CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
SEVENTH SESSION, HELD MAY 2ND, 1892.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND, BY
JAMES DROVER BARNETT
Short-hand Writers to the Court,
ROLLS CHAMBERS, No. 89, CHANCERY LANE.
THE POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE
REVISED AND EDITED BY
EDWARD T. E. BESLEY, ESQ.,
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW.
SESSIONS VII. TO XII.
STEVENS AND SONS, LIMITED, 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,
Held on Monday, May 2nd, 1892, and following days.
BEFORE the RIGHT HON. DAVID EVANS, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Right Hon. Lord COLERIDGE, Lord Chief Justice of England; the Hon. Sir WILLIAM GRANTHAM , Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice; Sir JAMES CLARKE LAWRENCE ,. Bart., Sir POLYDORE DE KEYSER , Knt., and Sir JAMES WHITEHEAD ,. Bart., Aldermen of the said City; Sir CHARLES HALL , Knt., Q.C., M.P., Recorder of the said City; STUART KNILL , Esq., WALTER HENRY WILKIN , Esq., GEORGE FAUDEL PHILLIPS, Esq., JOSEPH COCKFIELD DIMSDALE, Esq., JNO. VOCE MOORE, Esq., MAROUS SAMUEL, Esq., and JOHN POUND , Esq., other of the Aldermen of the said City; and Sir WILLIAM THOMAS CHARLEY , Knt., Q.C., D.C.L., Common Serjeant of the said City; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
CLARENCE RICHARD HALSE, Esq.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
EVANS, MAYOR. SEVENTH SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—a dagger (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, May 2nd, and Tuesday, May 3rd, 1892.
Before Mr. Recorder.
ALEXANDER MALCOLM . I am a publisher, and have an office at 165, Finsbury Pavement, and also at Glasgow—in 1890 the prisoner was in my employ as manager of the London office—his duty was to appoint and supervise the travellers, and to collect the accounts and send them on to me at Glasgow, not later than a week—if an account was paid by cheque it was his duty to send it to Glasgow—he had no authority to endorse cheques—is was his duty to enter in a cash-book all sums that he received, and to send each week to Glasgow a sheet copied from the cash-book—I have here the cash-book for 1890—turning to 21st November, there is no. entry of £118s., received of Mr. E. Lovell on 13th November—there is no entry of £4 7s. 4d., received from G. Greenburg—there is no entry of those two sums anywhere in the cash-book, nor have I ever received them—I first discovered these defalcations about September or October last year—the balance-sheet of 22nd November, marked "A," is in the prisoner's handwriting—there is no entry in that of the £1 18s.—that is the sheet sent to me by the prisoner; exhibit "E" is a receipt from Lovell's—that is the prisoner's writing, signed by his initials A. J. P., dated; it is a London account—exhibit "E" is a cheque for £4 7s. 4d.; the endorsement on that is the prisoner's writing—exhibit "F" is a receipt given to Mr. Greenberg; that is in the prisoner's handwriting—he has never accounted for either of these SUF;—I have the balance-sheet of 13th November—the £4 7s. 4d. has been taken out.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. No one is joined with me in this prosecution—I had a policy with the Guarantee Society'; all I recovered under that policy was about half of what you took; I claimed under two
policies of £100 each—I am not prosecuting under the authority of any association—I am not aware that the Guarantee Society have sued you and recovered judgment—I had no audit from the time you entered my service—I placed implicit trust in you, and you betrayed that trust—I wrote to the Guarantee Society on 10th October, making my claim—I did not prosecute then, because I was waiting to complete my evidence—I think I saw you on 12th October; I did not mention the matter to you then—I was paid by the Guarantee Society about 8th January—I discovered the forgery only eight or ten weeks ago—I never stated that I would never have taken any steps if I had not found that you had joined another firm and got my customers away from me, because I knew you had not joined any other firm, and had not taken any customers from me—I think forgery was included in the charge I made; it was forging my name on the back of the cheque for £1 3s. 9d.—I gave you authority to sign the name of the firm in County-court summonses, but under no circumstances to endorse it on cheques—I very likely gave you authority to keep £5 in cash in the office, and also to vote at creditors' meetings—I very likely gave you a power of attorney—my son was in the business, and knew a good deal about it—I am not aware that you signed documents in his presence; he never told me so—at the time this £1 3s. 9d. cheque was paid, and you endorsed it, you were in my office at Glasgow, and sent it back to London, and a portion your account of yours was paid by it—I had very good testimonials with you when you entered my service—I have never said that I would crush you—I did not tell your wife that I would send you away if I could; I might have said she would be better without you.
Re-examined. The prisoner was nearly a year in my service—I recovered from the Guarantee Society £177 2s. 2d.; that was the amount I claimed—there is no truth in the suggestion that I am prosecuting the prisoner because he has taken away any of my customers; my business has increased several hundreds since.
THOMAS BRAKE (City Detective). I arrested the prisoner on the evening of 8th March; I went to his address, 23, Redmond Street, Upton Park—I told him I should take him into custody for embezzling several sums of money belonging to his late employer, Mr. Malcolm, of 165, Fingbury Pavement; I said he would have to come with me to the City; he appeared very dazed, and went off into a fit—when he was charged at the station he said he understood the Guarantee Society had settled the matter—a list of the sums he was charged with embezzling was left at the station by Mr. Malcolm—I did not show him the list.
Cross-examined. I said before the Magistrate that I showed you the list, not the list marked "A," but a list of four or five amounts; I showed it to you in your own house; it was there for you to see, but you were drunk at the time, and you went into a fainting fit for about three-quarters of an hour—I did not mention the word forgery—you were charged with forgery at the police-station; Mr. Malcolm was asked if he
wished to proceed with that, and he said, "No"—it was entered on the charge-sheet; the clerk said, "If you incorporate this charge, the case cannot be dealt with here"—I saw Mr. Malcolm next morning, and may have told him what you had said; he did not say that he wanted to punish you because you were injuring his trade and taking his customers—you said Mr. Malcolm was prosecuting you because he was in "queer street"—I never said if I could not get you on these two charges I would incorporate another one—there was a witness named Buchan, he was charged with something; that charge was not withdrawn in order that he might give evidence against you; he was bound over to come up for judgment; a missionary interposed for him, and he was to go to Egypt—I never told you that Mr. Malcolm had given him ten shillings more than once, and that he was keeping him back to give evidence against you.
The prisoner, in his defence, alleged that he had authority to endorse cheques, and apply the proceeds to payment of accounts, and that the omission to enter might have been merely a mistake.
GUILTY .— Four 'Months' Hard Labour.
462. DAVID HAIMSOHN , Unlawfully and with intent to defraud within four months of the bankruptcy petition against him, concealing a certain part of his property, namely, thirty-six bags of flour; Other Counts, for other offences against the Bankruptcy law.
CHARLES L'ENFANT . I am a clerk in the Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of proceedings in prisoner's bankruptcy; the petition is dated 6th June, 1891; the adjudication was on 1st July—an order was made under Section 121 of the Bankruptcy Act, for appointing the Official Receiver trustee on 26th June; the summary order was on 3rd July—there were twenty unsecured creditors; the total liabilities were £1,563; there was a cash account.
Cross-examined. The cash account is on the file—I see in that account on April 20th a sum of £90 as received by the debtor from H. S. Haimsohn for flour; on 27th, £22 received from 8. Berlinski for van and pony; this cash account was supplied by the bankrupt; he filed it on 9th October, 1891; it commences on 1st January, 1891—he charges himself with the receipt of £9 from J. Dickson for books on 27th April; and on the same date with £14 from H. s. Haimsohn, of Pelham Street, on account, and with £54 lis. 3d. from D. Frost, for flour—on the other side of the cash account he shows the disbursements he made; I have the Official Receiver's report—on 27th he pays £17 18s. 6d. to Messrs. Sache and Howard for flour, monthly instalment of £3 to P. Mumford, £25 to Lavine as repayment of a loan; £8 10s. to J. Cohen, repayment of a loan; H. Levin £8, repayment of a loan; N. Frost £10, repayment of a loan—£21 to H. S. Haimsohn is not on 27th—at the end of the Official Receiver's report upon the bankrupt's application for discharge, on 27th January, 1892, it stated that the bankrupt has offered the Official Receiver all the information and assistance that was required—the petitioning creditor was the next friend of the child who was injured, Goodman Davis.
appointed official trustee in this bankruptcy—an order of summary administration, which applies to small bankrupts, was made on 3rd July, and it was not necessary to appoint another Official Receiver unless by order of the Court—every bankrupt at the time of the making the receiving order is directed to bring in his books—the books he brought in consisted of ledger, day-book, cash-book, and banker's pass-book—subsequently a cash account was filed on 8th October—the bankrupt's public examination was begun on 25th August; it was adjourned for the purpose of the preparation of the cash account and goods account ordered by the Court—the bankrupt was examined at considerable length; he was asked as to his financial position, and as to what he had done with his property—the ledger appears not to be posted up—in the cash-book on 20th April appears an entry of £90 from H: S. Haimsohn, and opposite the name are words I take to be "a favour"; they have been struck through with a pen—I have noticed those words "a favour" frequently occurring; it means a short loan without interest, as distinguished from a more formal loan for security—the item appears in the cash account, which was filed as "H. S. Haimsohn, £90 flour on 20th April"—there are a great number of items referring to loans in the book, there are several items between the prisoner and H. S. Haimsohn—I find D. Frost and N. Frost there; two different persons—there are dealings, as shown by these accounts, down to the beginning of June; the cash account goes on for some time—the day-book stops in April, but there are items on the account subsequently filed—the goods account goes down to 1st July.
Cross-examined. There are entries in the books of money received as favour money, and after a short interval of the repayment of the money—there was receipt of money in that way from H. Lavine, J. Cohen, and the Frosts—the petition was by the judgment creditors, the next friend of the child, and the child, who are jointly named in the petition, I think—no complaint of any kind has been made against the prisoner by his trade creditors; I think there is nothing exceptional in the way of opposition by the trade creditors—no doubt before the accident happened to the child the prisoner had been in pecuniary difficulties, and was paying two large flour merchants, Peter Mumford and Seth Taylor, by monthly instalments; but I cannot answer definitely as to his paying instalments—there are several items of the same amount, which rather implies that they are instalments—the prosecution took its origin from the Ike of examination taken on the public examination of the prisoner in August—I believe the prisoner was examined by Mr. Myers, the solicitor to the petitioning creditor and to the plaintiff in the action—the difference between a bag and sack of flour was discussed considerably, and I think it turned out that a bag is half a sack—the prisoner has admitted throughout the fact that he disposed of his property—there are very numerous items under the heading of "favour money"—the cash account shows several items on 27th April, which are described as loans—in the banker's pass-book there are payments in on April 20th of £126 and £27—the counterfoil slip contains items of £90 and other amounts, making up the £126—on the 20th find him by the cash account making payment to Sache and Howard, flour dealers, of £35 17s.; a payment to Walker and Co., flour dealers; on the 21st payments of £9 12s. 6d. to N. Frost, £10 1s. 8d. to Seth Taylor;
on the 22nd £20 3s. 4d. to S. and L. Howard for flour, and a monthly instalment of £3 to Mumford—on the 25th to N. Pomfrey for the expenses of the action £20—there is no payment entered in the cash account of £27 to Frank Hutchinson, the flour, merchant, about that date; in the banker's pass-book on 24th there is "Hutchinson £27 4s. 2d."—losses and depreciation are mentioned in the prisoner's statements, but the immediate cause of his bankruptcy was clearly this judgment—I am not sure if he has been pecuniarily assisted since his bankruptcy by some of his trade creditors—an offer was made of £50 as compensation to this child; I don't know if it was made by a creditor or a friend; I believe a suggestion was made of something to be done—a prosecution once instituted is taken up by the Treasury as a matter of course, and there is no discretion about it if the Court of Bankruptcy has made the order—the Official Receiver, in his report on an application for the bankrupt's discharge, which is now pending, reported that he had received every assistance from the debtor—there is no doubt about the prisoner having been clearly insolvent before the action was decided.
Re-examined. This appears to be a copy of the judgment in the action, £425—the Official Receiver moves the Bankruptcy Court, which considers the file of proceedings, and makes such an order as it thinks proper—I ibid in the receipts, Judah Cohen, a favour, £8 10s. on 21st April; H. Lavine, £8 on 21st April; Frost, £10 on 22nd; £25, H. S. Haimsohn; there are several small sums distributed over a time—I have been through the books, and find these flour transactions in the day-book in the ordinary way.
CHARLES VINER EDSALL . I am a shorthand-writer at 2, Portugal Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields—I took a note of the evidence of the bankrupt on 25th August, the first day of his private examination. (Certain parte of the notes were read.)
GOODMAN DAVIS . I live at 5, Pelham Street, Spitalfields—my daughter, Esther Davis, was run over by the prisoner's wagon on September 28th, 1890—I brought an action as her next friend against the prisoner for the injuries she suffered—judgment was given on 25th April, 1891, about three o'clock, in my favour for £425, £400 to my daughter, and £25 to me for expenses as her next friend—the case was heard in the Queen's Bench before Mr. Justice Wills—five months after the accident negotiations for settling came forward; they were declined—after judgment was obtained, I communicated with the police, and also with my brother—on 25th April, 1891, I was in Bell Lane about eight p.m.—I went into Tenter Street, and saw this van being loaded up with flour in front of his warehouse—the prisoner was there and two constables—the van was loaded with about 36 sacks of flour by the carman Ellison—the constables came up and spoke to the carman; after that I saw the prisoner and his son come up—I did not hear what was said; they went to the Police-station—the prisoner did not see me at the time, I was out of sight—I was called by the police-sergeant to go to the station—my brother did not go with me at the time, but he came there afterwards—I said at the Police-station to the prisoner's son, in the prisoner's presence, "This is very strange; this is father and son, as
I have a verdict against this man for the sum of £425"—he said he had bought these goods of his father, and I remarked that it was very strange, as he is not in the flour business at all; the son said, in answer, I am going into the flour business now," and he produced a receipt for £114—it was dated 25th April when I saw it, I am sure—it was a, receipt like this, dated 25th April, for the same amount as this—the inspector said, in the prisoner's presence, "I will give you assistance to watch where the goods are going to"—he asked the prisoner's son where the goods were going to; he said, "No. 21, Whitechapel Road"—the inspector said, "I should not advise you to move these goods so late at night, it being already eleven o'clock on Saturday night"—he said, "I can do as I like with my own goods"—instead of the goods being removed on Saturday night to 21, Whitechapel Road, they were taken to 56, Leman Street, a fancy box factory—the name of N. Lavine is up there—it is not and never has been a flour warehouse—when it was unloaded there the carman and I were there—next day, Sunday, 26th April, I came round about ten o'clock to Tenter Street, and saw the van being loaded up again with thirty-six sacks, right up to the brim; it started about eleven, and went to Leman Street, to the same place as the night before—it unloaded, went back to Tenter Street; it was loaded again with eighteen very large sacks, which went to 21, Whitechapel Road, a shipping agency and foreign money exchange, carried on by the prisoner's son—the second loading was over about twelve o'clock—then the van went back, and was loaded up with seventeen large sacks and two bags, which went to the son's place, 21, Whitechapel Road, and was unloaded there and placed in a cellar among a lot of bricks and rubbish—then the van went back again—it must have been about three o'clock when I returned again—my brother was with me all the time—a third load went to the Whitechapel Road, three went there and one to Leman Street—later in the day I was in Tenter Street again; when they had finished loading for Whitechapel Road the carman took an interval of about an hour and a half, and between five and six o'clock he started loading again, and a very big load was taken down Tenter Street into Levy's yard, occupied by Levy as stabling—only Mr. Levy was there; he is a carman and coke merchant—the sacks were unloaded there; the van returned again in two hours, and loaded up again, and went to the same place—by the time they were finished it was quite dark; it would be a little after eight—on the Saturday night the van and two horses were stabled in the prisoner's stable in Tenter Street, and on Monday they were stabled at oxen Square, at Burnell's stables—early on the Monday morning I was in Tenter Street; I was called away, and I left my brother there—late that evening I saw the cart coming back with a different name, Bellinski, painted on the side; it went to Burnell's—later on I again saw the van; it then had the name of B. Haimsohn by the side of thewheel—I only know the prisoner's son by sight—as I have been in the same neighbourhood all my life I know his business is that of a shipping agent and foreign money exchanger; he is at Whitechapel Road now—I was in Court on the day of the trial—the prisoner and his son were there—they were together before they went into Court, and they went away together.
Cross-examined. This receipt looks similar to the one I saw at the
Police-court—I should say it was the same, bat when I saw it there it was dated 25th, and I suggested that the 25th has been altered to 20th—I knew the Haimsohns by sight in their business—I was never introduced to the prisoner—I was convinced he was a man in a substantial way of business, and I thought when the accident happened he could make substantial provision for the child, and pay a substantial sum—I knew nothing about his having made arrangements at that time to pay some of his trade creditors so much a month—he never told me that he was not to blame with regard to the accident which happened when his man was out with the van on a Sunday—the prisoner was not present then—the child was four years old, and it was playing on the kerb when its limbs were crushed by the van—the prisoner offered to give me £50 I could not accept that, not because I believed him to be a man in a substantial position, but because I considered it was no substantial recompense for the way the child was afflicted for life—I was sure he was in a substantial way of business; I had made inquiries—I have not seen any of his creditors—I was the petitioning creditor—throughout the bankruptcy I was represented by Mr. Myers, the same solicitor who had appeared in the action—he was present at all the examinations—I was; there, and saw the moving of the flour, but the prisoner could not see me—I went to the Police-station—I said to the inspector, "These are our Jewish Passover holidays," and the defendant considers himself a strict Jew, and it is a strict rule in our religion that during the nine days Passover there is no dealing in flour; I am a Jew myself, and I keep the holidays as such. (MR. GILL handed a document to the witness, and requested him to read it to himself)—after reading this letter I still say that dealing with the flour on that Sunday night was against our religion; I don't understand the document properly; I think there is a mistake in it—; some friends of the prisoner made an offer that the child should have some compensation—I heard of the offer through my solicitor; it was that £75 was ready for the child, and £25 towards my expenses, independent of the solicitor's costs—there was nothing said about so much a month—the smallest sum I asked for was £100, clear of costs—I cannot say what the costs come to; my solicitor said he would expect his money out of pocket.
Re-examined. The friends' offer to pay money was made last week—the offer of £50 made by the prisoner was before the case came on for trial in the Queen's Bench—the jury gave me £450.
By the COURT. The injuries to the child were very severe; one leg is off at the knee, and she has lost a toe on the other foot, and has had four operations—I was out of sight while the first load of flour was being removed, and after that I was in sight.
ISRAEL DAVIS . I am brother of the last witness—on April 25th, 1891, I was in Tenter Street about eight p.m., and I saw a van loaded with flour being detained by two constables—I went to Commercial Street Police-station—I there heard my brother say to the inspector that they were father and son, and that the son had never dealt in flour before—the son then remarked that he was going to deal in flour from now—he produced a receipt; this is it, but the date has been altered; it was 25th, I am positive—the inspector advised the son not to remove his flour so late at night—the son said he could do just as he liked with his own goods—the inspector told us to follow the flour; we did so; it went to Lavine's, 56,
Leman Street, a fancy box manufactory; it is not a flour warehouse—that was about eleven o'clock—on Sunday I saw one load taken to Leman Street and three loads to Whitechapel Road, the son's foreign money exchange and shipping agency; there it was put in a cellar among bricks and rubbish—in the evening two loads went to Tenter Street and were delivered to Frost—on Monday morning, 27th, about twelve o'clock, I was in ft ell Lane, and I saw a packing-case full of books removed to Dixon's, a bookseller in Sandy's Row, by Rusty, whose proper name is Moore—when Rusty came back he went into Burnell's stable and harnessed the pony and drove away—when the van came back the name of Haimsohn was painted over, and afterwards the name was altered to B. Haimsohn.
Cross-examined. This is the same document as the one I saw on the Saturday night; I saw it for two or three seconds in the son's hand; it was never in my band—the date has been altered—I may have said before the Magistrate, "This is not the document that was produced on the Saturday night"—the 5 was quite distinct; I could see it plainly; it was an ordinary 5; the stroke at the top was not particularly long—during the two or three seconds I looked at the document my eye was on the 5—I looked at it when the inspector had it; the inspector would not interfere—we were ten minutes at the station, I daresay—the delivery was stopped for an hour or so in consequence of our going to the police-station—the van was loaded at nine, and was not delivered till eleven in consequence of this visit to the station, I daresay.
Re-examined. It was inside the station that I saw the receipt—there was gaslight; there must have been more than one burner, because it was quite light—I looked particularly at the date, and it was the 25th.
THOMAS MOORE . I am known by the name of Rusty; I live at 69, Brick Lane—on Monday, 27th April, the prisoner asked me to take some Hebrew books to No. 8, Sandy's Row, Mr. Dixon's—I did so, and came back again—I went to the stables in Bell Lane, and harnessed the ponies and put them in the van, and went to Mr. Bellinski, at Ross's, Grange Road, Bermondsey—the name of Haimsohn was on the van; the name on the front was painted out, and "S. Bellinski" was put on the side.
JACOB DIXON . I live at 8, Sandy's Row, Beishopsgate, and am a bookseller—last April I bought about thirty-five books from the prisoner, four couple sets Hebrew books, one set of Talmud—the bill was £9, dated April 27th, and this is the cheque—I had never bought any books before from the prisoner—he came to me and said he was very hard up for money—I had known him for thirty years.
Cross-examined. He has always borne the character of a respectable hard-working man—I gave the full value for the books.
DAVID FROST . I lived at 33, Kenrick Street, in 1891—I had premises. in Tilley Street—on Sunday, 26th April last year, two loads of flour were brought to my premises, and sold to me by the prisoner—this is the receipt for £54 lis. 9d., dated 25th April—I paid in cash on the 27th, not by cheque—I had no banking account—I gave the full market price.
ALBERT ALLISON . I am a carman—in April last year I was in the defendant's employment—in the week ending Saturday evening, 25th April, I took a load of flour to Leman Street, and another load the following morning.
Cross-examined. They were thirty-six bags of flour, making altogether six loads and a half.
ADOLFH GUDMACHER . I keep a warehouse at 56, Leman Street, as manager to Mr. Lavine, a box maker—the defendant's son took a portion of the premises about the last day of the Passover—he kept the place about eight or nine weeks, and remained there eight or ten days—a load was brought there on the evening of the 25th—it was moved in and out.
Cross-examined. There was no difficulty in-seeing what was being done.
Samuel Bellinski was called, but did not answer.
Witnesses for the Defence.
HYAM SOLOMON HAIMSOEN . I live at 21, Whitechapel Road—from. 1884 to 1889 I assisted my father in his business of a flour factor—during that time I acquired a knowledge of the flour trade—in 1889 I went into business with my father-in-law, Mr. Barnett, in the fur trade, and I carried on a shipping business on my own account—I knew of my father being in difficulties in his business—after I started in business he used to come to me very often to borrow money, almost daily—he used to return it sometimes the same dav, in a few hours—in April, 1891, he owed me £60 odd—in that month I was making some alterations in my premises—I did the work myself, I had a surveyor to tell me what to do—I wanted money to finish the building—on Monday morning, 20th April, my father came to me and asked me for a loan—at that time I had a cheque for £90, which I had borrowed to complete the building, from Mr. Herman, of Tredegar Road—this is the cheque—my father owed me money at that time—he came to me on the Monday morning and said, "Solomon, I must have some money this week; I have a lot of payments to make and if you don't give me some money I am ruined"—I said, "You owe me £60 already, I cannot give you more; I have this £90 which I borrowed to complete the building, which I cannot part with; if you give me value or security for the money I can give you that"—he said, "I have no security, all I have is the flour, for which I have to pay this week"—I said, "If you will give me value for £25 or £30 off the old account I will give you this £90 cheque"—he agreed to that; he tried not to agree, he said he would try to pay me part of the £60—I said I could not part with the cheque without having something, he should give me the flour; he then went to his place and brought me an invoice for £113 10s.—this is the invoice, and then I gave him the cheque, and he gave me this receipt—on the invoice I noticed that it was dated the 21st, and as the transaction took place on the 20th, I told him to date it the 20th; he asked for a pen and corrected it; that was done in my presence—the flour did not remain at my father's place; the usual practice in the flour trade is to allow fourteen days after it is bought—my premises in Whitechapel Road were not in a convenient state at that time to take the flour in—I rented a place at 26, Leman Street, I formerly carried on business there—I think I knew of this action being on the paper for trial on the evening of the 22nd—my father came round and said he was told by his solicitor, Mr. Pumfret, that the case was coming on that week, but father always gave me to understand that it would not come on till July or August—the purchase of the flour was
not concealed by me in any way—one load of it was removed on the 25th as soon as the Sabbath was over, and on the 26th I took the remainder—it is usual in our persuasion to remove goods late on Saturday night, it is our most busy time, there is nothing in our faith against it—the police-were there at the time of the removal, I went to the station—this receipt is in the same condition now as it was when I produced it at the Police-station—on the 27th April the sheriffs' officer came in to seize the goods under the execution—I shovel him the receipt, and said he had no business in my place—I did not know at the time that my father was making any payments, he told me afterwards there was some money to pay—I knew on Saturday, the 25th, that he had lost a verdict—on Monday morning, the 27th, I made an arrangement about taking the furniture to Pelham Street—my father said they were pressing him for money, and asked me for more money—I said, "I cannot do it," everybody had heard about the verdict, and it was no use his having his furniture there, and I would buy it of him, as he must have money to pay his creditors—I did not take the furniture, I took possession of it, it was not worth as much as I gave him for it—I gave him £14 in cash and deducted the remaining £21 from the £60—that reduced my debt to £15 and some shillings.
Cross-examined. I am now a fur dealer and shipping agent—I do not do much business in flour now; I carry it on at my office, 21, Whitechapel Road; it is also a money exchange office—I went into the flour business as soon as I bought the flour from my father; that was on 20th April—I was five years in the business assisting my father—I was examined in bankruptcy; I stated that I went with my father to Mr. Davis, the place of a mutual friend; I offered £50—he said he would not take a penny less than £1,000—I did not say, "If you do not accept our offer we shall know what to do; "nothing of the kind; it is a pure fabrication, a malicious invention—he said to me, "If your father won't pay me the money it will be just the same as Duncan's case"—I did not know Duncan's case then—I told him I was not as rich as Duncan—I asked persons about-Duncan's case, and they told me £6,000 was afterwards found in a safe in Broad Street—I was in Court when judgment was given against my father, but in a different part—I went away with him; think we went to Mr. Pumfret's office, 14, Paternoster Row—I do not recollect what we talked about on the way—I did not mention the subject of removing any property; I swear that—I told Mr. Pumfret about the transaction of the 20th, and said, "What am I to do?"—he then said, "They can't seize your goods, but they may put you to a lot of trouble and expense"—I did not say anything to Mr. Pumfret about moving the furniture, or the van or ponies, only about the flour I bought on the 20th—the solicitor said nothing about its being a good thing to move the property—I told him the flour was in my father's warehouse, and I asked his advice, and he told me that no one could touch my flour if I had proof it was mine, but he said the plaintiff was a poor man and could put us to expense, and the best thing I could do was to take the flour away as soon as I could—Mr. Harris is living in Pelham Street now—the furniture the belongs to me—I let it to him since 1st May, 1891—he carries on business as a baker, and I supply him with flour five loads of flour altogether were removed to my premises, two on the Saturday night and three on the Sunday; there was no hurry about it
—I went to the Police-station when there was a complaint—He place in Whitechapel Road cost me £75 to make it a good light war house—at present I have no flour there, it is lying at the docks—I hare an existing contract for the delivery of flour with Messrs. Walker and Andrew Craig, and Seth Taylor.
ABRAHAM LEVY . I live at 14, Tilley Street, Spitalfields—I know the van and the two ponies—£21 is a reasonable price for them; it is more than I would give for them—one has been sold, the other has since died.
MARCUS LAVINE . I am a fancy-box maker, of 30, Great Alie Street, Goodman's Fields—in March, last year, I was in want of money for my business, and applied to Mr. Effrath for a loan of £50—I spoke to Mr. Harris to get security, and got from him two post-dated cheques of £25 each—I borrowed them of him for the prisoner; as I got money come in I paid him in small sums—by the middle of April I repaid the first £25; the second cheque I paid myself—I heard of the verdict against the prisoner—I saw him about it—I did not give him the cheque, only favour to oblige him, that was all—the second £25 I gave to Mr. Effrath—he gave me a cheque, and I returned it to Mr. Haimsohn—I paid him the first £25 in email sums—I did not tell him about the second £25—I did not pay him anything on the second cheque.
Cross-examined. I am a countryman of the prisoner; he is not a relative, only a friend.
HYAM LEVIN (Interpreted). I live at 16, Brick Lane, Spitalfields, and am a butcher—I have lent the prisoner £8 on the eve of the Passover; it was repaid on the Sunday or Monday following the Passover—I think my son went to the prisoner's house, and the money was handed to him—that money was lent without interest—I had lent money in the same way before, a good many times, and had been repaid.
JUDAH COHEN (Interpreted), I live at 30, Jane Street, Commercial Road—on the eve of Passover, 1891,1 handed my savings of £8 10s. to the prisoner, to keep for me for three days until the Passover feast was over, as I thought it was not safe in my lodgings—it was returned to me four days afterwards, on a Monday.
Cross-examined. I did not lend the money to the prisoner; I was in fear of my money, and gave it to the prisoner to keep it for me.
JOHN DOUGLAS TAYLOR . I*am in the employment of my father, Seth "Taylor, of the Waterloo Flour Mills, Waterloo Bridge—the prisoner has had dealings with my father for some years, and up to April, 1891—we have always found him honest and straightforward—in 1891 he, being; in pecuniary difficulties, came and saw my father, and explained his position, and an arrangement was made by which he was paying instalments up to April, 1891, I believe—I should think his debt to my father was about £500—the price of the flour we sold him on 14th April was 26s. lid. a sack, I believe, and selling it at 31s. would be at a reasonable profit.
G. W. RHODES. I am a clerk in the firm of Klein and Son, flour factors—the prisoner has been our customer for some years, and down to April, 1891—we supplied him with flour as late as 26th March, 1891; thirty sacks at 33s. per sack—on 18th March, 1891, the prisoner paid our firm £157 10s. for flour—there was flour for delivery to him on 1st
April—during all the time he has had business transactions with our firm his character was that of an honest and straightforward man.
TASKER. I am a clerk in the firm of Hunter, Craig and Co., of the Corn Exchange, flour factors—we had business transactions with the prisoner, and always found him honest and straightforward in his dealings—in April, 1891, he returned to us a delivery order for flour which, he had previously purchased, and which was going to be delivered to him—he had not paid for it.
FREDERICK WINDSOR . I represent the firm of H. and E. Walker and Co., flour factors—the prisoner has had dealings with our firm for a number of years, and has always been straightforward and honest in his transactions—in April he returned to us a delivery order for 100 bags of flour which he had ordered—in April, 1891, he paid us £61 1s. 3d., which was overdue; this is the receipt.
Two other witnesses deposed to his good character.
GUILTY . The JURY added that they thought it probable the prisoner had acted through ignorance, and strongly recommended him to mercy,— Two Weeks' Imprisonment.
463. ARTHUR SMITHSON (20) PLEADED GUILTY to forging and uttering an endorsement on a cheque for £12 0s. 9d.; also to stealing & letter and a banker's cheque for £12 0s. 9d.; also to a previous conviction of felony in October, 1891.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
464. JOHN GOUGH (18) , to stealing a post-letter addressed to Miss Ashdown, containing twelve 1d. postage stamps and a postal order for 20s., the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office. [Pleaded Guilty: See original trial image.] — Three Months' Hard Labour.
465. JOHN JOSEPH SALMON (24) and JOHN WILLIAM ORFORD (20) , to stealing while employed in. the Post Office a post parcel containing various articles, the property of the Postmaster-General.— [Pleaded Guilty: See original trial image.] Three Months' Hard Labour. And
466. JOHN WRIGHT (38) , to unlawfully obtaining by false pretences from Solomon John Humphries and Samuel Henry Phillips, his employers, money with intent to defraud.— [Pleaded Guilty: See original trial image.] Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. MORRIS Prosecuted, and MR. C.F. GILL Defended Mund.
GUSTAV TIETZ (Interpreted). I am living at the First Avenue Hotel—on Thursday night I was in Oxford Street and met Braun, and I went home with her to the Charing Cross Road—I remained there perhaps' a quarter of an hour—when we got into the room the door looked as if it was locked or shut, I tried to see whether it was so—in my pocket-book I had a £1,000 note, five £100 notes, and four £5 notes—when I was in bed I heard some sort of noise at the door—there were two gas burners alight—my clothes I had hung up on hooks on the door—the bed was a canopy bed, and was on the right-hand side of the door lengthways. (Sergeant Merritt produced a rough plan of the room at 137, Charing Cross Road)—this plan represents the position and shape of the bed and canopy—there was a mirror close to the door on the left-hand side—above the lock there was a bolt; whether it was open or not I cannot—before
Braun came to bed she went to the door—afterwards, while I was dressing, a knock came to the door, and she went out of the room—when she came back I asked her what it was all about, and she said, "Oh, the woman only came to ask whether you wanted any coffee"—she was out a minute or so—I finished dressing and went out into the street; Braun accompanied me downstairs—I dressed near the door without looking at the mirror—when I had got outside and had walked a little distance the noise I had heard came back to my mind, and I immediately opened the pocket-book to see if I had everything safe—the pocket-book was in the inner pocket of my coat—I found that the £1,000 note and four £5 notes had gone, and that I had lost £1,020—I went to the corner, where I saw a policeman, who took me to the station-house, and I went with him to a house where I believed it had happened; at first I made a mistake and selected the house next to it, but I found out the mistake, and we went to the right house and searched it—I had not been drinking that night at all—the police-knocked at the door very loudly, but nobody came to open it at first, and then at last the landlady of the place was fetched, who took us round through the shop into the house—I searched the place; nothing was found—I received information afterwards at the hotel that the money had been found, and I afterwards saw the notes at the Police-station—when I returned to the room the bed had been put across, as it is in the plan, and the canopy had been pulled down; the whole room was arranged, no doubt, for the purpose of making it unrecognisable—there was no pole on which the curtains hung, but there was a holdfast and some knob or something which fastened to it—that was still there.
JOSEPH HARRISON (224 C). On this night I was in Charing Cross Road—I met the prosecutor, and went with him to 145, Charing Cross Road; that was the wrong house—I went to the station with him; he made a complaint there—I returned with Detective Showers to 137, Charing Cross Road between one and two on Friday morning—after ringing the bell for some time a man opened the door from the inside; he said he was a lodger and could not get in—I went to the first floor and found all the doors looked—I sent for the landlord, who came and forced the door of the first floor front room—I entered with the prosecutor and Showers, and the prosecutor said, "This is the room"—I found nobody in the room—I arched the. premises, but found nothing—the room was in the condition in which it is shown by this plan.
Cross-examined by MR. GILL. We went to 137, Charing Cross Road, and by the time we had examined it it was about a quarter to three a.m.
WILLIAM MERRITT (Sergeant 30 D). At three o'clock a.m. on Friday morning I was in Gresse Street, when I saw the two female prisoners and another man and a constable—I went and asked what was the matter—Tolls said that Braun had accompanied a man to 137, Charing Cross Road about eleven o'clock; they stayed there a few minutes, and then, left; that she herself went upstairs to clean the room, and found on the floor four Bank of England notes, one for £1,080 and three for £5—she spoke English perfectly well—she said she took the notes to her brother-in-law at No. 11, Grosse Street—that would be a quarter of a mile or more from 137, Charing Cross Road, I should think—Tolls stated, that her brother-in-law had snatched the notes out of her hand, and refused
to give them back, and she wanted them to give back to the gentleman whom she knew, and was going to meet the following night at the Horse Shoe Hotel—I knocked at the door of 11, Gresse Street—Mund came to it, and seeing me he rushed back—the door was held by a woman—I pushed the door open, caught hold of Mund in the passage, and with the assistance of another constable brought him into the street—I told him that Tolls accused him of taking some notes from her; he said he knew nothing of any notes nor money—I told him I should take him into custody, and directed two constables to bring the woman—on the way to the station Mund said if I would let him go he would show me where the notes were—I did so, and followed him to the back room of the basement of 11, Gresse Street, and from a hole in the wall, close to the ceiling, hidden by a cornice and the wall paper, he took three notes, one for £1,000 and two for £5 each—I asked him where the other notes were—he said they were all he had—I took the three prisoners into custody—on the way to the station Mund called out that the two women had stolen the notes from a gentleman, and had brought and given them to him—I don't think he said which one had brought them to him—I received information at the station that the money had been stolen, and I informed the prosecutor—the prisoners were taken to Tottenham Court Road Station first, and then to Marlborough Mews, where they were charged—they all three understood the charge—they said nothing; Tolls said, before I apprehended Mund, she had been going backwards and forwards since eleven o'clock, looking for the prosecutor to give him back the notes—there was a scuffle when I arrested Mund, I had to get the assistance of another constable to assist me to get him into the street.
Cross-examined by MR. GILL. I did not say before the Magistrate that there was a scuffle—Mund went back—the landlord afterwards said he had gone back to get his boots, as he was in his bare feet, that he did not think he had any boots on—Mund did not come back to me till I pushed the door open—after he left the door I could not see what he did—he was in the passage afterwards, and had his boots on—I do not speak German—I did not thoroughly understand whether Mund understood me or not—I afterwards made a note of the conversation—the statements he made were in English—I made my note after I had been examined before the Magistrate; it was not practicable for me to make it before, as all my time was taken up; I made it afterwards to aid my memory—the case came before the Magistrate at ten a.m.—I got to the station with the prosecutor the first time about half-past three, I daresay, and I was backwards and forwards—Mund's statement was not interpreted by Tolls—I did not ask her to interpret what he said—I asked her to translate one question, but I don't remember asking her to translate to me what he said, except one question—I said before, "I had difficulty in making Mund understand; I understood some of what he said; I had to get Tolls to translate the rest"—Tolls translated one question; it is not true that I had to get her to translate what I could not understand—"I had to get Tolls to translate the rest" means she translated the accusation she made against him; it does not refer to what he said—there were a lot of birds in the house the prisoner was in; I did not know that he was carrying on that business—I mean I never fought birds of him—he has never to my knowledge been charged before
—I have taken a good deal of trouble in trying to find out—the address given by the women was not the prisoners' house—the woman in saying that he had the notes was very angry, and showed it; she was very calm, but angry; she displayed in her words that she was angry; she was not excited—when he said he did not know anything of the money or notes she said he knew he had taken them, that is all I mean when I say she was very angry with him—I do not mean that she was very excited in making a charge against him—she talked a great deal, and he did not—I do not know the other man who was there—Mund spoke broken English; I understood what he said.
Re-examined. Mund spoke in English when he made the statement about the notes being stolen by the woman—the morality of 11, Gresse Street is doubted by the police.
By MR. GILL. I had never been to that house before, and I have only been since to search for the notes, and to inquire about the prisoners' characters—before this I knew nothing of the house of my own knowledge—it was doubted by the police generally—I have seen the occupier; I do not know his name—that was the house Mund was in, and where the canaries were—he did not occupy the rest of the house.
WILLIAM WEBB (394 D). On Friday morning, at three, I was in Gresse Street, and saw Braun and Tolls, and a man who was not Mund—Tolls said she had lost some money—a man at 11, Gresse Street had taken some money from her, and she asked me to go in and get it for her.
The Prisoners' statements before the Magistrate. Mund and Braun said: "I am not guilty; I reserve my defence." Tolls said: "I found the notes."
Braun, in her defence, said that she did not steal the notes.
Tolls said that she did not know anybody was in the bedroom, but that she heard voices there, and knocked and asked Braun if she wanted some coffee; that then she went out, and on coming back heard a dispute at the next house, and on inquiring was told that a gentleman had lost a £1,000 note; that afterwards she went into the bedroom, and saw the bed disarranged, and found 7s. on the table, and the £1,000 note; that she ran out, thinking it belonged to the gentleman, but not seeing a policeman she took it to her brother-in-law, and asked him to keep it till she saw the girl as she did not know the gentleman herself; that she met Braun, and together they looked for the gentleman, and afterwards were going to fetch the money from Mund, when they met a policeman, and told him.
BRAUN— NOT GUILTY .
MUND— Guilty of receiving.
TOLLS— GUILTY .
MUND and TOLLS— Six Months' Hard Labour Each.
NEW COURT.—Monday, May 2nd, 1892.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted.
lemonade and bitter ale, price 1 1/2 d; he gave me a florin; I bit it, it was gritty; I showed it to Mrs. Arnold; the prisoner could see that—he said nothing—she broke it in half on the engine; this is it—I had seen the prisoner there a fortnight before, when he had some mild and bitter ale and a 2d. cigar, and gave me half-a-crown—I eave him the change, and put it on the till; it was the only one there—I have no doubt about his being the man who was there on the first occasion.
SARAH ARNOLD . I manage the Marquis of Granby public-house—on 16th April, in the afternoon, I saw the prisoner there; Miss Granger made a communication to me—the prisoner could hear and see what was going on—I sent a man for a constable, and placed another at the door to prevent his going out—I tested the coin under the beer-pull, after the constable came, and then Rave the prisoner in charge—he said he did not know where he had taken it, and did not know it was bad—I had seen him on the Thursday, two days before, when another half-crown and a florin were shown me; I showed the half-crown to the barmaid, and put it away in a drawer by itself; I took it out again on the 18th—I identify both coins.
JAMES FLAVEL (460 E). On 16th April I was called to the Marquis of Granby, and saw the prisoner—Mrs. Arnold said, "This man attempted to pass a bad two-shilling piece, and about a fortnight previously he did the same thing"—I said, "How do you account for having it in your possession?"—he said, "I don't know where I got it"—I took him to the station, and charged him—he then said to the barmaid, "I did not try to run out of the house;" she said, "No; a man was put there to prevent your running away"—I found on him a match-box, two half-crowns, and 1 1/4d.; two florins were handed to me, and I was told that a mistake had been made, it should have been a half-crown which he had the week previous—these are the coins—the inspector handed me the half-crown at the station.
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, denied uttering the first coin, and stated that he received the second in change for a half-sovereign, and did not know it was bad.— NOT GUILTY .
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
ANNIE BROWN . I wash glasses at the King's Arms, Cheyne Walk, Chelsea, and sometimes serve in the bar—on April 1st the prisoner called for a glass of port wine and a twopenny cigar; I got them, and he gave me this crown piece (produced); I took it to Miss Clayton, who took it to Walter Charles Clayton—he stopped my giving the prisoner the change.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. The manager threw it on the counter, and said "This is bad"—you did not attempt to run away—I saw Mr. Clayton scrape the edge of the coin in your presence.
last witness handed me this crown piece; it felt rather light, and I handed' it to my brother—I saw the prisoner there.
Cross-examined. You did not bounce the coin—the girl handed you the change; you did not hand it back to the manager—my brother gave me the change, and I handed it to Annie Brown—the manager shaved the edge of the coin away in my presence; you did not attempt to run away while the constable was coming; it took ten or fifteen minutes to fetch him.
Re-examined. Mr. Clayton said, in the prisoner's presence, that he was going for a constable.
ARTHUR HAYTER (90 B). On April 1st, at 1.20, Mr. Clayton spoke to me, and I went to the King's Arms and saw the prisoner—I said, "Hare you tendered this coin?"—he said, "yes"—I said, "How do you account for having it in your possession?"—he said his master, Mr. Frederick Lamb, gave it him in the Borough Market—we went to the station, and Mr. Clayton charged him—he gave his address 14, Masters Street, but I could not find it.
WALTER CHARLES CLAYTON . I am manager at the King's Arms, and my sister serves there—on April 1st she brought me this crown for change, I threw it down on a desk and gave the five shillings change, and then I took another piece and scratched it, and then drew my teeth across it, and said, "Stop that man"—I went to the bar, and asked the prisoner where he got it; he said, "That is my business"—I said, "It is mine," and went round the other side of the door and found a constable, and showed him the crown—we went back together, and the prisoner was standing at the bar smoking; he said he got it in the Borough Market, from his master, and proposed that we should go to the station; we went there and made a statement to the inspector, who asked the prisoner what he had to say, but could not get a satisfactory answer—he gave his name Samuel Solomon, 14, Masters Street, Islington, and said that his master was Frederick Lamb, a fruit salesman, Borough Market—he offered to pay with a good shilling, but I would not accept it.
Cross-examined. You did not bounce the coin on the counter and say "This is not bad"—you could not have walked out of the house, because the potman was there, and one or two others—I was away from the shop five minutes before I came back with the constable.
Re-examined. I had to walk 120 or 150 yards to fetch the constable—the persons in the bar were aware that I had gone for a constable—it was clear that the prisoner was going to be charged; he said he would go quietly.
GEORGE DOUGHTY (Police Inspector B). When Hayter brought the prisoner in, Mr. Clayton said that he had tendered a counterfeit crown to his barmaid, but that he did not wish to charge him if he had done it innocently—the prisoner said he was a respectable working man, and got the coin from his master; I asked his master's name he said Mr. Frederick Lamb, a fruit salesman, Borough Market, and he had been in his employ four months as master's man—I asked his name and address—he said, "Samuel Solomon, 24, Masters Street, Islington, close to Upper Street Police-station"—I sent a telegram, and found there was no such street; he was then charged.
has left—I do not know the prisoner; I have not employed him as master's man—I never saw him to my knowledge—I did not give him a crown on April 1st; I do not recollect seeing him.
Cross-examined. I do not know you working in the market as master's man or as a fourth—there may be people in the market named Lamb and I not know it—there may be a greengrocer of that name, but not to my knowledge—you may have carried things for me in Covent Garden Market.
Re-examined. Fruit salesmen are men who have a regular place of business, where they are known in the market—I knew a vegetable grower who carried on business there two years ago named Lamb, but no one in April.
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he was employed by a man as porter for eighteen turns, and received the five shilling piece in payment from Mr. Lamb; that he went to have a drink and found the coin bad. He maintained that Mr. Lamb had known him for years in Covent Garden Market.
He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of a like offence on March 3rd, 1890, in the name of Michael Couchman, and six other convictions were proved against him.— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, May 3rd, 1892.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
471. ALFRED GATHERCOLE (35) , to embezzling £10, £15, and £10, of Powell Brothers, his masters. (His defalcations amounted to £1,000.) [Pleaded Guilty: See original trial image.] Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted, and MR. GRIFFITHS Defended.
JAMES MURPHY (City Detective). On 14th April, about noon, I was with Miller in Queen's Road, Dalston, and saw the two prisoners leave No. 220; we followed them into Kingsland Road, where Miller missed me—I next saw the female prisoner about one o'clock in Finsbury Pavement, and Wood about forty yards behind her—they went into London Wall separately, and Glarke went into Lockhart's, a cook's shop, Wood remaining outside, apparently watching inside the shop—Clarke came out and stood at the corner of Blomfield Street, and Wood went that way and opened the Talbot public-house door and looked in, and then joined Clarke, who came back and went in at the same door—Wood remained outside till she came out; she went down Throgmorton Avenue, Wood following—they joined each other in Broad Street, and went through Gresham House, which is a thoroughfare, into Bishopsgate Street—they stopped in the passage and conversed, and Clarke gave Wood something, and then Wood gave Clarke something—Clarke went into Bishoppgate Street, Wood remaining in the passage—he then went out into Bishopsgate Street, and joined Clarke, and they went together into Gracechurch Street, where Clarke
went into a sweetstuff shop, No. 11, while Wood remained. outside the door looking into the shop—Clarke came out and went into Bell Yard—Wood followed her, and she gave him a small paper bag—they then went into King William Street, where I got in front of them—they went into a cook's shop kept by Mrs. Stephenson—I spoke to the cashier, and saw Clarke come in, go to the counter, and give the cashier something, who gave her change and gave me this shilling—at that moment Miller came in—I saw "Wood standing in the passage, looking in the direction in which Miller went, who was speaking to the cashier—I spoke to Miller, and we went out—I noticed that Ward had his right fist clenched—I caught hold of his right arm, and Miller his left—he placed both his clenched fists together, leaned his weight on us, and bent his head to his hands, and I heard the clink of money—he threw himself on his back, and the three of us went down together—he apparently had something in his throat; we tried to make him disgorge it—I got my hand under his throat—I distinctly saw an impression in his throat, and he appeared to be choking—we lifted him up on his feet, and then he had something in his throat; he was making peculiar motions with his neck—not a word was said—we handed him over to Perry, a uniform constable—about a quarter of an hour afterwards I saw Clarke in Bishopsgate Street, and said, "I am a police officer; I am going to take you in custody for being concerned with a man already in custody in uttering a counterfeit shilling at a cook's shop in King William Street"—she said, "I don't know what you are talking about; it is all Latin to me"—I took her to Seething Lane Station; she was placed in the dock with Wood, and I said to her, "Do you know this man?"—she said, "No; he is a stranger to me"—I said to Wood, "Do you know this woman?"—he said, "No; I never saw her before in my life"—I had seen them together twice before; Clarke was carrying this small handbag; I found in it a purse containing three florins, a sixpence, and fivepence, all good—the inspector asked Wood for his address; he said, "I live at a coffee-shop over the water; I don't know exactly where it is" Clarke said she had no address—I know the cell in which Wood was confined.
Cross-examined. I am married, and have gone out shopping with my wife, and have stopped outside to see that sue did not spend too much money—I have bought sweets for my children, but never saw one of them put a handful into its mouth at once; the liability to choke would depend upon the size and the number of them—when Clarke came out of the sweetstuff-shop she had a paper-bag, and gave Wood something—I was in the shop, and heard her call for a penny cake, and saw her give something—I did not take her then, because Wood was the one I was looking after—I could not pull Wood's hands apart; it was all done in a second, and his weight was on us—I have been in the force about ten years, and have been here before—I saw an impression in his throat, but whether it was sweets or a bit of cake I cannot tell—there are five cells at the station, I think—this is not the first coiner I have taken.
Re-examined. Bullseyes do not jingle when they come together.
and saw Clarke go into 64, King William Street, a cook's shop; Wood stood a short distance away, with his back to the window of a boot-shop—when Clarke came out I went in and saw Murphy, who spoke to me—Wood was standing in the passage, looking through the glass door—when we came out he turned his back to us—his hands were clenched—Murphy caught hold of his right hand, and I of his left—he drew both hands together, and changed some shillings from his right hand into his left, threw his head forward, put his mouth to his left hand, and put something into his mouth; he then threw himself on his back on the pavement, and struggled very hard—I said to Murphy, "Be has put something into his mouth"—we tried very hard to make him disgorge it, but he kept his mouth closed—we let him get up—Murphy called Perry, and we took him to Seething Lane Station—he was choking and very faint when we got there—I told him he would be charged with being concerned with a woman in uttering counterfeit shillings—he made no answer, but when we got into Great Tower Street he said, "You say I shall be charged with being concerned with a woman?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "I have not been in the company of any woman to-day"—I found on him £3 17s. in silver, a watch, and other articles—Clarke was brought to the station, and Wood said to me, "Is that the woman?"—I said, "Yes; do you know her?"—he said, "No; I have never seen her before"—he was put in the dock where Clarke stood, and Murphy asked him if he knew her—he said, "No"—he then asked Clarke if she knew Wood—she said no, she never saw him before in her life—I found four sixpences and 3s. 7d. in bronze, loose in Wood's coat pocket; the other money was in a purse in his under-coat pocket.
Cross-examined. I found on him altogether £4 0s. 7d., all good money—he swallowed something; he had nothing in his hand afterwards—I tried my best to hold his hands down—I did not fall on top of him when he pulled us down; I don't know whether Murphy did—I found a pedlar's licence at his lodgings.
ALICE SADLER . I am cashier to J. and R. Sloman, confectioners, 64, King William Street—on 14th April Murphy came in about one o'clock and spoke to me—about the same time Clarke came in and had a cake; she brought me a penny check and gave me a shilling—I gave her elevenpence change, and put the shilling with my other money, and then gave it to Murphy, who cut a piece out of it—Clarke went out.
Cross-examined. I gave the coin to Murphy about half an hour after I received it—I was taken to the station to identify Clarke—I only knew her by her dress; she was not placed with others, only with Wood, but I have no doubt she is the same woman.
CLARA PAYNE . I live at 220, Queen's Road, Dalston, and let lodgings—the prisoners lodged with me; they had one room for sleeping and living in, in the name of Mr. and Mrs. Clement—they have been gone about a fortnight—a policeman examined their room on the day they left.
Cross-examined. They were fond of my cat, and I suppose they gave it bed and meals—I suffer from fits.
WALTER OUTRAN (City Detective Sergeant). On 14th April I went with Miller to Mrs. Payne's house, who pointed out the second floor back room, where I found some plaster of Paris, some whitening, an earthenware pot, wet sand, this shilling under the carpet, and these three metal
tins in a vase on the mantelshelf; also some white powder and a small bottle of oil—I showed them to the prisoners at the station, and Wood said, "The plaster of Paris was had to mend the fireplace with, did you notice that it had been mended?"—I said, "Yes, I did"—he said, "The whitening she used to clean the hearth, and the sand we clean the knives with; I lost a shilling in the room some time ago, and that must be the one; the piece of metal I know nothing about; did you notice there was something in that earthenware pot?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "That was for the cat."
Cross-examined. The pot was not broken then; there was bread and milk in it, and there was a cat in the room—the shilling is good—this may be hair-oil—I have sand in my house for the bird-cage; I do not wet it; I do not think wet sand is useful for cleaning knives.
THOMAS COX . I live at 15, Cannell Road, Leytonstone—it it my duty to clean the cells at Guildhall Police-court—on 28th April I found these six pieces of coin in a crack between two boards of a partition in the fourth cell.
Cross-examined. The cells are cleaned every morning—the boards are nine inches wide, but they do not come quite close together; they do not go through to the next cell; there was only just room to wedge them in—I have been in the other cell; the crack is only on one side; the wood has decayed through continual washing—the crack is vertical; it has cracked all the way down from the ceiling, and stops when it reaches the skirting-board.
Re-examined. The crack is within reach of any man put into the cell; it goes down within six inches of the floor—I did not examine the crack every day, but there was a stain on the skirting, and I had to go down on my knees to get it off, and then I saw it.
Cross-examined. There is a stool in each cell in a corner, and the soil goes into the sewer.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to Her Majesty's Mint—the shilling tendered is counterfeit—this other one (Found under the carpet) is good, and has been used as a pattern-piece, from which a mould has been made, and this counterfeit smiling has been made from the mould of which this good shilling was the pattern—these six shillings are counterfeit, and all from the same mould, but of different dates from the one uttered and from the pattern—plaster of Paris is used to make moulds and for other purposes—this bowl has been on the fire; these pieces of tin are like capsules—whitening is sometimes mixed with plaster of Paris.
Cross-examined. The bowl would do for heating tea, before it was broken, but it would be dirty; there are many reasons why it has been on the fire—whitening is used for cleaning windows and grates—I have never had capsules before in connection with coining; they look more like the capsules of a sauce bottle—the pattern shilling exhibits certain marks—they can coin without a galvanic battery.
Cross-examined. November 18th was the last counterfeit coin case; I was there at the time—other prisoners have been confined there—counterfeit coin is sometimes found on prisoners not charged with coining.
Clarke's statement before the Magistrate: "All I can say is the three pieces of metal were in the room when I went there; they are used as a covering for buttons for ladies' jackets."
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
ARTHUR FIELD . I am a house decorator, of 2, Luther Road, Kingston—on 11th April I went to the Sun Brewery, asked for a pint of Deer, and tendered this half-crown, dated 1874; Bosher was in the bar—the landlord said it was bad, and I took it back and paid him with good money—Bosher asked me to let him test it, and took it from me and went out of the bar, and said he would be back in a few minutes—I waited half an hour, but he did not return.
Cross-examined by Bosher. I did not give it to you; you snatched it from me.
MARK HAMILTON . I am landlord of the Sun Brewery public-house, Hounslow—Field tendered me a bad half-crown, and as he was putting it back in his purse Bosher said, "Let me have a look at it," and put it between his teeth, and then put it on the floor and stamped on it, and said, "I will get it tested," and went out—Field waited about half an hour, and directly he left Bosher came back for some flowers which he had left on the counter.
ELIZABETH HOLLEY . My husband is a bricklayer—we have two or three greenhouses, and I sell flowers—on 11th April, between two and three o'clock, Bosher came and selected a shillingsworth of flowers, and tendered a half-crown—I told him I did not like the look of it, and he said he would take it back to where he took it.
Cross-examined by Bosher. You were drunk—I have known you many years.
Re-examined. He knew what he was doing—he selected the flowers.
CLARA BENWELL . My father keeps the Cross Lances, Hounslow, and I assist in the business—on 11th April, about 6.15, the two prisoners came in—Butfoy called for a pint of four ale and offered me this half-crown (The same coin)—I told him it was bad—he said, "Oh, is it? I drew six over Buccaneer," referring to a horse-race—I gave it back to him—he gave me twopence, and left.
Cross-examined by Butfoy. I had seen you there once before—you put it in your pocket and left.
Cross-examined by Bosher. You came in two minutes after Butfoy.
Re-examined. When Bosher came in Butfoy asked him to have some of the beer, and they shared it together.
CHARLES BENWELL . I am landlord of the Cross Lances—I saw Butfoy tender a half-crown, and my daughter said it was bad, and called my attention to it—I picked it up, and Butfoy gave her twopence for the ale, and put the coin in his pocket—Bosher drank some of the beer—Butfoy said he had a bet on some racehorse, and had six of those half-crowns given him, and he had got rid of four of them—I went outside,
but could not find a policeman—they drank the beer and left, and went to the Gladstone.
SARAH MARCHANT . I am a daughter of the landlord of the Gladstone public-house, Hounslow—on 11th April, between six and seven o'clock, Butfoy came in and Bosher followed him—Butfoy called for half a pint of beer, price one penny, and gave me a half-crown very much like this—I took it to my mother, who came into the bar and told them it was bad—Butfoy said he did not think it was—Bosher went off, but Butfoy remained in the house till Detective Ward came in—my mother gave the coin to Butfoy.
Cross-examined by Butfoy. You did not say you were sorry it was bad, but it did not belong to you—you did not attempt to go out—I have seen you in the house once or twice before, but not in Bosher's company.
JANE MARCHANT . I am the mother of the last witness—on April 11th she brought me a half-crown between 6.30 and 7—I believe this is it—I took it into the bar, and saw the two prisoners there—I said to Butfoy, "This is a bad half-crown you gave to my little girl"—he took it and handed it round the bar, and they all said it was bad—Bosher paid with a good coin and went out—I gave the coin to Butfoy.
Cross-examined by Butfoy. You did not say, "If it is bad I am sorry for it, but it is not mine"—you did not attempt to leave the house—that was the third time you have been there.
WILLIAM HENRY BULL . I keep the Bed Lion at Hounslow—on April 11th, near 8 p.m., Bosher came in with a woman and asked for a pint of four ale—he tendered this half-crown (The same)—I told him it was bad—he said he was not aware of it, but his wife had taken it, and paid me with copper—I gave the coin back to him, and he left with it.
LEONARD WARD (Detective T). On April 11th a communication was made to me, and I went with Tilbury, to Hibernia Road, Hounslow—the Gladstone is in Albany Road—I kept observation on it, and saw Bosher leave it—Tilbury went in, and came out and spoke to me, and we went in together and said to the landlady in Butfoy's presence, "Have you had anyone here attempting to utter counterfeit coin?"—she said, "Yes; that man over in the corner," pointing to Butfoy, "just gave a bad half-crown to my daughter; I have given it back to him, and told him it was bad—Butfoy then took up a bag containing some clothes, and was going out of the house, but I said, "Wait a minute we are police officers; I am going to arrest you for uttering counterfeit coin"—he said nothing—I said, "I shall search you—he was so violent I could not do it—the other officer held one hand and I the other, and with assistance we took him to the station, and searched him—he said, "You are very clever, but you won't find any money about me"—I said, "Yes; I have not found the half-crown I am looking for"—he said, "No; I gave it to a chap when the landlord gave it back to me"—about eleven the same evening I went to a common lodging-house, and found a soldier in bed—I said, "I shall take you in custody for being concerned with another man in uttering a bad half-crown—he said, "It is all through the booze, or I should not have done it"—he was not drunk then, But he had evidently been drinking—I got him to the station, and searched him—he said, "You won't find it; I threw it over the field opposite the
Lodging-house"—on the 14th I searched the field, and found this coin about 20 yards from the lodging-house—after I had searched him at the station I said, A communication was made to me that you went to Mr. Benwell's public-house, the Lances, prior to going to the Gladstone, and tendered a bad half-crown there, and when it was given back you told the barmaid that you had had six of them that you got over your winnings in a race, and had got rid of four of them"—he said, "Yes, that is right."
Cross-examined by Butfoy. You told me you had laid out all your money, and had bought some clothes at Mr. Wood's auction—you said the half-crown was not yours, and you had given it back to Bosher.
Butfoy, in his defence, stated that he met Bosher by accident about six o'clock, and did not know what he had done with the half-crown previously, but he asked Bosher for sixpence, who said he had not got one, but told him to take it out of the half-crown, and they went and had a drink, and he threw down the. coin in the Lances, and they said it was bad, and he said he wished it was as good as six he had won over Buccaneer that day; then went to the Gladstone, where he said to the girl, "See if this is a good one" and gave it back to Bosher, and said he would not have anything more to do with it, but was taken in custody. Bosher, in his defence, said he was the worse for drink, and when Field put down the half crown and the manager said it was bad, he took it and went out, and asked a man if to was bad, and when he got back Field was gone; that he then asked Butfoy to let him have sixpence, who told him to take it out of the half-crown, but finding it was bad he threw it away not to get into trouble.
BUTFOY— NOT GUILTY .
BOSHER— GUILTY,** Recommended to mercy by the Jury— Three Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, May 4th, 1892.
Before Mr. Justice Grantham.
MR. KEELING Prosecuted.
ARTHUR ANNIS (179 B). On the night of 24th April, about a quarter to one, I was on point duty at the foot of Chelsea Bridge, on the Pimlico side—I saw the prisoner there with two children; one was the baby she now has in her arms, the other was about four years old—she went on the bridge—thinking it suspicious, I followed them towards Battersea—she came back again—I told her I should not leave her there all night, she must go home—she went across the bridge towards Pimlico; seeing a man come up, I thought they were related, and I let them go on together—as soon as the prisoner got round the pillar, which hid her from my sight, I heard the child screaming, and on running forward I saw the child hanging over the parapet of the bridge, catching hold of the railing with one hand—I immediately shifted her away from the side of the bridge; the witness Cliff came up and caught hold of the child—I told the prisoner I should take her into custody, and she made no remark
—she was perfectly sober—on the way to the station she made some complaint about being ill-used at home.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You had the baby in one arm, and had hold of the arm of the other child on the top of the parapet; it was not standing on the footpath; I did not see you attempt to throw the baby in the water, nor yourself.
JOHN CLIFF . I live at 7, Goldstein Terrace, Battersea, and am a fish fryer—on 24th April, about one o'clock, I was coming over Chelsea Bridge, and saw the constable moving the prisoner on; I stepped back, as I suspected something wrong—she had one child in her arms, and the other one by her side—as soon as the constable had left her she picked up the child that was on the ground, and attempted to throw it over the side—I ran and caught hold of her and the child—it was level with the rail, and had hold of it with its hand—she was trying to put it over the side—the child cried out, "Mother, don't put main the water"—the constable came up and took her to the station.
Cross-examined. You had your baby in your arms; you lifted the child while you had the baby in your arms; you held up the child by the stomach, and it lay on the rail.
CHARLES POSTER (Inspector B). On 24th April, about half-past one a.m., I was on duty at Gerald's Road Police-station, when the prisoner and her two children were brought in by Annis and Cliff, who told me what they had seen—I said to the prisoner, "This is a serious matter; do you wish to say anything?"—she said, "All I have to say is that I did intend to take my children's lives and my own; if I had got the one over I could soon have got over with the other. It is not the first time. I have got five children, and my husband has done no work since Christmas Eve; he has only earned a few shillings. I expected a good week's wages from him last Saturday night, but he gave me none, and I was compelled to sell a glass for half-a-crown to be able to take my sick child to a doctor. I have had to dispose of nearly all my home to keep ourselves. I have only had two pieces of bread to-day, and my husband has not been home. He can find money to get drunk with, and get locked up"—she was charged, and made no reply—she was quite sober—I thought she seemed somewhat strange and excited, and I sent for the divisional surgeon, Dr. O'Brien, who came and said in her presence she was perfectly sane, and able to be put in the cell—I went to 28, Tyneham Road, Battersea, where she lived; the door was opened by a little girl—they lived in two rooms in the basement—on entering the back room, which was poorly furnished, I found the husband lying drunk on the couch—I had great difficulty in rousing him—there was a sick child lying on the bed, and two other children dressed—I found no food; only a pennyworth of butter and some bread—the husband was in the precincts of the Court here on Monday, drunk—he is a tailor; he was in good employment up to last Christmas at the Civil Service Stores, but was discharged on account of his drunken habits.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "My husband is a very good father and husband; only when he takes to drink he don't seem able to manage himself.
The prisoner, in her defence, stated that she had no intention of drowning herself or children, and what she said was only to frighten the child, and what
she said at the station was to frighten her husband, thinking it might do him good.
GUILTY.—Strongly recommended to mercy by the JURY on account of the provocation brought about by the husband's drunken habits. The inspector said that she bore a very good character. Discharged on her own recognisance to appear for judgment if called upon. The GRAND JURY had commended the conduct of the witnesses Annis and Cliff, in which the COURT concurred.
MR. ROUTH Prosecuted.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Strokes with the Birch.
MR. ELDRIDGE Prosecuted.
ALFRED LEWIS . I am a carpenter, and live at 7, Savage Street, Marylebone—on the night of 7th April I and Calvert and Louis Plouns went to 120, Wardour Street, to see Mr. Phillipe—I rang the electric bell at the front door; no one came, and we went round to the back door in Ship Yard; there was no bell or knocker there; we kicked at the door; some one came, I thought it was Phillipe—a white bull-terrier rushed out at us and growled, and went back; then I saw a flash and heard a report; I am nearly sure I heard three reports—we ran away, and three or four yards higher up I met Phillipe and gave him in charge for firing at mediator on I saw the prisoner, and said to him, "Did you fire a revolver?"—he said, "Yes, I fired, and I made them run"—I said, "You fired at me; come to the station and get Phillipe out, he is accused wrongly"—at first he said, "No, it will be all right to-morrow;" but I insisted, and he came, and he was charged at Marlborough Street.
By the COURT. Phillipe had accused me of being a thief, and said he would shoot me if I came to his premises again, but he had employed me for five years, and gave me a character—I said before the Magistrate that I went there on this night to have a row with Phillipe, because he had struck a man's eye—I also said I did not know in which direction the pistol was fired, as it was dark—I did not strike the prisoner with a stick.
JULES CALVERT . I live at 19, Union Street, Marylebone—I am independent; I have £2 a week from my parents—on the night of 7th April I went with Lewis and Plouns to 120, Wardour Street—we knocked at the front door, and then went to the back door in Ship Alley—it is a public thoroughfare—we knocked, the door was opened, and a white dog came out—I kicked the dog, and it ran away—at the same time I heard three reports of firearms, and we ran away into Wardour Street—we saw Phillipe there—I don't think I had seen the prisoner before—we went there to have an explanation from Phillipe for giving a blow to one of my friends.
to eight—I took Phillipe to the station—before the charge was taken I went with Inspector Andrews to Ship Alley—I examined the wall opposite the door, and found two bullet-marks, one eight feet from the ground and the other about four feet—on the 8th I went to Phillipe's house, and he handed me this revolver; it was loaded in four chambers, and two others were empty.
JEAN CHARDON . I am an engraver, of 60, Berwick Street—on the night of 7th April, at half-past nine, I met the prisoner in Marsh Street; I asked him what had happened—he said, "Nothing at all; I fired one shot into the air, and they went away; they were not wounded; Phillipe was not at home at the time."
CHARLES SEYMOUR (50 C). On 8th April, about quarter-past twelve, I was on duty at Marlborough Mews Station when Lewis came in with the prisoner—he said, "This is the man that fired the revolver at me, not the other prisoner"—the prisoner nodded his head; he did not say anything, except "Oui, oui."
ALFRED PHILLIPE . I am a foreign produce merchant, of 120, Wardour Street—the back door of my premises opens into Ship Alley—I found this revolver, produced by Inspector Andrews, about five yards inside the entrance to my workshop—Lewis had worked for me two years—the prisoner was my lodger.
By the COURT. There had been several attempts to rob my premises; the prisoner knew that—I told Lewis not to come to my house, and I told the prisoner what I had told Lewis.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I have to say that if he had not come into the workshop I should not have fired the revolver. Seven of them came in with false keys, and as houses had been robbed I told him to go out; he made use of bad language, and gesticulated with a big stick. I fired once in the, direction of the door, and a second shot in front of me, and they ran away. They are the people that unfastened the bull-dog, not I; the dog knows the prisoner. I was alone in the house, and I fired."
Prisoner's Defence. All that is stated there is quite correct, and I say again if they had not entered the premises and threatened me I should not have fired. NOT GUILTY .
There were two other indictments for shooting at Lewis and Calvert, upon which no evidence was offered. NOT GUILTY .
477. ALFRED JOHN FIELD was indicted under the 3rd Section of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, for by false representations procuring a girl to have connection with him. MR. C.F. GILL, for the prisoner moved to quash the indictment on the ground that it did not on the face of it disclose what the false representations were. MR. GEOGHEGAN, the prosecution, contended that
it was not necessary to specify the nature of the false representations. After certain authorities were cited, MR. JUSTICE GRANTHAM held that the false pretences were necessary to be alleged, that the omission was fatal, and the indictment was therefore Quashed.
NOT GUILTY of rape , but of an offence under the Criminal Law Amendment Act.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday. May 4th, 1892.
Before Mr. Recorder.
480. HARRY HOINVILLE (41), JOSEPH PULLEN (22), and HENRY COOPER (16) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of John Welch, and stealing a cash-box and other articles, and £36 in money, Hoinville having been before convicted.— [Pleaded Guilty: See original trial image.] HOINVILLE— Six Months' Hard Labour. PULLEN— Three Months' Hard Labour. COOPER— On recognisance to appear.
He received a good character.— [Pleaded Guilty: See original trial image.] Nine Months' Hard Labour. And
482. JAMES BROUGHTON (19), GEORGE HARRIS (18), and FREDERICK GEORGE WEBB (20) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of Jacob Hoffe, and stealing 232 cigars and other articles, Broughton and Webb having been previously convicted. [Pleaded Guilty: See original trial image.]
BROUGHTON— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
HARRIS— three Months' Hard Labour.
WEBB— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. COLLINS Prosecuted.
HENRY THOMAS SAUNDERS . I keep a public-house at Hammersmith—on March 11th I left the place secure, and on the 12th I found it broken into; a window at the back was open, and also a door—the place was strewed about with cigars; whisky and brandy were missing, and some field-glasses—the gas was fully alight—I had only left a small burner alight—I missed £13 or £14 worth of property—this decanter is mine; it was found about four doors from my house, in the yard of Mr. Cole's house—there are three or four gardens between—I missed £1 5s. in money.
GRETANO GRECO . I live at 6, Cape Cottages, Hammersmith—on 12th March, between 1.30 and 1.45, I was going home, and on opening my barrow in the yard I saw the three prisoners come from Mr. Little's yard next door into my yard—I went upstairs, and said nothing to them—I then saw them go to No. 4—Baker had something under his arm—I saw them go upstairs, and next morning, about ten or half-past, I saw them come out of the same house—the road is no thoroughfare.
Cross-examined by Baker. I can swear to the time—you were eating the potatoes which I had left—I said nothing to you, or you to me.
Cross-examined by Barker. I cannot say whether what you had got was some of the potatoes.
Re-examined. To get from the Dove public-house, persons would have to climb over some walls, ten or twelve feet of brick and boards up higher—they could get in from the street, but not from the back.
T. GRECO. I live at 4, Trafalgar Street, and sell ice cream with my father—I take a barrow about—on the night of March 12th I was asleep, and about two or three o'clock Baker woke me up by hitting me on my head—I saw the three prisoners—they called my father, and whispered to him, and gave him some brandy and smokes—my father sent me out of the room—the brandy was corked with glass corks, and a bit of cork inside the bottle—Barker had some opera-glasses, and I saw some cigars in a box, and some in a packet—they stayed till about ten next morning—they all three gave my father some money.
Cross-examined by Baker. I asked you what time it was; you said five o'clock; I did not believe it, as I came in at 1.30 with my potatoe-can—there was one bottle full of whisky, and one half full.
EDMUND LOCK (594 T). On 12th March, about 1.15 a.m., I saw the prisoners at the bottom of Waterloo Street, going in the direction of the Dove public-house, a hundred yards from it—they had nothing in their possession then.
BASILIO GRECO . The last witness but one is my son—on 12th March I was in bed, and he a woke me about three a.m., and I saw the three prisoners—Baker had worked with me many a month before—they were all three drunk—Baker gave me some whisky in a glass—the bottle had a glass cork with cork round—they also gave me some brandy and two cigars each, which were broken, and they gave me 2d. each for my little child—they had some cigarettes, and the ginger-headed man (Barker) had a pair of opera-glasses—he wanted to put them into his pocket, but dropped them—the bottle was like this (produced)—they said, "Good-bye, governor; we are going to Marylebone"—when they woke me up they said that they were drunk, and lost the train for Marylebone.
Cross-examined by Baker. I know the time, because I saw a little daylight—I did not go out with you in the morning.
H. T. SAUNDERS (Re-examined). This bottle is similar to what I lost; it has a glass stopper fitting into a bit of cork—it snowed that morning. FRANK FOSTER (Police Inspector). On 12th March, about nine o'clock, I went to the Doves and traced two sets of footprints in the snow, over the wall to the prosecutor's yard; one set of prints were of smooth-bottomed boots, and the other had square-headed nails; Clark had nails in his boots—the only property recovered is a decanter and the ends of some cigars.
Cross-examined by Barker. Your boots have similar nails to what I saw in the impressions, the nails were all over the soles, but only tips on the heels—Baker's and Clark's boots had no nails in the soles or heels, and would make no noise.
Baker, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said that they found a bottle of wine, a box of cigars, and the opera-glasses in the yard, and took them into Mr. Greco's house and stopped all night. The other prisoners each said, "I say the same as Baker."
BAKER then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at West Ham on 24th September, 1890, and BARKER to one at the West London Police-court on August 26th, 1891.
BAKER— Six Months' Hard Labour.
BARKER— Four Months' Hard Labour.
CLARK— Three Months' Hard Labour.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. FARRANT Prosecuted.
WILLIAM WALTER COLLIER . I am a coffee-house keeper, of 28, Cloth Fair—I was introduced to the prisoner about the beginning of April by Mr. Woodcock, an auctioneer—I saw him on April 11th—he said that he had a remittance coming from a firm of solicitors, Bywater and Co., for whom he had done some work, and he would see me next day—he brought me a cheque for £2 15s. next day, and asked if J would change it for him—I asked him to put his name at the back—he said, "It is an open cheque, there is no necessity for it"—I got it changed at the White Hart, and gave him the money; he gave me a half-crown and said, "There, old fellow, go and get a drink"—the cheque was signed by Bywater and Co.—on the Tuesday following the manager of the White Hart told me that it was not good—on Thursday morning, April 14th, I saw the prisoner; he said, "I expect another cheque to come, and we will go round to 8, Bridgwater Street," where he was employed—it was for £3 17s., drawn by Bywater and Co.—I went to the landlord of the White Hart; he made a communication to me, and I told the prisoner I could not get it changed, as the other cheque had not been cleared—he said, "Is there anywhere else where you can get it changed?"—I went to one or two other places with no intention of changing it, but only to gain time—on the Thursday night he made an appointment to come for the cheque on Good Friday; he did not come, but sent a friend, and I handed the cheque to him—on the same day at one o'clock the prisoner came and said, "Your own common sense might tell you not to give it to him, the cheque came from me"—on the Wednesday or Thursday following I saw him outside the Meat Market, and said, "That cheque has come back"—he said, "I am very sorry, there must be some mistake"—we went to the White Hart, and he said it was all right, he would see his friend about it, and that he got it from a Mr. Murray—I let the matter stand over, and on the Saturday he said, "My friend is going to bring the money down: I will stay till three o'clock for him"—he stayed till nearly six, but his friend did not appear—I saw him on the Monday, and asked him to accompany me to Cornhill, and then I said, "Come on to the bank about this cheque"; that was the National Bank, on which it was drawn—we saw the manager, and I told the prisoner that the cheque-book had been issued on December 30th, 1880—I do not remember what he said to that—I gave him in charge, and ho said, "I did not expect this from you.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. It was done so quickly that I did not
even look to see who the cheque was payable to—you did not tell me you received it from Mr. Murray, who received it from Messrs. Bywater for work done—I went to a public-house the day previous, and drank with you and a Scotchman; I do not know who he was—on the day I handed you the money we did not go and have a drink where Mr. Murray was; I saw a man with you, but did not know his name—you did not tell me he was the gentleman for whom you were getting the cheque cashed.
By the COURT. He never suggested that I cashed the cheque for Murray, and not for him.
WILLIAM JOSEPH . I am a cashier at the National Bank, Old Broad Street—on 16th April the cheque was presented through the clearinghouse, marked "No account"—Bywater and Co. never had an account with us—the cheque-book was issued to a stockbroker of Warnford Court in April, 1880, and the account was closed in two months.
HARRY AYRES (630 City). On 25th April, in the afternoon, I met Collier and the prisoner—Collier gave the prisoner in charge for uttering a cheque on the National Bank for £2 15s.—he seemed very much surprised, but said he was quite willing to go anywhere to make inquiry—I asked Collier whether he was aware of the serious charge he preferred against the prisoner—he said, "Yes"—he was taken to Snow Hill Station—he said he received the cheque for work done for Mr. Murray, a commercial traveller, of Camberwell New Road; that he was unable to give the number of the house, but could point it out—he afterwards said he received it from Mr. Murray at the Bedford Hotel—there is no firm of Bywater and Co., solicitors, in the "Law List"—I cannot find Murray.
GEORGE JOSEPH HOWELL . I am manager of the White Hart, Long Lane—on 12th April I cashed this cheque for Mr. Collier—on Wednesday, the 20th, the prisoner and Mr. Collier came to me, and I showed him the letter I had had from the bank, but he did not take it—he said the cheque was obtained from solicitors for work done.
Cross-examined. I cannot say whether you said you received it from Mr. Murray—I said, "You might have received it innocently enough.
"The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "When I handed the cheque to Mr. Collier I explained that I had received it from Mr. Murray to get cash for it; I deny saying that I received it from a firm of solicitors; I told him what Mr. Murray had told me."
He repeated the same statement in his defence.
GUILTY of the uttering.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BURNIE Prosecuted.
JOHN VIVASH BAILEY . I am manager to John Munday, furniture dealer, of 241, Commercial Road—in September last I lent some goods to Mr. Moss Hart, of 7, Star Street—this is the agreement.(This was for a bedstead, chairs, and other articles, value £8 1s.)—there is the usual power in the agreement to retake the goods if the payments are not kept up—in January Hart was £1 0s. 6d. in arrear in his payments, and on January 19th I spoke to the prisoner, who is a licensed broker, and said, "You go to Moss Hart, and if you can't get the goods without
paying the rent, I must pay the rent"—he did not bring the goods to me: I made inquiries, and sent the prisoner this post-card—I saw him at his house on 21st January at one a.m., and asked him what he had done with the goods—he said that the landlord had distrained on them for rent, and he had taken them under the landlord's directions—I went to the sale rooms, but could not get the goods.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You came and told Mrs. Bailey you wanted the money to pay the rent—you did not tender me the goods—the arrears in your agreement hare not been paid up—I wrote this letter, and said that you had paid the arrears because you had made the arrangement to come and pay them in the evening, but you did not do so—I suggested that the best thing you could do was to see Mr. Munday—I received this letter from Mr. Munday. (Informing the witness that unless the goods were delivered by Monday morning at eleven o'clock proceedings would be taken against him)—I thought there had been a legal distraint by the landlord.
Re-examined. A few days after that letter was written I ascertained that the landlord had never authorised the distress.
By the COURT. I did not know where the goods were, and wrote to him, and called at 1 a.m. and found him in bed—he did not say, "I had to find money to pay the rent, and so I had to raise money on them"—have heard of such cases—my wife refused to give him anything—his duty was if he could not get the 18s. to leave the agreement.
WILLIAM ELLEN . I am landlord of 9, Star Street, where Moss Hart lives—the prisoner came there on 19th January; I was there he represented that he came for the goods, as Mr. Munday's head broker—he did not ask me to accept a note for the rent, and let the goods go—I did not authorise him to distrain—later in the afternoon he paid me 18s. for the rent.
Cross-examined. You brought a man named Brittle with you—I said that I had been to Mr. Bailey, and he treated me in a very shabby manner—I said, "I have been to a broker to get him to distrain for the rent;" but you wanted 5s. on signing the warrant—you came back and said you could not get the money, but would borrow it and pay it—I gave you this receipt (For the 18s.)—I was living in the same house as your father.
By the COURT. The prisoner said that he got a friend to pay the rent, and he brought the friend with him; it was not Mr. Hayward.
ALBERT HAYWARD . I am clerk to Mr. Hawkins, the proprietor of some auction sale rooms at Stratford—on January 19th the prisoner came to me with a bedstead and some other articles, which Mr. Bailey afterwards identified—he said they were under distraint for rent, and he wanted to sell them, and asked for an advance of £2, which I gave him.
CHARLES HAWKINS . I am an auctioneer, of 239, High Street, Stratford, and am the employer of the last witness—these things were brought to my rooms under a distress warrant, and I advanced £2 on them—they have not been given up.
Cross-examined. It is customary to make advances in that way. Prisoner's Defence. I was employed by Mr. Munday to go into possession under this hiring agreement. There had been some difficulty, and I told him I should have to pay the rent. He said, "Do your best, and get them out of the place. "The landlord said, "No, I am going to have my
rent. I got a van and paid the 18s. for the rent, and went across to Mrs. Bailey, but she would not pay any money; she said, "You had better let the matter be." I said that I could not; I had better put them in a stable and get the money. Two or three days afterwards, when I was in bed, Mr. Bailey came and said, "What hare you done with those goods?" I said, "They are down at Holborn sale rooms; I paid Ids. for the rent. "I went and saw Mr. Munday. The whole thing is that I would not go and fetch the goods back again; they were not disposed of in any way. He wrote to me and called me "Dear Harry."
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, May 4th, 1892.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted. KATE KINSEY. I am a daughter of Orlando Kinsey, tobacconist, 70, Mansfield Road, Kentish Town—on 21st April, about six o'clock, I was serving, when Marks came in for half an ounce of tobacco, price twopence, and gave me this half-crown, which felt very light—I called my father into the shop, and he asked her where she got it—she said at the linendraper's at the top of the road—that would be Mr. Howse's shop—my father went out with her—on 16th April Cove came in for half an ounce of tobacco, and gave me this half crown, which I put in the till, giving him two shillings and fourpence change—he went away—I went to the till about ten minutes afterwards; I examined it; it felt very light; I put it back again, keeping it by itself, and when my father came in some time afterwards I gave it to him—I afterwards went to the Police-station, and there picked out Cove from a number of persons.
Cross-examined by Cove. It was between the lights when you came in; I could not say the exact time, but it must have been between five and six—on 21st I did not see you with the woman—the Oak is not many yards from our shop—I put the half-crown at the back of the till—I don't know how many customers came in during the time you were in the shop—after you went away I had two or three customers—I did not notice the half-crown you gave me. till I went to the till to serve a customer.
ORLANDO KINSEY . On 21st April my daughter called me into the shop in the evening, and showed me this coin, which I examined, and found to be a counterfeit half-crown—I asked Marks, who was in the shop, where she got it from—she said she got it at a draper's shop at the top of Gordon House Lane—I said, "He is a particular friend of mine; I will walk back with you, and I will get a good one in return, no doubt"—we had gone a little way down the road, when she said she must leave me; she did not want me to follow her—I allowed her for decency's sake to go out of my sight, but as soon as I looked round the corner she ran away—I followed; the male prisoner, whom I had seen opposite my shop, and who had followed me down the toad, came up and said, "You don't want to do that woman any harm; she is only a poor prostitute"—I said, "No, what I am doing is for her benefit; she tells me she has taken a bad half-crown"—I went on till I met a
detective-sergeant, after following them for about three-quarters of an hour—I told the sergeant, in their presence, that Marks had attempted to pass a half-crown in my shop, and that it was good enough, from the description of the man, to take him as well—he said he would go to the station, and I gave them into custody—my daughter had shown me this other coin on the 16th, and I had it in my possession, and she had also given me a description of the person who gave it to her—I kept it till I gave it to the sergeant with the other half-crown—when I came out of the shop on the 21st I saw Marks looking over her shoulder to see where Cove was, and I saw him at that time.
Cross-examined. On the 21st you were opposite my shop, which is 200 or 250 yards from the Oak—when you came up to me and the woman you were 70 or 80 yards from the Oak—when the policeman came up I held up my hand to call him, and then you held up yours—you walked by my side to the police-station, and you complained once or twice of my following you so closely—I saw you talking to Nethercot, the fishmonger, and his wife, in the road opposite my shop.
ANNIE GOVIER . I am the wife of Charles Govier, who keeps a tobacconist's and sweetstuff shop at 5, Mansfield Road, Kentish Town—on 21st April Marks came in about 5 o'clock for twopennyworth of cough drops—she gave me a half-crown, which I bent in the tester, and told her was not good, and gave back to her—she said she had taken it from the linendraper up the road—she did not name the linendraper—there is one in the Gordon House Lane, and one in the Mansfield Road, on each side of us—she took the coin and went away, turning to the left—the same night we heard from Mr. Kinsey—I next saw Marks on Thursday at Marylebone Police-court, where I identified her from among other people—I only know it was a bad coin by its bending in the tester.
Cross-examined by Marks. I do not identify either of these coins. CHARLES NUTKINS (Sergeant Y). On 21st April I met Kinsey and the two prisoners about half-past six—Kinsey gave Marks into custody, saying, "I give this woman into custody for passing a counterfeit half-crown, and you would be doing right in taking the man as well"—Cove was there—he said, "I shan't go to no station; I saw this man speaking to this woman; I don't know her; he accuses me of being with her"—I said to him, "We know each other; you had better go to the station and clear yourself"—Marks said, "I got it from the linendraper's at the corner of Gordon House Road; I bought three yards of calico, and these socks"—she produced the calico and socks—"I changed half a sovereign"—I took her to the station, Cove walking in front, and Kinsey going with me—at the station Cove was placed with ten others, and Miss Kinsey identified him as the man who had uttered a bad half-crown to her on the previous Saturday—I searched him, and found 6s. 4d., good money, a silver watch, a pawn-ticket, and a receipt—after Marks was searched, I received 2s. silver, and fourpence, and a small velvet purse—before the charge was read to them, Cove said, "I don't know this woman"—Marks said, "I don't know him"—when charged they made no reply—Marks gave 36, Preston Street, Norland Road, Kentish Town; and Cove, 7, Cromwell Terrace, Upper Holloway, as their addresses.
Cross-examined. The prosecutor beckoned me, and you beckoned me
afterwards—you know why you did not run away; you could have run away if you had liked—the gentleman handed over one bad half-crown at the station, and the other when he gave the woman into custody—these are the two coins I received from Kinsey.
JOHN JOSEPH ASHTON . I live at 68, College Place, Camden Town, and am agent for Burnett, of 152, Holloway Road, and sell watches for him—I sold this watch to Cove, who gave the name of Goldsmith—he wrote from 5, Union Terrace, first, and then I went twice to 30, Ellenborough Road, Hornsey, to collect the money, as it was to be paid for by instalments—he paid me 7s. 6d. down, and paid up to the week before last—when I called on each occasion Marks has let me in each time, and Cove has paid me—my last call there was about 20th April; the payments have been settled up so far.
Cross-examined by Cove. I saw a rather elderly person at 5, Union Terrace—I asked her to take a sewing-machine, and you said you would have a watch—you afterwards said you were going to move to 30, Ellenborough Road—you have paid me each time I have been—you said you had a donkey and barrow—I did not see it.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . Both these coins are counterfeit and from the same mould—it is hardly sufficient test of itself the bending of a coin in a tester, as I have known a good coin to be broken in a tester; it depends on the amount of forte used.
The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate—Cove says: "I am NOT GUILTY. " Marks says: "I PLEAD GUILTY to one. I did not know it was bad."
COVE, in his defence, said he knew nothing of the matter; that he saw Kinsey and Marks having high words, and went to see what it was about, and then went to the station to clear himself. MARKS said she did not know the coin was bad. GUILTY .
COVE**— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MARKS— Three Months' Imprisonment.
HARRIS— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
MANNING— [Pleaded Guilty] Judgment respited.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, May 5th, 1892.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted, and MR. GRAIN Defended. GEORGE HENDRY. I carry on business at Oak Lane, Limehouse, as a coppersmith and brewers' engineer—in April, 1890, I recovered a judgment, with costs, against George Ferdinand von Weisenfeld for £250—Mr. Birchall was my solicitor in that action—I instituted bankruptcy proceedings against Von Weisenfeld—he was declared bankrupt
in June, 1890—I was appointed trustee on 2nd April, 1891—a protracted litigation took place with reference to that bankruptcy, and with reference to some furniture in Stoneleigh; likewise as to a bill of sale that was set up respecting a claim by the Produce Company, Limited, to that furniture—the issue was, whether I or the trustee was entitled to that furniture—judgment was given by Justice Vaughan Williams; there was an appeal, and his judgment was affirmed—on that I took steps to compel the bankrupt to attend his public examination—he did not attend—he did not file any statement of affairs—a summons was taken out, under Section 20, for a private examination of the defendant Betts—that was issued on 7th May, and on the 28th he came before Registrar Linklater and gave evidence—I have never seen the furniture since, or recovered a farthing—I know that Von Weisenfeld had an interest in two houses, Stoneleigh and Grafton House, in Clissold Park, Stoke Newington—he was also supposed to rent Oak Lodge—I did not know of the furniture being taken there on 18th April or 20th May.
Cross-examined. There was no order of the Bankruptcy Court for this prosecution—I am prosecuting as trustee—there are several creditors—there is no committee of inspection—the Official Receiver and myself, as trustee, conducted the whole of the litigation—there were proceedings extending over nine or ten days about the bill of, sale—Mr. Justice Williams set it aside in my favour, and the Court of Appeal affirmed his judgment—the date of the information was 17th July, 1891—I first gave evidence in this matter a week or two after, at Bow Street—the case was adjourned by Sir John Bridge until the proceedings in the High Court had been adjudicated upon—after the judgment of the High Court I applied for a day to be fixed for the hearing of the criminal charge against the defendant—I cannot say when I first heard of the removal of the furniture from Stoneleigh House—it is twelve months ago; it may have been about the end of March, 1891—we could not take proceedings because we did not know where it went to—we took steps to watch Oak Lodge after we heard of the removal, I can't say the date—I took steps to try and recover my debt, and instructed my solicitor to proceed accordingly—the man bad become bankrupt, but we understood that he had a lot of property—my solicitor applied for authority to break into Oak Lodge and see if there was any property there belonging to me—I did not break into the place; I don't know whether my solicitor did; I was not there when they went in—I went there afterwards, but I never got in—I believe an inventory was taken—I left Mr. Birchall to take all necessary proceedings.
CHARLES L'ENFANT . I am a clerk in the London Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of proceedings in the bankruptcy of Charles F. von Weisenfeld—on 2nd of April, 1891, George Hendry was appointed trustee—on 7th May an application was made to Registrar Linklater for a summons for the examination of the defendant—this is the summons—his examination took place on 28th May—Mr. Barber was appointed by the Registrar to make a transcript of the notes.
ERNEST BARBER . I am assistant to Charles Barber, shorthand writer to the Bankruptcy Court—I attended before Mr. Registrar Linklater on 28th May last, and took shorthand notes of the examination of the defendant—he was sworn in the ordinary way—there is a correct transcript of my notes on the file. (The transcript was put in and read, and the
portion upon which the perjury was alleged was that he did not, on 28th May, 1891, know where Von Weisenfeld's furniture was, or that it was supposed to be bought by Dr. Wilde.)
WALTER JAMES TERRY . I live at 171, Morrison Road, Camberwell—I am a salesman—in April, 1891, I was engaged by Mr. Potts, the late tenant, as caretaker on the premises known as Oak Lodge, Green Lanes, Stoke Newington—on 18th April, 1891, the defendant came there about eight in the morning, and knocked at the door—I opened it; my wife was with me—he put his foot inside the door, and said, "I have come to take possession of the house"—I said, "Where is your authority?"—he could not produce one; he was a complete stranger to me—I told him I had not received any instructions to allow him to take possession—to the best of my belief he said the furniture was coming—upon that I bolted the door—he said, "Is that your little game?"—I went to the back and bolted the door, and when I came to the front again he said, "We know your little game"—he stood with his back to the door to prevent my shutting it—the door gave way—he called another man, and told him to go for the agreement and the letter—he went away and came back—in the course of the day, about three, van loads of furniture came to the house in two pantechnicon covered vans—the defendant told me it came from Stoneleigh House, and by his direction it was put into Oak Lodge—he supervised the putting it in—he remained in the house all day—I declined to leave the premises—he threatened to turn me and my wife out—he told me he came in on an agreement with the owner—he showed me the agreement the next day—he remained there till the 20th, and I then left with my furniture—I read part of the agreement; I don't think this (produced) is it; I am not sure, I should possibly know the letter better—the name of Dr. Wilde was mentioned during the day—I understood the agreement was between Mr. Elton and Dr. Wilde—I saw Dr. Wilde on the Sunday; he was a man of military appearance, rather taller than myself, and stouter—I did not see much of him—he appeared to be a foreigner; I could not say whether he spoke English; I could not say whether he wore spectacles—the defendant had told me that Dr. Wilde was coming in on Sunday morning; he came, and I was afterwards told by Horton that he was Dr. Wilde—I can't say that Horton was caretaker after I left.
Cross-examined. I heard afterwards that Messrs. Elton and Macluer were the owners of the house—I did not notice that there were any foreign labels on the furniture that came in—a Madame Wilde afterwards came to the house—I don't remember Horton telling me that she was coming; she came after some of the furniture had come in—she was in the house while part of the unloading was done—I left the house, in charge of Mr. Betts and Madame Wilde; Dr. Wilde was there—I have not been there since.
Re-examined. I should know Mrs. Wilde if I saw her—I have not noticed Dr. or Mrs. Wilde here.
JESSIE TERRY . I am the wife of the last witness—I was with him at Oak Lodge on 18th April—I saw the defendant there that day—on 16th April I had been on a message to Stoneleigh House for Madame Wilde—I saw her there—I saw some furniture in the hall—I did not go into any of the rooms—I afterwards saw some that I believe to be the same furniture, at Oak Lodge.
Cross-examined. I went no further than the hall at Stoneleigh House—all I saw there was hall furniture—it is rather a large house—I think there were three or four large pieces of furniture; I could not be positive—I saw Mrs. Wilde afterwards at Oak Lodge—I believe she and the defendant were there when I left—I did not see them when I left.
Re-examined. Mrs. Wilde opened the door to me at Stoneleigh House—I was there about a quarter of a hour or twenty minutes—that was on the 16th, and on the 18th I saw part of what I believed to be the same furniture at Oak Lodge—I did not see Mr. Wilde at all—I was there on the 19th when my husband left—I left at eight in the morning—I expected furniture to be brought from Stoneleigh House to Oak Lodge.
HENRY BRIDE . I am gardener to Mrs. Hancock, of Marlborough Cottage, Green Lanes, Stoke Newington—our gardens adjoin Oak Lodge at the back—on 18th April last year I remember furniture being moved into Oak Lodge—I saw Mr. Betts there that day—I went into the house and saw him there that night—I know Stoneleigh House; it is in Church by the man that moved in the furniture that it came from Stoneleigh House—I was in Mrs. Hancock's service during the summer of 1891—during May and June I saw the defendant at Oak Lodge once or twice a week—in July last I remember two persons walking up and down the road watching the house—I know Von Weisenfeld—I saw him in June, and had a conversation with him about drains—I did not see him after the two persons were watching the house; he disappeared then—I have not seen him since, only at the Law Courts—he was living at Oak Lodge in June; I saw him in the garden at the back of the house; I have spoken to him there about lawn tennis.
HENRY HORTON . I was living at Oak Lodge at the time of the examination before the Magistrate—I do not live there now—I am a bottler, and bottle wine for the Concentrated Produce Company; the defendant is the secretary; he pays me my wages—I am in the service now, and live at 2, Balfour Road, Highbury New Park—the Baroness Lydia de Frank does not live there; she comes there to stay when in London; she calls there for letters; she has not stayed there since I have been there—I know nothing whatever of her business; I have never seen her at the premises of the company; I never knew her by any other name—I was introduced to her when I went to live there—on 18th April Mrs. Wilde sent me to take a paper to the defendant—I had known Mrs. Wilde before, for twelve months; I saw her in January and February this year—I know Dr. Wilde; I saw him last December—I was examined at the Bankruptcy Court on the part of the company in support of their bill of sale—the proceedings were adjourned from day to day—I did not see Dr. Wilde about the Bankruptcy Court; he was not examined there to my knowledge—when I took the note to the defendant from Mrs. Wilde on 18th April I saw the furniture moved in—I came with it; it came from Stoneleigh House; Mrs. Wilde gave it to me there; Dr. Wilde was not present—there were three or four pantechnicon heavy vanloads—I remained at Oak Lodge until the furniture was finished removing, on the 18th—I was there on the 20th; I saw Dr. Wilde on the 20th—I became caretaker there about a fortnight after—I remained there until the 25th of March this year; people were not living in the house all the while; Dr. Wilde was living there occasionally—I knew the gardener
next door; more's the pity—I know Von Weisenfeld—in June last year he stayed there—I remember two persons walking up and down outside the house; Von Weisenfeld was not there all the time—he has been there two or three weeks at a time; he never stayed there like Dr. Wilde; he paid occasional visits—they have been there together; they did not occupy the same bedroom—I saw Von Weisenfeld there on the 19th April; he is not Dr. Wilde—I had been to Stoneleigh House before the 18th of April—I had been in the dining-room, the drawing-room, and upstairs, and saw the furniture there; it was not the same furniture that went to Oak Lodge; it was not Von Weisenfeld's furniture—Mrs. Wilde paid me my money as caretaker; I can't say who she got it from, without it came from Dr. Wilde through the Concentrated Produce Company—Mrs. Wilde instructs me as caretaker, and there is Dr. Wilde and Mr. Betts; I take instructions from Mr. Betts when Dr. and Mrs. Wilde are away; they are generally away; I generally take my instructions from Mr. Betts—of the furniture moved from Stoneleigh House, I only saw two things belonging to Von Weisenfeld, a sideboard and a lookingglass in the hall—Mr. Betts lives at Stoneleigh House at present; on the 18th April Dr. and Mrs. Wilde lived there—I did not see Von Weisenfeld there then—I always understood that he left there in October, 1890, when he gave the house up—I don't know that that was after the action was heard; I did not know anything about the action then—I don't know that the looking-glass was his, but it was in his use, and so was the sideboard—the three or four vanloads of furniture were used at Stoneleigh House—Dr. Wilde lived there; I don't know where that furniture is now; I could not say where it was in March; there was no furniture there; I don't know where it had gone to—I was examined before the Magistrate three times, the last time was on 24th July, 1891—I told the Magistrate that the furniture which had been moved to Oak Lodge in April had remained there ever since, and was there then, at the time I gave my evidence—Mrs. Wilde had it moved away the first week in January, 1892—I remember the trustee calling on the 17th January—I did not know that Dr. Wilde had said he had a bill of sale on that furniture; I never heard it till I was told; I did not know that the sale was declared void, and a sham—I do not know that the furniture was removed directly the bill of sale was declared a sham—all I can say is that the furniture was taken away in pantechnicon vans; I don't know where it went to—I don't know what became of the mirror on sideboard—a search-warrant was issued and executed on the premises while I was caretaker—Mr. Birchall, the solicitor, came in under that search-warrant—he had a paper with him; he looked at some of the furniture while he, had the paper in his hand—I never heard of a schedule to a bill of sale.
Cross-examined. I was examined in a room at the Bankruptcy Court on 16th July, 1891, and on 24th I was at Bow Street; I gave evidence, and was recalled and cross-examined the following week—I joined the Produce Company in 1888, and was in the company's employ until 1891 as bottler—from time to time during that period I saw a person calling himself Dr. Wilde; I understood him to be a member of the company—I always took Von Weisenfeld to be the manager—I saw the removal of the furniture from Stoneleigh House—it was the last Friday in March, 1891; I was bottling at the rear of Stoneleigh House, the
factory; the business was carried on there—Von Weisenfeld was there from time to time—it was a company to supply grapes and extract the musk; it is made into a kind of claret—I was going home to dinner about one o'clock, the pantechnicon van stood outside, being loaded with furniture, and when I returned it was gone—between four and five in the afternoon Mr. Betts came down and asked the meaning of it, and I told him—I saw no moving till the Tuesday afternoon, when I saw some furniture being unloaded and moved into the house; it came in a pantechnicon van; it came on a railway trolley—the furniture was being moved into the dining-room—I only saw one van there, it had "Paris" on it—I had occasion to go into the house with a letter; I saw Mrs. Wilde, and had a conversation with her, and then went back to my business—it was the same furniture that was moved into Oak Lodge—I was in the house after the furniture was there—I had occasion to be in the house nearly every day—I always went into the dining-room to see people I wanted to see—I saw Mrs. Wilde, Dr. Wilde, and Von Weisenfeld—I knew Von Weisenfeld well, and I know Dr. Wilde; they are not the same person—the only persons that came to Oak Lodge to ask me for any information was at eleven o'clock at night, and they gave the names of Flaxman and Edwards—that was about a week before the warrant—the furniture had not gone then; it was in the house, and was there up to January this year—I had nothing whatever to do with the removal of it in January—I last saw Mrs. Wilde on 23rd of March this year—I saw her at the house a day or two before the furniture was removed—I had a conversation with Mrs. Wilde as to who it belonged to—I knew from her where Dr. Wilde was generally living when he was not abroad—I have not seen her since 20th March.
Re-examined. The furniture that came from abroad was put into Stoneleigh House, and was afterwards removed to Oak Lodge—I only saw one van, but I was not there all the while; I had business out—at the time I was examined before Mr. Justice Vaughan Williams I knew that the ownership of this furniture was in question—I was not asked if it ceased to belong to Von Weisenfeld and belonged to Dr. Wilde—I saw Mr. Elton several times before I was examined before Mr. Justice Williams—I don't know whether he took my statement—I told him that I knew the furniture came from Paris in March, and was then removed to Oak Lodge—I don't think I was asked a single question by Von Weisenfeld's counsel about the furniture coming from Paris—I did not know that the whole question was who the furniture belonged to—I am sure that the furniture that was removed from Stoneleigh House to Oak Lodge was the same that came from abroad, except the two articles I have mentioned; I took particular notice of it—I had been in the dining-room frequently, and seen the furniture there—there was not a walnut wood buffet and a bookcase there of Von Weisenfeld's—I knew to whom each article belonged, because I minded the furniture when they were in the country—there was a dining-table—there were not twelve walnutwood chairs covered with velvet; I did not see such chairs at Oak Lodge—I saw a mahogany clock and a bronze five-light, a barometer and thermometer, a good many oil paintings, a piano, and a cabinet—I never went into the bedrooms; I don't know anything about the bill of sale—I was not aware there was a bill of sale.
By the COURT. I can't say that the articles in Stoneleigh House were
the same that went to Oak Lodge—I say I saw some furniture removed into Stoneleigh House in 1891—I can't say whether it was the same—the furniture brought from Paris to Stoneleigh House was the same that Mr. Birchall saw at Oak Lodge—I don't know that it was the same as mentioned in the bill of sale—it was moved out from Stoneleigh House—I don't know where it went to—furniture went out in October and November, 1890; that was Von Weisenfeld's furniture—I don't know where it went to; it was not there when I went—I was there when the furniture from Paris was brought in—I don't know who brought it in; all I can say is that "Paris "was on the van in painted letters—I don't know whether the persons that brought it in were foreign or English—it was a two-horse van—I did not ask where they came from—I could not read the name of the owner, because it was in foreign letters, different from ours; the word "Paris" was in English—Madame Wilde is a foreigner, and Dr. Wilde also—I have never seen any foreign prints in their house—I never spoke to the persons that brought the furniture—the goods were packed; I could not see what they were.
EDGAR BYRON PHELPS . I am a manufacturing agent—about Christmas, 1890. I entered into the occupation of 58, Bishopsgate Street, with Von Weisenfeld—the prisoner used Von Weisenfeld's office, and I had the private office—I last saw Von Weisenfeld about March twelve months-after that the prisoner came to the office—letters came for Von Weisenfeld during his absence, which the prisoner would take away—as far as I know the prisoner represented Von Weisenfeld at those offices—since I last saw Von Weisenfeld the prisoner has given me a letter from him; if had an envelope, but when I saw it it was open, with no envelope; it was an enclosure apparently, delivered to me by Betts.
Cross-examined. I have a libel action against Von Weisenfeld, which is still pending, and I am also in litigation with the Concentrated Produce Company, I believe—I have the scrip of one share in the company, but I believe I am not entitled to it, from what my solicitor says.
Re-examined. The company brought the action against me last year, I think—I have heard nothing more about it—the statement of claim has been delivered, and I have not heard anything more about it.
CHARLES FRANCIS BULLARD BIRCHALL . I am a solicitor, of 5, Mark Lane—I have been acting for Mr. Hendry—Mr. Flaxman is my managing clerk—we acted in the bankruptcy proceedings—this is the office copy, I think, of the bill of sale, 1890—I am acquainted with the litigation that has been going on, ex parte the Concentrated Produce Company re Von Weisenfeld, and the different claims that have been made on the property—the company claimed the furniture at Stoneleigh House under this bill of sale, which is from Von Weisenfeld to the company over the bankrupt's furniture—the consideration is £270, I think—it has been alleged that the company have made an assignment or something—there is an inventory attached to the bill of sale—about 3rd of July last year I went to Oak Lodge, where I found Horton in possession—I had the bill of sale in my hand; I went over the house, and compared the furniture in it with the schedule, and the articles we found there answered the description given in the schedule; we did not find some pictures that should have been there—an offer was made with reference to that furniture, which they said was in Oak Lodge, in the bankruptcy proceedings, by a solicitor or
his clerk, acting for the company, of £275—they said it belonged to Dr. and Mrs. Wilde—I was not aware of the removal of any furniture from Stoneleigh House when I examined the prisoner at the Bankruptcy Court—I had reason to think until the removal of the prisoner on 28th May that the furniture was still there—a week or ten days after the prisoner's examination I traced it, and I then applied for a search-warrant under the Bankruptcy Act to inspect the property—the warrant was granted, and I went and searched; that was the occasion I spoke about—the furniture was left where it was, because other proceedings were pending—the Court made an order that it should not be removed—in July I took proceedings before Sir John Bridge, who said it was a rule there that if civil proceedings were pending with regard to the subject of criminal matters the criminal matters were postponed till the civil matters had been determined—I think that is the course—the civil matters were all determined on 25th March in the favour of us and the trustee.
Cross-examined. I heard nothing about the removal of the furniture till I heard it had been removed—I got the summons under the 22nd Section, partly because I could not find where the furniture was—Mr. Elton, a solicitor, said at the Bankruptcy Court that he was appearing on behalf of Mr. Betts, I understood.
GUILTY — Six Weeks' Imprisonment.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, May 5th, 1892.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. MORRIS Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.
ARTHUR VOGELSARG , M.D. I live at 18, Montague Place, Russell Square—on 22nd April, about 11.30 a.m., I was in Fleet Street, and the prisoner Martin came up and asked me if those were the Law Courts; I said, "I think so. but I cannot give further explanation because I am a foreigner too"—I thought he was a foreigner by his speech; he asked where I was going—I said that I had some business to do in Oxford Street—he asked if I would allow him to come with me—I said, "Yes, I have not much time, but if you like you can come"—during the walk he asked me to go with him to the Crystal Palace and Westminster Abbey—I declined that—I had to go to Heath's, the hatter's, while he went to a bar near—I found him there, and he insisted on paying for some whisky, and soon afterwards Cox accosted me and asked me if the South Kensington Museum was near—I said, "It is very far from here"—he. said that a cabman had put him down there, telling him he was near the South Kensington Museum, and that he had given the cabman a sovereign, and waited an hour for the change, and he had not come back—he showed by accident a bundle of bank-notes about an inch thick, in a pocket-book—I told him it was foolish to show such an amount of money in a public bar—Martin seemed surprised to see such a lot of money, and joined me in telling Cox to be more careful, who shook hands with us as a sign of gratitude—Cox said he had got an inheritance
of £30,000 last Thursday, before which he was a labourer I getting £1 a week; that it was from au uncle in Ireland, who added a I codicil to his will by which he, Cox, was obliged to give £5,000 to the poor in any part of the globe—I noticed that his hands were not those of a labourer, and told him he was very foolish to tell such a story, and to show so much money to strangers—he said that he should seek agents to give the £5,000, and they must be persons of honesty and substance, and neither lawyers nor clergymen—I had told him that I am a doctor—he told a story about an Irish schoolmaster to whom he had given £200 for the poor, and £20 for his trouble, and who had proved his position by showing £200 cash at the bank, and he, Cox, would do the same with us if we fulfilled the same conditions, which were that he should see the money, to be sure we were men of substance, and he must see cash and not letters of credit, because he could not understand them—Martin then offered himself to be such an agent—Cox said it would be necessary to show £200, and then he went down to £150—I told him I could not show him such a lot of money, but I could take him to our Legation, where I could prove my honesty—I asked their names—Cox said he could not produce a card—I invited him to write, but he refused, and Martin put down the name of Cox, and also Patrick Lynch, of Pryor's Hotel, and said that in London he stayed at the Great Western Hotel—the other man said he was Mr. Watson, of the Talbot Hotel, Richmond—I am looking at my pocket-book—the first name was written by Martin, and the second by me—I gave my address-card—Cox said that he should see the money that afternoon—I said that I could not produce money that afternoon, because my money was in Switzerland—it was then 1 or 1.30—we were to meet at Holborn Restaurant at 5 p.m., when Cox said we were to show as much money as possible-Martin came with me some 100 yards, and said it seemed to him that this man was very stupid, and he might be a fool, but he could do much good with the money, and he recommended me to brine as much money. as possible for the interest of the poor—I went home alone and fetched some money, and went to a solicitor and told him the story, and he and I went to Scotland Yard and saw Mr. Williamson, the detective—I kept the appointment at five o'clock, and saw the detective in the saloon bar—he gave me a sign, and I went to a chair, and soon afterwards Martin came and told me he could not get so. much money as he expected, only about £40 or £50—I told him I was unsuccessful in getting money too, but the thing was so important that we could have another appointment with Cox—he was very anxious to now from me how much I had got, and whether it was gold or bank notes—I said I had about £4 in cash with me, but I could in case of necessity show my watch and chain—Cox then came in, and offered to pay for a bottle of ale; Martin objected, and I objected too, and then Martin told Cox he was sorry he had not got so much money as he expected, and I said I could not get more than about £4—I saw in the looking-glass that Williamson was standing behind us with two or three gentlemen—I observed that Cox changed colour, and was out of composure—he said, "I shall go back to my quarters," and walked to the door—I looked after him, and saw that he was arrested and Martin had disappeared—I went to Bow
Street, saw the prisoners in custody, and charged them with attempting to extort money from me.
Cross-examined. No one else was with them—I was acting on the instructions the police gave me when I entered into conversation with the prisoners at the Holborn Restaurant—I have been in England since the end of October; it is my first visit here—I have been in Germany-Martin said that he thought Cox's story was a little strange—I was convinced that they were swindlers, and I only went to the Holborn Restaurant to lay a trap for them—I took £4 there—the police did not advise me to show my money.
WILLIAM WILLIAMSON (Detective Sergeant). On 22nd April, about 5 p.m., I went with Norland and Nash to the saloon bar of the Holborn Restaurant, and saw the two prisoners, and the prosecutor sitting between them—on our approaching them they got up and went away—I told Cox I was a police officer, and should take him in custody for attempting to obtain £150 from the prosecutor, pointing to him—he said, "Don't make a scene; you can't do much to me, for I have had nothing out of him"—I took him to Broad Street, where he was charged—I found on him sixteen pieces of paper, eight representing £ 1,000 notes, and. the others £5 notes on the Bank of Engraving; they are dummies—he was charged, and made no reply.
Cross-examined. Flash notes are seen on racecourses; they are carried by welshers—I know a great many welshers—I have not taken proceedings against the printer; this is a new issue—I was at the Holborn Restaurant before Mr. Vogelsarg came in, and went out again, and when I went in a second time the three were together; he was acting under my instructions.
JOHN NOWLAN (Detective Sergeant). I went with Sergeant Williamson on 22nd April, about five p.m., to the Holborn Restaurant, and saw the two prisoners sitting one on each side of the prosecutor—on our approaching them they attempted to leave—I stopped Martin, and told him I was a police-officer, and should take him into custody for attempting to obtain £150 by means of a trick—he said, "Very well, it is a good job we got nothing from him; you can't do much to us"—I took him to Bow Street, where he was charged—he made no reply—I found nothing on him.
Cross-examined. I made a note at the time—Martin said, "It is a good job we have got nothing out of him"—I did not keep it as it was such a trifling thing—Martin did not deny at the Police-court that he had said so.
GUILTY — Eight Months' Hard Labour each
MR. FORREST FULTON Prosecuted.
GUILTY on the Second Count— Three Months' Imprisonment, without Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Friday, May 6th, 1892.
Before Lord Chief Justice Coleridge.
493. DAVID JOHN NICOLL (32) and CHARLES WILFRED MOWBRAY (35) were indicted for unlawfully, in a newspaper called the Commonweal, inciting, soliciting, and encouraging certain persons unknown to murder the Right Hon. Henry Matthews, Secretary of State for the Home Department; Sir Henry Hawkins, one of the Justices of the High Court of Justice; and William Melville, inspector of police.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (SIR RICHARD WEBSTER), with MESSRS. SUTTON and HORACE AVORY, Prosecuted; MESSRS. GRAIN and BURNIE Defended Mowbray; Nicoll Defended himself.
ROBERT JOHNSON . I am an officer of the Criminal Investigation Department—on the 12th April last I purchased at No. 145, City Road this copy of the Commonweal newspaper, dated the 9th of April—on the back of it it appears to be printed and published by C. W. Mowbray at 145, City Road—at the same time I purchased the issues of that paper from 5th March up to the 9th of April, bearing the same imprint—145 had the appearance of a disused shed—I saw printing apparatus there—I have seen persons there at work setting up type.
Cross-examined. by MR. GRAIN. I have not an issue of the 16th April here. (A certificate of the registration of Frank Kets and Joseph Nicoll as proprietors was put in, dated 29th July, 1890.)
EDWIN GRAY . I am a police officer—on 16th April I purchased this issue of the Commonweal of that date at 145, City Road—the imprint on the back is, "Printed and published by D. J. Nicoll, 145, City Road."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL read several extracts from the "Commonweal" of various dates. The following, of 9th April, is the one upon which the indictment is framed:—
THE WALSALL ANARCHISTS "CONDEMNED TO PENAL SERVITUDE."The Walsall Anarchists have been condemned—Charles, Battola, and Cailes to ten years' penal servitude, while Deakin has been let off in mercy with five. For what? For a police plot concocted by one of those infamous wretches who make a living by getting up these affairs and selling their victims to the vengeance of the law. Surely we ought not to have to warn Anarchists of the danger of conspiracies; these death traps; these gins set by the police and their spies, in which so many honest and devoted men have perished. Surely those who desire to act can do as John Felton did, when, alone and unaided, he bought the knife which struck down the tyrant. Are there no tyrants now? What of the Jesuitical monster at the Home Office, who murders men for taking a few head of game? What of the hyena who preys upon bodies of hanged men, and whose love of the gallows a few years ago won him the title of 'Hangman' Hawkins?—this barbarous brute, who, prating of his humanity, sends our comrades to ten years in the hell of the prisons. What of the spy Melville, who sets his agent on to concoct the plots which he discovers? Are these men fit to live? The Anarchists are criminals, vermin, gallows carrion; well, shower hard names upon us; hunt us down like mad dogs; strangle us like you have done our comrades at Xeres; shoot us down as you did at Fourmies; and then be surprised if your houses are shattered with dynamite, and if people shrink from the companionship of officials of the law as 'dangerous company.' Justice has been done. Has it, gentlemen of the middle classes? 'Justice!' Was it justice that was done in your Courts of Tuesday, when a cruel wretch belonging to your class bearing the
likeness of a woman was let off with one year's imprisonment for torturing her own child to death, while men who loved the suffering people so much that they dared all things for them are condemned to ten years' penal servitude? Justice it may be; perhaps, too, it will be just when the oppressed strike back at you without ruth and mercy; only don't whine for pity in these days, for it will be useless.—D. J. NICOLL."
JOHN SWEENEY , I am an officer of the Criminal Investigation Department—I know the defendant Nicoll; I have seen and heard him speak at Anarchist meetings, at South Place Institute, Finsbury Pavement, at Tottenham Court Road, and at Hyde Park—I did not hear him speak at Tottenham Court Road; I saw him there—I saw him at a meeting in Hyde Park on Sunday, 10th of April last, and heard him make a speech there—I made a note of it shortly afterwards, within half an hour—I do not write shorthand—he said, "This is the first of a series of meetings to arouse public sympathy against the cruel and unjust sentence on our comrades at Stafford. I do not want to warn Anarchists against conspiracies and death traps set up by the police and their spies, in which so many men have perished. That Jesuit Home Secretary Matthews, Inspector Melville, and Coulon are the principal actors, and two of them must die. What can be our comrades' feeling when they come face to face in the street with Justice Hawkins, or, rather, 'Butcher' Hawkins, by which name he is better known?"—he also said, "We must stand by our comrades, every one must give his individual aid, and strike back"—that came after the words "two of them must die," and after the words" what can be our comrades' feelings?"—I am positive those are the words used by Nicoll in the park on Sunday—I had not read any article in the Commonweal before I went to the park that Sunday, or been told the contents of any article—I was present at the Stafford Assizes—four men, named Charles, Battola, Cailes, and Deakin, were there charged and convicted, before Mr. Justice Hawkins, of unlawfully having certain explosive substances, viz., bombs, in their possession; the first three were sentenced to ten years' penal servitude and the last to five years' penal servitude—Inspector Melville is an officer of the Criminal Investigation Department—he had been engaged in the investigation of the Walsall affair, and was called as a witness at the trial.
Cross-examined by Nicoll. I took the note of the speech within about half an hour—it would have been conspicuous to have taken it on hearing it, in the capacity in which I was engaged—I have not a very good memory, tolerably good—I don't think it possible that I might have forgotten the words, or put some other words in their place; I swear those were the words you used.
FRANCIS POWELL . I am a police officer—I was at the meeting in Hyde Park on 10th April; it commenced between five and six in the evening; I was standing apart from Sweeney—I knew Nicoll by. sight at that time—I heard him make a speech at that meeting, and soon after I made a note of some of the things I heard him say, as much as I could remember; perhaps an hour after, as soon as I could get to a place where I could conveniently make it out and write it—I have my notes here (referring to them)—Nicoll said, "This is the first of a series of meetings which will be held for the purpose of arousing public sympathy against the unjust sentences passed on our comrades at Stafford"; that he did not think it
necessary to warn their comrades of the danger of conspiracies, because they are traps set up by the police in which so many have perished; they must depend upon themselves; that they could see the Jesuitical Home Secretary Matthews, Inspector Melville, and Coulon were the principal conspirators in this plot—"Two must die for our comrades; everyone must give individual aid, and strike back; what must be our feelings when we come face to face in the street with Justice Hawkins, or 'Butcher' Hawkins, as he is called, on account of the number he has passed sentence of death on?"—I also heard Mr. Justice Hawkins referred to as "Hangman" Hawkins in that speech—after he had finished his speech I saw that he had several copies of the Commonweal under his arm, and was crying them for sale—I only heard him call them the Commonweal—I did not buy one at that meeting; I bought one at another meeting in Hyde Park later on, on another day, a later issue altogether—I saw several persons selling them on 10th April, and I saw several sold—I saw a gentleman purchase one just behind me, and I saw the date on it; it was the 9th—I know the premises, 145, City Road—they had been under my observation for some months—I saw Nicoll go in there twice in the early part of the time—I knew the premises—that would be about the 8th of May perhaps—six months before the Hyde Park meeting I saw him go in on two occasions—I can't remember the dates—the last time was on Thursday evening, 14th April—I saw him leaning over and speaking to a person who appeared to be setting up type—it was in the night-time, I well remember—you can't see them in the day unless the gas, or oil, or whatever they use is alight; it was when there was a light there.
Cross-examined by Nicoll. I took a note of the speech about an hour afterwards—I could not do it before; there was no place where I could conveniently take a note—I am accurate—I wanted to hear as much as I could of die other speeches as well as yours—I did not go there for anything particular, merely to see. what occurred—I did not compare the note with Sweeney—I am sure they are the words you used, "two of them must die"; I am positively certain.
RICHARD POWNEY . I keep a newspaper stall at the foot of Westminster Bridge, on the Surrey side—I have been there for a number of years—I have been in the habit for about two years past of selling copies of the Commonweal—I sell all papers—I obtain my copies from agents—I presume I sold copies of the 9th of April—I sell it regularly every week, each weekly issue—I can't say that I have seen the same paper given away at meetings.
Cross-examined by Nicoll. I can't say that I have seen it sold. By the COURT. I suppose I sell about eight or nine copies a week; that would be about the outside.
PATRICK MCINTYRE . I am an officer in the Criminal Investigation Department—on the afternoon of 19th April, in company with Walsh, another officer, I arrested the prisoner Mowbray on a warrant—I had the warrant with me, and read it to him—previous to reading it I told him we were two police officers, and held a warrant for his arrest—he replied, "This is a very bad job; my wife is lying dead, having died this morning"—on reading the warrant to him he said, "I am not guilty; I have severed my connection with them; I do not believe in violence of any kind," addressing Chief Inspector Little child, who stood close by,
that was a little afterwards, he added, "I disagree with the article," meaning the article in the warrant; I had just read the warrant to him—he then took from his pocket a number of letters, documents, and memorandum-books, and a copy of the Commonweal of the 16th, and handed them over to me—Sergeant Walsh found other papers there—he was taken to Bow Street, and in reply to the charge he said, "Very well."
Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. I have since ascertained as a fact that his wife was lying dead in the house—from inquiries I have made I believe she had been ill seriously for twenty-two weeks, and prior to that in a delicate state of health for some months, she had been prostrate for twenty-two weeks, and I believe he had attended upon her.
WILLIAM MCCLINCHEY . I am an inspector of the Criminal Investigation Department—on 19th April I arrested Nicoll outside his house, 194, Clarence Road—I went in with him—I read the warrant to him—he said, "I wrote an article"—a woman who was present remarked, "But you have not incited any one"—I searched the room—I found a lot of pamphlets and literature and letters—they chiefly related to the case at Walsall; I have them here—I also found some copies of the Commonweal—I afterwards took him to Bow Street—he there wrote this letter and the envelope in my presence—I was present at Bow Street Police-court on 20th April—I heard Nicoll referring to the article of the 9th April, say that he accepted the whole responsibility of its production, and entirely exonerated the other prisoner, Mowbray.
Cross-examined by Nicoll. The letters were solicitors' letters, letters enclosing subscriptions, and entirely of an innocent nature as regards this case, except one leaflet—the letter written at Bow Street was not delivered.
Re-examined. The name on the leaflet was "Fight or Starve"—I do not know that the leaflets were distributed publicly in London.
JOHN WALSH (Police Sergeant). I was with McIntyre when Mowbray was arrested—on that day I searched the premises at 145, City Road—among the papers I found this manuscript of the article of 9th April—also this manuscript on pink paper—I found that partly set up in type in the Commonweal, office. Nicoll: "Yes, that is my writing."
Cross-examined by Nicoll. We took all the set-up type in the office. Nicoll's statement before the Magistrate: "I reserve my defence in the main. I deny that the article was an incitement to murder at all. On the morning of the Walsall conviction, I knew that a good and charitable fellow, Charles had been entrapped by the police; I used strong language such as one uses under the influence of strong feelings; I do not deny that I wrote the article, and under the same circumstances I would write it again."
The following witnesses were called by Nicoll. JOSEPH BURGESS. I was in Hyde Park on Sunday, the 10th—I heard your speech from beginning to end—I heard what you said with regard to Home Secretary Matthews, Melville, and Coulon—you said that the Walsall Anarchist case was a plot invented by Home Secretary Matthews for the purpose of bringing the Anarchists into connection with the Liberal party, and bringing the Liberal party under the obloquy that would attach thereto—he reasoned it out in this way—he said that the
Anarchists were connected, or were allied in some measure, with the extreme Socialists, and that the extreme Socialists were allied with the Social Democratic Association, that some of the Social Democrats were Fabians, and that the Fabians were generally Radicals or Liberals, and by this chain it was the intention of Home Secretary Matthews to fasten the condemnation of the Anarchists on the Liberal party—I did not hear you say anything like this, "I do not want to warn Anarchists of the danger of conspiracies and death-traps set up by the police and their spies, in which so many men hare perished; that Jesuit Home Secretary Matthews, Inspector Melville, and Coulon are the principal actors, and two of them must die"—you said the chief actors were Matthews, Melville, and Coulon, you never said "two of them must die"—you said it must be very unpleasant and embarrassing to Justice Hawkins to meet so many men in the street who he had condemned to death and who were respited—I did not hear you say, "Every comrade must give his individual aid and strike back."
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. I heard some language about the Home Secretary being at the bottom of the plot, and Melville and Coulon were agents—I don't remember his speech beginning with, "There are a lot of fresh faces since the last collection"—there was a collection after the speech—I think the collection was made before the speech, but I will not be positive about that—there was only one collection made during the time I was there—I only heard Nicoll make one speech—I should think that was between three and four o'clock.
HENRY BOND HOLDHAM . I was in Hyde Park on Sunday, April 10th—I heard the whole of your speech—I did not hear you say, "Two of them must die; "I heard you remark as to one of the Anarchist men, who was in ill-health and not likely to survive his imprisonment, that he would be likely to die; it was to that effect, but certainly not in the sense mentioned, certainly not about the Home Secretary—as far as I remember, the reference you made to Justice Hawkins was that it had once been said about him that he must have felt very uncomfortable on meeting in the street so many men who he had sentenced to be hanged, the inference being that they had been respited—I was there when the speaker before you had got about halfway through his speech, I imagine, we heard the end of the speech of the man that followed you, and then we went away.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. I should say I was there altogether about three-quarters of an hour—we entered the Park about half-past three, and heard one or two speeches at the Marble Arch and at the Reformers' Tree, and got out about six—I did not hear Nicoll make more than one speech—the impression that he gave me was that this scare, if I may use that expression with regard to the Anarchists, was that it was a scare of the Home Secretary and the Tory party—I have no recollection of what he said about Melville.
W.R. CUPAR. I was in Hyde Park on Sunday, 10th April—I heard the whole of your speech, from beginning to end—I did not hear you say, "The, Jesuitical Home Secretary Matthews, Inspector Melville and Coulon are the principal conspirators in this plot; two of them must die"—I heard you say that someone had said that it must be very uncomfortable for Mr. Justice Hawkins to meet so many persons in the street who he had condemned to death, but I do not remember your
having added anything of that sort that is added to it—I heard nothing like an incitement to murder either of these men, decidedly not.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. He made a long speech—he began by giving us some particulars about Auguste Coulon, and he suggested that the Walsall affair was very likely to be a got-up plot, and very likely it was done with a political intention, to show the connection between the Anarchists and the Social Democrats, and the Fenian Society and the Radicals, towards the Liberal party—that the uncomfortableness caused by the Walsall plot would reflect upon the Liberal party—and further, he denounced, in pretty strong language, the action taken by the police, and Justice Hawkins and Mr. Matthews, and Inspector Melville—I don't remember anything particular about it—as to Justice Hawkins, he characterised him as—I don't know whether he used the expression as his own, or as somebody else's, but he certainly used the expression, "Hangman Hawkins"—I am not quite sure about "Butcher Hawkins"—he might have, but I don't believe it—he said nothing about the Home Secretary which might be taken as inciting to murder—he spoke about his action in the case of the poachers at Aylesbury—he did not call him a murderer; he simply let it appear that Mr. Henry Matthews, at any rate—let me see—no, I can't remember what he said about it—I only heard one speech from Nicoll that afternoon; I can't tell the time exactly, but it must have been between four and half-past five, I think nearer five—I am a Dutchman.
FRED HENDERSON . I was at the meeting in Hyde Park on Sunday, 10th April—I heard your speech—you did not say "Justice Hawkins, Home Secretary Matthews, Melville, and Coulon are the chief actors in the Walsall plot; two of them must die"—I heard another speech before yours, and I waited about five minutes after you had finished—you said something about coming face to face with Justice Hawkins—you did not say anything like individual aid, and striking back—I did not take notes of your speech.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. I only heard him make one speech—I think I can tell you what he did say about Justice Hawkins; it was something rather like what he said, "What must be Justice Hawkins' feelings when he meets so many persons in the street that he has condemned to death, and who have got off since?"—he called him "Butcher Hawkins"—he was not complimentary to Mr. Justice Hawkins—he was generally abusing him, calling him "Hangman Hawkins" and "Butcher Hawkins," but nothing that could in any way be interpreted into a threat or inducement—he was speaking of Melville in the same strain he said he went about employing men to get up plots, spies—I could not say what more—he was talking in that strain—he said the Home Secretary was a party to the Walsall plot—he was speaking about half an hour—I was bail for Charles, one of the Walsall prisoners—I was convicted at Norwich with Mowbray for inciting to riot, for a speech; that was either in 1886 or 1887; I am not sure which—I am not an Anarchist; I regarded them as being Radicals—it was a speech I am not proud of; it was merely a speech—I had not gone to attend this Anarchist meeting—I frequently go to Hyde Park on Sundays—I was rather interested in the meeting, having stood bail for one of the prisoners.
By the COURT. Nicoll spoke at the top of the rising ground, about the middle of the Park, under the Reformers' Tree. By MR. BURNIE. I am now a member of the London County Council. JOSEPH BURGESS (Recalled by the COURT). When I heard Nicoll speak it was under the Reformers' Tree.
H. B. HOLDHAM (Recalled). It was under the Reformers' Tree that I heard Nicoll speak.
W. R. CUPAR (Recalled). It was under the Reformers' Tree that Nicoll spoke.
THOMAS NAYLOR (Examined by Nicoll). I was in Hyde Park on Sunday afternoon, April 10th—I heard your speech under the Reformers' Tree—I am a newspaper reporter—I took notes of the speech; I have not got them here—I do not recollect hearing you say, "The Jesuitical Home Secretary, Melville, and Coulon are the chief actors in the plot; two of them must die"—as a newspaper reporter it would have been my duty if you said anything of that Kind to send it in—we generally select any striking passage to send in—I do not remember you saying, "What must be our comrades' feeling when they come face to face in the street with Justice Hawkins, or Butcher Hawkins, by which name he is better known? we must stand by our comrades, every one must give his individual aid and strike back"—I did not stay to the end of the meeting—I left when the speaker who succeeded you was speaking—the meeting seemed practically over; most of the crowd had gone away; there were not many there.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. I cannot remember what he said about Inspector Melville—I believe he said something about the Home Secretary and Jesuitism; that is all I remember—Nicoll's speech lasted about twenty minutes—I only heard him make one speech that afternoon; that was under the Reformers' Tree.
THOMAS CHARLES POPE . I was in Hyde Park on the afternoon of 10th April, about a quarter past five—I did not hear the whole of your speech—I don't remember hearing any passage like "the Home Secretary, Melville, and Coulon are the chief actors in this plot; two of them must die," or "What must be our comrades' feelings," etc—I was there from just before the beginning of your speech till a quarter-past five.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. I was given to understand that this was just by the Reformers' Tree—I only heard Nicoll make one speech.
JOHN SWEENEY (Recalled by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL). Nicoll made more than one speech that afternoon; there was about an hour's interval between them—his opening remark in the second speech was that he saw a lot of fresh faces—the hat was going round, and the audience was diminishing.
By the COURT. He repeated as near as possible what he said on the first occasion—he mentioned the cruelty of the police, and mentioned Justice Hawkins, Melville, and Coulon again, and said the same words again—I took general notes—I took the notes when the audience was breaking up after the second speech—I made general notes after the two speeches were made—I did not know at the time that it would be the subject of a prosecution.
afternoon—I should think they were about an hour apart—two speakers spoke between the two speeches—I took my notes about an hour after the meeting; I should think about eight—the meeting lasted about three hours, it commenced about a quarter to four.
THOMAS E. WARDLE . I am a shorthand writer, and I am connected with the press—I was present in Hyde Park on Sunday afternoon, April 10th, to take a report of the Anarchist meeting—I heard your speech—I did not hear you say, "Two of them must die"—I heard you tell a tale with reference to Mr. Justice Hawkins sentencing men to death and meeting them daily in the street, but I have no recollection of hearing you make a reference to "striking them back"—I was present till the meeting was over—I only heard you deliver one speech.
Cross-examined. I did not take a verbatim note of the whole of the proceedings—I only took what was required for publication—I have no notes here—I have only what was published in the Star for Monday, 11th—only a small portion of what was said was put in the paper—Nicoll only made one speech while I was there, unless they held two meetings—I was there about three, and Nicoll started about a quarter to four, and I got back to my own place about six—Nicoll asked the question of the audience, as far as I could gather, how any Anarchist or anybody could have any respect for the law if it was upheld by certain members, whom he named, Mr. Matthews, Mr. Justice Hawkins, Melville, and Coulon—I am telling you what I remember—the expression I took down was not "hangman," but "Butcher Hawkins," I think—he called Mr. Matthews a papist—he distinctly said that the Anarchist business at Walsall was got up by the police; I don't remember him making a statement about the Home Secretary as apart from the others; I understood that he was included with the others as one of a number who had got up the plot against him; Mr. Matthews was mentioned as being part of the business—there was a statement in which the relation of one party to another was taken into consideration.
Re-examined. The Anarchist business is considered good copy at the present time, and is put on the bills—the Tories make more of it than the Radical or Liberal papers do—by "good copy" I mean it is saleable.
FREDERICK ARTHUR FOX . I was present at the Hyde Park meeting on Sunday afternoon, 10th April, from beginning to end, when all speaking was over—you delivered two speeches—you did not say in either speech anything about the Jesuit Matthews, Melville or Coulon being the chief actors in the Walsall plot, and that two of them must die; nothing of the kind—nothing occurred like that, or that I could put that construction upon—you did not use those words—you did not say, "What would occur if they came face to face in the street with Mr. Justice Hawkins, or Butcher Hawkins? by which name he is generally known; we must do our best; every comrade must give his individual aid, and strike back"—I don't remember anything of the kind, and I should have remembered it—your last speech was repudiating something that had been said, by former speakers, and you said the public were not to take notice of violent speeches made by so-called Anarchist speakers; they were in the pay of the police generally, and not Anarchists at all.
Cross-examined. I am a shop assistant—the first speech occupied about twenty-five minutes I should say, and the second about ten to fifteen minutes—three speakers intervened between the two, so that there was about an hour in between—both were made at the same spot, the Reformers' Tree—he used a little abuse of Melville in the first speech; I could not say what it was—I heard him call Mr. Justice Hawkins "Hangman Hawkins," as the name he was publicly known by, not "Butcher Hawkins"—he called the Home Secretary a Jesuit—I could not give what he really said about the Walsall plot; he condemned the proceedings—I think he said they were a plot by the Home Secretary and Melville and Coulon-that was in the same speech in which he spoke of Hangman Hawkins and abused Melville—I could not say for certain if he said anything about traps set by the police; I daresay he did—I don't think he said anything about his not needing to warn his comrades about the danger of conspiracies as traps set by the police—he certainly did not say, "Two of them must die"—I think I must have noticed that immediately—he said Deakin and Charles were suffering from consumption, and must die; I think it was Deakin and Charles—he generally says the comrades should help in the cause—I have heard him before, not at an Anarchist meeting (I do not attend this kind of meeting), but at a shop assistants' meeting, an early closing meeting.
MR. GRAIN called on behalf of Mowbray
WILLIAM JAMES RAMSEY . I am a printer, living at 14, Brownlow Road, Dalston—I have occasionally machined the issue of the Commonweal—I knew Mowbray as being one of the committee who were engaged in producing the Commonweal; he never gave me any order in regard to it—on 13th April I saw him at the Carlton Restaurant in the City Road, and he was speaking to me of what he described as the foolishness of an article which had been written by Mr. Nicoll; he said he entirely disapproved of any such language, which was very foolish, to take the best view of it, and as easily-scared people might make a scare of it, and it was nothing but bombast, it was damnable (I think that was the word), because people that might be easily scared might take notice of it, and he wished to withdraw himself from the paper, and would do so if any such stuff as that appeared in it—after that I accompanied him to the office of the Commonweal, 145, City Road, just across the road—he had a very heated discussion with some of the people there about what we had been talking about—I machined all the paper of 9th April—I had nothing to do with setting up the type; it is the custom with many small papers of limited circulation to set up the type and send it to the machine—the type was sent to me in a chase, an iron frame, locked up ready to be put on the machine and copies printed off it.
Cross-examined. Before 13th April I had seen Mowbray from time to time, but very rarely—I understood he was one of the committee who managed the paper; I was not particularly interested—the type always came to me set up—I had no occasion to go to the office—I knew nothing of who wrote the articles or set them up—I cannot say if Mowbray's name was on it for many years as printer—I have occasionally seen it; but it had a small circulation, and I Know very little about it—there were other names on it before Mowbray's, many years ago, when William Morris had it—I don't remember any other name than Mowbray's for
four or five years; but I cannot say if he has been the printer for five or six years—I printed the issue of the 16th on Nicoll's instructions.
Nicoll, in his defence, said that he had written the articles when labouring under a strong feeling of indignation at the sentences passed upon the Walsall Anarchists, and he argued that it could not be construed into an incitement to murder.
MOWBRAY— NOT GUILTY . NICOLL— GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Friday, May 6th, 1892.
Before Mr. Recorder.
495. JOSEPH INKERMAN HIGGS , to embezzling an order for £36 6s.; also an order for £48 18s.; also orders for £23 10s. 9d., £93 2s., and £41 8s. 8d., having been convicted at Newington on July 1, 1884.— [Pleaded Guilty: See original trial image.] Judgment respited.
MR. HUTTON-LE-MAISTRE Prosecuted.
FREDERICK DAKERS . I am a porter, of 13, Took's Court, Chancery Lane—on 17th April at night I was at the corner of Seymour Street and Euston Square—I had just taken leave of a young woman, and saw the two prisoners speak to her—I turned back and said, "Leave her alone, she has nothing to do with you; she is going home"—they asked me who I was, and struck at me, and we had a bit of a scuffle, and the other prisoner knocked me down and cut my pocket out, containing a leather purse with 8d. in it—I called "Police!"—they both got away, but a constable brought Cheer back, and the inspector brought Johnson—I charged him with cutting my pocket out.
Cross-examined by Cheer. I said that I had known the woman four years; she is a common woman—I told you to let her go—you touched me first—you were not there when the robbery was done.
Cross-examined by Johnson. Cheer spoke to the woman, but you were behind him—I was knocked back on the steps, and you held me down, and cut my pocket out and tore my waistcoat open, and punched me on my head and ribs—Amy Simms, the woman who was with me, is a common prostitute.
AMY SIMMS . I am a servant, and live at 3, Crescent Place, Burton Crescent—on Saturday night, 17th April, I was in Seymour Street, and saw Dakers there—after he left me the two prisoners came up, one of them took me round my waist; the other interfered, and Dakers came back and spoke to them; they began knocking him about, and I called out for the police.
Cross-examined by Cheer. I did not put my arm round your waist, and ask you to go home with me for half-a-crown; I believe you were the first that struck him, but you both had him on the ground.
him and said, "What is the matter over there?"—he said, "I don't know, I am going home"—I took him back, and Dakers said, "That is the man that robbed me"—I asked if he had lost anything—he said, "I don't think I have"; but afterwards he said that they had got a leather purse containing sixpence and twopence—he pointed to Cheer, and said, "That is the man that struck me first and knocked me down"—at the station Cheer said, "I was speaking to the female and he struck me first"—Johnson said, "All right"—they were put into cells, and a portion of the pocket was found in the dock where Johnson had stood—I have compared it with the piece left in the trousers, and they correspond; there is a stain on each—I think it has. been torn off, not out.
Cross-examined by Johnson. I did not search your pockets at once; I looked in your hands, and rubbed my hands down outside your pockets.
WILLIAM THOMPSON (111 S). I arrested Cheer, and found on him a half-crown, a sixpence, and twopence—I found a sixpence on Johnson—after they were put in the cells we found this portion of the pocket immediately under where Johnson had stood.
Cross-examined by Johnson. I searched you, but you must have had the piece of the pocket in your hand—Dakers was quite sober.
The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate. Cheer says: "I did not go near enough to him to steal anything. The woman asked me to go home with her, and he came up to me and shoved me, and I hit him." Johnson says: "I am innocent of this charge."
Johnson's Defence. I do not know this man; I saw these two men fighting; I picked the man up, and he shouted "Police!" I went away, and the inspector asked me what was the matter; I went back with him.
CHEER received a good character.
— NOT GUILTY .
JOHNSON— GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of a like offence at this Court in the name of Edward Lyons, on 16th December, 1889.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
THIRD COURT.—Friday, May 6th, 1892.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
497. BRUNO HOLMFELDT (38) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing in the dwelling-house of Henry Trump 31s., his moneys; also to obtaining by false pretences from Mary Blanchflower Brown 5s., with intent to defraud.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. ABINGER Prosecuted. CHARLES GEORGE SMITHERS. I am a foreign art-dealer, of 47, Darnley Road, Hackney—on 7th April I was coming home at 12.15 a.m.—I went inside the little, garden in front of my house, and turned to shut the gate, when three men suddenly approached me, and asked if my name was Jeffrey, or Gregory, or some such name—I said, "No"—one said, "Yes, it is," and they pushed the gate open, and sprung upon me; I was forced back over the partition between the gardens, and the bigger man got hold of my throat, and made me speechless—I was helpless—I
could not scream—I was sensible—they got my arms up, opened my clothes, and rifled my pockets, taking about 12s. from my trousers, and my pince-nez from my waistcoat pocket—my sister opened the door, and they ran away to the right—the prisoner is about the height of the man who got my arms up—I went to the Police-court next morning, but three days after that I was in bed—I have not my natural voice, and my throat is still very bad.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I came from Aldgate—I had been to see some friends—I had not been out for a jollification; I was sober—I went into a public-house at the corner of our road—I went indoors, and when I recovered I went to meet my sister—she ran for twelve minutes or a quarter of an hour—she said she had seen a policeman, who followed in pursuit—about 1.30 a policeman came, and said we must go to Hackney Police-station to charge the man; we went—I gave particulars—I forget if I was questioned—I said I was not thrown down; I am doubtful whether I said I would press the charge or no—I do not think the inspector said be would have to summon us—I had physic from Dr. Trapp—a policeman came during the remand to see how I was—he said he had got the man, and would call for us the day we were to go to the station; that was Booth.
KATE SMITHERS . I reside with my brother—I am single—at 12.15 a.m. on 7th April I heard a scuffle—I opened the street door, and saw four men; three ran away and left my brother; the men had my brother against the division of the houses—Iran after them—I lost sight of them—I saw 313 J, and made a communication to him—I cannot identify the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I asked the policeman if he had seen three men, they had just assaulted my brother—he called or whistled—I saw two other policemen after I had spoken to the first—they were in Elsdale Street—when asked, my brother and I said we did not want to prosecute—I do not know that he said we should be summoned, but he said we should have to appear—my brother attended at the Police-court, but he was ill in bed two or three days—he would not have a doctor, but he had physic and his throat is very bad—he was not intoxicated, he was very excited after his ill-treatment—the men ran to the right—I called out, "Stop him!"—the three ran together—I came up with. the policeman at the corner of Devonshire Road.
THOMAS PETTY (312 J). I was in Elsdale Street, Hackney, about 12.15 a.m. on 7th April—I heard shouting "Stop thief!"—another constable gave me instructions—I was standing at the entrance of the Elsdale Road—I saw three men running—I chased them—the prisoner turned and struck me a violent blow on the helmet with this life preserver (produced)—my helmet was knocked into the road—the handle of the life preserver was broken in the scuffle—I closed with him; he struck me two more blows on the top of my head—when he struck me first he said, "Take that, you b——!"—I got the weapon away—becoming exhausted from loss of blood, I struck him with it over his head to defend myself, and then fell exhausted—two constables came to my assistance—I fainted—I was assisted to the station by two gentlemen, and the prisoner was taken to the station by the two constables—he was charged with highway robbery and assault—he made no answer—I did not see the faces of the men, but I never
lost sight of them till I captured the prisoner—the prisoner carried the life preserver with the handle up his sleeve, with the lead in his hand—I blew my whistle about twenty yards before I got to the prisoner—I have resumed duty the last day or two—I was under the police doctor.
Cross-examined. It was a lady shouted "Stop thief!"—I chased the men up Loddiges Road, out of Elsdale Street—I did not strike you till I had arrested you—I know nothing about taking a woman to the station, and your assaulting me and running away on 1st March—I do not remember your telling the inspector that I assaulted you for nothing, and that you were innocent.
Re-examined. I have no doubt it was the prisoner who struck me with this weapon—I was forty or fifty yards" from the prosecutor's house when I first heard the alarm—no other persons were about but the three men.
WILLIAM BOOTH (313 J). About 12.15 a.m. on 7th April Miss Smithers made a statement to me, and I ran into Elsdale Street and saw three men running towards Loddiges Road—I saw Petty thirty yards off and nearer the men—I called to him, "Stop them!"—he took up the chase—I followed as quick as I could—when I came up the prisoner and Petty were struggling—this life preserver was picked up—Petty fell back against the railings, exhausted from blows he had received on the head—Samway assisted to take the prisoner to the station—two gentlemen assisted the constable—I was present when he was charged; he said nothing—we searched him.
Cross-examined. I did not hear any shouting till the lady came up—you struggled at first, and then said, "Take me as quick as you can to the station"—I do not remember hearing you ask what Petty struck you for and what he charged you with, nor your telling the prosecutor you had nothing to do with it and were innocent.
Re-examined. The prisoner was bleeding from the back of the head—the prisoner and the constables were bleeding from their heads—the prisoner was exhausted when we got him to the station, but not when I took hold of him.
DAVID SAMWAYS (345 J). I saw some men running in Elsdale Street to Loddiges Road—Petty and Booth were following—I ran down Devonshire Road to get in front of them—I saw Petty and the prisoner struggling—the prisoner held Petty by his collar—I took hold of the prisoner—he was very violent and struggled—Booth came up, and we took the prisoner to the station—both the prisoner and Petty were bleeding—they had one another by the throat.
Cross-examined. I was in Chatham Place when I saw the men, and crossed the Darnley Road, through Devonshire Road and Frampton Park Road into Loddiges Road—you were not exhausted—you struggled at first, then went quietly to the station—you did not become exhausted before you got to the station.
DAVID JOSEPH JENNINGS . I am a manufacturer of ice safes at 19, Gaskin Road, Hackney—I heard a policeman's whistle when I was 50 yards from the prisoner—I ran up and saw the prisoner holding Petty by the throat and beating him about the head with his fist; two others were standing alongside—they ran away—I picked up this life preserver between my feet when I arrived on the ground, the handle broken as it is—I gave it to 313 J—soon afterwards two other constables
arrived and took the prisoner—I and another man helped the prosecutor to the station—he was exhausted, and covered with blood from head to foot when I arrived.
Cross-examined. You said to the policeman "You brute!"—I said that at the Police-court—I was not asked the question at the Police-court, but I saw you strike the constable.
The prisoner, in his defence, said that Petty had a spite against him because he protected a woman the constable was ill-treating on 1st March, and the constable had threatened him; that he saw two men running and one walking on the other side of the road; one turned round sharp, and the policeman took him (the prisoner) and struck him twice and said, "You are one of them," then struck him three or four times; that he struggled to get away, but when taken did not try to avoid going to the station.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour, and twenty-nine strokes with the" cat.
MR. DRAKE Prosecuted, and MR. WILLES Defended.
WILLIAM KEMP (Detective Officer). About two a.m. on 2nd April I was in Millfield Road and saw Ruston and Mason—I was standing at the corner with Lee and Moore; I turned and saw the prisoners emerge from the gate that leads to 198 and 200—we withdrew into the doorway of a public-house and waited for them to pass us, when I stepped out and stopped Ruston—as his person appeared bulky I said, "What have you got under your coat?"—he said, "Nothing"—I put my hand under his jacket and found this chisel standing in his waistcoat pocket—I seized him—he said, "Oh, dear!"—Mason attempted to run away—he was seized by Lee and Moore—I asked Ruston, "What are you doing there at this hour of the morning?"—it was about 2.10—he said, "I am just going home from the Britannia"—I said, "Where did you get this from?"—he said, "I bought it of a man a week ago"—I took the prisoners to the station, and on Ruston I found these pair of kid gloves, 11/4d., a soldier's discharge in the name of William Wellrum, as incorrigible and worthless, a photo of a young lady, torn in three-pieces, cigar-holder and case, memoranda, match-box, and portion of a watch—this jemmy was found on Mason—when charged they said nothing.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLES. The chisel is used by housebreakers—the cigar-holder Ruston owns; it is an expensive one, and in my opinion too luxurious for Ruston—I have not found owners for the articles—I examined the gateway in the morning—I could not say when it was used—Ruston lives in the Millfield Road; I have seen him leave there—he was taken in custody fifty or sixty yards from his own doorway—Bayly'sfactory is opposite Ruston's house, and twenty-five or thirty yards from the gateway—I was standing at the comer of a public-house—it was rather too late to be coming from the Britannia Theatre at Hoxton or a public-house—Ruston was on the right direction home.
Re-examined. The Britannia would close about eleven, and public-houses about 12.30 at latest.
in the doorway of a public-house at the corner—Kemp stopped Wilson, and felt underneath his coat and found this chisel—Ruston said, "Oh dear!"—at that moment Mason attempted to escape—I seized him, and felt something under his coat—I took him to the station—I afterwards searched Mason—I found this jemmy concealed under his coat—I asked him, "Where did you get this jemmy from?"—he said, "From Tottenham; a man there gave it to me; I have never seen the man before, and do not know him."
Cross-examined. I examined the gateway about an hour afterwards—the gates were closed—I cannot say when they were used—I should say they had been closed for years.
By the COURT. I also found this piece of wax candle, 91/4d. in bronze, a gun licence, a receipt, four keys, and a pawn-ticket in Mason's pockets.
NOT GUILTY .
500. The said JOHN MASON was again indicted, with ALFRED BOONEY (21) , for burglary in the dwelling-house of George Collier, and stealing 2,000 cigars and other goods, the property of Edward John Rose.
MR. DRAKE Prosecuted, and MR. WILLES Defended Mason.
GEORGE COLLIER . I am manager to Mr. Edward John Rose, the proprietor of the Peacock public-house, 325, Cambridge Road—on 29th March I closed the house about eleven p.m.—I was afterwards awakened by a dog barking, and while listening the housekeeper knocked at my bedroom door and made a communication—I went to the window and saw two men on the parapet adjoining the skylight—this was about 4.30 a.m.—I raised an alarm—I saw a postman pass, and made a communication to him—I examined the premises—I let two plainclothes officers in—we found the house had been turned upside down, and champagne had been drunk, and sodas and brandies—the door leading to the bar was roped up—two pieces of glass had been taken out of the skylight—I missed 2,000 cigars, all we had, 6 lb. of tobacco, an umbrella, a saw, and some old coins, English and foreign, from cigar boxes—these are some of the articles (produced)—the coins were like these—we take them with coppers from customers, and throw them into this cigar box, and they have accumulated.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLES. I know this saw by the mark on the handle, and it is roughly made—the coins are not an art collection—we sometimes get them in the 5s. to £1 packets of coppers—I never saw them in any other public-house—I have not taken much notice of them—I never saw one like that with the lion on before.
Re-examined. I cannot identify all the coins—I believe I had these two—I missed an umbrella and a screwdriver.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLES. He was driving a pony and cart in Clapton Road—I arrested him on suspicion—he was not charged with stealing the pony and trap—an application was made to the Magistrate to give up the pony and trap—he was charged with unlawful possession of it—it was given up to Ruston's father—I had no other charge; only loitering.
GEORGE WHITLOCK (Detective Sergeant J). At 12.30 on 2nd April Booney, having been detained at the Police-station, was charged by Lisle—I searched him—he took this canvas bag from his right-hand trousers pocket; it contained fifty-one old coins—I said, "What have you got there?"—he said, "That is mine"—I took it from his right hand—I afterwards showed the coins to Collier.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLES. His house had been visited by Kemp and Lee—I believe twenty-nine coins were found—I did not go—Mason's house was searched early in the morning.
SAMUEL LEE (487 J). On 2nd April I arrested Mason in Millfield Road—he gave me his address, 3, McLaren Street—I searched his house, and found this meat saw on the kitchen table, and these twenty-nine bronze coins in a tin cannister on the mantelpiece, and this black-handled screwdriver—Mason was afterwards charged with burglary—he said, "Booney gave me them one morning in Pond Lane"—that is Millfield Road.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLES. Mason was charged with Ruston at the station on the second remand with burglary, seven days after the arrest. (Collier here identified the screwdriver, and stated that he gave a penny for it over the counter.)
THOMAS STANDING (110 J). I was on duty at four a.m. on 30th March in the Cambridge Road—a postman spoke to me—about forty or fifty yards from the Peacock public-house I found fifteen boxes of cigars, a quantity of loose cigars, several half-ounce and quarter-ounce packets of tobacco, two bottles of brown brandy (full), an umbrella, and four dusters—these were identified by Collier.
Cross-examined. This was in Bethnal Green—I do not know where Mason lives.
Cross-examined by Booney. I do not know where you live.
NOT GUILTY .
BROMLEY PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. PIGGOTT Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended Murrell.
ABRAHAM NAAR . I am a cigar merchant, of 567, Commercial Road—on Saturday, 1st April, I closed my premises about eleven p.m.—I was awakened by the police betwen 5 and 5.30 the next morning—I found a large plate-glass window smashed through the railings—425 cigars had been stolen out of the window—they were there the night before—I next saw part of them at the Police-station—these are some of them—their value is twelve shillings a hundred—this packet is worth three shillings—an empty box was left, which could not be got through the railings.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. These are British made cigars, not Pickwicks; I make them—they are 3s. wholesale and 4s. 6d. and 2d. retail—my shop is on the left-hand side of the Commercial Road, at the corner of Grosvenor Street, near Stepney Railway Station, and beyond the Arbour Square Police-station.
Re-examined. I have sold six or seven dozen a week of them—I have no doubt they are mine—they are Sumatra leaf and Connecticut fillings.
WILLIAM GILL (Detective H). On 4th April I arrested Murrell where he was living, 49, Broad Street, Ratcliff—I said, "I am a police officer; I have called to see you about some cigars that you purchased on Saturday"—he said, "Yes, I bought a bundle," and he went into the parlour and fetched a box and the bundle produced—he said he paid 1s. 3d.—he did not know whom he bought them of, but afterwards said that it was from a young man living at the lodging-house next door—I told him they were part of the proceeds of a burglary, and I should take him into custody for receiving them—I took him to the station, and he was charged—he said, "That was the only bundle I received."
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I received a statement from Bromley when I took him into custody—he lived at a lodging-house next door to Murrell's shop—every statement Bromley told me about Murrell was correct—Murrell's is a general shop—he is licensed to sell tobacco—he sells cigars from boxes—he took this bundle from the parlour behind the shop—he had been in a situation many years before he took the shop—Mr. Woods, his employer, is here; I have known his employer twenty years—Murrell had gone into this shop about six months—the police have no reason to suspect him of receiving stolen goods—this is the only case—it is a rough neighbourhood—lads like Bromley pester the tradespeople—Bromley said he had only sold this one bundle to the old man.
Witness for Murrell. HARRY PRATT. I know Bromley—on the 2nd of April he came to me with two bundles of cigars, like these produced—he offered them to me—he asked me where he could sell them—I did not answer him. MURRELL received a good character. NOT GUILTY .
BROMLEY then PLEADED GUILTY**† to a conviction of felony at the Thames Police-court, in November, 1891.— Eight Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BOOTLE Prosecuted.
MICHAEL MENDOZA . I am a general dealer, of 7A, Arrow Alley, Houndsditch—on the 15th of March, about 3.30 p.m., I was in the Victory beer-house—I was sober—I had not been there before—the prisoner came in with his fists clenched, and said, "Give me a shilling, you bleeder!"—he appeared sober—I replied, "What shall I give you a shilling for?"—he said, "I'll take your bleeding eye out" with his trembling hands—I said, "You take eyes out very cheap"—he hit me on the side of my head, made me roll; then he kicked me with the back part of his boot, and I fell to the ground; he kept on kicking on the calf of my leg—I had £6 18s. in my breast-pocket and 1s. 8d., the change of a two-shilling piece for a glass of ale and a mild and bitter—he rifled my pockets, but did not find the £6 18s., only the 1s. 8d. from my trousers pocket—he tried to get away, but I fastened one hand on the back part of his collar—the use of one of my legs was gone—he said, "If you don't let me loose I'll bite your b——nose off"—but I kept to him till he dragged me out of the public-house door to the corner of the street—first I called to the barman, "Is there no protection here for a fellow coming to have a glass of ale to be murdered and have my leg broke by a scoundrel like that?"
—I was obliged to let him go, and as he made across the road with a woman the landlord pointed to a policeman to catch hold of him, which he did, and brought him back—my age is sixty-eight—I never said, "Who are you?" nor did he—I did say, "Do you allow your customers to be insulted?"—the barman did not say, "No; give him one"—I never struck the prisoner, giving him a black eye—the prisoner's state ment before the Magistrate is not true—he dragged me up, and got his hands into my pockets—he did not say, "If your leg is broken come to the hospital"—I was in the hospital from 15th March to 15th April—my leg is bad now, and will be for years to come—I never wore crutches before.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You did not say, in trying to pass, "Hold up, old man, let me go by"—I did not strike you in the eye—I became insensible, and you would have got away had it not been for the landlord pointing you out to the policeman—you did not ask me to put my arm round your neck, nor say that you would take me to the hospital, nor that you were sorry for what you had done—I was not hurt in the fall, I was hurt by the back part of your boot—you were given in charge for breaking my leg—I do not know what you said—I had no chance to go to the Police-station and charge you with robbery—I told the policeman as soon as I could that I should charge you with robbing me as well as breaking my leg—I could not get out of the hospital before I did to charge you—the policeman came to the hospital the week following the assault—I do not know who came—I did not know my own children when they came, I was so bad.
Re-examined. I could not eat and drink in the hospital for nearly a fortnight; I had tinglings in my ear, and was shaking.
HENRY HODGES . I am a barman at the Victory public-house—on 15th March last I was in charge of the bar about 3.30 p.m.—the prosecutor came in—the prisoner was in another compartment—I asked him to leave before any row occurred, but he walked through to the prosecutor—he refused to leave, and used abusive language towards me—he called me a "bastard," and "a cow's son"—he walked up to the prosecutor, and struck him without any provocation—I saw him put one hand across him and the other on the partition—the prosecutor complained to me, and the prisoner knocked him down—he kicked the prosecutor while he was standing, and afterwards while he was lying helpless on the floor—he struck me at the same time—the prosecutor said, "Do you allow your customers to be insulted in your house?"—I did not say, "No; give him one"—I did not hear the prisoner nor the prosecutor say, "Who are you?"—the prosecutor did not strike the prisoner, and give him a black eye—the prisoner walked in backwards, with his hat over his eyes—I did not hear him say to the prosecutor, "If your leg is broken, come to the hospital"—he scarcely said more than three words to him—I was the other side of the bar.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I knew you by your back—I did not see that you had a black eye—I did not say to the prosecutor, "Give him one"—I jumped over the bar when the prosecutor was lying helpless on the ground, and you were belaying him on the floor.
ROBERT DAVIS (262 H). I was stationed close to the Victory on 15th March—I received the prisoner from another constable—he was charged in my presence with assaulting the prosecutor, and breaking his leg—he
said, "Well, I will charge him," and "Look at my eye"—he had a slight red mark over his eye—he said it was an accident, referring to the broken leg.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I took you to the station, went out to the hospital, and came back.
RICHARD THOMPSON (337 H). I was stationed in the Commercial Road about four p.m. on 15th March—a communication was made to me—I saw the prosecutor standing outside the Victory—he complained to me—the prisoner was walking away, and I went after him and brought him back—I took him into custody—the prosecutor said, "I shall give you into custody for kicking me in the leg"—I took the prosecutor on an ambulance to the London Hospital—he was suffering great pain—the prisoner said, "Why don't you charge the other man as well as me?"—I said the old man would have to go to the hospital first—there was no reference then to the loss of money—I saw the prosecutor the next morning—he was still in great pain—I was only with him a few minutes—I next saw him a week afterwards—he then told me he had been robbed.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You were about 100 yards away when I walked after you—I did not say, "That scoundrel wants to lock you up for breaking his leg"—you said, "If his leg is broken it is an accident"—you wanted to give the prosecutor in charge—I handed you over to another policeman—I did not see anything the matter with your eye—when I went to the hospital I got the prosecutor's address—I did not ask him questions, nor if he had any property about him; nor if he wanted to be sent home—he was unable to make any statement—I saw him the next day; I asked him how he was—he said he was very bad—I asked him where he lived—he told me—I went again to the hospital the following Wednesday—then he told me he had lost 1s. 8d., and that he would prefer another charge against you for robbing him—I came back and told the Magistrate—I searched your pockets; I took no money out—I did not say, "That man charges you with stealing 1s. 8d., but you have 1s. 5d."
Re-examined. I gave evidence at the Police-court on 13th April—I was there every week—the prisoner did not charge the prosecutor till I had taken him into custody—the prosecutor was very ill, but a week afterwards he was out of some of his pain, when he complained of the robbery—that was three weeks before he came out of the hospital.
DAVID HUNTER . I am a dresser at the London Hospital—the prosecutor was brought in on 15th March—both bones of the right leg were broken—the fibia was fractured through the internal malleolus, and the fibia three inches from its lower end—there was a good deal of stain about the fracture—he remained in the hospital till April 15th—he was there a month—I attribute the injuries to the wrenching of the foot outwards—I found no external marks of violence—the injury could not result from a kick from the toe of a boot.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. The prosecutor was in a fit state to speak about the robbery, when I saw him first—(The prosecutor here stated that was ten p.m.)—I saw him the first day, but not the exact time he came in.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I went in the house with some men; I went to pass the man, and he said, 'Who are you?' I
replied, 'Who are you?' He said to the barman, 'Do you allow your customers to be insulted?' The barman said, 'No, give him one.' He then struck me, giving me a big black eye; we wrestled together, then he fell. When he got up he said his leg was broken. I said, 'If your leg is broken come to the hospital.'"
Witnesses for the Defence.
WILLIAM CATHERINE . I am the landlord of the Victory beerhouse—on 15th March, about four p.m., I saw the prosecutor lying on the ground, the prisoner standing over him—the prisoner went in and out two or three times—finding my house in trouble, I went to get assistance—I saw you walking away, and pointed you out to the constable—I said, "That is the man that has done it"—I did not see the assault—I said, "We will soon do something with you, find a policeman"—I was referring to you—you were taking possession of the bar—I cannot say whether the prosecutor got up—he had his back against a. seat inside the door—I cannot say if you picked him up—a character like you had no business to subpoena me, as I saw nothing of the assault—as soon as I saw you I thought it was a tiger in the house.
ANNA EARLY . I am a single woman—a charwoman—I live at 95, Grove Street, Commercial Road—about 3.45 on 15th April I was in the public-house opposite the Victory—I went there about twelve—the prisoner changed a two-shilling piece—I left him there—I did not go into the Victory.
The prisoner, in defence, repeated in effect his statement before the Magistrate, and said he was sorry for the accident to the old man's leg; he had 1s. 5d. change from the two-shilling piece, and the robbery was a made-up story.
GUILTY of assault with intent to rob.
He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of felony in September, 1890, at Middlesex Sessions.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
OLD COURT.—Saturday, May 7th, 1892.
Before Mr. Recorder.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (SIR EDWARD CLARKE, Q.C.), with MESSRS. SUTTON, CHARLES MATHEWS, and C.F. GILL, Prosecuted; and MR. KEMP, Q.C., with MESSRS. GRAIN and BANKES, Defended.
SAMUEL HAYMAN . I am a clerk in the Joint Stock Companies' Registry Office, Somerset House—I produce the file of proceedings of the Gold Queen Company—they are filed at Somerset House—among them is the list of subscribers to the memorandum of association; these are the original signatures—at the bottom is the signature of Edward Marshall—there is an agreement of 3rd February, 1888—the office of the company was originally at 3, Broad Street Buildings; it was subsequently changed to 31, Lombard Street—I have not got here the United States Gold Placers Company; it is at Somerset House; I will go and get it.
accounts in the department of the Official Receiver, under the winding-up of the Companies' Acts—I have had under my observation all the papers found in connection with the Gold Queen Company, Limited—I have made it my duty to examine them minutely—the company was wound up upon a creditor's petition, the creditor being the Gold Placers Company, Limited, in December, 1890, by order of 21st February, 1891—the company was incorporated on 3rd February, 1888, and registered on 27th February—among the registered documents there are the articles of association; article 76 specifies 120,000 shares to be allotted by the company to the public, and that they should be numbered in the company's books, 1 to 20,000—under article 4 of the agreement there is a statement that the vendors' shares shall be Nos. 1 to 160,000 inclusive, leaving the shares to be issued to the public Nos. 160,000 to 180,000—by article 2 the vendor shall show that he holds a good and legal title to the said company under the statute of the State of Colorado—I also had under my notice documents connected with other companies—I have seen a cheque for £200 of 17th February, from Anthony Gibbs, payable to the Gold Queen, Limited, also two other cheques of 28th February and 28th March, making £1,000—these (produced) are the cheques; they are endorsed by the prisoner for the Gold Queen Company—I have also had placed before me a receipt of 29th March for £500, showing a receipt of £5,000 in all, by means of the three cheques and acceptances—I have had my attention called to this document of the 8th March, which is signed twice by the prisoner, first as showing the allotment to Mr. Gibbs of 5,000 shares of this company, the certificate to be issued in a few days according to the terms of the prospectus, and at the bottom of it a receipt, signed by the prisoner, for £4,500, being 18s. 6d. per share on 5,000 shares—I have had before me, in my official capacity, the letter-book of the company—I find in it letters addressed to Mr. Anthony Gibbs—on the 29th May there is a letter acknowledging a cheque—that purports to be signed by Mr. Scott for Mr. Gilbert—on 28th June I find a letter purporting to be signed by Mr. Gilbert—it is, "Dear Sir (private), I see your acceptance for £2,000 falls due on 31st July; if it is any inconvenience I will retire it. as I did the last, so as to prevent the necessity of presenting it"—on 29th June there is another letter purporting to be signed by Mr. Gilbert. (This enclosed cheque to cover acceptance which has been duty retired, and enclosing prospectus of the Gold King, the largest property on the run)—among other things my attention has been directed to what purports to be the holding of Edward Marshall's shares in this company—I have examined the cashbook of the company; this is it (produced)—it was acknowledged by Mr. Gilbert to contain the whole transactions of the company—this is the only book in which I find any cash entries, this and the pass-book—the book does not contain the whole of the entries in the pass-book—this is the passbook; it contains very few entries—these two books together contain the whole record of the company's transactions that have come to my knowledge—in neither of these books do I find any record of a receipt by the prisoner of the £4,000 which he acknowledged on the 29th February in going through the books and documents of the company I found no forms of application for shares—in consequence of that I made application to the prisoner for them on 11th August, 1891—we have received no reply—Mr. Larchin, the manager of the company, was examined by the
liquidator on or about the 16th of March last year. (This was put in and taken as read.)
Cross-examined. The shares allotted to the prisoner were Nos. 1 to 160,000; those are all vendor's shares—those are the numbers of the shares for which Mr. Gibbs paid £4,000—I don't recollect Mr. Gilbert saying, "None of my shares were for my own benefit"—I understand he did say something to that effect, but 1 was not present the whole time—I took down his answers—I generally do—I do not take every word, I condense the answers—I will not undertake to say that he did not say, "I have sold none of my own shares for my own benefit"—he answered all my questions apparently frankly and fairly; some of the answers he gave were afterwards discovered to be incorrect; his answers were perfectly frank—this mine is in Colorado—a ditch had to be constructed for the purpose of bringing water to the mine, that was in addition to a ditch used by another mine—I understand that after Mr. Archer left America Mr. Merchant had something to do with the. property—I do not know what remittances were made through the bank to America—I have made no attempt to trace the moneys through the London Trading Bank, it was no part of my duty; the books of the company ought to afford the evidence in the first instance—I have not taken the trouble to ascertain what moneys were sent to America respecting this mine; I have not inquired through the bank of the company; Mr. Larchin says he has received moneys, but he has not disclosed it—Mr. Merchant is the representative of the company—I have not taken the trouble to ascertain, except from the books, what moneys were transmitted to Mr. Larchin as receiver of the company.
Re-examined. I have the certificate of the allotment of shares to Mr. Gibbs, dated 2nd May, 1888; the answer of the prisoner, in which he said he had not sold any shares for his own benefit, is in red ink in his own handwriting, and initialed by him—it does not appear what Mr. Gilbert's holding was; it is imperfectly disclosed in the books—I believe Mr. Merchant is Mr. Gilbert's son-in-law—the bank book does not contain any record of moneys sent to America—there is one cable to America of £20,000 on the 9th of May; except that, the only information about money sent to America is that which appears in the cashier's account—there is really no evidence that the company had any mine, but I believe they were allowed, to a certain extent, to commence operations—they were not proprietors, they never had any title, nor had Mr. Gilbert—since the Official Receiver has called for accounts he has received one, showing an expenditure of £2,970; that is the only evidence in the Official Receiver's possession of any operation whatever.
By MR. KEMP. The certificate I have produced is the scrip certificate of the shares given to the shareholders—this is the scrip certificate which was given to Mr. Gibbs for 124,000. (The SOLICITOR-GENERAL put in a letter of the defendant's to Mr. Gibbs, dated 16th May, 1888, enclosing "certificate for your shares as under;" the first thousand being company's shares, and the other 29,000 of the vendors.)
ANTHONY GIBBS . I live at Thamesfield, near Naresfield, Somerset-before 1888 I had known of the prisoner in connection with some Placer companies, and I had seen him once—in the early part of 1888 I heard from him with regard to the Gold Queen Company, by a letter, I think, which I cannot find—I have not kept all his letters, and have produced
all I could find—the letter gave me particulars as to the holdings; I do not remember having a prospectus; terms of subscription were given by letter—in consequence of it I applied for 400 shares in that company by an ordinary letter, in which I forwarded this cheque for £200, dated 17th February—I had a receipt from the prisoner for that £200 on 20th February—on 28th February I forwarded a cheque for £300 for 600 more shares; no communication was made to me between those dates—on 28th February I sent two acceptances for £4,000 for 4,000 more shares, and I received the letter of 29th February from the prisoner, acknowledging the receipt of my £300 cheque and the acceptances—I had seen Mr. Larchin—I think I Knew him before that—he had nothing to do with my application for the Gold Queen shares—I received a letter (of which this is a copy) of allotment, dated 8th March, and a receipt for the moneys I had paid—I have tried to find that letter, and cannot do so—about 28th March I forwarded a cheque for £500 for the balance of my purchase, so that I had then paid £1,000 by cheque and cash, and there were acceptances for £4,000 lying in the defendant's hands—I have not got the acceptances, they were destroyed; I sent £2,000 for one at the end of May and £2,000 for the other at the end of June in each case, and had these letters acknowledging receipt, and the acceptances were retired and returned to me and destroyed—I received the certificate for the shares—I have not retained the letter of 16th May enclosing it.
Cross-examined. Mr. Scott came to Nailsea and saw me before I took the 4,000 shares—I swear he did not-ask me to buy vendor's shares—I said I should like to have the 4,000 shares for the sake of the bonus—he never said a word about my buying vendor's shares—I think I got back the first bill of exchange before I got the second; I could not say whether they came back together or not—they were not due at the same time—there was a month's interval between them—I could not swear how they were drawn—I put them in the fire directly I got them back—I sent the cheques for the purpose of taking up the bills, and I suppose the bills were taken up by them—I got the bills back.,
Re-examined. I was anxious to pet the bonus of 24,000 shares, and it was with that view and on the representations made to me that I purchased the 5,000 shares—I knew nothing about vendor's shares, or how many the prisoner had; the subject never came up—I thought I was buying shares of the company, and I never heard of the others till last year.
By the COURT. The bills were sent, or brought to me by Mr. Scott when he came to see me; I think it is possible he brought them—I don't suppose it would have prejudiced me much if I had got, instead of a bonus of 25,000 shares with the 5,000 company's shares, 30,000 shares whether bonus or not if they were all paid up, but I should have had no right to them—if they were transferred to me I must have got them.
By MR. KEMP. I had taken many shares in companies before—I had never been a director, only a shareholder in a good many companies.
By the SOLICITOR-GENERAL. I had about £11,000 or £12,000 in the United States Placers Company, and I think £3,000 in the Golding Placers, and I think £1,000 in the Gold King—I have lost it all, I consider—I daresay I have lost £20,000 altogether; I could not say at this moment.
WILLIAM OLDHAMFSTEAD (City Detective Inspector). I had a warrant for the prisoner's arrest placed in my hands, and on 22nd October I saw him in Portugal Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, and I said to him, as he was coming out of the Bankruptcy Court, "Mr. Gilbert, I have a warrant for jour arrest; shall I read it to you now, or will you wait?"—he said, "Presently"—I read it to him directly I could; it was for that he, being the secretary of the Gold Queen Company, did unlawfully and wilfully detain a cash-book, and embezzle £4,000—he said, "Yes, it is quite right, I had the money; the company made me their banker"—when charged at the Moor Lane Station he made no further statement—I believe I found on him a letter of 15th October from Marshall.
MR. KEMP submitted that there was no case to go to the JURY; the prisoner was charged with stealing two cheques, and it was proved that the cheques were sent for the specific purpose of taking up two bills, which were so taken up and therefore the prisoner had not embezzled them.
After hearing the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, the RECORDER ruled that the case must go to the JURY.
Witnesses for the Defence.
EDWIN BENNET GILBERT . I am head of the telegraphic department of Brown, Shipley and Co.—in March, 1888, we received £1,000 from the London Trading Bank, with instructions, in accordance with which we remitted £1,000 to the First National Bank, Denver, Colorado to the credit of J. S. Merchant—on 16th March, 1888, we received £1,000 from the London Trading Bank with similar instructions, and we remitted it in due course to the same bank and to the credit of the same person—on 4th April we received £1,000, and remitted it in the same way to the same person; and on 6th April another remittance of £1,000 was made under the same circumstances—on May 1st we remitted £800, and on May 10th £500—£5,300 was the amount altogether.
Cross-examined. We had no account with the prisoner or with the London Trading Bank; they paid us each amount with distinct instructions every time—the transactions with the London Trading Bank began on 8th August, 1887, as far as I have been able to trace, and from then to October, 1889, there were remittances of this character on behalf of the London Trading Bank—by far the larger number of remittances were in the name of J. S. Merchant—the remittances between the dates I have given come to fully £36,570—there may have been one or two small sums under £100 altogether in addition to that, and there was a further sum of 16,000 dole., not sent to Mr. Merchant, but to Mr. S. P. Gilbert—we did not know what they were connected with—that was a total of about £40,000—there is nothing in our books which attribute particular sums in that amount to the account of any particular company—there is nothing which distinguishes sums sent to J. S. Merchant in March and April, 1888, from others—besides the sums I have given, there were sent to America £50 on 7th March, £370 on 21st, and £200 on 5th April—I have no knowledge of return of moneys from America to this country since the date of this account; there has been nothing that has been identified with this company at all—I know of no remittances by Mr. Merchant, or anybody on behalf of Gilbert to this country during 1889.
Re-examined. I cannot say whether moneys would, if sent back, be sent back through my firm—the Solicitors to the Treasury have asked me for
a statement of the account, and I have supplied them with all the information they asked for.—COOPER. I am a director of the London Trading Bank, where in 1888 the prisoner had an account of his own for the Gold Queen Company, by direction of the directors—it was a private account, opened by the prisoner for the purpose of the Gold Queen Company—in March, 1888, I believe, we directed Brown, Shipley, and Co. to send £1,000 to Colorado for the Gold Queen; it was payable to Merchant or Shipley, I don't know which—there were only three people we had directions to send the money to—our directions were by letter and cheque to send the money to the Gold Queen—we had instructions about that remittance through the prisoner or the managing clerk in the Gold Queen office, mostly from the clerk—the instructions were mostly verbal, but sometimes written—a cheque always accompanied them—I have not got the writings with me; they were simply slips written by the clerk, to say, "Please remit £500 or £1,000 to the First National Bank," and enclosing a cheque—I have found some of the slips; I don't know if the others exist now; these are all that can be found—I have searched, and I have sent a messenger for them since I have been here—these are all that can be found—upon instructions from the prisoner, or the Gold Queen office we Bent another £1,000 on 16th March to Brown, Shipley, £1,000 on April 4th, £1,000 on April 6th, £800 on May 1st, and £500 on May 10th—we should enter those in the pass-book—these sums are not entered in the pass-book of the Gold Queen, as that was all there was in that account of the Gold Queen—I don't know what the object was in having an account for the company—the prisoner's account was to be used for the purposes of the Gold Queen—a correspondence took place in connection with the company as to how the account should be conducted.
Cross-examined. I think I opened this account for the Gold Queen in February, 1888, in consequence of receiving this authority. (This was a letter of 7th February, 1888, from the Gold Queen Company to the London Trading Bank, authorising the bank to honour the company's cheques when signed by two directors and countersigned by the secretary)—we afterwards had the authority of the prisoner and two of the directors (Mr. Norman, I think, was one; I cannot recollect the other) for opening a private account, in the prisoner's name, for the purposes of the company—they stated that the prisoner was acting as banker—I should think that was done both orally and in writing—I know they were present—I cannot find any such document—I cannot give a date on which I think it is possible you would find such authority in the company's letter-book—I should say such a conversation took place between myself and the prisoner about a month or so after the company's account was opened; it might be in February or March, 1888—our directions were that the prisoner had authority to take and conduct the account of the company, and the other account was not used—this account was conducted for the company and in the interests of the company, at the direction of the prisoner and of the company itself; every transaction was for the company—I pledge myself that two directors as well as the prisoner gave me directions of that kind—Mr. Norman was one; I cannot remember the second—I have no book or paper, further than this account, which shows that the amounts I have given
as having been sent to America were sent on behalf of the Gold Queen—we understood it to be so—the entries in the account are, 12th March, "Merchant, £1,000"; 16th March, "Merchant, £1,000"; 4th April, "Merchant, £1,000"; 6th April, "Merchant, £200"—I don't think there is anything in my book which shows those sums were for the Gold Queen—the entry in the account on 6th April, "Merchant, £1,000," was to the best of my knowledge for the Gold Queen; we had no other intimation—I could not say that all the amounts entered under the head of Merchant were for the Gold Queen; I cannot distinguish between them—the "£800 Merchant" on 1st May I believed to be for the Gold Queen; I could not say that it was—our authority was from the secretary in writing, together with a cheque, and we understood the money was to be paid to the Gold Queen—the authority in these cases was one of the prisoner's cheques and a written slip such as this; these are all I can find; we do not keep them as a rule, but searching through our papers we have found these—small memoranda are not kept when the cheque is there—sometimes the slips have got into their proper place; they have no use—I suggest that the reason some of these slips have been kept and not others is because these have been placed in the correct form, and the others have been thrown away as waste—I should prefer that they were kept, but they are not always—this letter of 1st October, 1886, headed "Jenkins, Son and Nephew," was long before there was any Gold Queen account. (This letter requested £50 to be sent per cable to J. S. Merchant, Denver)—moneys were being sent to Merchant by the prisoner long before; I do not know for what purpose—I cannot produce any evidence that these sums were for the credit of the Gold Queen; I cannot say so definitely, but we understood they were—the prisoner came to me and wanted me to discount these acceptances; I was conversant with the whole matter—the prisoner offered to let us see his letter to Mr. Gibbs if we discounted the bills, as we wanted to be in communication with the actual acceptor ourselves apart from dealing with the prisoner. (The SOLICITOR-GENERAL read a letter from the witness to the prisoner concerning the acceptances, and concluding with the words: "Now that the Gold Queen account will be formally opened, please arrange for all cheques payable to them to go to their credit")—the Gold Queen account was never formally opened after that date, the account was reversed in the way I have mentioned, by the directors and secretary, and it was carried on in the prisoner's name, on behalf of the Gold Queen, with the directors' consent—the meaning of "Now that the Gold Queen account will be formally opened" was a small account, which is contained in the pass-book; the bills were not discounted, and were not placed to the company's account. (The SOLICITOR-GENERAL read a letter of 8th March from the prisoner to the bank, stating that for reasons given he declined to proceed with the business of the bills)—to the best of my recollection before the date of that letter there had been an interview between me and the directors of the company with respect to this account being used for the Gold Queen; that was why the correspondence ensued—we had Gilbert's account before the company's account was actually opened, and money paid into it—I don't know anything about United States Placers money, nor about the company; I don't know anything about any particular money—this document may be on the United States Placers
Company paper, but that heading does not instruct us that we received money on its behalf; all these mines are in the United States, and we do not distinguish one from the other—I say, although I have no documents to verify it, that certain amounts were sent on behalf of the Gold Queen, because the prisoner and Mr. Scott told us they were; we could not note everything we are told; we do what we are told—Mr. Gibbs' acceptances was brought to us without a drawer's name—we did not discount them, but we received just about that time, on 12th March, two sums of £1,000 each, credited to this account, and on 16th another sum of £1,000—I did not know at the time, but I have been told that that the bills have been discounted at the London and South-Western Bank—I do not know if the prisoner has an account there—no such amount as £2,000 was paid into our account in May or June by a cheque of Mr. Gibbs'.
Re-examined. I believe these bills were payable at a banker's—we have been transmitting for some time, and for other companies besides this one—the account with the Gold Queen and that with the prisoner were both running; only one person paid into the Gold Queen account—I cannot remember the exact date when the directors came and gave their authority; they did come.
JAMES SMITH MERCHANT . I am the prisoner's son-in-law—I have been in Colorado, and I have been the agent of the Gold Queen and other mines there—from time to time money was remitted to me on behalf of all those mines, and among others in respect of the Gold Queen—that came by cable to the First National Bank of Denver, and they forwarded it to Montrose—on March 12th, 1888, I received £1,000 for the Gold Queen; I think I was in Denver when it arrived—I had left New York on March 3rd or 4th, and gone to Denver, Colorado—on 16th March I received I think it was £1,000 on behalf of the Gold Queen—I was managing the matter over there—I started the ditch for the Gold Queen directly after I left New York and got out there; that was very expensive, 200 men were employed at 3 dollars a day, and the ditch had to be taken about four miles—it joined on to one belonging to another mine which I had just finished; we had taken the ditch for the New York Placers Company from the river, and afterwards I took it on from there for the Gold Queen—on April 4th I received £1,000 I think for the Gold Queen—I received money after that; I was continually receiving sums of money—before the end of April I think I received £800—I took accounts of these sums, and those accounts I sent to the company's office in London, and afterwards I saw them here; those accounts would show the exact amounts received, and the dates and the exact payments—I should think I received for the Gold Queen in all £8,000 or £9,000—I sent, not a copy, but all receipts and accounts and documents to London, as they were the company's property—I was the company's agent, and had to render accounts to them—I kept no copy of vouchers or accounts for myself; I thought I had done with them—it is not usual for a clerk to keep a copy of his master's accounts—I returned to this country at the end of 1888—while I was out there the works on the ditch were going on from the beginning of March, 1888, to November, 1888; 100 to 200 men were employed during the whole of that time; they were paid monthly—in addition to wages, money had to be paid for provisions, cartage, haulage, cutting and taking timber
down there, and all that sort of thing, which amounted to a lot of money.
Cross-examined. I was a partner, from 1882 to 1889, in the firm of Jenkins, Son, and Nephew, which does not now exist; the prisoner and I constituted that firm—prior to 1882 I had carried on business as Merchant and Co.—to the best of my belief the prisoner had carried on business as F. 8. Powell and Co.—I heard of other firms which were Jenkins, Son, and Nephew, under aliases; I did not know of their existence myself; I complained of it; I wanted accounts, and there was an action pending between the prisoner and myself—I knew there was a firm of Watson and Co., which was Jenkins, Son, and Nephew, and there was another firm, Beaumont, Foster, and Co, that I thought belonged to our firm, but it was alleged on affidavit that it did not; I allege it did—I claim against the prisoner that there was nobody in it but the prisoner and myself—Jenkins, Son, and Nephew promoted the Cork Cutting Syndicate, Limited, the Steam Supply Association, the Lancashire Steam Supply Association, the Staffordshire Steam Supply Association, the Yorkshire Steam Supply Association, the Astrop Patent Syndicate, the United States Gold Placers, the United States Gilding Placers, the Gold King, and Gold Queen—the only ones we really promoted were the Placers, the others were promoted by other people, and we only acted as brokers to them—we did not promote the Scottish Steam Supply Association; we derived certain advantages from it—I do not know that nobody but the promoter ever derived any advantage from any of these companies; I don't think that any of them have survived; I think they have all come to winding up—during 1888, when I received money for the Gold Queen, I was the prisoner's partner, and entitled to share with him the 7 1/2 per cent, commission on the capital—the only accounts I kept were the accounts for them; I kept books for them, and gave and had receipts—I last saw those accounts in the hands of the accountant, Mr. Collier, in Lombard Street about two years ago—I have no note now of any sort as to my expenditure, and I cannot go into details—I received from the beginning of 1886 up to 1888 in respect of all the companies between £40,000 and £50,000; it might be £47,000, or something of that sort—I spent every penny of it on the properties—a legal title was made out to some of the properties when Mr. Chave came over there—a legal title was made to the United States Gold Placers in 1887, I think—a Receiver's receipt is a legal title in America—I don't know what the Official Receiver has been able to obtain; I know that when I left we had an official title, such as the Government give; a Receiver's title—the prisoner told me he had lent out of partnership property £30,000 to the United States Placers—I had no means of knowing what was advanced out of one property and another; that is what I complain of in my affidavit—the statement in my affidavit is true—he (the prisoner) did tell me that the moneys received by the firm as vendors of the mining properties had been advanced by the firm, and not by the companies, to the United States Gold Placers, Limited—that is what he told me—I only know by hearsay of the payments into the prisoner's account at the Bank of England after 1889; I heard he had a banking account there—the prisoner has not been promoting any more companies that I know of since the beginning of 1889—I cannot suggest any business from which he could receive large sums of money since
the beginning of 1889—I came back from America in December, 1888, or January, 1889—I did not bring back money with me—I had disposed of all the money that had been sent to me on property out there; I brought back receipts showing the cheques endorsed by everybody.
Re-examined. When I returned I gave up my papers; I was not aware of any existing disputes or the necessity of keeping the cheques—I gave up my papers in respect of every mine—I went through the books and everything with the accountant—everything was checked, and was perfectly correct—Mr. Collier, the accountant, is now dead—he was working at the company's office, working out these accounts for them—I do not know where his place of business was—I gave him all my books and papers when I got back in 1888 and 1889, and went through everything he wasted to know—I have had nothing to do with the company since.
THOMAS GOURLEY (Re-examined by the SOLICITOR-GENERAL). All papers forthcoming, books, receipts and so on, have been under my inspection and examination—no receipts for moneys expended in America in respect of these sums have been forthcoming—I began to deal with the matter when the winding-up order was made in December, 1891—I believe Mr. Collier was one of the prisoner's clerks, I saw him several times—so far as I am aware, he had no official position or occupation apart from the prisoner—he had nothing to do with any official inspection of these books.
By MR. KEMP. I have never been to America—I have no doubt work was done on these places.
GUILTY .— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
NEW COURT.—Saturday, May 7th, 1892.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS Prosecuted, MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended Sutton.
HORACE UNDERWOOD . I am manager to my brother at 18, Cranbourne Street—he keeps a fine art dealer's shop—on 24th March, about nine p.m., I locked the outer door with two locks, and gave one to the boy Wilshire, who opens the shop in the morning, and the other to the barmaid at the Crown Hotel, just round the corner—I returned the next morning about ten o'clock—the police were there before me—two pieces of wood were broken out of the door jamb by the lock, and there was an impression of some instrument an inch and a quarter wide—the small lock was giving way, it was bent—the barmaid hung the key on a nail with her other keys behind the money.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. This plan appears to be a proper description of the locality—no one lives in the house—I had left the large key at the hotel for a few months; it opens one of the looks—I have seen Sutton doing something to the Crown Hotel window.
JOHN BROOKS (166 C), Shortly after twelve o'clock at night on 24th March I saw Sutton and a man not in custody in the doorway of 18, Cranbourne Street—Sutton had a stick or something, in his hand, which
he was prizing between the door-post and the door—they both pressed towards the door, and Reynolds was standing on the kerb—I walked towards them on the opposite side of the way—I was in uniform—they moved out of the doorway, and Reynolds made a hissing noise—I crossed towards them, and all three ran away—the two prisoners ran into the Crown public-house, Charing Cross Road—I ran after them, a very few yards behind them—Sutton ran straight through and down stairs into the basement and I after him—I arrested him in the wine cellar, I believe it was, and I said, "I shall take you in custody for trying to break into a shop in Cranbourne Street'—he made no remark, but began to struggle—I brought him up into the bar, where Cunningham was with Reynolds—at the station Reynolds made no reply at first, but when being taken to the cells he said, "I was not there "; and on the way to the station he said, "I was not there"—I was about fifty yards from the three men when I first saw them, and about seven yards from them when they began to run—Sutton got into the public-house first, but the other was very close behind, in fact he tried to pass him, and Reynolds was not a yard behind the other, and about three yards from me—I knew Sutton by sight; I had seen him for the first time the night before—I did not know Reynolds.
Cross-examined by Reynolds. "When you ran I did not hear a squeaking noise in your boots, but I heard it at the station—I did not say, on bringing Sutton up, "I promised I would have you, and I have got you this time"—I think there were other customers in the bar—I did not tell Cunningham to keep all in that were in—I searched the bar—the cellar is about thirty yards from the lavatory door.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I was against Pratt's shop, a large clothier's shop, when I first saw the prisoners—that was about 12.5—I did not hear Cunningham examined at the Police-court; I was out of Court—we have not talked about the time; I do not think he said the time was 12.5—I have been in that division eight years—I have never had a case here before—I have ordinary constable's boots—I did not walk on tiptoes, I passed slowly down—there was very little traffic—the Empire Theatre was over—any person must have heard me coming—I can't swear whether Sutton was using a stick or a crowbar—I could see, at fifty yards away, which man was using the jemmy—I kept my eyes on Sutton the whole time, and followed him into the public-house—I did not find a stick or a jemmy on him, nor did I see him throw anything away, but it was possible for him to get rid of it—he ran into the saloon bar—I cannot say whether you can go from bar to bar, round the whole house, without going into the street—I ran forty yards; I was not a bit puffed or blown—Mr. Jennings did not say to me, "What is the matter, policeman?" nor did I say, "I will tell you when I get my breath"—I did not start to run sixty or seventy yards away, nor did I lose eight of these two men as I turned the corner—I had my great coat on, with my belt round, but I have often run three times the distance without puffing or blowing—that is Mr. Jennings—he spoke to me in the public-house—two shillings were found on Sutton, but no housebreaking implements—he had not that light coat on; he had a light check suit—it took from five to seven minutes to charge them at the station—he did not, in the dock, deny being there; it was going back to the cell—I had never seen Sutton and Reynolds together before; as far
as I know they were perfect strangers to each other—when Reynolds gave the hiss Sutton moved from the doorway—they stood as if they thought I should go by without noticing them.
Re-examined. When I passed through the public-house to the cellar I did not see Reynolds—the theatres close rather before 11.30, after which there is very little traffic, but it gets busy again when the restaurants close—there were about a dozen lamps there, and they were not sheltered from the light in the doorway; I could see distinctly—I did not see the door till some hours afterwards—I am twenty-eight years old—I ran a little faster than they did—I should have caught them if it had been a little further—I can swear Sutton had a check suit—I whistled to Cunningham—I first spoke to him on entering the publichouse.
By the JURY. There were very few men on the pavement besides the three at the doorway—I left Sutton at the station, and then went to the Crown to inquire if they knew him—he had not said, "I was not there" before I went to the manager—he told me he was potman at the Crown, and I went to the manager and found it was true.
WALTER CUNNINGHAM (126 C). On 25th March, about 12.10 a.m., I was in Cranbourne Street—Brooks whistled; he was running after two men, five or six yards behind them—I ran close behind him into the publichouse, and as we got in, the door directly opposite slammed to; we ran on to a staircase which leads into the kitchen and cellar—he said something to me, and I returned to the bar and recognised Reynolds, who was in an excited state, standing against the bar trying to pull on a pair of brown gloves—I told him to consider himself in custody for trying to break into Mr. Underwood's, 18, Cranbourne Street—he said, "Don't come it too thick; I have not been in Cranbourne Street; I have only just left the Cock Tavern"—I took him to Vine Street, and Brooks brought Sutton up from below—Reynolds made no reply to the charge; he spoke to a boy on the road to the station—I had never seen him before, but I recognised him in the bar as the man I saw running, and Sutton also—Sutton looked round; I had seen him once or twice before, but had not much knowledge of him, because I have not been on duty there long.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. The fixed point is at the corner of Charing Cross Road—I had left there three or four minutes before Brooks called me—when I was two or three yards from Brooks he said, "Look out, they have been trying to get into Underwood's "; that was about ten yards from the public-house—it is not true to say that the first time he spoke to me he was entering the public-house—he spoke to me on two or three occasions going along—Sutton said something going to the cell about being out all day—I think Brooks told me he said he had been to Cricklewood, or in that district, to see some friends.
Cross-examined by Reynolds. Several people were in the bar of the public-house—I do not know whether you could have got out if you liked; you got among the other people—I saw a messenger-boy outside; he is not here; you asked him something, and he said, "I can't come, I am on a message"—you asked him to come to the station, and said something else which I did not hear—I found nothing on you—when the charge was entered you said you had not been at 18, Cranbourne Street; you had only just left the Cock Tavern—I found your address
correct—I did not search your place properly, as there were three women and a boy and a girl, all in bed—I went to verify your address more than anything else.
Re-examined. It was a matter of seconds from the time I ran through the bar to the time I ran back—I was half a minute out of the bar, and Sutton said to me, "Go back"—there was scarcely any traffic about, and no cabs—there were a few pedestrians, but none where this took place—the Empire and the Trocadero were shut; the Monaco is half a mile off.
By the JURY. I saw Sutton going down the stairs, and Brooks behind him.
J. BROOKS (Re-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN). I am almost certain Sutton made no statement at the station except that he was not there—I had no conversation with him at the Police-court, but I heard him telling the other prisoners who were sitting beside him that he had been spending the day with his friends at Cricklewood—Detective Camber is in my division; he did not go and speak to me when I was ordered out of Court—I do not think he understood the solicitor—he said, "Surely I can speak to my brother officer"—he did not speak to me.
Evidence for Sutton.
REGINALD H. BOYSON . I am an auctioneer's valuer and estate agent, of 12, Canal Terrace, Hyde Park, and live at 6, Station Villas, Cricklewood—Sutton is first cousin to my wife—he visits my house nearly every Thursday night; that is his night out—he has never been in trouble—he has been in London about nine months—until that he was in Dublin—on Thursday night, 24th March, he arrived between nine and 9.30, and I saw him off by the 11.5 train—he wished to remain the night to assist me in the morning, as I was moving into a new house, but I said it would not be right, as he might lose his situation by doing so—Mrs. Boyson looks after his linen, and it is washed with ours—he took a bundle of washing away with him that night by the train, for the ensuing week—I have always found him perfectly honest and respectable—I was ready to give evidence at the Police-court, but the Magistrate had made up his mind to send the case for trial.
Cross-examined. He would come either to King's Cross or St. Pancras Station—I think the 11.5 train goes to King's Cross, Metropolitan; it arrives about 11.30—I met a friend next day, who told me that Sutton was arrested, and I went to the solicitor's.
THOMAS POOLE . I am employed at the Crown Hotel, Charing Cross Road—Sutton is potman there—when his night is off mine is on, and I remain on duty till he returns—on 24th March I was standing at the door when a hansom drove up; Sutton was in it; it was as near twelve o'clock as possible—he had a bundle of washing with him—he went down into the kitchen, and from there you can go into the pothouse and wine cellar; there is a door to the pothouse, but it is not locked, and there is a cellar door—he remained downstairs a minute or two—it is a rule that we are not to drink at the counter, and after he came up we went to the Provence Hotel, at the corner of Bear Street, and I had a drink, and Miss Whiston, the barmaid, who I believe had been to the theatre, came in and spoke to me, and gave me some sweets—Tucker served us—Sutton had some mild and bitter, and while he was in the bar his hat fell off and over the counter; Tucker picked it up and gave it to him
—there is a clock in the bar; we left at 12.5 or 12.10, and I went back to the Crown with Sutton—he stood at the door, and I went in and went upstairs, and in less than a minute I heard a struggle in the passage leading from the bar to the kitchen stairs—there is a lavatory there, with the word "lavatory" on the door, and stairs leading down to the kitchen—I went down to the lobby and saw Sutton struggling with a policeman in the kitchen—from the time Sutton drove up at twelve o'clock till he was taken in custody he was not out of my company—I went up to his room to get a latch-key out of his pocket, which I have got here—it was a dark brown coat—Alice Smith is also a barmaid at the Provence; Priscilla Brown is at the Crown.
Cross-examined. I am under Sutton, his wages are ten shillings a week—he does not often take hansoms—there is no special order that he must be in at twelve o'clock to a minute—he arrived at two minutes to twelve as near as possible, and went into the kitchen; we stayed talking a minute, and then walked to the Provence, which took us a minute—we were there five minutes—I looked at the clock there, because I had to get home to Westminster—Sutton lives in the house—it is only on the nights he is out that I stop till 12.30—Miss Barnes and Miss Money were serving at the Crown—Sutton was not on duty at all that night, but he had some work to do when he came in—the house shuts at 12.30—he generally comes by omnibus on Thursday night.
Re-examined. I have to wait till he arrives—I am there by 7.30 a m., and I get to work by eight, and work till twelve—when I came from the hotel I did not see much traffic about; not many pedestrians—in our public-house when you get into the saloon bar you can go round all the bars without going into the street—there are always a good many people about that neighbourhood.
JANE WHISTON . I am barmaid at the Crown Hotel—Thursday is. my night out, and I went to the Criterion Theatre—I bought some sweets coming back, and gave some to Poole and Sutton, who were standing at the door—I looked at the clock to see if I was late, and it was twelve o'clock.
Cross-examined. I did not see Sutton after twelve.
ALBERT TUCKER . I am barman at the Provence Hotel—on 25th March, about 12.5 a.m., Sutton and Poole came in, Poole had hot rum, and Sutton had mild and bitter—they left about 12.10—they were in company the whole time in the bar—Sutton's hat, a light brown one, fell over the counter, and I picked it up and gave it back to him.
Cross-examined. I should not like to swear to the time to five minutes—Sutton does not come into the public-house every night—I cannot tell you whether he was there on the 23rd.
Re-examined. A gentleman from Mr. Clarke, the solicitor, called next day to take my evidence.
ROSETTA BARNES . I am a barmaid at the Crown Hotel—I did not see Sutton come in on Thursday evening, March 24th, but I afterwards saw a bundle, which I knew to be his, on the kitchen table—I saw him come upstairs with Poole, and saw Miss Whiston come in, who gave them some sweets—two policemen came in walking sharp after a man; I cannot tell you whether Sutton was the person they were following—they went straight downstairs, and when they came up Sutton was with them—I saw no one rush downstairs before the police came—if Sutton had
rushed in with the policemen at his heels I must have seen it—I have always found him a perfectly respectable young fellow—there were a very few customers at the counter when the constables rushed in.
Cross-examined. I did not notice that the policemen came in just after two other men, but I must have seen them if they had—I should not like to say they did not.
Re-examined. If the men had rushed in with two policemen after them I must have seen it.
ALICE SMITH . I am a barmaid at the Provence Hotel—on 25th March, about 12.5 a. m, Sutton and Poole came in, and each had a drink—they were larking, and a hat was knocked over the bar—Tucker handed it back to Sutton—they left at 12.10 nearly—I looked at the clock to see if it was near closing-time, because it was very quiet—the men were in the house from 12.5 to 12.10.
Cross-examined. They were only there five minutes—I do not think they could have come in at 12.7; we close at 12.30—I cannot tell you the time the last person left before Sutton—they all stayed till closing-time.
Re-examined. A solicitor called on me the following Wednesday, I believe—the bar I was in is in Bear Street; it is not very large; there is a counter with a flap on the left side—there are seats, but the customers were standing—my attention was called to them because they were larking—I come on duty at eight and work till twelve, and I was anxious for closing-time.
THOMAS EDMUND JENNINGS . I have been manager of the Crown Hotel since Mr. Manning left—Sutton is my barman, and is a perfectly respectable young fellow—I remember the police rushing in on the 25th and taking him in custody—I said, "What are you doing with our man?"—Brooks said, "I will tell you when I get my breath"; he was puffing and out of condition, and seemed excited—I told them who Sutton was, and said, " What have you been doing?"—he said, "I have not been doing anything at all, sir"—I asked Brooks again, and he said he was taking him for attempting to break into No. 18, Cranbourne Street—Mr. Underwood has very often left the key of his premises at our place, and Sutton knew that—there was nothing to prevent his taking the key and going to the door—you have called all my establishment except Miss Money.
Cross-examined. I was at the door, and heard a constable say, "Take him!" meaning Reynolds, and a messenger-boy said that Reynolds had just come in with him—I did not hear Reynolds ask the boy to come to the station, or hear the boy say he had to go on a message.
Re-examined. Brooks was excited; he did not tell me that Sutton had had a struggle with him—Sutton was calm and collected—I should say that Brooks had been running; he was out of breath.
Sutton received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
505. RICHARD REYNOLDS (50) was again indicted with JANE REYNOLDS (77), HORACE SMITH (40), and WILLIAM ALLEN (16) , for burglary in the house of Charles Dixon, and stealing two cases of surgical instruments, forty cheque-forms, and other articles, his property.
MR. T. HUMPHREYS Prosecuted.
a sitting-room, consulting room, and bedroom on the ground floor—on 22nd March I went to bed not much before twelve o'clock; Mr. Dixon was not in—I came down next morning at 7.30, and after missing something in the hall went into Mr. Dixon's room, and saw a drawer on the table, and two candlesticks on the writing-table; Mr. Dixon was not there.
Cross-examined by R. Reynolds. I never saw you before—there may have been six other lodgers that night in the house—the door has been found open—I saw no marks on it—I do not believe it was forced.
Cross-examined by Smith. The lodgers have keys.
CHARLES DIXON . I am a surgeon, of 14, Half Moon Street, Piccadilly—on 22nd March I went home about twelve o'clock, and shut my door with the spring lock—when I got up next morning the drawers in the inner sitting-room were pulled out, and put across and across on the table—I missed a cheque-book of the London and South-Western Bank from one of the drawers of the writing-table, also a hat, two silver-headed walking-sticks, these two oases of surgical instruments, this tablecover, and an overcoat—I have not seen the cheque-book since, but I have seen some cheques out of it—there were forty, to bearer, and I had only used eleven—I know nothing of any of the prisoners.
Cross-examined by Reynolds. I told the woman I had never seen Jane Reynolds before—I am single—I have never taken a woman home to sleep—the first time I saw you was when you were in the dock with Sutton—you were not pointed out to me before you were fetched in—I said I had lost a pair of gloves—I saw you with a light pair, and I thought they were mine—I lost two pairs—these (produced) were never mine.
Cross-examined by Smith. I went to the pawnbroker's—he said the man was well dressed, and not bad-looking.
Re-examined. I do not identify Reynolds.
RAYMOND MILES . I am assistant to Mr. Raper, a pawnbroker, of 82, Great Queen Street—these walking-sticks were pawned there on 23rd March, about midday, by the prisoner Reynolds, in the name of Henry Freeman, 10, Southampton Bow—I next saw him at Marlborough Street Police-court—I have no doubt about his face.
Cross-examined by R. Reynolds. About the 29th or 30th, Sergeants Campbell and Allen came to look at the sticks which had been pledged—I first saw you when you pledged the sticks—Sergeant Allen did not point you out to me at the Police-court, but I saw you come into the dock—I was not called to identify you—Sergeant Alien did not suggest placing you with others for me to pick you out—I am certain you are the man—I said it was rather an elderly man with a sallow complexion.
Re-examined. Directly Reynolds came in I said to Adams, "That is the man who pawned the sticks."
WILLIAM ATTEWELL . I am assistant to Mr. Smith, a pawnbroker, of 80, Newgate Street—I produce a case of amputation instruments pawned in the name of Ayas, on March 24th, for £1, between four and five o'clock, by the prisoner Smith—I saw the list of stolen articles next morning, and communicated with the police, and gave them a description of the man who pawned the case—Smith was placed with eight or nine others at the station, and I picked him out.
Cross-examined by Smith. I described you as a man of twenty-five or
twenty-six, with a fair moustache and a high hat—I saw no marks on his lace, nor do I see any on yours—the shop is dark—I see a great many faces during the day—I asked the man about the name on the box, and I he said it was his name—he was in the shop ten minutes—when I picked you out at Vine Street you said you had not been there for three years—the sergeant did not tell me what kind of man he had in custody.
Re-examined. He had no beard when I saw him at the Police-court; he had a top hat.
CHARLES CLARK . I am assistant to Henry and Thomas Davis, pawnbrokers, of 145, Waterloo Road—I produce a table-cover pawned with a handkerchief on 29th March for 1s. in the name of Ann Reynolds—that is the woman (Jane Barker).
Cross-examined by R. Reynolds. You have pawned things with me—I know the female prisoner, but I do not know her Christian name—I know that jacket—I do not know whether you pawned that waistcoat; I do not know those boots—I know you well enough, but I do not remember what you pawned; you have pledged things and taken them out and put them back again.
JANE BARKER . I am a widow, and live at 8 1/2, Robert Street, Waterloo Road—R. and Jane Reynolds occupied rooms there for about three weeks—I have heard that they are man and wife—about 29th March, Jane Reynolds asked me to pawn a small table-cloth and a handkerchief for her; she was very hard pushed for money, and the cloth was laid on a side table; she thought someone had left it there, but was not sure who—she said, "If anyone comes to claim it I shall redeem it in a day or two"—I saw Allen once—he asked me if Mr. Reynolds was in the house—I had the back dining-room—I have only seen Reynolds two or three times—I have pawned things for him and redeemed them.
Cross-examined by R. Reynolds. I do not remember a lamp breaking there; I was told of it—I could not swear it happened on the Wednesday before you were locked up—I remember you telling me it was broken when I went next day—it was in the middle of the week.
EDWARD COLES . I am a provision dealer, of 122, Lower Marsh, Lambeth—on 25th March the prisoner Allen brought me this note: "Green Dragon. Dear Sir,—Will you kindly oblige me by changing the enclosed? I have run short of ready cash; if you cannot spare it, please send as much as you can spare.—FREDERICK GRANGER"—this cheque was enclosed. (This was payable to Mr. Granger, or bearer for £4 15s. signed Earls-field and Co., and marked, "No account; blank cheque stolen")—I gave Allen £4 15s. and paid the cheque into my bank—I had seen him before—I identified him at Vine Street among eight or ten boys—the cheque came back marked "Blank cheque stolen. "
THOMAS FREDERICK GRANGER . I live at the Green Dragon, Belvedere Road—I did not write this note or give anybody authority to write it—I never saw the cheque till I saw it at the Police-court—I do not know Allen; I did not ask him to change a cheque, for me on 25th March.
CHARLES GARRARD . I live at 124, Lower Marsh, Lambeth, and am manager to George Orton, a butcher—on the evening of 25th March Allen brought me this cheque, with a letter, which I have not got—I gave him £2 5s. for the cheque. (London and Westminster Bank, Kensington, Pay A. Hopper or bearer £2 5s. E. J. Billington. Marked, "cheque stolen.")—Mr. Hopper is a customer of my master's; I do not
know his writing—I afterwards picked Allen out from about a dozen others as the boy who cashed the cheque.
Cross-examined by Allen. My only doubt was that when you came to me you were wearing a cap, and when I identified you you wore a felt hat.
BENJAMIN ADAMS (Police Sergeant C). On May 1st I was at the Police-court when Miles identified Richard Reynolds—I told him he would be charged with others in stealing property from Half Moon Street—he said, "I know nothing about it"—on March 31st, about six p.m., I went with Camber and Darby to 8 1/2, Robert Street, Lambeth, and saw Jane Reynolds in the first floor front room—another woman, Barker, was present—I said, "I am a police officer, and have been informed you have property here which has been recently stolen from 14, Half Moon Street"—she said, "I have not got any stolen property here; you can search my room"—Camber showed me three cheques—I said to Reynolds, "How do you account for these?"—she said, "I did not know they were there"—I told her the charge; she made no reply—I took her to Vine Street Station, and on the way she said, "I did not know the cheques were there; I suppose Reynolds left them there"—I was present when Attewell identified Smith—Smith said, "That gentleman (Mr. Attewell) has made a mistake; I have not been in a pawnshop for three years; I know-nothing about it."
Cross-examined by R. Reynolds. The Magistrate did not tell me to charge you—he said, "Are you going to charge Reynolds?"—when you were placed with the others the pawnbroker did not attend, and there was not time to put you up for identification afterwards.
Re-examined. When the pawnbroker identified Reynolds he was being charged in another case—I saw Reynolds in prison at his invitation; he wrote to me—he said he did not commit the burglary, but he could give me information who did do it, and where the property was disposed of.
ALFRED CAMBER (Detective L). On 31st March, about six p.m., I went to Jane Reynolds' room with other officers, and found these three cheques (For £28, £57 10s., and a blank one.) in an envelope in this box on the dressing-table, and these new handkerchiefs, not marked—the envelope had no address—I arrested Allen about 11.45 on the night of the 4th in Charing Cross Road, in the* street—I said, "I am a police officer, and shall arrest you on suspicion of answering the description of a boy wanted for uttering a cheque and obtaining £4 15s. by means of a forged order"—he said, "I know nothing about no cheques"—I took him to Vine Street Station, and next day he was placed with ten other boys, and identified by Garrett and Coles—the charge was read to him; he made no reply—I know the two Reynolds; they are not man and wife—I know Reynolds' wife personally; her name was Markham, and she has four children; she lives in Drury Lane; I think it is 34, and gets her living by charing.
Cross-examined by R. Reynolds. I have not had the separation deed in my possession—I did not produce it at the Police-court—you did not get a divorce.
in Jane Reynolds' room—I found six pawn-tickets in a box in a washhand-stand in the same room, one of which relates to a table-coyer, and a very common handkerchief was pawned with it—on April 5th, about 2.30 a.m., I went with Camber to 2, Bear Street, and saw Smith in bed—I said, "We are police officers, and I arrest you on suspicion of being concerned in a burglary at Half Moon Street, Piccadilly, and pawning a case of instruments stolen from the place, and, thirdly, with selling some cartridges and a cartridge case in Waterloo Road"—he said, "You have made a mistake; I have pawned no instruments nor sold anything whatever"—we took him to the station—he was charged, and made no reply.
Cross-examined by Smith. I got your description from the pawnbroker as a man of thirty, with a high silk hat and a moustache, rather fair; and I also had a description in Waterloo Road which caused me to go to your address—no one said anything about your moustache.
Richard Reynolds called
JANE BARKER (Re-examined). When Sergeant Batty called at 8 1/2 Robert Street, he did not see Mrs. Cooper, the landlady; he merely left a message with me, and I delivered it—she did not say she would get no pay if she came.
Examined by Jane Reynolds. You were in bed all day—a man named Vaughan called—I sat by the fireplace, and you were very ill—Vaughan said, "I am going out; I shan't be long; I leave this here "; that was the envelope containing the cheques—he came back after you were arrested—I had seen him once or twice—when you went up to Holloway to see Reynolds and give him some food, there were not seven men in your room, only the one who left the cheque, Vaughan.
Cross-examined. I am not prepared to swear that I saw a man leave an envelope in that room a quarter of an hour before she was arrested, but I heard him say, "I will leave this with you"—I did not tell any of the officers that he had left anything there.
JANE BRAZENBY . I am the wife of Thomas Brazen by, a journeyman—I am Smith's landlady—on 22nd March he came home at 12.40, and I asked you if you had got any money—next day you talked to my husband about the rent—someone called for you the next morning—you were at home all night; if you had gone out in the middle of the night I should have heard you.
Cross-examined. It was Tuesday morning, the 22nd, when he came home—he was not at home all the afternoon on the 22nd, I do not know where he was between nine and twelve.
Reynolds, in his defence, complained that he had not been placed with other persons to be identified; he stated that he knew nothing about the burglary, and denied pawning the stick.
Jane Reynolds produced a written defence, stating that the box belonged to a young woman who used to visit her, and she did not know who put the cheques into it, as Reynolds' friends used to come there, sometimes five men at once; that she found the table-cover lying on the table, and asked the woman to run to the pawnbroker with it, saying that she would take it out if called for, and if she had known it was stolen it would not have been in her room; and that Reynolds had not supported her or her child for two years, and she did not know where his money came from.
Smith's Defence. I had not been in a pawnshop for three years; do you think anybody could have a conversation for ten minutes, a yard and a half apart, and not see this scar on my cheek on a bright sunny day? My landlord can prove that I was at home that night; I am never out on Tuesday night. The detectives searched my place, but found nothing but my own property.
Allen produced a written defence, stating that a man named Vaughan, whose real name was Errington, gave him a letter in the Strand, addressed to Mr. Cole at the Spotted Log, Lower Marsh, Lambeth, which he delivered, and received £4 15s., and gave the money to Vaughan, who gave him 5s. and told him to say nothing about it, and especially not to Jane Reynolds, as she might want to borrow some, and that he knew nothing about the burglary or the cheque.
JANE REYNOLDS NOT GUILTY .
R. REYNOLDS, SMITH and ALLEN GUILTY.— Judgment respited.
OLD COURT.—Monday, May 9th, 1892.
Before Mr. Recorder.
After the case had been proceeded with for a time, the plea of justification was withdrawn, and all imputations on both sides, and the JURY found a verdict of NOT GUILTY .
MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted, and MR. GRAIN Defended. After MR. GEOGHEGAN had opened the case, the prisoner, in the hearing of the JURY, expressed his willingness to withdraw his plea of justification, and plead guilty to the indictment, and thereupon the JURY found him GUILTY .— Discharged on recognisances.
NEW COURT.—Monday, May 9th, 1892.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. C.F. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. PAUL TAYLOR Defended.
March—he was employed in the lamp stores—it was his duty to sort and count lamps; there were numbers of stems of broken lamps where he was employed—the platinum wires to which the carbons are attached are kept; they burn about a thousand hours, but the platinum wire gets twisted, and it has to be melted before it can be used again—we allow our customers for broken lamps—the value of the platinum in these lamps is about 9d., and in the small ones 2d.—the present value of platinum is about 39s. per ounce—these broken ends were kept in several large boxes in the stores—some of these platinums are made only by us, in a way that enables me to recognise them—when they accumulate we send them to our refiners, Johnson and Matthey, who replace them with good wire—the police showed, me this platinum (produced) which was taken from the prisoner—it would weigh twenty-seven ounces—it is composed of many thousands of these wires—I have examined the parcel thoroughly; it consists of such wire as would result from the breaking up of lamps at our place—there are at least ten varieties of wire—there was among them an experimental stem; it is not here, the Magistrate took charge of it—we do not send any of these things out to New Zealand—the experimental stem was never taken out of our factory, but others were supplied to the Admiralty—our company has the monopoly for manufacturing incandescent lamps for Great Britain, and these are the stems of incandescent lamps; they are in a mass, which has been beaten up and solidified, but not melted; all the glass is cleared away off it; and it has the appearance of heat having been applied to it; we just knock the brass off, and then send it to the refiners—we found less at the stores than we expected to find.
Cross-examined. I first examined the stores after the prisoner had been arrested—we knew that the boxes were there before he was arrested—we then examined them—the special parcel consisted of several boxes—it would not be necessary to empty twenty boxes to get twentyseven ounces of platinum—there were not more than three or four boxes in that room—we do not make the platinum wire; it is manufactured for us—the incandescent lamps are made with platinum wire, there are thousands of them made—those made out of this country are riot of the same dimensions—there is nothing but the dimension and the form to go by; by dimension I mean length and diameter—I can positively swear to this particular wire having been in our possession—it is not all comparatively the same, we designed some for the Admiralty, a special stem, and in this box you will see we put on a piece of common iron wire—I am unable to say I can identify any single wire-all manufacturers have more or less the same thickness; I cannot swear to this piece (produced) being one of our wires—I do not identify the whole lot; I recognise the experimental stem by its thickness and length, and the one supplied to the Admiralty by the twist and form—the broken ends do not go into the stores; these are not customers' ends, they are a few resulting from defective lamps; the stores are all for the manufactured lamps—pieces of a broken lamp, or a whole lamp, would come into the prisoner's possession—the record has been lost of the amount of platinum in the stem—in the absence of other portions we could not keep the record—the order sent to the Admiralty in 1891—I have said, "I think the portion claimed by the police has been cleaned"—when I last examined that heap it was pounded together; it was separated afterwards
at our works; it appeared to have been cleaned—there was not a lot of dross—I took one piece in my hand and measured it—I knew that to be a stem which we use for experimental purposes—when I was measuring in that minute manner I had not an experimental stem with me; there was not one in existence, there were only a few made—they were made about eighteen months or two years ago, long before the prisoner was in our service—I cannot say that it is inconceivable that any other maker should have a piece of wire like this in his possession—about six of my staff were present when I made the examination.
By the JURY. The only wire I have with me has not been used in any lamp; this is simply the stem, broken off at the collar; the upper part is made of pure carbon, the diameters are not in any way altered by the light, or by the process of disintegration—there is not sufficient alteration to prevent my identifying them; they get out of shape, but that does not affect the thickness; you cannot corrode it.
Re-examined. I only know of one person who has to do with the disposition of platinum in London—when the prisoner came into our employment he did not suggest that he knew anything about this kind of stud, not until his arrest, then he said that he had some in his possession which he brought from New Zealand—platinum is the only metal which would do—it is not affected by heat—it is not a thing that would be sold in the street—the company is getting more known now—I saw that the wires had been hammered for the purpose of getting the mass together, and that it had been subjected to heat—the stems from other makers generally pass through our hands before they go to the refiner—I saw the prisoner in August, before he came into the employment, I think he came to my office—he made about 25s. a week.
JAMES WHEELER I live at 18, Percival Road, Enfield—I am in the employ of this company, and work at Ponder's End, in the same room as the prisoner, where the boxes were kept with the broken lamp ends—the boxes were open, and the prisoner had the putting of them away—when he came backwards and forwards he had a little bag with him like this—he was sometimes left alone in the room where the boxes were—you use steps to get to the shelves—I did not always work in the same room with him.
Cross-examined. He brought his food in the bag—he used to leave it at the door—I never missed any platinum stems—the prisoner directed my attention to a particular box, nearly two feet deep, and I told him to put it up in the rack—it is suggested that these were only taken from one box.
RICHARD GLEN GAYLOR . I am a watchmaker and jeweller, of 38, Clerkenwell Road—the prisoner called on me in my absence—he afterwards called at my branch establishment in Finsbury Park, on or about the 22nd, and said he had left some platinum at my shop, and wanted it melted—I said, "It will have to be mixed, and it will be rather an expensive job; do you want to sell it?"—he said, "No, not particularly"—I said, "The best thing will be for me to get an offer for it," and he left it for that purpose—it was a compressed mass—he said he had tried to melt it in an ordinary fire with a crucible, and failed—I asked where he got it from; he said from New Zealand—I made inquiries at Johnson and Matthey's, and then wrote this letter to the prisoner. (Request-)
ing to know who he was, and where the platinum came from.)—I posted the letter; he called the same day, and I showed him the press copy—he asked me to return the staff; I said I could not give it to him then because it was locked up in my safe at Clerkenwell, but I would leave it out for him the following morning—I afterwards identified my letter.
Cross-examined. He said he had cleaned it, and tried to melt it—the police came to me.
ARTHUR SEWELL (Detective Sergeant). On 26th March, about 8.30 a.m., I was in Clerkenwell Road, in plain clothes, and saw the prisoner carrying this little bag, and looking for a reference—he tried one or two doors, but they were not open—I said, "Well, old boy, what have you got?"—he said, "I have got a bit of stuff, mate"—I said, "What are you going to do with it?"—he said, "I want to sell it, or get it melted, at any rate"—I said, "What is it?"—he said, "You had better see"—I had told him that I was a police-officer—he opened the bag, and I saw some metal—I said, "Where did you get this?,—he said, "From Home and Gross, Hornsey Road, where I live"—I said, "By what means did you become possessed of it P"—he said, "Well, I got it in New Zealand"—I said, "That is not satisfactory to me; I shall have to take you to the station and make inquiries"—I did so; he did not tell me what the metal was—after I returned from Hornsey I said to him, "I have seen your wife, and she tells me she saw this stuff on Monday last, and you were pounding something with a pestle and mortar all Sunday, and unless you can tell me something more about it I shall take you for unlawful possession"—he referred to a seaman's discharge, and said, "Well, I brought that stuff from New Zealand two and a half months ago"—I asked him if he had any bill—he said, "No"—I asked him the name of the town—he said, "I met a man in the street, and got it from him"—I said, "When did you arrive?"—he said, "In August last year"—I said, "What have you been doing since that?"—he said, "Living on my means; I don't work, and don't want to work"—I searched him, and found Mr. Gaylor's letter, torn up in several small pieces, in his pocket.
Cross-examined. This is the certificate he gave me (produced)—I have made inquiries as to his being a seaman for some years—on this discharge there is a character for ability, and" very good"—he told me he got the stuff out of a black lump.
Re-examined. His wife said that the black lump used to lay at the door to keep it open, and he came in and took it up, and said, "Why are such valuables left at this door?"
WILLIAM FIELDING (Police Inspector P). I was at the station when the prisoner was brought in—I said, "Can you give a satisfactory account of the possession of the metal? If not, you will be charged with having it in unlawful possession"—he said, "My servant can prove I have had it in my possession for some time; she saw me breaking it up; it was not in the same state then as it is now"—I examined his seaman's discharge, and said, "What have you been doing since you left the ship?"—he said, "Nothing; living on my means"—I said, "Where did you buy it?"—he said, "Wellington, New Zealand."
Cross-examined. These are the discharges—they are all marked favourably, with a good character.
E. S. GILLINGHAM (Re-examined). The prisoner left the works of his
own accord—I have nine other stems here of the same kind—both of these have been used in a lamp.
Witnesses for the Defence.
ANDREW SIMPSON . I am a seaman, of 38, Holly Bush Road, Plaistow—I was a shipmate of the prisoner on board the Duke of Westminster—we were at Wellington, New Zealand, in October, 1890, and he came on board one evening, and showed me something which appeared to be cement, clay, and dark mud—it was very heavy, and there were bits of wire sticking in it, such as they use to tie up lemonade bottles—these are similar wires—I took it in my hand, and it weighed five or six pounds—he rolled it in a bit of canvas and put it in his chest; he said it was valuable—the shops and the harbour and all the principal towns of New Zealand are lit by electricity—we arrived in England on Christmas Day, 1890.
Cross-examined. I have been at home since April 26th—I went to see the prisoner on the day I arrived, and he told me of this charge—he was out on bail—he said he was in trouble about the stuff he brought from New Zealand—I went with him to Clerkenwell Police-court, and could have given evidence if I liked, but nobody asked me—he had a solicitor there—the prisoner asked me last Monday if I would come to the station and say what I knew about it; I was then at his house—I did not hear the evidence at the Police-court—I did not know that he had been employed at a place where there was a number of boxes of platinum wire—his wife was in the shop—I never heard till now that the wire was knocked out of a stone which was used to keep the door open—the lump was as biff as my two fists—he did not tell me where he got it from, or what he gave for it; it was never mentioned during the voyage—he mentioned the matter to me last Monday week, and I remembered it—the wires stuck out all over it—I handled it, and saw them in different places sticking out of the stuff—I did not look at it closely—I never heard of platinum before now—he never said a word to me about being employed in a place where there were bits of wire lying about; I only knew that he was employed on shore at the electric factory—he did not show me the pestle and mortar, or what he tried to melt it in—there is no mud or cement in it now—he has never told me what he gave for it—I have never met a man who sold anything of the kind in the street—he also brought home a bit of green stone and a piece of coarse gum and some shells—those are the things people come round and sell.
ANN STANGER . I entered the prisoner's service on 6th May, 1891, and my attention was directed to something in a canvas bag; it was a large piece of black stuff like charcoal or black clay—I did not see the defendant do anything to it till about March 24th, when I saw him breaking it up in the hall, and washing it in a basin in the hall—after it had been washed it was like twisted wire—it was a heavy article; it fell on my foot, and I had a gathered toe afterwards—it seemed like black day.
Cross-examined. I knew he was in trouble, but I did not know all about it—I heard in Court what he was charged with stealing—they did not call me as a witness at the Police-court, but I knew that I was to be one—Mr. Kemp, the chemist, asked me to be a witness, not my master or mistress—he asked me if I knew anything about the black stuff, and I told him I had seen it, and it fell on my foot, and that I saw Mr.
Brehmer washing it, and then he told me he wanted me to be a. witness—this was before the case was committed for trial—I first saw it in June last year; it was not used for anything; it was hanging in a cupboard in a bag; I never saw it taken out—it was-always left there, but I saw it was like black clay, because the string broke, and it fell on my foot—I have had it in my hand; it was about the size of both my hands—I did not see little wires sticking out till it was broken—my master left his employment at the electric works on 19th March, and it was after that that I saw him with a pestle and mortar, and something with wires in it; I first saw the wires when the black stuff was broken—I did not see him break it; I saw it after it was broken—I did not see it knocked into a lump, but I saw a twist of wires altogether on the day that it was broken—I did not see him try to melt it, or know of his taking it to get it melted—a day or two after that he was locked up—there were thousands of little bits of wire—I did not see it lying at the door.
Re-examined. I have no doubt that what fell on my foot was what was hanging up in the cupboard—my master was not in England at all in June last year.
WILLIAM HENRY KEMP . I am manager of Kemp and Co., Limited, chemists, of 220, Holloway Road—I have known the prisoner three or four years—I first saw platinum in his possession last March twelve months, in the form of wire of different sizes mixed up with dirt, exactly like this produced, only not so clean—he applied to me for some nitric acid for cleaning it—about the beginning of March last I saw him again, and supplied him with some nitric acid; he did not say what he wanted it for—he borrowed a pestle and mortar on several occasions, and he did so when I first supplied him with nitric acid—I am sure it was platinum he showed me; it was mixed up with dirt.
Cross-examined. That was March twelve months—there were thousands of small pieces of wire of various sizes like this; he brought it in paper like they wrap moist sugar in—I took it up, and examined a few pieces—I have nothing to do with buying or selling platinum; I know it simply by experimenting—I took it in my hand, and I could tell by the weight of it; I did not tell him it was platinum; he told me; he simply brought a sample, 8 or 9 ounces; he did not bring the bulk—what was mixed with it looked like lead; it was shining as if it had been scraped—the dirt looked like pieces of iron—I believe he said he brought if from New Zealand—very few people deal in platinum; it is the business of one or two—I first learned at the Police-court that he was employed at the electric light works; it did not come on me by surprise, because he has dealt in various metals for three or four years; he has bought gold and silver in a rough state, and an iron pestle and mortar to break it up—I do not think he sold the metal; I thought he was a collector—there are very few places in England where you could steal platinum wire; I could obtain any quantity from dealers, but not in small pieces.
JAMES WILMOT . I am a smith and farrier, of Upper Tollington Park, Holloway Road—I know the prisoner—in the beginning of last year he asked me to allow him the use of my fire, as he wanted to melt some metal—I could not do so then, but I told him as soon as I had got a fire I would let him use it—he did not mention what the metal was.
Cross-examined. I understood he had been in the mines and the gold diggings; he would know what platinum was, and if he went into the employ of the electric light company he would know that this wire was platinum if he saw it lying about—I did not see the metal—I made up a large fire, and let him have one of my boys to blow it for him—that was six or seven weeks ago—I knew he was working at Ponder's End, but this was after he left—I picked up a few pieces in my yard, and I could see bits of wire, and I knew it was platinum, because he told me so—there are well-known furnaces where metals are melted—it must have been about the end of October that I knew he had gone into the employ of the electric light company—he carries on a milk business—I have known him about three years—I was not asked to give evidence—I. am his bail. NOT GUILTY .
MR. METCALF Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended, SAMUEL WILLIAM MERRY. I am clerk to the Registrar of the County-court, Brompton—I produce the papers in an action between Compton and Clark—the summons was on 19th June, 1891, and judgment was signed by default on 18th August—the judgment summons was on 21st September, but it was not served; it came on for hearing on 11th December, and was adjourned to January 15th, then to February 11th, and finally to April 11th, when it was struck out—I was present on January 15th when the defendant appeared, and produced this document—Judge Stonor examined it with a magnifying-glass, and put this word on it, after which the original judgment was allowed to stand—it was then further adjourned, and on 7th April it was struck out.
Cross-examined. The document was impounded by the Judge on 15th. January—he wears spectacles.
CHARLES WILLIAM CARPENTER . I am a carman and contractor, of 66, Queen Street, Hammersmith—in 1890 I loaded some barges of bricks for the defendant, and on October 7th he owed me £10 8s., and I sent him in this bill (produced)—on 1st November he paid me £2 at his house, Laura Crescent—I gave him a separate receipt in pencil, because he could not find the bill. (MR. GEOGHEGAN objected to this evidence, and the COMMON SERJEANT, having consulted the RECORDER, admitted the document, but would tell the JURY to disregard it)—this is the receipt I gave him for £2 on account; he owes me £8—the £10 was not on it then—I did not see him again till 15th January, 1892, in the Brompton Court—I called several times in that interval, generally on Saturday, and asked for the £8 8s. due to me, but being unable to get it I took out a County-court summons against him, and served it myself—judgment went by default, and I took out a judgment summons—I was not present at the first hearing, but I was on January 1st, and saw the document put into the Judge's hands—it was afterwards handed to me, and I saw that it had been altered—I swore this information against the prisoner some three weeks ago.
Cross-examined. I do a good deal of business in the year; I have a good many customers—I employ Mr. Thane every week to come and see to my books—I have no witness to prove the payment—from the moment I saw this £10 I knew it had been altered; the question was whether
2 had been altered into 10—there was a lady in the room; she was not present when the money was paid to me—I said to the Magistrate, "The elderly lady was there when the money was paid"—that was the prisoner's wife—the Judge asked me to write my signature, and I did so—I do not know that a good many people have disputed my accounts.
Re-examined. I do not think I gave the prisoner a receipt for a £5 cheque, or for £5 in cash.
EDWARD FRANCIS THANE . I am a rent and debt collector, of 86, Queen Street, Hammersmith—I keep Mr. Carpenter's books—previous to November 1st £8 8s. was due to him from the prisoner—I did not keep the books then; I began to keep them about the beginning of May, 1890—between November 1, 1890, and June, 1891, I called on the prisoner twice for the £8 8s., but did not see him or leave accounts for him—I was present in December when the judgment summons first came on—the defendant appeared and put in a pretended receipt for £10—Mr. Carpenter was not there, and the case was adjourned for his attendance—I served the judgment summons on the prisoner; he said, "I am not Mr. dark"—I said, "I shall serve you on suspicion of being Mr.
GEORGE PARSONS (608 A). I am warrant officer at Westminster Police-court—this summons was put into my hands on February 6th, and I tried to serve it at 63. St. George's Road—I eventually served it on 7th April, on his leaving Brentford County-court.
Witness for the defence.
AMY TAYLOR . I am the wife of Samuel Taylor, 7, Johnson's Place, Upton Park—Mr. Carpenter called about six weeks before Christmas, and the two of them went through the kitchen into the breakfast parlour, which is used as an office, and I saw Mr. Clark pay Mr. Carpenter £9 or £10—I was trying to find the bill but could not—I saw Carpenter writing something with a pencil on a bit of paper, but I did not see what, as I was looking for the bill—Mr. Clark told me that when Mr. Carpenter sent the receipt I was to put it on the office table; he slept at that house—my husband worked for him sometimes off and on.
Cross-examined. From 1890 till I went to Westminster Police-court in April this year I had not spoken of this matter to Mr. Clark at all—my husband worked for Clark sometimes at the beginning of the year—I am sure this was not in September or October; it was about six weeks before Christmas—I was only there once when Carpenter called—I saw Mr. Pearson produce the book in Court, called by Mr. Clark—I was not there at the judgment summons.
Re-examined. I was confined on August 7th—Clark's workmen came into the parlour, and I paid them from a list.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, May 10th, 1892.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted, and MR. MIRAMS Defended.
Hill—I report for the City Press, at the City of London Court—on 29th January the ease of Mahony v. Fontana came on there before Mr. Commissioner Kerr, and I took a correct but very short shorthand note of it, for reporting purposes, and I afterwards made a transcript for the City Frets report—the prisoner gave evidence, and the ease was adjourned to 15th February, when the case was heard before Mr. Julian "Robins and a jury—the prisoner was examined, but I did not take a note then of what she said, because it was practically the same as she said on 29th January; I have a very fair recollection of what took place; I checked what she said by the report of the 29th—she swore in substance what she had previously sworn—I wrote a report for the paper—she said she had lent the defendant in the action thirty shillings; that the defendant borrowed it to pay her gas bill, and that she had put it down on the defendant's table (the kitchen table, I think) in the presence of the defendant's mother; that she drew £2 out of some savings bank account, out of which she gave defendant 80s.; that she usually drew £1 periodically, but that the defendant having asked her to lend her this 30s. she drew £2—she said something about a receipt, but I cannot remember whether she said it was given or not—no legal adviser appeared for her or for the defendant—Mrs. Fontana and her husband, who were both either in the box or on the box, asked questions of the prisoner—it was very exciting at times—there were three or four persons talking at the same time.
Cross-examined. Mr. Commissioner Kerr heard the case first, and then sent it to be heard by a jury, who found for the prisoner, after, I think, a very few minutes' deliberation—the prisoner produced a book which she said was her bank book; I think this is it—application was made to Mr. Commissioner Kerr for a new trial, and he afterwards said he had consulted Mr. Robins, and was satisfied that there should not be a new trial.
JOHN BOLUS . I am an usher at the City of London Court—I produce from the register an extract signed by the Registrar, and under the seal of the Court, of the proceedings in Mahony v. Fontana—it shows that the case was first heard on 29th January, and adjourned to 15th February, when a verdict was given for the plaintiff for 30s. and costs—I administered the oath to the prisoner as a witness on 15th February before she gave evidence.
Cross-examined. This is the bank-book the prisoner produced—by it. she fixed the date of the loan—after the new trial was applied for Mr. Commissioner Kerr said he had communicated with Mr. Robins, and they agreed that the verdict was right.
Re-examined. I should say the case took about ten minutes.
CAROLINE FONTANA . I am the wife of Nicholas Fontana—we live at 5, Gunpowder Alley, Fleet Street—we take in lodgers, amongst whom, in June last, was the prisoner, who occupied a room at 3s. 6d. a week—Mrs. Stevens occupied the room with her—on 9th December she left the house, having paid up her rent regularly to within two or three days—this is the book in which I enter the payments of rent—after she left I received this summons, dated 22nd December, in the name of Mary Ann Mahony—the prisoner lived with us in the name of Miss Mary Martin, but I found when I went to the City of London Court on 29th January, in answer to the summons, that she was the plaintiff—we both made statements
there; I said I had not had the money—the case was adjourned to 15th February, when I went with my husband and Mrs. Middleton, my mother—I had no solicitor or counsel—the prisoner gave evidence—I said I had not had the money—I had not been in Court before—my mother was called—I was not in the kitchen with my mother in June when the prisoner gave me 30s. across the table—I never borrowed 30s. from her, or any sum—on 24th June we owed the Gas Company £1 11s. 11d.; my husband knew it, and on that day gave me that money to pay that bill—I went to the office, and paid it—I got this receipt—on 9th December the prisoner left, owing 3s. 6d., which was afterwards paid on 16th December—she had no dispute with me—she said nothing about the 30s. when she left—I attend to chambers in Clement's Inn, for which I receive 10s. a week—in August last I was confined, and the prisoner did the work at the chambers for the three weeks I was ill—the gentlemen in the chambers paid her during that time—I was not paid for those three weeks.
Cross-examined. My husband is an engine-driver, earning pretty fair money—we are sometimes short of money—the prisoner had lodged about twelve months with us—I don't know if Mrs. Stevens was an annuitant of the Corporation—we always paid our gas bill within a month after application—they send a second paper, and then I send it—not long after this bill was paid we ceased to have gas; they discontinued it because I complained about the meter, and they cut it off—when I paid on 24th June we owed six months, we pay one quarter under another, and the payment on 24th June was for gas that had become payable in March—they did not cut it off because they had difficulty in getting the money from us—on June 24 the was the last payment we made—I did not borrow any money—I do not owe money all round—my husband did not always give me the gas money, sometimes he paid it himself—I do not pay the gas out of what he gives me "every week—I did not go to the prisoner about my difficulty in paying the gas bills out of my housekeeping money; my husband always sees to the payment of the gas himself, because he burns more than I do—I paid this bill because he could not get away himself—I did not borrow 30s. of the prisoner on 16th or 24th—I did not ask the prisoner not to tell my husband that I had borrowed it; I never did anything underhand to my husband—I had never been asked to pay this 30s. before the summons was issued—the prisoner called on me after she had left her lodgings, to give the keys up, and afterwards to pay the rent—my husband was at home when she brought the keys—I never used strong language—I was not at home when she saw my husband—I did not bring out the other lodgers, and call her foul names—I threatened to put her out because I thought she made a disturbance; the disturbance was not when she asked me to pay the 30s.—she was paid for doing my work at the chambers for three weeks when I was ill—she did not hand me over the money she received—my friends were not up at the Country-court; I know nothing about the matter—only one of my witnesses is in arrear with her rent, and her husband is out of work—my mother lives with me—I have, on many occasions, been in the kitchen with her and the prisoner—on no occasion has money been paid except the rent—the prisoner concocted the whole of this through spite; she left of her
own accord—I never knew she asked for this money till I had the summons.
Re-examined. The gas only has a stop put on it now; we have the meter—I owe no money to anybody in Gunpowder Alley—my husband has a small workshop at the back of our house, where he does saw work at night; he drives a printer's engine by day—I had never paid the gas bill out of housekeeping money—I never saw her bank-book.
NICHOLAS FONTANA . I am an engineer; I have worked at a stereo-typer's in Shoe Lane for nine years, at £2 a week—we have lived at 5, Gunpowder Alley for six years; the prisoner lodged with us for about eighteen months—I allow my wife money every week—I pay for the gas every quarter; my wife never pays for it out of her housekeeping money—on 24th June I gave her £1 11s. 11d. for the gas, and at five p.m. I saw this receipt—on 1st December the prisoner left; on 9th December, about a quarter-past one, she brought this key, and I said she should have brought it on the 7th, and I was going to summons her for another week's rent; she went away—she has said nothing about having lent 30s. to my wife, although I have seen her several times—I went to the Court on 29th January and 15th February, but did not give evidence—I owe no money to anybody.
Cross-examined. I always pay the gas account regularly every quarter; it is never in arrear—I always give the money to my wife to pay it a week or so after the bill comes in, and she pays it; I never go and pay it myself; the bill never goes as much as three weeks after it is due—when I paid £1 11s. 11d. in June I was not under pressure for payment by the Gas Company—I gave the money to my wife on 24th June, and expected she would pay it, and I saw the receipt at five p.m.—I know the date by the receipt; I make no note in any book of these payments; the £1 11s. 11d. had been owing about a week, I think—I was paying in June the June account—I pay the gas bill as soon as I have got the money—all I said to the prisoner on 9th December was that she ought to have brought the key on the 7th—I have seen her pass through the alley since, and she has insulted me many times, and I took no notice—I never threatened to throw her downstairs—I have been kind to her—she was a quiet lodger sometimes—there was never any dispute between my wife and her to my knowledge—I saw the prisoner many times after she left—she never came and asked for 30s.
Re-examined. The money I make, about £2 a quarter, by sharpening saws for Mr. Dellagana, goes to pay the gas bill—he keeps it till I ask for it.
CLARA MIDDLETON . I am a widow, living at 5, Gunpowder Alley—I am Mrs. Fontana's mother—I was not present on any occasion in June last year, in the kitchen or elsewhere, when the prisoner gave my daughter 30s.—my daughter got the money for the gas bill in June from her husband—I afterwards saw the receipt—I saw the prisoner on that same day on which the gas bill was paid—she said, "Will you tell your daughter that I am very sorry I could not bring down the rent, but I have to go and borrow some money from the bank?"—she went out, and when she came back, about five o'clock, she gave me 3s. 6d., which I gave to my daughter—from that time till she left on 9th December I did not hear her say anything about having lent my daughter anything.
Cross-examined. I never had any 30s.—my daughter did not want
money—her husband supplies her with money every week, and with that and what she collected in rent from the lodgers she paid all the household expenses—her husband put money aside from his saw money every week to pay the gas bill—I have no recollection when it was paid—the gas has been cut off.
LIZZIE BENNETT . I live at 14, New Street Square, Fetter Lane—I have known the prisoner for six or seven months—about the end of last year, on the staircase at Clifford's Inn, I think, the prisoner told me that Mrs. Fontana owed her 30s. for work done—she said she had moved to Mr. Ball's.
Cross-examined. She is now taking care of Mr. Ball's premises—I did not know her before October—I saw her every day at 3, Clifford's Inn—before they served a subpoena upon me a fortnight ago Mrs. Fontana asked me to come; she asked me if I knew what the prisoner had summoned her for, and I said, "Yes, for work done"—I have had a fair opinion of the prisoner; she and I have always been good friends up to the present—she is a highly respectable woman—I saw the summons; I did not read it.
HENRY MACKEY . I am a book-edge gilder, of 5, Gunpowder Alley—one day in the new year I met the prisoner in the street, and she told me Mrs. Fontana owed her 30s., and that when she went to ask for it she was blackguarded by the lodgers in the house; she said she had done the work for Mrs. Fontana, during her confinement, at the chambers, and that was what the 30s. was for—she said she had no proof, but she would summon Mrs. Fontana, because she stood there while the lodgers blackguarded her, and did not take her part.
Cross-examined. The summons had then been issued—she said it was for work done; I did not see it, I did not know it was for money lent.
FLORENCE PULLINGER . I am the wife of Alfred Pullinger, of 5, Gunpowder Alley—I met the prisoner in the street after she left there, and she said, "I lent Mrs. Fontana 30s. to help to get her over her confinement, and now she says she does not owe it to me"—I said, "If I had been you I should have stopped it out of the rent"—she said, "I did not stop it out of the rent, but she had the money."
Cross-examined. I have been a tenant some time at Gunpowder Alley—I have been in arrear with my rent, but I do not owe much now—I was at the trial at Guildhall—the prisoner was very annoyed at Mrs. Fontana's treatment of her.
Re-examined. I have been Mrs. Fontana's tenant two years, and am there still.
MARIA STEELE . I am the wife of James Steele, of 5, Gunpowder Alley—on the day Mrs. Fontana was confined in August I went into her room—the prisoner came in with the keys of the chambers in Clement's Inn, and said to Mrs. Fontana, "You owe me twopence"—Mrs. Fontana said, "I have only got half a sovereign"—I gave her change, and she paid the prisoner twopence—the prisoner was doing the work at the chambers—I never heard her say anything about having lent 30s. to Mrs. Fontana till after the summons.
Cross-examined. I never saw the prisoner give Mrs. Fontana any money—she did not on that occasion bring her 10s. from the chambers—she said the twopence was for newspapers.
Witness for the Defence.
ROBERT MAHONY . I am the prisoner's brother—she is sixty-seven—for the last twenty-five years she has assisted to maintain Mrs. Stevens, her old mistress—she is a hard-working, honest woman—some time before Christmas I went with her to call on Mrs. Fontana, whose mother, I believe, opened the door and told my sister Mrs. Fontana was engaged with the baby and could not see her—my sister asked, "When is she going to pay the 30s. owing to me?"—Mrs. Fontana answered from upstairs that she did not owe it, and that if my sister did not get out of the house she would throw her downstairs.
Cross-examined. I did not see Mrs. Fontana—I cannot say I know her voice, but my sister spoke to Mrs. Fontana, and I concluded it was Mrs. Fontana who answered—it was two or three weeks before that I first heard from my sister that she had lent the 30s.; it might be a week or ten days after she left the Fontanas' house.
The prisoner received an excellent character. NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. WOODFALL Prosecuted.
JOHN MARSHALL . I am clerk to D. and W. Murray and Co.—two boxes of feathers were consigned to them early in February from the South Australian Feather Company—this is the bill of lading, marked D. W. M. 9 and 10, and this is the invoice—(Describing Lot 5, two bundles of ostrich feathers, white seconds).
AUGUSTUS SMITH . I live at 40, Elbomere Street, Poplar, and have worked for the P. and O. Steam Shipping Company—on 27th February the ship Britannia came into the Docks—she began to discharge her cargo on the 28th—the prisoner was working there on March 1st and 2nd—on 2nd March I saw a case marked D. W. M. in the shed about two o'clock—it had been landed from No. 3 hold—the prisoner was working at No. 2 hold; they communicate by an alley—we have a gang of men at each.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You were working on the orlop deck.
EDWIN SMITH . I am a timekeeper in the employ of the P. and O. Company—this is my time-book—the prisoner was working at discharging the ship on March 1st and 2nd; but I cannot say where—he was a sidesman on March 1st, not on the 2nd—a sidesman is a man whom the labour-master thinks ought to have extra pay, and he gets an extra 6d. a day.
JOHN WILLIAM TURNER . I am a clerk to the P. and O. Company at No. 7 shed, at which the Britannia was discharged on 1st and 2nd March—the bill of lading is handed first to the company, and as soon as the
freight is paid they five a delivery order—on 2nd March, about two o'clock, Daniels called my attention to a box lying in the lock-up shed—it was an old ease, and appeared to hare been re-nailed—the lid had been split, but was nailed down—Mr. Rod well examined it, and took the contents out and counted them in my presence, and made 110 bundles of ostrich feathers—I instructed Cooper to re-fasten the case.
GEORGE RODWELL . I am a cargo examiner to the P. and O. Company—it is my duty to examine all cargoes which are not landed in prime condition—the lid of this box was split and re-nailed; it was an old case—it had a tin lining, which had not been cut—it contained 110 bundles—all the feathers had linen tabs on them like these (produced).
SAMUEL DAVIS . I am a permanent labourer in the employ of the company, at Cutler Street warehouse—it is my duty to go to the dock, clear the goods, and put them in a railway truck, which is locked by the Customs—on 2nd March I saw the case No. 60 in the shed.
WILLIAM E. DELAY . I am a Customs officer at the Royal Albert Docks—it is my duty to see all goods which are not cleared—if the cargo is to be examined at the Custom House, there is a notice to me that it has not been cleared—it is put into a truck, and sealed by me—on 2nd March I saw case 10 in the truck, after which I had nothing to do with it.
JOHN BURRELL . I am a warehouse-keeper in the employ of the company, in the feather department—I examine cargo in every case, whether damaged or not—on March 3rd Davis called my attention to box 10 as having been split, and on the 4th I received it from Driscoll—one of my clerks and the foreman went through the contents and made a statement to me, and I counted and found six bundles were missing—lot 5 ought to have contained five bundles, but it only contained one—those consignees are the only people who mount them with linen tabs.
FREDERICK DICKER (Detective Sergeant). On April 1st I was with Sergeant Reed, near Canning Town Railway Station, and saw the prisoner—his coat looked bulky, and I stopped him and said, "We are police officers; what have you got about you?"—he said, "Nothing"—opened his coat and found a parcel containing these 26 ostrich feathers—I said, "Where did you get these from?"—he said, "Down the Lane," meaning Petticoat Lane—I said, "When?"—he said, "About three weeks ago"—I said, "Your tale is not satisfactory; I shall take you to the station"—on the way he said, "You know where it came from; cannot you say that you picked them up, and let me go?"
Prisoner's Defence. I throw myself on your mercy; my poor wife lay in bed fourteen years. This is the first blemish on my character.
GUILTY of unlawful possession. Recommended to mercy by the JURY.— Three Months' Hard Labour.
MR. TURRELL Prosecuted.
THOMAS WITHELL . I am a saw and tool sharpener, living at Burney Cottages, Lea Street, Ilford—on the 20th March, about a quarter to five p.m., I was about to get into a tramcar in the Romford Road, going towards Ilford—my wife was by my side—something struck me right in the side of my ribs and backbone, and knocked me violently to the ground—I did not see what did it; I did not see the prisoner or the cart before I was knocked down—I was taken to the Police-station, and afterwards to my home—I was attended by a doctor.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I am very deaf—I did not hear you shout—you asked me to see a doctor, and I referred you to my doctor—I saw another doctor on Saturday week—I think I had one foot raised when I was struck.
MARY WITHELL . I am the wife of the last witness—on 20th March I was with him when, as he was getting into a tramcar in the Romford Road, he was run over by a pony and trap, which I had seen a few yards behind the tram—two men were in it; I could not say who was driving—it was going very fast—I heard no shout from the cart before my husband was struck.
Cross-examined. I was standing on the right-hand side of my husband, coming eastwards towards the front of the car—you were driving towards the tail end of the tram.
GEORGE LEWIS . At five o'clock on 20th March I was driving a tramcar in the Romford Road, going towards Manor Park—I stopped to pick up and set down passengers, and I looked round the side of the tram and saw the prisoner driving a pony and trap at a furious pace; it knocked an intending passenger down; the pony and trap were thrown over, the prisoner and his companion being thrown on to the pavement—I jumped off the car, seized the pony's head, and rendered what assistance I could—the prisoner got up and seized the pony's head, and I helped to right the pony and cart—I called the attention of a constable, who took the prisoner to the station—he was drunk.
Cross-examined. I was looking on the near side of the tram—you were following the tram—I saw a child lying on the pavement where it had been thrown—I did not notice it before that—you were sitting on your driving side—the only remark I have made while attending at this Court was that the prosecutor might be more lenient—I did not see that the wheel of the gig skidded on the tram line—I did not stop suddenly; you were 50 yards off when I stopped—it was an ordinary gig with two wheels, with no painting on it; it was not a trade gig.
GEORGE HORSLEY . I am a house decorator—on Sunday, 20th March, I was riding on the top of a tramcar in the Romford Road about five o'clock—I saw the trap coming on the left of the tram—I should say it was furiously driven—the prisoner was driving—I saw the man knocked down and run over; I heard someone shout out before that; that attracted my attention—I saw the shaft hit the man, and knock him down—I did not see a child on your knee; I saw one on the pavement after you were thrown out—you were behind the tram on the left of it—I saw no whip—I saw you at the horse's head while they lifted the rap over afterwards.
up, and saw the prisoner standing by the side of the trap—while I was attending to Smith, who had been riding with the prisoner, and who was lying on the pavement insensible; the prisoner got into the trap, and drove away—I went after him, found he was drunk, and took him into custody for being drunk while in charge of a horse and cart.
Cross-examined. A child was afterwards brought to the station; I did not see one at the time—you did not carry the child to the station.
HENRY WOOD (Sergeant 78 K). On 20th March the prisoner was brought to the station; he was drunk—he was charged: with being drunk while in charge of a horse and cart, and running over and knocking down James Withell, and causing him hurt.
Cross-examined. You had a child with you—Withell walked into the station twenty minutes or more after you were brought in—he was suffering from an abrasion of the shin, and complained of injuries to his back—I promised you bail—the address you gave of a bail and of the man to whom the gig and horse belonged turned out incorrect—a bail came for you afterwards.
CHOWLEY. I am a surgeon and physician practising at Ilford—I have attended the prosecutor, who was suffering on Monday morning, 21st March, from a severe shock—he did not pass any water for twenty-four hours—his eye was hot and painful and red, and he complained of great pain, and the second day inflammation of the eye set in—I saw a contused wound three or four inches long on his leg; the skin was broken off in some places, and next day inflammation of the bone set in—he was feverish, and the places were swollen and painful, and could not bear touching—there was a little bruise on the arm and back as well—at the time those injuries did not seem serious, but after wards they were, because he could not sleep for three weeks at night because of the intense pain of his eye and leg.
Cross-examined. I received a letter from Dr. Kennedy on 18th April, asking me to appoint a time when he could examine my patient in the prisoner's interests—I answered, by a letter written by the solicitor, and signed by me: "Dear Sir,—My patient does not wish to see you without the consent of his lawyer"—I took no notice from 19th to 24th April, because I had received no answer from the solicitor to my letter—the doctor wrote on the 25th, asking me to let him know if Withell was prepared to submit to an examination—I did not answer it, because I received no answer from the solicitor—I received a letter of 28th April asking for an answer—I did not write refusing to let him be examined—I wrote saying that I had nothing to do with giving consent; that he did not wish to be examined by any other than his medical man, but that I would enclose the letter to his solicitor.
By the COURT. I had no right to say whether he should be examined by another doctor; according to medical etiquette one doctor should not examine another doctor's case unless a consultation were appointed—I consulted other people, and they said another doctor had no right to examine him without the consent of the patient.
Re-examined. Doctor Kennedy has since examined him.
GEORGE LEWIS (Re-examined by the prisoner). The trap, after it was turned over, was drawn about two and a half lengths, or about eight yards, by the pony—it did not go. beyond the length of the tram, because the turning over stopped it—I did not see where Withell was struck.
The prisoner called the following witnesses.
DENNIS KENNEDY . I am a surgeon and physician, practising at Bow Road—you asked me to communicate with Withell with regard to hit injuries, and I wrote to his doctor asking for an appointment to examine him, and I received the letter of 19th refusing—I wrote again on 25th, but received no answer—I don't know if I have any power to compel a patient to be examined if he does not wish to be; I have always accepted such an invitation myself—in a case of this kind I could not compel an injured man to be examined unless he chose—I could not interfere with another medical man's case except by his permission, and I could no compel the prosecutor to be examined without his permission—at last I sent a registered letter, and had a reply, in consequence of which I saw the prosecutor—there was no evidence of recent injury to the eyes; there was evidence of old-standing damage to the eyes—I have seen a man knocked down without being injured—I found bruises on his left leg, a graze; the leg must have met some sharp and hard substance—I was told by the doctor there was no need to examine his back—it was nearly six weeks after the accident when I saw him—there was an injury to the shins—there was no trace of injury to the left shoulder Or right side of the head—the graze would not be caused by the wheel passing over his leg—if a graze lasted six weeks it must be a very bad graze, unless it were on a diseased surface; that was the only thing I found.
Cross-examined. If I heard that a man was knocked down by a cart, and was picked up insensible, and had bruises over his eye and arm and on his back and leg, which lasted six weeks, I should say it was severe bodily injury.
MR. TURRELL called
JOHN SMITH . I am a seafaring man, not accustomed to driving—on 20th March I was driving with the prisoner in the cart at the time of the accident—I drove first of all, and then the prisoner took the reins from me—We stopped several times and had a glass of drink—after the accident I remember no more, and it never came back to me—it was a small pony about twelve hands, and a pleasure cart.
Cross-examined by prisoner. You took the reins from me just before the accident—you were endeavouring to pull off the tram line to pass the tram—you had my sister's little boy on your arm; you had been nursing him very near the whole time—we had no whip the pony was not capable of going at a furious pace; she was only a Russian pony, and not fast.
The prisoner, in his defence, denied having been drunk; he said that he tried; to pull out to pass the tramcar when the cart skidded and then turned over; and he read a letter which he said he had received from the prosecutor's lawyer, stating that hit client did not want more than reasonable compensation for the injuries he had sustained, and that he should like to see him (the prisoner) before advising the prosecutor whether to appear and support the prosecution on remand against him. NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. GRAZEBROOK Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. OGLE Prosecuted, and MR. TURRELL Defended.
ARTHUR CHARLES JACKSON . On 12th April I was in Mr. Fenn's employment as barman at the George, Broadway, Stratford—at a little past nine p.m. I saw the prisoner in the bar; his brother introduced him—he talked about commonplace matters first and then said, "If I tender you a coin, take it to the till, rattle the money about, and bring back to me a handful of coppers with my own coin"—I said nothing, but let him talk on—I afterwards communicated with my master, and received instructions—next day the prisoner gave me 6d. for a glass of beer; I brought a handful of coppers back with the 6d., and gave them to him—after that he tendered me the 6d. again for one 2d. cigar; when I brought him the box he took two; I took the 6d. to the till, and brought it back with some more coppers, 6d. or 7d. I should think—when I went to the till he said, "Take a good handful"—he also asked for a glass of mild and Burton, and gave me 6d. again; I cannot say if it was the same 6d.—I gave him the 6d. back and some coppers—he had said on the 12th that when I got off on a Sunday I was to meet him and divide the spoil—he said he had a brother in a bar who could lay his hand on £25 or £30 if he left his situation—Mr. Fenn was not there when I gave him the change out of the till.
Cross-examined. On the 12th I saw the prisoner for the first time; there was another boy in the bar with me, and two other customers besides the prisoner—I believe there was nobody in the bar when he came on the 13th—I am not in Mr. Fenn's employment now; I gave notice because I was not strong enough—I did not notice whether the prisoner looked at the change; he put it in his pocket without looking at it.
By the COURT. I am just eighteen years old.
FREDERICK CHARLES DUTTON FENN . I am landlord of the George, Broadway, Stratford—on 12th April Jackson made a communication to me, in consequence of which I gave him certain instructions—next day I saw the prisoner in the bar about eight p.m. for a short time—I saw Jackson serve him once, and give him change from the till—I sent for a constable, and when he camel said to the prisoner, "I am going to give you in charge for inciting my servant to steal from me"—he said, "I never saw him before yesterday"—I have no reason to find fault with Jackson in any way; he gave me notice five days after this happened, and has left my service through no fault.
Cross-examined. I was not in the bar on the 13th, but in the public bar at the back of the prisoner—there were two or three barmen helping in the bar, but no customers.
CHARLES COTMORE (509 k). On 13th April, in consequence of information, I went to the George about eight o'clock; Mr. Fenn gave the prisoner into my custody—the prisoner said, "I suppose this will be rather serious for me"—I searched and found on him 3s. 6d. silver, 2s. 7d. bronze, four pawntickets, and three half ounces of tobacco—there was only one 6d. among the silver.
Cross-examined. On the way to the station he said, "I never saw the man before."
GUILTY .*— Four Months' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. STEPHENSON Prosecuted.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. STEPHENSON, for the prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. F. FULTON and GILL Prosecuted.
JULIA ELIZABETH NEWLAND . I am the wife of William Newland, of 89, Bridge Street, Greenwich—on 14th April, about 1.30, I was at my gate in Lamb Lane; a boy named Green spoke to me, and I saw the prisoner inside a gate; she had a little boy with her, and was sitting against a tub with some water in it; she had the child face downwards, holding his head in the tub of water, and said, "I will b——well drown you"—I pulled the child's head out of the water—he was black in the face, and could not speak—he appeared about four years old—Mr. Goldthorpe took the child from me—it got a little better, and said something—the prisoner was tipsy—she could walk with assistance—she walked to the station with the policeman taking hold of her—the tub was against a sink, and there were four or five inches of water in it—the only boy I saw was one outside the gate.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I was not there when the boys followed you down Lamb Lane, or when you knocked at Mrs. Gardner's door.
ALFRED GOLDTHORPE . I live at 48, Haddon Street, Greenwich—on 14th April, about 1.30, a statement was made to me, and I went to 27, Lamb Lane, and saw a number of boys of all sizes outside a gate, looking through it—I saw Mrs. Newland come out of a yard with a child in her arms—she said something to me, and I took him from her—his face and shoulders were wet, and his face was slightly discoloured—I took him in a cab to the station.
CHARLES GREEN . I live with my father and mother at 28, Bell Street, Greenwich—on 14th April I saw the prisoner with a child in the street—she went towards the Bee Hive public-house, and stopped at a cottage, and said to Mrs. Gardner, "I have got plenty of money; let me come in and I will treat you"—she went to a tub in the yard, and held the child's head in the water—she was drunk; she could hardly stand—I ran and called Mrs. Newland.
By the COURT. A lot of boys were following her and jeering her and hooting her when I first saw her—she did not say to Mrs. Gardner that
she wanted to come in to get rid of the boys—I saw the boys knock the gate in before she did anything to the child.
Cross-examined. I was among the boys—I saw Mrs. Gardner come to her door when you knocked, and saw you go to the tub.
WILLIAM MOORE (70 R). Green called me to this yard—I saw Mrs. Newland at the gate, and the prisoner inside—Mrs. Newland said in her hearing that she had attempted to drown the child by putting his head in a tub of water, and I said I should arrest her—she said, "I did not intend to drown the child"—it was taken to the station, and then to the infirmary—when charged the prisoner said, "I did not intend to kill him; I love him too well"—it was an ordinary washing tub; some of the water had been spilled, and about six inches of rather dirty water was left in it; it was standing near a sink—it was an ordinary washing tub, nine and a half inches deep.
Cross-examined. It might be part of a butter tub—the child's head was wet at the top and front, and down the left shoulder.
EDWARD STILLWELL (Police Inspector R). I was on duty at the station when the prisoner was brought in, charged with attempting to drown her child—she said, "I did not intend to do my child any injury; I love him too well"—his hair was wet and a portion of his clothing—I had him taken to the infirmary—his hair was dry at the back.
WALTER BURNEY . I am Medical Superintendent of Greenwich Infirmary—I saw this child when he was bought in—he was about four years old, and a delicate child; he had been in the infirmary, and the mother took him out the day before, against my wish—his face and the front part of his hair were wet—if his face was held in six inches of water it would become discoloured, but it would pass off.
Cross-examined. I asked you to let the child remain for a week, and you let him remain from Saturday to Thursday.
The prisoner, in her statement before the Magistrate and in her defence, said that she took the child out of the Union to take him to see his father at the Dreadnought Hospital, and then to her sister's, and a lot of boys followed her, shouting, "Old Mother Gilby" and tore her dress; that she was in great danger of falling with the child; that she went to Mrs. Gardner, and the boys threw the gate open and pushed her down on her face and threw water over her, and she put her hand on the tub to save the child from going in, and the next she heard of it was that it was in the infirmary; and that she had had eleven children and had only this one left, and would lay down her life for him. She called'
MARY ANN GARDNER . On 14th April the prisoner came into my yard, surrounded by a large mob of boys, and said, "If you let me in I have plenty of money"—she had occupied the next cottage formerly—I had to go out on business, and left her sitting on the doorstep—this was a butter tub, it was not mine—it had one hoop to it and part of another—it leaked at the upper part, but it would hold five inches of water—there were a great many boys at the gate, and I was glad to get away—they were hooting when they first came.
GUILTY of a common assault. The prisoner had been charged at this Court in December last with causing the death of another child by neglect , and was acquitted. She was stated to be an habitual drunkard,— Four Months' Hard Labour.
PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at Clerkenwell on 5th May, 1879.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Justice Grantham.
MR. PASSMORE, for the prosecution, offered no evidence. The GRAND JURY had ignored the bill. NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. DRAKE Prosecuted. HENRY FLYN. I am a helmet maker, of Rathbone Place—on 25th March I was near Waterloo Station with two parcels; one of them came undone and an article fell out—the prisoner came across the road from three others and said, "I will pick, it up for you"—and as I stooped down I felt his left hand in my pocket, which tore my coat—I said, "Get away, I can do it myself"—he felt the impression of my purse in my pocket, which contained £2, my child's funeral money—he pulled my coat aside, pulled my purse out, knocked me down, and ran across the road—I jumped up and ran after him—he ran round a cab—I called "Police!" and never lost sight of him till I gave him into custody—I had had a glass, but was not drunk; I knew what I was doing.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You did not come out of the Lord Hill; you were standing outside with three more.
JOHN HOWARD . I am a blacksmith, of 48, Oakley Street—on 26th March I was at Waterloo Station—I saw the prisoner and prosecutor stooping together—I walked on a few paces and heard a scuffle, and turned and saw the prisoner running across the road, followed by the prosecutor, who caught him and accused him of stealing his purse—a crowd collected, and I saw the prisoner pass something to some one—I could not see what it was.
GEORGE BUTLER (40 L). I was on duty in Waterloo Road—the prisoner was standing outside the Lord Hill, and the prosecutor in front of him; he said he had taken £2—he was very excited; I should say he had been drinking, but he knew what he was about—the prisoner said he knew nothing about it.
Prisoner's Defence. I was coming out of the Lord Hill when the prosecutor said I had stolen his purse; I had never seen him before.
He PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction in the name of William Smith at the Surrey Sessions on 1st February, 1886.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
MR. TURRELL Prosecuted.
GEORGE SAGE . I am a gardener, and live at Twickenham—on 9th April I was at the Boat Race, standing on the towing-path near Barnes, looking at some roundabouts and swings; a friend, William Brown, stood close to me; the prisoner passed in front of us; I heard a snap, looked down and saw my watch-chain hanging—I kept my eye on the prisoner, and went ten or twelve yards and took him by the arm and said, "You have got my watch"—he said, "Me got your watch?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "Well, what are you going to do?"—I said, "To give you in charge"—he said, "If you want your watch it is no use giving me in charge, if you do you will never get it; if you will come back with me I will get back your watch"—I gave him into custody.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You denied stealing it—there was a crowd—I did not see you strike a man and a man strike you—you said you would allow me to search you—my friend said, "It is no use searching him now, it is gone"—I did not see you pass the watch—you were the nearest to me except my friend.
WILLIAM BROWN . I am a coachman, and live at 18, Portland Place Road, Notting Hill—I was at the Boat Race with Sage on the towpath—I saw the prisoner by the side of Sage, walking a short space—Sage turned and said, "I have lost my watch!"—I did not see the prisoner take it, but he was the nearest person—there were not many about—the prisoner came into collision with another man and accused him of striking him, and I believe that man passed me and ran through the crowd—the prisoner said, "Me take your watch? I have not taken it; if you think I have get it you can search me if you want your watch, if you let me go I will get it back for you; the other man has got your watch."
Cross-examined. You said that directly after you had come in collision with the other man; you were about four yards away then—I heard the snap of your watch, and saw you walk away.
FREDERICK STARKEY (430 V). I was on the tow-path near Barnes, and saw the prisoner, prosecutor, and Brown there—the prosecutor said, "That man has stolen my watch"—the prisoner said, "I have not got your watch"—that was all that was said—the prosecutor gave him into custody.
Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate: "I wish you would settle it here."
Prisoner's Defence. No one saw me take the watch; he might have lost it before I came up.
He PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at Bow Street on 25th September, 1891, in the name of Henry Wright**'— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
(28) PLEADED GUILTY to conspiring to obtain and obtaining by false pretences from Albert James Bruskett a quantity of tea and sugar and 12s., and other goods and moneys from other persons, with intent to defraud.— Judgment respited.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
ELEANOR JARMAN . I am barmaid at the George, Grange Road, Bermondsey—on 23rd April about half-past ten the prisoner came in for half a pint of ale, and tendered this shilling with his hand over it—I found the shilling was bad, and took it straight to the landlord, Mr. Catherwood, who came and said to the prisoner, "Do you know what you have given to this young lady?"—the prisoner said, "It is a shilling"—Mr. Catherwood said, "Yes, it is a bad shilling"—the prisoner said, "Give it to me back, and I will pay for the ale"—Mr. Catherwood said it should not pass from his hands till he had called for a constable—the prisoner said he got it from his master.
ALFRED HENRY CATHERWOOD , I keep the George—on 23rd April Miss Jarman brought me this shilling, and I noticed it was bad and corresponded with two other coins we had taken on two previous days—I asked the prisoner what he had given my barmaid—he said a shilling—I said, "Do you know it is bad?"—he said, "No"—I asked if he knew where he had got it from—he said, "Yes, from my master"—I said, "This coin corresponds with two others that were taken here on Thursday or Friday, and in consequence of that I have communicated with the police, and you will have to remain here and prove to them how you got possession of this coin—I sent my potman for a constable—the prisoner remained.
HENRY COLLISON (315 M). I was sent for to the George, where Mr. Catherwood said the prisoner had tendered a counterfeit shilling—I searched the prisoner and found elevenpence in coppers—I took him to the station, where he was charged and further searched, and in his left boot I found a counterfeit shilling; he said, "There is a hole in my pocket, and it must have dropped into my boot, or I cannot account for it else"—he gave an address at a common lodging-house at Deptford.
EDWARD ANNING . I am manager at the Britannia public-house—on 23rd April the prisoner came in for a pint and a half of ale in a can, and tendered this shilling—I broke it with my teeth, and gave it back to theprisoner; he said he knew where he got it—on the following Sunday I saw the prisoner at the Police-station; I identified him—I was quite sure the coin was bad.
ELIZABETH BRAYFIELD . I am the wife of Thomas Brayfield, a leather-dresser, and live at 30, Marine Street, Bermondsey—the prisoner lived at my house, renting a bedroom and a washhouse, which he worked in, where the copper is; it is outside my house—no one went into it except to wash—anyone could go in to wash—the bedroom he had to himself; it is on the first floor upstairs—no one 'was with him—I never saw anyone come to see him except his daughter—he came on 12th April and stayed till the 23rd—when Sergeant Bradford came I pointed out to him certain rooms—on 23rd April I found this sixpence on the floor of prisoner's
bedroom as I was scrubbing it—I afterwards identified the prisoner at the Police-station as my lodger—the prisoner told me he was a bootmaker—you can see through the washhouse windows from the outside.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. There is no lock, key, or bolt to the washhouse, only a latch—the people of the house could go in and wash there if they wanted to.
Re-examined. I used to go there very seldom; if I wanted to go I would knock with a stick—I have seen some boots in the shed—on 24th there was a shirt hanging in front of the washhouse window, and the lamp was alight.
WILLIAM BRADFORD (Detective Sergeant H). On 24th April I saw the prisoner in custody; Anning identified him—I said to the prisoner, "You will be charged with uttering a counterfeit coin to this gentleman last night when you called for a pint and a half of beer in a can at the Britannia; this is the shilling"—the prisoner said, "It is quite true; that is the shilling he took from me last night"—he was charged; he said, "It is quite true"—about eleven p.m. the same day I went to 30, Marine Street, Bermondsey, where I saw Elizabeth Brayfield—in consequence of what she said I went upstairs to a back bedroom—Mrs. Brayfield there handed me this counterfeit sixpence—I then went into a small washhouse in the yard—there I found under the window a box with a quantity of shoemaker's tools, silver sand, and small packets of whitening on it; on the mantelshelf this battery and bottle of solution; in the fireplace this saucepan, with small pieces of metal in it; on the floor of the washhouse I found this packet of plaster of Paris—I opened the door of the copper, and found this handkerchief, in which I found these pieces of metal, nine unfinished counterfeit shillings, and right at the back of the washhouse I discovered this mould for the manufacture of shillings (one of the shillings and one of the pieces of metal exactly fits into the mould), a small file, and a knife which undoubtedly had some metal substance adhering to it—I went to the Police-station—subsequently Mrs. Brayfield came there, and said in the prisoner's presence, "That is the man who occupied my back room and the washhouse for doing his work"—the prisoner said, "It is quite right what she says"—he was charged with having these things in his possession, and he said, "I have never been in trouble before; this is all through a drop of drink"—the washhouse window was whitened over for about 18 inches from the bottom upwards, and on the Sunday evening an old shirt was hanging over the window—from the ashes in the washhouse grate it appeared as if there had been a fire recently—the prisoner had a hole in his pocket.
By the prisoner. If I came up to the window I could see you at work—the window was rather high—the shirt was hanging up, but I could see when the lamp was alight—I had no occasion to go there—in the house there are I and my husband, and two people upstairs, who were out at work—my husband has no occasion to go to the washhouse, and I did not go.
metal was originally attached to one of the coins; it was broken off, and the edge of the coin filed—these are two other counterfeit shillings, finished, from the same mould, and the broken counterfeit shilling is from the same mould—the plaster of Paris (the composition of which the mould is made), the whitening, antimony (which is sometimes mixed with the metal to harden it), a file with traces of metal on it, pieces of metal, the solution, and the battery, are all used in the manufacture of counterfeit coin.
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said he was drinking all Saturday and in the forepart of the week with Mrs. Brayfield and her husband, and that he fell in with a man with a bag; that they drank together, and that the man gave him the two counterfeit shillings, and asked to be allowed to leave the things in the washhouse.
ELIZABETH BRAYFIELD (Re-examined by the COURT). We had a glass of drink on the Monday with the prisoner, and on the Tuesday I gave him half a sovereign to fetch half a pint of ale—I did not see these things on the premises, only this (The battery) on the mantelpiece in the week previous, directly he took the premises—the place was empty before he took possession.
GUILTY*— Six years' Penal Servitude.
MR. ALLEYNE Prosecuted.
GEORGE REECE . I live at 117, Sudbury Grove, Hammersmith—on April 9th I was with a friend on the towing-path, between Hammersmith and Putney—there was a crowd—I felt a pull at my pocket, and saw the prisoner snatch his hand away, and my watch was gone, and my chain hanging down—I had seen it safe immediately before—I said "You have got my watch"—he said, "I have not"—his hand was closed—I asked Mr. Lawrence to hold him while I went for a constable—he asked me to search him.
HENRY STAPLETON (85 L R). Mr. Reece charged the prisoner with stealing his watch—Lawrence was holding him—the prisoner said, "If you saw it in my hand, why did not you take it out?"—I searched him at the station, and found a watch-chain, two pawntickets, a return ticket, and a little brown cap, besides the felt hat he was wearing.
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, denied taking the watch, and stated that he had no chance of passing it to anybody.
GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUTLTY** to a conviction of a like offence at Southwark on 7th December, 1891.— Six Months' Hard labour.
MR. LEVER Prosecuted.
and went into the Lord Hill, Waterloo Bridge Road, and saw the prisoner and a man not here—the prisoner said, "I know you, young fellow; your name is Charles Kirby"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "I am a cousin of your uncle, Mr. Golden"—I said, "I don't know if you are the same name as my uncle"—he said, "Yes," and that he knew my cousin Jim Golding—I asked where he got to know him—he said he had been great pals with him, and he used to work at an orange place over London Bridge, and was working there now with his father—I did not know him at all—I had some drink, and he said, "Don't you pay for it; we will pay"—he offered me the pot of beer, but I only drank some lemonade—he wanted me to go to a theatre—we went next door to get a bed, and the prisoner and the other man followed us and asked the price of a bed—my shipmate and I gave 4s. for two beds, and went out and tried to get away from the prisoner, and turned down Pear Street, and went into the Hereford Arms and called for drink, and the prisoner sat beside me feeling my pocket, and the other one was by my shipmate—they both went out, and I put my hand in my jacket pocket where I keep my money, and missed £5 10s. in half-sovereigns and about 15s.—I had my hand in my pocket and he wanted it out, and gave me an awful blow on my face—I had my purse in my hand—I fell from the blow, and saw him running away—I got up, and the prisoner said, "What is the matter?"—I said, "That young fellow who was with me has robbed me"—he ran off—I have not seen my money since—I saw the prisoner next day at the station—my mate has gone to sea.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. We did not ask you to have a drink—I did not let two men in the Hereford Arms feel the weight of my purse—you left me outside the house with two other men—I lost my purse about three yards from the house—there were no men with me but you and your partner.
Re-examined. When he left me he struck me, and I could hardly talk to my shipmate through the pain, which lasted till I got to the Police-court.
GEORGE SENNETT (Police Inspector L). I received information, and on 2nd April I went into the Lord Hill and saw the prisoner—I knew him, and saw that he had a new suit of clothes on, and had taken a little hair off his upper lip—I charged him with being concerned with another man in an assault and robbery—he said, "Not me, governor"—Kirby identified him from five or six others at the station—I found on him thirteen shillings in silver and 5s. 6d. in bronze.
Cross-examined. You had a slight moustache the day before, but you were shaved when I took you—I have known you some time.
Prisoner's Defence. I am innocent of the case.
GUILTY *†— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BIRON and MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS Prosecuted.
Battersea—Wallace and I were about six yards from my brother—I saw the four prisoners rush round him—some came out of the Railway Tavern, and the others seemed to be in waiting—there were eight or nine altogether—they knocked him down, and when he was down kicked him and robbed him—I saw Dowley down on his hands and knees, working his hands over my brother while he was on the ground—I saw Malone kicking him—he went down with Dowley—Gardner was one of the first to kick him and knock him down—I saw Howse there, but do not know whether he did anything—I ran up to my brother directly I saw him fall—I went to pick him up, and received a kick and was knocked back—Wallace ran up too—the three other prisoners went away, but Dowley stopped I should think twenty minutes—I took my brother down Totteridge Road; a lady brought a chair out for him to sit on—he was insensible; she brought him some water, but it did not seem to revive him—I took him to Mr. Barton, the chemist, who gave us something in a glass to give him, but he did not come and have a look at him; we took him home—I had seen Dowley several times before, and knew him by sight, and I have seen Gardner before, but not the other two.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Dowley. Before my brother was insulted I saw you outside the Prince's Head early in the evening—I was not standing inside the bar with a young woman—I do not remember you coming when the row was on and patting me on the shoulder, and asking me what was the matter—you did not fetch a glass of water for my brother, but I saw it given to him—I do not know that you assisted my brother—I did not charge you at first, because I was too busy with my brother—I felt in my brother's pockets, and found nothing in them—I told the policeman he had been robbed and knocked about—after you had all gone the policeman said, "Are there any of them here?" and I said, "No"—I was never in your company drinking with you.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Malone. I was sixty yards away when I saw my brother knocked down, and you went down on your knees and kicked him; you were down the longest—I said that at the Police-court—I saw you kick him on the left jaw; there was not a crowd then; there was only your own company—my brother was lying on the kerb—Gardner hit him first—you ran away—Gardner did not fetch him another glass of water—you never heard what the constable said, because you were not there—it was in the bar where the fish are, on Saturday night—I did not see you—I did not nod to you—I had never seen you before that Saturday to my recollection—my brother and I are not amateur pugilists—we were both perfectly sober.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Gardner. I did not say that you hit him first; I said you were one of the first to hit him—someone hit him before you—there were no people round at the commencement—I did not take off my coat and want to fight anyone there—the constable told me to shift my brother—you were not there then—I saw you strike him; I believe it was in the face.
Re-examined. I was not thirty yards from my brother when Malone kicked him—there was no one near him except the men who came out of the public-house—it was five minutes before anyone came up—he was being held up when the constable came, and, being occupied with him, I did not make any complaint to the constable, because I could not see the prisoners; I did so on the Sunday afternoon—I said something to
the constable, and he asked me whether any of the people were there—that was a quarter of an hour after he first spoke to me—I said, "No, I do not see them here"—they had all run away then—when I put my hand in my brother's pocket after he was assaulted I found nothing—I know he had money.
GEORGE CLARKSON . I am a barge-builder, at 30, Warple Road—on 19th March, about ten p.m., I was with my brother Wilfred, just on the kerb, about fourteen feet from the public-house—Gardner and a man not in custody came out of the public-house, followed by seven or eight others, of whom I only recognise Malone—Gardner struck me on my mouth and tripped me at the same time—I fell, and was kicked more than once on my head—I cannot say who kicked me, because other men were there at the time—I became insensible, and do not remember any more till Sunday morning, when I found myself indoors—at the time I was set upon I had 18s. loose in my trousers pocket—it was gone in the morning—I had seen Gardner before, and knew him by sight, and I have seen Malone standing at the Prince's Head—there had been no quarrel between me and these men—my brother and I were both sober.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Dowley. I was not drinking with you in any public-house—I was talking to a chap named Moss—my brother was down Temperance Street.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Malone. I did not see you hit me, but you were very near me.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Gardner. The one not in custody hit me first—I did not make a strike at a friend of yours, nor did he hit me on the jaw and make me fall on the flagstone and strike my head—I fell in the road off the kerb—I was not fighting in the road—I was never inside the Railway public-house.
GEORGE WALLACE . I live at 48, Francis Street, Battersea, and am a wool-sorter—on 19th March, about ten p.m., I was with Wilfred Clarkson in Simpson Street, and saw George Clarkson outside the Railway Hotel talking to a friend—I saw a mob of about nine fellows rush out, and one not in custody struck him in the face—the prisoners are four of them—they rushed out as soon as he was knocked down—Dowley went on his knees, and put his hands all over him, and Howse kicked him on his head and rushed away, and I saw no more of him—I saw Malone kick him on the left side of his face—George Clarkson was up on his feet, but Gardner knocked him down—I attempted to get his watch. from his pocket and prevent them having it, and one of the mob hit me behind my ear; I made a second attempt and got it, and said to his brother, "Will you take this watch or shall I keep it?"—he said, "Keep it," and I put it in my pocket—I fetched two or three glasses of water—when I came back George Clarkson was still on the ground insensible; I helped Wilfred to take his brother home—I had seen Dowley before, outside the Prince's Head, and knew him by sight; the Prince's Head is about three hundred yards from the Railway Hotel—I know them all by sight; I have seen them more than once.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Dowley. I did not see you when the police came up—you never held him up—Clarkson did not thank you for what you had done—you did not go into the private bar of the Railway Hotel that afternoon.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Malone. I could see you rush out of the
public-house, though it was sixty yards down Simpson Street—I was too busy with George Clarkson to give you in custody; I was perfectly sober.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Gardner. I have never boxed for my living—you have never been in my company—I do not remember treating you to whisky.
Re-examined. I was away about a minute getting the water, and when I came back with it I only saw Malone—no one else went for water.
HENRY BURNHAM GREENE . I live at 20, North Street, Wandsworth—on 20th March the prosecutor's father called, and I went down to see him—I found a large contused swelling on the right side of his head, and on the left cheek-bone another contusion with a smaller swelling, and he was showing symptoms of concussion of the brain—he was sensible, but his mental faculties were not as clear as they might be—he answered very slowly—he was apparently recovering—that was about 3.5 p.m.—the injuries were consistent with a kick, but I am inclined to think the one on the right side of his head was from a fall, because there was a little grit in it—the one on the left side might be caused by a blow, or a kick, or a fall.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Malone. He could not have fallen from the kerb and injured both sides of his head—it is possible that he could have injured his jaw in falling, but it was the right side that I said was more probable, because there was some dirt or grit in the hair, but it might have been caused by a blow—the concussion might have been caused by either a fall or a blow.
JOHN THORLEY (Detective V). I took Dowley on Monday, 21st March, at eleven a.m., outside the Prince's Head public-house—I said I should take him for being concerned with others in violently assaulting a young fellow named Clarkson, on Saturday night, by the corner of Simpson Street—he made no reply—when he was charged at the station he said, "There were others there as well as me."
Cross-examined by the prisoner Dowley. I took you by the arm and handed you over to a constable—I did not say to Hopkins, "Don't let him know nothing"—I was present when you were charged—I did not take the prosecutor into a room and say, "Charge him; go in and charge him."
By the JURY. The Railway Tavern is one hundred yards from the Prince's Head—it was outside the Railway Tavern that the assault took place—there is one door at the corner, inside which there are two doors—you can almost see the whole length of Simpson Street—it is very quiet.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Malone. If you are standing in the lobby you can see down Simpson Street, and so you can in High Street, but not if you are back in the bar—as soon as you opened the door you could see to the corner of the house—the lobby is like a triangle; the door is not in the same line of building; it stands in a triangular recess—coming off the step of the door you are in the public street—any man rushing out of the public-house could see right down Simpson Street.
WILLIAM KEMP (Detective V). I arrested Howse, and told him the charge—on the way to the station he said, "I know the gang, but I was not there"—he was put with a number of men, and Wallace picked him out.
WALTER HOPKINS . On 16th April I went with Wallace to the Old Farm House beer-shop, Plough Road—I stood outside and saw Malone drop from the tap-room window—I chased him through several streets into Cory Street, where he came to a standstill, and I told him I should take him for assaulting and robbing Clarkson last month—he said, "Why didn't you take me before?"—I said, "I hare made every inquiry, but failed to find you"—he got his breath again and then struggled, and I handed him over to a uniform constable and followed to the station, where he was charged, and made no reply—on 24th April I went to 24, Yelverton Road, North Road, Battersea, and searched the house—in the top room front there was a man lying in bed—I looked under the bed and then in a small cupboard, and saw Gardner standing up in his shirt, with his clothes on his arm—I said, "Come on, Gardner," and told him I should take him for assaulting Clarkson outside the Railway Tavern last month—he said, "You have got the right one now; I knew you would be sure to have me"—he was taken to the station and charged, and made no reply.
Cross-examined by the prisoner Gardner. You did not say, "You have not got the right one"—it was about one a.m.—we remained outside till we were certain you were in the house—we surrounded the house—your father told me he did not know whether you were in or not—your mother said, "Oh, he has not come in"—your brother, who is now in the gallery, was in the bed—I did not arrest you when I took Dowley, because I did not see you—I have known you for years, and if I had seen you I should have been sure to have arrested you.
Cross-examined by Malone. You could have stood outside and looked in to the tap-room at the bottom part—I was at the corner of Livingstone Road about half a minute, but did not see you looking through the window at somebody inside—I was at the Boat Race between Hammersmith and Putney, out did not see you—I did not know where you lived—you gave me no address—I told the inspector your address was Hatherton Street, but when I made inquiries I found it was 35, Harroway Road.
Evidence for Donley's Defence,
ANN DOWLEY . I am Dowley's mother—his father is alive—he is a general labourer—we live at 19, Latchmere Road, Battersea—on the Sunday morning, about twelve o'clock, as this happened on the Saturday night, you asked me for some money to get a glass and a bit of "'bacca," which I always do when you are out of work, and you always paid me back—I saw nothing different in your manner then than there was before—I know you had no money on the Sunday morning.
Cross-examined. He was out of work at the time—he said he had no money.
GEORGE FREDERICK HAND BARTON . I am a chemist, of 133, High Street, Battersea—on 19th March, about 11.5 p.m., a man was brought into my shop by another man—they were half tipsy—there were four or five of them—they broke the back of a chair and a pane of glass in a case—the man who was brought in seemed thoroughly done up—I gave him some medicine to fetch him off his drunkenness—I might know them again. (The two Clarksons were here brought into Court)—I think one of those might be one of them—one of them was jolly—I gave the drink to George.
Cross-examined. George was sensible when he was brought in—that is why I say I think he was drunk—I gave him the drink in order to revive him—I did not know he was suffering from concussion of the brain, or that he had been knocked down and assaulted—a number of people did not come in after them—the door was shut—two or three people did come in and go out—the glass was broken through the man being put on the chair, and by his movement back, the back of the chair went against the glass.
ALBERT PRINCE . I work at a factory, 161, High Street—on 19th March, about 10.30 p.m., I was in a sweet-stuff shop opposite the Rail way Hotel, and saw a rush out of a public-house, which knocked a man down—they started rowing, and came to a fight—there were a tidy few people there—two or three others were with me—I did not see Dowley messing him about—there were fifty people about him—I got a glass of water and bathed his forehead—that is the young man. [George Clarkson]—somebody took the glass out of his hand and raised him up—a policeman came up, and said, "If you don't take him away I'll shift him somewhere else"—the policeman came up ten minutes afterwards—the quarrel was nearly over then—Dowley asked what was the matter, got a glaps of water, and bathed his face—I did not see him kneel on his less—I saw two men messing him about before you got there—I should know them again—they ran away when they saw the policeman come, but you stopped there—I did not see you on your hands and knees doing anything to him.
Cross-examined. I saw about five men rush out of the public-house—I was five or ten yards off—they went round Clarkson—one of them bumped into him, and started rowing—I did not see Dowley among the men that came out of the public-house—he came up about ten minutes afterwards—I saw him in the crowd round Clarkson, and assumed that he had come up afterwards—I know Malone and Gardner—I never saw Howse.
Re-examined by Dowley. The two men who were fighting were drunk—they started fighting in High Street, about ten yards from Simpson Street, and finished in Simpson Street—I know you because you came into the barber's shop where I was working.
By the JURY. One man who was fighting had his coat off—that was not George Clarkson—I do not see him here—the one who kicked him is not here—I did not see either of the prisoners kick him or kneeling on him—I saw someone messing him about—I should know him again—I know him by sight—I do not know Malone and Gardner, but I saw them there—Dowley had white cord trousers on.
Witnesses for Howse.
ELIZABETH ALLINGTON . I am the wife of Joseph Allington, a bricklayer, of Beckley Park Road, Battersea—on 19th March, when I came home, you were having your tea with my little daughter and your wife—my husband and two witnesses, who are outside, and a friend of my husband, were with you—we came out at 8.20 or 8.30, and went into the Prince's Head, and had a glass of ale and ginger beer—it was then nine o'clock—I stopped till 11.30—a lady said mat you had worked for her some time, and would give you a good character, and she asked you to go to the Boat Race—you were talking to her over two hours—we wished her good-night outside the Prince's Head, and I went to do my
shopping—the last public-house we left was the Cricketers, and I saw you indoors before I went home—it is seven or eight streets from the Rail way beerhouse—we had tea between 6.30 and 7.
Cross-examined. We went out after tea—I left my son and daughter at home; that was after twelve o'clock—we were together the whole evening—we were in company from 8.20 till after 12 o'clock, and I never saw any bother—we went into three public-houses—we were not drinking all the time; we only had three pots between us the whole evening, but we went out during the evening and got what we wanted—we all went out together and did the shopping, my husband and daughter and son-in-law, and the two other witnesses who are outside—my son is not here; he is gone to the country to look for work—I never lost sight of him the whole evening, except two minutes; that was after eleven o'clock—after we came out of the Prince's Head we went to the Queen, and said good-night to Mrs. Woolgar and Mrs. Coates—we left the Cricketers just as they were shutting up; this was Saturday night—we left the Prince's Head at 11.5, having stayed there two hours in one bar all the time—it was my son-in-law, Alfred Harrison, not my son, who was with me.
SUSAN WOOLGAR . I am the wife of Raymond Woolgar, a butcher, of Springfield Farm, Putney—on Saturday, 19th March, at a few minutes past nine, I went into a public-house, and saw Howse inside, with other people—after I had been there some time he came across to me, and asked me if I could employ him for the Boat Race—he has worked for me for seven or eight years—I told him that I was waiting for two lads, and I had got sufficient, and if he was not engaged for the holidays I could employ him—I can swear that he was in the place from the time I went in to the time I came out, 11.10, because I looked at the clock, being afraid I should lose my last train, which I did.
Cross-examined. The lad worked for me at swings and merry-go-rounds—he was in the public-house first—it was five or six minutes to nine when I went in—I remained till near eleven, as it was much warmer inside than out, and I suffer from diphtheria—Howse was in my company over an hour—he was in the house two hours—I was there half an hour before he came to me—that would make it 10.30 or a little earlier—he was talking to me a full hour, after which he stood right opposite to me, and I did not lose sight of him—I was at the Police-court twice, but did not give evidence—Howse's wife told me he was locked up—they suggested that he should call me, and I told the boy to tell the Magistrate so, but he did not call me; there was no time given—Mrs. Howse gave me a subpoena.
ELIZABETH COATES . I am a widow, and stand at a little shooting stall—I live at 399, York Road. Wandsworth—on this Saturday night I saw you in the Prince's Head a few minutes after ten, talking to Mrs. Woolgar, my sister, whom you asked for work—I went to the bar to ask for drink, and did not take much notice—your wife and mother-in-law and father-in-law and another young man were with you—I stayed in there about half an hour, and came out a few minutes after ten; I went to my stall to pack up, and a few minutes to eleven I went round, and you were still there with your wife and mother-in-law.
Cross-examined. I asked the time before I left my stall, and they said ten, and I went and did my stall up, which was fifty or sixty yards
from the Prince's Head—it was 10.30 when I left the Prince's Head; I looked at the clock.
Dowley, in his defence, stated that he saw Clarkson with fifty people round him, and got a handkerchief and bathed his face, and picked him up, but that nothing was taken from him in his presence, and that he heard no more of it till the Monday morning.
House's Defence. I know nothing about it; this is the first time I have been charged.
Malone's Defence. I was in the public-house, and hearing a row outside I went out—if I was guilty of such a thing he would not have let me walk away—they knew where I lived and did not arrest me till a month afterwards, though I only live a few minutes' walk off.
Gardner's Defence. It is impossible to see anybody come out of the public-house from Simpson Street, sixty yards down. Clarkson came out of the public-house, and made a blow at my friend. I always work hard for my living. I have just got over an illness, and live with my respectable parents.
DOWLEY and HOWSE NOT GUILTY ;
MALONE and GARDNER GUILTY of assault with intent to rob; they then
PLEADED GUILTY to previous convictions.
MALONE** at this Court on February 3rd, 1890, after a previous conviction of burglary; and GARDNER** at St. Mary, Newington, on 14th July, 1891.
MALONE— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
GARDNER— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted, ALBERT CAMBER (Detective L). On 10th April I was with Detective Darby in Westminster Bridge Road after nine a.m., both in plain clothes, and saw the prisoner standing at the corner of Lambeth Palace Road, rubbing something with his finger and thumb; he put it into his right waistcoat pocket, and took something out of the same pocket, and rubbed it again, looked at it, and put it into the same pocket—we crossed over to him, and I said, "lama police-officer; what is that you put in your pocket which you were rubbing just now?"—he said, "Nothing"—I said, "I shall search you," and put my hand into his right waistcoat pocket, and found this counterfeit half-crown—I held his hand while Darby searched him; he found some other coins in a different pocket—I took him to the station; he was charged, and made no reply.
EDWARD DARBY (Detective L). I was with Camber on 15th April—I searched the prisoner, and found six half-crowns folded in this packet in his right jacket pocket—each coin was wrapped round singly—I said, "Have you got anymore about you?"—he said, "No, that is all I brought out with me"—he was taken to the station and charged; he made no reply.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to Her Majesty's Mint—this single coin is counterfeit—these six are are also counterfeit, three of them are from the same mould as the other—the black stuff is rubbed off with the fingers and thumb preparatory to passing it, and this coin is much brighter than the others.
The prisoner called
GEORGE SENNETT (Police Inspector L). On Good Friday morning I asked you if they had searched you—Camber said that he saw you examining a loin, and rubbing it, and putting the others in your pocket, and took out a second coin, and he crossed the road with Darby, and asked what you were examining, and you said, "Nothing," and he took it from you, and you said, "I might as well give you all I have," and produced six more.
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that a man named Dick Bland gave him the parcel, and said, "Sere, catch hold of this; I am going into this coffee-shop"; that he took out one coin, and put it in his waistcoat pocket, and the officers took him, and that he gave the other coins to the officer, and told him that Bland was in the coffee-shop.
GEORGE SENNETT (Re-examined). Camber said, "We have a man here for passing counterfeit coin,"and gave me the first half-crown, and said in the prisoner's presence that he saw him take it out of his pocket and put it back, and that he put his fingers in his pocket and took it out;, and Camber said, "Have you any more?" and he took out the bundle of six and gave to him, and said, "I may as well give you all I have."
E. DARBY (Re-examined). Camber distinctly said that he seized his hands, and that I searched him and put my hand into his pockets, and pulled out a brown paper parcel.
A. CAMBER (Re-examined). What the inspector says is true—I held his hands while the other officer searched him—I never said to the inspector that the prisoner said, "I may as well give you all,"and then produced the packet—he did not give them up, and I did not say so to the inspector.
GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of a like offence on 28th February, 1887.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. RICHARDS Prosecuted.
CLARA LOW . I am assistant at the post-office, 159, Tooley Street—on Saturday, 16th April, the prisoner came and asked for a withdrawal notice—I gave him one—he did not fill it up—he gave me the number of his book, 8,754—he asked me to lend him a stamp.
JOB GRINTER . I am a baker, of 167, Tooley Street—on 16th April the prisoner, who I had never seen before, came into my shop for a loan of 6s. on this postal order; he said his wife was coming up from Devonshire on Monday, and he should have plenty of money—I said, "You can't get it before Tuesday because it is Bank Holiday"—he produced the form, and my wife handed him 6s.—I took it as a Post Office order, but when I read it twenty minutes afterwards I found it was a withdrawal order—I thought it was a valuable security—I found him in a publichouse twenty minutes afterwards, and asked him to give me my money back and to sign the order; but John Hunt came up and said, "It is a wrong one; he done me the same a year and nine months ago, and a lot of people in the neighbourhood he has done the same"—the prisoner said nothing; I gave him into custody.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You did not tell me that it was no good, you said you would be a good customer to me when your wife came up—I found you had defrauded about sixteen people in our neighbourhood.
JOHN HUNT . I am caretaker of the Southwark Chambers, a lodging-house—the prisoner stopped there a year and nine months ago—on 16th April I was in a public-house in Tooley Street, and he came in I saw Mr. Grinter speaking to him, and followed them into the private bar—they were about to get pen and ink when I said, "That is a wrong one; he served me the same trick a year and nine months ago; he has got no money in the bank; you go and fetch a policeman."
Cross-examined. I did not swear before the Magistrate that you done me five months ago—you did not lodge in my house twelve months ago.
Re-examined. It happened in July. 1890, he offered me a withdrawal form, and I gave him his lodging that night, and in the morning he asked me to advance him 5s. on the order, as the post-office was not open, it was too early—I took it to the post-office, and they said there was no account.
Prisoner's Defence. I could have paid it back on the Monday morning when my wife came up.
He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Clerkenwell in 1890 .—Three Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. HODGSON Prosecuted.
LOUISA VASEY . I am the wife of John Vasey, of 15, The Grove, Lewisham—in April last I lived at No. 8, and the prisoner lodged with me; I am a laundress—I was washing the whole of Tuesday, and it was all dry on a table in the kitchen at 10.15, and the prisoner was in by 10.30—he slept in the kitchen—next morning I missed a silver brooch, a coral necklace, a bracelet, a dust •coat, a silver coin, a jacket, two dresses, a night-dress, two chemises, a hat, a handkerchief, and a pair of boots—I did not see the prisoner; I went to a public-house, but could not find him—he had said that he was going to the War Office to take his money—he owed me money for food and lodging—he did not come back—about a year afterwards he came, and they fetched me; I said, "Davis, what have you done? you robbed me and took the bed from my invalid husband"—he said, "I have come to make you a little compensation"—I took a constable in with me.
CHARLES RAWLINSQN (302 R). I was called to 15, The Grove; Mrs. Vasey had a list in her hand, and read it to the prisoner—he said, "Yes, that is right"; directly afterwards he said, "No, I do not say that is right, I had been boozed over-night; and I got up early in the morning, and went out to get a drink"—he gave his address, 10, James Street, Woolwich; I went there and it was false.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You did not admit owing for the food and lodging, and deny taking the things.
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said that he owned to owing the prosecutor money for board and lodging; but that the charge of robbery was false, being made through spite.
L. VASEY (Re-examined). I think he had had a glass when he came back—he said, "Oh, never mind; a little compensation will settle that"—I have no grudge against him; I am sorry to see him standing there.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. F. FULTON and MR. STEPHENSON Prosecuted, MR. HUTTON Defended.
Cross-examined. My wife was there and Mrs. Goodwin—my son was scalded—my friends knew about the inquest, so that they could go if they chose.
Cross-examined. The prisoner offered me 1s., and I refused to take it; I said it seemed very hard for me take money on my own child's death—I did take it, and signed for it in a room off the inquest room—Mrs. Goodwin signed too.
Re-examined. I was a witness—I did not sign my name for two shillings, nor my husband's name.
ELIZABETH GOODWIN . I am the wife of Robert Goodwin, of 10, Salisbury Place, Bermondsey—I was present at this inquest, and received one shilling—this is my signature—I did not sign Samuel Bateman's name—there was no figure there when I signed.
Cross-examined. I was present when Mrs. Bateman signed, and signed immediately after her, and we went out together, leaving the prisoner there.
ARTHUR CUTHBERT LANGHAM . I am Deputy-Coroner for Southwark—certain payments are made for expenses at inquests—this is one of the forms which has to be filled up (produced)—a maximum scale was drawn up by the London County Council for the guidance of Coroners—the prisoner was Coroner's officer to my father, the Coroner—if he wanted money before an inquest he would ask for it, but very frequently he did not ask for it till the conclusion of the inquest—it was his duty to obtain the signatures of the persons he paid—this should be the signature of the actual recipient, and be the receipt—I total the amount, and see it is not in excess of the scale—I attended an inquest on the body of Joseph Bateman on 24th December—the amount and names were on this document when I affixed my signature—I believed that Samuel Bateman was entitled to receive 2s., and paid that to the prisoner with other money—I think there were three or four inquests that day—this list of witnesses is in the prisoner's writing—it was part of the prisoner's duty to submit to me, in writing, a list of witnesses attending the inquest—this is all in his
writing; and it appears that Samuel Bateman's father, 50, Bermondsey Walk, was one of the witnesses.
Cross-examined. I carefully examine the paper before I pay the money, and see that it is correct—the witnesses receive 1s. an hour and 1s. afterwards—I cannot say how long the inquest lasted—this only represents the witnesses who receive payment—the house surgeon would not receive payment in some cases—if 2s. was put down I should allow it if they came from a distance—there has been some disappointment about the new rules, about reducing the officers' fees—the prisoner got 5s. in the first case for summoning the jury and witnesses, and his mileage, and 3s. 6d. afterwards—if a witness refused to take the money the prisoner would be entitled to keep it.
Re-examined. If he gave 1s. he would not be entitled to take 2s.; it was his duty to see that the amount was put down before the witnesses signed; if they are unable to sign they put a mark and he writes their names—he had not authority to sign for 2s. for Samuel Bateman—if a person is paid money which the scale does not authorise, the Coroner would have to pay it out of his own pocket—it is only as a matter of charity that I have put my hand into my own pocket to provide money not included in the scale.
THOMAS MILLS . I am a bathman at Guy's Hospital—6s. is paid for cleaning a body, but if the person dies in the hospital nothing is allowed me for removing the body—this "T. Mills "is not my signature—I did not remove the body of David Carey, for receive 5s. for it, but if the body was brought in dead I should receive it.
Cross-examined. I cannot remember whether I received that sum or not—I am very busy on operating days, Tuesdays and Fridays, and just run out during the inquest to receive my money—the Coroner's officer has signed for me—I have been there eight years.
Re-examined. Inquests occur at Guy's Hospital every week—assuming that a man dies in the hospital, there is no case in which I receive money for removing the body or cleaning it—I would not sign for money which I did not receive.
SAMUEL FREDERICK LANGHAM . I am Coroner for Southwark—the prisoner, is my officer—this document is his writing. (This was addressed to the witness, and stated that on Tuesday, at two p.m., David Carey had been admitted to the hospital, and died on the 28th, and had been a platelayer on the Brighton Railway, and was knocked down by a truck, and died from a double amputation.)—this is the voucher for the expenses of the inquest—as the man died in the hospital no such sums as two of 5s. and one of 1s. 6d. purporting to be received by T. Mills would be payable—this is my casting; I have to rely on the fidelity of the Coroner's officer, and I paid him £1 6s.—there was another inquest the same day on the body of a man named Spires; this is my casting too, and this is the letter announcing the matter (produced), and this the official record of the expenses—my son signed for three sums of 6s. and one of 2s. 6d.; no such sums would be payable, as the man died in the hospital—I paid the prisoner £3 9s. on the faith of Bateman's signature.
Cross-examined. I should not knowingly allow the paying of police-sergeants; that is against the rules—the prisoner worked well as a clerk; he has had very heavy cases to get up, and has done them well—I have given him large sums to take to my bank, and have found no irregularity
—there had been very strong complaints about the fees being reduced; the fee for summoning jurors is disallowed, and we used to have 1s. allowed for each juror—he might bring me the document and receive the £3 9s., and then go and pay the witnesses; he signs, and I give him the total—I should assume that he had already paid the witnesses—we have two or three cases going on at the same time—I have no knowledge of his having got the receipts first, and paid the people afterwards—I do not think he has ever come to me with the paper and the signatures already there, and I paid him the money, and he then went and paid the witnesses—if he hired two or three men, the bathman and the washer, he might pay them first and come to me for the money—I know no case where he has filled up a person's name who was not able to receive the money himself—he has been with me three years—I appointed him on the death of his father—he has always been a young man of excellent character; I have not the slightest complaint to make—I was quite surprised at the suggestion of fraud.
Re-examined. I was communicated with by the County Council, and attended, which first brought the matter to my notice—if the prisoner paid a policeman, he ought not to write his name without his authority.
CHARLES DANIEL BALCHIN . I am a bathman at Guy's Hospital—if a person dies in the hospital the nurses clean the body; if he dies outside we clean it and remove it—if he is brought in dead we are not paid for removal—I signed this, "Chas. Balchin,"but I did not make the brackets—if Joseph W. Spires had died in the hospital I should not have cleaned the body prior to the inquest, nor should I have received 5s. for removing the body—I received 2s. 6d. for the hire of a room for two hours, but neither of these sums of 5s.
Cross-examined. I cannot remember whether he died in the hospital or not; the only thing I go by is the book.
By the COURT. I have never received 5s. when the person has died in the hospital—if a person is brought to the hospital and examined and life is found to be extinct, we should be entitled to a fee for washing him, but nothing for removal.
Re-examined. When I signed my name there was nothing but 2s. 6d.—I know nothing about the bracket with the two sums of 5s.
JAMES O'DEE (Police Inspector M). I took the prisoner in the Nag's Head on 24th March, and told him I had a warrant for his arrest, and he must come to the station with me—he said, "Very well, I have a perfect answer to the charge"—I found 6s. on him.
Cross-examined. I have known him all his life—I knew his father, who was a police inspector.
CLANGHAM (Re-examined by the COURT). In such a case as the man being taken ill as Spires was and brought to the hospital by a policeman, I think it has been customary to pay a fee for removal—the prisoner would not be entitled to sign the bathman's name if the money was given to a policeman or to an omnibus conductor.
The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury.— . Six Months' Hard Labour.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, MAY 23RD, 1892.