition, as owing to his injury he had not signed it.) I went with Inspector Griggs on 26th December, about 3 a.m., to 2, Fuller Street, Malmsbury Road, Bow—that is a private house—we had received information about 2. 30—I knocked, and a female voice inside said "Who is there?"—I said "Never mind who we are, open the door; I want to see you very pressing"—the door was not opened—I knocked again, and there was no answer—I saw through the glass panel of the door, somebody walking about inside, apparently a woman—I knocked again, and the prisoner opened the door in her nightdress only—we had been about 20 minutes at the door—I was in plain clothes and the Inspector was in uniform—we went in and I said "We are police officers, and we have a suspicion that you have stolen property on your premises"—she said "I know nothing about it"—we entered the back parlour, which is used as a bedroom—there was a full-sized bed made up for two persons, and it had recently been occupied by two persons—I saw this clock on the mantelpiece, and on the sofa various articles which have been identified in four other cases—the whole of Mr. Statham's property was found on that sofa, carelessly laid down—I found this jemmy on the floor under the bed (it is of the finest steel), and locked up in a writing desk I found a seven-chambered revolver not loaded, and two boxes of cartridges; also this small pistol (produced)—on a sideboard in the same room I found two skeleton keys and three files—I went into the kitchen on the same floor, and noticed that the side door leading to the back yard was wide open—I said "Who has gone out of here?"—the prisoner said "He let himself out"—I said "Who let himself out?"—she said "My lodger"—I said "Where did he sleep?"—she said "In the back parlour"—I said "Where do you sleep?"—she said "In the kitchen"—there was a bed made up on a chair in the kitchen, and the prisoner's boy, about 12 years old, was sleeping there—I found no traces of the man—he could get from the yard on to the Great Eastern Railway line, or into a timber yard—I took the prisoner in custody, and she was charged by the acting Inspector with being concerned with a man not in custody in housebreaking and receiving—she said "Very well, thank you, I know nothing about it"—her ordinary day clothes were hanging in the back parlour where the bed was; she put them on to come to the station in—I saw this jemmy tried at Mr. Statham's house; it corresponded with some marks there—the prisoner's husband gave me this rent-book after she was in custody—some property has been identified as coming from Mr. Bliss, 8, Upper Montagu Street, Mile End, on 17th September—the lock of the front door had been smashed, and also the beading—I examined them the next morning—the house of Mr. Apps, 110, St. Mary's Road, Peckham, was opened on October 1st apparently with a key, as there was no breakage—on 16th October Mr. Bevan's house, 18, Coborn Road, Bow, was opened with a false key, and the shop parlour ransacked of various articles of jewellery and money; also Mrs. Newstead's house, but another officer will prove
that—the property is here, and has been identified—the prisoner's husband is here, and her son, Charles Bruce Ward.
Cross-examined. I found two rent-books on the premises—the rentbook showing that the house was let to her at 13s. a week was handed to me by her husband—I do not know why he is separated from her—I did not ask him to come here—I found a rent-book of Mr. Hyland—she dressed herself in the back parlour in her outdoor dress, and went to the kitchen for her boots—a small clock was found in the kitchen; excepting that all the produce of the burglary was found in the back parlour—she did not tell me that the ground floor and back parlour were the two rooms let to Hyland—other lodgers were in the house, an old lady and gentleman; they are not here—from the general appearances there is no doubt in my mind that the prisoner occupied four rooms—she is the land lady of the house and the other rooms are let—I do not know that a burglar occupied two rooms, and bolted—I do not know that there was a burglar there; she said that her lodger had gone out there—I found spurs and straps and a pair of gaiters belonging to Mr. Apps, in a cupboard—a spirit kettle was on one of the sideboards—the cupboard was fastened, but it could be opened without a key—I found Mr. Beyan's two tankards in the parlour, and Mr. Bliss's scent stopper and a Dutch metal brooch in the front parlour—I also found an American clock of Mrs. Newstead's and a brown leather hand-bag in the back parlour—Plenty of things were found in the kitchen, a tremendous lot, which are not identified and not brought here.
Re-examined. I found 87 pawn tickets under the bed and mattress relating to jewellery, plated goods, and other articles pledged between April and December—I am trying all I can to trace the owners—Hyland cannot be found at present—the front and back parlour, the kitchen, and the scullery appeared to be all occupied together—the old lady and gentleman had the upper part; they were none in the kitchen.
By Mr. PURCELL. All the pawn-tickets were concealed in the bed in the back parlour; there were none in the kitchen.
ROBERT THOMPSON I live at 169, Tredegar Road, Bow, and collect the rent at 2 Fuller Street, Weekly—this is the rent book—I let the prisoner the whole house eight months ago in the name of Mrs. Ward—13.6 means June 13, it is one week 13s.—I entered the rent in the book and initialled it—the last payment was December 13—I saw a man there once who the prisoner said was her brother—I wrote this since she has been in custody.
Cross-examined. She took the whole house unfurnished and let a portion of it—while she was in custody the landlord distrained on her goods, but al the things were not taken; her husband paid the balance of the account and took away the things that were there—there was more there than would satisfy my claim—a fortnight was owing on Boxing Day, and then the landlord distrained on the goods and gave me the money and took away the furniture.
JANE BLISS . I am the wife of Aaron Bliss, of 8 Upperr Montague Street, Mile End Road—on 19th September our house was entered between 7.30 and 9 p.m.—I missed a lady's small 18 gold keyless watch a gold bracelet, 5 diamonds, and a gold chain attached, a small necklace and chain a gold necklace, a locket with garnets a purse, a needlecase, two Silver thimbles, a gold enamel ring set with diamonds, a gold ring
and a dark brown overcoat—this gold brooch with emerald centre (produced) is mine; that was among the things stolen, and so is this glass scent stopper, and this is what it belongs to.
THOMAS ROBERT BARCLAY APPS . I am a solicitor, of 110, St. Mary's Road, Peckham—on 1st October my house was left with no one in charge between 7 and 8 p.m., and some persons entered it with a false key and took away a quantity of article, among which were a buff leather Gladstone bag containing riding boots, spurs, and straps, a biscuit box, a skirt, and a jacket, those are all here; I have identified them.
HARRIETTE BEAVAN . My husband is a haberdasher, of Coborn Road, Bow—on 18th October our house was entered between 6. 30 and 10.30 by a false key—no one was there—I came home and missed four gold rings, a large opal brooch, a cameo brooch, two tankards, a red leather purse containing 10l. 13s. 9d., an overcoat, a walking-stick, and an umbrella—these are the tankards and this is the purse—no money was in it when found.
ANNIE NEWSTEAD . I am a widow, and live at 4, Greenwood Street, Dalston—on 13th December, about 2. 30 or 3 p.m., I went out, leaving no one in the house, but leaving it all safe—I returned at a little before 5 and missed a nickel lever alarm clock, a brown leather bag, a coat, and a purse—the place was not broken, it was entered by a key—this clock, purse, and bag (produced) are mine.
Cross-examined. I gave about 10s. for the clock; you can get them cheaper.
GUILTY of receiving the goods and harbouring the man. — Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday, January 31st, 1888.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
269. GEORGE BAKER** (22) to stealing 20 pairs of earrings, and other articles, of William Henry Hill, and receiving, and to a conviction at Clerkenwell in December, 1885.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. WILLS Prosecuted; MR. KEITH FRITH efended.
CHARLES BRIE . I am a musician, of 4, Whitfield Street, Tottenham Court Road—on 10th September I was in Hanover Court, about 12.45 a.m.—the prisoner put one leg between my legs, throwing me violently on the ground, breaking my thigh bone, and injuring my knee cap and my foot—he took my watch and chain from my waistcoat pocket, and an imitation spade guinea; my thigh being broken I was unable to move, and he walked quietly up to the top of the court, where I lost sight of him—a man carried me home, and a market man took me to the hospital in a cab—I was in the hospital about 10 weeks—in the beginning of
January I was close to Covent Garden Theatre, and saw the prisoner—I described him when I was in the hospital I afterwards picked him out of about 14 other persons at the station—I have no doubt he is the man.
Cross-examined. I had not seen the man before—the robbery was done very quickly, and I was grievously assaulted, but I was not dazed, and I had the prisoner's face in front of me—I gave my evidence at the police-court; a witness was called for the prisoner, and he was admitted to bail.
ALBERT PEDDAR (Detective E). I received a communication from Brie on 10th September—on January 4th I saw the prisoner in Hart Street—I told him that I and another constable were police officers, and that I should take him on suspicion for having assaulted a gentleman, and robbing him of his watch and chain on 10th September, 1887—I took him to the station—he was placed with 12 or 14 others, and Mr. Brie immediately identified him.
Cross-examined. His master was called at the police-court, and gave him a good character, and Mr. Vaughan admitted him to the bail of 40l.
JOHN PALMER . I reside at 8, St. James' Street, Covent Garden, a coffee-house—the prisoner has been in my employment twice—about eight years ago for 12 months right off, and then as odd man until April last—I took him into my service again from 26th April to 11th October—our business closed at 7 o'clock—he would then be at liberty till 10. 30 or 11, when the house is closed—he slept in the house every night except Saturday—the house was fastened at 11 o'clock, but he could return any time between 7 and 11.
Cross-examined. I know nothing against him—I have known the neighbourhood for years—he had been living in Hart Street, which is within 50 yards of the robbery—he has never attempted to get away from the neighbourhood since 10th September, and has been under my notice—the young men came in at 11 o'clock at the latest—the housekeeper would know when he came in—he slept in the same bed with Holmes the foreman—the housekeeper would report any one coming in late, but they would not be let in after 11 o'clock.
Witnesses for the Defence.
WALTER HOLMES . I am foreman to Mr. Palmer—the prisoner was in his service in September—I slept at Palmer's on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays—the prisoner slept in the same bed—he is not now in Mr. Palmer's employment—he was not allowed out later than 11 o'clock—as long as they were in at that time we took no further notice, but if any one had come at 1 o'clock the bell would not be answered—I was the first down in the morning—if any one had stopped out I should have been the person to have let him in, and it would have been my duty to report to the master—that does not often happen—it has occurred about 18 months ago—the prisoner slept with me on the night of the robbery—he went to bed about the usual time—he was in his bed at a quarter to 1, and he was there when I woke up in the morning—I only remember his being out once, on October 4th—I remember it, because he left five days afterwards.
By the JURY. The housekeeper is not here—she was examined at Bow Street, but I did not hear her statement—I have known the prisoner about seven years—the day after the robbery he was going about his duties as usual.
Cross-examined. I heard of the robbery soon after it happened—
heard the prisoner tell my master about it, and advise him not to go up that court, as he used to go up there sometimes—I fix the day, because the 10th would have been a Saturday, and the prisoner always stopped in on a Saturday night, and if he had not been in the master would immediately have dismissed him—I hardly think he could be let in late by his fellow-servants without my knowing it—he could not get in without some one letting in him—he has not a key, and I slept with him the same night.
Re-examined. If the housekeeper had let him in it would have been her duty to report it—so with regard to the others.
GEORGE PARKER . I keep the Ship public-house, Hanover Court—on this Saturday morning, about 12. 45, I heard someone calling out "Murder!"—I got out of bed, looked out at my window, and asked what was the matter—I saw the prosecutor—I thought it was a policeman—he said "My leg is broken"—I saw two men feeling his pockets—I went down in my shirt and lit the gas, and then went out—the men had gone away—I should know one of the men if I saw him again—he appeared to be deaf and dumb by his motions—the prosecutor was carried away by a man in a corduroy suit—I saw the two men come back again, and a running stream like blood—the men put their fingers in it and smelt them, and there was a third party there who said it was only beer—I saw them altogether for about a quarter of an hour; not all the time—the first time when I went downstairs was the longest time, and the second time was for about five minutes—I have seen the prisoner before—I am certain he is not one of the men who committed the robbery—they were taller men; nearly as tall as I am.
Cross-examined. When I looked out I saw two men stooping over him, but they had gone away when I got down—he complained of being robbed and injured—I saw the men come back again, and I watched them for five minutes—they went into a lodging-house next door—I explained to my neighbours next day, and gave a description of the men—about two days afterwards I told the detective about it, and he went to see the prosecutor in the hospital—I did not recognise the prosecutor that night—the prisoner is not tall enough to be one of the men who robbed the prosecutor—they were two stout, big men.
By the COURT. I saw them feeling in his pockets when he was on the ground—I halloaed through the window "What is the matter? wait a minute"—I ran downstairs, and I saw a man picking him up—I saw the men I had seen come back and go into the house next door—I told the police about that the next day, or a day or two after, and I went to the neighbours on the opposite side, and told them what had happened, and described the sort of men they were, and how they were dressed, but I did nothing that night—I went to bed—I did not go out of my own door, but simply undid the door, and when the man was taken away I went upstairs—hearing talking again I looked out again, and then recognised the two men, and I had them in my sight for about five minutes.
By the JURY. I did not see the prisoner that night—he came occasionally to my house as an ordinary customer, and the prosecutor came occasionally—I do not think either of them were there that day—they did not usually come together—they would see each other there—both of
them were at the theatre at times—I have seen them there as late as 11 o'clock—I close at 12. 30.
NOT GUILTY .
NOT GUILTY .
MR. WILLS Prosecuted.
DAVID MAHER . I live at 6, Sydney Street, Islington—on the evening of the 17th January I secured the doors and windows of my house—about five a.m. I heard a knock at the street door—I got up and went down, and found two policemen there, and the locks of the street and shop doors broken—from the shop I missed seven rolls of cloth, two rolls of cotton cord, one jacket, and some buttons, which were safe the previous evening—I afterwards identified them at the station—I have a portion of the cloth that I cut the stolen cloth from in my possession.
SAMUEL BREALEY (Policeman G 252). About 1.45 a.m. on the 18th I saw the prisoner in Rawstorne Street, Goswell Road, carrying a loose bundle—I went towards him and he walked faster—I started running and he threw the bundle over some railings—I gained upon him, when he appeared drunk—I brought him to where the parcel was thrown over the railings, and then to the station—I went back and got the bundle from over the railings—it was taken to the police-court, and the Magistrate allowed the prosecutor to take it away, because he was poor, and it was his whole stock-in-trade—in it were seven pieces of cloth, two pieces of cotton cord, a boy's jacket, ready-made, and a card of buttons.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I said "I believe they are women's clothes"—I shied my lantern in your face—I kept you in the road about 10 minutes—it was just three o'clock when you were charged—it was a quarter to two when I caught you.
Re-examined. I did not lose sight of the prisoner only just when he turned the corner—I had been 30 yards behind him, and then I was not more than 20 yards behind—the area the bundle was thrown down is about 12 feet deep—I stayed with the prisoner till another constable came up.
GEORGE SELLER (Policeman G 258). About 4.40 on 18th January I went to Maher's shop, looked at the front door, and saw a slight graze on the inner part of the post—I called Maher up, and, upon entering another passage, saw that the shop door had been forced by a jemmy; there were marks of it.
Prisoner's Defence. I do not know where this gentleman's place is. If he cannot identify women's clothes he cannot identify me. I had a child lying dead, and went to get some cards, and had to bury it next day. I would not do a mean and paltry action like that.
GUILTY . — Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WILLS Prosecuted.
GEORGE COOPER (Policeman G 266). About one p.m. on 9th January I was in John Street, Clerkenwell—the prisoner came and asked me if I knew anything about a trunk being stolen in the City about a fortnight before Christmas—in further conversation we made an appointment to meet at eight p.m.—I did so; he was the worse for drink—he asked if I knew what was in the case—I said "Yes"—he said "There was a saddle and bridle in the case"—I said "Yes"—he said "Do you know the maker's name is Davis?"—I said "Yes, quite right"—he said "There was also a pair of socks in the trunk, and a jacket and waistcoat"—I said "Yes"—he said "What is more, I can tell you where the trunk is; I put the trunk away in my name"—I said "Yes"—he said "If you will go with me I will show you"—I went with Police-constable Reed to Neighbour's Auction Rooms, Old Street—the prisoner went into the shop and we followed him—he said "I want to look at the trunk I received 4s. on which I left the other night, "and he pointed to a trunk standing on a shelf, and said "That is the one"—it was taken down from the shelf and he said "These are two detectives; don't sell it; I think there is something wrong about it"—then we left the shop, and the prisoner made an appointment for a quarter of an hour or 20 twenty minutes later—we then met him, and he took us from 15, Hampstead Terrace, where we had appointed to meet him, to Spencer Street, to point out the man—he took us to 10, Jerusalem Court, Clerkenwell, and knocked at the door—it was opened and he went in—in a few minutes he was thrown out into the court—I said to the other constable "We had better go away"—the prisoner said "He is there, but he won't come out"—then we walked to St. John Street Road again, and a little time we went back to the house—the prisoner knocked at the door again—it was opened, and after a few minutes he came away and said "He has gone; he has been gone about a week"—he then gave us a full description of the man who stole the trunk, but said he did not know his name—they called him Ted, and that he came from Notting Hill—Edwin Bridge, who is here, comes from Notting Hill—I took the prisoner in custody—he said he knew where the saddle and bridle had been disposed of, and where the jacket and waistcoat had been pledged, but he has not told us any more about it—when I first met him he was sober.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You had another chap with you when I first saw you, who left you—you said the trunk was yours, and that you had left it in your name and had got 4s. on it—there is a sale at the auction rooms, I believe, one night in the week—I know you used to keep stables—I have seen you there, but I did not know that you kept a shop—you kept a lot of rubbish, but it was not worth anything, some old nails and things, and some bird cages and rabbit hutches—I do not know how you get your living—I did not know that you had a donkey or pony, or anything of that sort—I saw you thrown out of the house—I have always known the place as Jerusalem Court, not as Jerusalem Passage—I made no inquiries at the house—the other constable was with me and saw you thrown out—he made no inquiries—I did not see that the left side of your face was swollen after you were in charge—you were rather dirty after being thrown in the road—I did not notice the bruise where you were hit—when you were detained at the station I made inquiries at Bishopsgate Street, but I did not go back to the house—I appeared at Guildhall three times—I believe I mentioned about Ted
the last time or the second time—I did not give evidence the first time—I made inquiries at Jerusalem Passage a day or so afterwards.
Re-examined. The first time I was examined I said the prisoner had given me a full description, and I afterwards amplified that evidence—the witness Bridge answers to that description.
EDWIN BRIDGE . I am a coachman, and live at 33, Northampton Street, Clerkenwell—previous to January 2nd I lived at 10, Jerusalem Passage—I know the prisoner by sight as selling shrimps in the neighbourhood—I never had any dealings with him in connection with a box—I have not seen the box before, but there are plenty like it—I do not know anything about it.
Cross-examined. I was asked at the police-court "Are you brought here as the man I bought the trunk of"—I do not recollect having any dealings with you—I do not know that I am known by any nickname, but my short name is Ted—I used to live at Notting Hill some time ago.
GEORGE LANGDALE . I reside at 21, St. John's Wood Road—this trunk belongs to me—on 21st December it was packed, and on the 22nd it was dispatched for India—it contained some saddlery, a horse-rug, socks, books, and other articles—I enclosed it in a wooden case and sent it to Messrs. King and Co. to dispatch to India.
JOSEPH STRUDWICK . I am porter to Henry S. King and Co., of 65, Cornhill—Mr. Henry Seymour King is a partner—on 22nd December I received a wooden case addressed to R. Camberley—I cannot give the full address—the case was left in White Lion Court—about 4. 15 I received the case—about 4. 25 I saw it safe—about 4. 30, when I wanted it to go with others, it was missing.
WILLIAM MORRIS . I am an undertaker, of 10, Jerusalem Passage, Clerkenwell—on 9th or 10th January I heard a scuffle on the stairs—I saw the prisoner between 9.30 and 10 o'clock, or a little later—I looked at him and asked what he wanted there—he said he had been to see a party he wanted, called Ted—I understood him to mean Edwin Bridge, who lived at the top of the house a few weeks before, who I have seen here to-day—I said "He has gone away"—he refused to leave the house—he was drunk, and what called my attention to him more than anything was hearing him vomit on the stairs—I followed him downstairs, and instead of turning to the right to go out, he turned to the left—I asked what he was doing there, and said that was not the way out—I believe he asked for Bridge, but I cannot be quite clear—I am certain he asked for Ted.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I threw you out because you refused to go out, and used obscene language—the police made no inquiries about the trunk—I never saw them there before they took you away.
JOHN WALTER NEIGHBOUR . I am an auctioneer, of Old Street, St. Luke's—the prisoner came to my rooms on 29th December and brought this trunk—he said "I want you to put this in your next sale"—I said "Very well, I will do so"—he said "I want a little money on it"—I said "How much?"—he said "Four shillings"—I gave him 4s.
Cross-examined. You have bought at my house once or twice—it is the
custom of dealers to ask an advance—you did not sell the trunk, only put it up to be sold.
Cross-examined. I saw Morris put you out—I showed a light at the door—I know of no inquiries being made by the police at the house regarding you—they came afterwards, but I did not know anything about their coming.
Cross-examined. Some inquiries were made with regard to seeing you at the house—I saw you there on the 9th or 10th and heard the scuffle—I did not see you thrown out—the police inquired if I knew who you were—I know you were the party who came that night—I am not aware of any inquiries about the trunk.
Witness for the Defence.
THOMAS JONES . On 10th January you came to my stand in the Central Fish Market—you brought some empty barrels, and asked me to mind them—you said you were going to Old Street Police-station to tell something about a trunk.
The prisoner in his defence stated that lie bouqht the trunk of a man at 10, Jerusalem Passage for 5s. 6d., and hearing a conversation in a public-house which led him to believe it was stolen, he gave information to the police, but denied having said that the man's name was Ted, who lived at Notting Hill, and none of the information he had given to the police was wrong.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. KEITH FRITH and HUTTON Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
JAMES MCMAHON . I am a bricklayer, of 29, Mitcham Street, Edgware Road—on Christmas Eve, about 12 o'clock, I was in Edgware Road, outside the Metropolitan Music Hall, when the prisoner came to me—I had had a few words with him two or three months previous, and had not spoken to him for three months—I was talking to two friends—he called me away and said "Here, I want you, Mac; do you see this big fellow here? We are going to out him and have his b——y lot"—that meant make him senseless and rob him—I said "Are you? Not whilst you are in my company you will not take any liberty with him"—he said "You are a b——y nark"—that is one who stops a person from doing wrong by informing the police—I said "I am not a b——y nark. If you will come up and ask him I will see that he gives you 5s., but you shall take nothing from him"—he took me by the collar and said "You b—y s—, take that," and shoved a long Spanish knife into me—I had seen the knife previously—he said "That is how I serve all b——y narks. I will put your b——y light out before I have done with you"—I said "I am stabbed"—a few people got round, and the two persons I was with put me in a cab and took me to the hospital—I did not see the prisoner again till his arrest—I have been convicted twice, and charged several times—these are my clothes; they show the place
where the knife went in—I have had it sewn up in the overcoat, as I wanted it to wear—it went right through my clothes, cutting my brace right across—I had not heard him threaten me with the knife.
Cross-examined. I had often seen him before—I cannot remember the last occasion—we had not been drinking together previously—I may have seen him come into a billiard-room—I had seen the knife at the Green Man about two months previously, not since—I have an independent witness, named Grant, whom I have known six or seven months—I have no regular occupation—I was in work last April—I have been ill—I have been suffering from inflammation in the jaw—the only time I visited Grant at his house was to tell him he was wanted at the police-court—I had been with him to various public-houses—sometimes he comes every day into the same billiard-room—I do not go about with him in the evening to public-houses—I had not seen him before on the night he assaulted me, but I had been with Grant in the billiard-room, I might say for an hour—I do not know where Grant had been previous to that—Grant did not tell me that he had 40l. about him in money till afterwards—a man named McDonald, who was with the prisoner, asked another man if Grant had any money—McDonald was not with me; Shaw was—I saw no bets made, and no money passed in the billiardroom—I had not offered to fight the prisoner till after he stabbed me, when I said "Why don't you put your knife away and fight properly?"—I did not catch him by the collar, and say "Will you fight me now?"—I did not want to fight him long before the knife was drawn—I was not having a row with Shaw—I was never in the 19th Hussars, or in the Army, and if I was I should not answer questions which would incriminate myself—I was never the prisoner's enemy—we were not on bad terms, but if he had not spoken I should not—we had no row, only three or four words—I asked my friend where he lived—the prisoner thought very likely I should stand to do the robbery, and I did not do it—I have been at Brighton several times, and at Doncaster—I know the racecourse, but I never did any welshing there—I do not know what the Magistrate called it—I got three months for assaulting the police, and two months at Doncaster for welshing—I was charged at Brighton with stealing a watch, and committed for trial and acquitted—I was not charged with a murderous assault, but for what my brother had done, and was acquitted—I was not charged at Marylebone for kicking a man's eye out—I was charged with assaulting a poor man, and acquitted, and with assaulting the police, and acquitted for that—I have had 18 months for felony—I called witnesses when I was acquitted; all independent witnesses; people who had been in my company—I did not know that Grant had 40l. about him, nor proposed to rob him, or I should not have had a knife in my stomach—it was not I who took the knife out—I was never in Grant's house but once, when I told him we were coming up to the police-court about him.
GEORGE GRANT . I live at 3, Lodge Road, St. John's Wood—I was in Edgware Road on Christmas Eve, about 12 p.m., with McMahon, and saw the prisoner and some other men there—Murray called McMahon away from us, about 10 yards, and I heard them quarrelling afterwards—I walked up, and saw Murray take hold of McMahon and make a motion with his right hand—within a minute afterwards I saw a long Spanish knife like a chisel, or a long bright steel instrument—I did not take it
in my hand—McMahon wanted to fight—I said "Don't kick up a row here"—he said "I am stabbed, Jack"—we got him in a cab, and took him to the hospital—I have known McMahon seven or eight months, and have seen him frequently during that time—he is an acquaintance—I have seen the prisoner, but have never spoken to him.
Cross-examined. I have heard that McMahon has gone by the name of Maxey—I am landlord of 3, Lodge Road, and let the premises out—they are not let at present—I have been there 12 months—they have been let twice in that time—the tenants, two ladies, have gone away—they were ladies of a peculiar character, living under the protection of gentlemen—McMahon has been there once since this case has been on—I have seen him pretty well every night—I do not know that he is a fighting man—I do not know what he is—when I first met him he was making a book—I drank with him every night in the same public-houses—I had been in the billiard-room on this night playing at billiards—I do not recollect with whom—I was not the worse for drink—I might have stood drink to the company—I had not seen the prisoner till I saw him in Edgware Road—I had 40l. about me—the prisoner made no assault upon me—the prosecutor, and Grant, and Shaw, were not having high words to my knowledge—there was no discussion going on between the prosecutor and other people, only with Murray—I have not gone in any other name but George Grant—I have been known as Frampton—I have been at the Isle of Wight, but not in penal servitude at Portland or Dartmoor under the name of Frampton—I have been locked up for being drunk—that is the only time I have been in trouble—I am a cook—I am not in service now—I do not go to gentlemen's houses—I was last in service about two years ago—since then I have not done much cooking.
Re-examined. I have not had a complaint or a charge against me.
HARVEY NORTON , M. D. I am the house surgeon at St. Mary's Hospital—the prosecutor was brought there about 12 o'clock on Christmas morning bleeding from a wound in his abdomen, three-quarters of an inch long and about half an inch deep—a sharp instrument like a knife would cause it—he is cured now—I did not think it dangerous enough to keep him in the hospital that night—the mark on the coat would be about the place where his wound was.
Cross-examined. It is a perfectly perpendicular wound, quite straight.
WILLIAM RECORD (Detective Sergeant D). About 8 a.m. on January 17th I took the prisoner in the Tottenham Court Road on a warrant—I had been looking for him ever since the occurrence in consequence of information given to me by McMahon—he said "It serves the b——right"—I took him to the station, and he was charged—he made no other reply.
Cross-examined. I know the prisoner; he is known to the police.
GUILTY . — Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. KEITH FRITH Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
THOMAS MCMAHON . About 2. 45 p.m. on 12th January I was in the Horse and Sacks public-house, Borough Road—the prisoners and a man named Ryan not in custody came in after I had been there about a minute—Tom Murray said "Now then, set about the sod" and all three
pulled out of their trousers pockets a glass each, broken in half like this one produced—I turned to catch hold of Ryan when Tom Murray from behind shoved the glass in my head—I turned from Ryan to catch hold of Murray, and Jack Murray caught me by the back of my neck and cut it with his glass—four or five nights previously Jack Murray met me in Edgware Road and asked me if I meant going against his brother—he said "If I were you I should not, as you will make us all bad pals, and before you can go into the witness-box we mean murdering you"—I said "I will put up with that," and I had not seen them since till they came in with the glasses—as soon as the two Murrays had hit me with their glasses they ran out and left Ryan—I caught hold of Ryan and threw him on the ground—the Murrays came back and kicked me in the side, and ran away—I lost a great deal of blood, and was taken to the hospital and kept there eight days—my head was attended to.
Cross-examined. The house surgeon examined me—I got four wounds on my head, and was black and blue about my body—I complained of being kicked to the men who used to dress me; I complained to Mr. Norton at the time; I did not say much—I could not see the wounds in my head—I have known Thomas Murray since the case has been on—when I was brought to the police-court both the Murrays were in custody—I had had a row with Ryan the night before the assault; we had a fight; I think it was finished; I do not know who got the worst of it—you have to go through other rooms to get into the billiard-room—I struck the prisoners and Ryan—the wounds are very nearly in the same place—the first blow opened my head, and others went into the bottom of it—the Murrays were kicking me when I had got Ryan on the ground and the barman was going for a policeman—I used to attend a boxing exhibition two years ago; I was not "M. C.," but doorman—disorderly characters were not allowed to come in—I was what you may term a chucker-out—I was not hitting Ryan when I was on the ground; I should have liked to, but I was not able—my head was cut, and I got hold of him round the neck—I was pulled away, and Ryan got up—I have not seen him since he ran away—John Murray was charged on 19th January—he was one of the men who struck me—the Murrays not only tried to get Ryan away, but struck me as well—I know a man named Reeve he did not see the beginning of it—Ryan did not say "You fought with me last night, but the fight was not finished, and we will finish it," or anything of the kind, and we did not then set to—they had not given me time to get the best of it—Ryan was not the only person who struck me.
JAMES SMITH . I am a glass and china dealer, of 55, Earle Street—I was at the Horse and Sacks public-house on the afternoon of 12th January—I saw the prisoners and McMahon there when I entered the house about 2. 30 p.m. in the next bar to myself—three men came in about 3 p.m.; the prisoners were two of them—a fight occurred about a second afterwards; they ran through the bar, and the fight occurred immediately—the prisoners ran away, and Ryan remained—the prisoners returned again in about two or three seconds—Ryan hit the prosecutor on the back of his head with a glass on the left side, and I saw blood fly out of his head, and the prosecutor said "Oh, my God," and put his hand up to his head, and the three ran up to me sharp—the prosecutor went to get a cab, and when he got to the bar he said "Will some one go to the hospital with me?"—I handed two hats to him—he said "That
is not mine, the other is mine"—I handed him the other hat—I picked up a glass with the bowl broken like this one; it was covered with blood; it was standing in the corner.
Cross-examined. I did not see the whole of the occurrence because the door was shut when the other man rushed in—the blood was flying out of his head.
HERBERT JEFFRIES . I am barman at the Horse and Sacks, Borough Road—on 12th January I was serving behind the bar about 3 p.m., when the prisoner and another man came in—the prosecutor had been there about a minute—they rushed in, and I saw Tom Murray and Ryan strike the prosecutor—I did not see anything in their hands; they might have had glasses—I jumped over the counter and fetched a policeman—Smith picked up a broken glass and handed it to me—we have no glasses so common in our house—this is not my master's property.
CHARLES REEVE . I live at 458, Edgware Road—I am an agent for the Provident Association—I was in the billiard room of the Horse and Sacks between 2 and 8 p.m. on 12th January—I heard a noise in the bar and I went to see what was the matter—I saw the prosecutor struggling with a man not in custody, named Ryan—the prosecutor was bleeding a great deal from a wound in his head—the prisoners came in and kicked him while he was struggling with Ryan—they all decamped—I saw no more.
Cross-examined. I cannot say whether they were having a stand-up fight or not—they were struggling together—I could not tell who was getting the best of it.
WILLIAM STOLEY (Policeman F 154). At 9.10 p.m. on 18th January I was in Friday Street—John Murray was given into my custody by the prosecutor—I took him to the station, and he was charged in my presence—he said "You are making up a nice case for me"—when the charge was read over to him he made no reply.
WILLIAM RECORD (Detective Officer D). I arrested Tom Murray on 13th January at Vine Street—I told him I should take him for maliciously wounding James McMahon—he said "I meant to pay him for striking me on the night my brother stabbed him."
Cross-examined. I sent William Donough to follow him, who gave him into my custody—he is not a policeman—I directed a policeman to take him to the station—he was given into custody first opposite the Criterion, and taken to Vine Street Station, Piccadilly.
HARVEY NORTON . I am house surgeon at St. Mary's Hospital—the prosecutor was brought there on 12th January, bleeding from a wound in the head, and suffering from a shock to the system—his wound was attended to—I saw him about five minutes afterwards—I made a further examination of the wound—a large number of pieces of glass were removed from it by my colleague and myself—I did not see my colleague remove any, but I saw some pieces by the bedside—he was placed in our casualty room, and then taken to the ward, where I removed some more pieces of glass—my colleague attended to him before I came downstairs—it was a lacerated wound about three and a half inches long, and exposing the bone from some distance right through the scalp—a branch artery was cut, and the wound was dangerous—he lost a large quantity of blood—the wound might have been inflicted by the glass produced—
no complaint was made of kicking or anything else till the following day, when he complained of stiffness.
Cross-examined. The wound might have been done with one blow—there were two smaller wounds in one line.
Re-examined. He was in the hospital seven or eight days.
GUILTY . — Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, February 1st, 1888.
Before Mr. Recorder.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. WALLACE Prosecuted; MR. FULTON Defended.
ALFRED COOPER WOODWARD . I am the principal clerk in the General Post Office—I received this telegram "To Mr. Strong, Oatlands, Enfield Highway. Come to my office to-morrow, John Street, about 10, important. Baker."—the last word "important" is written over in pencil to make it more legible—the telegram was handed in at Chancery Lane Post Office on the night of 10th November.
ROBERT FERGUSSON STRONG . I am a civil engineer, of Oatlands, Enfield Highway—I have known the defendant about three years—I received a telegram, which I have mislaid, on 10th January—this is a copy—on the 12th I met the defendant in the Strand, near the Law Courts—he took me into custody—I got him to do it at my solicitor's office—I went to Holloway Gaol and was imprisoned six weeks—on the way in a cab from Fetter Lane I said "You have got yourself into an awkward predicament by sending a telegram in Mr. Baker's name, I suppose you know that is forgery"—he said "Oh no, they cannot do anything to me, I have had advice about it, and there are more Bakers than one"—I said "That is the only Mr. Baker in John Street I know"—I have known Mr. Baker of John Street for some time—I have had business with him—he is a solicitor—I had had one or two telegrams from him; he was transacting business for me.
Cross-examined. I cannot remember whether I mentioned at the police-court about the defendant saying there were more Bakers than one, it certainly occurred in the cab—he did not show me Denham's authority to act as assistant bailiff, he showed it to my solicitor—I saw it in his hand—the Edmonton County Court Judge on 23rd June had committed me for default of payment of another person's debt—I was going about my business, I would not go in the bailiff's way—this telegram did not secure my arrest, but there was another telegram—I have not satisfied the Judgment.
Re-examined. I lived at Edmonton regularly for a month or six weeks after my committal on 23rd June.
GODFREY ALEXANDER BAKER . I am a member of the firm of Futvoye, Field, and Baker, of John Street, Bedford Row, solicitors—this telegram is not my writing nor that of anybody in my office—I have had business with Mr. Strong—I saw the defendant on 10th November at my office—he asked me if I knew anything about Mr. Strong—I said "Why do you ask it?"—he said "It is a secret, "and added "Well, I come from the High Bailiff"—I said "Oh, if that is the case I do not want to hear anything more about the matter, I won't have anything to do with it"—he said "I am sorry you can't help me, "and left—I did not give him any authority to send this telegram—he did not ask me for it.
Cross-examined. I only saw him on the 10th—he did not say anything about a committal order—I was not aware of one—I did not say I did not want him arrested in my office—I said at the police-court "Ido not remember the defendant asking me to help him to find Strong; he may have done so"—that referred to the words "High Bailiff"—I do not think anything was mentioned about arrest—I did not go into the question.
HARRY CLARKE . I live at Tottenham, and am clerk to Mr. Baker—I produce the office call book—on 10th November I find my entry of the defendant calling—I saw him on the 11th walking up and down—I asked him if he wished to see Mr. Baker, he said "No; I have a warrant from the Edmonton County Court to arrest Mr. Strong, and in order to get him I sent a telegram to Mr. Strong, and used Mr. Baker's name, telling him to come to John Street to-day, and I sent it last night"—I said "Had you any permission to use Mr. Baker's name?"he said "I had."
Cross-examined. I am not sure that I told Mr. Baker what the defendant said about his having his authority, but I told the managing clerk in the afternoon.
MR. FULTON submitted there was no case to go to the Jury, as the defendant, from his conversation with Mr. Baker's clerk, thought he had Mr. Baker's authority to use his name. MR. WALLACE contended that what was in the defendant's mind was immaterial, according to the 11th section of the Post Office Act, 1884, which said that "Every person who forges a telegram shall, whether he had or had not an intent to defraud, be guilty of a misdemeanour. "The RECORDER considered that it was a case for the Jury.
GUILTY . — Three Days' Imprisonment.
MR. WATTS Prosecuted, and the evidence was interpreted to the prisoner.
JAMES CAHILL . I am an ironmonger's assistant—I live at 8, Red Lion Square—the manager, George Allsopp, is at Liverpool on business—on 23rd January I went to bed shortly before 12 o'clock on the third floor—I had fastened the front door by request at 9 o'clock—about 3 a.m. on the 24th my wife awoke me, I saw a light in the sitting-room—I got out of bed and heard more than one person going rapidly downstairs—I
went down, opened the door, and called "Police"—a policeman came—I went upstairs, put some clothes on, and when I came down I saw the prisoner in the constable's hands—I found my wife's mantle on the stairs—it was in the sitting-room on the same flour the night before—a window in the basement was open—I found two brushes on my table which did not belong to me—also two hats and two pairs of shoes.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not see you in or near the house the previous day.
JOHN DAMPIER (Policeman E 274). On 24th January, about 3 a.m., I heard a policeman's whistle, and on running to 8, Red Lion Square I saw Cahill at the door, who spoke to me—I heard a noise in the basement and went downstairs—I found the kitchen window leading into the front area, open—I had passed the house about 1 o'clock—the window was then closed and fastened—I could see the fastening from outside—I got through the kitchen window and found the prisoner concealed under a ladder in the front area—I asked him what he was doing there—he said "Nothing"—I told him to come out; he had no hat or shoes on—I searched him at the station and found two pocket-books, a candle, a box of silent matches, and a putty-knife—I went back to the house and found two hats on the second-floor landing, and two pairs of boots in the second-floor back room—the prosecutor idenified one pair of boots and one of the hats.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not strike you—I gave you your boots back at the police-court but not the hat, I was ordered not to by the Magistrate—I did not strike you so that you became bewildered; you can understand English very well.
NATHANIEL ROGERS (Policeman E 70). On 24th January, about 3. 10 p.m., I was on duty in Red Lion Square; I heard Mr. Cahill halloa "Police "and "Thieves"—I went there and found the prisoner concealed in the front area under a ladder—he was taken to the station—I examined the area window and found marks where the catch had been forced back, which corresponded with this knife, which was found on the prisoner.
The Prisbner's Statement before the Magistrate. "My mate went in first and called me in."
The prisoner in his defence said that a man took him in to paper a room and ran away, that he tried to explain but could not make himself understood, so ran away too.
GUILTY . — Nine Months' Hard Labour
MR. HUGGINS Prosecuted; MR. LOWE Defended.
EMMA HIGGINSON . I am manageress to Mr. Samuel Lewis, of the Two Brewers, Shoe Lane—on 6th January, about 11.50 p.m., five men came in—I served them with a pot of ale—the prisoners are two of them—I left the bar in charge of a boy and went into the bar-parlour—I heard something on the stairs and opened the door—I saw a man—the boy made a communication, in consequence of which I went back to the bar, and missed a bowl of money which I had left there, with 5l. in gold and silver in it and 2s. worth of bronze, wrapped in paper—I sent the boy for a policeman—the man on the stairs was shorter than the others, but it was dark; I could not recognise him.
Cross-examined. I could see the bar from the bar-parlour—I was standing with my back to the bar—I was just finishing counting the money when the men came in and asked for the ale—I saw them enter the bar.
Re-examined. The men were sitting about three yards from where the bowl was.
GEORGE FREDERICK CLARK . I am employed by Mr. Lewis, of the Two Brewers—I saw five men come in—the prisoners are two of them—Mrs. Higginson served them—she went to the bar-parlour—I stayed in the bar—one of the men jumped over the bar, took the bowl of money, and jumped back again, and all ran out—four were in the bar and one outside—I ran and told Mrs. Higginson—I went for a policeman—I next saw the prisoners in custody—I saw the five men talking together—they seemed to know each other.
Cross-examined. I was putting the coffee machine straight when they came in—I said at the police-court that the prisoners were not the men who robbed the bar—that is true—I saw one of the other men go out first—I called out "We have been robbed"—I did not say at the police-court that I could not identify the men—my deposition was read to me—I said another word which might mean that, I am no scholar.
EDWARD WOOLLETT . I am night watchman at Pontifex and Wood's in Shoe Lane—on 6th January I saw four men leave the Two Brewers about 11. 45, one by one door and three by another—I saw Clark, and from what he said I kept the men in view; I never lost sight of them—I apprehended Wise, he walked towards Ludgate Circus—the man who came out at one door went up Robin Hood Court—I spoke to a policeman—the prisoners are two of the men—I saw three of them taking money from papers and dropping the paper—I was about 50 yards off—I picked up the paper and handed it to the policeman I handed Wise to—the little one escaped.
Cross-examined. When I first saw them I was nearer 100 than 200 yards from them, it might have been nearer 200—I did not see them throw anything away—I never lost sight of them.
GEORGE WHEELDON (Policeman 377). About 11.55 p.m. on 6th January, Woollett spoke to me and I followed him down St. Bride Street—he seized a man—the prisoners were walking on the other side of the street—I caught Bray—he slipped away; I caught him again—I had noticed the men before I was spoken to, handing something to one another—they appeared to see me and walked quickly towards Ludgate Circus and stopped—the prisoners were charged—they said they were innocent and they had been in the public-house and a man treated them—they gave addresses where I went and found they were not known—I found on Wise 1s. 1d., and on Bray 5 1/2 d.—I lost sight of the prisoners for about ten seconds.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, February 1st, Thursday 2nd, and Friday 3rd, 1888.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
281. THOMAS CALLAN (46) and MICHAEL HARKINS (30) were indicted for feloniously conspiring with other persons to cause an explosion in the United Kingdom of a nature likely to endanger life and cause serious injury to property. Other Counts varying the form of charge.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (SIR RICHARD WEBSTER) with MR. POLAND and MR. R. S. WRIGHT, Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN appeared for Callan, MR. KEITH FRITH for Harkins.
FREDERICK DOWNES (Detective Sergeant City Police). On Friday, 18th November, I was sent for to the Bank of England, and I there saw Callan and a gentleman named Hewke in the secretary's office, they were in the act of leaving—I saw Callan changing bank notes for gold—he afterwards left the bank, and I with two other officers followed him to Cheapside—we were in plain clothes—he there went into a bootmaker's shop, and purchased a pair of boots and put them on, leaving his old ones behind—he then went to a coffee-house in Aldersgate Street and stayed there two or three minutes, after which he went into another coffee-house in the same street—he remained there some little time, about 20 minutes or half an hour—he had some refreshment there, and then he went to Goswell Road, to a barber's shop, Mr. Marks'—when he went in he had a short beard and moustache, but when he came out he was clean shaven—I then followed him to Queen Street, Cheapside, where I stopped him—I said "I am a police officer, and you will have to go with me to the police office in the Old Jewry"—he said "Very good"—I then took him to the police station, where ho was detained for about ten minutes—I said to him "In consequence of a telegram from Mr. Munroe, the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, I must take you to Scotland Yard; but, before doing so, I must search you"—he said "All right"—he was then asked for his name and address by the station sergeant, and he said "Thomas Callan, 156, Broadway, Mass."—he was asked if he had any London address, and he said "24, Baxter Road, Islington"—I then searched him and found on him the sum of 19l. 15s. 6d. in gold and silver, a rosary, a slate memorandum book, and a letter containing passage notes by the Cunard Line to New York (produced)—the letter bore the postmark "New York, Nov. 8," and also contained a draft for 2l. in favour of Callan—I also found this street door key and some plain envelopes—I, with Inspector Pope, took him to Scotland Yard, and handed him over to the custody of Inspector Little child—I then went to 24, Baxter Road, Essex Road, Islington, the address given by Callan—I saw Mrs. Bright, the landlady—Inspector Quin and Sergeant M'Intyre were already there—I saw there this small tin box (produced), it was in the back room, ground floor, it was locked with a padlock; there were two locks; I opened it with two keys given to me by Mrs. Bright, one of the brass padlock and the lock of the box; it appeared to be empty—I have made a mistake, I found two keys on Callan, the second was an American key—I locked up the box again—in the same room I found this brown leather portmanteau (produced), it was locked; I opened it with this key found on the prisoner, which I call the American key—it contained some wearing apparel, a Smith and Wesson revolver (produced), loaded in five chambers; it had on it the address of S. and W. Springfield, Mass., U. S., Jan. 24, 1868, and another of July 11th—it appears to be nearly new, it is No. 154, 146—there were also 10 loose cartridges in a parcel—I replaced in the portmanteau the wearing apparel, the revolver, and the cartridges, locked it and took it and the box to
Whitehall, and gave them to Inspector Littlechild—next day, Saturday, the 19th, I went to Xing Street Police-station with Littlechild and Quin, and saw Callan; Littlechild said to him "Have you any objection to showing these officers where you live in the Falmouth Road?"—he said "No"—I had not mentioned Falmouth Road to him—I then went with him and Quin to Falmouth Road, New Kent Road, and he pointed out No. 93, Mrs. Howitt's, as the house where he lodged—during the journey Quin said to him "What became of the letter that was with the passage notes?"—he said "There was not one, and that other letter was given to me by a man"—I said "The two envelopes are the same as that which contains the letter"—he said "He gave me them too"—I said "Who is he?"—he said "I don't know"—that was all that passed—later on the same day I assisted in conveying him to Bow Street.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I have said that the day was too foggy to see whether he had whiskers—I believe I said he had a short beard and moustache; it was more than a fortnight's growth I should say, possibly between a fortnight's and three weeks'.
FREDERICK WALTER SMITH . I am a surgeon, of 40, Newington Causeway; I know Mrs. Alice Haslitt Howitt, she is the landlady of 93, Falmouth Road, New Kent Road—she was confined about a fortnight ago, I attended her—she is at present unable to leave the house to come here and give evidence, she is too ill.
JOHN GEORGE LITTLECHILD . I am an inspector of the Metropolitan Police, Scotland Yard—I was present at Bow Street when Mrs. Howitt was examined as a witness for the Crown—the prisoners were present, represented by a solicitor; they had full opportunity of asking her questions; her deposition was taken in their presence, read over, and signed by her.
The deposition of Mrs. Howitt was then read as follows: "I live at 93, Falmouth Road, New Kent Road; my husband is an engineer. In June last we had a room to let. About the third week in that month, Thursday, Callan came and took that room at 4s. 6d. a week, a bedroom, he paid the rent in advance, and gave the name of Scott; he remained six or seven weeks at our house. He came in the evening of the day he took it, bringing a portmanteau, quite a new one. He always paid the rent in advance; no one ever came to see him. He never told me what he was or how he was employed. He said he came from Liverpool. He was out a good deal, and left the first or second week in August. He told me when he left that he was going to Nottingham; he took his portmanteau with him. I do not remember his receiving any letters during his stay at my house; he never had a tin box like this produced. I noticed his portmanteau was very heavy when he came, and light when he went away. Signed ALICE HASLITT HOWITT. "
MARIA BRIGHT . I live at 24, Baxter Road, Lower Road, Islington, and am the wife of Robert Bright—my daughter Anna Maria lives with me—in August last I had a bill in my window to let lodgings—a gentleman came and looked at them; I think it would be the second week in August—he did not give any name then—I showed him the room, it was the back room, ground floor—it was on a Wednesday—he said he would take the room, and come next day—the rent was 4s. a week—he came the next day and paid a week in advance, bringing with him a portmanteau—Callan is the man—I said "What occupation do
you follow?"—he said "I am a travelier in tea—this (produced) is the portmanteau he brought—I asked him his name, in case of any letters coming—he said "My name is Scott"—he went by that name all the time he was with me—he seemed very regular in his habits; he went out between 9 and 10 in the morning, and returned about the same time at night—he had a latchkey—one night in October he was out late, all night I think; he said he had been staying up with a sick friend—that was the only time he was late—before that, in September, I went into the country with my daughter—we came back on 10th September about 6 in the evening, and that same evening Callan brought home a tin box—I did not see him bring it in; I saw it the same night when I went into the room with my daughter—this (produced) is the box—I saw him leave the house that same night with another man; I did not see that man's face, but I saw his shoulders and back as he left the house—that was after the box was brought—I did not see them come in, but I heard them come in when they brought the box in—I heard footsteps in the passage of two men going to the room, they appeared to be carrying something very heavy—they remained about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour at the outside, and they then left together—I only saw the back of the second man when they were leaving the house, going down the steps—he appeared to have broad shoulders—I afterwards picked out Harkins at Scotland Yard, by his shoulders—he was the only person who had called; no one had ever called to see Callan before—next day I went into Callan's room with my daughter; he was out—we tried to move the box to tidy the room, but could not, it was too heavy—it was locked—on Thursday, 27th October, I found the closet in the yard, 12 feet or more from the back of the house, was choked, and found the pan nearly full of lime and cement, as I thought—I sent for a party to come and unchoke it; he was not at home, and I tried to unchoke it myself, but could not, and was obliged to take a chisel—I took three parts of a pailful out—it had got into quite a solid lump—I asked the lodgers if they had choked it, and they said they had not—as soon as Scott came downstairs I asked him if he had choked the closet; he said he was very sorry he had, that he had some apples for sale and could not sell them and threw them down the closet, and whatever it cost to unchoke it he would pay half—I threw the stuff which I took out into the dustbin, and there was a quantity more there in powder, dry, like lime, nearly half a bushel of it—I had not put it there—I could trace it right round from the dustbin to the next house, strewn round the paths—I got a workman named Low who cleared the place—I did not see Scott again till next morning, Friday; he said that he was very sadly, as he was taken in the street, and he thought he should not have got home, he was taken with his limbs so bad—he stayed in all Friday, and on Saturday morning I went up and knocked at his door, and he said he would take a little milk or a little coffee—he stayed at home all Sunday, and on Monday he went out, but not for long—he continued his usual habits the next three weeks—on 17th November, in the evening, a man came and asked for Mr. Scott—I told Scott a gentleman wished to see him—he said I was to tell him he was too ill to see him; he was in bed—the gentleman said that he must see him, and I showed him into his room—a letter came by post next morning addressed to Scott, which I took in, and gave him—he opened it, and said he was very pleased it had come for he was getting
very short of money, and he might be leaving of me now any day—he then said that he had a tin box upstairs in his bedroom, which would be very useful to me, as I was in the habit of going into the country, and if I liked to buy it he would sell it—he only had one room, this conversation took place in our breakfast parlour on the basement floor—I asked him what he wanted for it; he said 3s.—I said that I would have it, but I could not pay him, because I had not change for a sovereign—he said "Never mind, let that stand over," and told, me to take the box out of the room as soon as I liked—he gave me the key—there were two keys he told me that it locked twice—he then went out, and I never saw him again till I saw him at Scotland Yard the next Saturday—he was then clean shaved—the police came on the Friday, and I told them all I knew, but I did not tell them on the Friday about the closet, not till they questioned me—next day, Saturday, the 19th, McIntyre examined the dustbin, and on the same day my daughter took in a post-letter for Mr. Scott; I did not see it—on the following Monday my daughter took in another letter, but I did not see it—Scott told me that he was a traveller in tea, but he never brought any in—no one ever came to see him.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. The man I saw on 10th September was quite a stranger to me—it was between 6 and 7 p.m., but it was very light—he had a long frock coat—I did not notice whether his hat was a high or a round one—it was a dark colour—I did not notice his face at all; I only noticed his shoulders and his back as he went down the steps—I was asked to pick him out at the station from 15 or 20 persons, 8 or 10 of whom were about his size and appearance, and they may have been about the same height, age, and general appearance—I looked at all of them; it was some little time before I picked Callan out; I looked at all their shoulders—the man had a frock coat on, the same as he had when he left my house—I did not see one with a coat so long as his—there was not one like this one among them—I cannot remember how many of them wore frock coats—I looked the men up and down for half a minute or a minute, and I never saw one of them before—I recognised his shoulders as soon as I went in, as I thought, but I was not certain then—Mr. Littlechild asked me if there was anybody there whom I knew, and I said "That is the most like it"—I told him I could only recognise him by the shoulders—I had remarked of him "What a square-built man"—I really tell you that I identify him by the shape of his shoulders, and I said at the time that he was the man—to the best of my knowledge he is the man, judging by his shoulders, but I cannot undertake to swear it.
Re-examined. I saw Harkins among the other men, and rightly or wrongly picked him out.
ANNA MARIA BRIGHT . I am the daughter of the last witness—I saw Callan several times while he was lodging at my mother's house—I knew him by the name of Scott—I used to clean his rooms—he had one portmanteau there, the one produced, before I went to the country, and when I came back with my mother on September 10th I saw this tin box (produced) in Scott's room agin the bed at the side—I was sweeping and pushed the brush against it, and found I could not move it; it was too heay—next day, the 11th, I called my mother's attention to it, and she tried to move it, but it was too heavy—on Thursday morning, 27th October, I noticed something in the water-closet like milk and water, and some white powder on the seat, and a box of matches—the pan was choked—I traced
the powder from the floor of the water-closet to the dustbin—I told my mother, and she went and sawit—on November 4th I moved the tin box, and noticed that it was very light; I could move it easily—on the Saturday, the day after Scott left, I think it was November 19th, a letter came for him, and another on the Monday, both by post—they were addressed to Mr. Scott—I gave them to Mr. McIntyre, who slept at the house after the 18th.
GEORGE LOW . I am a painter, of Balls Pond Road—on Thursday afternoon, 17th October, I went to 24, Baxter Road, and found that the pipe at the bottom of the pan of the water-closet was stopped—I used the forcer seven or eight times to clean the obstruction away, and got it clear, but I did not get any of the stuff out; I forced it down—on the same day Mrs. Bright drew my attention to something like broken mortar in the dustbin; it looked like half a pailful—it was whitish stuff, like decayed mortar.
MARY ANN JOHNS . I live next door to Mrs. Bright—my number is 26 and hers 24—there is a low wall between the backs of the two houses—about November 4th I saw some mortar, I thought, in the back garden near the wall—I picked it up and threw it in the dustbin—there were two small shovels full—two or three days afterwards, on a Tuesday, I think, I was sitting near the kitchen window, and my son had put it in the oven to dry, and an explosion happened, which burst the door open—I turned and looked, and saw a blaze in the oven and in the fender—there was a blue flame, sulphur; I thought brimstone—it cracked the oven door; it is in two pieces now.
CHARLES BENJAMIN JOHNS . I am the son of the last witness and live with her—on 8th November she spoke to me of some stuff in the dustbin; it looked like old mortar; it was damp—I took out a pint of it, and as I was going to keep pigeons I put it in the oven to dry it, and in 10 minutes there was a loud explosion—the stuff blew about the room like grains of sand—there was a bluish flame and a bad smell, which made me sick—I gave Mr. McIntyre the rest of the stuff—it was then in the yard; I had taken it out of the dustbin.
PATRICK MCINTYRE (Police Sergeant). On Friday, November 18th, after Callan was in custody, I went to 24, Baxter Road, and took a lodging, and stayed there that night, and next day I went to the w. c. and dustbin, I got a shovel and moved some of the stuff from the dustbin; it seemed to be a mixture of dust and grey stuff, which I separated from the ordinary dust; it was an earthy substance resembling lime or cement—I dug down a few inches, and collected from 18 to 20 1b. of it, which I put in a box, and handed it to Chief Inspector Littiechild—I did not take it all away that night, I got more of it next day, which Inspector Quince handed to Col. Majendie in my presence—on the 20th I went to the garden of 26, Baxter Road—I collected some more of the stuff, and some more was given to me by young Johns, and I gave it to Inspector Quin—the gardens of Nos. 24 and 26 adjoin, a small wall divides them—to get to Callan's room at 24, you go down to the basement and out into the garden to the yard; the closet is in the garden or yard—on Saturday, 19th November, I heard the postman at the door, and Mr. Bright gave me this letter, addressed "Mr. Thomas Scott, 24, Baxter Road, Essex Road, Islington," it had the London postmark of November 19th—it has been opened since; it contained the letter which is now in it—on November
21st I heard the postman, and this other letter was given me, addressed "Thomas Scott, 24, Baxter Road, Essex Road, London, England," it bears the Lowell postmark of November 8th, and the New York postmark of November 11th—I opened it, it contained a letter and a draft for 10l., which are here—on 19th October I went with Inspector Pope to 9, Alfred Street, Islington; that is a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes' walk from Baxter Road, and Mrs. Horan, the landlady, pointed out to me Harkins's bedroom, or the top floor; I found there this portmanteau locked; a key on my bunch opened it, and I found in it this five-chambered revolver (produced), one of Smith and Wesson's, of Springfield, Mass., No. 178, 345—the other revolver is the same shape and pattern, and by the same maker—it was unloaded, and there were 15 cartridges—there was wearing apparel in the portmanteau—I put the things back as they were and locked it up, and left it in the room and came away—I was not present when it was fetched away.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I did not notice any grease marks in the portmanteau, but I only made a casual examination—beyond the name of the maker, there was nothing to show by whom it was sold.
ELIZA HORAN . I live at 9, Alfred Street, Colebrook Row, Islington—in June, 1887, I had a card in my window, of a room to let, and the prisoner Harkins came and looked at it one morning, and said he would let me know whether he would take it—that was on a Thursday, and on the following Monday he came and took the room at 4s. a week—he gave me no name at first—on the Monday afterwards he went away for about ten minutes, and came back with this portmanteau, and a man whom I recognised at Scotland Yard as Callan, and to the best of my belief he is the man; they both took it up, but I did not see them—next day, when I went to clean the room I tried to remove the portmanteau, but it was too heavy—the room is the top attic—Harkins said he should only want the room for a week or two—after he had been there a week I asked him if any letters would come for him, and he gave the name of Scott, but no Christian name—he gave me no reference, nor did he pay in advance—once or twice he went out with a small black bag, but I never saw it in his room—he never left it there when he went out, but it might have been locked in the portmanteau; I generally saw him go out—two or three weeks after he came I noticed that the portmanteau was lighter—no one came to see him, and he had no letters—he told me that he was a traveller in agricultural implements—when he first came he went out between 9 and 10 a.m. regularly, but afterwards he stopped in much later—when he had been with me three months he said that he should be leaving me next week, he was going to a job in Kent (that was about September), or that he should be leaving shortly as that job in Kent would be finished—shortly after that he was away for two separate nights—once he said that he had been to Wimbledon and could not catch the train, and another night he said he had been sitting up with a sick friend—when the police came to the house I saw the portmanteau opened and the revolver taken out—after the policeman had come Harkins did not come back that night, but he did the following night, and stayed—I found out he was with the police, and then he came back and stayed longer at my house—I heard Scott or Harkins speak of the inquest on Cohen—I had the paper in the evening especially to read Harkins's evidence at the inquest—I told
Harkins I had not heard what the suspicion was on him, but now I had read for myself—I knew there was suspicion by the officers coming to my house—he said it was a lot of lies, he could clear himself if he chose by exposing his family affairs, but he did not mean to do so—I read the evening paper on the 26th, the day the inquest was held—from 20th October to 19th November the police officers were living in my house the whole of the time—Harkins knew there were policemen there—there were six policemen always living there; they took their turns—the prisoner knew it—that went on to 19th November, when they were finally arrested and taken to the police-station—on the 19th I was taken to King Street Police-station, Westminster—I saw a number of men there, strangers to me—I was asked to look and see if I could pick out the man who had come to my lodgings when Harkins took them, and I picked out Callan—I believed and still believe he is the man—he was very much changed when I saw him at the station—when he came with Harkins he had a very fresh colour and a moustache, a very fresh-looking man he looked—when I saw him at the police-station he had no moustache—I do not think he had any whiskers when he came to me, and I did not notice that he had any beard—he was much paler when at the police station, and I do not think he had any beard or moustache—I was able to the best of my judgment to pick him out as the same man—previous to the policemen coming to reside at my house on 20th October Harkins had always been able to pay me; the first week after that he was able to pay me, but not afterwards—Harkins told me once he travelled in tea; I cannot say how long that was after he first came, or at what date it was—we were having a conversation; he was down in my kitchenhe might have been with me seven or eight weeks; he had been with me some weeks—I think we were having tea that day, and that brought the conversation up that he used to travel in tea, that he used to be a traveller in tea, something of that sort—during the whole time he was there nobody ever came to call on him—he did no business at the house, not so far as I know of.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. The first time Harkins came he looked at the room, and then said he would go and fetch his portmanteau, and he went and brought back the man, who to the best of my belief is Callan, with him—Callan stayed 10 minutes perhaps or a quarter of an hour—they had refreshment, I brought it in and stayed in the room while they had it—I did not leave the room the whole time they were there; they were there 10 minutes quite—from that time till Callan was at King Street Police-station I did not see Callan—I dare say I was five or ten minutes at King Street Station before I was brought into the room to identify Callan; it might have been longer—I picked Callan out from among eight or nine, they were standing almost in the middle of the yard—some of them had the appearance of labouring men—I could not tell you if any of them had black moustaches—I think I was asked to give a description of Callan before I went to the police-station—I did not say he had a black moustache; I said he was a very fresh-coloured man—I don't think I mentioned the way he wore his hair over his face—I said he was a medium-sized man—I said the way he was dressed when he came to my house; he was dressed differently to that at the police-yard, he had quite a different suit of clothes on—he was standing in the middle of the men in the yard—I was perhaps two or three minutes in the yard before
I picked him out—I stood and looked at the men—I did not walk up and down before the row of men—I pointed to Callan as the man to the best of my belief—he looks very different now—there is a much greater difference now than there was when I picked him out at King Street—the man I picked out is the man, to the best of my belief, who called with Harkins—the man who came to my house had an iron-grey moustache; I don't know if he had whiskers—he had a fresh colour—he had not when in the police-yard—one of the police officers thought me to the station to identify him—I almost forget his name, he is one of the witnesses, there have been so many I really forget their names.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. The small black bag of which I have spoken was a bag about this size—he carried it easily in his hand, haveging down—during the time he occupied the attic he never had his meals at my house—I don't remembor his telling me that he kept a grocery, oil, colour, and hardware shop in Philadelphia, or a store—he did not speak of dealing in hardware to me, he only spoke of dealing in oils—when the police came I went up and told him two gentlemen wanted to speak to him, he at once frankly told me to show them up—after they left he went out after them, and he did not come back till next evening—he remained living there constantly till the time of his arrest—after the police came he made at no time, to my knowledge, any attempt to move his portmanteau—he said he thought he should like to get back to America—he did not attempt to get away from the house, or to leave me at all—I cannot tell how long it was between the inquest and the time of his arrest; I don't remember, the date at all, some days I think it was. I am not sure—during the whole time he was regularly coming into and going out of the house as before.
Re-examined. I don't know whether he was followed by policemen when he went out—the policemen lived in my house when they were there; they slept in my back parlour on the first floor—no one could leave the house without going by the door of that parlour, and without their knowing.
EUGENIE HORAN . I am the daughter of the last witness—on 21st October Harkins asked me if I would mind writing a letter—I told him I would—he asked me if I would buy him some paper and envelopes, and I said I would—I went and got them and took them to him—I sat down and began "Dear Sir," and put "9, Alfred Street"—he dictated to me to write asking for some money, 12l. or 14l.; he asked him if he would draw it out of his bank—he gave me the name of Birchall, and I wrote on the envelope "Mr. Birchall, "and put that into another one—I spelt it, and then asked him if it was right, "Birchall"—when I had done it he said that would do—I put the letter into that envelope and enclosed it in a larger one, which I addressed "Mrs. Hawkins, 1939, North Second Street. Philadelphia, United States, America"—I asked him what name I should put in the letter, and he stood for a few minutes, and then said "Harry Scott, "so I signed it "H. Scott"—afterwards I read the letter to him, and he said that would do—he wrote to ask him if he would send him 12l. or 14l. to enable him to get back to America, because he had been taken on suspicion of being seen with some suspicious person, and he said the police were always with him, they ate with him, they drank with him, they walked and rode, and would be until he could leave England; he said he hoped the letter
would find him and his family all quite well; I think he said he had lost some one lately; that was in the letter also; I don't remember any more—I sealed it, and he asked me if I would post it—I had no stamps; I bought him a 2 1/2 d. stamp and put on it, and I posted it in Goswell Road—I told him I had posted it.
JOHN CRAY . I am a police constable—on 20th October I went to lodge at 9, Alfred Street, the house in which the prisoner Harkins was living—I and five other officers continued to watch him for some time in turn he knew all about it, he was told by Littlechild—I did not hear him tell him, he knew I was a policeman—on 26th October he asked me to write a letter for him—he told me the landlady's daughter had written one for him, he said he believed some of our chaps had got it—he then went out with me and bought some paper and envelopes, and then we came back and he dictated a letter—he said he could not write—I made this copy (produced) of the letter in his presence, I read my copy to him; he said that would do. (This was addressed to Mr. Birchall:" 26th Oct., Metropolitan Police Criminal Investigation Department, 9, Alfred Road, City Road, Islington, London. Dear Sir, I am sorry I made a mistake in a letter I sent you, in which I gave the name of Scott instead of Howkins. I wrote to you asking you to send me 12l. or 13l. If convenient please send it at once, if not, please ask Mrs. Howkins to do so. I am, dear sir, yours sincerely, Michal Hawkins. Mrs. Howkins, 1939, North Second Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, America. ") He said "Howkins"—he told me to sign the name of Hawkins—I did not know him by the name of Scott, and made no observation to him as to why he signed Hawkins instead of Scott—I put the letter into an envelope and addressed it to Mrs. Howkins—I gave Scott the original letter in that envelope—I saw him post the letter—I had conversations with him at various times, in the course of which he said he kept provision and grocery stores in America at the address he gave—he also said he had worked on a railway.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. He said he had worked on a railway and had kept a grocery store in America, at the address given—I could not say what railway, some railway in America.
Thursday, February 2nd.
PATRICK QUIN (Police Inspector). On Thursday, 19th October last, at half past 9 in the morning, I went with Sergeant Fordham to 9, Alfred Street—I saw the landlady, Mrs. Horan, and was shown up to a room on the top floor—I there saw Harkins in bed; I said "We are police officers, we have been directed to ask you to give, some account of yourself; "he said "What do you want?"—I said "I' want your name, where you have come from, and what you are doing here; "he hesitated, and then said "My name is Harry Scott, I have come from 1, 939, North Second Street, Philadelphia; "I said "When did you come to this country?"he said "About June"—I said "In what ship?"—he said "The City of Chester"—he went on to say "Iam a grocer, and I am here on business"—I said "With whom have you done business?"—he paused and then said "I have not done any business, I have been having a look round"—I said "Can you give any references in America?"—he said "Barber and Perkins. Water Market, Philadelphia"—I said "Can you give any reference here?"—he replied "Iknow no one here"—I said "But you have been seen going somewhere; whom have you
visited?" he said "That is my friend, Mr. Brown"—I said "Where does he reside?"he said "42, Lambeth Road"—I said "Who besides Mr. Brown have you been with?"—he said "Some friends who have been trying to get Mr. Brown into the hospital," and he produced this letter of admission. (This was dated 7th October, and was an order to admit Joseph Brown, 42, Lambeth Road, aged 33, to the Hospital for Consumption, Hampstead, signed by Br. McKenna, of Finsbury Circus, and endorsed T. F. Slack and T. G. O'Malley.) I said "How did you get to know these people?"—he said "Mr. Brown gave me Mr. Slack's address, I saw him, and he did the rest; if they have been doing anything wrong, I don't know anything about it, we had a lot of drinking, and they signed the paper in the City"—that was all that passed between us on that occasion—that same day, about a quarter to 1, I went to 42, Lambeth Road—I there saw Mrs. Keys, the landlady—I was shown into a back room on the second floor, where I saw the dead body of Joseph Cohen, upon whom the inquiry was afterwards held—the landlady, Harkins, and Mr. Ducqué were in the room—I had not known that Harkins was going there when I left him in the morning; he said nothing to me about going there; I found him there when I went to the house; he recognised me, and he said "The man is dead, I must go and see about his being buried"—he was going out; I followed him, and said, close to the street door "I will have to take you to the police-station"—he said "What about the burial?"—I said "That will be attended to"—he said "That's very well for your business, but I have got my business"—I said "What do you mean by your business?"—he made no answer to that—I then took him to 22, Whitehall Place, and delivered him over to Inspector Littlechild—in his presence he said "My name is Michael Harkins, if you want to find out anything about me"—he had not said anything about his name being Michael Harkins until then—about 4 o'clock that afternoon I went back to 42, Lambeth Road, with constable Maguire, and saw the landlady, and searched Cohen's room, in the presence of Maguire and Mrs. Keys and another lady—I found a quantity of wearing apparel in various parts of the room, and this bag (produced), and in it some clothing, and this five-chamber revolver, made by Smith and Wesson, No. 178, 370, the same in size and in every particular as the other two; each barrel was loaded; there were also ten cartridges, tied up in ordinary brown paper; I produce them—I also found 36l. in money, 26l. was in gold and silver, and two 5l. notes—I gave the paper and money to the Coroner's officer, and the notes to Inspector Littlechild—in Cohen's room I also found this letter (produced), addressed to Dr. Bernard O'Connor, 17, St. James's Place, Westminster—I also found this envelope, with the name of Joseph Cohen on it; Mrs. Keys handed it to me—that is all of importance I found in that room—between 6 and 7 that same evening, I went back to 22, Whitehall Place, where Harkins was searched by me and others—I found in his right-hand vest pocket this piece of paper, which appears to be a cutting from a newspaper. (Read: "Mr. A. J. Balfour, Chief Secretary for Ireland, has accepted an invitation to address a public meeting at the Town Hall, Birmingham, in connection with the first annual meeting of the Midland Union Conservative Association, on 4th November.") In the same pocket I found this paper with the name of Mr. Phillips upon it, and this one with the name of Mr. O'Malley on it, with the name and address, the same that is on the hospital form, also this card,
with the name of Slack upon it; upon him I found 18s. in money, nothing else—I left Harkins in custody of Chief Inspector Littlechild there were about 20 men under him in the office—I don't know why he was not searched before—there was no actual charge made against him at the time I arrested him; I made no charge against him when I got back; I was acting under Littlechild's orders—on Friday, 18th November, I went with Mclntyre to 24, Baxter Road—I there found the tin box and revolver which were produced yesterday—on 22nd November I went again to 24, Baxter Eoad, and was present when the dust was taken out from the dustbin and sifted; the stuff I found there was afterwards handed to Colonel Majendie, it was a grey substance like mortar, about three ounces of it; it had been disturbed before I got there—Colonel Majendie gave me the order to have it sifted—I also examined the dust and dustbin at No. 26, next door; I sifted that, there was five pounds of it—Inspector Mclntyre gave me a packet of about a pound in the morning—I handed all of it to Colonel Majendie.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. Harkins's statement that he came over in the City of Chester I found to be true—I don't know that he has been a grocer in Philadelphia—I had told him I was a police officer when I went into the room; he said "If they have done anything wrong I don't know anything about it"—he did not give me the name of Harkins then—when he came to Inspector Littlechild and was put under arrest, he said "My name is Michael Harkins if you want to find anything about me"—he also gave his address 1939, Second Street, Philadelphia—I don't know that he had lodged there—Mr. McKenna, the gentleman referred to, is a Roman Catholic priest.
JOHN WALSH (Police Sergeant). On 19th October, about 3 p.m. I went with Inspector Pope and Sergeant Mclntyre to Harkins's room, the top room, 9, Alfred Street; I there saw the portmanteau, revolver, and cartridges—the portmanteau was afterwards locked up, and the revolver and cartridges left in it—Harkins was detained at Scotland Yard that night and released next day, and from that time observation was taken of him by the police—on 21st October I went again to his room and there found this newspaper, the Daily News of the 12th October; it was on the top of a small fire stove in the bedroom—in the sixth column there is a piece missing from it; I have compared the cutting found on Harkins with the newspaper and it exactly corresponds—I also found the Evening Standard of 4th October on the same place, they were lying together on the top of the stove—I had seen the newspapers on the top of the stove when I was there on the 19th—on 26th October I went to Harkins's room about 12 o'clock in the morning, he was in bed; I told him I wanted to see his portmanteau; he at first said "I should think you had seen all that it contained before"—he unlocked it, and I then took possession of the revolver and cartridges, leaving the portmanteau there—I said "I will have to take possession of these; "he said "I hope you don't think I am a man of that sort; "I said it will be for the safety of everybody that we should take possession of them until such time as you are going away, and then we will give them up to you; he said "I was just going to pawn the revolver this morning, I am getting very hard up, I expect to get 2l. on it; "Itold him I did not believe he would get 2l. on it in this country; I then long him 7s. 6d., that being about the amount I thought he would get by pawning it—this
was on the day that the Coroner's Inquest had been fixed for on Cohen—I told Harkins that he would have to come to the inquest, and I went there with him—he gave evidence at the inquest—since that time the police lodged in the house and watched him, and when he ran short he was supplied by the police with food—the police went into the house before the 26th—on the 19th I heard that Callan was in custody, and on the same day I brought Harkins to Scotland Yard in a cab by direction of the chief inspector—I arrested him a second time; I told him I should take him to Scotland Yard, but I did not make the charge against him—after that, on that same day, I went back to 9, Alfred Street and took possession of his portmanteau; it was locked at that time and I forced it open, and put all his things into it and brought it away and gave it and its contents to Inspector Littlechild, also the revolver and cartridges.
Cross-examined by MR. KEITH FRITH. I forced it open—I did not say before the Magistrate "It was locked, but I unlocked it"—I am quite sure of that—Sergeant McIntyre unlocked it—it was after Quinn's visit that I went; he went about 9 in the morning, and I went the next day.
SAMUEL FREDERICK LANGHAM . I am Coroner for London and Southwark—I held an inquest on 26th October last on the body of Joseph Cohen, who died at 42, Lambeth Road on 19th October—the prisoner Harkins was sworn and examined before me as a witness, and I took down his evidence—these are my original notes—he was sworn as Michael Hawkins, of 9, Alfred Street, Islington, Grocer. (The noise were here read as follows: "Icarry on business in America as a grocer, and carried it on for two or three years. I got acquainted with the deceased at a public near the Obelisk about a month ago. I afterwards visited him at 42, Lambeth Road. I sat up with the deceased the night before his death. He looked very weakly. I suggested to him to have a doctor. He said he would rather get to the hospital. The deceased told me his name was Brown and he came from America; he did not tell me what part of America. The deceased never told me what his occupation was, or what he was over here for. He said he was about 33 years old. I left the deceased about 9 or 10 o'clock the night he died. When I came the evening he died I found a purse containing 16l. I took the keys, and afterwards gave them up to one of the doctors; then they were taken by Mr. Monro. I am known at my lodgings by the name of Scott. I had no reason for changing my name from Hawkins to Scott. 1939, North Second Street, Philadelphia; I and my wife and family live there, three girls and one boy. I never saw the deceased at any time with a man named Melville. I met him about three months ago. I met Melville at the House of Commons. I know a Mr. Burchell, of Philadelphia, as a real estate agent. I have written a letter to Burchell; I ordered it at my residence; it was asking for money. The paper produced was found on me; it contains an address of Mr. Phillips. I saw Stack and O'Malley within the last week; they were strangers to me. I was sent by deceased to get a paper signed to get him into a hospital; the deceased gave me the address. Mr. Stack took me to a gentleman to get the certificate signed. I recognise the paper as having Mr. Balfour's name on it; I cannot read. I had a revolver which I gave up this morning; it was a Smith and Wesson's, of Massachusetts; I bought it in America; I cannot say where. I asked for the deceased by the name of Brown when
I went to his lodgings.") Mr. Monro is one of the Commissioners of Police—there were reporters I believe at the inquest—I don't know in what evening papers Harkins's evidence was reported—the inquest was held at 1. 30 on the 26th at the Coroner's Court, Southwark, close by St. George's Church—I daresay I had a receipt signed by Harkins; if I had it at any time I have not got it now—I have looked for it—I had it at Bow Street, and since then I have lost it.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I believe I took down everything that Harkins said, as far as was material—some things that I did not consider material I may have omitted—the statement as regards Melville I think I might have omitted—I believe it is substantially correct.
JOHN MASON . I am Coroner's officer for Southwark—I attended at the inquest held on Cohen—it is part of my business to pay the expenses of the witnesses, and I paid 2s. to Harkins for his expenses, and I made out a receipt on one side, and he answered it on the other—I saw him sign the receipt as Michael Hawkins, and I handed it over to the Coroner at the end of the inquest—I am sure he did not put his cross—I am positive he signed it. and I handed him a two-shilling piece.
ELIZA HORAN (Re-examined). I have several times seen Harkins looking at the newspapers—he simply had the papers in his hand looking at them; whether he was reading them or not I do not know; he was holding them up as though he was reading them—I remember on one occasion my daughter was reading a penny novelette, and Harkins came in, and after she had laid the novelette on the table he took it up and looked at it, and said "I am surprised at your reading such a book as that."
ELIZABETH KEYS . I live at 42, Lambeth Road—about the first week in June last a man, whose name I did not know at the time, came and took lodgings at my house—later on in the week he handed me an envelope with the name of "Joseph Cohen "on it—he stayed with me until he died—he occupied the second floor back room at 6s. a week—he always paid in advance—during the last week of Cohen's life both Callan and Harkins came to see him—I cannot say whether it was every day—sometimes they were both in the house at the same time—I never saw them come together—I cannot say how long they stayed—Harkins came afterwards with Inspector Quinn on the day that Cohen died—in November I went to Scotland Yard to see if I could identify Callan—he was in a room by himself, but I did not identify him positively at that time—he had then shaved off his moustache—I believe he is the man who used to come and see Cohen during that week—I used to know Harkins by the name of Brown—he told me that himself—when Cohen first came he had several visitors, but I don't know any of them except Mr. Melville—I did not always see them—I have seen Melville there several times; I don't know how many—he passed by the name of Joseph Melville—I only knew Callan by hearing Cohen call him "Tom," and Cohen called Harkins "Harry"—they called Cohen "Joe," I believe—I don't know how I know that—neither of the men have ever asked me for the name of Joe—Cohen had a few letters; they bore foreign postmarks, Paris and New York—I don't think I noticed any others—I don't know what luggage Cohen brought when he first came—I did not see anytin boxes there during the time he was there—there
was a locked cupboard in the room that Cohen occupied, and he had the key of it—I never heard Cohen, Callan, or Harking say whether there was any relationship between Melville and Callan.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. The greater part of the time Cohen was with me ho was a great invalid—I had other lodgers with keys at the time Cohen was lodging with me—I was always suggesting to him that he should call in a doctor, and he always gave me an evasive answer—he apparently did not like strangers in his room.
Re-examined. I have seen this piece of paper before—I found it on a paper in Cohen's room after his death—I found the whole paper—I can't say who cut it out—it was the Pictorial World—this (produced) is the paper I saw—it was not cut out when I saw it; it was part of the paper.
By the COURT. Cohen told me he was in ill-health, was not able to do anything, and he was resting—he used to walk out in the daytime—he had no regular hours—he used to remain out some hours sometimes.
ELLEN BROWN . I was servant at 42, Lambeth "Road when Cohen lodged there—I am not now living there—on 10th September I saw two tin boxes taken out; I had not seen them before—they were in Mr. Cohen's cupboard—a gentleman came for them—he went up into Cohen's room twice, and they were carried down separately—a cab was there; the cabman came and helped the gentleman carry them out to the cab—the man told the cabman they were heavy—I have seen Harkins before—I had not seen the gentleman who took the tin boxes away before the week Mr. Cohen died—I had seen him at the house two or three times before he took the things out—I did not know him by any name—I have heard Mr. Cohen say his name was Mr. Brown—I have seen him since—during the week that Cohen died he was there every day—I saw the prisoner Harkins at Bow Street on 28th November with a number of men—the prisoner Harkins is very much like the gentleman that took the tin boxes; I judged him by his moustache, I could not swear to him—I could not say whether he is, Harkins is very much like him indeed—I was in the house on the day Cohen died—I remember Quin the officer coming there that day—Harkins came with Quin—I cannot swear it was the same person who took the boxes away that was there when Quin was there, he was very much like Mr. Harkins, but when he took the boxes away he did not come so often, only when Cohen died—I saw the gentleman who took the boxes away often the week Mr. Cohen died—that gentleman was very much like the gentleman who came when Quin the officer came—I never used to take much notice of him when he came—I did not always look at him—I saw the person come into the room at the time Cohen was dead; Quin came in while he was there—I could not be positive whether that was the same person who had called upon Cohen pretty nearly every day during the last week of his life—I could not swear to him—I did not open the door every day; I did very seldom; sometimes missus would, or her little boy, of a day—I had very often before seen the gentleman who was in the room when Quin came—he came about two or three times before Mr. Cohen died, I think—I saw him all that week before Mr. Cohen died; every day he came during the week that Cohen was dying—the two tin boxes were very much like that one (produced)—it was at 4 p.m. on 10th September the boxes were taken away—I saw the prisoner Callan at No. 42 during
all the week Mr. Cohen was dying—I only knew him by the name of Callan—I opened the door to him sometimes; he gave no name, only wanted to go upstairs to Cohen—I afterwards saw him with other persons and picked him out at Bow Street on 28th November—the cupboard in Cohen's room was always kept locked—the only time I saw the boxes was when they were being moved, and the gentleman went away with them in a cab.
Cross-examined by, MR. GEOGHEGAN. When Callan called on Cohen he would stop for about an hour and a half a day; he used to stop a long time with him—they appeared to be great friends, and were fond of each other.
Cross-examined by MR. KEITH FRITH. I am the only servant kept there—being maid of all work I had plenty to do—I took very little notice of who called—I took very little notice of Harkins—I picked Harkins out by seeing him come to where I was in service—I said "The only way I say it is because of his moustache; that is the only way I can speak to him;" that is the only way—I could not swear to him now.
Re-examined. To the best of my belief he is the same, he is very much the same, I cannot swear to him.
GEORGE CRAMPTON WICKS . I am cashier in the Princes Street branch of the London Joint Stock Bank—I produce these two drafts, one for 205l. 6s. 9d., drawn by Drexell and Co., of Philadelphia, in favour of Joseph Melville, upon J. S. Morgan and Co., London, and dated 11th June, 1887—that would be the date it was drawn in Philadelphia—I paid that draft myself on 24th June, 1887, by 195l. in 39 5l. Bank of England notes, and 10l. 6s. 9d. in cash—the numbers of the notes were 18101 to 18139 inclusive—the other draft is for 330l., which was presented to me the same day; it is impossible for me to say whether it was presented by the same individual as the last was presented by; it follows in sequence the draft previously paid; it might have been a minute or two after it, there was some lapse of time—I am quite unable to say who presented the first draft—this second draft was drawn by Cantony and Co., of New York, in favour of Joseph Melville, on the German Bank of London, dated June 8th, 1887; it is endorsed Joseph Melville—the first was endorsed Joseph Melville—I cashed the second one in 65 5l. Bank of England notes, numbers 84914 to 84979, and 85001 to 85050—that was on 24th June—I have my book in which it is my duty to enter the particulars of drafts and cash—the endorsements on the two drafts appear to be identically in the same handwriting; the letters are not precisely the same, but the handwriting is the same style—if the writing is precisely alike in all respects, we are more apt to inspect them.
WILLIAM HENRY STANTHAM . I am a clerk in the issue department of the Bank of England—these two 5l. Bank of England notes, 18110 and 18115, are both endorsed "Joseph Cohen, 42, Lambeth Road, S. E., London"—on 2nd September they were cashed by me across the counter—I cannot say whether that endorsement was written in my presence, or whether they were brought endorsed—it is the practice that the endorsement should be written on notes before they are cashed, when they are cashed by a private individual—if cashed by bankers they would not be marked if there were only one or two, but a number of them from another office would be marked by machinery.
HERBERT HEWKE . I am a clerk in the Secretary's Department of the Bank of England—prior to 18th November I had had instructions given me about certain bank-notes—about 12 o'clock on 18th November these four notes were brought to me by Mr. Brooks, one of the clerks in the issue department, they are numbered 85002 and 85003 and 18112 and. 18113—18112 and 18113 are endorsed Thomas Callan, Baxter Road, North Essex Road, Islington—Brooks brought with him the presenter of the notes, that was Callan; I asked him his name, he said "Thomas Scott, 24, Baxter Road, North Essex Road, Islington"—I said "That is where you live"—he said "Yes, but my right name is Thomas Callan, but I am known as Thomas Scott"—I asked him what he was, he said he was a citizen of the United States—I said "Oh, where do you live then?"—he said "165, Broadway, Massachusetts"—I asked him when or where he got the notes, he said he received them last night from New York—that was in substance all that passed—I communicated with the police—I went round to see Major Smith—after communicating with the police I went with Callan to the issue department—I apologised, to Callan for keeping him waiting so long, and I said "You would like to have the money"—he said "I should"—I said "Would you like to have gold?"—he said "I should"—I said "You would like to have gold for the whole of them, I suppose?"—he said "Yes"—I said "Well, if you will come with me you shall have it"—I took him to Mr. Brooks, and told him he could pay the notes, and I believe the notes were paid in gold over the counter—when I got to the issue department Downes was there—I did not actually see the gold paid myself, I said good morning to him.
Cross-examined by MB. GEOGHEGAN. I don't remember that when he said his real name was Callan he also said he rented a room at the address he gave me in the name of Scott—he said "I rent a room, and am known as Scott."
LEONARD CLARENCE BROOKS . I am a clerk in the issue department of the Bank of England—on 18th November Callan came and presented to me these four 5l. Bank of England notes which the last witness referred to—I took him to the secretary's department, and eventually when he came back with Mr. Hewke I cashed them for him across the counter, giving him gold for them.
HONOR THURSTING . I live at 7, Gladstone Street, St. George's Road, Soutkwark—I let lodgings—in June last year I had a bill up in my window "Lodgings to let"—somebody came and took my first floor back room on 23rd or 24th June; I think it was on the Thursday in Jubilee week—he gave the name of Melville; he paid 5s., 6d. a week—he brought a portmanteau and a satchel-bag, which he kept in a cupboard in his room—he kept the cupboard locked—I know that because I gave him the key when he came and took the room—he was there nearly three months; to the best of my recollection he received two letters during that time, both with the Paris postmark—two gentlemen came to see him; Cohen was one, he frequently came—I don't know who the other was—Cohen lived at 42, Lambeth Road, about five minutes' walk from me.
WILLIAM CLARK HORSLEY (Police Inspector A), On 4th August last I was on duty at the House of Commons, and I was regularly there—it is the practice now for strangers to be stopped at the octagon, the central
hall—a stranger requiring to see a member writes his name on a card and hands it to the policeman there, and also the name of the member whom he desires to see—on that day one of the constables on duty was Oram—while the house was sitting he brought me a card with the name of Joseph Melville on it at 7. 35. (The cards are handed back to the members.) The member inquired for was Mr. Joseph Nolan, a Member of Parliament now and last Session—he is well known to me, a tall gentleman—Mr. Nolan came out—when a member comes out he comes along from the House of Commons side to where the policeman is standing, and then the policeman calls out "Who sends for Mr. Nolan?" or whoever the member is—that practice was followed on this occasion—Melville came forwards, and directly after Harkins—I did not know Melville by sight before that time—I knew Harkins by sight, and had seen him standing in the central hall, just by the strangers' gallery entrance—I had not seen Harkins there that day, but previous days—when Melville and Harkins came forwards Melville was on the watchman's side of the central hall and Harkins on the right-hand side, on the strangers' gallery side—members have to get a pink order to take strangers to view, and a white order to take them to the gallery of the house—on that occasion I saw them go towards the lower waiting hall, further on towards the river—there is a strangers' barrier there, and policemen are stationed to stop strangers; that is as far as strangers may go without orders—I can't say how long they were there—Mr. Nolan went with them towards the barrier, they all three went away together—on the next day, the 5th, I saw Melville and Harkins again about 6 p.m.; I did not exactly see them come in—a card was sent in again for Mr. Joseph Nolan—Mr. Nolan had a pink order in his hand on that occasion—that is to view the House only, and does not admit to the gallery while the House is sitting nor under the gallery, but it admits to the library, smoking-room, terrace, and strangers' dining-room, to enable people to walk round and see—I saw Mr. Nolan and Melville several times afterwards that night—they were sitting on a seat on the terrace—I cannot say I saw Harkins again that night—I saw Melville up to about 11 o'clock that night, to the best of my recollection—I remember Harkins on one previous day at the House of Commons; I have no recollection of seeing him since—I have seen Callan at times previously, not in the House of Commons, but in St. Stephen's Hall and the central hall—St. Stephen's Hall is the one with statues in it, going up to the central hall, where strangers sit waiting their turn to go up to the gallery, and I had also seen Callan in Bridge Street, where the members cross over—I cannot say how late in the year I saw Callan in the central hall, it may be the latter part of July or beginning of August, I cannot be positive on the matter—the name of Melville had been given to me by Chief Inspector Littlechild before it was on the card.
JOSEPH ORAN (Policeman A 157). I was on duty during the whole of last Session at the House of Commons at the barrier to which the strangers bring the cards—I saw Harkins there on two occasions—on an occasion in August a card was handed in to me by Joseph Melville—I did not know him by sight—Inspector Horsley had given me his name before—when Melville handed me the card Mr. Joseph Nolan was sent for—I have heard the last witness's account of what happened on 4th
and 5th August—I was in Court—I only remember seeing Harkins on the two occasions—they were the two days Mr. Nolan was sent for—I do not remember seeing Harkins except on those two occasions—on both occasions I saw him with Melville—on both days the same name was given on the card, Joseph Melville—in December last I was sent over to New York, where I watched for and ultimately saw Joseph Melville—he was lodging on the third floor of 925, Tenth Avenue—I saw him on more than one occasion—I did not follow him—I followed him on one occasion to a restaurant—he was the same man who presented the card on 4th and 5th August at the House of Commons—I found he was passing by the name of John Maroney at New York.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I was sent alone only to inquire about Maroney, not about Callan—I inquired about Maroney by Mr. Monro's directions—I did not know Callan's address when I went over—I did not know it was Massachusetts—I was not told to inquire about him—it was my first trip to America—I was there nine days.
JOSEPH NOLAN . I am M. F. for North Louth—I was in attendance last Session, I think, every day, and had more applications than were pleasant for people to come in—I cannot say that I remember Mr. Melville sending in a card to me, but my attention has been called to it—in the Speaker's Gallery in August I found the name of Mr. Stock, M. P.—if it is not possible to get anybody in, it is usual for another member to do so—I think this entry is my writing, but I do not remember writing it—I think the introduction was by me, and the sending them into the gallery—I believe Mr. Stock used his name as the member introducing—we get an order from another member if we have not got one—these two names are "Joseph Melville, U. S. A.," and a name which looks like "McGinn, U. S. A."—I do not recollect seeing a man introducing himself as a person I knew in America—I have very often taken people in with whom I have no letter of introduction—beyond the fact of my admitting somebody who gave the card of Melville I have no recollection of it at the present time—I do not recollect Harkins as a man I have seen at the House of Commons—I am unable to say whether he is a stranger who, without having previously known, I admitted to the House of Commons in 1887—I have not seen Callan before to my knowledge.
By the COURT. My attention was drawn to the name of Melville in the book, by the Solicitor to the Treasury after the visit, and while the thing was fresh in my memory I answered what questions he put.
JOSEPH MYLER . I am steward of the steamship City of Chester belonging to the International Steam Shipping co., which reached Liverpool on 21st June—Harkins was a passenger on that voyage—I cannot swear to Callan, but I fancy I have seen him—I am not so sure of him as I am of the other; it is my belief that he was one of the passengers.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGIIEGAN. When I was asked to identify Callan he was in a room with about a dozen others—I had 80 or 90 passengers under my charge in that boat—I am not an American—Smith and Wesson are revolver makers—I cannot say if they are the largest manufacturers—I have seen many hundreds of their revolvers.
JOHN GEORGE LITTLECHILD (Re-examined). I received from McIntyre a box containing some stuff like mortar, which I showed to Colonel Majendie on the 20th, and handed it to him on the 21st—I also received
from Downes, Callan's white portmanteau and the tin box, which I handed over to Dr. Dupre—on 19th November I received Harkins's portmanteau, which I also handed over to Colonel Majendie—I produce a copy of the Penny Illustrated Paper of November—on 12th December Callan signed this receipt (produced) in my presence—I have also seen him write on other occasions—on one or two occasions he wrote his name and address, and on two occasions he wrote his signature—this is a receipt for money, and a receipt for linen and clothes—I was present at the inquest on 26th October—Harkins's evidence was reported in the evening papers—I produce the Globe, the St. James's, the Evening News, and the Pall Mall, of the 26th, all of which give an account of his evidence at the inquest—in the beginning of July instructions were given to the House of Commons' policemen as to a man named Joseph Melville—I knew Melville after that date—I saw him in London possibly a dozen times—I saw him staying at the Hotel Metropole on 30th August, and I saw him again two or three times up to 8th September—I do not think I saw him in London after that—I think I saw him going away from Victoria—he was watched and followed after the 4th and 5th August—on the 8th he went to Newhaven—he booked for Paris, and never returned—there is a warrant out for him—I did not see him leave for America—he has never been found.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I have had the conduct of this case all through—I was present at the first hearing before Sir James Ingham at Bow Street, when Mr. Poland first appeared; on that occasion the prisoners were not represented by a solicitor—there was then a remand until September 6th, and then Mr. O'Brien first represented both prisoners—before Mrs. Howitt was called Mr. O'Brien said that he had only just been instructed, and I don't think he cross-examined at all throughout the whole case—he said his duty was only watching the case—both prisoners had the opportunity of asking questions—I was present when Callan was confronted with Mr. Monro at Whitehall; he asked him certain questions—that was after he was in custody; he is the Assistant Commissioner of Police; he would not let Callan walk out of the room—Mr. Monro examined some persons at the inquest—he was asking Callan questions in the room for about half an hour, and then Mr. Monro reduced it into writing; he asked him how he became acquainted with Cohen—it was not read over to Callan, and I do not think he was cautioned, nor was he asked to sign it; it is at the office now; Mr. Williamson, the chief constable, occasionally came in—it was after Callan had been in the room for half an hour that he was formally charged—I signed the charge-sheet—Callan was brought there by Downes; there was not a warrant at that time; he was arrested on a warrant—I heard Mr. Monro ask Callan how he had become acquainted with Cohen, and heard him say that he had been to the Oratory at Brompton, and after praying there he went outside to a public-house and met Cohen there, who said "You look like an American," and he said he looked very delicate, and asked him to come and visit him at his lodgings—that was the purport of it—I think it also happened in the case of Burton and Cunningham that a prisoner was questioned for half an hour before he was charged—that is the only case I know—the conversation between Callan and Mr. Monro occurred on Friday evening, the 18th, and he was formally charged on the 19th.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I was present when Mrs. Bright picked out Harkins by his shoulders—among the persons whom he was placed with there were, I believe, none but police officers in plain clothes—the police have all gone through drilling and would present a more erect appearance than other people—when we are going to have an investigation, if we can get persons who are passing by to come in we do, but there is a difficulty about it—I did not try to get them on that occasion—there were about six policemen in plain clothes when Mrs. Bright picked out Harkins, and some of them had tolerably square shoulders—if you press me on that question, Harkins has remarkably square shoulders, and, knowing that, I abstained from following the ordinary course, and had only police officers; all the men were about his own height and stamp, and we gave him the advantage—she did not go three or four times up and down the line; she first of all saw them with their faces towards her, and she did not identify any of them; I requested the whole of them to turn round, and she immediately picked out Harkins—she said that he was the man—I did not say "Oh, it is him "or "That is him."
Re-examined. Callan was not formally charged till the 19th, because the suspicion was so strong, and the evidence did not appear so strong, and the men were detained pending inquiries, which resulted in their being charged—I had been looking for the people who had the bank-notes probably a month or more, and it was on Downes being summoned to the Bank of England that the inquiry began by Callan himself—Burton and Cunningham's charge was at the Court for causing explosions in the House of Commons.
GEORGE SMITH INGLIS . I am an expert in handwriting—I have carefully examined the letter dated November 17th, and signed Thomas Scott, with this bank-note, 85033, three receipts, and three white bits of paper, and I believe the letter is by the same person—I am prepared to give my reasons if necessary.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I have got 13 reasons—I have 11 letters from Thomas Scott—I do not base my 13 reasons on those 11 letters, I have taken into consideration other writing I have got.
Re-examined. I am prepared to take letter by letter and show the identity in the genuine letter and in this letter. (MR. GEOGHEGAN here stated that he would not dispute the letter being Callan's writing. Read: "Nov. 17th, 1887. Dear friend Joe,—I received your kind present last night, and it was a very welcome present, you bet. All I had was 7s., and that looked very blue. I had to do away with all the tea last week, as there was two of my dear friends came to see me to my room before I got out of bed, and wanted me to go to work, and they have taken very good care of me for the last two weeks; they have seen that I would not get lost. I have not seen Harry for a month. I do not know what has become of him. He promised to meet me the day after Joe died, and I went there three days; as I did not see him, I did not get any of the money that Joe had; I thought that Harry would get it, and that he would give we some of it, so you can't blame me for getting away with the tea, as I was here all alone, and did not know where to write to, and did not know anyone knew where I was. I thought it better to do away with it than to have them get it and see how it was done up. They have done you down fine; they have got your picture in most all the papers; they have got you in one paper where you are in
an hotel with a woman, and in another where you and Joe first met, and every place where you have been in beside. I intend to leave for home in a few days, as I am sick and tired of this business. I sent for money last week, and as soon as I get it I will start from this d—d hole. That poor man Joe, I will never forget him, he was one of the best men ever walked. I remain, yours, Thos. Scott. ") I have compared these two bank-notes with the writing on an envelope, they are written by the same person.
COL. VIVIAN DEERING MAJENDIE . I have been Chief Inspector of Explosives for the Home Office since 1875, and have had considerable experience in examining explosives—I investigated the explosives in the various dynamite explosions which have taken place in London—on Sunday, November 20th, I was shown a white box at Whitehall by Inspector Littlechild, containing about 20 lb. of brownish white stuff like dirty mortar—it was dynamite mixed with paper, cinders, bits of string, and so forth—I left it in charge of Inspector Littlechild, and took a small portion of it to examine; the kind of earth which it was mixed is keisolgraph, which is very commonly and largely used to absorb the nitro-glycerine—when dynamite is intended to be used for industrial purposes it is usually made up in cylindrical cartridges either of parchment-paper or paraffin-paper, to resist moisture—paraffin is used when the cartridges have been filled; the complete cartridge would be dipped in some cases, not in all, in paraffin, to complete it, to prevent the water penetrating—among the dynamite in the box we found several flakes and lumps of paraffin, and some small fragments of paraffin-paper—on Monday, November 21st, I went with Dr. Dupre to 20, Baxter Road, Islington, and examined the back yard and the dustbin—Inspector Quinn was there—I went there again on the 22nd, and examined the same and other parts of the premises, and picked up these pieces of paraffin-paper (produced)—they are parts of a dynamite cartridge or cartridges—I got 2 lbs. 5 oz. of dynamite there, besides what was in the box—I examined No. 26, Baxter Road on the same day—I had given the order the previous day, and the dustbin was sifted by Quinn by my directions—on the. 22nd 51/2 lbs. were found there, of the same material which we had in the other cases—it was just beside the dustbin—there were two dustbins on the premises—I don't think we got any from any other part—I had the water-closet taken to pieces, but found nothing—the total quantity of dynamite which I had furnished to me or succeeded in getting was 27 lbs. 13 oz., exclusive of what I could not separate from the earth and cinders—the charge used in dynamite cartridges varios; ¼ lb. is not uncommon, but 2 oz., 4 oz., or 8 oz. are used, or larger—I have visited a very large number of dynamite factories on the Continent and in America, and I have no doubt that this dynamite was made in America—I am well acquainted with European and with English dynamite, and am confident that this is neither—this cartridge paper was made in America to the best of my belief—different makers have different papers—there is a variation in the marks on them—in my opinion it is American dynamite and American cartridges—I carefully examined the explosives at the House of Commons crypt in 1885, and had means of studying the quantity used there; it did not exceed 8 lbs.—the case was tried in this Court—it did very great damage to persons and property—this kind of dynamite is capable of doing very great damage indeed to persons and property—
it has been used for charging bombs, find it is proposed to be used for military purposes—1/2 lb. is used in each bomb—on November 21st I examined Cailan's tin box—if it was full of dynamite, without cartridge paper, it would weigh about 90 lbs, in bulk, and probably about 70 lbs. if in cartridges—the cartridges do not fit into one another; they are cylindrical—on examining the box we found a number of small flakes or pieces of paraffin, and some particles adhering to the paint, which proved to be keisolgraph dynamite, the same as we found in the dustbin—in my judgment those were small particles of dynamite and paraffin from the cartridges—this would be the effect if cartridges or dynamite were carried in the box or moved about, or if a cartridge came to pieces, or the rubbing of the paper would have that effect—on December 3rd I examined Cailan's portmanteau, and found some particles of paraffin as before, and we found some keisolgraph, but the particles were not of sufficient size to see whether it was dynamite or not—I cannot tell you whether it was explosive—damp or moisture might wash the keisolgraph out—it was absolutely consistent with the portmanteau having carried cartridges or dynamite—on 21st November we examined Harkins's portmanteau very carefully, and found some small particles of keisolgraph dynamite; assuming that it had been filled with dynamite or dynamite cartridges that would have produced the traces we found—I also examined Cohen's portmanteau and found some flakes and pieces of paraffin, but no keisolgraph—we found paraffin in all four; keisolgraph dynamite in Cailan's tin box and portmanteau, and some dynamite in Cailan's bag—we did not find any cartridge paper in any of the portmanteaus—dynamite can be and is purchased in England for commercial purposes, for mining, for industrial work such as harbours, and for blasting rocks—if persons want it, foreign or English, there is no difficulty in getting it.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. It requires an expert, to some extent, to tell European from American dynamite—the action of water on dynamite would not be to cake it, but to expel the nitro-glycerine: that from the w. c. had been frozen, it was caked by frost.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I have personally seen the method of making dynamite in America—sometimes the name dynamite is used for various preparations, all include nitro-glycerine—I never heard one kind described as the dynamite of commerce—I cannot say that I have read Spond's "Encyclopaedia of Work"—I have read Ures' book; Foulger's is in German, I do not understand it—I have read some books upon it—I have been acquainted with cases of dynamite which has not been made for commercial purposes; there is no distinction in the manufacture, except that one would be more perfectly made than the other—there is a form of dynamite known as No. 1, that contains 1 per cent. with a certain quantity of keisolgraph; that is a silicious earth which has undergone decay, having porous interstices—it is called silicious, from silex, a flint, but there is very little flint in it; we know that in this country as No. 1 dynamite; it would absorb 7 per cent, of nitro-glycerine if introduced into it, which fills up its interstices and absorbs its absorbing power—what we have in this country is pink—No. 2 contains a smaller portion of nitroglycerine—that is a different class altogether—this is No. 1—I should not say that litho facteur is American, it is German—I have not
estimated the percentage of nitro-glycerine in this, but I believe it to be 73 to 74 per cent.
AUGUSTE DUPRE . I am professor of chemistry at Westminster Hospital, and have had very large experience in examining explosives—I examined, with Col. Majendie, the 27 lb. 13 oz. which has been referred to, and in my judgment it is American dynamite—at the garden of No. 24 I picked out some particles of paraffin from the mass of pieces of paper—we also examined Callan's tin box together—Col. Majendie's evidence as to that is quite correct—Callan's portmanteau contained only particles of keisolgraph; Harkins's contained dynamite and paraffin, and Cohen's only paraffin—I tested the paraffin in every case, to melting point, and in every case it was the same quality, both that which came from the trunk and the flakes and the paraffin paper.
Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. It is unusual to have keisolgraph in American dynamite, but keisolgraph is in this.
Re-examined. There are different kinds of keisolgraph—I have no doubt this is American; I have examined every kind of dynamite.
MR. GEOGHEGAN handed in two affidavits to Callan's character.
GUILTY . — Fifteen Years' Penal Servitude each.
OLD COURT—Friday, February 3rd, 1888.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
MESSRS. POLAND and CHARLES MATHEWS Prosecuted; and MR. GILL
From the evidence of MR. HOLLAND HODGSON WRIGHT, Surgeon, of Ostring Road, Kentish Town, it appeared that at the time the prisoner committed the offence she was suffering from puerperal mania, and was not accountable for her actions, and also that the injuries might not have been inflicted until after the death of the child.
NOT GUILTY .
284. ALBERT HARDING was also indicted for feloniously wounding Charles Langford with intent to murder him. Second Count, with intent to resist his lawful apprehension. Third Count, to do grievous bodily harm.
MR. TORR Prosecuted; MR. KEITH FRITH Defended. CHARLES LANGFORD (Policeman XR 29). On Saturday, 7th January, about nine or ten minutes to 7 p.m., I was in Priory Park Road, Kilburn, and saw a man at the corner of Aldershot Road passing up and down—I went over to him, and as I passed he took his handkerchief out of his pocket and put it up to his face—I crossed the road again on the left side of Aldershot Road, walked up the left side, and saw the man not in custody following behind—when I got to the top of Aldershot Road I
met the prisoner coming towards me; he took his handkerchief out of his pocket and put it up to his face in the same fashion as the other one did, and he then passed—I thought that was a sign of the two coming together; I looked round and heard the man not in custody say "I have been waiting for you a long time"—he said "Come on this way and we will go on and see how George is"—they came up then and turned to the left into Willesden Lane—I went up Willesden Lane then and looked round and saw the two men go down Kenilworth Road—I turned round and went over to the side of a hedge, and looked down Kenilworth Road, where I saw the prisoner and the man not in custody standing under a lamppost in Kenilworth Road—I went through the railings and crept on my hands and knees across the grass plot for about 30 yards, and got within about 50 or 60 yards of them—I saw the man not in custody go to the door of No. 10, Kenilworth Road, and knock very loud; he came out again and said something to the prisoner, who then went to the same door, and then I heard a sound as of glass being broken, and a lot fall down—the prisoner then came out and said something to the other man, I could not hear what—the prisoner then went into the house again, and came out at the gate and gave a slight whistle, and then the two men entered the house—I went three or four doors down on the left hand side, to No. 8, Mr. Holder's house—I knocked at the door—Mr. Holder answered me—I made a communication to him; he came with me and brought a poker—Mr. Holder and another man went round to the back of the house, I stopped at the front; they had not been there more than a minute when I heard the latch of the door where the prisoner and the other man had gone in—I rushed in the gateway and met the prisoner—I caught him with my left hand—he said "There are robbers in your house, sir"—I said "Half a minute, and you are one of them"—I had no sooner said that than he took this jemmy from his breast pocket and struck me three or four times on the top of my forehead with it, and then violently on the top of my head, which caused blood to flow all over my face and down my back—I was in plain clothes—I was holding the prisoner right in the doorway—we staggered outside by some means or other—I had hold of him by his collar—I called "Murder!"—a gentleman came; I said "Take this whistle and blow it, "pulling it out—he took it, I don't know if he blew it, but I was struggling with the prisoner when a uniform man came, and I know no more after that—I was unconscious for several days—I was taken home—I am still on the sick list—I cannot go on duty—my sight and head are very bad.
Cross-examined. I never saw the prisoner before—I was in plain clothes—I did not tell him I was a constable, there was no time for that, I no sooner heard the latch than I rushed in.
ROBERT HOLDER . I was at the rear of the premises when I heard cries of "Help, ""Murder," and "Police"—when I got to the front I saw the prisoner struggling with a plain-clothes and a uniform constable—the plain-clothes man said in the prisoner's presence "He has struck me on the head with a jemmy"—he became unconscious and faint—he was bleeding—I saw a jemmy lying on the ground near where they had been struggling—this looks like it, it was about this size.
Cross-examined. The prisoner was struggling violently; he was trying to get away.
WILLIAM MULLER . I live at Oxford Road, Kilburn, and am divisional surgeon to the X division of police—I saw the prosecutor on 8th January at 8 p.m.—he had two severe wounds over the parietal bone on the left side of his head, very deep, but not entirely down to the bone—a blunt instrument had caused them—I saw that jemmy on that night—the two wounds were likely to have been caused by it—he is seriously ill now.
GUILTY on the third count. — Ten Years' Penal Servitude.
The Grand Jury and the Court highly commended the conduct of constable Langford, and the Court ordered him an award of 10l.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, February 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, 1888.
For the case of Ivimy and Cross see Kent Cases.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, February 1st, 1888.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
285. BENJAMIN BARNES (40) , Unlawfully obtaining, by false pretences, from Christopher Stirk, three cheeses, with intent to defraud. Other Counts for obtaining other goods from other persons; also obtaining credit and incurring debt and liabilities with the said Christopher Stirk.
MESSRS. MATHEWS and BODKIN Prosecuted; MR. CANOT Defended.
FRANCIS AUGUSTUS BERRY . I am a provision dealer, of 59, Ripon Street, Lincoln—in September last my address was 65, Ripon Street—on 23rd September I advertised in the Exchange and Mart that I had some ducks and chickens for sale—I received this reply (produced). (This was on a printed memorandum form: " 59, Canning Road, Highbury, October 3rd, 1887. Bought of B. Barnes, wholesale druggist, drysalter, and dealer in sundries. Dear Sir,—Please quote me present lowest prices for weekly supply of fat ducks and chickens delivered free, and oblige yours truly, B. Barnes. ") I answered that, and told him I could supply him with both ducks and chickens—I did not keep a copy of the letter—I sent the goods—I then received this letter from him dated 4th October. (This stated that he had received the hamper, but found that the railway charges made the price come very high, but he would see how they went.) I answered that letter, asking for payment for the goods—I then received this letter dated 5th October. (This stated that the prisoner could do with five pairs of dead fowls and five pairs of dead ducks.) I wrote this answer dated 7th October. (Stating that he could supply fat ducks at 6s. 6d. a couple, and good fowls at 5s. a couple, and that the amount could be forwarded by cheque or P. O. O.). I received this answer dated 8th October. (This asked far five couple of ducks, and five couple of chickens to be sent, and stated that if they were as the witness stated them to be he would send a remittance on Saturday, and also another order. It also stated that he had been established 19 years, and supplied some very good families in Highbury.) In consequence of that letter I sent him 10 dead chickens and 10 dead ducks value 2l. 12s. 6d.—I sent them believing the statement in the letter—I sent the account shortly afterwards, but have not received payment for it—on 22nd October I wrote this letter to the
prisoner. (Stating that he had found the prisoner lived in a private house, and that unless he received the money by Tuesday morning he should put the matter in the hands of the police.) I then received this letter of 24th October. (This was on the same billhead, and asked for an invoice of his indebtedness to the witness, as he had not yet received one; it also expressed surprise at the witness's letter, as he had been established there 20 years, and was known to the police.) On 29th October I wrote this letter to the prisoner. (Stating that the matter was in the hands of the police, and that only payment by first post back would stop proceedings). I have never been paid the sum owing to me or any part of it.
Cross-examined. I have been established about eight years, and have had some experience of business—I am a subscriber to the Exchange and Mart, and take it in regularly, and advertise in it regularly—it contains certain directions how the business through the medium of that paper ought to be conducted—I was cognisant of those rules—there is a difference in price between advertising in the trade column and advertising in the private column—I cannot tell whether I put this in as a private advertisement or not—the editor of the paper did not charge me with fraud in connection with this advertisement—I have seen and read this issue of 30th January—I advertise both in the private and trade column, and I have done so in to-day's issue—I am not aware that the editor of the paper has made any claim upon me for any payment in respect of advertisements I put in the private column which they considered I ought to have put in the trade column—I paid trade prices for one, and private for the other—I did not consider it was necessary to have a deposit in this case—sometimes I send things on the deposit system, sometimes I have the money in advance, and sometimes I send them without the money—the Exchange and Mart keep a reference book, and if anybody is on that book it is a guarantee that inquiries have been made about them—I might have had three or four other people answer this advertisement besides the prisoner—I did not know them, and I made no inquiries about them—some people have billheads like the prisoner, and some have not—I supplied all those people who applied with goods without making inquiries—I communicated with the police first; that was directly after I expected the money and did not get it—I cannot give you the date—I wrote this letter to the prisoner on 5th November. (This stated that he had just had the police at his house, who had received a letter from Scotland Yard about some other goods, and that unless the prisoner paid by Tuesday morning he would find himself in prison.) I don't remember whether the police mentioned this to me first or not.
Re-examined. The ducks and chickens I sent were my own—I wrote to the police in London first, and then they wrote to our chief constable—this is the advertisement I inserted: "To hotel-keepers, &c. Can supply large or small quantities of well-fed ducks or chickens; large sizes at low prices according to number required weekly. T. A. Berry, 59, Ripon Street, Lincoln"—that is in tho trade column; you will see up above it it says "The following trade advertisements."
CHRISTOPHER STIRK . I am a farmer, of Barden Lane, Beddall, Yorkshire—in September last I inserted this advertisement in the Exchange and Mart: "To provision dealers, &c., finest rich Stilton cheeses for 8 1/2 d. per pound. Christopher Stirk, farmer, Beddall, Yorkshire," and in reply received this letter from the prisoner, dated September 30th. (This
was on the same billhead, and asked that three cheeses might be sent for him to try.) I answered that by letter, stating that I would send him the cheeses, but I should like payment—I then received this letter, dated October 7th. (This stated that he had been established 19 years, and was not likely to run away for 1l. 1s. 11 1/2 d., and that he would send remittance as soon as he received the cheeses.) I then sent three cheeses, value 1l. 1s. 11 1/2 d., addressed to "B. Barnes, 59, Canning Road, Highbury," that was upon his representation that he would pay for them when he received them, and that he had been established 19 years, and that a genuine business was being carried on there—I have never been paid—upon 21st October I received this letter. (Stating that he had received the cheeses, one of which had been very much broken in transit, but that he had sold the other two, and asked that 12 more might be sent, and he would send a remittance for the lot next week.) I then sent him 12 other cheeses, value 4l. 3s. 11d., to the same address—I have never been paid for them—I parted with them because I thought he was an honest man and would pay me.
Cross-examined. I took no action to recover the money—I got about 200 answers to this advertisement besides the prisoner's—I supplied them all but about 20—I cannot say how many of that 180 were strangers to me, but I made inquiries about all those whom I had not supplied before—I wanted the money from the prisoner before he got the cheeses—I am in the habit of subscribing to the Exchange and Mart, and I know the rules and methods by which they conduct their business—you can arrange for a deposit between vendors and purchasers—some of the 180 persons applied with billheads and some without them, and I supplied them both—the police communicated with me first.
HARRY PIER . I am a provision dealer at North Street, Guildford—on 19th October I inserted this advertisement in the private column of the Exchange and Mart:"Choice home-smoked hams only 7d. per pound, postal orders to Harry Pier, North Street, Guilford"—on 20th October I received this answer. (This was on the same billhead, and asked if he had any hams about 10 or 12 pounds each, and stated that he had been established nearly 20 years.) I believed that letter to be true—I then received this further letter of 25th October. (This requested the witness to send 20 choice hams, not too fat, as his customers were very particular.) I believed the statement in that letter, and forwarded him, on 25th October, 20 hams, value 8l., to the name and address which appears on these two documents—I received no acknowledgement of their receipt, and on 31st October I wrote to the prisoner, and on 1st November received this letter from him. (This stated that he had received the hams, but did not expect them to be American.) I again wrote to him, and received this letter of 11th November. (Stating that he could have bought such hams at 5d. a pound.) I have never been paid anything with regard to that consignment—on 24th November I wrote this letter. (Asking for the money for the hams, and saying that if he could not sell them all he could send them back, and also offering to send him honey for sale.) I had communicated with the police previous to that—I parted with my hams in the belief that the prisoner was what he stated, that he was a wholesale dealer and had been established 20 years.
Cross-examined. I have been established four years—I have been an advertiser in the Bazaar and Mart from time to time, and have taken it in occasionally—I know the way they conduct their business with regard
to purchaser and vendor—this had been a running advertisement for some time, and I was continually receiving letters—I generally used to receive five or six letters each time it came out, twice a week—I did not know the other persons who applied, but their orders were always, as far as I remember, accompanied by postal orders, according to the advertisement—I did not supply hams to any persons who did not send postal orders unless references were given—I applied to those references—I did not make inquiries about tho prisoner—I did not receive complaints from any of my customers about the hams; eulogy was generally passed upon them—they did not complain that they were not English but American—they were American hams—I do not think the advertisement is misleading when it states "Delicious home-smoked hams"—they were sent green from America, and we smoked them at Guildford—the price of American hams fluctuates considerably; the present price is 68s. a cwt. or a shade over 7¼ green—12 lb. would be about 6s. 9d. green and about 7s. 3s. dry, wholesale—there are different grades of quality in English hams; in Yorkshire they are 11d. or 1s. per lb., but the average is about 10d.—I am not accustomed to receive letters complaining that the hams were American and not English—it would not strike me if I received such a letter—I remember the prisoner's letter because I had not had the money—I went and saw the local superintendent, and he referred me to the police at Stoke Newington—I afterwards went to Scotland Yard, and gave them this charge in hand—that was about five days after I had sent the hams—notwithstanding that I wrote to him on 24th November, offering him other goods for sale; that was to try and get some money on the first things—I was at my wits' end to know how to get my money—I thought if I put the criminal law in action I might get my money.
Re-examined. He did not send back any of the hams that he could not sell.
JOHN TOOGOOD . I am a farmer at Hurtsbill, near Bridgewater—in October last I advertised in the Exchange and Mart, and in answer received this letter. (Stating that the writer was a buyer of fat ducks and chickens for weekly supply, and requested him to quote his supply.) I wrote an answer to that addressed to B. Barnes, and in reply I received this letter, dated 14th October, from B. Barnes. (Saying that he was sorry to receive live birds as he had asked for dead ones; and asking him to send five couple of ducks, two of chickens, dead, plump and young birds.) Before I received that letter I had sent 10 chickens and 10 ducks alive to B. Barnes, value 3l. with the crates—I sent no more poultry in answer to that letter of October 14th—I wrote to the prisoner after 14th October, and received in answer this letter of 20th October. (Stating that he had noted what was sent in the letter of the 19th, and asked him to send on Saturday next five couple of ducks and chickens.) I sent no other poultry in answer to that—I received this letter on 3rd November, 1887. (Headed 59, Canning Road, Highbury, stating that he had received his letter, but he did not send his poultry to any Bazaar, and did not know what he meant.) I had said in my letter that I should put the matter into the hands of the Bazaar if he did not pay—by the Bazaar I meant the newspaper, the Bazaar, Exchange, and Mart, and that I should put the matter into the editor's hands—I sent nothing to the prisoner except 10 couple of poultry, for which I have never been paid—I believed the various
statements in his letter—I parted with my money on account of the billheads I received from Barnes—I thought he was a straightforward man in business.
Cross-examined. I have not seen any lawyer about this matter, or any person of legal experience—I did not see the police in the country—I gave information to the police at Highbury—I found out whether such a man was in business at the address—nobody has explained to me what it is necessary to prove to bring home the charge to the prisoner—I have not been in the habit of advertising in the Exchange and Mart—I received no applications from other persons except the prisoner—I communicated with the police before they did with me—the local police did not speak to me.
CHARLES CROLL REES . I live at Loftus Road, Uxbridge Road—I have no occupation—I am owner of No. 59, Canning Road, Highhury New Park—I saw the prisoner on 5th August, 1887, I believe, in relation to taking that house—this is the agreement; it is not stamped because I did not complete it—I did not give him the counterpart. (This stated that the letting was to commence on 12th August for one year certain, subject to three months' notice on either side, at 2l. 10s. per month, or 30l. a gear, and that the house was let as a private dwelling-house.) I have 42 houses there, all private—there is a covenant that the lessee shall not carry on, nor allow to be carried on, any trade, business, or manufacture—they are private villas with bay windows, and either a small garden in front or a small basement—I have some letters I have received from the prisoner—to the best of my belief the exhibits in the case are in his writing—I went to the house a month or six weeks after I let it to him.
Cross-examined. That was about six weeks I should think before he gave up the house—I don't know what was carried on there during that time—I have been to all of my other 42 houses, and so far as I know no business or trade is carried on in any one of them—I should consider it a breach of covenant; they are simply private villas—if I knew they were carrying on business I should give them notice to quit—I did not know he was carrying on business, and did not give the prisoner notice to quit—my agent took him as a tenant—he was there about 21/2 months—he went away about 15th September, I think—he and his brother, who was in the house as well, bolted from the house, and I have not had my rent—10l. was owing me on 24th January, for four months' rent—that is not from the beginning of the tenancy; 3l. 15s. was paid me for 11/2 months—I have been paid for half August and September—rent accrued from 25th September—when the rent became due on 24th January the prisoner was in custody; he had not paid the previous rent—he only paid me up to September—I pressed him and his brother for rent, but could not get it, and then while my agent was constantly pressing he bolted—I have received 1l. on account since September; before the bolting the brother paid it—the rest was to be paid next day. but it was not.
Re-examined. They bolted in October, I believe—I received this cheque on October 14th—that is the only money I have received, 3l. 15s.; it is for the August and September rent up to 24th September—the prisoners brother was always there; the prisoner was not there—I did not see the prisoner living there—he got into the house before he had any right to do so, before the agent had got the reference—I never saw him in the
house—he never occupied the house in any way to my knowledge; his brother did, William Barnes—I have seen him in Court—by the agreement I have the right of re-entry in the event of any breach of covenant.
MICHAEL JAMES HEALY . I live at 52, Bemerton Street, Caledonian Road—the prisoner rented a back room ground floor there of me, paying 3s. a week for it—I believe he came in February, 1887, and left just before Christmas—he had his wife with him, I think—I have seen her here.
Cross-examined. I received my rent all right—I mean by his wife the woman that lived with him—I cannot say what position she held; she lived in the house with him—I don't know that they passed as man and wife.
Re-examined. He only rented one room; he slept in that room, and she slept nowhere else—I never saw her going to bed.
JOHN SUMMERS (Detective Sergeant M). On 6th January I arrested the prisoner at 92, London Wall—I said "Barnes, I hold a warrant for your arrest for obtaining 20 hams from Mr. Pier, of Guildford"—he said "No, you don't mean it"—I read the warrant to him, and he said "I can't see how you can make it a fraud; the hams were not as represented to be"—I took him to Upper Street Police-station—when the inspector asked him his address, he said "I refuse to give my address"—he was searched—on him was found a memorandum book and two leaves of a rentbook, which he took from his waistcoat pocket—they showed the amount payable weekly was 3s., and they are signed "M. J. Healy," for back room, ground floor—I went on 29th October to 59, Canning Road, Highbury, a private house—as far as I could see there were no signs of any business being carried on there—his brother, David Barnes, was there.
Cross-examined. I had arrested the prisoner on 29th October, 1887, on suspicion, with other men—I took him to Upper Street Police-station, and handed him over to other officers—it was found to be a mistake—I searched 59, Canning Road, and took possession of two papers, a letter, and a telegram from Walker, of Hull—I found no letters relating to the charges that have been brought against the prisoner to-day—I did not find Pier's address; I only found one letter there from Horn and Son, of Carlisle—there was nothing there by which I could obtain information, and I did not put myself into communication with these four people—I did not institute this prosecution—I did not go to my superiors and give information about the prisoner in connection with these four charges—a letter was handed to me which I sent to my superior, Mr. Berry, the inspector in charge of the station—the prisoner did not tell me I should suffer for arresting him—he said I had made a mistake—he was taken from our station at 10 o'clock by the officers who had the other case in hand.
Re-examined. That other case was a long firm one, in connection with which a man, Henry Barnes, was wanted by the police—those prisoners were sent for trial and convicted here—information in this case was laid by Mr. Berry first and then by Pier, and then by Varley, the agent of Mr. Reeves—they put the police in motion.
Witnesses for the Defence.
business—I have known the prisoner 17, or 18, or 19 years—all that time I have had many dealings with him—I have bought oils and colours of him, and I fitted up a shop for him—in 1868 and 1870 he had a large chemist's shop in Kentish Town Road—I next found him in Highgate Road, where I was building some property—he had a linendraper's and bootmaker's shop, which I did some repairs to—I next remember him with a Mr. Kersey, who kept a chemist's shop in the Whittington Road—I did some repairs there—I fitted up a shop for him in Cross Street, Hatton Garden—he was a chemist, drysalter, and sold varnish, and so forth there—I dealt with him there—I can't say how long he was there—I used to buy all my leads and colours of him—he came and spoke to me about his flea powder—I had a trap, and drove out with him—he was selling goods then—he once left a large quantity at Butterfield's, in Wandsworth Road—I only lost sight of him for a few months together—I heard he had a kind of warehouse, I think, at John Street Road, Clerkenwell—I was never there—I knew he had a great many orders at Butterworth's, and on many occasions I had goods from Butterworth's shop—I believe he is Butterworth's traveller—I don't know it of my own knowledge—people used to buy the flea powder—it was very well sold—I had not much to do with the prisoner in Canning Road; I knew he was there—he used to come with goods to my shop, and I bought goods from him when he lived there—he told me he was there—I should think the last time I bought goods from him was about two months ago; they were the same sort of things, colours and brushes, and that sort of thing—I knew he dealt in a great many things that I did not want to buy—I knew when he was in Bemerton Street.
Cross-examined. The prisoner was trading as a chemist at Kentish Town when I first knew him—he had a very large shop—after that he was bound over not to open a chemist's shop in a certain district, and he opened a linendraper's and a bootmaker's—his brother-in-law, who was a bootmaker, and his wife attended to it—that was 12 or 14 years ago—he next assisted Mr. Kersey—I cannot say what he was doing; I used to see him there—he next was a chemist at Cross Street; that was about 10 years ago—I have seen him every month for the last seven years—he was selling goods, I believe—the last time he had a shop was seven or ten years ago—he has dealt in and sold all kinds of goods—all I have purchased of him has been confined to oils and dry colours, and the building and decorating trade—I have known him go about and sell a quantity of poison—I do not know what he sold to other people—I never saw him at Canning Road—I have been to Bemerton Street many times—he lived there I know—I only went to the door if I wanted any goods—I think the last time I went was two months ago, and the landlord told me he was locked up—he used to send goods to me—I paid him—I have documents showing those transactions—I have not brought them here—he would bring the goods, or mostly my cart used to fetch them.
Re-examined. I have been informed that he has sold goods on commission—there were goods of all descriptions at the shop at Cross Street—he used to call himself an oil and colourman—there were tins of lead and linseed oil, and all sorts of things—I don't know about tinned meat—it was a kind of opposition shop to a man in Leather Lane—I only bought oils and colours—I have always found him verys straightforward, and if he wanted me to open a shop for him to-morrow I would do it.
JAMES GUNNEN BISHOP . I am a house decorator, of 39, Ball's Pond Road, Islington—I have known the prisoner between 11 and 12 years; first as a drysalter selling oils and colours and sundry goods at Cross Street—I think he went next to Holloway—I bought goods from him there—I have bought goods from him up to the present time, at various times when he has had anything to sell—I knew him when he sold insect powder—I have bought it of him many times—I knew him at Canning and Wittington Streets—I bought goods from him then—he brought them to my house—I never bought anything but what I have described—I did not go to Canning Street—I went to Bemerton Street once—I saw him there at the street door—I bought goods, and he delivered them—I believe the prisoner is a honest man—I have found him trustworthy.
GUILTY . — Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, February 2nd, 1888.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
FREDERICK WOOLLARD . I live at 10, Margaret Street, Clerkenwell, and am a carpenter—about 12 a.m. on 22nd January, I was coming along Eyre Street Hill, Holborn, with a parcel under my arm containing a dead goose—when I got to the corner of Summer Street the prisoner came up to me and seized me by the waistcoat pocket and by my elbow, but finding he could not get the goose like that, he knocked me on the left arm, which was carrying the goose, and then he struck me a second time, and got hold of the parcel, and then got hold of my collar and flung me into the centre of the road and ran away—as soon as I got up and had wiped the mud from my mouth, I cried "Stop thief," and the prisoner was brought back by a policeman with the goose—when I was flung into the road I cut my nose and lip—the doctor strapped it up at the station—I have suffered since with my head till last Friday, when I coughed, and a lot of clotted blood came down—I missed several little things, but I cannot say whether they dropped out of my pocket in the fall or not—I had no watch on—I was sober; I had had about a pint of ale, I never drink spirits—I suppose I had been in one public-house—I am certain the prisoner is the man that took the goose.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You pulled my waistcoat pocket right back very forcibly—you did not tear it—neither my inside nor my outside coats were buttoned.
Re-examined. I did not know the prisoner before—my name is not George—when he came up and said "George, "Idid not know him.
WILLIAM POLE (Policeman G 251). I was on duty in Spanish Court, Holborn, on Sunday morning, 22nd January—I heard cries of "Stop thief," and saw the prisoner running from the direction of Eyre Street Hill, through Summer Street—I stopped him and said "What have you got there?"—he said "Smell it, don't it stink?"—it was a goose, nothing was round it—I said "Wait a minute," and I said he would be charged with assault and the robbery of the goose—the prosecutor's face was covered with mud and blood—the prisoner went quietly to the
station—the prosecutor had been drinking—he walked to the station—he had had a glass, nothing to speak of—the prisoner was sober—this is the goose's foot—the goose was not fresh.
The prisoner in his defence said he saw the prosecutor rowing with a foreigner, and said he had a nice goose, and hit it, whereupon the prosecutor hit him across the face with the goose twice, and then with his hand, and dropped the goose, and that he (the prisoner) then ran with the goose to the constable, and told him he had better take it, as the prosecutor was insulting everybody with it.
GUILTY . —The prisoner then
MR. TEMPLE Prosecuted; MR. PURCELL Defended.
CHARLES ALBERT STATHAM . I am a master carman—I live at 4, Frederick Place, Mile End—on 26th December I left my house about 10 a.m., to go to the Thames Police Court to prosecute a woman—I returned about half-past 4—my house was then all right, as I had left it—I left it again before 5, having previously called next door and told them I was going away, and where I was going to—about 7 o'clock the police called at the address in Agnes Street I had given my neighbour, and made a communication to me—I came home and found the back bedroom upstairs had been turned out, the bed had been torn off, and all the things in the servant's box turned out on the floor—I had left the door shut, on the latch; it was as I had left it when I came back—I missed nothing—I found a silk handkerchief of mine on the stairs.
Cross-examined. My household consists of my wife and servant—on Christmas Day we were all three out; we came home at 2 o'clock on Boxing morning—I then found my house had been broken into—my house was broken into on two consecutive days—the front door had been opened by a jemmy, and a quantity of property had been removed—I came home with my wife and servant—I at once left my wife and servant at my wife's father's, and went to the police—I then returned and remained in the house the remainder of Boxing night with a gentleman friend—my wife and servant remained at my wife's father's—next morning I went to the station to give evidence on the finding of the stolen property—I returned to my house after that about half-past 4—when I came home at 2 o'clock the whole house had been ransacked practically—the door when I came back was as when I left it—when I returned at 4 or 5 o'clock I found no additional marks on the door—when I came back at 7 o'clock the door was shut—I did not particularly notice it; it was seemingly in precisely the condition I had left it—there are steps up to the door, and an area in front—a blank wall goes from that house up towards the corner of the road, 50 or 60 yards—that leads into the Mile End Road, which is a very busy thoroughfare.
By the COURT. When I came back at half-past 4 I brought my wife and servant with me, and I then went out again at 5 o'clock—we all went out to get tea, as we had nothing in the house—between 5 and 7 o'clock there was no one in the house at all.
JOHN TATTERSFIELD. I live at 2, Ewen Street, Marden Street, Burdett Road—on 26th December I was communicated with by the last witness, and about 6 o'clock I heard the door of 4, Frederick Place closed—I came out to the front with my father, who knocked at the door of No. 4, but he could make nobody hear—he then went to the back of the house, I stayed in the front—my wife was outside my door—there are no gardens in front of the houses, but the front kitchen is in the basement—the front door of No. 4 was opened by the prisoner and another man; they came out. and one said to the other "If we look sharp we shall catch them up"—I said "No, you don't; "they then pushed me on one side and ran away towards Bow Road—I followed them, and at the top of Frederick Place they separated, one going towards Bow Station and the prisoner towards Grove Road—I followed, calling out "Stop thief!" and he was stopped in the Grove Road by a policeman—I did not lose sight of him.
Cross-examined. I was at the gate of the house from which they came out—they came out very slowly, they sauntered gently out till they got to the gate—it is rather a dark spot there—I had seen neither of the two men before—they pushed me on one side and immediately ran off—I was standing by the gate, outside—there is a little railing between the houses—you must come outside the railings to get to the adjacent house—from that house to the Mile End Road there is about 50 or 60 yards of blank wall; there were only one or two lamps there—the prisoner did not get much ahead of me—I never lost sight of him, we went round the corner very nearly together; I saw him as he went round, and for half a second when he was round the corner—ordinarily that is a crowded road—there was nobody in the Mile End Road, not a soul from Frederick Place to the corner of Grove Road—the man turned round Grove Road, that was the second corner he turned round—he was round a couple of seconds before I was—there was a policeman in Grove Road—I was calling out "Stop thief!"—that attracted attention; I only saw the policeman run—when the prisoner was taken he said I had made a mistake, and he said immediately "Iheard you calling out stop thief, and I ran after"—I saw nobody running in front.
Re-examined. I have not the slightest doubt that the man I saw coming out of 4, Frederick Place was the man arrested by the policeman.
By the COURT. There was no light in the door of 4, Frederick Place—I lost sight of the prisoner for a couple of seconds as I turned the corner—there was nobody else about, the place was quite clear till we got into the Grove Road—my father went through our passage to the back.
WILLIAM HURLEY (Policeman K 554). About 6 o'clock on 26th December I was in Grove Road, at the corner, and saw the prisoner running towards me from the direction of Frederick Place, pursued by George Tattersfield, who shouted "Stop thief!"—I took up the chase, he run past me, after running about 50 yards I stopped the prisoner; he said "You have made a mistake, I was running after another man"—no other man was running—Tattersfield came up and said, in the prisoner's hearing, that he saw him come out of No. 4, Frederick Place, and that he knew no one was at home there—I took him back to 4, Frederick Place, found the
occupiers were not in, and I took the prisoner to Bow Police-station, where he was detained until the prosecutor came and charged him—in answer to the charge he said nothing—Inspector Wyldie left me in charge of No. 4, Frederick Place while the prosecutor came to charge the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I was standing at the junction of the Mile End Road and Grove Road—Frederick Place was 10 yards on my left—several persons were passing in Mile End Road; I think more than six or eight—it is a busy road with a tram line—6 o'clock is a busy time—it is always a busy thoroughfare—I heard the cry of "Stop thief"—I arrested him in Grove Road—there were people in Grove Road, and also in Mile End Road—nobody but myself took up the chase—I saw nobody but Tattersfield behind me—I cannot say if there were any others—I saw nobody in front of me—when the prisoner said "You have made a mistake; I was running after that man"—I said to Mr. Tattersfield "Are you sure?"—he said "Yes, I can swear to it"—I was standing at the corner of the Grove and Mile End Roads when the prisoner passed me—he shouted "Stop thief "when he saw me.
RICHARD WYLDIE (Inspector K). Between about 7 and half-past or a quarter to 8 o'clock on 26th December, I examined 4, Frederick Place—I found entry had been effected by forcing the front door with a jemmy; the box of the lock was partially forced off—I went over the house with the prosecutor, and found it in disorder—I afterwards returned to the police-station with the prosecutor, where the prisoner was charged with breaking into the house—he made no reply—the jemmy marks on the door were totally distinct, and different marks from those of the entry of the day before—they were made with a different sized jemmy.
Cross-examined. A jemmy was found in the other case, and Mr. Statham's property was found—that jemmy was compared with the marks in my presence.
GUILTY . He then
MR. ST. AUBYN Prosecuted; MR. HUTTON defended Kelly.
ALFRED HAWKINS . I am 17, and am a grocer's assistant, of 2, Hobart's Place, Regent Street—on Boxing night, after 12 o'clock, I was in the Pentonville Road with Case, another boy—I saw the prisoners and other men—Paul said "Well, Charley, good night"—I said "Good night," and was going to shove by—Paul shoved me by holding his coat among the other chaps—Kelly rushed across the road and caught hold of my shoulder—I had a hard blow on the head—it made a whizzing noise in my head, and made me giddy—I stood upright only for a second—I saw Paul snatch at my watch—I took my chain through my fist; it broke and came into my hand—I have not seen my watch since—it was a silver Geneva, and the value of it was 25s.—the men made off up the Pentonville Road—I followed—one of them threw my hat across the road—I ran for my hat, and ran after them—I called "Police"—they went in different directions—I identified the prisoners the following afternoon at Clerkenwell Police-court as the men who had robbed me.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I cannot tell who struck me on the
head—there were live or six men altogether—it was a bright moonlight night—I had not seen Kelly before, I picked him out from about 16 men—Case was not with me—he was in another room at the station—Kelly seized me from behind—he came from across the road—Case was by my side.
JAMES CASE . I am a baker, of 20, Cantalowes Road, Camden Square—I was with Hawkins on Boxing night in the Pentonville Road a little past 12 o'clock—I saw a number of men—Paul was one—he said "Good night," and my friend said "Good night"—Paul pushed my friend amongst the others, and I ran after the police—I identified him the next day from about a dozen—I could not swear to Kelly.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I did not see the prosecutor struck—at the police-station I picked out a man named Cook—I said "I identify the prisoners Paul and Cook as being two of the men, "and afterwards "Ishould not like to swear to Cook," and the prisoner was discharged.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Paul. I was on the right-hand side of the road—the houses stand back, and there are gardens in front—I did not see you come round a turning, but you came on the path—you did not walk past us—you caught hold of my coat and pushed my friend amongst the others—you were there all the while.
JOHN ROBINSON (Policeman G). On 27th December last, about 5 p.m., I apprehended Kelly—I said "You will be charged with stealing a watch from a lad in the Pentonville Road last night"—he said "I can prove that I was taken home drunk that night; if you will give me mother chance I will go to work"—I apprehended another man named Cook on the same charge—Paul was with him at the station—when Cook was charged Paul said "Cook was not there at the time; he mows nothing about it"—Cook was discharged after being remanded for a week—I was present when the men were identified.
Cross-examined by Paul. I did not say I wanted you for stealing a watch—I said "You answer to the description of a person who is wanted for stealing several watches"—I did not say at the identification "Go on; have a good look round; don't be frightened"—the prosecutor said he was struck on the head—he did not accuse you.
CHARLES MATHER (Policeman G). I took Paul into custody on another charge about 2 p.m. on 27th December, and this charge was preferred against him—he said "I know nothing about it"—he was charged with robbery with violence.
The Prisoners' Statements before the Magistrate. Paul says: "Ishould like to call my father as a witness. "Kelly says: "Iwished to call a witness."
KELLY— NOT GUILTY .
PAUL— GUILTY **.
There was another indictment against Paul for stealing a lady's handbag.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour and Twenty Strokes with the Cat.
MR. ST. AUBYN Prosecuted; MR. HUTTON Defended.
close to the approach to Cold Bath Fields Prison, where there is a coffee stall, and hustled up against me and knocked me down—the prisoners are two of the men—I can swear positively to Richard Kelly; he was in front of me—when I got up my watch and chain were gone with the exception of this piece, which I produce—the value of the watch was 2l. and the chain was 2l. 10s.; it cost more—I had it new 12 years ago—I was scarcely able to get home, my knee was so bad, and is had now; it is sore—the men dispersed in all directions—I could hardly walk, and so I did not go the station, but went home—I feel the effects now in the right knee—I saw the prisoners again on 27th December at the policestation about 10 o'clock, and I identified Richard Kelly.
Cross-examined. It was a fine night—I do not remember saying at the police-court "When I picked out Richard last night to the best of my belief this is one of the men"—I might have said it—I swear to Richard Kelly now—I did not have any doubt, but I wanted to be careful what I was saying—it all happened in a minute—when I got up they were gone—it was about half-past 10 when I identified Richard—I had gone to bed, and was fetched away—I picked him out from about 14 men in a semicircle.
WORTHY RICH . I live at 7, Upper Gloucester Street, Clerkenwell—I keep a coffee-stall—on Sunday morning, 11th December, I was at the coffee-stall at the entrance to Cold Bath Fields Prison—Ackerman was approaching my stall, and about a dozen men surrounded him, and had him down, and then they all ran away, and the prosecutor came to me and showed me the end of his chain—the prisoners are two of the men—I had a light each side of my stall, and there was a lamp just across the road which showed a light—I had not seen them before, but they were at the stall that night, and the prisoners were there with them—when I saw them round Ackerman I was able to recognise them—the next time I saw the prisoners was on the early morning of 27th December—I saw a gang of them—they came to my stall and asked for coffee; about eight or ten of them—John Kelly asked for the coffee—I refused to serve them—Kelly and another man said "God blind you; I will put your bleeding light out"—I said "I will blow my whistle"—they said "You can blow your whistle"—I blew my whistle, and they all disappeared—I saw the prisoners the next day at the station amongst about a dozen men—I identified them—I have not the slightest doubt they are some of the men who were at the robbery.
Cross-examined. I saw them at the stall about 12. 10 with a crowd of others, about 12 of them, and the prosecutor was attacked a very few minutes afterwards, about 10 yards from my stall—I was inside my coffee-stall at the time—I did not blow my whistle then, I had not one that night—I called for the police, who came some time after—I did not call "Police!" the whole time—I had my coffee-stall to look after—I occasionally served coffee and called "Police!"—I communicated with the police on the 27th—I picked the prisoners out from 10 or 12 at the station.
CHARLES MATHER (Policeman G). I apprehended Richard Kelly on another charge—at the police-station he was told of this charge, after being picked out from 12 or 14 others on the 28th—he made no reply to the present charge—there were two charges at the time.
December on another charge—he was charged with this offence afterwards—he made no reply.
RICHARD KELLY— GUILTY . — Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
JOHN KELLY— GUILTY . *†—He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction of felony on 12th April, 1886, at the Clerkenwell Police-court.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour, and Twenty Strokes with the Cat.
THIRDCOURT.—Friday, February 3rd, 1888.
Before Mr. Common Sergeant.
MR. BURNIE Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN appeared for Butler, and MR. HUTTON for Garnham.
ERNEST DAVIS . I am assistant to Richard Davis and others, who trades as Richard Davis and Sons, at 101, Wood Street, as flannel merchants—on the night of 14th December I was the last to leave the premises, about 6 p.m.—we occupy the ground-floor and basement, and the upper part is let out, and there is a general entrance from the street leading into a passage—when I went next day at 10. 30 I missed 19 pieces of flannel and 14 rugs—this (produced) is part of the flannel, and this is one of the rugs—ten other rolls of flannel have been shown to me by Detective Wise; they belong to Messrs. Davis—there are five rugs here, and I have been shown live others; they belong to Messrs. Davis—this flannel is 2s. 9d. per yard—the total value of the property taken is about 135l.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I know Mr. Harris; he lives at 36, Wood Street, nearly opposite to us—Jewin Street is within five minutes' walk of our place—we communicated at once with the police—the flannel had tickets pinned on with our marks, but they have been taken off—the flannel is worth about 105l.—all the rolls are not the same length, some had been cut.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I have no doubt about the flannel and rugs—we have a very large business—they must have had a key and got in—they had not broken the lock.
JAMES ALFRED GARNHAM . I am assistant to Messrs. Lewis and Lewis, drapers, of 149A, Aldersgate Street—I know the prisoner Garnham, but I am no relation of his—he called on me about the commencement of January about some rugs, and he brought two with him similar to these and asked if I would buy them—I said I could not—it was then late in the evening, and he asked me if he could leave them—I said "You can if you like"—he then went away, and never came back for them—I delivered them up to the police later on.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I know Butler; he travelled on commission for Messrs. Lewis and Lewis for three or four years—I knew him as a man who effected job sales for dealers on commission—during the time I have known him he has always borne an irreproachable character, and has always been much trusted by his employers—Garnham has been to the shop before.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I have purchased goods from Garnham before—I cannot say whether it was the first week in January
when he came to me; it was early in January—several other persons were present when he spoke about the rugs, and it was late in the evening when he left them with me.
WILLIAM SIMMONS . I am a straw warehouseman at 190A, Aldersgate Street—Garnham called on me with these two rugs about the beginning of January—he asked me if they were of any use to me, and could I buy them—I said "No, they are not my stuff; I am a dealer in straws"—he took them away, and next day, or a day or two after, I had been out, and on my return I found the two rugs left, with a note—I tore the note up at the time; it purported to be an invoice, with" on appro. "written at the bottom—Grarnham afterwards came and took them away—a day or two afterwards he came again—I was on one side of the ware house speaking to someone, and he left a parcel, saying "May I leave this parcel for a short time?" or words to that effect—he did not call for them again—I found afterwards that it was the same two rugs he had brought before.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I never saw Butler in connection with these rugs—I know Butler; he has been a traveller on commission for me for about nine months, and has had goods and samples of mine—I put the most perfect confidence in him, and he apparently deserved it; there was never any improper transaction at any time, if there had been I should have known it—as far as I know he is a man of excellent character.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. Garnham has been to my place before this, I knew him as a buyer of straws—a traveller may leave his things for an hour or two for his own convenience.
JOSHUA HANS . I am a warehouseman at 37, Jewin Street, City—I know both the prisoners—on 16th January, about 4 p.m., Butler called on me and showed me some samples of flannel and said they were very cheap, he would let me have it at 1s. 2 1/2 d. a yard—I said it was no good to me, I did not want it; then to get rid of him I said I would give him 9d. a yard, although I had no idea of buying it—I was looking at it by gaslight—he went away, and next day I was called from my office into the warehouse, and there saw the two prisoners, they had four or five pieces of flannel on the counter, and Butler said "I want you to see the flannel in the piece, and I have brought them for you to see"—they then went out and fetched in some other pieces, making eleven pieces in all—I then said to Garnham "How did you get these, did you get them straight?"—he said "Certainly, I will give you every information about them and bring you the manufacturer's invoice"—I said "I am busy now, leave them for two hours, and I will make inquiries, and then come back"—they then went away—about half-an-hour afterwards two detectives came in and I gave up the flannel to them.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. It is not correct to say that Butler accepted ninepence a yard; he was not anxious to get rid of them at any price he could—Butler could not hear the conversation I had with Garnham as to his having got the things straight—I regarded Butler as the agent of Garnham, who introduced the goods to the buyer—I have known Butler some time; he has sold for me on commission—I employed him as a traveller for about a year—I entrusted him with samples of goods, and always found him perfectly honest and straightforward.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I am a general merchant, and have sometimes purchased at sales.
CHARLES HENRY HARRIS . I am a tie and scarf manufacturer, of 36, Wood Street, City—on 16th January Butler came to me, and showed me these samples of flannel, and said "I have them to sell for a friend of mine, who has bought them at an auction" or "under the hammer; there are 18 pieces of them; they are perfectly clean and papered, and the price is 1s. 1 1/2 d. per yard"—he showed me this billhead, with "Gorrange and Co., Chapel Street," on the top of it—I selected seven pieces, and told him that if when I saw the whole bulk in the daylight I thought well of it I would buy the whole parcels—he went away, and in the afternoon one of my employees named Oliver brought me this note on one of my billheads: "Mr. Harris. Dear Sir,—Have seen my friend, Mr. Gorrange, and he will let you have flannels any time you name to-morrow morning for cash, less 21/2 off, which is the best he can do. Please say if 9. 30 or 10 a.m. will suit you, and oblige yours truly, R. BUTLER. P. S.—Clean and perfect at 13 1/2 d. per yard for cash, less 21/2 off"—I handed that back to Mr. Oliver after having read it—next morning Butler came again about 11 o'clock, and I looked at the pattern again—a van was with him, and Garnham stood outside by the horse's head, while Butler came into the warehouse—the goods were unloaded piece by piece, and I noticed that the paper around them was very much torn, and the things were very dirty, and altogether they had a very slovenly look about them—pieces of straw were hanging in the strings, and they looked more like dead pigs than rolls of flannel—they were all placed in my warehouse—by daylight I saw that they were very much better than I had imagined they were on the previous night; several of them had a silk stripe in them—they were worth considerably more than was asked for them—after they had been taken into my warehouse I called Butler into my counting-house and said "I must have an explanation of this; it does not look like a businesslike transaction; I must have some explanation of their being covered with straw and brought in such a dirty way"—he said "The straw was put there to keep them clean"—I simply laughed at that, and said it was too ridiculous to accept such an explanation as that, and said "It is my impression that these goods have been improperly obtained"—he seemed very much confused and he coloured—I said "I shall not either pay for the goods or part with them until you produce the owner and satisfy me how you obtained them"—I also asked him what auction rooms they had been bought at, and he mentioned Young and Lee, of Cherry Tree Court, Alders gate Street, and Burton's, of Ludgate Hill—he said "Last night, when you offered to buy the seven pieces, I suggested bringing the owner to see you; now it will make me look very foolish to have to bring him to confirm the sale when he thinks I have sold it"—I said "Foolish or not, youwill have to bring him, or you won't be paid for the goods"—he said "Well, I know nothing about their being stolen; I am an honest man"—I told him if he was an honest man he had better prove it by bringing the owner—he said "Very well, I shall take the goods away," and he went out into the warehouse, and looked out at the door, and then went away—the van had gone before that—11 pieces had been put back into it, and Garnham had gone away with them, leaving only seven pieces with me—directly Butler had gone I went and communicated with the police at Moor Lane Police-station—Butler had offered to bring the owner
on the night before, as he was not sure whether he would part 7 pieces out of the lot—about two hours afterwards the prisoners came back again with the empty van, and I again called Butler into my counting house, Garnham still remaining outside—I said to Butler that I had sent for the detectives, and they were on the premises at that moment, and that I had discovered that the goods had been stolen from Messrs. Davies and Son—he said "I know nothing about their having been stolen; I merely had them given to me to sell, and all I shall get out of them will be my commission"—he did not mention who had given them to him—I said I would send out for the detectives—he said "Oh, don't do that; I will tell you all I know; I had them given to me by a man named William Garnham, whom I have met at my employer's, and at auction rooms"—I made an answer respecting the character of William Garnham—I knew Garnham by sight—Butler said he knew nothing at all about that; he had merely had the goods given to him in the ordinary way—I then sent across for Mr. Davies, and told Butler that he had better make a clean breast of it, as that was Mr. Davies, who owned the goods; and we had a general conversation—I also said "You had the other 11 pieces here recently; they are not very far away, you had better tell us where they are, "he then gave an address, which I wrote down and gave to the detective, and he went on and got the 11 pieces—Butler kept repeating that he knew nothing about it, that he was perfectly innocent of how they had been obtained, and said he was willing to give any information he could—I went out with the detective, and pointed out Garnham, and he was taken in custody.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. He gave us all information afterwards—I regarded Butler all through as the agent and not the principal—I had never seen him with the bulk till he came with Garnham—he said "I did not know they were improperly come by, I got them from my employers"—when he talked about Young, and Burtons' he said he believed they had been bought there—my father has done business with Butler, I cannot say for how long—he sold me two remnants of silk once—he said he had been sent by my father—I do not doubt the story he told me—his commission varied a great deal, sometimes it would be 5 or 6 per cent., the ordinary commission—at the second interview when I called in the detective, I asked Butler where Garnham was, and he said "Outside in the trap at the bottom of the street."
FREDERICK OLIVER . I am warehouseman to Mr. Harris—on 16th January, about 3 o'clock, I saw Butler, and he then saw Mr. Harris—about 5 or 5. 30 he called again, Mr. Harris was engaged, and he wrote this note in my presence, and I took it to Mr. Harris.
GEORGE GORRANGE . I am a job buyer, of 81, Chapel Street, Islington—Butler has been travelling on commission for me—I know nothing about the flannel referred to in this note—I never have flannel in my place unless it is small remnants—I never instructed him to sell any flannel on my behalf—this is one of my invoices.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I have known Butler about two years—he has bought and sold for me—he is an honest and straightforward man—about six weeks before this transaction he had some gloves
to sell, and I gave aim permission to use one of my invoices similar to this one (produced)—I heard that Butler had been round to my place before he went to Mr. Harris—I know he sold for job dealers besides myself—a commission agent's work is to introduce buyer and seller, and he would be paid for that introduction—I have entrusted him with 50l. worth of goods and about 20l. in money at one time, and he has always brought home every farthing.
Re-examined. I gave him permission once to use my bill head, but I never gave him permission to fill up this billhead for flannel—I have given him some of these bill heads to carry in his pocket when he has been buying and selling for me.
FREDERICK FUNNELL (City Policeman 110). On Tuesday, 17th January, I was watching 36, Wood Street, and saw the two prisoners drive up with a horse and van, and saw Butler go into No. 36, while Garnham remained in charge of the horse and van—I followed Butler into the warehouse, and a few minutes afterwards Mr. Harris came and spoke to me, and I went with him into Wood Street—I said to Garnham "I am a police officer, who are you waiting for?"—I was in plain clothes—he said "I am waiting here for a friend of mine named Butler, but I don't know where he has gone"—I said "What is your name?"—he said "Johnson"—I took him into Mr. Harris's counting-house, and Butler said "That is the man I am selling these goods for, I never saw the bulk before this morning"—Garnham said "I know nothing about them"—with assistance I took them to the station, where Butler gave a correct address—Garnham was asked "What is your name and address?" and he said "I have no home"—I searched Butler and found on him this invoice. (This was one of Mr. Gorrange's bill heads, filled up with particulars of this flannel.) The numbers tally with the numbers on the flannel—I searched Garnham and found on him one of Mr. Gorrange's blank billheads, and this piece of blue paper which contained numbers corresponding to those on this invoice found on Butler.
BAXTER HUNT (City Detective). I found this address, "55, Northcote Road, Walthamstow, "on Garnham's desk amongst his property on the evening of the 17th—I went with Detective Wise to that address, and in the front room found six rugs, which have been identified by Mr. Davis—I took them to Moor Lane Station, and they were shown to Garnham, and I said "I have brought these rugs from 55, Northcote Road, Walthamstow, your address; how do you account for them?"—he said "I bought them at sales"—I said "What sale?" he said "I don't know; I attend so many; I can show you the catalogue which of the two."
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. On 5th July, 1885, there was a disturbance outside the Manchester Hotel, and one of our constables was ill-treated by two men, and he called on the people for assistance—Butler, who was passing by, came and gave him valuable assistance, and afterwards received a reward from the Alderman who tried the case—as far as I know he is a respectable young man.
JOHN WISE (City Detective). On 14th December I found that these premises had been broken into, and on 19th I received from the witnesses Simmons and Graham these four rugs, which I afterwards showed to the prisoner Garnham, and asked him what account he could give of them; he said "I have nothing to say."
Butler received an excellent character.
NOT GUILTY .
GARNHAM.— GUILTY .
He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at this Court in December. 1881.— Judgment respited.
OLD COURT.—Saturday, February 4th, 1888.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
MESSRS. POLAND and MATHEWS Prosecuted;
MR. PHILLIPS Defended.
JOHN GIBBS . I am a land and estate agent, at 44, Ebury Street—on Tuesday, Dec. 27th, I was walking with my wife Elizabeth Gibbs down Grosvenor Place from Hyde Park Corner—she was 68 years of age—we had passed St. George's Hospital on our right hand going towards Victoria Station—we were walking near the kerb—we attempted to cross Halkin Street—I did not see any vehicles in Halkin Street; I don't think there were any there—I saw none in front of me as I was passing—I was just a trifle in front of my wife, and immediately I left the pavement and had gone perhaps two or three steps, I suddenly became aware of a two-horse van coming down upon me, so close that I had neither time to think or act—it came apparently from behind me as it were, but I could not say from which direction—apparently it came from the direction of Hyde Park Corner—I am under the impression that I tried to spring forward, but was instantly knocked down—I think I was about three paces from the kerb when I sprang forward—I was knocked down towards the middle of the street—I believe I came in contact with the pole—the moment I touched the ground I had presence of mind to swing myself round, and by that means I escaped the wheels; nothing went over me—the wheels were between me and the footpath nearest Hyde Park Corner—I escaped with a few cuts and bruises, nothing serious—I got up immediately, and found my wife lying in the direction that the van had just gone, about two yards from the pavement—she was a little behind me—I cannot say I noticed the van when I saw my wife lying in that way, because it had gone very quickly—she was lying apparently where the van had gone—the van was going down Halkin Street towards Belgrave Square, it appeared at a rapid pace—I heard no shout before the accident—my wife's hearing was very good—she was quite an active woman—Mr. Arnold came to my assistance—he was just a few steps before me as it were—I believe he was the only person who really witnessed the accident—I believe she was not insensible, and I took her to the hospital—on the following day the amputation of her left arm was performed—she received every attention there—she died on Sunday, 1st January, about 2 p.m.
Cross-examined. Her age was 68, and mine is the same—I was nearest the kerb as we walked side by side—when I started to cross Halkin Street it was all clear immediately in front of me and down Halkin Street—I had stepped two or three paces, when suddenly the van came on me from behind, I think—when I stepped to go across I did not look round to see what was coming behind me, everything in front appeared clear—I did not observe what might be coming behind me—before I had time to think, or act, or spring, I was knocked down—I heard no shout whatever—after I was knocked down I saw the van going down Halkin
Street; it appeared to me to be very soon out of sight—my attention was concentrated more on my wife than on the van—I believe when I got to Halkin Street I walked straight on to cross it.
By the COURT. I know the difference between the right and wrong side of the road—for a man coming from Hyde Park Corner down Halkin Street towards Belgrave Square the opposite side of the road to where I was would be the right side—I had not got into the middle of the road; I had only gone two or three steps.
FREDERICK ARNOLD . I am a clerk, of 98, Denley Street—on Tuesday, 27th December, about 1. 15, I was going down Grosvenor Place from Hyde Park Corner on the right-hand side—I proceeded to cross Halkin Street—I had come up behind Mr. and Mrs. Gibbs; they were on the kerb, walking slowly, and I fast—I ran across in front of them—I only noticed the van just as I crossed—when I had got three parts across the road I turned round, and saw the pole of the van strike Mr. Gibbs on the shoulder, I think, and they both fell—I think the wheel of the van was about a yard from the kerb coming round the corner—I cannot say what pace the van was going at; I am no judge—it appeared to me to be going at a fast trot—I heard no calling out before this occurred—it continued to drive on down Halkin Street—I went to Mrs. Gibbs's assistance, who was lying about 9 or 10 feet from the kerb—the near wheel had gone over her—the van was on the wrong side; it ought to have gone down on the other side of Halkin Street—I had not noticed it coming down Grosvenor Place—there is an incline at that part of Grosvenor Place—I assisted Mr. and Mrs. Gibbs to the hospital—I saw nothing more of the van.
Cross-examined. I passed them on the kerb, and I then proceeded to cross the top of Halkin Street; I saw the van approaching before I went across—it was going the same way as I was, it was making in the direction of Halkin Street—I ran across in front of it—I turned round to look for Mr. and Mrs. Gibbs when I was three parts across the road, because the thought struck me that they would attempt to cross, and I thought they had not got time—I cannot say if the lady looked round—I looked to see what was approaching before I crossed over—I think the van was coming from Hyde Park Corner, I am not positive—it was going rather fast I think, not at a furious pace, I don't think he could have stopped coming down hill, not a heavy van; I would not say if that implied anything with reference to the speed—from the time Mr. and Mrs. Gibbs went off the pavement the van had no time to stop—there was no traffic in Halkin Street—I heard no shout from the driver—there were not many people about—I heard afterwards that a lady came up and went to the hospital with us—I am a little accustomed to driving, not in London—I live in London, and walk about the streets.
By the COURT. This was broad daylight, it was easy enough to see.
WILLIAM CHARLES SANT . I am a letter carrier in the General Post Office—I was coming from the direction of Belgrave Square towards Grosvenor Place, delivering letters on the right-hand side of Halkin Street, looking towards Grosvenor Place—I heard a sort of noise at the end of the street; I looked up and saw a lady on the ground and a gentleman; the left wheel, the wheel nearer to me, of a Batley's mineral water two-horse van was going over the lady—it went at a smartish trot, he was not furiously driving—only the prisoner was in the van—he was
driving on the wrong side of the road—when I saw that I ran out from the pavement into the road, got in front of the horses, held up my hand to him, and told him to stop and that he had run over a woman; he pulled up and got down—he had driven about 50 or 60 yards from the corner of Grosvenor Place, he was just by Guiness's stables—when he got down I said "Hold on, you have run over a woman; you had better go back and see what you have done"—he said "What the b——hell has that got to do with me?"—he saw there was no policeman coming, or I thought so; he got up then on his van and drove away—it took about a minute I daresay—he did not come back—I saw a crowd at the corner move away first after he drove away—a little later on I saw the prisoner in Belgrave Mews East, next door to the butcher's, at a house which belongs to the butcher—I told him I had heard the woman was seriously injured, and he had better go back, it would be much better for him—he told me to mind my own business and began to abuse me—he was going to take off his coat to fight me, he kept pushing me iu the chest—Mr. Bennett ordered him out of the shop—I took the number of the van, it was No. 80; I told him I should do so, and if there were any inquiries I should go to the police—he was excited; I should not like to say he was actually drunk, but no doubt he had been drinking.
Cross-examined. I was by Stocking's carriage factory at the corner of Belgrave Mews, I could see distinctly the head of Halkin Street and some distance into Grosvenor Place—I had a better opportunity of seeing from the right-hand side—I did not see him actually coming round the corner—I did not observe the van before it went over Mrs. Gibbs, but as it was going over her, it was then going at a fairish trot—I do not know if there were many people—there was no vehicular traffic in Halkin Street—it was a dry, sharp morning—there had been no frost that I am aware of, the roads were dry—I fancy the prisoner had been drinking—I said before the Magistrate that I should not like to say he was under the influence of drink—I said he seemed to have had a little drop, and he seemed sober but excited—I think since, from his actions, he seemed to have had some drink—his actions were of an excitable nature, to say the least of it—I know the neighbourhood well—there is a large refuge a little way up Grosvenor Place, where part of the traffic goes up towards Piccadilly and the other part towards St. George's Hospital—the traffic going to Piccadilly would keep on the left side—traffic coming down by Halkin Street would not be on the wrong side of that traffic, it is a very wide street there—traffic going down towards Halkin Street would have that line of traffic going into Piccadilly on its left just there—I did not notice that at Halkin Street traffic to Piccadilly deviates to the right, and that traffic from St. George's Hospital would have that traffic to the left of it; they generally keep on the opposite side and turn; a man driving in a proper manner would make a wide sweep—this plan does not show where the green places are in front of the hospital—at Halkin Street the traffic goes off to Piccadilly, but there is a wide road there to take the traffic off; it would be on the wrong side if it came down on the left side of the vehicles.
HENRY BENNETT . I am a butcher, of 3, Belgrave Mews East—on 27th December about 1 o'clock, the prisoner came into my shop—just before he did so I saw Sant outside, and heard some altercation between the prisoner and Sant—I asked Sant in the prisoner's hearing what was
the matter—he told me he had run over a lady, and would not go to see what was done—I told the prisoner I thought it was a very serious case, that he ought to go and see what he had done—he said he had done nobody any harm—he struck Sant several times in the ribs, and threatened to fight—I had known the prisoner about eight months—his usual demeanour is very quiet as a rule; I never saw him like it before—he was most decidedly different on 27th December to what he had been on any previous occasions I had seen him—I thought he was in liquor and a little bit excited.
Cross-examined. I had never seen him in a state of excitement before, or under any circumstances that would produce excitement—I only saw him when he came to take orders and money—he was always a quiet, steady, respectable man as you would expect of a man delivering goods—I expect a man delivering goods to be civil and quiet—he seemed very excitable on this occasion—I could not say his conduct was due to excitement alone; I think he had had a little drink as well.
HUGH LAWSON . I am house surgeon at St. George's Hospital—I saw this lady on 28th December, the day after she was brought in—she was suffering from a fracture of her left arm and injury to her foot—her left arm was taken off—she died on 1st January at 2 p.m. from the shock and exhaustion following the injuries and the operation—the operation, in my judgment, was necessary in consequence of the fracture—her forehead and right eye were bruised.
JOHN GROSE (Policeman B 403). I understand making plans—I made this plan; it is correct and to scale—the width of Halkin Street from kerb to kerb at this point is 27¾ feet—that part of Grosvenor Place is on an incline.
Cross-examined. I know the neighbourhood well—there is a large refuge in Grosvenor Place about 50 yards above Halkin Street, opposite another turning—traffic going up Grosvenor Place towards Piccadilly, when it gets opposite Halkin Street, begins to diverge towards the refuge—I should think traffic coming down Grosvenor Place would not pass inside that going to Piccadilly—there is plenty of room there—before it gets to Halkin Street there is plenty of room for it to get on its right side, and when you get further up, the Grosvenor Crescent Road is something like 90 feet wide—the traffic going to Piccadilly bears to the right—there is plenty of room on each side of the refuge—I cannot say that traffic coming down from St. George's Hospital would have the traffic going towards Piccadilly on its left-hand side—if there are two streams of traffic, for each stream there is a right and wrong side—there is a policeman on duty at the refuge, and there is plenty of room for three or four lines—the two lines are bound to a certain extent to come together, but there is plenty of room for three or four to go abreast—they can go either the right or left side—vehicles coming down from St. George's Hospital would have the other traffic on their left at some yards above Halkin Street, not at Halkin Street—there is nothing whatever, either at Halkin Street or Grosvenor Place, to prevent anyone keeping on the proper side.
The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY . — Six Months' Hard Labour.
292. CHARLES BONLETT (30) , Feloniously attempting to discharge a loaded revolver at Andrew Lansdowne, with intent to murder him. Second Count, with intent to prevent his lawful apprehension. Third Count, to do him grievous bodily arm.
MESSRS. POLAND and MATTHEWS Prosecuted.
ARTHUR WILKINS . I am butler to Lord Compton, of 51, Lennox Gardens—on Friday night, about 7. 40, I arrived at St. Pancras Station, and took a cab with the intention of going to Lennox Gardens—I had three portmanteaus, all of which I saw put on the cab before I started—at Regent Circus I missed one of them from the top of the cab—among the things that had been put into it was this cheque (produced) for 44l., drawn to me or my order by Lord Compton, dated 6th January, on Messrs. Drummond—it was not endorsed then—the portmanteau also contained articles of wearing apparel, among them this coat and waistcoat (produced)—I at once gave information to the police at Tottenham Court Road, at from half-past 9 to 20 minutes to 10—the next morning, in consequence of a communication made to me, I went to Drummond's Bank about five minutes to 10—I received information which induced me to return to the police-station at Tottenham Court Road, and subsequently, about 3 o'clock p.m. on Saturday, I was summoned to Bow Street—the prisoner was there in custody—I then saw this cheque, which had been taken with the portmanteau, with this endorsement on it "A. Wilkins"—that was not written by me, nor with my authority—the prisoner had on in the dock a brown overcoat with the top button buttoned, his hands were in his pockets, and I recognised that he was wearing this coat and vest of mine—I have a special means of identifying the coat—I afterwards examined them more closely, and can positively say they are mine, and were part of the articles missing in the portmanteau.
GEORGE HARRELL . I am a cashier at Drummond's Bank, Charing Cross—at a quarter to 10 a.m. on 7th January the prisoner presented this cheque to me across the counter—it was not endorsed—I told him it must be endorsed by A. Wilkins before I could pay it—he said nothing—I asked him his name—he said "W. Clements"—I gave it back to him—he took it away, and came back in about half an hour—in the meantime Mr. Wilkins had been to the bank—when the prisoner returned he again presented the cheque across the counter in the ordinary way—it then bore the signature on the back as it now appears—I did not pay it—Inspector Lansdowne came from Scotland Yard—I left him to deal with the prisoner, and they left the bank together.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I am certain, you told me your name was Clements—the second time you handed me the cheque I took it away, and the manager came—I questioned you concerning the cheque—the manager asked your name, and you said "John James Drummond, "and within a minute or two Lansdowne came in, and he, you, and the manager adjourned to a private room—I think the manager told you to sit down on a seat opposite the counter after his conversation with you—I should say he was not away more than a few minutes before he told you to follow him—you might have tried to walk out; I don't think you would have done so; you were near enough to the door to try—you did not ask me what endorsement I required on the cheque the first time you handed it to me—I don't remember saying "A. Wilkins."
and saw the manager and the prisoner—the manager handed me this cheque for 44l.—I told the prisoner I was a police officer, and that the cheque produced had been stolen the night previous, and asked him his name—he said "John James Drummond, jeweller, 203, Pentonville"—I asked him from whom he received the cheque—he said "I had that cheque from my partner, Mr. Clements, jeweller, 145, Barnsbury Road, this morning. I brought it to the bank, but as it was not endorsed they gave it back to me, and I took it to Mr. Clements, who got it endorsed, and I brought it back to the bank"—I said "We will go and see Mr. Clements"—I went with him in a cab to 145, Barnsbury Road—a man answered the door; that man, whom I know now is Mr. Freeman the occupier—I asked him in the prisoner's hearing if Mr. Clements lived there—he said "No one of that name lives here, but I have a young man of that name working for me"—the prisoner said "The game is up"—Freeman said that some one had been about a cheque the previous week—the prisoner said "You make a note of that"—we went into the parlour, and I told the prisoner that I should take him in custody for forging and uttering a cheque—I took hold of his right arm and handed him down the passage, on to the doorstep, and into the Hansom's cab outside—he made a rush to get out on the opposite side, but I caught a firm grip on his coat behind with my left hand—he then put his right hand into the right coat pocket of his overcoat and pulled out this revolver (produced), the muzzle of which he presented at my breast—he said "Let me go, or you are a dead man"—I heard a click as though the hammer fell—I caught hold of the muzzle and barrel of the revolver with my right hand, and just at that moment the trigger must have been pulled, because the hammer fell on to my thumb and cut it deeply, and it bled—we struggled from the footboard of the cab on to the road together—I kept hold of the revolver with my right hand, and of the prisoner with my left—we struggled for several minutes—several persons came round, and as soon as they saw the revolver they ran away, but almost immediately after, Wilson, the driver of a coal-van, passed—I called to nun, and he came and then Gleeson, the driver of my Hansom's cab, came to my assistance—with their aid I got the prisoner into the passage of 145, Barnsbury Road, sent for a constable, secured the prisoner, and he was given in custody—I got the revolver from him after the driver of the coalvan had secured him from behind—we took him to King's Cross Road Police-station, and he was afterwards charged at King Street—it was a six-chambered revolver, loaded with ball cartridges in five chambers, and the hammer had fallen in the first instance on the empty chamber—when the trigger is pulled the barrel revolves to the right, and the empty chamber was to the right of where the hammer was—the hammer was then down between the two chambers—the next chamber to the empty one was loaded—the hammer had fallen between the empty chamber and the next loaded one when it fell on my thumb—it was down over the spot between the empty chamber and the loaded chamber, to the left of it, it having fallen on the empty chamber; when it was pulled up again it would revolve, and before it had actually got to the next loaded one my thumb had got there; I had grasped it—I charged the prisoner at King Street Station with forging and uttering a cheque for 44l., and with attempting to shoot me—he refused his name and address, and when the
charge was read to him he made no reply—on searching him I found this cheque-book produced.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I still persist in thinking it was your intention to take my life—we walked from Drummond's Bank to Scotland Yard together; you made no attempt to escape—you might have tried it, you were not my prisoner—I took you there to get my overcoat—I saw the endorsement "A. Wilkins" on the back of the cheque—we rode to Barnsbury Road in a Hansom's cab; you might have shot me then if you liked; you were not my prisoner then—I swear you told me you were in partnership with Mr. Clements—you did not mention Mr. Freeman's name—I was holding your right arm from the time we left Mr. Freeman's parlour to the time we got into the hansom cab—I had hold of your right hand until I handed you into the cab; you did not lay hands on me till then—I took hold of your right arm just as we came out, when I told you I should take you in custody—I grasped the revolver with my right hand—I did not take both hands; both your hands were on it,—I had one hand on your collar—my right thumb was cut on the inside, on the part nearest to the forefinger—the cabman unfortunately did not come at once to my assistance when I called him; he was on the box.
FREDERICK WILSON . I am a carman, of 6, Henry Place, Barnsbury—on 7th January I was in Barnsbury Road with my van about 20 minutes to 12—I saw a Hansom's cab standing outside No. 145, and near the cab I saw Lansdowne and the prisoner struggling, partly on the footboard of the cab and partly off, and by the time I had thrown the reins on my horse's back they were struggling in the road—I stopped my horses, threw the reins on their backs, and jumped down—the struggle continued for two or three minutes, about the time I ran across—I saw a revolver in the prisoner's hand—when I got up Lansdowne's thumb was under the hammer—I seized the prisoner from behind directly I came up, and with the assistance of the cabman Gleeson he was overpowered and the revolver taken from him.
Cross-examined. I was not there when the struggle began—I first noticed you struggling partly on and partly off the footboard—you had hold of the revolver with one hand, I believe the right; I am not positive—I believe Lansdowne had one hand, the right, on the revolver—I did not notice where his left was—I did not hear you use any threatening language towards him during the struggle—I heard you pass no remark at all.
EDWARD GLEESON . I am a Hansom's cab driver—on 7th January I drove the prisoner and Lansdowne to 145, Barnsbury Road—they went into the house together, and came out together after a short time—the prisoner went to walk up to the near side of the horse's head—Lansdowne pushed him into the cab, and the prisoner tried to escape out on the other side—Lansdowne pulled him back by the collar—he turned round and told the inspector he was a dead man "if you don't let me go"—I saw the revolver in his hand; he was holding it right up to the inspector's chest—the inspector seized it at once, directly he pulled his arm back—there was a struggle; they got from the footboard into the road—after that the carman came up, and with our assistance the prisoner was overpowered and the revolver taken from him.
Cross-examined. I observed nothing in your pocket to arouse my suspicion during the time Lansdowne was with you in the cab—you went to
make your way to the near aide of the horse's head, and the inspector caught hold of you and pulled you into the cab; then he pulled you in again after you tried to escape—he held you by your left arm—I did not see the revolver when he put you into the cab—I did not see from which pocket you drew it—I might have been sitting on the cab when you drew it—Lansdowne grasped the revolver with his right hand—I did not see him use both hands to it.
WILLIAM CLEMENTS . I work for Mr. Freeman, a jeweller, of 145, Barnsbury Road—the prisoner is my half-brother; his name is Charles Bonlett—I have not seen much of him for the last six months or so—I, I know nothing of this cheque or the endorsement on it—I believe it to be in the prisoner's writing.
Cross-examined. I would not swear the endorsement was in your writing—you have seen me two or three times in the last seven years, I should think; you were living with us some years ago—I always understood your name to be Bonlett.
The prisoner in his defence said that he had no intention to murder Lansdowns, and that if he had he had opportunity to do so when in the cab; that Lansdowne pushed him into the cab, and he would have fallen out if he had not put out his hand and foot to save himself; that then Lansdowne caught sight of the revolver in his pocket and seized it; that he (the prisoner) tried to regain possession of it, as he did not know that Lansdowne might not use it in the excitement of the moment; that it was a pin fire revolver, and that if Lansdowne had spoken the truth the hammer must have rested on the pin of the cartridge, and with the least touch it would have gone off.
GUILTY* on the Third Count.
MESSRS. POLAND and MATTHEWS Prosecuted.
JAMES LUCK . I am a warder in Leeds Prison—the prisoner was under my charge there undergoing a sentence—I had constant access to his cell, and found this document (produced) there—it is in his writing—I saw him write the name of Montgomery on it.
GEORGE INGLIS . I am an expert in handwriting—I have examined this document said to be the prisoner's writing, and have compared the endorsement on this cheque with it, and my opinion is that they are written by the same hand.
The prisoner in his defence stated that the cheque was given to him by Willy Clements, whom he had nursed, and whose father he knew; that he went to the bank with it, and was told to get it endorsed, which he did, and took it back, which he would not have done had he thought there was anything wrong.
GUILTY of the uttering. There was another indictment against the prisoner, which was postponed to the next Session. MR. JUSTICE HAWKINS gave to Inspector Lansdowne a presentment made by the Grand Jury, commending his conduct, and that of the witness Wilson, and stated that he would consider whether he had the power to reward them.
MR. DOUGLAS Prosecuted.
NOT GUILTY .
GUILTY. — Judgment respited.
MR. RIBTON Prosecuted; MR. GRAIN Defended.
JAMES WHITE . I live at 4, Bothwell Street, Fulham, and am 15 years of age—my father was a builder—on Saturday, 31st December, just after 5 o'clock, I was in Hawkesmere Street, Fulham, turning out of Delorme Street—I saw the deceased, Leggatt, on the box of his van driving two horses; they were trotting rather fast—I know whew this heap of dirt was, just outside the Board School gate—he passed over and then jerked down; the driver fell off, and the wheel passed over his stomach—I was five or six yards behind the van—he could not get up afterwards—it was dark; I could see the heap of dirt from where I was standing before I saw him go over it—there was no lantern or anything to mark it—I went and told his wife, and a policeman came.
Cross-examined. Leggatt lived in Delorme Street—Hawkesmere Street is in a very bad state; great ruts in it, not deep ones—there are no kerbs or paving—I saw the heap—there is a lamp at the corner of the end house—it is about 18 yards from there to the heap across—it is about 15 feet between the outside edge of the heap and the opposite footpath—there is a lamp at the corner of Delorme Street in such a position as to reflect on to the heap, and there is another lamp at the corner of Davis Road—I brought the wife to the place—the man was not quite dead—I had seen Leggatt passing up and down this road on several occasions before the accident—I live close by—he passed up and down almost every day with his van; that was the nearest way to the stables—I mean nearly every day after the heap was there—the heap had been there over three weeks—there was plenty of room to pass between the outside of the heap and the opposite side of the road—I had seen him passing there of a morning when it was light, and of an evening after dark—Beattey's stables are round in Munster Road.
The prisoner's deposition before the Coroner was read as follows: "Iam foreman of works at the Board School addition in Everington Street. They have excavated at the works and carted it out in the road ready for removal; it has been there about three weeks. It is not protected, fenced, or lighted at night; it is lying in the road trodden down a little by children. There is about three yards or three loads. It is in a thoroughfare, but with very little traffic in it; it is not a made road, kerbed only. There is a lamp within 40 feet of the road. There is 15 feet of clear roadway. There is another 2 feet of one heap only 10 inches high which has been trampled down by the children. The highest part of that heap is 1 foot 10 inches, and that is not where the wheel went over, but 10 inches from that. It was partly my work to see the heap of dirt removed, but I have had a very important job at Strerbrook Road Schools, and it has rather been neglected through that.
Cross-examined. The heap was all part of the original heap that Bagley contracted to
remove with the exception of about one load. One day Bagley came back with a tale that the clerk of the works at the Sloane Square job would not have any more of the heap in there, and it came back again. He never took his horses and carts away. It was all grit that Bagley ought to have taken."
FREDERICK SMITH (Policeman T 318). Leggatt was pointed out to me lying in the road—I took him to the hospital—he was dead when we got there—I saw this heap of dirt—I have seen two or three different heaps of dirt there before this happened—it is not a new road; there is not much traffic, but vehicles pass and repass—there are three lights, one in the street and one at each corner of other streets—the nearest light to where the accident happened is 18 yards off—I could not see the heap if I were driving a van the way he went; it is a very dark street—the lamp does not throw a light over the street properly, not over that side; it confines itself to the footpath.
Cross-examined. I did not know Leggatt—he was driving a two-horse van with a box seat up above—I don't think he could see the heap the way he was coming—I have never driven in my life—this was a very dark place—I cannot say I had seen the same heap before—it was a month since I had been there—it was a dark night.
SAMUEL SQUIRE . I am house-surgeon at the West London Hospital—on December 31st a man was brought in dead at half-past 5—the wheel had gone over his body and chest, and crushed him internally, and broken five or six of his ribs.
JOHN HAYWARD . I live at 187, Escourt Road, Fulham, and am a ground workman—I was employed to work on the new Board Schools in Everington Road which is now called the Hawkesmere Road—I cannot tell you how long since we shifted the dirt there—Mr. Gaylon was foreman; he gave me directions to move it; I could not tell where they took it to.
Cross-examined. I said before the Coroner "I have excavated ground out of where the school building is; I have put it in the road, I suppose Hawkesmere Road, only one lot of earth, and I suppose that is the heap that remained there and that the man fell over—it is perhaps three weeks ago since I moved it out—our foreman Mr. Gaylon gave me instructions to move it from the road into the cart, at the end of last week—I have seen Leggatt going to his work in the morning—I have not spoken to him—if he had not his eyes shut he must have seen the heap, but at one time there was not as much as 40 loads of the earth—a man named Bagley was carting it away."
Re-examined. I saw where the accident happened—the earth was there at that time.
WARWICK BAGLEY . I live at Crabtree Lane, Fulham, and am a carman and contractor—I got instructions from Mr. Johnson to move the sand and ballast from Everington Street Board School to Sloane Street—I heard nothing about rubbish—I know nothing about the heap in Hawkesmere Road; I have never seen it there—Mr. Gaylon has not frequently asked me to remove the stuff—there was no heap of rubbish nearly opposite the school-gate, to my knowledge.
Cross-examined. Gaylon has never given me any authority to do anything—I have only had written instructions—his masters, Johnson, have given me instructions—I know Gaylon—as far as I know he was the master of the men—I know Johnson was engaged on this School
Board work in Hawkesmere Road and some other School Board work in Sherbrooke Road—I had no instructions only to remove sand and ballast—ballast is stones sifted from sand—I don't understand the term grit—it was a written order—it was torn up after we had finished the work—the carman told me they had removed all the sand and ballast that was wheeled out there—I have no carman here who did the removal.
Re-examined. I have no master—I presume Mr. Johnson is his master—Gaylon was foreman of the job—we had no instructions whether to leave the stuff or not—we had written instructions from Mr. Johnson's office.
The Jury here stated that they had heard sufficient evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Saturday, February 4th, 1888.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. AVORY Prosecuted; MESSRS. CRUMP, Q. C., and GRAIN Defended. After hearing MR. AVORY'S opening, the RECORDER considered that the alleged perjury having been committed in 1881 as to matters occurring in 1876, and the Magistrate having dismissed the case, the Jury would not be likely to find the defendant guilty, upon which MR. AVORY offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. CARTER Prosecuted.
ALFRED WEBB . I am the son of Jesse Webb, cheesemonger, 23 and 24, Beresford Square, Woolwich—I live on the premises—on Saturday night, 14th January, I closed the shop at 12—the shutters were fastened by a bar across, a bolt, and screw—they were perfectly secure, and the doors also—about 2 a.m. the police called me—I went down and found that the iron bar which secured the shutters had been wrenched out, the shutters taken down, and the window thrown up, and I missed between 40 and 50 lb. of cheese, in three pieces, a bladder of lard, three tins of lobster, and some bacon, to the value of about 2l.—I have seen some of the things since—I know all the prisoners; they lire in Woolwich—I saw Early outside our house, and the policeman warned him away.
SAMUEL DALTON . I am a labourer, of Howard's Buildings, Woolwich—about 2 o'clock on Sunday morning, 15th January, I was just passing Mr. Webb's shop to go down to Winter's Wharf, where I am employed—three shutters at one end and four at the other were down, the place wide open, and the lights inside lighted—I saw Cocklin about the
shop and Lucy and Early standing about 50 yards away—Cocklin had half a cheese on his shoulder, and he asked me if I would have a bit of cheese or a bit of butter to take home—I told him I did not want nothing—I went on a little further, and met Early and Lucy—they asked me for a light; they were making cigarettes.
EDWARD WHITTOCK (Policeman R 78). About 20 minutes past 2 on the morning of 15th January I was in Beresford Square—I saw the four prisoners; I know them all well—they were standing together opposite Trinity Church about 40 yards from Webb's shop—I said "Here, I want you"—they all ran away—Dalton came up to me directly after, and made a complaint to me, and I went to Webb's premises—I had seen the shop at 10 minutes past 1; the shutters were all right then—I had seen the four prisoners three times that night, from 10 to half-past 12, and ordered them to move on.
FREDERICK ALEXANDER (Detective Officer). On Jan. 15th, about 9 a.m., I saw Mr. Webb, and from information I went to 23, Cock Yard, Woolwich—I there saw Early—I told him I should take him into custody for being concerned with Murray, Lucy, and Cocklin in breaking into Mr. Webb's shop, and stealing three-quarters of cheese, two tins of lobster, and two bladders of lard—he said "I know nothing about it"—on the way to the station, he said "Gibbs "(meaning Whittock; it is a slang name)" saw me and Murray in Beresford Square, and upset us because we would not go away"—I took him to the station, and left him there, and then went to 18, Salutation Alley, where I saw Lucy; I told him the charge—he said he knew nothing, about it—in going to the station, he said "I and Early pulled down the shutters; Cocklin and Murray took the cheese and the other things away; you will find some of the cheese on the top of Mr. Tucker's place, at the side of the Salutation public house"—I took him to the station, and then went to 6, Salutation Alley, where I found Cocklin—I told him I should charge him with the others, mentioning their names—he said he knew nothing about it—I took him to the station—I next went to 13, Francis Street, Woolwich, where I saw Murray; I told him the charge—he said he knew nothing about it—I afterwards went to Mr. Tucker's, and on the roof of the shed adjoining I found one of the quarters of cheese, and another quarter in the cellar, where it had fallen through from the skylight that was broken—I showed both portions of cheese to the prosecutor, and he identified them—the four prisoners were all placed together, and the charge read over to them; they made no answer.
The prisoners in their statements before the Magistrate, and in their defence, stated that they were not there at all, and had witnesses to prove that they were in bed at the time.
Witnesses for the Defence.
MARY ANN MURRAY . I am Murray's sister—on the Saturday night I came in at 10 minutes past 12, and he came in by a quarter-past—he and his brother stopped talking by the fire two or three hours, and I and my sister stopped up washing until we went to bed at 2—I can swear that my brother did not go out any more.
Cross-examined. I was not called before the Magistrate.
said he was coming home directly—I went home, and had not been long in bed, when I heard the latch go—I said nothing, but a few minutes afterwards I went and put my hand on his head and felt him in bed, and I found that the front door was bolted.
Cross-examined. I went to bed about 12—I occupy the house myself; it is a three-roomed cottage—I and my daughter slept in one bed, and my son in another; it was dark when he came in—I had not been asleep—I heard him come in.
GUILTY . — Twelve Months' Hard Labour each.
MR. CARTER Prosecuted; MR. TAYLOR Defended.
GUILTY . — Six Months' Hard labour.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
FRANCES HAWKINS . I am a warder of Milbank Prison—I was present when the prisoner was convicted and sentenced, and afterwards had her in my custody—she is the person named in this certificate. (This certified the conviction of Caroline Smith at Clerkenwell, on February 4th, 1884, of stealing a dead fowl, having been then previously convicted. Six Months' Hard Labour.) She was under my observation during those six months, and I have known her since 1882.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You had no fits while you were under my charge.
GUILTY. **— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
302. FREDERICK HAYNES (25) to stealing part of a watch-chain, the goods of John Prescott, from his person, and to a conviction at Maidstone in September, 1887, in the name of Frederick Haybury.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. WILLS Prosecuted.
FRANKLIN ELLEN . I am manager to Mr. Webb, grocer, of Hare Street, Woolwich—on Saturday, 14th January, about 9. 30 p.m., I was in the shop; I missed a hand of pork; a constable afterwards showed it me; it was the property of Mr. Webb—I had seen the prisoner that night on
three occasions passing in and out of the shop; we were very busy at the time.
NATHANIEL RAND (Policeman RR 6). Mr. Ellen made a communication to me on Saturday evening, 14th January—I went in search of the prisoner, and found her about 50 yards from the house—I asked her to let me look in her basket, and found a hand of pork and half a pig's head—I took her to the station—I went to Ellen, who identified it—the prisoner said she bought it.
MARY ANN COLLINS . I am the wife of Alfred George Collins, of 23, Couton Terrace, Plumstead—on Saturday, 14th January, about 9 p.m., I was outside Mr. Webb's shop with my husband—I saw a woman take a hand of pork from the board—she placed it in a basket which she was carrying on her arm, and walked into the shop and came out again—she made no purchase—I made a communication to my husband, who spoke to Mr. Webb's manager—the prisoner is the woman.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate was that she bought the pork at a cheap store at Barking Side.
GUILTY . — Three Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WILLS Prosecuted.
ELIZABETH GREENHILL . I keep a general shop at 195, Church Street, Deptford—on 22nd December I went into the shop about 10. 15 p.m., and saw the prisoner standing by the till, with the till drawn out, taking the silver out of it, and putting it in his pocket—I seized him by the neck, and said "What are you doing here?"—he made no reply—we tussled all round the shop until we got to the door—he knocked me down over the step—I still held him; he knocked me down a second time—I got up again, and took hold of his coat—he kicked me and I lost my senses—I got up—I called out "Stop that man"—a man followed him—I got a constable—I missed from the till 22s. in shillings—on Saturday evening I saw the prisoner in custody at Deptford Police-station—I did not recognise him at first, as I only saw him with his hat on—I have not the slightest doubt he is the man.
HENRY PITT . I am a baker, of 22, Evelyn Street, Deptford—on 22nd December I saw the prisoner coming from the direction of Greenhill's shop—my attention was first attracted to his falling in the road, and he had no hat on—I saw him get up—he walked to a barrow and commenced halloaing "Ivy!"—he was selling holly and ivy—I have seen him before about the town—I am quite certain he is the man, I had a good look at him, and his having no hat on made him conspicuous.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You looked confused and red, as though you had been running.
IRVIN JARVIS . I live at 81, Church Street, Deptford—I am 10 years old—I remember one night being outside Mrs. Greenhill's shop—I saw the prisoner take the till out and put the silver in his pocket—I knew him before—he got Mrs. Greenhill outside the door, and threw her down the steps—he threw her down again in the road, and caught her eye—I am certain the prisoner is the man.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I picked out another man at the station.
Re-examined. I did not know the prisoner with his hat on—he had not his hat on when I saw him at Mrs. Greenhill's.
GEORGE SWIFT . I live at 177, Church Street, Deptford—on 22nd December, about 10 p.m., I heard screams coming from Mrs. Greenhill's shop, and saw a man and woman struggling together—the man knocked her down and ran away—she screamed out "Stop him, he has stolen my till"—I recognised Mrs. Greenhill's voice, and pursued him up a narrow court through Mary Ann's Buildings into High Street, Deptford, and to the top of the buildings, and then missed him—as he turned into the High Street, someone called out "He has fallen down," and I pursued him to the next corner—I saw a man standing by a barrow of holly with no hat on, and very much out of breath—I looked at him so that I should know him again, and then went and told Mrs. Greenhill where he was—she asked me to get a policeman, and I found two—we went where I saw the man and the barrow, and they had gone—last Saturday night a constable came for me, and I went to the police-station and identified the prisoner as the man I went after, but I cannot swear to his being the man I saw struggling with Mrs. Greenhill; I did not see his face till I saw him at the barrow, very much out of breath and with no hat on, and I concluded he was the man I had pursued.
EDWIN WOOLHOUSE (Policeman R 430). A communication was made to me about Christmas, and on 14th January I saw the prisoner—I told him he answered the description of a man who was wanted for robbery and assault, and I should take him to the station—he said "All right, I know nothing about it"—at the station I got several men and told him to take his place where he liked—the prosecutrix identified him, but not till he had his hat on—she kept this hat (produced), having put her foot on it when she struggled with the man.
GUILTY . **— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Recorder.
305. HENRY IVIMY (24) and GEORGE CROSS (30) were indicted (with THOMAS PERKINS and CHARLES WORRALL not in custody) for stealing on April 1st, 1886, certain deal flooring boards and mouldings, the property of the Surrey Commercial Dock Company, the masters of Ivimy. Other Counts, for stealing other timber within six months. Other Counts, charging Cross with receiving the same.
MR. COCK, Q. C., and MR. GRAIN Prosecuted; MR. PHILBRIGK, Q. C., and MR. FULTON appeared for Ivimy; and MR. WILLIS, Q. C., MR. BESLEY, MR. H. AVORY, and MR. WILKINSON for Cross.
SAMUEL BROWNFIELD . I am superintendent of the Surrey Commercial Dock Company, and am intimately acquainted with the details of the docks—I have worked there from a junior—Ivimy and Perkins had been in the Company's employ about eight years; they were regular labourers—they had been apprentices, but at the date of these proceedings they were foremen of the yard—I never knew Cross till these transaction took place—in June or July, 1886, I received an anonymous letter, which aroused my suspicions, and I sent Police Inspector Cruse to Cross's premises with Smithers, an officer of the Company, with certain instructions—they came back to me, and a few days afterwards Cross came to see me and said "I have been to Scotland; I know nothing of the circumstances you sent to my place about"—I said "I have received information that one
of our foremen had been sending you goods that you should not have received, and I sent to your place to trace a load which I knew had been so sent, and the people in charge of your yard declined to give the Dock Company officers any information or allow them to see the goods, or to tell them where they have gone"—Cross said that he would make inquiries about it—I do not remember whether I named the foreman—I did not show Cross the anonymous letter or allude to it—I directed Cruse and Smithers to go to the yard again—when timber comes in there is sometimes an excess over the amount indicated by the shipping document, and sometimes less, but if there is an excess landed from the ship, above the merchant's specifications or orders to receive, that excess is always accounted for in the returns we make to the merchant—Cross is a timber dealer, and in buying timber through brokers or timber merchants he would in the ordinary course receive a delivery order, which he would lodge at our docks, transferring it into his name, and draw the timber as he required it by our orders—we grant timber warrants, if necessary—Ivimy and Perkins each had a yard—on an order being presented it comes into the hands of the foreman of the yard—there are two foremen to each yard; one takes one set of orders and one another—no foreman has a right to deliver timber without the production of a delivery order—no foreman has any right to deliver timber in excess of the quantity indicated by the order, or of a different quality or size, and if he finds the goods ordered do not correspond with the order in every detail, his duty is to bring the fact under the notice of the inspector of the district in the dock, and if there is anything wrong about it it is the inspector's duty to brine it to my notice—in July, 1887, the charge against Ivimy and Cross was heard at Greenwich Police-court, and they stood for trial here on, I think, May 23rd, 1887—in July, 1887, Ivimy called at my house at Rotherhithe, near the docks, and said "Perkins intends going over to the other side; he intends to say that the evidence he gave at Greenwich was got from him under pressure, and he will deny everything he said there, and he will do all he can on behalf of Cross and me"—I told him what a deplorable condition he had placed himself in, a young fellow in whom I had taken an interest, not only for his sake, but his father's, who had been in the service many years, and I asked him how he could possibly have been led away by Cross or anyone else to have done what he had—he said "I hardly know how it is myself; I have recently been married, and I find my money insufficient; I am sorry you did not take my evidence instead of Perkins's, I could put you in possession of facts that would incriminate Cross at once, and I am not sure yet before the trial but what I will do so"—his wages were 32s. 6d. a week—that was the only time I saw him to speak to, and I have not seen Cross to speak to—there was no right or authority on the part of any foreman or employee of the Dock Company to trade in timber; it was contrary to rule and regulation—in the course of business there would be no justification of the document alluded to, passing between a foreman of yards and a timber merchant—I knew Ivimy's writing; both the figures and writing in the first, second, and third columns of sheet A are his, and the whole of the writing in B, and the figures, except the pencil figures, are Ivimy's—the figures in C, the specifications of quantities, are in Perkins's writing—I do not know whose writing the moneying-out is—I cannot say whether there is any writing of Ivimy's on it or whose figures they are—the
endorsement, "T. Perkins," to the cheque D is Perkins's writing; the other writing I do not know—it has been through the bankers and has been torn—we have mended it since we have had it—E is Ivimy's writing except the last paragraph—I do not know whose that is—the whole of F and G is in Ivimy's writing except the pencil figures—such documents as that are not issued by the Company, and Ivimy could not by any possibility issue them in the ordinary conduct of our business.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I have held my present position 10 years—I have told the Jury about the difficulty of persons who purchase from brokers getting the goods to which they are entitled—the timber is in pieces—I have known of a case in which some of the goods which answered to the broker's order could not be found; there was a slight discrepancy—sometimes there would be no order answering to it at all—Cross would have to bring an order from a broker before he got goods, but not for sub-orders; he would sometimes have the whole of the goods delivered to him at the time he brought the order, and sometimes he would have portions—when the goods answering to the order could not be found, the Dock Company has had to pay for them very often—they have not very often delivered other goods in place of them, but they have sometimes; six or seven times to Mr. Cross alone—goods of a different character have been delivered out with my sanction, but only with the merchant's consent—I cannot give you the merchants' names to whom goods have been sent which did not answer to the marks in the order, but it has happened 10 or 12 times in about 30 years—that was the state of things when I first held my present position, and it always will be—goods leave either by cart or barge; there are several entrances for carts, and a person who comes in goes first to the principal office and lodges with the clerk whatever document he has, and it is the clerk's duty to see whether goods are in our possession answering to that document, and without some endorsement on the order by the clerk no one ought to get any goods out of my yard—if he was going to get the whole of the goods the clerk would merely put that upon it which would show that everything was in order, and if he wanted to take less, or the carman said "I shall take so many, I want to leave some," he would take what he wanted, and would have a delivery note from the foreman in the yard for the rest; no sub order is drawn out by the clerk in the principal office—the foreman has a book showing what goods are under his control, and there are men under a contractor who remove the timber into the cart or barge, and the contractor is paid for so much as he delivers; it is piece-work—it is the foreman's duty when he gets an order for a portion, to mark the place where the wood is to be given to—every pile is marked when it comes in, to show its contents, so many pieces and such lengths, but the pieces are not marked—staves are counted by tale as they are delivered into the cart or barge, and the contractor keeps an account of them—the foreman of the yard is the inspector; he watches to see what the contractor puts into the cart, and the same with the barges—Ivimy was in the Island Yard—after the goods are put into the cart the man must leave by one of the gates, and he has a ticket which he shows to the gatekeeper whose duty it is to see that he has the same number of pieces in his cart as are marked on the pass, but not the quality or dimensions; but when they are very short boards they are stowed in the cart in two or more lengths; it is impossible for him to count them,
and he makes a mark on the pass that he cannot—with that exception, if the gatekeeper does his duty, the quantity of timber leaving the yard ought to correspond with the pass—the contractor and his men put the timber into the barges, but it is impossible for them to keep a correct account—if that was done we could get from the contractors' returns what had been put into the barge, but often and often it is not done; the contractor often cannot make entries in the book, and has to depend upon the foreman of the yard giving him the number—hundreds of times the contractor is not there; we trust to the Dock Company's own returns so far as delivery is concerned—the contractor is under a bond to supply sufficient men to do all work which the Company requires, if not, the Company put fresh relays on and charge the contractor with it—there are two foremen of the Island Yard, the other was Reest—there must be negociation with the merchant to see if he will take other goods—the foreman of the yard has often, against all orders, carried on negociations with a merchant for the purpose of getting other goods, and getting somebody else to buy his cargo—if there was any error or mistake, the foreman would not communicate with the merchant, I should conduct the correspondence—I don't know that I have any of my correspondence here, I have to give directions to my inspector or to the foremen—I have no letter which I have written; I should send it to the merchant—Ivimy would not write to the merchant respecting any error in the delivery of the goods—I don't know Ford and Sons having business at our yard—I have no idea whether Ford and Sons had orders in October, 1885, they are carriers or contractors—Mr. Sutton is a delivery clerk in our employ—letters on the Company's business would not come to him—I know nothing about this letter (produced) to Mr. Sutton from Ford and Sons—Ivimy left our service on 17th August, 1886, and Perkins was discharged on January 12th, 1887; he had been foreman of the stave yard, he occupied another place before that—I don't remember when he shifted, we often shifted our officers—I complained to Perkins about some goods going out which ought not to have gone, while he was foreman—I had him up before the directors—he told me before he went in, something about it having arisen from one person's goods being substituted for the other—I did not call him an internal rogue or a thief—I called him a rogue—he had not threatened an action against the Company—I did not tell him when he was before the Commissioners not to say anything about the system of shortage which existed in the yard, nor did he put a paper into my hands as to shortage of goods and give me the names of people—he denied that there had been anything wrong, except the substituting one person's goods for anothers—that was January 18th, 1887, the day that he was dismissed—I think he said that the people had not received more than they were entitled to—he came into our employ again after he had made his deposition at Greenwich Police-court, after he came to give evidence against Cross and Ivimy; he was put into the warehouse department at 20s. a week wages—he stayed three or four weeks in that service—I cannot tell you the exact time—he left of himself—he was overlooking no man; he did not give as a reason for leaving that we paid him 25s. a week while he was overlooking a man with a much larger salary; nothing of the sort—he gave a reason to Inspector Cruse, not to me—he was paid his wages—he was paid wages a week before be went into the warehouse office—I think he had one week's wages between January, 1887, and his going into the office—I
don't know that he had more than that; he had one week at all events before he came there—I don't know if that was the week he was giving evidence at Greenwich—he had a week's wages without being at the warehouse while coming backwards and forwards to Greenwich Police-court—I don't know if Inspector Cruse paid him at the Swedish Yard gate, certainly not by my direction—I believe Inspector Cruse paid the money—Inspector Cruse pays his proportional wages; he pays the constables, gatekeepers, and some extra men—he was told to pay this man who was in the warehouse 25s.—I think Inspector Cruse paid him 25s. the week he went to the police-court—I took Perkins to the solicitor's office, and before he went I gave him a sovereign out of my own pocket, but whether it was two or three days before I do not know—that was as well as his 25s. wages—I gave him another sovereign in my office some time in June; that was after he had been discharged—I gave him 1s. going to the police-court—that was before he was receiving the 25s.—about a week after Perkins left, Ivimy came to me the first or second week in July—I did not keep the date—I did not request Perkins to tell Ivimy that I should like to see him, nothing of the kind—I have not seen Perkins since he left about the end of July—he went before the directors in January, 1887—I had seen Cross in August, 1886—my suspicions were aroused in 1886—Perkins went on till June, 1887—directly he left the Dock Company Ivimy went into the service of Mr. Cross—when I saw Cross in August, 1886, he did not tell me he had not received any timber more than he was entitled to receive—he did not deny it—he told me he knew nothing about it—he said he had been to Scotland and heard that I had been to his place about some timber, but that he knew nothing about any timber having gone wrong, and that I could send the inspector to his place of business—they went the day afterwards to Mr. Cross's yard and reported that they had not found any timber there—I telegraphed, about the close of the year, complaining about our own timber not being sent in conformity with his order. (A letter was here put in from the defendant Cross to the superintendent of the Dock Company. "Ex tempo Soderan, Station Yard," stating that they sent yesterday for 104 pieces of timber, and had received other goods instead of them.) I think Mr. Glassborough was foreman of Station Yard—I inquired into the case, and learned that the foreman of the yard was supposed to have sent back other goods in lieu of those on the order—he ought to have done that if he had reported it to his inspector, Mr. Monk, and I think he did; I will not swear it—if a foreman cannot find the goods he may send others, if the inspector instructs him to do so; we do not inform the merchant, but we inform the person to whom the goods are sent—I knew we were sending him some one else's goods, and I did not tell the other person—that is the system at our docks; I must be allowed to explain how that took place; in sending cargoes sometimes 30, 000 or 40, 000 pieces are lying alongside each other, the delivery ranges from 1, 000 to 10, 000; sometimes breakages happen, they get mixed up, and discrepancies of that nature are liable to take place, and they are put to rights by the merchants' leave; the goods are not sometimes sent out knowing actually to what cargo they belong; we don't knowingly, when one man's order is wanting, fill it up with another man's goods, and so on from year to year—probably I sent an answer to this letter, but I can't find it; I took some action in the matter, and probably I should
tell the foreman and inspector to bring the goods back—more goods of a different quality were not sent to induce the merchant to take what we were sending him, an equivalent was sent—I have not seen these documents before (produced), they have come from the Surrey Commercial Docks—they show 53, 51, and 104 pieces leaving our yard, the printed form and the orders seem to be in exact compliance with something—here is a paper pasted on this other document; I think it is in the writing of Jones's clerk—it is not an account of goods sent not answering to the 51 or 53—it is usual to send a piece of paper like this when the goods do not agree with the printed document, and so to advise the person of what he is receiving; we send this without asking his consent, it is so trivial, so trifling, that it makes no difference to a timber merchant—the 52 feet of deals are run over in red ink, that looks like the clerk's writing; that means that they are not sending him the things, but sending him 52 feet over to induce him to take them—the value of them was about 2s.(Mr. WILLIS here read other letters from Cross complaining of short delivery and wrong delivery of timber by the Company and delay in loading.) I gave instructions to have the timber fetched back—there was a load at Mr. Cross's warehouse which I had notice to take back; we could not tell whose goods they were—we have millions of pounds of timber, and I could not tell without referring to the books. (Another letter from Cross Brothers to the Superintendent, dated January 19th, 1887, making a similar complaint as to timber,"Ex Nilo," and enclosing documents, was here put in). I think Hearn was foreman at the Brunswick Yard at that time—these documents are from our dock—these are not the foreman's instructions at the back,—I think the writing is that of some of Cross's people; I do not know it. (Press copies of other letters were here sent for). We settled two or three of Cross's claims—I don't think think he has two or three actions against us waiting for trial—different foremen have charge of the upper Quebec Shed. (Letters of March 4th, March 10th, March 12th, and 19th, were here put in from Cross Brothers, making similar complaints about other timber.) We did not inquire about the goods of March 10th, ex Monarch—it was at a public sale—when the letter of April 22nd came I inquired if goods not answering to the order had been taken, and found that goods had been substituted from another ship which I think was Simpson's and Mason's—I don't think there is any letter to them in the press copybook—I mean to allege that if I found such a thing I communicated with the persons, particularly in this case—on this letter coming, saying that goods had been sent wrongfully, I sent to Simpson and Mason, but I sent my son to them to buy these goods before that letter of April 22nd came; another person's goods had been sent to Mr. Cross, and immediately he complained we bought some goods of the same quality, dimensions, and mark—I sent the order for the goods; Simpson and Mason were aware of it—I did not say to them "We have sent away goods which belong to you," but I told them after why we wanted them—I met a member of the firm at their office and told him—I don't know whether we had paid Cross anything at that time—there are two foremen, one of the Quebec Yard and the other of the Station Yard—my son is not one; he is inspector—Glass was one foreman, and I think Podman was another; will you allow me to correct a statement I made? it was not Simpson and Mason that the 40 pieces came from; I was
thinking of another transaction, but they had similar marks and similar character—I think I bought them of Breezman, but am not sure; they were in our yard; I had bought goods before that for the Company's use, and two or three times since we have had this difficulty with Cross Brothers it was Burton whom we bought the goods of—I merely mention Breezman's name—I have bought goods more than three times since I have been in the service; I think this was the first time; it was last year—I think we have bought a few other pieces to meet Cross Brothers' complaints, but I can't say of whom; it is not since I was at the police court; they may have been bought by myself, but not in writing—there are two, three, four, or five persons to whom we have paid money by reason of short delivery to Cross Brothers—Wilkinson Brothers is one—Ivimy was the foreman I mentioned who had lately left our service; he was not in Cross's employ when I wrote "If you send in your claim for the missing pieces I will take care it is properly met; he left next day—this letter (produced), refers to the delivery by mistake by Ivimy; it relates to the ship Friar, and I think I saw the load which was sent to the Friar leave the docks—Mr. Zachari has timber at our docks—I don't remember that when he wanted to have it in July, 1886, there was none answering to it; if it had been so I should have heard of it; we had a claim from Zachari, and we could not find the goods—I don't know that Ivimy was sent down to see them for the purpose of getting Mr. Cross to buy the goods from him, with a view of sending substituted goods, but I believe Cross purchased Zachari's goods; there was no timber in our yard answering the exact description of Zachari's; I can't say there was not one piece—I think Zachari sold his interest to Cross; I enquired into the way by which substituted goods were sent to Cross, but I did not see him upon it, nor do I know who did—if he got substituted goods some one must see him upon it and make arrangements—I don't know that Ivimy was to call on Zachari, and say that Cross would pay cash against that order—I don't know that that was how it was done—I don't remember taking any steps in it—I do not know of any ends being out off substituted goods when they were supplied—as far as I know they were sent out, bearing a wrong mark—the marks were not removed when sent out.
Cross-examined by MR. PHILBRICK. The writing on these documents A, B, C, and D, is Ivimy's—I know of no books which show that every bit of timber mentioned in Ivimy's writing was not sent out of the dock instead of timber which ought to have gone out, on the delivery orders; there ought to be a book to show it—if there is any substituted timber it is entered; there is no book which shows where one man's goods are sent instead of another's—no such thing happens except irregularly, and there is no record—I have been through these papers; every delivery order contains the right goods, but if they are not found the order is sent away short, and the merchant sends in a claim for what is short, and if other goods are sent, the delivery book shows what is sent—there would be no record in the delivery book, but an entry on the order—a delivery note is attached to the delivery book—when timber is substituted it is shown on the note, but not in the book—I can't show you any document which shows where we delivered one man's goods for another's—there is no record of every time the Company have delivered one man's goods for another's; we never had such transactions knowingly—if either
accidentally or from a benevolent motive we don't deliver what we ought there is no record of it—if a foreman takes an order for 150 pieces of boarding, and gets the contractor's men to put in 150 boards of a superior quality, neither the gatekeeper or any one else can tell, but if he takes out 200 instead of 150 the gatekeeper ought to detect it; the inspector would not be there—the contractors are illiterate men, and are paid by the piece, and they take the scale which they are to be paid at from our office—if they did more than was specified on the delivery order they would, as a rule, want to be paid for it, but if a foreman liked to be dishonest he could be so; it would go to the same merchant—Ivimy came to me after the committal, and told me what Perkins had told him about what was stated at the police-court about him was untrue—he said that Perkins said he had been bribed by me under a promise that he should be taken back into the Dock Company's service—I said "It is all bosh or nonsense"—he said that Perkins said that when the trial came on he should correct his evidence, and give it right—I think Ivimy told me that Perkins said that he had been to their solicitors—I think I told Ivimy that I had great respect for his father, who had been there many years—I said that Cross's had been giving great trouble with their claims lately—I did not say that the directors had made unpleasant remarks about the number of small claims, I said that it caused me unpleasantness and annoyance, but the directors' names were not mentioned—Ivimy did not say that he had never been a party to any dishonest act—he did not say that all that happened under him or with him had been the sending away one timber for another, or that to his knowledge Cross never received more than he ought to on the whole—no one else was present at the interview; it was in my dining-room in the evening—he came round to my house unexpected, and called on me—I made no minute of the conversation—I saw a letter from Perkins; this is it—it is addressed to "Lewis and Lewis, December 24th, 1887."
Re-examined. These claims made by Cross began directly after Ivimy entered their service—the foreman of the yard would have some knowledge of what goods had been delivered, if there had been any—after these complaints were made to the Dock Company we had some stock books taken, showing what goods were missing—some of those books were stolen from the office of the Island Yard soon after Ivimy left the service—some of them were returned to me by Perkins, I do not know the date, some months afterwards—I do not know when they were taken—I knew they were missing—the whole of Cross Brothers' claim as to mistaken deliveries and shortages amounted to about 30l. or 40l., extending over from the time Ivimy first joined Cross till the case came on—that included the claim for 23l. in the action which the Company are defending—besides that it was between 20l. or 30l.; some of those the Company settled rather than fight—there is no system in the docks of delivering other people's goods to merchants who require timber—it does not happen to any appreciable extent—I should say the value of timber delivered from the docks in the course of a year is roughly about a million and a half—taking one year with another the shortage claims amount to not 10l. a year—the claims made by Mr. Cross while Ivimy has been in his employment are larger than have ever been made in the same length of time—when delivery orders are sent for particular goods, and there is some slight variation in the quantity delivered, that is sometimes appended
or written on the back of the delivery notes—those are delivered to the customer buying the goods—therefore if there has been any mistake the customer buying the goods would have those documents in his possession—sometimes the mistake or the deficiency is reported to me at once, and then I say "Deliver what you have," and the merchant to whom the goods belong will send me in a claim for the difference, but when it is a very trifling difference then I always say "Send what you have and a memorandum of what you do send. "Q. So that when the claim is made it very often arises from one set of goods being substituted for the other in the course of loading? A. Being mixed up—there is nothing in the course of his business in which Ivimy was called upon to send such documents as A, B, C, and E D, the cheque—Ivimy under no circumstances was authorised to receive money—Mr. Willis asked me about a conversation with Perkins, in which he asked me if he did not deny that there had, been any irregularities with regard to the delivery to Mr. Cross; and he, asked me about taking Perkins into the service and giving him the sovereign—I gave the first sovereign to Perkins because I knew that he had no money at all, and that he had a wife and youngster dependent upon him—I received this application from him, and it was after that I gave him that assistance—this letter (produced) was received after Perkins had disappeared—I had been making every effort possible to find him. (MR. COCK read a letter from Perkins to Messrs. Lewis and Lewis, of 24th December, 1887. This stated that he saw from the Timber Trades Gazette that it was inferred by their Counsel that two witnessess had been got away by the defendants, and that he wrote to let them know the real facts; and that Samuel Brownfield might have told them the facts if he would). I am Samuel Brown field—it is not true to say "As he would have shown his own guilt, it was he who got me to stop away from the Court"—I never dreamt of being absent until it was first put to me by Brownfield, but I could not understand Inspector Cruse telling me only a few days before the Sessions, when he subpœnaed me, not to come on the Monday, and, in fact, not to come before—he told me previous to this that one of Mr. Brownfield's confidential men intimated that the governor would like to see me—I did arrange to see him on the Saturday morning previous to the trial, not in the office, but in one of our yards—I deny that I took the precaution to take a witness with me in case of any treachery being practised on me, knowing what he had done and got me to do before—this witness accompanied me into the docks, and left me at the Station Yard while I went to speak to Brownfield, who was coming along the quayside of the Station Yard on his way back to the main office from the Commercial—it is utterly untrue that anything of the following took place, "My friend who went with me will be forth coming to prove my statement, it was then he put it to me, would I go away if he would satisfy me fully before I left with an assurance that no steps would be taken by the Company to bring me back; after a few minutes' consideration I told him I would rather stay and face the trial and tell the whole truth: he then pointed out the dangerous position which I should stand in, whether I gave the evidence over again which I did at Greenwich Police-court, or as I now desired to; on the one side the evidence the defendants would have me because of the letter I had written to them and the I. O. U., and on the other hand the Dock Company would have me on the police-court evidence"—there is not a syllable of
truth in this "I sawmyself then in a very awkward position, and at once accepted the second bribe off him on the distinct understanding that I should not appear on the trial, or, in fact, again at all, and he then supplied me with sufficient money to go where I could not be fetched back, and I deny any one living soul, save Samuel Brownfield, knowing that I was not going to be present at the trial, the less Inspeotor Cruse says about me the better, as for Mr. O'Halleran, he had better say nothing more, or I shall say something more; he does not state in his sworn evidence what he himself said to me at the public-house named; you may not see the importance of Brownfield sending me away, but he knows if I had stayed and given my evidence, and the other servants of the Dock Company who are subpœnaed for the defence, that a large number of cases where he, Brownfield, has given direct orders for goods to be taken away whilst they were lying on the quays before being touched, belonging to the various merchants, I may here mention a few of them, Hook, Fowler, Bryan, Powis, Shooter, Churchill, and so forth, and lots of others, all these can be proved by myself and the Dock Company's men and books, and it can be proved what was done with them, and who reaped the benefit, and also to his ordering goods to be re-branded, ends cut off, goods cut in two, &c."—there is not the slightest foundation for saying I have been a party, or having anything to do with such proceedings; it is utterly untrue—"To defy detection, that is why I am sent away, and it is for him to endeavour to squash the case, and save his position, and to keep back the putting in of one of the Company's overstock books, which Brownfield knows is in the possession of the defendants, and the timber in the book is stolen by Brownfield's orders. In conclusion, allow me to say that this prosecution was begun and continued until now by malice, bribery, corruption, and perjury, done and caused to be done by Samuel Brownfield, all because the defendant Cross refused to take any more goods other than his own, but brought actions to recover the same or their value"—he never did that to my knowledge before these cases with which we are now dealing in this prosecution arose—I never heard of inquiries asked for from Cross as early as August last year—"Had he not done this there would have been no prosecution. I wrote this purely and simply in the interests of justice, and to save two innocent men"—the man writing that is the man who had given evidence on oath before." (The letter contained a postscript stating that a copy of a letter had been sent to the defendant's solicitors, so that it should be suppressed.) There is not the slightest foundation for the suggestion that I got Perkins away; the Company have taken every means in their power for the purpose of having him here—we have advertised, and a warrant has been issued.
GEORGE CREWS (Police Inspector, Surrey Commercial Docks). When the first inquiries were made from Cross I went, on instructions from Brownfield, to Cross's place with Smethurst, Inspector of the Island Yard—that was in August, 1886—I did not see Mr. Cross; I was told he was in Edinburgh—I went back and communicated with Mr. Brownfield, and subsequently went again with Smethurst—I am not certain whether I saw Cross on the second or third occasion that I went—shortly afterwards I saw Cross at the yard—I said "Mr. Cross, I want you to show me the goods which were delivered to you on a certain date," particulars of which I had then with me—he said he would make inquiries, and he
would send them back to the Dock Company the next day if any mistake had been made—I had two of these papers with me then, I think—"C" was one; I had that from Mr. Brownfield—I had some conversation with Cross about this identical delivery—I said "If you can tell me who bought these things; I only wish to see them, to see some of the things that were delivered on that particular day; if you can show me some here, that is all I want; I merely wish to see them"—he went out at the back and spoke to one of his men, and came back and said "You shall have them back in the docks to-morrow"—I still pressed him to tell me where I could see them; I would go anywhere—he still kept on that he would make inquiries at once, and he would have them returned to the dock, so that I could see them there—I then produced that piece of paper "C." (This gave particulars of timber amounting to 38l. 7s. 10d., divided into thirds, 12l. 16s. each.) I said "I believe, Mr. Cross, these are your figures," pointing to the third—he looked at it; he said "Yes"—I said "What does that one-third mean, Mr. Cross?"—he said "It showed the value of the goods that I got for those I ought to have got, which the Company were unable to deliver to me—the value of those I got in comparison with those I ought to have got"—I said "I do not believe it"—he said "I think we had better have a bottle of champagne together instead of bothering about this"—he then followed me and Smethurst out down the New Church Court into the Strand—at the bottom of the court he again asked us to have something to drink with him—we left his place of business then—these goods were never returned to the docks, and I went again to Mr. Cross, I do not know whether it was two or three days afterwards, with Smethurst—we went to New Church Court, Strand, where there is a timber yard—I still asked about this particular delivery, and said they had not been returned—he called a Mr. Kingsbury in, who was in the firm, and he said "Mr. Kingsbury, what about that lot of goods that we was to send back to the Dock Company? have you found out where they are?"—Kingsbury said "No, they were all sold at once; they arrived outside the premises in a cart from the docks, and they were sold at once as they stood in the van"—I said "You would know the person's name and address?"—Mr. Kingsbury said "No; it is not usual to ask people's names when there is a cash purchase like that"—I said "How were they taken away?"—Kingsbury said "Our carman took them round on the van to the man's place who bought them"—Mr. Cross was present—I said "The carman will know where he took them to"—Kingsbury said "I have asked the carman; he cannot remember"—Cross said to Kingsbury 11 Did not you keep none of it; did not you keep one of the boards?"—Kingsbury said "Yes, I think I did one"—Kingsbury then left the office and went into the yard, and returned with a broken board, and said "This is one of them"—Mr. Smethurst looked at it, and remarked that it never came from the docks at all—I do not know anything about that myself—I told Mr. Cross I thought it was very unsatisfactory—I left then—I made my report of the interview to Mr. Brownfield—I had no more interviews with Cross till the hearing at Greenwich—I was present when he was apprehended, and at the hearing before the Magistrate—I was in Court when Perkins was called as a witness, and I heard him give evidence—I heard it read over to him, and saw him sign his deposition—I heard Worrell give evidence, and I heard it read to him,
and saw him sign his deposition—both of the defendants were represented by a solicitor, Mr. Moss appeared for both—I heard him cross examine Perkins and Worrell on behalf of both defendants—the matter went before the Grand Jury in May or June last year—a true bill was found on 23rd May—I was not present before the Grand Jury—I was in Court about here, and I saw on that occasion both Perkins and Worrell—I won't be sure that Worrell went into the Grand Jury room; Perkins did; he was the first witness—I won't be sure the Grand Jury did not return a true bill on his evidence—I spoke to Worrell about the precincts of the Court—there was a postponement of the trial till the June Sessions—I was here looking after the case then—I again saw Perkins and Worrell then at this Court—I did not go to the Queen's Bench when the argument of this rule was taking place—I was here in the November Sessions when the case stood for trial—I saw Perkins here then; I do not think Worrell was—I did not see Worrell—I have never seen Worrell since—the next Sessions were on 12th December; I was present then—between the November and December Sessions I received certain instructions as to Perkins, not as to Worrell. (MR. WILLIS objected to this evidence as irrelevant to the issue. MR. COCK stated that it was given for the purpose of putting in the depositions of Perkins and Worrall on the ground that they were being kept back by the present defendants. MR. WILLIS and MR. PHILBRICK protested against such evidence being given in the presence of the Jury, it being a question for the Court alone, upon which the RECORDER dismissed the Jury till the following morning, and in their absence heard certain evidence to guide him in determining whether he ought to allow the depositions to be put in, after which he stated that, in his opinion, Perkins and Worrall were being kept out of the way by the present defendants, and on that ground permitted the depositions to be given in evidence (See page 582.)
FRANCIS DAVEY . I used to keep the Crystal Tavern, Rotherhithe, near the Surrey New Docks, and at that time I banked at the London and Joint Stock Bank, Limited—I know Ivimy—I endorsed this cheque (produced)—Ivimy and Perkins brought it to me, I imagine about the date that is on it—had it been an old cheque I should not have changed it—I cashed it for them, and gave them the value, 11l., and it passed through my bank in the ordinary course of business—I don't remember whether I have cashed other cheques for them.
Cross-examined by MR. WILKINSON. I remember a conversation to the effect that Perkins had borrowed money from Cross, and was going to get married—Ivimy asked me to change the cheque, knowing me, but he said it was for Perkins—I do not remember the exact words that were used by Perkins about having borrowed the money from Cross—I know there was some conversation respecting a matter of that description—I said to Ivimy "This cheque is for Perkins, I suppose it is all right?"—"Oh" he said, "that is all right; or Davey and I would not bring it you"—I found it was all right—he said it was for the purpose of Perkins getting married, and I heard he was married shortly afterwards.
REGINALD MCMASTER . I am a clerk in the Knightsbridge branch of the London and County Bank—I produce a certified copy of Mr. Cross's ledger account between February, 1886, and July, 1886—he was a timber merchant and banked there—the date of the last cheque is 19th April, and it was paid in through our bank on 10th May.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I have known Cross about three or
four years—he has, I believe, been a customer of the bank during that time.
WILLIAM PERKINS NEWTON . I am clerk at the Greenwich Police Court, I produce the depositions—they were taken before the Magistrate whose name and signature appears upon them in the presence of the two prisoners—the prisoners were represented—the examination took place before them, and they cross-examined—each witness was sworn. (MR. PHILBRICK objected to the admission of the deposition on the ground that no signature of any Magistrate appeared on that part of the paper which purported to contain the evidence of Perkins, and that it was not therefore properly verified; and also that the deposition appeared to be on a general charge of felony, without specifying any particular days or charges, and having nothing to show it related to the charges which were the subject-matter of the investigation before the COURT. MR. WILLIS took the same objecetion on behalf of Cross. MR. COCK submitted that the deposition mas taken is the usual way, and the Magistrate's signature was quite sufficient; and that no deposition could state otherwise than that the offence was a felony, and that the details would appear from it. MR. BESLEY submitted that the deposition was equivalent to a deposition without a caption, and therefore could not be admissable. The RECORDER overruled the objection, but made a note of it. The deposition of Thomas Perkins was here read as follows: "Thomas Perkins, on oath, saith as follows: I live at 41, Algar Street, Rotherhithe; no occupation. Up to January last I'd been for about nine years in the employ of the Surrey Commercial Dock Company at Rotherhithe. I was assistant foreman in several of the yards, one being the * * * Yard. It would be part of my duty to see that the timber was delivered into barges of the timber merchants. In April, 1886, Prisoner Ivimy introduced Prisoner Cross to me. Ivimy said to me 'If you have any overstock send them up in addition to what you have orders for, and Cross will pay you or allow you something for them' Cross was there when Ivimy said that, and Cross said he would do so. Cross was in the habit of sending orders to the Company for timber; the orders are in writing, and, according to the timber in and the orders, I used to deliver it in Cross's barges; in addition to what was mentioned in Cross's orders I delivered timber in his barge. I did so many times between April, 1886, and January, 1887. After delivering the extra stock I and Ivimy went to Cross's place at Chelsea to have a reckoning up of the stuff he'd received in addition. At Cross's place an agreement was made for Cross to pay one-third of the value of the timber delivered in addition, to me and Ivimy. He had the benefit of the difference between one-third of the price and the whole price. The timber he so paid us for was stolen by me and Ivimy from the Surrey Commercial Dock Company, and Cross knew it. I never accounted to the Company for the money so paid in by Cross. The three papers produced marked 'A,' 'B,' and 'C': in paper 'A' the description of goods I delivered over and above what was mentioned in the order, the goods we stole, is in Ivimy's writing. In paper 'B,' the description of goods we stole is also Ivimy's writing. In paper 'C' the description is in my writing. All three papers were sent to Cross, and subsequently Ivimy and I went through them with Cross, and arrived at the prices to be paid by him. In each of the three papers there are pencil alterations in quantities and prices, and prices carried out, all in Cross's writing, and they were worked
out when Ivimy and I went to Cross to settle the amounts to be paid, and it was on the basis of the figures he wrote we received one-third. The cheque produced marked 'D 'came into my possession at Cross's house. He handed it to me soon after it was found out. In July last a complaint was made to me by an officer of the Company as to irregularities. I then went to Cross's house at Chelsea; Ivimy went with me, and I said to Cross, the taking away, the stealing the timber from the Company's yard without the purchasing it, was found out. Ivimy heard that. About the papers 'A,' 'B,' and 'C,' we told Cross he ought to be more careful; thereupon he handed me the cheque marked 'D,' saying 'You will see the last piece of this evidence. 'I'd seen goods received unlawfully. Ivimy and I were present when he gave the cheque. It it for 11l., and was for goods Ivimy and I had stolen and delivered to Cross. I handed it to Ivimy, and he cashed it, and we each took half the amount. I've received other cheques for goods stolen; the majority of them were made payable to Howard. The papers produced, 'E,' 'F,' and 'G,' are lists of stolen goods sent to Cross; they are in Ivimy's writing, and Cross paid us one-third of the value. The note 'H' I received. It is in Cross's writing; I can't say to what letter it refers. The lists were sent by post to Cross, and generally a few lines were sent with the lists. The note 'H' is an acknowledgment of lists, and the request to see us is to settle up for payment of goods. The letter marked 'I' is in the writing of Worrell, in Cross's employ. I don't remember if ever I spoke to Cross about it.
Cross-examined: I was apprenticed to the Company; my father was in their employ. The stealing began as far as I'm concerned in April last. I know Messrs. Cross received goods from the Company while I was with them. I've heard of complaints by them that goods purchased by them couldn't be obtained from the Company. Messrs. Cross bought goods of brokers which was in charge of the Company, and they sent their barges to the docks for their goods. A delivery note would be given. To my knowledge, when those goods have been sent for, they could not at times be found. I don't know that other goods were supplied to make up for the deficiency. I made out a list of goods missing at the docks; the lists were produced marked 'K,' 'L,' and 'M. 'These lists assist my memory only as to goods delivered to Cross unlawfully, and were missing. I handed to Mr. Brownfield these three lists, and he gave them back to me. Messrs. Cross might have complained three or four times as to the non delivery of goods. I didn't know anything about Cross, except seeing their barges there, till April, 1886. I left the Company' service last January, and am not in their service now. The cheque marked 'D 'was given to Ivimy and me for what we'd stolen. It wasn't a cheque for money lent to me to get married. I was about to get married in April, 1886. I saw a part of the goods mentioned in lists 'A,' 'B,' and' C 'delivered into craft; Salter was the lighterman. Some of the goods were sent by van, and I can't say which were sent by craft and which by van. I can swear the goods were stolen by Ivimy and me.
Re-examined: It was not my duty to send lists to customers, we sent delivery notes, nor my duty to receive payment of goods sent to customers. Payments would be made to the brokers. No payment would be made to the Company for timber sold. The lists 'K,' 'L,' and 'M' were not lists of goods missing at the docks; they were overstock. (Signed) T. PERKINS. "
(MR. COCK read the letters referred to in the deposition; the first was to the effect that Cross would be glad to see Perkins arid Ivimy on Sunday morning; and the second asked if he sent for some of the 3 by 8 spruce to-morrow they could manage it for him, and said Cross was under the impression they told him on Sunday they had no more; this letter was from Croat Brothers in Worrell's writing.)Witness. I cannot recollect what was done with the letters, "K," "L," and "M"—sometimes they are attached to the depositions, and sometimes returned to the solicitor for the prosecution—they are returned to the parties producing them.
(The deposition of Carl William Worrell was here read as follows:
CARL WILLIAM WORRELL , on oath, saith as follows: I am a merchant, 34, Great St. Helen's, and am summoned by the prosecution. In 1886 I was with Messrs. Cross as manager; our offices were at Chelsea. I left Cross early part of August, 1886. I was paid by part profit, one-sixth of the profits. I was to draw a certain amount during the year, and if I left before the end of the year that was to be treated as salary, and I had no further claim. That agreement was not signed; the agreement last year was simply verbal. The papers 'A,' *B,' and 'C' I have seen before at the offices at Chelsea. I was taking a salary at that time. I should have had an interest in the things if I had remained till the end of the year. I can't remember how these lists came to the office of Cross. The pencil amendments as to quantities and prices are in Cross's writing. I did not see him write them. The lists related to deliveries by the Company in the way described by Perkins. The papers 'E,' 'F,' and 'G 'I have seen before in our office. The pencil marks are in my writing, measurements and prices. I can't say if Cross or his foreman gave me them. I carried out the prices with Cross. The cheque produced, 'D,' is signed in Cross's writing. The letter 'H' is in his writing. The letter 'I' was written by me by Cross's directions.
Cross-examined. I was there in May, June, and July, to early part of August, and previously. I know I should see all Cross's customers at Chelsea. I know Howard, of Covent Garden, and a foreman named Howard, at St. Mark's College, Chelsea. We generally had large business every month with the Chelsea people. I received all the cash. I did not make payments to Howard. Some of the books were kept by me, some by Cross. I could not say what was the extent of our business with Howard's in May, June, and July. I only once received a share of the profits. The pencilling in 'E,' 'F,' and 'G,' is the value of the goods. I could not by that pencilling arrive at the profits till the end of the year. I was not to have a share of the profits on the goods in 'E,' 'F,' and 'G,'as I have already given notice to leave before the end of the year, in which case I should have no part of the profits. The pencilling was not done with a view to ascertain the profits. I had a quarrel with Cross. He did not complain of my neglecting my work. The complaint was that last summer, when this nearly came out, they accused me with having something to do with bringing it about. Cross did not accuse me of committing the irregularities in stealing these articles. He did not attempt to charge me with receiving this property unknown to him. My notice was given six weeks prior to any disagreement.
Re-examined: There is no truth in the suggestion that I have anything to do with these things being brought on the premises. In August last Cross accused me of being the cause of this being nearly found out. He accused me of
giving information to the Company. The first conversation was, I think, in Cross's house. He alluded to the Dock Company having pointed out the goods were stolen, and said I had been the cause of its being found out. He said 'Under the circumstances, I think you had better leave us at once. 'I expressed my willingness to do so provided that he paid me to the end of my notice. The lists 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' 'E,' 'F,' and 'G' represent goods stolen from the Company and received by Cross. In one of the lists the sum of 97l. 12s. 7d., which figures are in my writing. The calculations were made to ascertain the value of the goods, and to pay Ivimy and Perkins their portion.
By the COURT: I never participated in any way in the profits of the transactions with the Dock Company. The two Howards we're our customers, and bought goods of our firm. Messrs. Cross once or twice advanced money to their customers to meet bills. (Signed) C. W. WORRELL. "
WILLIAM HOWARD . I am the foreman at Mr. Mark's College, King's Road, Chelsea—there were business transactions with Mr. Cross's firm; I know him—I did not receive a cheque for 17l. from him on 10th May, 1886—I did receive a cheque some time in 1886, but not for that amount—I received a cheque from Cross for 4l., that is the only cheque I received from him during that year.
JAMES KEYS . I am manager to Mr. Howard, a builder, of Russell Street, Covent Garden—I have had the management of all his books for 1886 and 1887 and prior dates—he has never received any cheque from Mr. Cross or his partner—we had extensive business with him—I managed the entire business; none of Howard's business is done except through me; nothing is done by the head of the firm—I have the entire management of the business, therefore all money transactions are through me, and no money has passed from Cross to me.
GEORGE SMITH INGLIS . I am an expert in handwriting—I was instructed on behalf of the Dock Company to examine certain documents which were submitted to me—I only saw these three documents, A, B, and C—this undisputed letter (produced) and these others are written by the same party, I have not the slightest doubt—in A, B, and C there are certain corrections of amounts and prices in lead pencil; I am of the opinion they are in the same writing as that of the letters K, L, M, N, and O—I n give my reasons in detail if desired.
GEORGE HENRY MONCK . I am chief clerk at the principal office of the Surrey Commercial Docks—I am familiar with the course of business at the docks, with the way the delivery orders are delivered—when this matter was first brought before the Dock Company, I went through the whole of the orders that relate to the yards where Ivimy or Perkins were employed, every order from 1st January, 1886, to 31st July, and the first week in August, when the discoveries were made, every order—in the whole of the orders no goods were identical with the documents A, B, C, E, F, and G, with the exception of one order for boards five-eighths of an inch thick and 51/2 inches wide, 100 pieces from 14 feet to 17 feet long, and in the legitimate order there are 48 pieces answering to that description—the value of that would be a few shillings—these (produced) are the copies of those lists marked A, B, C, and D, of goods which it is alleged were stolen, and in these lists there are 100 such pieces, as against the 48 in the order; that is the only item which is identical with any order at all—there was nothing at all in the course of business
which would in any way have rendered it necessary for Ivimy and Perkins to deliver such lists as these by a timber merchant dealing with the docks—I have taken out the value of goods delivered from those two yards in 1886—the total value is 1, 404, 000l.—the 1887 balancesheet is not yet made out, nor have I the year before—I have only got 1886—that represents rather less than the ordinary amount of business during the last few years at the docks; it was a slack year—speaking generally, and taking one year with another, I should think, from the claims I have seen in my experience of four years at the docks, the amount claimed by customers in respect of goods that get mixed, and some sent in the wrong parcel, would run to between 400l. and 500l. out of that 1, 500, 000l. delivery—that would be made at the office, and not at the yard where Mr. Brownfield is.
Cross-examined by MR. PHILBRICK. Whether the value would be the same in one year or another depends on the price of timber; of course dealing with such large figures both the prices and quantities vary—the price of timber has been abnormally low—when I say "claims "Irefer to claims made on the Dock Company in respect of goods which were, according to the warrants, in the docks, but which the Dock Company could not find when delivery was applied for—I have no knowledge of cases where a man had taken timber which was not precisely that named in his order, and had got something else substituted for what was his mark—if the claims for 400l. or 500l. exist they have nothing to do with such cases—these are claims which remain over and above for something which the merchant said he did not get—we have partially taken stock of our yards for the year 1887—I am not in a position to show you by my stock-book that in the year 1886 a single piece of timber that ought to be in the docks is missing, it has been taken since 1886—there was no stocktaking in 1886, we make up the accounts to 31st December—there was no stocktaking in 1886; in 1887 there was, subsequent to these robberies—as far as I remember the stocktaking, that is the comparison of the condition of the yards with what was due by the books of the Company, took place from April to June, 1887—the books can be produced I have no doubt; I have not them with me—I have not said there was a deficiency of timber that ought to be at the docks when I took stock from April, 1887—there was a deficiency, and a very large deficiency, found on the stocktaking of timber that ought to have been there and was not there, in two yards, the two yards where Ivimy and Perkins had been employed in 1886, the Island and Station Yards—there was in other yards an unappreciable quantity of overstock that did not correspond with our entries; I should say, perhaps, one piece over to the 5, 000 pieces; I call that an unappreciable quantity over when you are dealing with as much as that—that is very rough, and I am dealing with millions of pieces—marks were tested on the timber in the yards as compared with our stock-books; there was nothing over after allowing for everything that ought to have been there—the general thing was a balance to the bad; that is how we had to pay the claims—the 48 pieces that I found a deficiency order for in 1886 was of 1st March, 1886—they purport to be Cross's own goods, stored by him at the docks, purchased by him of the broker, and transferred to Cross's name, so that he could give a delivery order to anybody, which the Dock Company would be bound to honour—this is the delivery order, it is "Please deliver to
selves, per own carriage, Cross Brothers"—it does not say "48 sticks," the 48 pieces are part of a larger quantity; 148 are particularly enumerated; the order is for 367 pieces of a certain size, out of a certain cargo, 112 pieces, 5 by 51/2, second whites, tongued, grooved, and beaded, 259 pieces? by 5, also tongued, gooved, and beaded, ex Volante, Island Sheds—he would have those particulars from the merchant from whom he bought—I say that on "A" there are no pieces to correspond to that, for this reason, on paper "A" there is an item of 100 pieces marked M. A. R. G., the same mark as on the order, 14 to 17 feet in length, and each particular length is not enumerated,? by 51/2, second whites, tongued, grooved, and beaded, 18s. the whole—the specification of the goods is tongued, grooved, and beaded, and it is carried out at squares—there are no lengths enumerated on the delivery order, but we have books which would show the enumeration of lengths—there are no lengths enumerated on the delivery order; it is quite regular—there appears to be a statement of 100—the real order he gave to deliver to selves with those lengths are 48 only, that is the cargo of the Volante I am referring to—I have only particulars with me up to 31st July—there is no order ex Volante except this one that is now in question from 1st January to 31st July—the one that is mixed in the 48 is the Volante, the 48 pieces were due to him by the Volante—I do not think there were goods of Cross before July, ex Volante, stored at the docks, or that ought to have been; I could explain why not—I have not the papers for August with me—a duplicate of that order was not, to my knowledge, returned to me with the marks "None of our goods delivered, other goods sent from the docks for these"—if when we had sent out something purporting to be the real goods mentioned in the delivery order the merchant returned the ticket with an endorsement that "None of these goods were delivered, and other goods were sent from the docks for those received, so and so and so and so with the scantlings of so and so," it would come before Mr. Samuel Brownfield, the superintendent—I do not know of delivery orders sent in for goods and other goods sent from the docks; I do not know of any such case in my own office as a record being kept of that—if there is any complaint of that character at all it would be in the nature of correspondence, and would go to the superintendent who conducts the correspondence—if there is an error on the part of the clerk of the yard I have nothing to do with it; I have no control of the yard—my business is with the books and documents, my knowledge is confined to documents—there is this to tell that these goods were not in substitution for others, that we have the certificate of Ivimy that we correctly delivered the goods, except that I can point to nothing.
Re-examined. When I heard of these alleged robberies I examined the books for the whole period over which these documents that had been communicated to the Dock Company extend, and I looked over that period to see whether, on the delivery orders, Cross was ever entitled to the goods which appeared on the book, and I found during that period, giving him credit for every one of the 48 boards—that the 48 were boards—the delivery order is endorsed by Ivimy as correctly executed; the note and the pass is made out as of a perfect delivery, so that I do not see why there should be an additional 48 on the list—if goods had been delivered in the yard of which Ivimy was foreman, of course he must
have known what had been parted with—this letter is in Ivimy's writing.
(This was Ivimy's resignation, dated August 12th).
CHARLES JOHN HUDSON . I am a timber porter, I was formerly in Cross's employment as yard man at New Church Court, Strand—I went into his employ in January, 1886, and remained there up to September of the same year—during the time I was there some goods came to our yard direct from the Surrey Commercial Docks, and some direct from his Chelsea yard—some came in July, 1886; we were having some daily—I remember some oak staves and short pile-ends coming, the oak staves in particular—they came to New Church Court, and I believe they came from the Chelsea yard; sometimes they came from the docks to Chelsea yard, and then from there—they came from Chelsea yard, they had come from the docks to Chelsea yard—I was not there, but I had correspondence from the Chelsea yard to Mr. Cross's New Church Court yard, and I remember the oak staves being at New Church Court—between July and August to the best of my recollection two gentlemen came up to New Church Court yard in the early part of the afternoon, and asked to see Mr. Cross—we had had these oak staves up there two or three days, some at one end of the yard and some in the office, in fact, all were put in the office at New Church Court at last, and I had sold some to a customer named Green in the ordinary way of business; these staves were suddenly removed out of the office, afterwards I found, to Chelsea—they were removed before the gentlemen came, that opened my suspicions as a funny thing that they should have been removed—a dozen of them had been sold to Mr. Green; his place of business is in Compton Street, Soho—these were at the place in the Strand, and were removed before these gentlemen came to Chelsea.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. Mr. Green got the staves, three weeks afterwards, from Chelsea; I went to the Chelsea yard about these goods that had been sold to Mr. Green by Mr. Cross's order, because they were mixed—I was not a witness before the Magistrate—I was first spoken to about coming here as a witness in this case about six weeks back, it might be two months—a friend of mine came to me, Mr. Wade, a timber merchant in Leadenhall Street, he carries on business in the name of Wade—I was in no situation at the time, I was very ill; I had been in a situation since I left Mr. Cross, and I left it for my health—I had been in a situation before I went to Mr. Cross—I was discharged from him, I had a misunderstanding with him and his manager, Mr. Kingsbury—I cannot say if Kingsbury dismissed me because I used to get drunk; very likely, I did get a little drunk sometimes—I was dismissed for being drunk, not for being asleep for two or three hours on the premises, for drink—directly Mr. Cross began to find out I knew so much about this affair was the reason I was put about—I did not get drunk while I was in Cross's employ, very likely I got the worse for drink—I was not dismissed because I got drunk, or the worse for drink; there was some commission money due to me at the time—very likely I was dismissed from the situation I had before I went to Mr. Cross by reason of my drinking—after I left Mr. Cross I was recommended by his manager to a firm at Stoke Newington, which started in October and collapsed in December, after obtaining all the goods they could on credit, and part they sold to Cross—Kingsbury sent for me and introduced me to this firms—I had not asked for a situation from him—Mr. Wade came to see me;
he took me nowhere, I was too ill to go out—I saw a lawyer about a week afterwards—I do not know who it was, I am not acquainted with lawyers; I do not know if it was at Mr. Lewis's office.
Re-examined. That is the gentleman I saw (pointing); I had no idea of his name—first of all Mr. Wade came to see me in my illness; that was all he came to see me about.
Witnesses for Cross.
JOHN HENRY HOLLIDAY . I am now in the service of Mr. Kingsbury, who is managing Mr. Cross's business—I formerly entered Mr. Cross's service at the latter end of July, 1886—previous to Worrell leaving I was there to assist Worrell—after Worrell left I took the sole management of the books and was a clerk—I assisted in the books before Worrell left—I found a dock stock-book kept among the books—all the goods we got from the docks and the particulars of the ship are all named in the top of the book—as far as I know and could see Cross himself had nothing to do with the receipt of the goods himself or the examination of the documents; he was very seldom there at the time—it was part of the duty of the office to enter into the stock-book any marks or statements relating to the goods received; that was the purpose of the book—this is the book (produced)—I find in this book a good many entries made by Worrell himself, and find there a good many entries as to deficiencies and goods not coming according to the particulars on the orders—there is one of 8th April, some three-quarter matching, 58 boards, ex Friedrichshall, bought of Foy, Morgan, and Co.—I have my book containing all the entries coming from the docks—I knew goods came to the docks not relating to the book, that I noticed at the time they came in—this in Worrell's handwriting shows that we should have received some three-quarter match battens, but instead of that received some five-eighths—it does not say the difference in the pieces—the right number of pieces were sent, but they did not answer to the order itself at all; that is the order of 8th April, 1886—there is another entry here, ex Agnes Link—in Worrell's handwriting I find a number of entries of the goods not being according to the orders sent, deficient and of a different kind—I have not gone further back than April 8th—I have had charge since Worrell left—in keeping up this book and in receiving goods from the docks I have in several instances found goods deficient in quantity, and also goods of a different kind sent from that to which my master was entitled; I can enumerate them, I think; at least, I can give three or four—sometimes a large number, 90 pieces, were wanted, and different kinds were sent altogether—there was one ship, ex the Chester, I believe; he could not get the goods at all—it is ex the Sowerby, and the date is September; that is 66 pieces of 2 by 9 inches, &c.—we could only get 9 sevens and 19 sixes; that, I think, we find are ex the Friar—this, of 13th August, 1886, is one of the documents I brought from the dock—this is Ivimy's writing; it came on 13th August, after the time of the resignation—the entry in this book is Cross's writing; the date of delivery is 18th June, 1887—here is an entry on the back of it, "Arrived at Brunswick Yard, &c," and on 14th July, 1886, I find "Ex Stein Zanani"—the entry relating to that says "None delivered, see list"—that is Worrell's writing—they were both kept open at the office—when goods were different, some officer of the yard would pin a piece of paper on the ticket—they would give the Dock Company notice and say "Please receive as this," making an explanatory memorandum—it was sometimes
necessary to have an explanatory memorandum as to the value we were to receive, and to examine as to the value we ought to have, and I have actually worked those things out, but he was so disgusted he got into the habit of sending to the Dock Company to fetch them back—no timber came in while I was there except in carts and barges—Mr. Cross assisted his customers by letting them have money—if a customer has an acceptance due on a certain day, and was rather short at his banker's, he would come and ask Mr. Cross to assist him to meet it—I have had cheques made payable to myself, and have been to the bank and got money, and put it into my bank to meet the acceptances—that was to prevent the bank knowing that I was meeting a customer's bill.
Cross-examined by MR. COCK. When I did that I entered it, and the cheque-book will show it—no receipt was taken for it—Mr. Cross had so much confidence in his customers that the only document he took was the endorsement on his own cheque, but there would be an acceptance drawn at a further date in lieu of the cheque given—very likely there might be a current account in Mr. Cross's books—he would insist on payment being made of that, and on that condition he would renew the acceptance, in which the amount of the cheque would be included, and it would appear in the ledger account—the renewed acceptance would not appear in Mr. Cross's ledger; it would be in the diary as an independent transaction; Mr. Cross would undoubtedly be able to trace it in his books—he has not asked me, pending these proceedings, to examine his books; any goods which have been sent different from the delivery orders would appear in the book which I have here, but I am not in a position to trace in it any goods contained in this document—I do not know in whose writing the body of the document is, but the figures are Mr. Cross's—Mr. Cross's books are not all here—they have not been asked for, or they could easily have been got—I cannot, from my knowledge of the course of business at Cross's Yard suggest any explanation of this addition and dividing into three—the cash-book would only show cash received—the counterfoils of the cheque-books show what the cheques were given for.
MR. COCK called for Cross's cheque-book for May and June, 1886, but they were not produced). I was not present at the police-court when Worrell and Perkins gave evidence—I never saw a document like this brought to our yard; these papers are new to me altogether—I have seen thousands of forms like this, but I have never seen one brought to the Company by one of their servants, drawn up in this form or anything like it—I have never seen one with the values run out, from the dock company's servants; they would have nothing to do with the account; that would be with the brokers and Mr. Cross—I never heard of Mr. Cross paying differences with regard to timber, or of his paying the Company or their servants any sum in respect of any timber transactions.
Re-examined. Mr. Cross's cheques are returned by his bankers with the pass-book—it is my practice every Good Friday to clear up the place; I did so on Good Friday last, when the men were whitewashing the place, and there are no cheques or counterfoils at all of 1886. I have sometimes given cash to customers for the purpose of meeting a bill, and had cheques made out in my name, so that if the cheques were produced it would appear as if I had some claim, whereas I had none.
Docks for the last 15 years—on several occasions we have found a certain number short, and it has been the practice of the officials of the stave yard to come to us and say there are a certain number short, and ask us to accept other staves instead of them, and we have taken such goods by way of substitution on several occasions—the examination into their nature and quality came within my supervision and that of the foreman of the stave yard, who generally came with the party.
Cross-examined. I had a list sent me of the goods which were delivered in substitution of those which were lost—it was not to a very large extent, taking into consideration that we were drawing five or six dozen staves aday; we have made many claims, but on most occasions it has been settled in that way—we have had one case within the last two months; it is now a matter of correspondence with the Dock Company.
Re-examined. Though not a large percentage there was in a particular cargo sometimes a perceptible difference at the end.
ROBERT MORRELL . I am yard foreman to Messrs. Cross Brothers—it is my duty to check the timber brought in with the delivery notes and the lists—if he had a barge up he would have two or three extra carmen, and we should have the list up to check the men to see what they had done in their day's labour—no goods came in at all without my checking them and knowing it—in checking these goods we find them wrong in four cases out of six; cases which come from the Commercial Docks, wrong in quantity and quality, and all ways—sometimes the quantity would be less, sometimes more—when the goods did not correspond in quality and description I reported it to Mr. Worrell; he was manager at the time—we have had goods come in on dock-notes, and I could not make them agree, and left it to Mr. Worrell, and took no further notice—supposing the goods were not of the same quality and description, it was left to Mr. Worrell to see whether he would take the others or not—I remember the police coming to the yard and taking away some pieces of board and laths and some 11/2 inch pine boards—I do not know how long they had been in the yard; they must have come from the docks, and the laths also—I do not know out of what ship—the pine boards had been delivered in the place of some second pine, I mean in place of some others which had not been sent—the laths came in the place of some plaster laths, for which we had a delivery order.
Cross-examined. I had the checking of all the lighterage, and I found four times out of six that which came did not correspond with the documents—that fact was reported to Mr. Worrell, who may have taken a note of it—I took a note of it, and it was handed to him—they used to be destroyed after every barge was unloaded, and no record was kept—I cannot say that I have ever seen any document anything like this—I cannot think what it can be.
Re-examined. I cannot read—I know Mr. Worrell made calculations to see whether the things were the same as what we had—I took down the things received from barges or carts—it was sometimes Holliday and sometimes Holloway.
EDWIN HENRY ELLIOTT . I am manager to Messrs. Ford, timber merchants, of Rochester—I have been in their employ 22 years, and as long as I have been there they have had goods lying in the Surrey Commercial Docks—we had short deliveries from them frequently—almost in every barge we have had down, there has been a small
quantity short—we have had a large quantity short—in a cargo of match boarding in 1885 we had 20 feet square short; that represented one-tenth of the cargo—we wrote to Mr. Sutton—I cannot say where we got the name, but I think it was from the barge, pointing out to him that we were this quantity short, and we sent this letter. (Stating that the number of hoards delivered was 182 short, and that the lengths did not agreei but that that would make no difference, provided they got their proper quantity.) We had this letter from Mr. Ivimy. (This was dated October 8th, 1885, and stated:" If you will let your man call next time he is in the docks I will deliver them to him. ") We did not get the boards we ought to have had; we got a different quality altogether—we had not a barge going up, and we got Messrs. Bessington to let their barge call in May, 1886, and they brought us down some second-quality match-boarding, on which we had to allow the person to whom we sold them sixpence a square—this is the list—our people took down what there were—as we tallied them we found they were short, and I wont over the stack with him, and found one wrong—the quality was inferior, and we allowed sixpence a square for what we sold—we made no claim against the Company—we have generally had a few short in the barges—we mentioned it, and the difference has been made up by the dock people—on one occasion we had a very large quantity sent to Sheerness, I think a whole bargeload; I don't know when it was.
Cross-examined. I never paid the docks more for any of these things—the accounts are sent to my office on the delivery orders, which are endorsed.
Re-examined. I have got a list—I check them with our foreman—there are very few of the lengths which correspond with the order.
CHARLES HOLLOWAY . In 1886 I was assistant to Worrell, the foreman of Cross's yard, and it was my duty to check the goods as they were delivered into the yard, with the delivery notes—if often happened that the goods did not agree—I began in September, 1885—I sometimes made notes on separate pieces of paper or on the back, and handed them to Worrell, and did not see them after—I never left the yard; I checked everything that came in with the delivery orders, and everything came in the regular way of business—everybody in the yard could see the goods which came in.
Cross-examined. I agree that in four cases out of six the goods which came from February, 1885, did not correspond with the dock warrant.
GEORGE KINGSBURY . I was manager to Cross Brothers at the Strand Yard for two years, 1885 to 1887—I was there when Inspector Cruse and Smithers came—Mr. Smithers asked me if I knew anything about a load of timber coming to the yard—I said that I did not, but the load that came was nearly all sold to a customer, three parts of the load—that load was sold by the foreman of the yard, Hudson, I believe, who was discharged for being intoxicated—that timber had come in in the ordinary way of business—I was present at an interview when Cross was there—he did not suggest a bottle of champagne in my presence, and I was there all the time—I did not know the goods which came to the yard; it was the foreman's place to do that, and if anything was wrong he would report it to me—I heard of some goods coming in substitution for those on a delivery order—it would be reported to me if the goods were not in accordance with the delivery order, and I should decide whether I
would take others—that did not often happen—we never used to have much—the goods at the Strand yard have generally been sent to Chelsea first—as manager of the Strand yard I heard more than once of Mr. Cross's habit of drawing cheques to renew bills of his customers'—I do the same thing myself, not in my own name—I have made Mr. Bayfield the payee lately—I sign the cheques in my own name—he was not the man who had got the money—I think he used to make them payable to Mr. Fraser, and a great many cheques would be drawn payable to Mr. Wright.
Cross-examined. I am able to trace those transactions in my books—I have my cheque-book in my pocket now—my father took over this business about a month back; it was in January—I had been in the business before; it was taken for me—I took over all the books, bankbook, and everything.
EVAN JARRETT . I have been 10 years in Messrs. Zucani's service—they have had timber lying in the Surrey Commercial Docks—I have known the Company take short deliveries a great many times within the last five years—there have been a good many shortings during that time—I have known several cases where we have been offered other goods than those which we claimed—I recollect a case of Cross Brothers in July, 1886—we were entitled to 399 pieces, ex Christine, and the Company were not able to deliver one—we told the carman, and Mr. Ivimy called—it was a very large portion, and the carman said they could not be delivered—Cross bought the goods, and I addressed a letter to Cross, of which this (produced) is a copy, and I sent him this invoice—I have had goods lying there since July, 1886—we have had deficiencies during the last five years, and there is a deficiency now, a claim made by our firm.
Cross-examined. We never had such a transaction before—we sent for some of our goods to the Dock Company—I do not know whether they were on the wharf in Ivimy's charge—Ivimy came to our office, and said the goods were not forthcoming, they were sent out in mistake, and they had goods iu their yard which they would substitute for them—we told them we should have nothing to do with the transaction, we should have the money for the goods as we had in other cases—when the money was got for the goods, it was got by a distinct communication with the Dock Company, and they paid us directly—Mr. Ivimy suggested that we should sell these to Cross Brothers, of College Place, Chelsea—we had never heard of them before—we had got our claim against the Surrey Commercial Docks, and it would go direct to the office—I don't think we had any risk whatever, he came from the docks, and said he had a man who would buy them, and named Cross.
Re-examined. The Dock Company never came to buy out any goods of ours—I understood that the object was to get rid of the claim we made—we would not take their substituted goods.
CHARLES THOMAS LAKE . I am manager to Bryan, Powis, and Bryan, timber merchants, it is now a Company—they have large quantities of timber at the Surrey Commercial Docks—it has frequently happened in the last three years that goods to our order are not to be found, and we have had to take others—we make a claim, and they do not like that.
Cross-examined. The amounts have gone up to 100l.—I do not know whether they were goods missing from yards with which Ivimy had anything to do.
Re-examined. I am sure it was 100l. in one instance, more or less—I speak of the whole three years—our books are most accurately kept.
HENRY MOORE . I am foreman of the Island Yard, Surrey Commercial Docks, and have been about 16 years in the service—I worked in the yard with Ivimy in 1886—during that year orders came from Cross Brothers, and once when we could not find the goods mentioned in the order it was made up with unidentified stock—we got orders to do that from Inspector Smithers, and a remark was made that plenty of measurement was to be given to make up for the deficiency—if I was doing other work another person would mark off the goods for me—my duty was to take off cargoes and deliver them to the craft, but I was always in the yard.
Cross-examined. I had not to deliver orders except for the things I sent out myself.
Re-examined. When the inspector said "Give good measurement," Ivimy was making the delivery, and I saw it—I have had other cases in which I could not find the goods, and made it up out of the unidentified stock, and gave good measurement to induce the people to take the things.
Cross-examined. I have been discharged by the Dock Company—they did not say that it was for keeping my tally-books back—Mr. Brownfield called me up on 19th December last, and said "Robins, it has never occurred to me to ask why you are summoned on the opposite side; have you ever given them information?"—I said "No"—he said "Can't you assist me?"—I said "No"—he said "Can't you throw any light on it?"Isaid "No"—he said "There is another matter, the tally-books, you can't produce them?"—I said "No, they are not tally-books, they are only rough notes, it is a matter of impossibility; they were only rough paper, and they were destroyed; in fact, Mr. Mark, the foreman of the yard, has seen it done"—he said "It seems a strange thing you two men, "meaning me and Rolf," are subpœnaed on the other side, and yet you have destroyed the books"—I repudiated the insinuation immediately, and he discharged me.
Re-examined. I was subpœnaed without any question being put to me by the solicitor—every piece of timber should be marked, but as a rule it is not—the foreman would give an order for re-pile-marking—timber was frequently not found when orders were brought for it, and other timber has been offered to the merchant in lieu of it—these two letters (produced) are in Perkins's writing. (A letter from Cross, of March, 1886, an I. O. U. with an endorsement, and a letter from Perkins to Cross, of May 6th, were here put in).
MR. KNIGHT. I am a builder, of Bloomsbury—I have had business transactions with Mr. Cross for the last 10 years, and I had several sums of money from him in 1886, always by cheque, but never in my own name, always in assumed names—he has given me cheques in the name of "West," "Perkins," "Howard," "Self," and several others—in May or June I borrowed 12l. of him; I was doing some work in Tottenham Court Road, and he used to lend me money to pay my wages with when I ran a bit short—the last cheque I had was of Mr. Kingsbury—I had
two or three cheques in the name of Howard—I have had so many that I really forget the various names.
Cross-examined. I had a cheque for 12l. 16s. in the name of Howard at the end of May or the beginning of June—I have got no documents or entry in any book to show that; I have a large almanac in the office, and I make notes on that; I am only in a small way of business—I might make an entry on a piece of paper, and then put it in my pocket—I never saw Cross enter these sums anywhere, he would give me the cheque and say "There you are, George"—I don't know if that was on 1st May—I never had a cheque in the name of Blanche—this was the end of May or early in June; I have no doubt about the period—I paid that cheque in myself—I do not know that no cheque for 12l. 16s. was cleared in May or June, I know I had it and I cashed it.
RICHARD JULIAN . I am in the service of Mr. Jerrams at Lewisham—I have been several times to Mr. Cross to get money on behalf of my master—I got a cheque for him for 9l. in July, 1886, I think it was; it was made out in the name of a Mr. Walter Howard—I then went to the bank and got it cashed, and took it to Lavender Hill the same day, and paid a man the 9l. on account for painting and graining. (A receipt for 9l. was here put in from Mr. Jerrams on account of painting, July 29th, 1886). Mr. Jerrams instructed me to get the money.
Cross-examined. I think Mr. Jerrams is here—I received information that I was going to be called about this 9l. three or four Sessions ago—there was an account due to Mr. Shaw—I last saw this account at Messrs. Cudden's office, the solicitors for the defence.
Re-examined. I returned that receipt to Mr. Jerrams; I don't know who took it to Messrs. Cudden's—I was asked three or four Sessions ago about this, and I gave the same account then as I give now.
JOHN BARTLE JERRAMS . The last witness is my foreman—I sent him to borrow 9l. from Mr. Cross, and he brought it back to me, but not in the form of a cheque; he brought this receipt (produced)—I filed it, and after wards handed it to Messrs. Cudden and Co.
ALBERT BAGHOTT . A man named Stadden was subpœnaed to come here and speak to some of the Howard cheques—I went to his house last night and found him very ill—he is the landlord of a public-house, and he told me he had fallen down the cellar, and he showed me his arm—the doctor advised him not to go out, but he will be here to-morrow morning.
Cross-examined. He has bruised his arm, his side, and his abdomen—he was sitting in the corner of the bar when I saw him.
HENRY SALTWELL . I am a lighterman, and have been employed for some time past by Cross Brothers to take their goods from the Surrey Commercial Docks, the Millwall Docks, and all other docks—I keep a book showing the work I do—I don't know whether the goods are checked at the end or at the yard before I start—the Company's servants load them on to my barge—I don't know whether they tally them on to my barge, but when they are on the barge every delivery we shift the barge.
HENRY THOMAS SALTWELL . I am the son of the last witness—I have assisted in taking barges out of the Surrey Commercial Docks up to Mr. Cross's premises—I believe the goods which are put on to the barges are always tallied and checked on to the barges by the Company's servants—my father is paid by Cross according to the quantity he takes—we have to
have a pass before we leave the docks, to show what goods we have got—we could not take goods out without a pass; I have never done so.
JAMES FORDHAM . I am foreman over a team of men, and have been engaged for several years past in loading goods on to barges or carts from the docks—I am in the employment of a contractor—I have loaded goods for Cross Brothers, but never in any different way to what I did for other people, and they were always marked off in the usual way.
Cross-examined. That relates to the number of things that are on the van.
CHARLES THOMAS LAKE (Re-examined). I wish to make an explanation as to the claim of 100l.—I stated yesterday that we made the claim against the Dock Company—that is wrong; we made the claim against the ship which was in the dock—we never got our deficiency of timber made good.
Cross-examined. I do not know for what purpose I came here; they gave me particulars upon which to give evidence, but it was not relevant at all; it was relating to some timber supplied to the defendant for which he had paid—the timber was put into the dock without any price—I have no means of refreshing my memory—the merchants check the delivery of cargo ex-shortage into the docks now, since this matter—that was in consequence of the claim against the ships—the Dock Company make up the landing accounts; it is left to them.
Re-examined. The deficiency was between the timber and the bill of lading, and we lost the goods—there was no evidence that the goods were lost on the voyage—I do not know where they are now; we never had them—we had a deficiency and shortage.
By the COURT. We are the consignees of the cargo—in certain cases the cargoes are to be discharged at the docks—we are the brokers, too, in that matter—these are goods purporting to come from Canada—we make the Dock Company our agents—we had no one at that time on our behalf. (MR. WILLIS here put in letters of 10th May and 7th July, 1886.)
GEORGE STRUT . I am a builder, of Battersea, and a vestryman, and a member of the District Board, and assessor of the parish—I have done business with Mr. Cross for many years—I have my cheque-book with me—on 12th May, 1886, I had a bill due from Cross Brothers for 12l. 13s. 10d., and on the 13th one for 49l.—I had run nearly close up at the bank; I do not know that I had overdrawn—I asked Mr. Cross to renew his bill, which was coming due, and he drew me a cheque for 17l. in the name of Howard, I think—I find an entry in my pass-book answering to it—I paid it on the 17th.
Cross-examined. I paid it into my own bank, the Commercial—I have no doubt about it.
Re-examined. It is marked here "Cash"—the first acceptance was due on the 12th—as far as I remember I spoke to Mr. Cross before that.
By MR. COCK. I believe it is the universal practice to enter cheques paid in, as payments by cash—I believe I paid the cheque into my bank with 3l. cash, making 20l. My impression is I paid the cheque in and did not cash it first; I do not remember whether it was endorsed.
FREDERICK STADDEN . I keep the World's End public-house, King's Road, Chelsea—I was on intimate terms with Cross, and have cashed several cheques for him—I was in the habit of cashing cheques for him in 1886 at Bell Yard, Fleet Street—the last cheque I cashed for him was
for 23l. in the name of Howard, in 1886—I said "Is this cheque right?" he said "Yes"—I said "What is the reason it is in the name of Howard?"—he said "It is all right"—I had cashed one a month ago for Mr. Cross—Mr. Davey was with him—it was in the evening.
Cross-examined. I do not know how far I live from his bank—I don't know who Mr. Davey is—I am the gentleman who was so delicate yesterday that I could not give evidence for my intimate friend Mr. Cross.
PATRICK DAVEY . I am a furnace-builder and hot-water engineer—I have known Cross 10 or 11 years, and have received many hundreds of cheques from him—I know Mr. Staddon; I have been in his house many a time—the biggest cheque I had was 23l.; it was cashed at Mr. Staddon's at my solicitation—I did not think he would cash so large a cheque—it was in the evening; I don't know whether it was after banking hours, but I did not think it worth while to go to the bank; the public-house was nearer than the bank.
Cross-examined. I carry on business in Blackfriars Road—I have two men in my employ—this was not a business transaction; it was a loan for Mr. Gross's estate—these were not estate accounts, but I wanted the money and he obliged me—I have no entry of it; I think I paid it back—I have no receipt for it; I never take receipts—I have no banking accounts—the Cross estates are at Clapham, Wandsworth, and Hackney—when I am paid cash I don't book it—I was not sent for till 2 o'clock yesterday, or I could have looked up some slips of paper—I keep books, but I certainly should not have entered a loan—there is no writing about it—there was a little bow-legged fellow in Cross's office, who always wanted to know what I wanted with Cross, so I waited my opportunity, and saw him outside; he said it was not convenient just at present, but he would make out a cheque in the name of Howard—I do not know that the bow-legged man was his partner.
Re-examined. Mr. Cross is a trustee of some estates at Chelsea and on Clapham Common; he has employed me in the matter constantly for 10 or 11 years—I wanted some assistance and I got it—I was doing two large jobs at Sydenham and Perry Hill—I did not want to draw.
The defendants received good characters.
GUILTY. — Judgment respited.
Before Mr. Recorder.
307. WILLIAM PEACHEY (23) and FREDERICK SIMMONDS (23) to a burglary in the dwelling-house of Thomas Mackey, with intent to steal.— Nine Months' Hard Labour each. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
308. ANNIE TWYMAN (33) to stealing two mantles and other goods, the property of Robert Ebenezer Annan, also to stealing a mantle and other goods, the property of Alice Shobol, and also to a previous conviction at the Middlesex Sessions in October, 1885.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted.
WILLIAM GLOVER . I am manager of the Three Nuns, Aldgate—on 2nd December, about 6 p.m., the barmaid Irving, who has gone to Edinburgh, gave me a bad half-crown—I went into the bar, saw the prisoner, and said "This is a bad coin"—I bent it, and bent it back again, and it came in half—I handed the pieces to him, and said "You see it is a bad coin?"—he said "Is it? I did not know it was"—I said "Have you any more of them by you?"—he said "No"—I said "Where did you get it?"—he said "I do not know, I have had it three or four days"—I gave him in custody with these two pieces (produced)—he was brought up at Guild hall, and discharged.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I do not know whether the barmaid showed it to the postman before showing it to me—you stopped in the bar seven or eight minutes from the time I saw you—you did not attempt to get away when I said you would have to go to the station and prove where you got the coin.
WILLIAM HURBER (City Policeman 918). I was called, and Mr. Glover said "This man has tendered a bad half-crown for some ale"—I said to the prisoner "You hear the charge"—he said "Yes"—going to the station I said "Where did you get the money?"—he said "I don't know, I have had it three or four days"—the barmaid came to the station, and said in his presence that he had given her the half-crown in payment for half a pint of stout—he made no answer—he was remanded for five days, and then discharged.
FLORENCE MILLER . I am barmaid at the Rose and Crown—on 18th January, about 7 p.m., I served the prisoner with twopennyworth of rum, aud gave, me this bad half-crown (produced)—I said nothing, but gave it to Mr. Thame.
ALFRED THAME . I keep the Rose and Crown, Collingwood Street—on Wednesday, 18th January, the last witness gave me this half-crown, and I said to the prisoner "Where did you get this from?"—he said "I suppose I had it given me in my week's wages on Saturday"—I said "Have you got any more?"—he said "No"—he offered to pay with two penny pieces—he heard me send for a constable, and tried to run out, but a customer stopped him, and he was given in charge—he said that he had never been in trouble, and had been in one situation 10 years.
Cross-examined. You said that you had 10 years' character.
WILLIAM ROFFEY (Policeman L 89). I took the prisoner, and said "What have you got to say regarding the half-crown?"—he said "I suppose I must have taken it in my week's wages on Saturday night"—he said at the station "I suppose I must have taken it in my trade of tubbuying"—he said at the station that ho had no home, but at the public house he said he lived at 10, Tower Street, Westminster Bridge Road.
Prisoner's Defence. I might pass this half-crown as well as anybody here.
GUILTY . **— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. POLAND Prosecuted; MR. HALL Defended.
JULIA ALICE TUPPER . My husband keeps the Victoria Tavern, Waterloo Road, about four minutes' walk from Waterloo Station—on 6th January, about 11 p.m., I served the prisoner with a half-pint of stout—he gave me a half-crown—I rang it, and b t it, and found it gritty, and gave it to my husband, and the prisoner was given in custody—I had seen him several times in the house.
Cross-examined. This is the coin; it has a very good ring—he could have gone away when he saw me making inquiries, but he did not.
HENRY HAMPTON TUPPER . My wife gave me the half-crown—went round the bar. and said to the prisoner "This is a bad half-crown you have presented; I have had several bad coins here lately; I shall make an example of you"—he said "I hope not, you must overlook it"—I said "I shall not think of such a thing; where did you get it?"—he said "Over the way"—I said "Where?"—he made no reply—I gave him in custody; the constable searched him in the bar, and took from him five pence—I saw another man in the same compartment.
Cross-examined. Waterloo Station is across the road, 150 or 200 yards off.
PETER CATT (Policeman P R 29). I was called—Mr. Tupper gave the prisoner into my charge with this half-crown—I searched him, and found five pence on him—I asked him where he got the half-crown—he said "A gentleman gave it to me over the way"—I asked whether he could find the gentleman—he said "It is no use going over, he has gone away now"—I said "Shall we go over and see whether he has gone?"—he said "No"—the landlord a«ked why he did not pay for the beer with the 5d. which he had—he said "I wanted to get change"—he was taken before a Magistrate and remanded, and on the 11th, as he was going back to the cells, he said "I wish I had never seon that gentleman"—I said "What gentleman?"—he said "The gentleman who gave me the half-crown at Waterloo Station for calling a cab"—I said "Did he give you a half-crown for calling a cab?"—he said "Yes, and told me to mind and not get into trouble with it"—he gave his address, 12, Gay Street, Waterloo Road—that is a common lodging-house.
Cross-examined. He did not say "Mind you don't get drunk with it"—I put it down—I find he has been working with Mr. Genette's travelling circus; I find nothing against him—since last February he has been in Ireland.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. POLAND Prosecuted.
tea—he threw down a bad half-crown—my husband took it up, and gave him in custody.
HENRY SMITH . I saw the prisoner throw down this half-crown—I took hold of him, found it was bad, and sent for a constable—I then said "This is a bad one"—he said he got it of a commercial traveller, who gave him 3s. 6d.—the constable searched him, and found on him threepence and a key—he said he had spent the rest of the money—the constable asked his name—he said Scott, and that he lived over the water—afterwards he said he lived nowhere—he was remanded till January 10th, and then discharged—I am sure he is the person.
JOHN WHITTOCK (Policeman K 44). On 23rd December, about 7. 40 p.m., Mr. Smith gave the prisoner into my custody, and said "I have detained him, I have taken 10 within a month"—the prisoner said that his name was Scott, and that he got it from a commercial traveller, and had spent the rest of the money, and that he lived over the water—I said "Where?"—he said "Greenwich"—I said "Where at Greenwich?"—he said "I don't know"—I took him to the station, where he said he had no address—I found on him this key; he said that it belonged to 5, Commercial Road, Lambeth, where his wife lived—he was charged and remanded till December 27th then to January 2nd, and then to January 10th, when he was discharged.
ANNIE STEVENS . I am barmaid at the Feathers, Waterloo Bridge Road—on 12th January, about 9. 30 p.m., the prisoner and another man came in—I served them with some ale which the prisoner asked for, and gave me a bad florin—I told him it was bad—he said "What, is it bad?"—I told the landlord, who gave him in custody with the coin—I did not see what became of the other man.
HENRY ALFRED EMERICH . I keep the Feathers—on 12th January my barmaid gave me a bad florin—I went to the bar, and said to the prisoner "Do you know what this is?"—he said "Is it a bad one?"—I said "I have had several coins of the same description, "and asked my wife for a similar one, which I had received the same day—I compared it with the one the prisoner gave me, and it was the same date—a constable was was sent for, and before he came the prisoner struggled violently to get away; but I had hold of him—when the constable came I saw 1s. 6d. and 4d. in good money found on the prisoner—he said "For God's sake, let me go; I will pay you anything; don't lock me up"—a man who was with him went away—I asked the prisoner at the station who the other man was—he said "I shan't tell you"—he said that Mrs. Andrews gave him the good money in payment of a debt which was owing to his mother—I said "Who is Mrs. Andrews?"—he said "I don't know"—this (produced) is the coin I compared it with.
By the COURT. I said "If you don't tell me some one will make you, "and he said "I shan't tell you."
ALFRED HUNT (Policeman L 214). I was called to the Feathers, and took the prisoner—I asked him where he got the coin—he said he took it from a conductor in change for half-a-crown, going from Farringdon Street to the Elephant and Castle—I found on him 1s. 6d. in good silver and 4d. in bronze, which he said he had got from Mrs. Andrews for a debt which she owed his mother—I asked him where Mrs. Andrews lived—he said "I don't know"—he said he lived at 5, Commercial Street, Lambeth—I went there and found his wife—I afterwards told him that
his wife did not know any woman named Andrews—lie made no answer—I asked him where he worked—lie said "I don't know"—I asked him what he worked at—he said "A painter"—I asked him who had employed him—he said "I don't know"—he gave his name Alfred Robert Hughes.
Prisoner's Defence. If I had been guilty I could have gone out; the landlady was looking at it for five minutes; I did not try to get, away at all.
GUILTY **— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. FOSTER Prosecuted.
HUBERT HENRY LETCHFORD . I am in the employ of Messrs. Colls and Son—each of our workmen is required to make out a time-sheet, showing the number of hours he has worked each day, and these sheets have to be signed by the foreman in charge, and at the end of the week the total number of hours are entered on a pay-sheet, from which they are paid—if a man is discharged during the week he would simply have to present his time-sheet which had been signed by the foreman, at either our City office or our Camberwell office, and he would be paid—on 20th, January the prisoner produced this to me. (This was one of Messrs. Colls and Son's time-sheets for the week ending January 20th, 1888, and purported to be signed by a foreman named Hodgson, and teas read as follows; "72, Old Broad Street. For assisting painters, 51/2 hours; dido, 15; dido. 15; dido, 15; dido, 15; total, 651/2 hours at 61/2 d. Name of labourer, R. Simpson.") I said to him "Why didn't you get payment of this at our City office in Moorgate Street? the work was doue in the City"—he said "Mr. Hodgson told me that as I lived at Camberwell I could call there for my money"—I am at the Camberwell office, 26, Camberwell Road—I then asked him where he lived—he said "101, Waterloo Street"—I asked him whether he rented the house—he said u No, I live with my uncle"—I asked him what his uncle's name was, and he said "Simpson"—he said nothing about coming from his uncle when he produced this sheet—in the ordinary way we should pay it—I then produced these other sheets, and asked him if he had seen them before, and he said "No," he knew nothing about them—they are sheets in the same handwriting, but signed in different names—I told him they were in the same handwriting, and that he had played the game once too often—I asked him what he had been doing at 72, Old Broad Street, and who he had been working with—he said "I was assisting Mr. Pike aud Mr. Godfrey"—I said "We were doing no work at 72, Old Broad Street"—he said he had been working there, and that Hodgson had signed the sheet—I then asked him if he had been working the previous week—he said "No"—I said "How long back have you been working for us?"—he said "About three months back"—I said "Where at?"—he said "At the bank in Cornhill"—I said "Under what name did you work there?"—he said "The same name, Simpson"—I then sent for a policeman, and gave him in charge—we sent for Mr. Hodgson at the station, and when he was confronted with the prisoner the prisoner said his name was Ryan, and Hodgson said that this was not his signature.
HENRY HODGSON . I am foreman to Messrs. Colls and Son, at 53, Moorgate Street—I know the prisoner; he last worked for me last October—he had not been doing any work for me up to 20th January—this signature to this sheet is not mine; I don't know whose it is, but the body of the sheet is in the prisoner's handwriting—I did not give the prisoner this sheet marked "A"—I had not seen him for some months.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I have seen your handwriting more than once—I have seen it on the board; when you took anything out of the shop you would book it on a board—there are one or two men there who cannot write, and we write it for them, but you do not come under that category.
WALTER PIKE . I am a painter, and live at 29, Lucy Road, St. James's Road, Bermondsey—I know the prisoner, he has worked with me, the last time was in October—he did not work with me in January, and he was not working with me on 21st December.
ROBERT BOUCHER . I am foreman to Messrs. Colls and Son, at Milk Street Buildings, Cheapside—the prisoner has never worked under me to my knowledge—he did not work under me during the week ending 6th January—this signature to this time-sheet "B" is nothing like my writing.
EDGAR PROBYN WILLS . I am a clerk in Messrs. Colls and Son's—it is my duty to pay the money on time-sheets when the cashier is out—I paid this amount on this time-sheet marked "B," not to the prisoner out to a man I suppose he sent in—the name on it is "C. Brown"—I know nothing about him, I simply paid it becaused he produced it signed.
RUSSELL STAFFORD (Policeman P 387). At 3. 30 on 20th January I was called to Messrs. Colls and Son's, Camberwell Road, and received the prisoner in charge, and took him to the station, where the inspector asked him his name, and he said "Richard Simpson, 101, Waterloo Street"—he was detained until Mr. Hodgson came, and when he told him bis name was Ryan he said "Yes, James Ryan, 8, Tappisfield Road, Nunhead"—before Mr. Hodgson came the inspector asked the prisoner how he got possession of the sheet, and he said Mr. Hodgson had given it to him last night at 10 o'clock—afterwards he said the sheet was signed by Hodgson, but he had signed it in a hurry as he wanted to catch a train, but Mr. Hodgson said it was not his signature—after he was charged and put down below he said to me "I was in the City last night; I met a man we call by nickname Suckey; he asked me what I was doing; I said 'Nothing;' he then gave, me a sheet; I asked him what I was to do with it; Suckey said 'Fill it up, and I will tell you what to put down,' and the sheet was signed by a man who was present, but I do not know him."
SACKER. I am not called Suckey—I work for Messrs. Colls and Son at St. Swithin's Lane, Cannon Street—I know the prisoner—I gave him one of these sheets (produced).
GEORGE SPANSWICK . On 23rd December last, about 4 p.m., I was in Camberwell Road, waiting for a friend who works at Mr. Campanies', a chemist—I met the prisoner, and asked him what he was doing—he said he was going to take a time sheet in, but he did not like to, as he had signed a false name to it, the name being John Hutton, and he asked me to take the sheet in; I said "No," if he had earned the money he should
go and take it—he then went and took it in, and I waited outside, and when he came out he showed me 1l. 11s. 1 1/2 d., and he then went across the road and bought a pair of boots—he said that Hutton was his mother's name before she was married.
EDWARD JAMES RYAN . I am the prisoner's father—the whole of the writing on this time-sheet is in his writing—the filling in on this other sheet is also in his writing, but I don't think the signature "Bowson" is his writing—all this sheet is written by him, including the signature of "Hutton."
Prisoner. I only plead for mercy.
GUILTY. — Judgment respited.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27TH, 1888.