CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
ELEVENTH SESSION, HELD SEPTEMBER 11TH, 1893.
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.
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, September 11th, 1893, and following days.
BEFORE the HON. MR. JUSTICE LAWRANCE, one of the Justices of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice; Sir JOHN WHITTAKER ELLIS, Bart, (pro tem., for the LORD MAYOR), GEORGE FAUDEL PHILLIPS, Esq., Lieut.-Col. HORATIO DAVID DAVIES , Esq., JOHN VOCE MOORE, Esq., FRANK GREEN , Esq., JOSEPH COCKFIELD DIMSDALE, Esq., MARCUS SAMUEL , Esq., WALTER VAUGHAN MORGAN , Esq., and WILLIAM PURDIE TRELOAR, Esq., Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON, Knt., Q. C., Common Serjeant of the said City; and ROBERT MALCOLM KERR , Esq., LL. D., Judge of the Sheriffs' Court; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
Sir JOSEPH RENALS, Knt., Alderman.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
KNILL, MAYOR. ELEVENTH 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, September 11th, 1893.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. MORGAN Prosecuted.
ADA JANE WILSON . I live at 45, Upper Park Road, Hampstead, with my mother—on 2nd August, about seven a. m., I came downstairs and saw the back kitchen window was burst open, and the curtains, mincing machine, a few other things, and a great deal of food were gone—the total value of things taken was about 12s.; they belonged to my mother—I saw that the window was fastened the night before; all the premises were fastened and made secure.
ERNEST BAKER (667 S). About half-past five a. m., on 2nd August, I was on duty in Upper Park Road, Hampstead—I saw the prisoner carrying two bundles in the front garden of the Upper Park Road Studio, which adjoins 45, Upper Park Road—when he saw me he dropped the bundles and ran to the rear of the studio, and got over the fence into the rear of a nursery—I ran along the Upper Park Road and met him running towards Upper Park Road, at the end of which I stopped him and said he would have to come back with me to see what he had been in the garden for—he said he knew nothing about it; he was going to see about some work—he took this table knife from his pocket and threw it behind him—I took him back to 45, Upper Park Road, and got Constable Hall to hold him while I got the parcels from the garden—they contained a pair of curtains, a mincing machine, a quantity of broken food, a cucumber and a looking glass—the prisoner said he was not the man who stole the goods.
INSPECTOR MORAN. On the morning of 2nd August I received information of this occurrence, and went to 45, Upper Park Road, Hampstead—I found the back kitchen windows had been forced open; they open out
wards—the bottom part was in a rotten state—I compared this screwdriver which I saw found on the prisoner with the marks on the window, and they corresponded—the window could hardly have been opened with the knife—I did not find that any attempt had been made to get into the other part of the house.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate:—"I am quite innocent." The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he had slept on Hampstead Heath, woke at four in the morning, and ran to warm himself when the constable seized him.
Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
707. ROBERT CHARLES CURZON (60) , to stealing a bag and its contents, the goods of Keith David Erskine; also to a conviction of felony in July, 1884, in the name of Alfred Glover. There was another indictment against the prisoner for stealing a dressing-bag.— Three Years' Penal Servitude. The GRAND JURY and the COURT commended the conduct of Sergeant Thompson in the case. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
PLEADED GUILTY to attempting to commit suicide.
CHAPMAN— Three Months' Hard Labour.
SHARPE— Two Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
709. GEORGE BLAKE SMITH (35) , to committing an act of gross indecency with Thomas Blake, and indecently assaulting the same person. — Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
711. GEORGE RICHARD KEMP (32) , to stealing a post letter containing postal orders of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
715. CHARLES WEISSELL (24) , to stealing a post letter containing a cheque for £57 10s., the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office: also to forging and uttering the endorsement on the cheque.— [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] Judgment Respited. And
716. ARTHUR EDWARD CAMPBELL (17) , to stealing from a Post Office letter-box post letters, the property of the Postmaster-General. A gentleman promised to take the prisoner into his service, and keep a strict watch over him.—Discharged on recognizances. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
FOURTH COURT.—Monday, September 11th, 1893.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted and MR. PURCELL Defended.
GEORGE CONNOR . I am a clerk in the Post Office—on August 2nd I was instructing the postmaster at. a new office in Brushfield Street, Whitechapel, and about seven o'clock the prisoner came in for a penny stamp, and gave me a florin—I doubted it, and put it in the tester—the milling. was faulty—I asked him his name—he said, "Abraham Cohen"—I asked where he got it—he said his father had sent him with it—I asked why he came to Brushfield Street office, when he had post offices nearer to him—he said that his father had sent him to Aldermanbury—he gave his address 46, Pelham Street—I went there with him—he disappeared, and came downstairs with his father, to whom he said, "You sent me to Brick Lane, did you not, father?"—he said, "Yes"—I placed the matter; in the hands of the police, and took the coin there—this is it—I identified the prisoner on the 8th at Commercial Street Station.
Cross-examined. He said his father, a tailor, had sent him to take some work home.
SAMPSON KISSLEHOFF . I am a tobacconist, of 132, Brick Lane, Whitechapel—on August 6th,. between eleven and twelve a. m., I served the prisoner with some cigarettes, price 31/2 d.—he gave me a florin—I gave it in change to another customer, who was in the shop, Rosenwaite—he did not want to take it, but I tried it, and then put it in the till, where there was no other florin—he came back in about an hour, and showed me two halves of a coin—I gave him good coin for them—I had noticed black on the head of the coin I received from the prisoner—I kept this piece (produced) and the children had the other—on August 7th a little boy came to ray shop and gave me a bad florin—I sent him for his father, and followed him to Pelham Street, where he opened the door—I took hold of him, and the prisoner came out and said, "What do you want with this boy?"—I said, "I will take you too; you were in my place yesterday"—he said, "I don't know you," and ran away—I got a constable and went back, and he took the prisoner—when we got back to 46, Pelham Street, he said again, "I don't know you."
Cross-examined. I said before the Magistrate "I am sure the prisoner is the boy; he was dressed when arrested the same as when I saw him on the Sunday morning"—I cannot fix the time more closely than between eleven and twelve.
AARON FROSTICK . I live at 43, Weaver Street, Bethnal Green—on August 6th, about ten minutes to twelve, I went to Mr. Kisslehoff's shop and gave him a half-crown—he gave me a florin and some coppers—I put it in my pocket, went and got a glass of beer, and gave the florin; it was refused and broken—I went back and showed it to Mr. Kisslehoff, who gave me another for it.
ELI CODDEN (Police Sergeant H). On August 7th I went with Constable Pearce to 46, Pelham Street, and saw the prisoner—I said, "I shall arrest you for uttering counterfeit coin in Brushfield Street on the 2nd instant, and uttering another at 132, Brick Lane on the 6th—he said, "Have you got a warrant?"—I said, "No"—he said, "You cannot arrest me, without one"—I took him to Commercial Street—he was identified next morning and charged—he made no reply—Kisslehoff pointed him out to me at the boy's home.
Witnesses for the Defence.
BARNABAS HARRIS (Interpreted). I am a tailor, of 105, Rothschild Buildings—I cannot read or write, and I cannot remember the date, but I removed some furniture for the prisoner's father on a Sunday morning; at 5. 30—the job was finished at 10. 30, and the prisoner was with us in the stable—he stopped till 11. 30—he and I cleaned the horse, and Moses Cohen, the prisoner's brother, cleaned the van—the-prisoner was never out of my sight from 10. 80 to 11. 30—I do not remember how many Sundays this was before we went to Worship Street—I did the work for Mr. Harris and Mr. Morris—we took the goods to Gunn Street—Regan and Morris Cohen were there.
Cross-examined. We took the goods from Spital Street, not very far from where Mr. Cohen lives—I know the time we finished, because when we got into the stable the prisoner's brother took out his watch and said, "Barney, it is half-past ten o'clock"—I have no other reason for fixing the time—he told me the time, because the moving job took a long time—when I left the stable I looked at the church clock, and it was 11. 40; the prisoner and his brother were there then—I did not go out before asking the time—I am not in the habit of doing moving jobs, but the prisoner's father asked me to do it.
HERMAN COHEN . I am the prisoner's father—he is sixteen years old, and lives at home with me—on August 2nd I sent him to buy a postage stamp, and gave him a florin—the latter was on my shelf when the gentleman from the post office came to my house, and I showed it to him—the prisoner has never worn a black coat in his life—he had no coat on when he was taken from my house—afterwards the detectives came and took away a coat of his brother's, which he has on now.
Cross-examined. I sent him for a stamp and also with a message—he asked me where he should get the stamp—I said, "If you like you can bring it from Brick Lane"—he said, "I shall pass Kisslehoff's"—when Mr. Connor came I told him I sent him to Brick Lane.
JOHN REGAN . I live at 29, Vineyard Street, Brick Lane, and am caretaker at the prisoner's father's stable—I do not remember the moving job, but I saw the cart go out and come in on Sunday, June 6th—I think that was a week before I gave evidence at the Police-court—I saw the boy go to the stable—two more boys came home with him about 10. 10—I do not know their names; Barnabas Harris was one of them—I had to do the hog mane till 12. 20, and the prisoner was at the stable the whole time—I was not off the premises.
Cross-examined. I was looking after a horse and sweeping the yard and stable, and there is hardly a soul goes in and out but what I observe—I only knew the boys by sight—my wife and I live at the stable—I first saw the prisoner that Sunday morning at 10. 30—I was there the whole time; I did not go out at all—I told my mistress I was going, and said, "What is the time?" she said, "Twenty minutes to twelve," and I. went out and shut the gates and put the bar up—it is 100 or 150 yards
from the stable to Brick Lane—I could do it in three or four minutes—the prisoner has been in the habit of coming to the stable every day—I did not see him there on the Monday.
Re-examined. Brick Lane is a long street.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted,
NAPTHALI BENDON . I am a tobacconist, of 45, Middlesex Street—on August 8th I served the prisoner with a pennyworth of cigarettes, and he tendered me this florin (Produced)—I gave him the change and he left—I tested the florin, found it was bad, and gave it to my wife with certain instructions—I did not put it with other money—next moraine the prisoner came again for a pennyworth of cigarettes—I recognised him when he came in; he gave me another florin—I tested it before his face, and told him it was bad—he wished to pay the penny—I said, "No," and told my wife to fetch the coin of the previous evening, and said to the prisoner, "You came in yesterday and gave me a two-shilling piece, and it was bad"—he made no answer—I sent for a constable, and handed the coins to him—he said on Wednesday, the 9th, that he was not there on the 8th—I said that I had a very good recollection of faces, and charged him.
FRANK HICKS (City Policeman). I was called, and Mr. Bendon said, "This lad has just tendered this two-shilling piece in payment for a pennyworth of cigarettes, and last night he tendered a bad two-shilling piece, and I gave him 1s. 11d. change. I afterwards found it was bad, and gave it to my wife to keep it safe"—he made no reply—I found 33/4d. on him, and a packet of cigarettes.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not hear you say that you had not been in the shop before—I asked you if you had anything to say, and you said, "No."
Prisoner's defence. I am not guilty of being there on the first night. I got the second coin from an omnibus conductor.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
CHARLES KEMP WITHERS . My father keeps the Baker and Basket Public-house, and I assist him—on August 28th, about. 12. 30, the prisoners came in, talking as if they were acquainted—Phillimore asked for two glasses of ale, and gave me this shilling—I gave him the change, and put the coin on a plate—there were other shillings there—my father took it.
JOSEPH DEBONAIR WITHERS . I assist my father in this public-house—on August 28th I was in the bar and saw the two prisoners—Mainwaring asked for two of bread and cheese and tendered a shilling—I put it in the till, bent it, and handed it to my father—I said nothing to Mainwaring.
JOSEPH DEBONAIR WITHERS . I am the landlord of this public-house—my son drew my attention to this shilling; he had tested it—I took another bad shilling from the rack, and said to my son, "Have you taken a bad shilling?"—he said that he had taken a bad shilling from Phillimore—I went round and stopped them going out—I communicated with the police—a policeman came, and they were charged—they said that they were shoeblacks, and had taken it.
ALEXANDER CHALK . I was called—the prisoners said they did not know it was bad; they were shoeblacks, and were changing money every day—they were charged at the station, and said they did not know it was bad.
The prisoners in their defences stated that they received the money as shoeblacks.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, September 12th, 1893.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. H. C. RICHARDS Prosecuted and MR. HORACE AVORY Defended.
JOSEPH GEORGE STEVENS . I am a clerk in the office of the Secretary of the General Post Office—on 23rd August I was instructed to make inquiries as to the loss of letters in the South London district, and in consequence I made up a test letter—I enclosed in the letter these two postal orders, one for 2s. 6d. and one for 7s. 6d., and addressed the letter to Mr. E. Anderson, care of Mr. Gordon, Robertson Street West, S. W.—I gave instructions to Mr. Lowther, the overseer—about a quarter to eight that evening the female prisoner was brought to me by Constable Towers—I told her who I was, and asked her where she got the orders from—she said she had found them in a letter in Heath Road—(Towers had previously given me the letter and orders)—I asked her who opened the letter—she said she opened it, and was tempted to go to the office and cash the orders—I asked her who signed the orders—she said, "I did not write anything, I Jim no scholar"—I told her the orders were enclosed in a letter by me, in a letter which was handed to her husband for delivery, and it was known that he had not delivered it—she said the letter fell out of her husband's pocket, and he did not know it, and she then opened the letter and got the orders—I subsequently showed her some other orders at the Post Office—about nine o'clock I met the male prisoner in Lambeth Road, and he went back with me to the sorting office—his wife was not present—when we arrived at the office I described the letter to him, and told him it was handed to him for the four o'clock delivery that afternoon, and I asked what he knew about it—he said he did not remember them, meaning the orders, and that he never saw the letter—I asked what he did with any returned letters, or letters not delivered when he completed his delivery—he said he re-posted two and took nothing home—I then told him that his wife had been stopped earlier in the evening with the letter containing the postal orders he denied it altogether, and said he knew nothing about the orders or the letter, and that his wife knew
nothing about it—he did not appear to realise the fact that we had stopped her—I showed him the letter and the orders—he said, "I know nothing about the orders; I thought she had been connected with some bad clique for some time"—on the following morning I showed his wife these seven postal orders—they are all in a similar andwriting—three of the letters should not have been delivered by Wood, and should not have been taken home by him; two of the letters would be for his delivery.
Cross-examined. The male prisoner has been about twenty-five years in the service of the Post Office—he has been for some time entitled to a pension—he wears the good conduct stripes—the South Lambeth is a fairly large district—he commenced his round that afternoon at Wandsworth Road Station, about five minutes' walk from the sorting office; it may be ten or twelve minutes—Robertson Street would be the last place on his delivery—there are regulations forbidding postmen to omit the delivery of letters—at the time the male prisoner was taken into custody he had not seen his wife, and did not know she had been detained—he did not apparently credit that statement until his son told him of it—he lived in Nursery Street, close to Robertson Street.
Re-examined. I had him under observation that evening during the delivery of his letters, from 4. 30—he was watched by myself and others—he turned to go home when within two or three yards from Robertson Street.; I did not see him go into Robertson Street.
JAMES WILKINSON LOWTHER . I am overseer at the South Lambeth Sorting Office—the male prisoner has been employed there for some years—on 23rd August my attention was called to the mail bag which had arrived from the S. W. Office—I saw in it a letter addressed to Mr. Anderson; it was put in the prisoner's place for delivery—it should have been delivered at 6. 30.
MATTHEW TOWERS . I am a constable in the Post Office—about 7. 30 p. m. on 23rd August I saw Lucy Wood in Queen's Road, Battersea—she entered the Hartington Terrace Post Office, and I saw her take a test letter from her pocket, and from that the postal orders, which she presented for payment—they were already signed; she did not sign them in the office—the clerk paid the amount, 7s. 6d. and 2s. 6d., but Lucy Wood looked round and did not pick up the money—I advanced to her and said, "I identify these orders as having been stolen; how do you account for the possession of them?"—she replied, "I found the letter in the Heath Road"—I took her back to Mr. Stevens, and I was present at the conversation he had with her—I heard his evidence and confirm it—later on I saw Edward Wood with Mr. Stevens at the South Lambeth Post Office; he was not in custody then—he was very much astonished to know that his wife was detained—he said, "I know nothing about it, neither does my wife"—he was then brought into his wife's presence—when the charge was read over at the Police-station he said, "I never stole them; she stole he letter and cashed the orders"—he said about the letters for Robertson Street, "I was too lazy; I had two letters for Robertson Street, and I was too lazy to deliver them"—I had had him under observation in the earlier part of the afternoon, but not at the latter part of his walk—I took up a position to see if the prisoner went to the house to which the letter was addressed; he did not go there—I was there when Mr. Stevens
showed the female prisoner the seven orders; she said, "I cashed them" they all appear to be signed in the same writing; there is no concealment about them—different names were used for the payees—I think in every case the orders were forwarded through the Post Office blank; the test ones were sent blank.
Cross-examined. I kept observation on the prisoner till he had completed nearly two-thirds of his walk—I knew he lived at 22, Nursery Street—on the way to the station he said to me that his wife had mixed up with a bad clique, or that he thought she had—afterwards, on the way to ow Street in the cab, he said, "I had two letters for Robertson Street; I was too lazy to deliver them"—I made no note of that—he did not say he. was too tired to deliver them—I said before the Magistrate that he said, "I had two letters for Robertson Street, but I was too lazy to deliver them, too tired, so I took them home"—he said, in reply to the charge, "I know nothing about it; she must have done both, stolen the letter and cashed the orders"—I made a note of it—I am sure he did not say "she must have done both."
The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate:—Edward Wood says:"I have teen in the service ever since I was a boy, and have never stolen anything from the Post Office; such a thing never entered my head." Lucy Wood says:—"I picked the letter up and was tempted to change the orders. My husband knows nothing about it. He is quite innocent."
JAMES LOWTHER (Re-examined by Mr. AVORY). I believe the prisoners are husband and wife; they live together and have a family of children at Nursery Street—so far as I know he was a man of excellent character up to this time—he has been entitled to his pension for some little time past.
EDWARD WOOD, NOT GUILTY .
LUCY WOOD, GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. H. C. RICHARDS Prosecuted.
ELIZABETH SARAH SEAL . I am sub-postmistress of New Road Post Office, Gravesend—on the night of 31st May, or morning of 1st June, a number of postal orders, of which these are two, were stolen from my office—I received the orders from Somerset House on 27th May; this is the receipt for them—when I received them the issuing office stamp and the "H. Smith" was not on them—those should be put on when they were sold; they would not be cashed without them—this "H. Smith" is not in my writing; there is no person of that name in my office—I should sign my name Seal, and Smith has nothing to do with it—neither of these two orders was issued by me or anyone in my office on 31st May or 1st June—the place was broken open and about 400 orders and over £5 in stumps were stolen from my office—the stamps were of various denominations, from 1s. to 1/2d.—my husband stamped the date 1st June on some of the orders on the night of 31st May ready for next day; that is the date that appears on the orders.
Cross-examined. I could not say if stamps of each denomination between 1s. to 1/2d. were stolen.
the sub-postmistress—on the night of May 31st I locked up about £120 worth of blank postal orders, and in another drawer I locked up the postage stamps—in the morning I found that the drawers had been forced open—I changed the date stamp on the night of May 31st—there were stamps of almost every denomination, from 1/2d. to 1s.
CHARLES SPENCER . I am landlord of the Coach and Horses Public-house, Charing Cross Road—I received from the police a notice like this referring to the stolen postal orders—on the night of 25th July, about half-past ten, my assistant, George Shaw, brought me two postal orders—I did not see the prisoner hand them to Shaw, but I was only about two yards off—I asked Shaw what he wanted; he said a gentleman had asked him to cash these—the prisoner was near enough to hear what we said—I referred to the police list and found the numbers of the orders on it—I then went to the prisoner and told him these orders were the proceeds of a burglary at Gravesend, and I had found the numbers in the stolen list I had got, and that I should have to detain him till a constable came—he said they were some he had just cashed for a gentleman in Piccadilly—he said, "Will you give them to me back, and you shall not be the loser?" or words to that effect—I sent for a constable, and fastened the door—before the constable came the prisoner wanted me to allow him to go to the urinal—I said he could not go till the constable had come—I handed him over to the constable—he wanted the orders back, and said it was a sort of recompense, or something of that sort, if I would let him have the orders back.
Cross-examined. From where you stood in the bar you could have seen me comparing the orders with the list if you stooped a little under the counter screen—I was comparing the orders and the list for five minutes, perhaps—I understood that you would recompense me if I gave you the orders back—I did not know how you were going to recompense me.
FREDERICK HOLDEN (45 C). On the night of 25th July I was called into the Coach and Horses, Charing Cross Road, and Mr. Spencer showed me two postal orders, and the police list, and I compared them in the prisoner's presence—I said, "How did you come by these orders?"—he said, "I cashed them for a gentleman in Piccadilly"—I said, "When?"—he said, "About nine o'clock to-night"—I said, "No doubt the orders have been stolen; you will have to go with me to the station"—he asked me to let him go to the urinal when outside—I refused to let him—I took him to the station, and he was charged with stealing and receiving postal orders and stamps—he said, "I know nothing about the orders; I changed them for a gentleman in Piccadilly. I gave him 10s. for the two orders"—that is their value—I searched the prisoner, and found on him £2 10s. in gold, 19s. silver, 3d. bronze, and the following stamps: four 1s., three 10d., one 9d., three 6d., two 4d., two 2d., four 21/2d., one 11/2d., thirty-four 1d., thirty-four 1/2d.—the money was in his overcoat pocket, and the stamps in a brown leather purse—nothing else was in the purse—after he was charged he refused his name and address—he has not given any address to my knowledge; he has given the name of Thomas Daniels.
Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I do not know anything
about the postal orders being stolen, or the robbery having been committed. The postal orders which I tried to change I had changed for a gentleman in Piccadilly, giving him the amounts of the orders."
The prisoner called
MARTHA HAYWARD . I am a widow, living at 49, Grove Road, Mile End—I was living with you as your wife—before Whitsuntide we went to Mrs. Townley's—on the night of 31st May I was at 2, Letham Street, Stainsbury Road, Poplar—I and you went to bed about half-past eleven, and we both got up next morning about ten.
Cross-examined. Mrs. Hayward is my real name—I could not say what day of the week the 31st May was—I know I went to 2, Letham Street on Saturday, and remained there for three weeks, and left on Monday morning—I cannot remember what date that was; it was in June—I always go to bed between eleven and half-past—I have no reason for fixing the time on 31st May as different to any other night—ten o'clock is my ordinary time for getting up—I have lived with the prisoner since April, when I met him accidentally—after leaving Letham Street we went to Grove Road, Bow—I lived with the prisoner by the name of Hayward in Grove Road—he was travelling, I suppose—he started about half-past ten in the morning, and came back about nine at night—I don't know who he was travelling for—I have no knowledge how he was obtaining his living—I saw his arrest in the papers in the name of Daniels—he told me that was his name—I told him to take my name—he told me he travelled with fancy goods, and that he was an agent for the Free Insurance Trust—I never saw any postal orders—I never saw him write.
The prisoner in his defence stated that on the night the robbery was committed he was at Gravesend, and could not have been a party to it; the orders were given to him by a gentleman, that he did not know they were forged, or he should not have waited in the shop while the witness was comparing them with the bill.
GUILTY.— Judgment Respited.
722. JAMES ROBINS, Unlawfully and fraudulently obtaining from John Carey and another £39 2s., with intent to defraud. Second Count, obtaining credit and incurring a debt and liability, by means of fraud.
JOHN CAREY . I am a member of the firm of Carey and Lewis, auctioneers, 18 and 19, Ironmonger Lane—my partner knew the prisoner before October last year—I did not—I know my partner had some conversation with him before October about a Miss Horsman—on 11th October, 1892, the prisoner called at the office and saw me—he said that his aunt, Miss Emma Horsman, of Cedars Road, Clapham, had recently died, and that he with his sister, Mrs. Abbott, of Oxford, were the executors, and that he was also a legatee, that as executors they had proved the will, and he had in his possession the probate—he said that the property consisted of various stocks and shares in various undertakings, and a house of furniture; and that he intended to sell the same by auction and to instruct us, and that in the meantime he would be glad if we would advance him money from time to time as he wanted it, and that we were to deduct the same from the proceeds of the sale there was stock in the Gas Light and Coke Company, and shares in the Lambeth
and Vauxhall Water Works Company, and in the Crystal Palace District Gas Company—he said the solicitor acting in the estate was Mr. Chester, of Newington Butts—I advanced him two sums, one of £1 and 13s. on that day, he came in twice—between that date and December we lent him various other sums amounting in all to £11 10s.—during that time we received a number of letters from him referring to this business; these are they—this letter refers to some suggestion that we should see Mr. Chester, the solicitor, but the prisoner put us off from seeing him—this letter of 6th October asks us to fix the date of the sale of this property—he fixed the date of the sale later, and we ultimately prepared a printed bill of the auction for December 15th, and advertised it in all the daily papers, and posted up notices at railway stations and everywhere—he gave me these particulars of the stocks and shares he was to sell as executor; it was headed, "By the order of the executors of Miss Horsman, deceased"—on 12th December I received this letter from him requesting us to postpone the sale, and stating, "Since I last saw you I have done everything in my power to get certificates to draw particulars, and have failed to persuade Mrs. Abbott to withdraw her opposition"—in consequence we postponed the sale—I next received this letter of 14th December (Stating that the only person standing in the way was Mrs. Abbott; and that he wanted afresh advance next day and that they could draw on him at a month if they liked for cash advanced and expenses)—we drew a bill at a month on him for the advance, and £20 which we agreed on for expenses; the amount of the bill was £32 altogether—the prisoner accepted it—after that we received further letters from him, and made other advances in the same way, up to 26th May, 1893, amounting to £28 5s. more, which made the total advanced then, in cash, £39 15s.—the bill had become due; it was never presented, as it was understood we were only to have it instead of an I. O. U. acknowledging the debt; we were to have the money out of the proceeds of the sale—we made all our advances on the faith of what the prisoner told us about this estate; I believed absolutely what he said, otherwise I should not have advanced him a penny—further dates were fixed for the sale—the prisoner suggested that the property should be included in each of our regular monthly auction sales, and on each occasion he gave some reason for postponing it—once he said he had broken his leg, which was untrue—the last advance we made him was 15s., on 26th May—he never came near us after that day—after the sale was postponed he said there had been some disagreement with Mr. Chester; they had changed their solicitor from him to Mr. Edlin, of Chancery Lane; I could not find Mr. Edlin in Chancery Lane, nor his name in the "Law List"—on May 30th, I received this letter from the prisoner, in which he says:—"I am writing to my solicitors to have things brought to an end"—On June 21st, I went to try and find him at his address, Gelately-road, Nunhead; he was not at home; he was living there—I put the matter in the hands of my solicitors—the prisoner had represented to us that he was seriously ill and could not come to see us—our solicitors gave us some information about the will—I made inquiries to see if I could find any evidence of Miss Emma Horsman having lived at Cedars Road—I could find no evidence of her having lived or died there—the prisoner said the will had been proved in June, 1892—I suggested
to him that I would go and see both Mr. Chester and Mr. Edlin, but he made some excuses; no good would come of seeing them, and that he had the matter absolutely in his hands, and would deal with it.
Cross-examined. This matter was brought against you at the Mansion House on two occasions—I was cross-examined as to whether I paid you for attending at the auction mart—I said, "Yes," which was true—on the second occasion I said "No," but a very small sum was given to you—there was no agreed charge, you had a few shillings—you have attended sales for me—we have to get people to bid up to a reserve price—we do not pay people to do it—you did not propose that we should draw on you because we were short of cash; my pass-book would prove otherwise—the Lord Mayor dismissed the case against you because it was irregularly put, and then we summoned you—when we did not pay you by cheque we took your I. O. U., but we generally paid you by cheque—we often wrote to you stating that if the matter was not cleared up we should have to take proceedings—we still believed in you then.
Re-examined. We received this letter of 1st December, 1892—we wrote this of 10th April—in answer to that we got a further request for money, and we sent him 30s., which we said must be our last advance; that he owed us £60, and that failing other payment he must pay us out of the insurance money—he said his daughter had died, and he had got £60 insurance money—I believe the daughter did not die—on 10th May, 1893, we wrote this letter expressing annoyance at a further request for money, and asking what had become of money required for a specific purpose—that referred to his saying he was going to Oxford to see his sister to get the matter absolutely settled up—I did not know until our solicitors informed us that his statements about the probate of the will were false—they wrote that to us on 23rd June, and next morning we applied for a warrant—when the case was heard at the Mansion House the bill of exchange was proved in cross-examination, and the Lord Mayor then, without hearing me, dismissed the summons, saying that the matter had been treated as a debt by me, and that no jury would convict—on a subsequent occasion, when the case was heard again, it was explained that the case had been dismissed under the supposition that the bill of exchange had been taken by us after we had discovered the falsehood of the statements, but it was not so, and when the matter was properly explained the prisoner was committed for trial.
EDWARD CHESTER . I am a solicitor, of 86, Newington Butts, and have been practising there for a number of years—there is no other solicitor of my name in Newington Butts—I have not been solicitor to any estate of Miss Emma Horsman, of Cedars Road, within the last twenty years—I have no partner now—I have searched my books for the last twenty years—as far as I recollect I never heard her name till I was summoned in this case—I do not know the prisoner; I never acted, as far as I know, as solicitor for an estate of which he was executor.
ARTHUR WILLIAM OSMOND . I am a clerk to Mr. Lunnett, the solicitor conducting the prosecution, and solicitor to Carey and Lewis—this matter was first placed in my hands on 21st or 22nd June—I immediately made a search at the Principal Probate Registry at Somerset House, and found that no will of Miss Emma Horsman had been proved—if it had been proved it could be ascertained at Somerset House.
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he had many times asked the prosecutors to send him in his account, and if he had received it he would have repaid them, as he had no intention to defraud, but that they had never rendered him the account.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his age. — Six Weeks' Hard Labour.
723. JOHN GRAHAM (20), and EDWARD THOMAS (18), PLEADED GUILTY to breaking and entering the warehouse of the Prince Umbrella Company, limited, with intent to steal. GRAHAM— Nine Months' Hard Labour. THOMAS— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. And
(724) HENRY COLLIS BROWN (38) to embezzling cheques for £5 1s. 8d. and £7 7s. 6d., received by him on account of the Reliance Tank and Galvanizing Works, Limited, his masters; also to wilfully making false entries in a wages' book belonging to his masters.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday, September 12th, 1893.
Before ROBERT MALCOLM KERR, ESQ.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
CHARLES GETTING . On 12th August I was in Grosvenor Road with other officers, and saw the prisoner on the Embankment sitting on the end of a seat, watching, and not with his back to the seat back—a woman came up—he shook hands with her, and they both walked on about 200 yards, apparently in conversation, and I saw the prisoner take something from his pocket and hand it to the woman, who was carrying this parcel of lace in her left hand—she put it under the parcel—Camber and I crossed the road and said, "We are police officers, what have you got in jour left hand?" speaking to the woman—she said "Nothing"—I took this parcel of lace from her left hand, and this door key and these five half-crowns, wrapped in a portion of newspaper—I said these are counterfeit, I shall take you to the station—the prisoner put his back against No. 35 and struggled very violently, but with assistance I took him to the station—when I asked his address he said he lived somewhere in Whitechapel, he could not tell where.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I said that we followed you 200 yards—I was not 15 yards from you when you passed something to the woman—I did not knock you about, I never touched you, I had hold of the woman—I did not see you throw anything away; it was possible for" you to do so.
ALBERT CAMBER (Detective L). I was with Getting on August 12th, and saw the prisoner on the Embankment—the woman joined him—I had seen them together twice before—the prisoner got up and shook hands with her and took something out of his coat pocket and gave to her—Sergeant Getting caught her and I caught the prisoner; he became very violent and tried to throw himself down—a gentleman came up and helped me—the prisoner held the railings with both his hands—I over powered him and took him to the station and found on him 9s. in silver and 7d. in bronze.
Cross-examined. If you threw anything away it is doubtful whether I should have seen it, because I was trying to keep you—I did not use you very roughly—I had seen you the same week.
ARABELLA BRYANT . I am a servant in the employ of Mr. James Fonkland, of Grosvenor Road—on August 26th I had been out of town with the family, and returned and found this packet of florins in the area—I communicated with the police.
GEORGE PUGDEN (21 A R). I received these two packets of coin, wrapped in paper, from the last witness—the paper appears to be part of the Westminster Gazette of August 11th, but a portion of the date is torn off.
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, stated that he shook hands with Hart because he thought he had seen her before, and asked her to have a glass of ale, but denied passing bad money to her, and did not know she had any, and she afterwards told him that the detectives had been to her cell and asked her to say that he gave them to her.
Witness for the Defence.
ALICE HART (in custody). I did not tell you that the detectives had been to my cell and asked me to say that you gave me the coin, nor did I say that I would not tell a lie—you gave me a parcel; I do not know what was in it.
GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of feloniously uttering counterfeit coin on 10th September, 1883, upon which the JURY found him
GUILTY of felony.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted; MR. A. GILL Defended Hart.
CHARLES GETTING (Detective L). When Preston gave the packet to Hart I asked her what she had got—she said, "Nothing"—I took a parcel from her hand containing five counterfeit coins—they were under her fingers wrapped in paper—I took her in custody, and found in her right hand six good shillings and four good sixpences.
Cross-examined. Camber, and Cox, and I were all within a few yards of each other—when we watched Preston I was about thirty yards from him, leaning on a wall, but every few minutes we joined and talked—there was about two minutes' interval between his handing the parcel to her and my taking it—she handed me this parcel, but the parcel of coins was under her shawl.
PRESTON— GUILTY .— Ten Years' Penal Servitude.
HART— NOT GUILTY .
PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
ALICE GILL . My husband is a confectioner, of 18, Nelson Street, Bethnal Green—on 17th October, last year, Taylor took our first floor front room, as a weekly tenant—Holland came there on Good Friday, and stayed there till he was arrested—they both slept in the room—Taylor paid the rent regularly.
GEORGE WHITLOCK (Police Sergeant J). On August 18th, about 9. 30 a, m., I went with Godley and other officers to 18, Nelson Street, and in the first floor back room, which Holland occupied, I found in a cupboard two moulds for making florins of 1874, and some files, pans, and plaster of Paris—I charged Holland.
GEORGE GODLEY (Police Sergeant) I was with Whitlock—I went to the first floor front room and saw Taylor in bed with a woman, who turned out to be his wife—I said, "We are police officers, and are going to arrest you both for making counterfeit coin, and I believe you have implements in the house"—I began to search and his wife said, "I am out all day and cannot help what my husband does"—I found in a cupboard seventeen pieces of metal and a spoon, and said, "How do you account for these?"—neither of them made any reply—I also found in the cupboard a good florin of 1874, and said to Taylor, "Whose is this?"—he said, "Mine"—I said "I. think it is a bad one"—he said, "No, it is not"—I went to the station and had it tested, and went back and said, "I am of opinion that it is good, and that it has been used for making moulds"—he made no reply—I handed all the articles to Mr. Webster—the prisoners were placed in separate cells, and Taylor said to Holland, "Jacko, cheer up, you can get out of it you know"—Holland said, "Can I?"—Taylor said, "Yes."
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . These two single moulds for florins have been made from this good coin—these two pieces of metal are gets. which have been broken off, and one of them fits very well—this file, plaster of Paris, spoon, and pieces of metal are some of the stock-in-trade of coiners.
Taylor's statement before the Magistrate: "I will plead guilty to the metal being found in the room. I know nothing of any other."
Taylor, in his defence, stated that he let the back room to Holland, and that the mould was not found in his possession.
TAYLOR, GUILTY .**— Seven Years' each in Penal Servitude.
MR. A. GILL Prosecuted.
SIDNEY EDWARDS . I keep the Hare Tavern, Cambridge Road—on July 9th, about 12 o'clock, my barman served the prisoner with half an ounce of tobacco, and handed me a florin—I tested it, found it bad, and seat for a constable.
RANDALL HARRISON . I am barman at the Puke of Cambridge, Bow—on August 2nd, about 6 o'clock, I served the prisoner with half an ounce of tobacco—he paid with a florin; it looked rather funny and I tried it and broke it—I have one piece, the other is mislaid I asked him what money
he called it; he said he changed it just round the corner—I followed him and gave him in custody.
LYON ALLAN HARRISON . I manage the Duke of Cambridge—the last witness is my son—on August 2nd I saw the prisoner in the house—my son asked him where he got the bad coin; he could not give a good account of it—he showed me two half-crowns in a little tobacco box—he left the house rather sharply—I am quite sure he is the man.
ROBERT WEBSTER . I am a zinc worker, of 114, Devons Road—on August 2nd, between six and 6. 15, I was in the Duke of Cambridge, and saw the prisoner—he asked for half an ounce of tobacco, and put down a florin—I have no doubt he is the man.
JAMES BACKHOUSE (17 K R). On August 2nd, about 6. 15, Randall Harrison spoke to me, and I found the prisoner detained in the house—I took him in custody—he denied being in the house—I found on him two good half-crowns—this coin was handed to me.
The prisoner produced a written defence, asserting his innocence.
NOT GUILTY .
729. FRANCIS DESMOND, Unlawfully attempting to obtain £200 from the Commissioners of Sewers of the City of London by false pretences. Second Count, for counterfeiting a certain rent book. MR. H. AVORY Prosecuted and MR. GIL. Defended.
EDGAR ALEXANDER BAYLISS . I am solicitor to the Commissioners of Sewers of the City of London—prior to 1872 they were engaged in a scheme for widening Widegate Street, and in September, 1892, notice was served on the prisoner to treat for his property—I produce a duplicate of it—on December 31st I received these particulars of claim (produced) signed by the defendant for £375, in which he states that the six rooms on the upper floor are let to Mrs. Bell at £1 a week—the claim is made up of three items; it went before a committee of the Commissioners, and on April 25th they agreed to pay £200 as a settlement of the claim—an agreement was drawn up and signed by the defendant agreeing to accept the £200—an assignment was prepared, and a warrant for payment was drawn up and signed by the Commissioners, but before it was handed to the prisoner information came to me as to the rent of the rooms let to Mrs. Bell—I made inquiries, and declined to hand over the cheque.
Cross-examined. The scheme was never abandoned—in 1891 a Bill was submitted by the County Council, whereby part which we had done was made use of—the prisoner's claim was in reference to the whole house; he had a fourteen years' lease at £40 a year—the shop was let to a Mrs. Cohen at £40 a year—the Commissioners were represented by Mr. Haywood and Mr. Ross, his assistant—Mr. Haywood reported to the committee verbally, and it was considered—we know nothing about the prisoner having agreed to lay out some money, but the claim says, "In consideration of an outlay"—Mr. Haywood is not here—he did not make a report in writing—under Michael Angelo Taylor's Act there is no provision for his getting his costs if the case goes to a jury, but they
always ask me beforehand whether he will pay the costs—the amount claimed is always larger than the amount accepted.
Re-examined. This claim was read to the Commissioners, including the statement that the rooms were let at £1 a week.
P. A. CLAPHAM. I am articled clerk to Clapham and Vetch, solicitors—they acted as solicitors for the defence—I received notice and made out the original claim (produced) from particulars given to us by Messrs. Bishop and Eaton, which say, "The upper rooms are let to Mrs. Bell at £1 a week"—the prisoner signed that; this is his signature—he also signed the agreement to accept £200, and executed the assignment of the property to the Commissioners.
DAVID JAMES ROSS . I am Assistant Engineer and Surveyor to the Commissioners of Sewers—the defendant's claim for compensation for 9, Widegate Street came. before me, and I assisted Colonel Haywood in negotiating for the claim—on January 18th I saw Mr. Eton, who was representing the defendant—we had a conversation as to how the figures were arrived at—I made no inquiry about the price the rooms were let at—I accepted the statement in the claim—£150 was offered and refused, and the engineer was heard verbally, and the Commissioners increased it to £200, which was accepted.
Cross-examined. Colonel Haywood is a gentleman of forty years' experience; the property would be very well known to him—I negotiated with Mr. Eaton; his is a firm of high repute—he put the value of the basement at £15—I have no note of the value of the shop and parlour, which I should have made if he had told me—I was not present on that committee—Colonel Haywood attended it—it is usual to pay the solicitor's costs.
Re-examined. In some cases, where it has gone against the claimant, costs have not been paid—I took notes of what Mr. Eaton told me—he said that the rents received were £40 for the lower floor, and £52 for the upper from Lady Day, 1892—that is £1 a week.
EDWARD HENRY PHYSIC EATON . I am one of the firm of Bishop and hat on—we acted in this matter, and supplied the particulars on this blue paper on which Messrs. Clapham and Vetch drew up the claim—as far as my memory serves me, I got the statement that the six upper rooms were let to Mrs. Bell at £1 a week from the prisoner—that was after he had notice to treat—I did not see Mrs. Bell—I ultimately agreed to accept the £200.
Cross-examined. I have had a large experience in valuing property in that district—my firm has existed twenty-six or twenty-seven years; they have property in the street—the prisoner was using part of the house for storage—in my opinion the six rooms were worth £52 a year—I should have no difficulty in letting them for that—if this offer had not been accepted it would have been tried by a jury—the prisoner has lived in the parish many years, and is very much respected by the parishioners as one of the members for the Bishopsgate Foundation; my interview with Mr. Ross was purely to give him information—I explained to him in detail how I arrived at £375—that was based on value.
Re-examined. I have never let any rooms in this house, there are none empty; but we have a great many in the same street—I go through the street three or four times a week, and there were no notices out—I should
expect a tenant to be allowed to put a notice outside and in the window as well—I fixed it at £375, but I advised him to take the £200, because if it had been tried by a jury there would have been taxed costs—in arriving at the £375 I calculated that the rooms on the upper floor were worth £1 a week—if they had been put down at 16s. my claim would have been less.
By the JURY. I know other rooms in the same road let for the same as Mrs. Bell's.
MARY BELL . I am a widow—I have occupied the six rooms on the prisoner's upper floor for about nine years, and during the whole of that time I have paid 16s. a week—this is my rent book; it commences in June, 1886, and goes down to June 17th, 1892—for the last year or two Miss Hurley has been in the habit of paying my rent to the prisoner for me, and in June, 1892, she brought me this new book, and I then saw that the rent was entered at £1 a week, and had some conversation with her about it—the new book goes up to June, 1893, and in every week it has been entered £1—I have never paid more than 16s.—a gentleman afterwards called on me—I gave him the two rent-books, and went to Mr. Bayliss's office—I let off four of the rooms for the best I can get.
Cross-examined. I have carried on business there eight years last March—the rooms want papering and painting very much; that would increase their value—I do not know that he had had an offer, and that Mr. Wackett wanted the rooms, but the man who collected the rents spoke to me—I occupied two rooms, one on the first and one on the second floor—I let the top floor at 3s. 3d., and the top floor back at 2s.—I used the second floor front; that is worth 4s. in its present state, and the back room 3s.—I put the first floor front at 5s., but I never let it—I let the back room at 2s. 6d., but to a friend of mine.
Re-examined. I tried to let the second floor front, but I could only get 3s. 6d. for it; I wanted 4s.—the prisoner has never suggested that if I did not pay £1 a week I should have to go—he did not speak to me about it, but the collector said something—there is a business card of mine in the new rent-book—I had that printed in, I think, June, 1892, at the prisoner's suggestion, at the same time that I got the new rent-book.
KATE HURLEY . I am a dressmaker in Mrs. Bell's employ—I have been in the habit of paying her rent to the prisoner, at his house in Artillery Lane—I paid 16s.—the old book goes up to June 16, 1892; all the entries are in regular course—when I paid the 16s. in June, 1892, he asked me to bring a new book, and on June 24th I paid him 16s., and took a new book, which I left with him—when I went to pay the rent the week after he gave me the new book, with £1 a week entered in it from January, 1892—I asked him what it meant—he said, "Tell Mrs. Bell it will be all right," and if any gentleman came we were to show the new book—I went on paying the 16s. a week—he did not always enter it; sometimes his niece did it, and he initialled it—I never paid more than 16s.
Cross-examined. Mrs. Bell did not see Mr. Desmond at all—she had a conversation, a long time ago, with the person who collected the rent—I do not know that he has been offered £1 a week for the rooms—he told me he did not want to lose her as a tenant—those rooms wanted doing up, and she was to have rooms in a house three doors off.
The prisoner received an excellent character.
GUILTY on the First and Second Counts only. Recommended to mercy by the JURY on account of his character— Judgment respited.
730. CHARLES MCSHANE (37) , PLEADED GUILTY to thirteen indictments for stealing, while servant to Alfred Henry Paton, diamond rings, brooches, pendants, bracelets, and other articles of jewellery, value £3,700.— Strongly recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor— Judgment respited.
732. ERNEST FREDERICK ORTON was again indicted for stealing, while servant to the Commissioners of Customs, two hydrometers, a book, and other articles, their property. Second Count, receiving the same. He
PLEADED GUILTY to stealing all but the hydrometers.
MR. MUIR Prosecuted.
CHARLES BEADLEY . I am an examining officer of Her Majesty's Customs—about February last I sent out these two hydrometers, 4,541 and 7,508, which numbers are engraved on them, and on the weights and case, and entered in my books—I handed them to Parsons, who is dead—it was his duty to take them to the Long Room—they never reached their destination, and I sent out others which did reach—the prisoner had not access to the packing-room; he and other boy messengers have access to the Long Room—the engraving has been removed from these hydrometers with a rather coarse file, but here is part of the "C" and the" s."
Cross-examined. I sent them to the Metropolitan Board—only four of my men have access to the packing-room; Parsons was one of the four—the instruments all went to the Long Room with a letter of advice.
Re-examined. No notice was posted up about the loss.
WALTER SIMPSON . I am assistant to Mr. Besant, a pawnbroker, of 168, Goswell Road—I produce a hydrometer pledged by the prisoner on May 9th—I took it in and gave it to my master—he gave three shillings for it.
THOMAS SAMUEL COLLARD . I am a silver polisher—in April last I was living in St. Bartholomew's Buildings, St. Luke's—the prisoner came to me at the latter part of April, and stayed a month and three days—about two weeks after he came he showed me a hydrometer, and asked if I would come with him to get money advanced on it—I took him to Mr. Slope, a coffee-house keeper, who advanced him five shillings on it—he said it was one of his own instruments at the Custom House, and he had paid for it.
BENJAMIN SLOPE . I am an eating-house keeper, of 184, Eagle Street, St. Luke's—about the end of May Collard came to me with the prisoner, who produced this hydrometer, and asked me to lend him five shillings on it till the following Friday—this was on Tuesday—I lent it to him—he did not pay me—he came in about two months, and said he would pay on Friday if I would keep it for him.
applied for a day's leave, and on the 22nd he sent a telegram for an extension of one day—his brother came on the Monday, and next morning I received this letter from him: "Sir, I am sorry to say I have got to resign my position for certain reasons which you are aware of"—I was not aware of any reasons besides what his brother had told me.
INSPECTOR FLOSS (Detective). On August 4th, at 3. 30, I arrested the prisoner at 17, Leader Street, St. Luke's, and told him the charge—he said, "I did not steal them; I got them from a man at the Custom House, who said he had got no further use for them"—I said, "One has been pawned in Goswell Street; do you know anything about that?"—he said, "Yes, I pawned that."
GUILTY of receiving. — Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, September 13th, 1893.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrance.
733. MARY GROVER PLEADED GUILTY to Unlawfully exposing her child, and. thereby causing it unnecessary suffering, and injury to its health. She received a good character from her former mistress, who undertook to take her back at the expiration of her sentence.—Six Weeks' Hard Labour. She was also charged with the wilful murder of the said child, upon which the prosecution offering no evidence, a verdict of
NOT GUILTY was taken.
MESSRS. HORACE AVORY and ARTHUR GILL Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.
ELIZABETH WALTON . I am the wife of William Walton, of 38, Harrison Street, St. Pancras—the prisoner is my sister—on Friday afternoon, the 14th July, about-half past three, she came to me with her child, who was about a year and eight months old—she had no other children—she said she wanted to stop with me for a day or two, until her husband had come to a settlement about a separation which they were going to have—she told me how unkind he had been, and how unhappily they had lived; that he had told her he had her betters, and somebody far better than her to look after the baby—she cried very much for me to fetch her mother, as she wanted to go home with her—I fetched her mother on Sunday morning—that was after the child had been killed—the prisoner stayed with me on the Friday night and Saturday—every footstep she heard on the Saturday she said it was somebody coming to take her baby from her—on the Saturday night my husband came home about half-past twelve the worse for drink, and he sat on the foot of the bed in the kitchen and went to sleep—the prisoner was then sitting in a chair by the fire, with the child on her lap—she asked me to fetch her mother, and so pressed me that I started for her; and she returned with me and my brother-in-law, who was living in the same house—it was about half-past two or a quarter to three when I opened the door I saw the prisoner lying on her back on the floor with the baby on her arm; they were both bleeding from
the neck (my husband was not there, he had gone out)—I screamed for help and sent for a policeman—I had seen my sister about two months before, and I noticed that she was very strange; she had a very wild look about her—she then lived at Willesden, and had been there a twelvemonth—she had come up to see her mother—but when she came to my place she had been living in Swinton Street, Gray's Inn Road, for about three weeks—I had not noticed a knife when I came into the room—this knife (produced) is not mine.
Cross-examined. The prisoner had not lived in London until she came to Swinton Street—when I saw her before, I noticed that she was very strange in manner and speech—she appeared to be very anxious about her baby, and several times in the street she said there was somebody behind going to take her baby away from her—she had had two other children, but they had both died—when she came on the 14th she appeared very strange in her manner—she was very fond of her baby; she said she wanted to stop with me to conceal herself from her husband until the reparation—she seemed very funny and odd all day on Friday and Saturday, and she kept on asking for her mother all day—it was half-past twelve at night when I went for her mother; she lived at King's Road, St. Pancras.
Re-examined. She was living with her husband when I saw her two months before—I never visited their home, her husband and I not being on good terms—I had no opportunity of seeing on what terms they lived.
WILLIAM WALTON . I am the husband of the last witness, and am a zinc worker—on Saturday, 15th July, I came home late at night the worse for drink—I fell across the bed and went to sleep—I saw the prisoner in the room with her baby—I was awoke, I think, about half-past three—I then saw the child on the floor, with a wound in its throat—the prisoner was standing up—she said, "Bill, I have murdered my child"—I said, "Good God, Julia, what have you done?"—she only said, "Bill"—I ran out of the house, and went to her mother's in King's Road—I did not know that my wife had already gone there—I did not see that the prisoner had done any injury to herself.
THOMAS CLARK (215 E). On the morning of 16th July, about half-past three, I was on duty in Harrison Street—I heard a cry of "Murder! police!"—I went to 38, Harrison Street—I saw the prisoner lying on her back, and the child lying by her left side—it had a wound on the left side of the neck—the prisoner also had a wound in the neck, and this knife was sticking in the wound—I drew it from the wound—she said, Don't take the knife out; I want to die; I done it myself"—she said something about the child which I could not understand—I took her and the child to the hospital.
ANN JACK . I am the wife of Alexander Jack, of 38, Harrison Street—we lodged in the parlours—this knife is mine—I had it in my possession on the Thursday before—I saw it in the washhouse—I did not see it again till after this occurrence.
HUGH NORMAN ATKINSON . I am a resident medical surgeon at the Royal Free Hospital, Gray's Inn Road—on 16th July, at a quarter to four, the prisoner was brought there, also the body of the child; it was then quite dead—it had a wound in the throat; it was a stab, such as
would be caused by this knife—the prisoner was suffering from shock, also from a wound on the left side of the neck; it was more of a cut; it was a jagged wound, not very deep—I probed the wound directly afterwards, and no part of it was deeper than half an inch.
Cross-examined. She remained in hospital till the 9th of August.
JOHN THOMAS (Sergeant, 37 T). On the 16th July, about 3. 30 a. m., I heard a whistle blown, and went to 38, Harrison Street, and in the front kitchen I saw the prisoner and the deceased child lying on the floor—I thought there was a sign of life in the child—I accompanied the prisoner to the Royal Free Hospital—she then made this statement:—"I have seen my baby die first; I thought they would take it from me. I loved my baby. God forgive me. I put the knife deep down here. I killed my baby and saw it dead, and then killed myself. I have a husband living with me. I saw him at eleven o'clock in the house."
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate:—"My husband drove me to it. I loved and worshipped my baby. I never had a thought of £ hurting it or myself; it was my husband's unkindness has driven me to it. I never thought about it, I never thought about hurting my baby. I loved. it too much."
PHILIP FRANCIS GILBERT . I am Medical Officer of Holloway Prison.—the prisoner has been under my special observation in the infirmary since her admission on the 9th of August—she was very weak and ill when she came in; depressed, and apparently had no recollection whatever of what she had done, but quite rational—I could find no indications of insanity at that time; that was twenty-four days afterwards; she has improved since she has been there—I should say she is now decidedly of sound mind—she has recovered.
Cross-examined. While she was under my charge she appeared much, grieved, constantly saying she loved her child and it was hard to believe that she had killed it—I am acquainted with the facts of this case—from what I observed of the prisoner, I have formed an opinion as to the state of her mind on the 16th July—I believe she was then of unsound mind, and not responsible for what she did.
GUILTY of the crime, but being insane at the time. — Ordered to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure.
MR. MUIR Prosecuted and MR. SANDS Defended.
JOHANNA PETERS . I am married, but living apart from my husband—I was living with a man named John Palfry for three years on and off—on the last Bank Holiday in August I was with him; he had had a drop or two; I could not say he was sober—while I was with him I saw the prisoner; he was drunk—I saw the prisoner strike Palfry outside the Britannia Public-house, at the corner of Dorset Street, Spitalfields, between four and five in the afternoon; it had certainly gone four—I was standing there with two women; Palfry was across the road—a man came by, tapped me on the shoulder and said, "What cheer, Jo"—Palfry came across the road and said, "There goes your fancy man," pointing to the
prisoner—the prisoner said, "I never was a fancy man in my life"—he said that to the man who had tapped me on the shoulder—I was standing close by—Palfry struck the prisoner in the face and chest; I could not say which first—Palfry did not fall then—I took him away to where I was living; he was not much the worse for what had happened—between six and seven I was called and found Palfry sitting on a step, bleeding, outside the lodging-house—there were some men round—I said to the prisoner, "You coward!" and I tried to strike him, and he made a blow at me—I took Palfry to the hospital in a barrow, and he died there—I was there all night with him; he Was a healthy man.
Cross-examined. The fight was before five—Palfry was not the worse for that; he did not complain—I went to the Queen's Head to have a drink—I believe Palfry went out afterwards—it was between six and seven when I saw him sitting on the step—I spoke to the prisoner after the first fight, and told him he ought to be ashamed of himself—I said nothing to him before that—I spoke to him several times when I waft rowing with him—I do not know Leah Exstein by name—I did not tell the prisoner to come and give Palfrey a good hiding.
ALICE PROSSER . I am single, and live at 30, Dorset Street, pitalfields—about a quarter to seven on Bank Holiday I was in Dorset Street—I know Palfrey and the prisoner—Peters said something, and Palfrey came downstairs and said, "That is one of your fancy men"—he went down the street and followed him, and the prisoner gave Palfrey a blow with his fist, and hit him behind the ear—he fell on the kerb—it was a hard blow—after that they took Palfrey upstairs—he did not strike the prisoner, or try to strike him—he said he was too drunk to fight.
Cross-examined. All this took place in about twenty minutes, from beginning to end—I know Mrs. Brookbanks—I did not see her there—there were a good many people round—I did not take much notice of it. at first.
Re-examined. I told the Coroner that I did not know the man that struck the blow—I did not know him, only by standing about the lodging-house.
SARAH AUSTIN . I am sometimes known as Clara Williams—I am the. wife of Thomas Austin—I live at 30, Dorset Street—I know Palfrey—on Bank Holiday I saw him hi Dorset Street between five and six that evening—he went to the bottom of the court in the shirt sleeves—the prisoner came over, and deliberately struck him, and he fell—I only saw that one blow—he hit him in the chest, in front—he got up again and went indoors—he went out again, and after that I heard he was taken to the hospital.
Cross-examined. I was not with Alice Prosser the whole time—I was indoors, sitting down—I was not standing with her when the blow was struck—this happened between five and six—after the blow he went indoors—he lived in the house where I live—I did not go for anybody.
MARTHA BROOKLANDS . I am single—I live at 30, Dorset Street—I knew Palfrey and the prisoner by sight—on the last Bank Holiday I saw them together, opposite the lodging-house—as I was coming down the street I saw the man fall, but I did not see any blow—he fell just by the door—he was taken across the road on a barrow—that was all I saw.
Cross-examined. I saw nobody strike him—I could not say whether
his head fell on the kerb—this was between six and seven—I know Alice Prosser; she was not there at the time.
STEPHEN LEACH (Policeman H). At twelve on the night of the 20th August the prisoner came to Commercial Street Police-station—he said, "I have come to surrender myself, as I hear you want me"—I said, "Are you the man that has been referred to as Joe Bailey?"—he said, "Yes, I should have attended the inquest had I known it had been only yesterday"—he was then charged with the manslaughter of Palfrey—he said nothing further.
Cross-examined. The inquest was the day before—the place where all these persons live is a common lodging-house—it is about half a mile from the London Hospital—it would take about ten minutes to get there with the barrow.
CECIL HILLINGDON LEAF . I was House Surgeon at the London Hospital on the 7th August—Palfrey was brought there between seven and nine—he refused to stay in—about half-past twelve in the morning he was brought there again; he was semi-conscious, and bleeding from his left ear—there was no external wound—I thought his skull was fractured—he was treated, and died on the 16th August—I made a post-mortem examination—I found a fracture of the skull, chiefly on the left side—it went right to the base of the skull, rather forward—the result was in flammation of the covering of the brain, and laceration of the brain substance—that was the cause of death—I think a blow of the fist must have been very severe to have caused that injury; it is just possible—I think a fall on the kerb is much more likely to have produced it—I found no other injury.
Cross-examined. All the symptoms were consistent with a fall on the kerb, without any blow—when he was brought to the hospital between seven and nine he was lying in a chair in a semi-conscious condition, and bleeding from the left ear—he was advised to come into the hospital, but he refused—he was kept waiting there some time to see if he would take advice—he was actually admitted at half-past twelve—he was lying in the waiting-room all that time—he died of meningitis, inflammation of the covering of the brain, and laceration of the brain substance.
Witnesses for the Defence.
LEAH EXSTEIN . I am single—I was living at this house in Dorset Street—I knew Palfrey and his wife by sight—I saw them together on Bank Holiday, and I saw the prisoner there too—there had been a row between Palfrey and his wife in the morning; in the afternoon I saw the wife go up to the prisoner—she said, "My husband calls you a—ponce, and if you do not come and give him a good hiding I will give him one instead"—the prisoner went up to the deceased and said, "Did you ever know me to be your wife's ponce"—he said, "Yes," and the deceased raised his hand to strike him—as the deceased lifted up his hand he fell back on the kerb—this was between five and six in the evening; that was all I saw—I did not see the prisoner strike the deceased; he only held up his hand—after that I went inside, and saw no more.
Cross-examined. This took place in Dorset Street, at the cornet, outside the public-house, opposite the lodging-house—when the deceased fell I did not see if he got up again—I know the time, because when I went
inside I looked at the time, as I had a dinner to cook—we always dine about six.
ALFRED INCE . I am watchman at Corsican's lodging-house in Dorset Street—between five and six in the afternoon on last Bank Holiday I saw the deceased and his wife outside my door—the prisoner was standing round the corner, where I was sweeping outside my door on the step—I saw the deceased's wife go and speak to the prisoner—she said, "Jo, my old man calls you so-and-so"—the prisoner went over and spoke to the deceased, and he went up the court—they did nothing to each other at that time—later on, about twenty minutes or a quarter of an hour, I saw the deceased again going up the street—I saw the prisoner following him; he caught him up and said something to him, and the deceased put up his hand to strike the prisoner—the prisoner put up his hands, and the deceased fell—the prisoner walked back to the lodging-house—I saw the deceased on a barrow; he got off the barrow and walked up the street—that was close upon half an hour after what I have told.
JOHANNA PETERS (Re-called). It was about an hour or an hour and a half after I went down to Palfrey that he was taken to the hospital—he did not lie there for an hour and a half in the barrow; we went off to the hospital there and then—he was struck three times in all—he was taken to the hospital, and I left the hospital a little after eleven.
NOT GUILTY .
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, September 13th, 1893.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. COHEN Defended.
SYDNEY HERBERT SIMONS . I am in the employ of Offord and Sons.—they had a landau for sale in April, and I received this letter. (On a printed heading): "86, Amhurst Park, Stamford Hill.—Sir,—Seeing by the paper that you have a good landau for sale, I should feel obliged if you would send me on all particulars, and also state if you would take bill for same. I am willing to sign an agreement that it is yours until bill is met. If these terms suit, I should like you to give me a call by appointment—J. S. JEWELL"—I called and saw the prisoner—it was a private house—
I next received this letter on plain paper: "Sir,—Sorry that I have been unable to give you a call, owing to the heavy contracts that I have on hand; but if your representative could give me a call I might be able to arrange terms, as I am quite sure he would not falsely describe the landau. I shall be at home any day you name from one till 2. 30 p. m.—J. S. JEWELL"—that letter came before I went—I then told him to come and see the carriage, and on 19th April he came and saw the landau and a cart and harness, and selected them—he said he was a job master, and was going to let them out on hire—we received this letter the next morning: "April 19th. Sirs,—I will have the cart, harness and landau at the prices, viz., £30, £6, and £85, and will give you a bill for £36, payable in three months, and one for £85, payable in six months, and will sign any agreement you like, as I promised.—J. S. JEWELL"—that was followed by this letter of the 22nd: "Dear Sirs,—Yours to hand; please to have leather dash put on landau, which I will pay a little extra for, and also take off the bar and put on shafts, etc. You can also supply me with a good whip and one of those waterproof rugs, which please charge for in the bill, etc.—J. S. JEWELL"—he came on April 27th—I wrote the agreement; he read it, signed it, and asked for a copy of it, which he had. (This stated"When I have paid you the sum of £125 the carriages and sundries become my property, but not till then")—on June 19th Mr. Offord, one of the partners, spoke to me, and I went to Baker Street Bazaar, where carriages stand for sale, and there saw the Canterbury cart—I then went to the White Horse stables, Clapton, but found no trace of the prisoner or of the landau—I then tried some stables at Bouverie Road, Stoke Newington, which is one of the addresses on the letters, and on June 20th I went to some stables at 1, St. Andrew's Pavement, and saw the prisoner—I asked him for the landau; he said it was at Ascot at the races, but would be back to-morrow at twelve o'clock—I asked him for the cart; he said, "You know I have sold it"—I do not know how he got that information—I asked what right he had to sell it; he said he had made a mistake, he intended to come and see me next morning—I went back and saw my principals—he came next day and was referred to the solicitors.
Cross-examined. I did not state at the Police-court that he said my employers knew that he had sold the cart, because I was not asked—I saw no horses at St. Andrew's stables; I did not go to that part—he signed the agreement and the two bills at the same time; it was all one transaction—it was the prisoner's wish that the bills should be given—the amounts £40 and £85 were stated in the letters—I acceded to his suggestion, and he gave bills for these amounts—it was not after the agreement was signed that he was asked to secure the payments by two bills—none of the directors of my company are here—it is not within my knowledge that when the first bill came due the defendant's solicitor came and tendered the money—the prisoner did not tender the money to my knowledge—I have had some experience in the trade; I let these things on a hiring agreement—I do not think I ever had an agreement like this in the course of my experience.
Re-examined. He suggested, "I will give you a bill for £36, payable in three months, and one for £85, payable in six months," £4 6s. being, added for the other things—the inquiries were made by the solicitors—I
had no opportunity of making inquiries after June 20th as to what he said.
RICHARD GARWOOD . I am a jobmaster, of Linmouth Road, Stamford Hill—I did not know the prisoner personally till May this year—I did not write to him to say that I wanted a landau—on May 3rd I received this letter from him. (Stating that he had a splendid landau for sale, cheap, through want of room, just the thing for the witness's business, and asking him to make an appointment to see it.)—I went to a jobmaster's at St. Andrew's Pavement, and saw it—he asked seventy guineas for it, and I offered him fifty guineas, which he accepted—I paid him cash, and he gave me this receipt.
Cross-examined. I have not got it still—I changed it for a horse, but it was given up, and I paid him back the money, and Mr. Jewell paid me.
Re-examined. I got £10 back—I did not lose six sovereigns over it—I gave him £5 to chop for a horse.
HUGH EDWARD BROWS . I am chief clerk at the London and Provincial Bank, Kingsland—the prisoner had an account there, which was closed on July 11th by the bank—it was opened on May 8th with £45, and the total paid in between those dates was £112 14s.—when it was closed it was not overdrawn; £2 9s. was returned to him—it was closed on account of irregularities; cheques were drawn for money which was not there—on July 1st a cheque for £89 5s. was presented, and on July 2nd one to Rymal for £46 5s.; and one to Ward for £44 15s., and one to Jackson for £102 4s.; those were returned—two sums of £5 were paid in after July 1st—an acceptance of £20 was returned in June, and a cheque for £48 in July.
Cross-examined. I cannot tell whether the cheques were afterwards paid—the prisoner's mother banks at our bank—I believe she had considerable means some years ago.
JOHN MCGWENE (Police Sergeant B). On July 15th I arrested the prisoner on a warrant, on another charge—he said, "I have been a contractor, but have done none during the present year"—I found on him solicitors' letters, and a judgment summons for 12s. 6d. for stabling.
Cross-examined. I have three summonses—he entered into a contract in March, 1891, with the Hackney Board of Works for three years for road work; he only carried it on six weeks and then failed—he has done no work for the Board since July, 1891—they have £100 of his money deposited with them, and they detained it because they were going to bring an action against him.
Witnesses for the Defence.
HEBER MONTAGUE STENBERG . I am managing common law clerk to Messrs. Dyce and Co., solicitors, of Bishopsgate—I have the conduct of this case—I knew before proceedings were taken at the Police-court that the prisoner was not in good circumstances—in July, at the time the prisoner gave the returned cheques, his mother was endeavouring to raise money for him on mortgage through our firm, to be advanced to him—we have not all the cheques—the prisoner mentioned an indebtedness to
Offords—I did not ascertain that he had given a bill—in consequence of a communication from my principals, I called on Messrs. Offord on July 29th the day before the bill became due—I saw Mr. Offord, I believe, and informed him that I had come for the purpose of taking up the bill of Mr. Jewell's for £40—he said, "I have not the bill, the matter is in the hands of my solicitors; I will send to them for instructions"—he sent, but the gentleman attending to the matter was not in—I tendered him £40 in notes and gold, and said, "You can have this money at any time in exchange for the bill," and I wrote to them the same evening to the same effect.
Cross-examined. I believe the prisoner was charged in the first instance on July 17th at the Police-court in respect to Joyce's matter—I did not attend, nor was my firm represented—I attended on the remand before Mr. De Rutzen on the 25th,. and instructed counsel—I heard you open the charge of larceny of the landau and cart—I knew that the offence of larceny was complete on the conversion, and that if any felony was committed it was complete on May 3rd—after the case was disposed of some of the evidence in this case was taken, and all the documents were read and put in; in fact the case was complete—I believe no other evidence was called—after Offords' charge was gone into, the prisoner was out on the same bail as before, and I went and tendered the money for the bill while he was under charge under the instructions of my principal—the money that was to he raised on mortgage was to be paid about that date—I do not wish to disclose the name of the client it was to come from—the negotiations were very fully gone into at that time—Mrs. Jewell brought the money to our office, though she did not obtain it from that source—the negotiation was to be completed towards the end of July, but it was not completed—I did not inform the prisoner that he was to have money from the mortgage, but I said that his mother was raising money—she has paid off the cheques—Mr. Row was paid about £90 after the prisoner was committed for trial—Rymal cheque for £46 5s. was paid while the remand was going on—application was made under Order 14, and I settled it—that was for a horse, and I believe Mr. Ward's debt was for horses—the cheque to Jackson for £102 was provided for early in August—the prisoner is a jobmaster at Stamford Hill—I believe the address is St. Andrew's Hill; he had eight or ten horses there—I went there first six months ago—I do not know whether he jobs carriages; I have seen horses and carriages there—I saw him with this Canterbury cart, but do not know where he obtained it—I say cannot that he was honestly in possession of carriages, or whether he is licensed as a jobmaster—I heard a man swear that he had not a hackney carriage license; he might let a brougham.
Re-examined. The man who said that, said that there were many people doing business in London who had no licenses—Mr. Joyce is prosecuting—in several cases where the money was paid there was no suggestion of civil proceedings—I believe the contract was postponed by the Hackney Board of Works.
WILLIAM HENRY SMITH . I am a solicitor, of Devonshire Chambers, Bishopsgate Without—about 24th July I had a conversation with the prisoner with respect to his financial matters—he said he was indebted to Offord and Sons.—I asked him how much—he said, "I cannot say exactly"—he gave
me their address, and I went there that day, between four and. five o'clock, and saw some gentleman evidently in authority—I said, "I have come about the affairs of Mr. Jewell, as I understand he is indebted to you, and I have come to know the amount"—he said, "I cannot discuss the matter with you; my solicitors are next door, and the matter is in their hands'—I asked him to go with me, and I then went and saw Mr. Diver, and said, "I have been referred to you by Mr. Offord. I understand they have a claim against Mr. Jewell which I am anxious to arrange, if possible; I understand the amount is not very serious"—he asked a clerk sitting in the office with him to refer to the books—he did so, and said there were two sums of £40 and £85—I said, "Well I am not prepared for so large an amount, but Mrs. Jewell will arrange for the payment if you like to take her security," and I think I added, "I don't think she can find you cash for the whole amount at once, but she will pay half down and the balance in a month."—Mr. Diver said "To accept those terms it would be compounding a felony to take security"—I said,. "I know nothing about any felony; so far as I know it is a debt," and asked him to explain the matter to me—he declined to do so, and told me to go to the Police-court and find out—I pressed him for information, and said, "I did not know you had any charge against him"—he said "I decline to give you any information, my terms are £125 before six o'clock to-night, or it will be made hot for your client in the morning"—I said. "If we were disposed to put the money down; I am in Portland Place, and Mrs. Jewell at Stamford Hill, and it is five o'clock now"—he said, "Well, before six to-night or ten in the morning; it will not be too late at the Police-court"—I again asked him to give me the particulars, and said, "I do not quite understand if taking security is compounding a felony why taking cash is not, and as you decline to give me particulars, will you let me see one of your principals?"—he said, "If you don't get out of my place at once I will put you out"—I repeated my request, and he sent for a constable—two came, and Mr. Diver put his hand on my shoulder, and said, "Now you go"—he did not inform the constables of the facts, but I did—I walked out, and on the following morning the charge was preferred—Mr. Diver is in Court—the solicitors are Kingsbury and Turner, and there is a board with Mr. Diver's name on it, pointing to the Trade Protection Association.
Cross-examined. I am the solicitor instructed to defend the prisoner—Mr. Dyce it dead; I am the assignee, and have added to his name "and Co. '—when I went to Messrs. Offord I did not know that a carriage and cart had been obtained under a hiring agreement; I knew nothing but the fact that he was indebted—he did not show me a hiring agreement—Mr. Diver either said, "We have already instructed counsel," or, "We are going to"—that was at five p. m.—he did not say he was not going to be "tricked," or "trapped" by me into compounding a felony, or anything like it—every time I asked to see his principals he asked me to leave the place—I was settling three or four of these instances of indebtedness through my clerks—Mr. Jackson was paid; he has taken no proceedings—I do not know that he had a dishonoured cheque—Mr. Rymal's things were settled; I cannot say whether the cheque was paid—I know nothing about Mr. Ward.
Evidence in Reply.
WILLIAM DIVER . I am managing clerk to Messrs. Kingsbury and Turner, solicitors, of George Street, Portman Square—it is not true that I said to the last witness that I would take. £125 if it was paid before six in the evening, or that it would not be too late the next day.
Cross-examined. I am common law and Chancery clerk—we do not often have criminal work, this is only the second time since I have been in the office, which is six or seven years—I saw in a newspaper that Mr. Joyce was prosecuting the prisoner; I think it was for stealing a horse—I took civil proceedings because I was advised to do so by your learned friend long before the interview—I had already communicated with the police and instructed counsel, directly I completed my inquiries—I had delivered my brief—I do not know at what time it was sent; but it had been delivered in the morning—I am not aware that in the prosecution by Joyce, he conducted his own prosecution himself—Mr. Gill afterwards prosecuted, because Mr. Joyce came to my firm and asked them to prosecute—I do not think I made any communication to Mr. Joyce first—I wrote him one letter—it was not suggesting that Mr. Gill should also prosecute for him; I asked him whether it would not be advisable, as his case seemed rather weak, to employ a solicitor—his case had nothing to do with me—I never said that I would make it hot or warm for the prisoner; it is all untrue except as to taking cash at six o'clock at night, and when I told Mr. Smith that criminal proceedings would be taken he said "What proceedings? Do they want to make a job of it?"—I had not written the letter to Mr. Joyce at that time—my writing to Mr. Joyce after July 25th, when my case was complete, was not to make a stronger case against the prisoner—I did not write with the intention of hurting the prisoner—I saw that he had no solicitor, and I saw no objection to writing to him—it was not in the hope that the two cases combined would make it a more serious case for the prisoner—there are other cases besides this—there is no hand in my principals' office pointing to my name as having the management of the debt-collecting department, but the words "Debt-collecting department" are on the window blind—I have nothing to do with the debt-collecting, Mr. Cow land attends to that—an action on a couple of bills would come into my hands—I took these criminal proceedings because I was advised—I saw Messrs. Offord myself about the matter—I did not advise them to institute criminal proceedings till after I had seen Mr. Gill—Mr. Smith offered me Mrs. Jewell's security, but I knew nothing of her.
NOT GUILTY (See Fourth Court, Tuesday, September 19th).
742. RICHARD BROWN (21) , to stealing an envelope and piece of paper, the property of Alexander McDonald; after to a conviction of felony in September, 1892.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
743. HENRY MUMFORD** (18) , to breaking and entering the warehouse of Gilliat Hatfield and stealing three boxes of cigars and other articles.— Nine Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
744. WALTER HASTINGS COWARD (27) , to unlawfully, by false pretences, inducing William Henry Chapman to execute bills of exchange, with intent to defraud.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
(745). EDITH CHANNER (17) , to stealing two letters And a Post Office Order for ten shillings and sixpence, the property of Mina Mayner, her mistress; also to forging and uttering a receipt upon the said order.— [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] Judgment respited.
FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, September 13th, 1893.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq,
STEWART PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. WALLACE Prosecuted, and MR. LEYCESTER Defended Mundy.
JOHN KANE (Sergeant D). On 13th July I saw Mundy at Hastings Station—I said, "Mundy, you know me"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "You will be charged with being concerned with Alexander Stewart in stealing a box from Warwick Street, Pall Mall, by means of a forged telegram. That box contained plate and a cheque-book on Glyn, Mills, Curry, and Co. Several cheques in that book have been forged and uttered in the neighbourhood of Charing Cross. The boy who took away the box was wearing a black apron, similar to this one which was found at your lodgings in Hastings"—he said, "Yes, I took away the box, Alexander Stewart gave me the apron to wear; but I only cashed two of the cheques, one at the newspaper shop and one at the milk shop"—I conveyed him to King Street Police Station, London, where he was charged in my presence—Stewart said he had sent the telegram.
Cross-examined. Mundy was in custody when I saw him at Hastings—he told me that Stewart gave him the letters in which the cheques were contained—I found every statement of his to be correct—I have made inquiries about his character; he bear a good character—he had an impediment in his speech when he made the statement to me, so that I could hardly understand him—he appeared very stupid.
GEORGE JOHN CLARK . I live at 3, Warwick Street, Pall Mall—the plate spoken of by the last witness is mine; I kept it at Warwick Street—I did not authorise either of the prisoners to come and take it away—on. Friday, 30th June, I discovered that the trunk had gone from my bed-room and I made inquiries, and the servant told me that a boy had called' in the afternoon and taken it away—I sent no telegram that day—I knew Stewart; he used to be a servant at Warwick Street—in my trunk were a lot of plate, and old family papers, and a cash-box, a cheque-book, and old cheques—I had the plate valued at £4 5s. as its market value—I have got all the things back except the papers—I gave no authority for the removal of the box.
LOTTIE HIGGS . I keep No. 3, Warwick Street, Pall Mall—on 30th June a telegram arrived, and shortly after Mundy came for the box, and said he had come from Mr. Clark to fetch his trunk—I told the servant to go upstairs and help him down with it; and when he got to the door I said,
"How did Mr. Clark tell you to take it?"—he said, "He told me I was to call a four-wheeler"—a four-wheeled cab was called, and he took it with him.
NOT GUILTY .
STEWART PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. WALLACE Prosecuted, and MR. LEYCESTER Defended Mundy.
JOHN KANE (Sergeant). When I arrested Mundy, at Hastings Policestation, he said, "Yes, quite right; I only cashed two cheques, one at the newspaper shop and one at the milk-shop; Alexander Stewart gave me the letters which contained the cheques."
SHOLTO STEED . I am assistant to Mr. Marshall, dairyman, of 14, Whitcomb Street, Trafalgar Square—on 1st July Mundy came about ten minutes past ten o'clock, and handed this note to Mr. Marshall. (This was from Miss Higgs, and asked for change for the cheque enclosed)—this is the cheque—I saw Mr. Marshall give the £3 to Mundy—the cheque was taken to the Union Bank, Charing Cross Branch, and on Monday it was returned marked "No account."
Cross-examined. The cheque is in the same writing as the note as far as I can tell—when Mundy brought them they were in the envelope; he opened the envelope and handed the contents to me.
NOT GUILTY .
There was another indictment against the prisoners for forging and uttering a cheque for £2 10s.
Stewart PLEADED GUILTY . No evidence was offered by the Prosecution against
MUNDY.— NOT GUILTY .
Stewart then PLEADED GUILTY* to a previous conviction of felony in December, 1890.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. ROACH Prosecuted.
FRANK HENRY MEEKING . I live at 29, Southampton Road, opposite to the prosecutor's shop—on the 25th July at ten o'clock I was shutting up my shop, and I saw Latham make out as if he were drunk, and put his arm through the prosecutor's window, and take some varnish—I did not recognise the other man very well.
HENRY CARPENTER . I live at 4, Carlingford Road—at half-past nine p. m. on 25th June I was passing the prosecutor's shop—I received a communication from Meeking; I asked him to give a description, and I followed the prisoners and two other men till I saw a policeman—the prisoners were each carrying a white can; I am sure they are the men—I overtook them, and passed them, and let them pass me again under a lamp—I lost sight of Cressey, but not of Latham—I went to find the. prosecutor.
Cross-examined by Latham. I first saw you with a taller man in Southampton Road, and you looked into a public-house, and then you went into another—I went to the bottom of Maiden Road and spoke to a policeman, and I saw you come out, and I saw the policeman take the other man, and I went then for the prosecutor—when I was going to the station to charge the other man I recognised you in the Kentish Town Road carrying the can—you were not taken outside the public-house.
CHARLES MELVILLE HENRY . I live at 14, Baker's Road, Kentish Town—on the 25th July a communication was made to me with regard to my shop—I found one of my window panes broken, and two cans of varnish taken from inside—I have since seen the varnish—subsequently Latham was pointed out to me, and I gave him in charge.
Cross-examined by Latham, My window pane that was broken was about 2 ft by 2 ft. 4 in.
PHILLIP TAYLOR (475 Y). About 10. 30 p. m. on 25th July I saw the prosecutor struggling with Latham in Kentish Town Road—the prosecutor charged him with breaking his window and stealing two bottles of varnish—Latham said, "You have made a mistake"—he had one of the bottles of varnish with him.
Cross-examined by Latham. You said, "There is the man that gave me the varnish to hold for him; you are doing your duty; you have made a mistake."
HERBERT GATEHOUSE (615 Y). On this night I received information and. went to Malden Road, where I saw Cressey carrying this bottle of varnish—I asked him where he got it from—he said, "A man gave it to me in the Ponsford public-house to put it on a tramcar," and that I had made a mistake—I said, "I shall take you to the Police-station, as you have got the varnish"—he was there charged.
Latham, in his defence said that the varnish was given to him and Cressey in a public-house by two men, who said they got it from a man who owed them money, and that he and Cressey were carrying it for the men when arrested.
Cressey said that they were carrying the varnish for two men.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour, each.
(750) GEORGE JONES (18) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of Francis Manly Sims, and stealing four boxes of cigars and other articles, his property.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. MOYSES, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PURCELL Prosecuted.
GUILTY .*— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, September 14th, 1893.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrance.
753. JAMES THOMPSON (62) , Feloniously sending to the Right Hon. Henry Campbell Bannerman, Secretary of War, a letter, threatening to kill and murder him. Second Count, for uttering the letter well knowing the contents.
MESSRS. HORACE AVORY and ELDRIDGE Prosecuted.
GUY FLEETWOOD WILSON . I was private secretary to the Right Hon. Henry Campbell Bannerman till August last—I am now director of the Clothing Department—in August I had the entire charge of Mr. Campbell Bannerman's whole correspondence—on 2nd August I received this letter, signed J. Thompson, of the Royal Horse Artillery, directed to Mr. Campbell Bannerman—on receiving that letter I communicated with Mr. Anderson, of Scotland Yard, and conveyed to him the Secretary of State's wishes—no legal proceedings were taken on that letter—I subsequently received this letter of 7th August, also signed J. Thompson, late of the Royal Horse Artillery—on the receipt of that letter the matter was considered, and a warrant was obtained, mainly because more than one person was threatened in the letter—the case was rather taken out of the hands of the Secretary of State—the prisoner was in the Royal Horse Artillery, according to the records, and was discharged in consequence of wounds in 1857, or thereabouts—he received compensation of 9d. a day, awarded by the Chelsea Commissioners—in 1888 his case was further considered by the Chelsea Commissioners, and his pension was increased to 1s. 2d. a day—since then he has been in receipt of the highest rate of pension.
MICHAEL THORPE . I am a sergeant of the Criminal Investigation Department—on the 5th of August I received from my superiors of Scotland Yard this letter, of the 2nd August, and then went and saw the prisoner in the Workhouse Infirmary at Fulham—I had the letter with me—I produced the letter and asked him if he knew anything about it—he said, "Yes, every word of it was written by me, and if opportunity offers I mean to carry the threat contained therein into execution—I cautioned him of the foolishness of the course he was pursuing—he became rather violent, raised his arm and said, "If I can get a revolver I will shoot the lot at the War Office"—I told him he was pursuing a very unwise course, and if he was not careful he would ultimately find himself in prison, instead of an infirmary ward—on the 9th of August I received the letter of the 7th—I then went to the Fulham Workhouse with a warrant on the 11th—I saw the prisoner and told him I was a police officer—I read the warrant to him, and told him I was going to take him into custody—he said, "I am glad you have moved them at last; now it will be one way or the other with me"—the two letters appear to be in the same handwriting.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You made a long, rambling statement about some alleged injustice.
ANNIE BARNETT . My name is now Allan—I was a nurse at the Fulham Infirmary—the prisoner was a patient there—I have seen him write letters while there—I know his hand-writing—these two letters appear, to be in his writing.
The letters were read at follows:—"Workhouse Infirmary, Fulham, 2. 8. 93.—Right Hon. Sir,—I most respectfully beg to inform you that I have just underwent another operation, it is the 5th for the rupture I received through spite at the time, Royal Small Arms Factory, Sp., B'ham, in May last. Note I told you that my life was a trouble to me, as I am in pain when I ly down, sit, stand, or walk. I am tired of being in the Chamber of Horrors, the Workhouse Infirmary, where I have spent most of my time this last three years through the spite and malice and vilany of War Office Officials. Right Hon. Sir, this is to give you notice that unless you do me justice for all I have suffered, and will have to suffer as long as I live; you have robbed me of fivepence a day of my little pension, my weekly pay, and you have disabled, crippled, ruptured, and paralyzed me; you know that you cruily, brutally, starved and tortured and swindled, robbed and persecuted me; you know that you starved, tortured and murdered my poor wife; you know that I was lying in a Workhouse Infirnary, a poor, miserable, disabled, ruptured, paralyzed cripple, and my poor wife lying dead outside at the same time, and through the same cause, the spite and malice of War Officials; you have robbed me of all that life is worth living for; you drive me in heir to the Chamber of Horrors, and you stop my little pension that I fought and bled for; you persecute me and drive me in heir to die a miserable lingering death, and all for speaking truth; you tell lies to M. P. 's and others to prevent them from helping me; you are slowly and surely crushing me to death. Well, Sir, I may as well die on the scaffold as die heir, and unless you do me justice, I only want justice Right Hon. Sir, I do now swear by my God that I will take the life of some one of them that are now torturing and murdering me. I care not which of you it is, I will stick a knife between his ribs as soon as I get the chance, as I may as well die on the gallows as in the slaughter-house; you as well as the rest, first come, first served; I can't stand your torture any longer, I will have death or justice.—JAMES THOMPSON, late R. H. A."
"Workhouse Infirmary, Fulham, W.,7. 8. 93.—Right Hon. Sir,—You was pleased to send a police officer heir, you may just as well send him home for all the good he don, or will do or can do; it is you who can end this correspondence, not the police, you can end it by doing justice to me who you have most disgracefully treated; you have robbed me of my strength, of all means of earning a living; you are slowly but surely murdering me, as you have murdered my poor wife; you have robbed me of fivepence a day of my pension, for which I fought and bled, and left some of my best blood on the plains of Bengal, for you have robbed me of my weekly pay this last three years; you have most cruely and brutally tortured and persecuted me; you are now murdering me thro spite, because I speak the truth; but, Sir, I do not mean to die just to please you. I will not enter into any details now, as you know my case well. I claim and demand my back pay of fivepence a day from date of my discharge, my weekly pay from January, 1891, all the money I have paid into workhouse hospitals to be refunded to me, and some fair compensation for being disabled, crippled, ruptured, and paralyzed for life, and for all the sickness, pain, and torture and hunger I have suffered, and for all I have to suffer up to the day of my death; you know my case, so I will only that I have been robbed by you or those under your command. I have
been most cruelly and brutally tortured, and you know it, you are murdering me now, you and the set of villains at the War Office. Well, Sir, I will stand no more of your torture and persecution, send me the money that is honestly and justly due to me; if not, I will have this, and I will take the first opportunity I can get of sending a bullet, or knife, or anything I can through you or any of the other villains who are now persecuting and murdering me, and who have murdered my poor wife. There is six of you, and I am sure I would get a front seat in Heaven if I could send the lot of you to Hell together. You have murdered my poor wife, but I will take care you will not murder me, as you are now doing by persecution. I give you fair notice, and that is honourable; my case is well known to hundreds heir, and my case or my statement was read in the Liberal Club not far from heir. My case is in the hands of those that will circulate it, Members of Parliament, priests, parsons, in fact all classes, so that I now swear by Almighty God that unless you do me justice I will take your life and as many as I can of the others who are murdering and persecuting me, and that I will do it how, when and where I can. This I swear to, So Help my God. I am no Coward, and I will stand no more of your Hellish persecution; I have stood it too long, I will stand it no longer. Do me justice, and you will hear no more from me. I will have justice or death.—JAMES THOMPSON, late R. H. A."
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, entered into a detailed account of various acts of alleged hardship and injustice which he had endured at the hands of various officials, such as the inadequacy of his pension and the withholding of its payment, after having served his country for forty years, and having been seriously wounded during his service, concluding by asserting that he had no intention of carrying into effect the threats contained in the letters, and expressing sorrow for having written them.
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the JURY. MR. AVORY stated that the numerous complaints made by the prisoner had been carefully investigated by the authorities, but that the prisoner had been constantly sending threatening letters.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MESSRS. BODKIN and ELDRIDGE Prosecuted; and MR. H. C. RICHARDS Defended.
JOHN GLEESON . I am a broker's man; I live at 47, Neal Street—on Wednesday, 12th July, I was put in possession of 28, Queen Ann's Place Bush-hill Park, Enfield, for the holder of a bill of sale—I did not see the prisoner's wife and family there—there was furniture in the house; there was nothing in the shop—it was a kind of linen-draper's or dressmaker's; there was no business doing there—the prisoner was living there; a man named Rust was in the house—I was placed in a room at the top of the house by the prisoner's order; that was the first night I slept there—about four o'clock the prisoner came home; he said we need not sit up for, him, he should not be home before eleven; he had his tea and went out—
he came back somewhere about eight; he went out again and came back at twenty-five minutes to ten—he then said, "Well, gentlemen, I am going to bed"—I said, "I will make the first one to go"—I spoke to the other man, and whispered to him to be sure to fasten up the front door—the prisoner said if I had anything to say to speak up—I said I only told the man to shut the door—he said, "I can shut the door myself"—with that I went up to bed—I sat down reading, and I think about eleven, as near as I could tell, I had no watch or clock, the prisoner came up and knocked at my door, and asked if I was all right and did I have everything I wanted?—I said I was all right, and he went down-stairs—after that I heard somebody about the house; I can't swear to the time; to the best of my belief it was somewhere about half-past one—there was a bath in the next room to mine—I heard the prisoner go into that room and take a bath; I heard the water running, and the ordinary splashing of a man in a bath; I then heard someone leave the bath-room and go downstairs, and I went to sleep—I was awoke by the room being full of smoke, my gas was out; it was alight when I went to bed—I woke up choking with the smoke; I made a dash at the window, threw it up, and gave the alarm of fire—I then went back to the bed, and put on my clothes; I woke Rust, and we went down and, finding ourselves in the dining-room, I said, "We can get from here to the hall door"—we did get to the hall door, and I gave Rust the key out of my trousers pocket to open the door; he could not do it—the prisoner came behind us and said, "Give me the key"—he took it from me and opened the door—I could not see where he came from, he came behind us—he had his trousers and boots on and his braces were hanging down behind him—as soon as he opened the door I went outside and looked round—the prisoner was then sitting on the door-step—I said to him, "Mr. b——Corbett you are taking it very easily"—he never answered me—I rushed to the other houses, and gave the alarm there, and then I came back and had another swear at him; he was standing at the door, doing nothing—I kicked in a square of glass—he said, "Don't you damage my property"—I could see the fire there; it was all flame, like a furnace—he said, "Don't you do that; you are damaging the property; that will cause the fire to escape through," or words to that effect—the neighbours then came in and we all assisted in throwing water, and then I went for the fire-engine; but in coming back I got lost, not knowing my way—I guess it was about an hour from the time I awoke till the engine came; during that time the prisoner did not do anything to put out the fire, he was sweeping out the water with a broom.
Cross-examined. I have a watch, but was not wearing it at the time—I may have said before the Magistrate that it was about half-past twelve when I heard someone in the bath-room—I cannot swear to the time—I heated the water for tea at the gas-stove in the basement—I had nothing after that before I went to bed, except a pint of ale, which I paid for—I did not find the prisoner an unpleasant man—I was put in under a bill of sale—the prisoner said he expected me, but not for three days.
WILLIAM RUST . I am a broker's man, and live at 56, Russell Road, Tottenham—on July 11th I was placed in possession of the furniture at 28, Queen Anne's Place, for rent; a quarter's rent, £10, was due—I stayed there day and night up to the fire, on Friday, July 14th—the
prisoner came in that night the last time, I believe, about half-past nine—he said, "Now, gentlemen, I am going to bed"—Gleeson went to bed first, and I went afterwards, after bolting the front door—after I had gone up I heard someone about the house, up and down stairs—I slept in a room on the half-landing, at the back—I did not hear any noise in the bath-room—I suppose I went to sleep about half an hour after I went to bed; that would be a little after ten—Gleeson woke me up about half-past two—I found the staircase full of smoke—he and I went downstairs and endeavoured to open the front door—while doing that the prisoner came behind us and offered to open the door, as we were too flurried to do so—he did so, and sat down on the doorstep—we could not at first see where the smoke came from—we went outside and saw the light through the glass panel underneath the shop front—we called out, "Fire! and roused the neighbours—during that time I lost sight of the prisoner, and don't know what became of him—the neighbours came and assisted in pouring water down—after a time I went into the basement—I saw the partition there on the left side—the fire was out on that side then—there was a heap of ashes from some cardboard boxes, and a mantel-board; that was partly burnt—part of the partition was burnt right through—I saw the gas-meter on the other side—the pipe leading to the meter from the street had been broken off—there was flame from the gas-pipe—the ashes underneath had burnt out—the joists of the floor above were blackened and burnt—there was a hole in the floor, apparently burnt through—while I was there somebody turned off the tap of the gas—I saw Mr. Kirby trying to turn it off with a long piece of pipe, and Mr. Hill was trying to do the same thing, and between them they turned it off—the pipe appeared to have been broken off from the meter.
Cross-examined. I had been in for three days—I had no unpleasantness with the prisoner—I had no watch with me—I know the time we went to bed by the clock on the mantelpiece, and at half-past two I heard from the neighbours—I heard Gleeson use some bad language to the prisoner; that was after I got up, when we were downstairs—the prisoner did not seem dazed—he had not said anything to me about being a ruined man—I knew there was a bill for £10; that would about consume what there was there—I had gas in my bedroom—I locked the door each night I was there—I had tea with Gleeson about four—whatever cooking there was was done at the gas-stove.
Re-examined. I made the water hot for tea—I used a kettle, and then put the gas out—that was done safely and properly.
JOHN WALTER KIRBY . I am a dairyman at 29, Queen Anne's Place—I knew the prisoner as a next-door neighbour—some days before the fire I saw a van-load of things leave the premises directly after six in the morning—it was a four-wheeled van with two men—it contained sundry kitchen utensils, pots and pans—in the early morning of the 15th July my wife awoke me and I heard a cry of "Fire"—I put on some clothes and went to the street door, and heard a noise at the door of No. 28, as if of somebody trying to open it—I saw it opened, and the prisoner and two men came out—I saw flames coming from the basement, as well as light through the glass—the prisoner brought a bag into my house and asked me to take care of it;
he fetched the bag again during the fire—I looked through the fanlight and saw where the flames were—I first noticed the flames in front of the shop door, near the iron grating for the coal shoot—I then went back to my house, got some pails of water and poured them down the coal shoot, and the fire seemed to be got under a little—then we noticed the other end of the shop front alight, near the meter—my neighbour kicked in the glass at the corner pane, and we then saw that the meter was alight, or rather the pipe supplying the meter—I afterwards saw that there was a break in the pipe between the meter and the flame—it was coming up through the shop floor—my neighbour, Mr. Laws, went and got his garden rake to turn off the gas, and I went and got a large piece of zinc pipe and pushed it through the broken glass on top of the meter, and turned it off—I went down into the basement and looked at the meter—I saw that it was disconnected, and I picked up this piece of pipe, and handed it to the constable—I found it directly underneath the meter in about three inches of water—I saw a wooden partition before the coal place that was. burnt, but not from the floor—the fire commenced half-way up and went, up to the joists above—they were charred right across to the meter—I met the constable coming up the steps and handed him the piece of pipe.
Cross-examined. I and my friend put the fire out—I saw the prisoner sweeping the water from off the shop steps, on a level with the shop—the fire was all downstairs—I don't think there had been any fire burning underneath the meter—there was a small pile of cardboard boxes on each side of the partition such as would be used in the basement—I believe the fire had sprung up from there right up to the roof, and across it towards the meter—the joists were not charred so much in the centre as they were at either end—the coal shoot is immediately in front of the street door, in the footway—I could see the fire through the coal shoot, and down there I threw the water—I only knew the prisoner as a next door neighbour—his wife carried on the business of a draper and milliner.
Re-examined. The name on the door was "Arnold J. Corbett"—I saw the joists charred after the fire was put out—the appearance was consistent with there having been two fires, one on either side, which met in the middle—the gas-stove was right at the back of the basement.
CHARLES HILL . I am a carpenter, of 78, St. Mary's Road, Edmonton—on Friday, 14th July, I came down from Liverpool Street between a. quarter and twenty minutes past twelve—I went to Bush-hill Park, and waited there some time—I was then going across a brickfield towards Edmonton, and heard cries of fire—I met Gleeson, and went to 28, Queen Anne's Place—I saw the basement on fire—I tried to go into the cellar, but could not—I was beaten back by the smoke and heat—I went to the shop door; it was locked—while I was there the prisoner came to me—he said, "Wait a bit, don't burst the door open"—he felt for the key, and finally found it, and opened the door—the fire was burning at the back of the shop—I had a pail of water with me, and I threw it on—the fire was burning right through the floor, direct from the gas-meter—I went back immediately to the cellar; I found the partition burning from the joists, and there was water in the cellar ankle deep—I ladled the water with the pail, and threw it on the partition, and put it out—I afterwards went towards the gas-meter, where the fire was raging—the prisoner was behind me, and he
said, "Who are you? put out the gas"—I succeeded in turning it off someone outside was attempting to put it out with a rod; that was not successful—I put it out with my hand—I saw a person pick up the piece of pipe from the floor—the prisoner did nothing to help to put the fire out; he was simply walking about, half dressed.
JAMES HENRY LAWS . I live at 27, Queen Anne's Place, next door to the prisoner—on 12th July he had supper at my house—his wife and family had gone away—he said the business had been bad all round for about two years, and he did not know how things would go with him at all if they did not change for the better—on 14th July, at 10. 15, I saw him go past my shop home—at 2. 30 I heard the cry of fire—there was smoke in my room, and all over the house—it got into the next door—I dressed, and went out—the prisoner was standing outside—Kirby and I got some water—he and I took it in through a broken pane on the left, facing the partition—the prisoner was doing nothing during this time—I went into the shop—the flames were breaking through the floor, and we poured water through the floor—I afterwards went down to the cellar—I saw a mantel-board, burnt top and bottom, and a heap of burnt cardboard boxes near the partition—I saw Kirby pick up a piece of gas piping—the meter was disconnected.
GEORGE KITHERINGHAM . I live at Cecil Road, Enfield—early on 15th July I was in charge of the fire brigade—I received a call at 3. 3 a. m.—I went at once with an engine and hose reel, and arrived at 28, Queen Anne's Place at 3. 20 a. m. the fire had been extinguished—I examined the partition—it was burnt right through—on the kitchen side of the partition, where it was charred, I found a heap of burnt cardboard boxes; rubbish—the marks of that fire began a foot or two above the floor and extended up to the joists—I examined the charred beams of wood on the other side near and around the gas-meter—that fire had burnt through the floor into the shop—I examined the joists of the floor of the shop from below—I examined the joists between the gas-meter and the portion of the partition that was burnt—the joists nearest where the fire started against the partition were very much charred; nearer the centre not so much, only slightly smoked, and then near the gas-meter very much charred again—in the middle there was the appearance of smoke where the flames had travelled along but had not a very great effect upon the wood—I saw a mantel-board with marks of burning on it—it had acted as a flue for the fire by drawing it under it up the partition—I examined the gas-meter—on the consumer's side eight or nine inches of the pipe was missing—this piece (produced) was attached to the meter—this is the union joint of the inlet pipe from the main to the meter—that was where the fire had been—this (another) was fixed to the meter—this part is iron—the piece of the supply pipe did not touch the meter; it wanted another piece to reach the meter—I should say this piece was part of the same pipe—the piece with the union-joint has been melted at the end where the fire came—this appears to have been wrenched off at one end; the other was connected with the meter by a copper-bit joint; I should say it had been knocked off—you could break it with your hand—I did not notice any resin—it is usual to use resin with a copper-bit—I found resin in the shorter bit of pipe—about a foot of pipe was missing on the consumer's side—there was
no appearance of fire round the gas-stove—I found nothing in the basement to account for the fire—on the partition side the fire had burnt about half an hour—on the gas-meter side not so long; there would be a tremendous flame from the gas—I asked the prisoner the number of his policy—he said he was insured in the Liverpool, London, and Globe—he had not got the policy, and could not tell me the amount—I said, "Kindly produce your policy," and he turned away with the sharp answer, "I shan't"—he afterwards informed Inspector Doughty, who had some conversation with him, that it was at 17, Lawrence Lane.
Cross-examined. I am not a metropolitan fireman—I was captain of the Enfield Brigade; the chief officer was not on duty—I have attended twenty-four or twenty-five fires—I have not given evidence before—the fire had run up from the cardboard boxes along the joists—the gas-stove was ten to twelve feet from the boxes—I have never put out a fire by a gas-meter—the fire would melt the pipe, but not on the partition side, because it was too far away—I saw no coal-shoot.
ALBERT GEORGE BODLEY . I live at Wood Green—I am on the staff of the Liverpool, London, and Globe Insurance Company—I produce copy of insurance policy (Original produced)—it is dated 9th November, 1892—on 24th October the order was given—it is for £350 on household goods, £60 on the stock, and £30 on the trade fixtures and fittings: total £440—I had no notice of the stock having been removed on 15th July.
Cross-examined. The prisoner had insured in our office since 1888—his policy had once lapsed through non-payment—no claim has been made against our office.
CHARLES MUNRO COBB . I live at 2, Trinity Square—I am assistant to Francis Bacon, managing director of the Bush Hill Park Estate Company—the prisoner was tenant of 28, Queen Anne's Place, at £40 a year—on 24th June the rent was unpaid—a warrant of distress was levied on 20th July.
ROBERT CHARLES SQUIRES . I live at 48, Gibson Square—I am a clerk of the Discount Banking Company of England—I produce bill of sale dated 31st May, 1892, for £50, by the prisoner to the company; another of 24th October, 1892, for £30, by the same parties—the payments were kept up fairly regularly in the first instance, but not afterwards on the second bill—on 14th July the prisoner had paid £33 off the first, and on 12th July £8 off the second—he was in arrear four months in respect of the October bill of sale—no notice was given that possession was going to be taken under bill of sale—I instructed Gleeson to take possession on our behalf on 12th July—the prisoner told me on 11th the landlord was in possession for rent, and he applied for a further advance—I told him we could not entertain it—I put in distress, and have since taken possession of the things, having paid out the landlord.
Cross-examined. I have no complaint against the prisoner—the last date of payment was June 24th.
HARRY HORN (470 Y). I am stationed at Enfield—on 14th July I passed 28, Queen Anne's Place, at 11. 45 p. m.—I tried the doors—there was no light over the basement or on the ground floor—there is a fanlight along the footpath—I passed again at one o'clock—there was no light then.
the defendant standing with his back against the doorpost—I went into the shop—there was no stock—I heard a crackling noise in the corner, and called for water—the prisoner brought me one pail—I poured it through the hole in the match-board—the fire engine came—Kirby about that time gave me this short piece of lead pipe—in the basement I saw some charred cardboard boxes and burnt paper in the room, which is about 4 ft. 6 in. in width—I found this box of matches—there was a 3-f t. gas stove, and in the fireplace a kettle—there was no other appearance of tea having been made—the meter was 15 ft. from the gas stove—I lost sight of the defendant for some time, and Kirby and Laws brought water afterwards—the fire was burning behind the shop.
Cross-examined. The inspector has made inquiries as to the defendant's history—I believe he is a respectable man.
JOHN DOUGHTY (Inspector Y). I am stationed at Enfield—on the early morning of 15th July, when I got to 28, Queen Anne's Place, I found a, number of persons about the premises—I examined the premises, and conversed with Riley and Kitheringham—in the basement I pointed out to the defendant the quantity of cardboard boxes, paper, etc., where the fire appeared to have originated, and that it was clear the fire had been deliberately set alight to, and on my inquiring, so far as he was concerned the case was very suspicious—I told him I must ask him a few questions, and he could answer if he desired, but he need not, but I should make a note of all he said, when he said, "I came home at about ten p. m., boiled some water, had tea, and then went to bed at about eleven p. m., and heard nothing until I was alarmed by the man who was sleeping over me calling out 'Fire!' I then opened the door and put on my trousers and boots, and went downstairs and opened the back door; the house was full of smoke. I do not know if the other two men were downstairs or not, I did not see them; I went through the kitchen to get some water. When I first heard the call of 'Fire!'I opened my room door and heard a crackling noise going on. I think that by the time I got downstairs the men were about the house. I called and asked them if they had a light to light the light in the passage"—I asked him if he saw the men at the front door—he said, "I think when I opened the front door the men were trying to open it"—I went with him then to the bath-room—I then asked him if he had been to the bath-room during the night, and he said, "From the time I came up to bed at eleven o'clock I heard nothing, neither did I leave the room. I did not go up to the top floor after about seven p. m. I then filled the bath, as I usually have a cold bath in the morning, but I did not have a bath after the men had gone to bed"—I asked him what kind of matches he usually used—he produced a small box of safety matches, similar to that handed to me by Riley, saying "These matches are what we generally use"—I then went to the top of the house to the bath-room, and I pointed out that the bath was three-parts filled with water, and that it appeared to have been used, although there appeared to be very little soap used—he said, "I always use soap in the bath to wash. I did not run off the whole of the water, as I think it hardly worth while for one person"—then he explained his practice was when having a bath to run off a portion of the water, let the clean in, but never empty the bath—he then said, "When I opened the front door,
also the back door, and the kitchen window I found all secure"—that was in answer to my question whether he found all secure when he came down—he said, "I am certain no person came into the house after I went to bed"—I asked him about insurance—he said, "My furniture and stock are insured in the Liverpool, London and Globe for £500, I think, but I am not quite sure as to the amount. My policy is at 17, Lawrence Lane, City, where I go to business. It has been there for a fortnight or three weeks. I took it down there with some other papers which I have here, I do not know the number"—I pointed out to him there was no stock in the shop, and he said, "There is no stock in the shop, neither has there been for three weeks; it was my wife's property, and has nothing to do with me. She disposed of it about three or four weeks ago; my wife and family have been away since Tuesday, 11th; she has two children with her. My eldest son is in Africa"—he said, "I went into the basement when I came in, boiled some water on the gas-stove. I am in the habit of lighting my pipe and walking about the house, and throwing the match down" (that was after I asked him to come with me to the Police-station), "and I might have done so when I lit the gas-stove, and thrown the match carelessly on the paper. The gas was turned out by the man who came into the cellar"—that was in answer to the question whether he saw the witness Hill there, and he said the gas was turned out by him—he accompanied me to the Police-station and I returned to the house, and upon examining the place I found that there was nothing at all in any of the drawers or cupboards, no wearing apparel—there was no stock in the shop—there were large articles of furniture all through the place, it being furnished throughout except the shop; there was nothing in the shop—he was subsequently charged at the Police-station, and when the charge was read over to him he said, "The charge is not a correct one, for I did not wilfully and maliciously set fire to the place, it was on accident"—I searched him at the station—I found a small sum on him.
Cross-examined. I do not remember seeing a kettle on a gas jet—I have inquired and heard that he had occupied a good situation in the City between twenty and thirty years, and when he left, about five years ago, it was through the failure of his firm—since he has been carrying on a small drapery business at the house where the fire took place—the stock had been removed about a month before the fire—he had an office for a month or two at 17, Lawrence Land, which I visited, and found there no other furniture than a chair—I know nothing against him.
The Prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
No evidence being offered the JURY returned a verdict of
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.
The prisoner, in the hearing of the JURY, on the advice of his Counsel
PLEADED GUILTY to an indecent assault, and the JURY returned that verdict. Six Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, September 14th, 1893.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
WATSON PLEADED GUILTY .
PATRICK CALDON . I am a clerk at Anderton's Hotel, Fleet Street—my bedroom is No. 81 on the fifth floor—I went to my room about 12. 15 p. m. on Sunday, 6th August, and missed a scarf-pin from my dressing-table drawer—I went down and saw the prisoners in the coffee room—I told the porter to tell them I wanted to see them in the office—they came in, and I asked them why they had been on the fifth floor—I said I had missed a pin—they both denied taking it, and then Watson said he had it, and gave it me—Jones asked him why he took it; he made no answer—I sent for a constable, and gave them into custody.
Cross-examined. When I asked them why they were on the fifth floor Jones said he thought he had a perfect right to go where he pleased in the hotel—when I said I missed my pin he said, "I know nothing about it"—I said I should require proof that they had not got the pin—Jones said, "I can give you every proof that I have not got it"—I said, "I shall send for a constable"—Watson produced the pin before the constable was sent for—he also produced a pair of socks of mine—Jones said to Watson, "Why on earth did you take these things?" and reproached him—when the officer took hold of Jones he said, "What are you taking me for?"—the constable said, "You will see when you get to the station"—Watson had given me the pin.
Re-examined. I had been in the office during the morning.
MARY MANVELL . I am a servant at this hotel, and was on the fifth floor about 11. 30 a. m. on the 6th, when I saw the prisoners coming from the direction of room No. 81—No. 82 is along there, too—I watched them, and they went to the window and looked out, and then went downstairs—the barmaids occupy No. 82—there is no w. c. on that floor—the prisoners were coming towards me, and between them and me was the window—I did not speak to them—I was dressed as a chambermaid.
£1 10s. 6d. in gold and silver, a six-chambered revolver, loaded in one chamber, a number of cartridges, a letter, and several photographs.
Cross-examined. I stayed by the prisoners while the charge was taken—I did not hear Watson say that Jones knew nothing about it—Jones denied the charge—he said nothing at the station.
JONES— NOT GUILTY . WATSON— Discharged on Recognizances.
761. CHARLES POTTER (16) and WILLIAM BRANDUM (52) , Stealing 25 lbs. of indigo blue, the property of Henry Boardman Kenyon and others, to which POTTER PLEADED GUILTY. A second count charged BRANDUM with receiving the same, knowing it to be stolen.
MR. C. MORGAN Prosecuted and MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
THOMAS ABBOTT (City Detective) From information I received from Detective Hallum as to some indigo being stolen, I watched within the cloak-room at Fenchurch Street Station on September 1st—about six p. m. Potter took these two parcels in his hand to Brandum's oilshop, 99, Whitechapel Road—he remained there about three-quarters of an hour—he came out without the parcels—I followed him a short distance, and then stopped him—I told him I should take him in custody, and then took him back to Brandum's shop, and in Hallum's presence, and another officer, I said, "We are police officers. I have followed this lad (Potter) from the City with two parcels that contain indigo blue. We followed him into your shop, and saw him leave the parcels. He has told me you have given him £2 10s. for the blue; is that so?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "What do you know about this lad?"—he said, "I don't know much about him"—I said, "Where is the blue?"—he said, "There it is," pointing to a corner behind some sacks—I said, "Have you made any inquiry as to where the lad is employed?"—he said, "No"—I said, "About this blue?"—he said, "Oh, I thought it was some sweepings or samples"—I said, "I see you have not examined the parcels," as they were not undone—I then said to Potter, "How many transactions have you had with Brandum, and when was the last?"—he said, "About seven or eight, and the last one was about a week ago"—I said, "How much did he pay you on that occasion?"—he said, "About £1, and that was about 20 lbs. of blue"—I said, "How much money do you think you have had in all?"—he said, "About £7 or £8"—I said to Brandum, "You hear what he says; is that true?"—he said, "I have bought blue of the lad; I thought it was perqs, or something of that"—I said, "Have you any blue, as I intend to search before I leave?"—I had not made up my mind then whether I should take Brandum into custody—he said he had only about 1 lb., which he showed me in a drawer—he assured me he had no more—I told him I should charge him with feloniously receiving this 25 lbs., well knowing it to be stolen—he previously told me he sold the blue as fast as he got it, and that it was used for dyeing purposes—I took them both to Seething Lane Police-station, and charged them—they made no reply—I found on Potter £2 10s. and these keys—three of them fit four sample rooms at No. 9, Mincing Lane, one fits.
Mr. Kenyon's shellac room, one fits two indigo sample rooms of Mr. Kenyon's, and one fits another office of another indigo merchant in the same building—I also found on him these labels addressed in pencil to "Mr. W. Brandum, 99, Whitechapel Road, E.," also a receipt for a bicycle, £6 10s.—there was 6s. 81/2d. in his other pocket—he said the £2 10s. he received from Brandum.
Cross-examined. I satisfied myself that the parcels contained indigo, and took them into my possession—Potter was in my custody when I took him to Brandum's—I thought I was doing my duty in asking the questions I did in front of Brandum.
HENRY BORDMAN KENYON . I am one of the firm of John Kenyon and Son, indigo merchants—we have been missing indigo two or three years—on September 1st the police communicated with me—these are dock papers in which samples are packed—in this paper there was a 2 lb. sample—these two parcels correspond with the indigo which was on my premises—we got a dock sample with each parcel we bought in January last—our sample room is always kept locked—it is at the top of the house—the sample man has the key, but it is hanging up in the day, and locked up in the wife at night—this indigo is worth over £5—Potter was in the employ of a man named Walton, in Fenchurch Street, who had an office next door to me some years ago.
Cross-examined. When we receive indigo from the docks it is always in separate samples—it is not usual to mix indigo, it would deteriorate it, but dyers sometimes mix two kinds together—merchants send the old samples to the docks, and have them bulked there—it does not lose its colour by being kept—we never give away samples which have been on the shelf two or three years, it is too valuable—Potter's father is a carpenter and messenger.
By the COURT. The sweepings from the dock floors are sold by public auction—this is not at all like sweepings.
MARY POTTER . I am a widow, and live at 45, Branson Road, Brixton—Potter is my son—I was at the Police-court on September 2nd and 14th, and heard Brandum make this statement: "I have done business for them, and his grandfather and father, and after his father died his mother came and said they had a few customers left, and I could pay her whenever I could; I had no reason to know they were stolen"—I have seen Brandum once before in Whitechapel Road—my husband was acquainted with the prisoner—I do not know about my husband's father—I know it is not true that such an arrangement was mode with Brandum—I did not go to him and say that there were a few customers left, and I would send my boy round.
Cross-examined. My husband used to be in business at one time as a colonial dealer—he afterwards did office fittings, and was a messenger—I never heard that he had been at the prisoner's shop—I did not ask how he came to know him—I heard my husband mention his name—I have not heard him say he had just come from Brandum's shop—my son is in his seventeenth year—before he was arrested he was errand boy to Mr. Walton—I have heard that my husband did business with the prisoner—I never saw papers like these, or packets of blue in his possession—he was a very close man, he would not tell me anything—he died last March twelvemonth—the boy did not work for him in his lifetime.
BRANDUM— GUILTY of receiving. —Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. POTTER— Judgment respited.
MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted and MR. PAUL TAYLOR Defended.
DONALD MACKINTOSH . I am quartermaster of the steamship City of Agra, lying in Victoria Docks—on July 30th the prisoner and I went ashore together—we went to a public-house, and had three or four pints of beer—I was leaning on the counter, and Foley came at my back and knocked me down with his fist—I went to the ship and asked him for an apology—he said he would not apologise, and I struck him; he closed with me and stabbed me—I did not see the knife, but directly afterwards I saw him throw something out at the port.
Cross-examined. I did not remain on shore after he went on board—I had had about four good drops of beer—I said, "Why did you strike me ashore?" and the second officer said, "Go down to your berth"—he was not preparing to eat—it was daylight—when he was sitting down his head would be about as high as my loins; he was much below me—the whole thing was over in about a second.
JOHN DIXON DIXIE . I am a ships' painter—I was in the quartermaster's room; the prosecutor came in, and began to tell me what was the matter, and the prisoner said he was terrified—I have seen Foley with a sheath knife and a clasp knife.
Cross-examined. I did not see what the prisoner was doing, or what he had in his hand—it lasted two or three minutes.
Cross-examined. The prisoner was bleeding from a cut on his eye.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding, but with great provocation, and without the intention of doing grievous bodily harm. — Discharged on his own recognizances.
The Prisoner stated in the hearing of the JURY that he was guilty of unlawfully wounding, and the JURY found that verdict. He then
PLEADED GUILTY**† to a conviction at Southwark Police-court on 15th August, 1892— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
LLEWELLYN ST. JUST FLOWER . I am a clerk, and live in Essex—on August 21st I was in the Minories, wearing a scarf-pin—I was the worse for liquor—the two prisoners rushed up to me in John Street, one on each side—I broke away from them and the police came up—I did not know
that I had lost anything, but when they asked me if I had lost a scarf-pin I put my hand up and found it was gone.
Cross-examined by Gardner. I did not push against you, nor did you keep me from falling, that I know of—I was charged next morning with being drunk, and was fined—I cannot swear that you took my pin—I saw it ten minutes before in the Three Nuns—I was not sober when I went in there, but I was not drunk—I know I had it there because the barmaid noticed it.
EDWIN WILLIAM MITCHELL . I am a tin plate worker, of Whitechapel—on the evening of August 21st I saw Flower in John Street, drunk—the prisoners accosted him, and I saw Hughes try to take a pin out of his tie—he could not get it out, and then Gardner had a try—I ran and got a constable in a minute.
Cross-examined by Gardner. I was close to you, but did not wait to see which of you took the pin—Flower was too drunk to know whether he had lost it or not—you were holding him.
RICHARD TAPP (City Police Sergeant). On the evening of August 21st Mitchell spoke to me in the Minories—I turned into John Street, and saw Flower and the prisoners—I caught hold of them, and asked Flower if he had lost anything—he said, "No"—I said, "Did you have a pin in your tie?"—he said, "Yes," and put his hand up, and said, "I have lost it"—I told them they would be charged with stealing the gentleman's pin—they said they knew nothing about it.
Cross-examined by Gardner. You were not a yard from him.
Gardner's defence. I noticed this man very drunk; he walked up against us, and I said, "Be careful, sir, you will fall and hurt yourself. "He up with his stick and tried to strike me. I said, "Do not hit me or my friend, or you will get yourself into trouble. "No pin was found on us.
GARDNER then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at the Thames Police-court on July 30th, 1890.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. HUGHES— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
CHARLES WESTCOTT . I live at 67, Hollow Street, Islington—on July 25th, about 12. 40, I was in the New North Road, and one fellow hit me on my mouth, which made it bleed, and another took my watch and chain, and just as I was turning a corner the prisoner Davis tripped me up; but I kept hold of him, and a constable came and took him—Mendham was one of the five who hustled me—I picked him out from nine others at the station—I fell on my knees when I was tripped up, and have the marks now.
SIDNEY HILL (389 N). I heard a whistle, went in the direction of the sound, and saw the prosecutor holding Davis—he gave him into my charge for knocking up against him, one taking his watch and chain, and also with striking him on the mouth, and that Davis tripped him up—Davis said, "It was not me that did it, but I know the one that did it."
Mendham, from a description given to me—I charged him with being concerned with others not in custody in stealing a watch in New North Road on the morning of the 25th—I took him to the station—he was placed with eight or nine others, and Westcott identified him—he said that he came out of the North Pole Public-house, and saw the prosecutor talking with other men.
The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate. Davis says: "I was not there when the gentleman got his mouth bleeding. I saw him run away after someone, and another following him. I heard somebody say that I threw him over. The prosecutor laid hold of me; I said I had not moved from the corner. "Mendham says: "I came out of the public-house and was talking to the prosecutor, and someone came behind him and struck him on the mouth and ran away."
Davis's Defence. I saw the prosecutor talking to four men; one followed him and the others ran away. One of them threw him, and he caught hold of me. I was not there when he got the punch on the nose.
Mendham's Defence. I was talking to the prosecutor, and somebody came and struck him on the mouth.
DAVIS received a good character. GUILTY .
Discharged on recognizances.
FOURTH COURT.—Thursday, September 14th, 1893.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MR. BIRON Prosecuted, and MR. WARBURTON Defended Bovington.
EMILY HOVELL . I live at 226, North End Road, Fulham, and am agent for George John Murdock, bassinet maker—on 20th February Cutler came to my shop in the name of Blackwell, and said he wanted to purchase a bassinet for his wife—he went away, and came back a little time afterwards with a woman—he then chose this bassinet, and paid a deposit on it—the bassinet was sold to him on the hire system—this is the hiring agreement, which Cutler signed in the name of Blackwell in my presence—he said it was to be sent to 73, Shurles Road, and that he was a brewers' traveller, with his business place in the Borough, and that his employer's na ne was the same as his own—I sent the bassinet to him—I next paw it at the Police-court—I got nothing beyond the 8s. for it—my husband went to the address to try and get it, but found the prisoner had gone away.
EDWARD JOHN SAVERS . I live at 16, Melmoth Place, Walham Green, and am a cabman—on some day in February the prisoners came up to me on the rank and said they wanted to hire a cab, and asked me to go to Shepherd's Bush, and how much I would charge—I went with them to 73, Shurles Road—Bovington and Cutler went in there and brought out the bassinet, and told me to go Thompson's in the Askew Road—when we got there I helped Watt to take the machine into the pawnbroker's the other two prisoners stopped in the cab—Watt was in the pawnshop
about ten minutes, and when he came out he joined the other prisoners, and they went opposite to a public-house; and then they paid me and went away—about the same time I drove the prisoners with a sewing machine from 73, Shurles Road, to Clears', in Goldhawk Road, and I and Watt took the machine into the pawnbroker's, the other prisoners remaining outside—about the same time I took another sewing machine under similar circumstances—on that occasion Watt went in, the other prisoners waiting outside.
GEORGE MEAD . I am manager to Mr. Thompson, a pawnbroker, of 38, Norland Road—on February 20th I took this bassinet in pledge for £1 5s. in the name of Watt—this is the ticket—when the man brought it in I looked at it, and asked him what he wanted, and said, "We don't take these goods in without seeing that you have a receipt for it"—he said, "I have a receipt," and he produced this receipt. (This had a printed heading, "Gold and Co., Godliman Street" and purported to be a receipt for tine purchase from them of the, bassinet)—in consequence of seeing that receipt I took the bassinet in pledge; without the receipt I should not have done so—I wanted his address, and Watt gave me this card, with his name and address, and stamped across it in violet ink is "Bloemfontain"—he said he was in some difficulty, and that was why he wanted to pledge it—he took up the money and left.
Cross-examined by Cutler. I do not recollect seeing you when the perambulator was pawned.
ALFRED CAPES . I keep a sale-room at Clapham Road Station—in March I knew Bovington in the name of Vernon—on March 8th I received this letter, signed Leslie Vernon, enclosing a pawnticket for a perambulator, and offering to sell the ticket to me for 5s.
HAROLD GODWIN . I am manager of Jones Sewing Machine Depôt—on 3rd February I went to Bovington's house, 2, Delvino Road, in consequence of an arrangement—he consulted us about buying a sewing machine. (MR. WARBURTON objected to this evidence as irrelevant to the case. MR. BIRON contended that it was admissible as showing guilty knowledge, and also the connection between the prisoners. The COURT ruled that the evidence was not admissible.)
HARRY MORGAN (Inspector T) I arrested Watt on 18th July—I told him I was a policeman, and that he would be charged with feloniously receiving a sewing machine and two bassinets, which had been obtained by Cutler and Bovington—he said, "I pledged the things for them, not for myself"—on 15th July I arrested Bovington and read the warrant to him—he made no answer—on 19th I received a letter from Bovington written from the prison—on the 21st I saw him at the House of Detention, Holloway—I said I had come to see him about his letter, and I cautioned him that what he said would be used in evidence—he made this statement, which I took down at the time; he signed it. (The part of the statement referring to the charge in the indictment was read as follows: "Cutler obtained a bassinet from Mrs. Hovell. It was delivered at 73, Shurles Road; the name Charles Black well on the agreement now shown to me is in Cutler's writing. Watt afterwards came to me at 73, Shurles Road; he, I and Cutler went by cab to Mr. Thompson's, where Watt pledged it. The money we shared as before. I know nothing about the receipt he gave to Mr. Thompson"—Watt gave an address, 1, Kings Road,
Fulham—I searched and found a stamp which corresponded with the card produced to Mr. Mead, the pawnbroker—I have been to the address, Gold and Co., Godliman Street; there is no such firm there now, nor was there at the time the bassinet was sold.
Cross-examined by Cutler. Prior to my hearing from Bovington in Holloway, his father had spoken to me about his making a statement, and said be wished to give us all the help he could, and he did.
Watt, in his defence, said that he was introduced to Cutler, who told him he had sewing machines and furniture that he wanted to turn into money, and offered to pay him for pawning them, and that he (Watt), believing they were Cutler's property, pawned them for him.
Cutler stated that he obtained the bassinet openly, that he knew nothing about the receipt, and that he believed Watt knew nothing about the matter.
Mr. WARBURTON said that his client would make his own address to the JURY. Bovington stated that he did not see Watt write the receipt, that he knew nothing of what Cutler had done till the things were taken away, and that Leslie Vernon was the name the used as a vocalist.
WATT— NOT GUILTY .
CUTLER and BOVINGTON— GUILTY of uttering.
MR. BIRON Prosecuted, and MR. WARBURTON Defended Bovington.
HAROLD GODWIN . I am manager to the Jones Sewing Machine Company—I went to 2, Delvino Road about the 2nd or 3rd of February, and saw Bovington, whom I knew as Leslie Vernon, and arranged about a sewing machine being sent there—on 3rd February I took the machine to Delvino Road—in the course of our interview Bovington said he was a gentleman of independent means, and would pay in a day or two, and instalments were not mentioned at that time—he signed this agreement for hire—the machine was delivered there and then—afterwards, when I called to see about the instalments, I found Bovington gone, and no machine—the value of the machine was £7 2s. 6d.
Cross-examined by Bovington. One of our travellers canvassed for the machine—the transaction was to be for cash, but I took the precaution of having an agreement, as people sometimes alter their minds—you wrote after you moved, asking us to take the machine away.
EDWIN JOHN SAYERS . I am a cabman—in February Bovington and Cutler called me, and I drove them to 73, Shurles Road, where a sewing machine was brought out and put in the cab—afterwards we picked up Watt at Fulham Cross, and went to a pawnbroker's in Goldhawk Road—I helped Watt take the sewing machine in there, the other prisoners remaining outside with the cab—then the three prisoners went opposite to the public-house, and I brought them all back to Hammersmith.
LOUIS JELPHE . I am assistant to Mr. Clears, a pawnbroker at Goldhawk Road—on 17th February Watt pledged a sewing machine with me—I asked if he had the receipt, and he produced this receipt, heade "Dods and Co."—he said they were general dealers, and attended auction
sale-rooms, and bought these goods, and that he in turn bought goods of Dods and Co.—"Watt and Co." is written in the corner of the receipt as the name of the purchasers—he said he bought the goods and paid cash, and the receipt was handed to him—I believed his statement to be true, or I should not have taken the machine—it is the trade custom to ask for receipts.
HARRY MORGAN (Inspects T). I arrested Watt; he said he did it for the others—in the statement Bovington made to me at Holloway he said with reference to this sewing machine, "Cutler introduced me to Watt at my then address, 73, Shurles Road, with a view to the disposal of the Jones sewing machine, which Watt pledged at Clears', Goldhawk Road. Watt said he had a purchaser for the ticket Watt went with Cutler and me to pledge the machine; we waited outside, and Watt pledged it. The money was afterwards equally divided between us"—I have made inquiries, and find there are no such firms as Dods and Co. or Watt and Co.—Watt only lived at the address; there is no business there.
Watt, in his defence, said that he. could only repeat what he. had already said; that he knew nothing, but that the goods were received in the proper way of business.
Cutler said he did not receive any of the money obtained for the machine, and that he did not think Watt knew there was anything wrong.
Bovington said that he took the machine because the canvasser pressed him to have it, but that when he was going to move he wrote to the company to take it away, and they did not do so, and after that Watt disposed of it.
MR. BIRON Prosecuted, and MR. WARBURTON Defended Bovington.
Watt, in his defence, said he knew nothing about it. Cutler and Bovington said that they did not know a receipt was produced to the pawnbroker.
WATT— GUILTY of uttering.
CUTLER and BOVINGTON— NOT GUILTY .
MR. BIRON Prosecuted.
THOMAS WARBY . I live at 1, Cane Street, Chelsea, and am a dealer in pianos—on 22nd January Bovington came and gave the name of Leslie Vernon, and said he wanted a piano—this hiring agreement was prepared, which Bovington signed—before that he gave as a reference his lodger Myers, who had previously obtained an organ from me—we sent the piano to 2, Delvino Road—Bovington paid me 12s. 6d.—I got no more instalments—I went to 2, Delvino Road several times; I only saw a woman there—I never saw the piano there—I next saw it at Hammersmith Police-court.
Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON I have not since been paid for the piano.
ALFRED CAPES . I have a sale-room at Clapham Railway Station—in February this year I went to Delvino Road in consequence of a letter I received—I there saw Bovington under the name of Leslie Vernon—he showed me a piano, and told me that it was his own piano that he had bought of a friend who was hard up some time before; that he (Bovington) was a professional singer, and was very ill and could not carry on his business as a singer, and being hard up he was compelled to sell it—finally I agreed to buy it for £9 10s., and I gave him £1 deposit, and sent for the piano next day, and sent him a cheque—next day he came and asked me to cash the cheque for him, as he was very hard up—I gave him a few shillings—next day I sent him £5, and told him to come for the balance—a day or two afterwards he came to my sale-room—another man came with him, but did not come into my sale-room; I saw and recognised him at the Police-court as Myers—I could not identify Bovington at that time because he had grown a beard, and when he first came to me he was a thin, pale-faced fellow—the piano was afterwards identified by Warby as his; it is downstairs—I afterwards bought it from Warby through his agent.
Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I made an agreement with Warby's agent to re-buy the piano—Warby disputes my right to do so.
Cross-examined by Myers. I firmly believe you are the man who accompanied Bovington—at the Police-court I felt perfectly sure about you; I recognised you at once—I cannot see you at this moment—I had not seen or heard your name mentioned before.
JAMES (Sergeant) I arrested Myers on 18th August at Brighton, and read the warrant to him—he answered, "All right"—I brought him to London—on the way he said, "I was introduced to Bovington by his brother. I stayed with him a short time. I was very hard up, and in consequence I was easily led. He pressed me for money continually. He got some things, and I got some. He is as bad or even worse than I am"—when the charge was read at the station he made no answer.
HARRY MORGAN (Inspector T). Bovington, in his statement to me, said this with regard to this matter: "About 22nd January, 1893, I obtained a piano from Mr. Warby in the name of Leslie Vernon; it was delivered to 2, Delvino Road. About a fortnight afterwards I saw an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph that A Capes wanted to buy a piano. I sent the telegram produced to him about the advertisement. He called on me at 2, Delvino Road. After trying it he said, 'How much do you want for it?' I said £10. He said he did not want to give more than £9. I agreed to take £9 10s. He asked me if it was my property. The piano was taken away by Vigers, the carman who does his work."
Bovington, in his defence, stated that he obtained the piano on the hire system, and disposed of it to Mr. Capes, who was to take over the contract on his behalf and pay for it, and that Warby accepted that arrangement.
BOVINGTON— GUILTY .
MYERS— NOT GUILTY .
GEORGE MYERS and THOMAS HENRY BOVINGTON were also charged on two other indictments with stealing an organ, the property of Thomas Warby, and a piano, the property of Henry Daniel Scrine, to which MYERS PLEADED GUITY .
THOMAS HENRY BOVINGTON was further indicted for having been convicted of felony at Richmond in May, 1888.
FREDERICK HUMPHREYS (Sergeant, J 49). I was present at Richmond. Petty Sessions in May, 1888, when the prisoner pleaded guilty to felony and was bound over in £40 to come up for judgment if called on.
GUILTY .—WATT, CUTLER and MYERS— Two Years' Hard Labour each. BOVINGTON— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
CHARLES HOOK . I am a master carman, of 240, East Street, Walworth—on 28th June I went to the London, Chatham and Dover Railway Station, and received five cases, which I had orders to take to 7 and 8, Australian Avenue—I took them there, and went in the warehouse doors—I met a man coming out—I had a sheet in my hand—he said, "What have you got?"—I said, "Some cases"—he said, "Let us look; I will go up"—I gave him the sheet, and he turned and said, "I will see whether we will have them here or at the other warehouse"—I turned, and put the horse's nosebag on—the man came out and spoke to me in a few seconds, and in consequence of what he said I took the goods round to Milton Street, and there delivered them as by order—the party went and got a truck out of another warehouse, and helped me to cart the goods into the place in Milton Street, and gave me the sheet already signed and some beer money—the prisoner was not that man.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not see you.
DAVID HERD . I am a carman, of 40, Weymouth Terrace, Hackney Road—I used to work for Mr. George Burrows, of London Fields, a carman—on 28th June a man came to the house when I was working for Burrows and hired a van, with which I went the same day to Milton Street—I there saw the prisoner and others—five cases were loaded into my van, and I took and delivered them at a stable in a turning out of the Roman Road—we had three drinks on the way—the prisoner went by a hansom cab—I saw the prisoner at Milton Street and in the cab; I have no doubt he is the man—I did not see the cases after I unloaded them.
Cross-examined. You had a slight moustache when this happened, and at the Police-station you were clean shaven—I told the inspector so.
WILLIAM ROBERTS . I am a grocer, of 15, Arbour Road, Bow—I have a stable adjoining my shop—on 28th June the prisoner and another man came—the prisoner asked if I had a stable to let—I said, "Yes, but I would not let it for a horse"—he said he did not want it for a horse; he wanted it for goods—I agreed to let him have it—he paid my wife half-a-crown for the first week's rent—the same night he fetched about five boxes, and put them in the stable; I saw them from a distance—I don't know whether the prisoner was there when they came; I did not see him then—there were four or five men there at the time—afterwards the police came and took charge of the boxes—I next saw the prisoner at the Police-court, and identified him there—I am quite sure he is the man.
Cross-examined. I was put in front of six men at the Police-station, and I said I could not recognise anyone, but that was because it was gas-light,
and my eyes are not very good; I thought you were the man—the moment I saw you in the daylight I knew you to be the man, and I have in it the slightest doubt about it.
JOHN AVORY . I am forwarding clerk to Robert Lang, trading as Pearson, Lang, and Harris, of 7 and 8, Australian Avenue—on 28th June we should have received five cases containing dress material, value £350—we did not receive those cases till ten or fourteen days afterwards, and then they came from the police—I do not know the prisoner.
PHILIP ATHERTON (Detective J). I have known the prisoner for about twelve months—on September 3rd I saw him in Ashford Street, Pitfield Street, Hoxton—I said, "I want you"—he said, "What for?"—I said, "I will tell you directly"—he went quietly with me for about 100 yards, and then he made a desperate attempt to get away, throwing me to the ground—after a struggle I got the assistance of a constable, and the prisoner was secured—I took him in a cab to Bethnal Green Police-station, where Roberts saw him among others, but he did not identify him then—he was put up for identification again next morning, and Herd saw him and picked him out immediately, without any hesitation.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he, did not take the stable, and that he knew nothing of the matter.
A witness deposed to the prisoner's good character.
NOT GUILTY .
ELIZA STAMP . I am the wife of Henry Stamp, and live at 21, Gloster Street, Hackney—the prisoner was my husband's sister-in-law—my brother died on May 25th, 1892—the prisoner was William Stamp's wife—I was a witness to the marriage, which was on 2nd May, 1870, at the Red Church, Bethnal Green.
Cross-examined by prisoner. Your husband was not a person of good character, he was a drunkard—I know he lived with another woman and had two children by her.
JOHN PRESTON (84 J). I knew the prisoner's first husband, William Stamp—I last saw him on 21st May, 1885, when I assisted in arresting him on a warrant for making threats against his wife—he was bound over in. £10 to be of good behaviour, at Worship Street—the prisoner then appeared to give evidence against him.
Cross-examined. I have been sent to prison for beating you—I am not the prosecutor; I am subpœned here.
COLLETT (Inspector) On 21st July I was on duty at the station when the prisoner was brought in—she made this statement, which I took down in writing; she signed it: "I wish to give myself up for bigamy. I married Galliers on 24th November, 1886. At that time I had hot seen my husband, William Alfred Stamp, for eight or nine years, and did not
know whether he was alive or not till about three years ago, when my brother met him. I was married to Stamp on 12th May, 1870, at the Red Church. I only lived with him for about twelve months, and had to leave him owing to his cruelty to me. He died at a lodging-house about twelve months ago. I give myself up, as it is impossible for me to live longer with Galliers, as he is in the habit always of throwing up my having committed bigamy. There is no witness of the first marriage."
The prisoner, in her defence, stated that before her second marriage she was told her husband was dead.
GUILTY.—Strongly recommended to mercy by the JURY.— One Day's Imprisonment.
OLD COURT. —Friday, September 15th, 1893.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
PLEADED NOT GUILTY. Wesley Edwards (Police Sergeant, H R 3) identified him as the person so charged, but the
JURY found him NOT GUILTY. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. C. F. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. LOCKWOOD, Q. C., with MR. GEOGHEGAN, appeared for Walters, and MR. PAUL TAYLOR for Gamble.
GAMBLE— NOT GUILTY .
WALTERS— GUILTY .— One Year and Ten Months' Hard Labour.
FOURTH COURT.—Friday, September 15th, 1893.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MR. CONLEY Prosecuted.
WILLIAM JOHN HIGGINS . I keep a coffee-house in Horseferry Road, Westminster—I went to bed at eleven o'clock, and about 2. 30 my wife awoke me—I went down and found things upset in the passage, and the store-room window open, which was shut when I went to bed—I went to bed again, and in about a quarter of an hour stones were thrown at the window—I looked out, and saw a constable, and went down and let him in—I went into the back room, and found two windows open—I know the prisoner by sight.
I saw the prisoner put his head over a wall—he saw me, and disappeared—I gave information—a constable got a ladder and got on the other roof—I saw the prisoner there, and followed him about sixty yards—I then got Brockton's assistance, and discovered the prisoner—I said I should take him in custody—an entrance had been effected by getting on a wall and opening a window—I found a pair of boots, which the prisoner owns.
JOHN BROCKTON (225 A). I saw Fawcett in Horseferry Road—he let me through 41, Marsham Street—I went into a room used for storing fruit, and saw the prisoner concealed under some baskets—I asked what he was doing there—he said, "All right, governor, you see I am muddled again"—he had no boots on—we found some boots outside, which we took to the station, and he said they were his—he said nothing to the charge.
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said that there were four of them going to Kent, and one of them threw his (the prisoner's) cap away, and he went to get it, and knocked some flowerpots down, and that he took his boots off and got over a wall to get away from a constable, and that Higgins had a lot of lodgers, one of whom might have opened the window as he went up to bed.
He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at Clerkenwell on September 7th, 1891. Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. CAMPBELL Defended.
The particulars of this case are unfit for publication.
GUILTY.— Judgment respited.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted and MR. WILLS Defended.
WILLIAM THOMAS SPENCER . I am cashier to Gerald Hunt and Son, animal charcoal manufacturers—the prisoner was in their employ—it was his duty to go out and buy bones and fat—he had money given him every morning, and a counterfoil book—he would go to our customers' shops purchase bones and fat, enter the weight and price, in this book, give the customer this part, and bring the counterfoil to the office signed by the customer—the storekeeper received the book; I found that it was short in some places—on May 30th the prisoner went out with £4, and returned with 12s. 11d.—on the counterfoil here is £3 0s. 7d. as paid. to Messrs. Johnson—there are also two other cash payments, 2s. 10d. and 3s. 8d.—on June 30th he went out with £4, and returned with 10s. 5d., which is purported to be signed for by Peek—on July 20th he took out £2, and the counterfoil says that he paid Mr. G. Brown, of Homerton, 15s. 3d.—he retained £1 4s. 9d.—he was
called in in the presence of an officer, and I said, "In your collection of yesterday you have charged Brown 15s. 3d., but you have not paid it; you have kept the money and signed the customer's name"—he said, "I know I did"—I gave him in custody.
Cross-examined. I have a weigh-bridge—the wagon would be weighed as it went out and when it came in—the bones and fat would be weighed—I have found him to bring short weight—on May 30th he went out with £4, and was supposed to have expended £3 7s. 1d.—the weight on the weigh-bridge was 40 cwt. 2 qr.—that was composed of different articles which would be weighed next day on the scale—it is not priced out—the price charged is a fair price—I believe that on May 30th the stuff delivered was a fair value for the amount paid—small men walk about from house to house to buy fat, and I have heard that the prisoner has been in the habit of buying from them—on 30th June 37 lb. 2 oz. is entered in the weigh-book £3 3s. 9d. would be a fair amount for that—I think he was taken in custody on July 2nd, and Brown's affair was the day before—he had £2 on the 15th, and spent 15s. 3d. for 22 cwt. 3 qr., but there are some shops where he gives credit—on May 26th he brought home 34 cwt. 1 qr.—he was given £5 that morning, and he brought back £1 17s. 10d., but we should have had 1/4 cwt. more, value 11d.
Re-examined. On May 25th he was 14 lb. short on the bridge, value 8s. 10d., and on the 29th 17 lb. short—he brought 4 cwt. 3 qr. 5 lb from Brown's; it was not short weight on that day—they see the cart as. it comes in. and take the contents out.
By MR. WILLS. He sometimes came home with 2 lb. too much. The JURY here stated that they had heard enough of the case.
NOT GUILTY .
No evidence was offered.
NOT GUILTY .
HENRY LANCASTER MATCHAM . I am manager to Saville Brothers, brewers, of Stratford—on August 1st the prisoner called at my office and said he had a load of spirits at Forest Gate, and he was deficient of two cases, and asked if I could supply them—I asked, "What firm?"—he said, Donaldson, the wine merchants, of Villiers Street, Strand," and showed me a bill-head, and said he was the son of Mr. Donaldson—I asked him for a reference, and he gave me the name of Mr. Davidson, who I knew well—I said, "Will you pay for this brandy?"—he said, "I will bring a cheque to-night or to-morrow"—we gave him the usual permit, and took his signature for the brandy, which he took away in a Hansom's cab—I wrote to the address he gave, and the letter was returned to me—this is it—the value of the brandy was £6 6s.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I shall not have to refund the brandy; the firm will bear the loss—Inspector Morgan called on me perhaps three times; he suggested the charge of theft by means of a trick—I sold the
brandy to your firm through you; if you had paid me next day no charge would have been preferred—your failure to pay made you a thief—I have made many bad debts before.
JOHN KETTLE . I live at 58, Wood Lane, and am a dresser—on this Tuesday between five and six a Hansom's drew up at my door, and the prisoner got out and asked if I could do with two cases of brandy which a customer of his had not taken—I said if everything was straightforward and above board—he asked about 9d. a case less than the market value—I asked him for the permit; he said he had not got it, and he did not know what to do, as he had no money to pay the cab fare—I said he could have the case, and I lent him 10s. on his I O U—he came next day and said he had sold the brandy, and paid me the 10s.
JOHN PICKEN . I am a wine agent, of Forest Gate—on August 2nd the prisoner called and said that he had two cases of brandy which had been Bent to Mr. Kettle, who had been rather nasty about it, and asked if I would take it at 57s. 6d. a dozen—I asked him what firm he represented—he said he had no card—he took out some papers with "Ford and Co.," of Leith, and "Donaldson and Co. "at the bottom, and said that he was Donaldson, and he represented "Ford and Co."
HENRY NEAL . I work for Mr. Picken—I saw the prisoner at his shop in August, and he said to me, in the prisoner's presence, "Go with that gentleman to Mr. Kettle, and fetch two cases of brandy," and I did so.
ALEXANDER PICKEN . I am a brother of the former witness—a cheque in payment for the brandy was made out, and I handed it to the prisoner—it was passed through our bank, and paid—I gave it to the Magistrate.
JOHN WILLIAM VINK . I am a grocer, of 29, High Street, Thornton Heath—on July 19th the prisoner called on me and said he had an order from his master to get some grocery at the Stores, and knowing me I might as well have the order—he ordered articles which came to £2 1s. 10d., which I sent to Marney Road by Carter Paterson's—he called again on Wednesday, and said he had got a cheque to pay for the goods, and gave me this cheque for £3 8s. on the Consolidated Bank, Charing Cross—he said, "My dad has made it out for £3 8s. I can't make it out I suppose he had not got the bill before him, but it is no consequence; I will take more goods," which he did, and I gave him the change—I paid it in, and it was returned marked "Refer to drawer."
Cross-examined. I sold goods to you and cashed your cheques about two years ago when you lived at Thornton Heath—they were honoured, but they were not your cheques—there were only two or three—I was called as a witness in another case before I charged you—I wrote asking you to. refund the money, and having no answer, I wrote saying that I should take criminal proceedings at once—the superintendent said that I must come to the Police-court—I do not know who suggested the wording of the charge.
Re-examined. I wrote to the address the prisoner gave, 71, Marney Road, Clapham Junction.
MARY BOON . I live at 71, Marney Road, Clapham Junction—the prisoner lodged with me, and left in January—he afterwards called and asked me to receive a parcel—he said the address had been given wrong—
I received it, and afterwards a second parcel came, and a boy took it away.
GEORGE TRIMMER . I am a clerk at Charing Cross Consolidated Bank—they had a customer named Robert Donaldson—his account was opened in July, 1891, and closed by us on June 30th, 1893—there was a small balance, which we took for commission—he had no authority to overdraw his account—this cheque was paid in, and I returned it.
Cross-examined. I did not know that the signatures R. Donaldson and R. Vince were his writing—there was no suspicion of forgery—I wrote, "Refer to drawer," but it was an error; I ought to have written, "Account closed"—mistakes have been made at the bank, but not in your account within the last six months; they might have been previously.
ROBERT DONALDSON . I am the prisoner's father, and live at 56, Kimberly Road, Stockwell—I carried on business last year as Donaldson and Co., and gave it up about November—the prisoner was not a partner—I neither authorised him to or interdicted him from, using the name of Donaldson and Co.—he has lived away from me for a month or two—I did not give a cheque to Mr. Vince or an order for goods, but I believe something was ordered by my family—I thought this cheque was not my writing, but the bank say that it is—it is a plain paper cheque—I was in Scotland last year, and used sometimes to send blank cheques to my son—I had not a place of business in Villiers Street, Strand, in August this year.
Cross-examined. Up to the end of last year I was at Villiers Street, but I did not employ you—I sometimes sent you blank cheques from Scotland—no charges of fraud or theft were ever made against you—I will not swear that this is not my signature to this cheque—my account at the Consolidated Bank is not closed—I thought I closed it in November by a cheque for £19, but there were a great many errors—this is my passbook—here is "Error, £24 5s." written by the bank—they made a blunder, and gave me that credit without any reason—so far as I can make out I have a balance of £7 there—my book does not show that the account is withdrawn—in sending you blank cheques I simply signed my name; I could not fill them up because I did not know the amount.
By the JURY. Possibly this may be one of the blank cheques—I do not remember drawing it—my place at Villiers Street is not closed; it is simply chambers as a wine merchant—I also banked at Preedy's—this cheque might deceive me, as it deceived an adept, and my writing varies very much.
Re-examined. I have not communicated with the bank about the £7—I only found it out last night.
HARRY MORGAN (Police Inspector T). I searched the prisoner's room at St. John's Hill, and found the documents produced, and the permit—an attempt has been made to change the name in the permit to Kettle; it has been scratched with some sharp instrument—I went to Villiers Street, but found no such person had been there during the last twelve months—I arrested the prisoner; he was charged with obtaining a case of brandy by false pretences—he made no answer to this charge.
Cross-examined. I told the prosecutor you were charged with obtaining goods from Skinner by false pretences—I did not know that you owed
money, but I guessed so from the letters I found—Stebbing's was not a false charge; the Magistrate said so—I did not ask Mr. Davidson to come up against you.
The prisoner in his defence stated that the Magistrate dismissed the original charge of obtaining goods from Mr. Stebbing, and that while it was going on the Inspector went round to his creditors inducing them to get up charges against him, and that Mr. Matcham would not have appeared if the Inspector had not induced him to do so; that the cheque was given him by his father, and he filled it up for £3, being very short of money; that he bought the brandy as Davidson and Co., and that the change in the destination of the brandy was because the distance was too great.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
THOMAS K. EVANS . I am superintendent of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children—the prisoner was engaged by them some time as a probationer—he had the case of a child suffering from diphtheria—he came to me crying, and said he felt very lonely, and had been to Winchester, and his wife had let him have a little boy to bring up, but the boy died at Winchester—I gave him leave to go down, and reported the matter to the directors, and when he came back I told him to stay—he agreed to pay the expenses of the funeral and the doctor—I told him to make out a list of his expenses, and he received £8 1s.—I had to suspend him on June 15th, and on June 19th I had directions to dismiss him—he was not entitled to borrow money for the society on July 19th—he was not in the employment—we had claims from Mr. Sawyer and Mr. Cooper—he was not authorised to give that—he had no right to detain any receipts after he was dismissed—A, B and C are in his writing, to the best of my knowledge.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You did not attempt to obtain any money from me on behalf of your child—I sign the sheets—I did not sign this one, because Mr. Wall wished to see you and condole with you—I put it down on the company's paper; it was on a blank sheet, you wrote in my presence.
PHILIP CHARLES JEWIN . I live at St. Catherine's Cottage, Winchester—the prisoner married my daughter; she has three children, aged five, three and a half, and eighteen months, all boys—during May and June she was living with me—the children are all alive and well—a boy was not taken away to live with the prisoner at any time.
JAMES SAWYER . I live at 19, Lower Marsh, Lambeth—the prisoner handed me the document marked "E," and I believed he was an officer of the society—he said, "Mr. Sawyer, excuse me, but could you do this for me? This is a very bad case, the stench of the room is so great that I had
to go and get some ammonia"—I said, "Very well"—he said, "I will pay you next Wednesday, and if I don't they will"—I lent him 5s.
HENRY COOPER . I am housekeeper at 82, New Cut—I know the prisoner as a customer—on July 9th he gave me the paper marked "G" and a card—I believed him to be an inspector of the society—he said there was a case in Cornwall Road, and being Saturday he could not get any money, and would I lend him 5s. till Monday?—I did so.
ALFRED NICHOLS (Police Sergeant E). On July 12th, at two am., I went to the prisoner's lodging, and found him in bed—I read the warrant to him—he mode no reply—I removed a number of papers which he had left with the deputy of the lodging-house, and among them these three papers.
The prisoner, in his defence., stated that he received the money as a loan and did not know that it was the society's money, and that he gave his father-in-law £1 of it, and that he borrowed the two sums of 5s. for the benefit of the destitute children.
GUILTY .— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
JAMES DEWAR . I live at 110, Eastfield Streets—on July 25th I went to bed at eleven o'clock; I bolted the shutters and locked the front and side doors—about three a. m. I heard a noise, saw the shutters open, and saw the prisoner there—he looked through the window, threw it up, and came in and searched my child's clothes—I jumped out of bed, put my trousers on, ran round the corner, and saw the prisoner standing there, and another one—I laid hold of them, and said, "I have got you"—the prisoner pulled a pistol out of his pocket and gave it to the other one a policeman came up.
SAMUEL HUNTLEY (384 H). On the morning of 26th July I was in Englefield Street, and saw Dewar with the prisoner in custody, and another one running away—I ran after him, but lost him—I went back to the prisoner—he said, "Wait a minute; let me put my boots on; they are round the corner"—I found them there—the shutter had been opened from without, by a knife.
Prisoner's defence. I did not open the shutter, or do anything; he came round the corner and said, "Now I have got you."
GUILTY .— Discharged on recognizances.
OLD COURT.—Saturday, September 16th, 1893.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. BESLEY Prosecuted, and MR. PAUL TAYLOR Defended Dukes.
EVELYN ARBUTHNOT . I occupy 15, Craven Hill Gardens—about 10th July I went to Maples' to purchase a carpet—Mr. Hart was the assistant who attended to me—I selected a 12-foot seamless Brussels, price about
£5—the carpet now produced resembles it in every respect—I gave special directions that it should not be delivered, as I was going abroad; I would send for it when I returned—I left Mrs. Harrison in the house as cure-taker—I have since been to the house, and no such carpet is there.
FREDERICK GEORGE HART . I am a carpet salesman in the employ of Maple and Co., Limited, in Tottenham Court Road—I remember Mrs. Arbuthnot coming on Saturday, 8th July, and selecting a carpet—I believe this (produced) is it—I saw it at the Police-court, and examined it; the manufacturers' numbers are on it—it was supplied to us by Messrs. Crossley, of Halifax—to my knowledge no such carpets are supplied to any other parties within eight miles of Charing Cross—I have a note of the size of the carpet that Mrs. Arbuthnot bought, 12 ft. by 11 ft.—that is the size of this carpet; the price was £5 2s. for cash only—I have no knowledge of either of the prisoners—the carpet was put aside in the sold fixture; that is a place intended for the keeping of goods sold waiting for delivery—I made out a delivery note, which I have; if it had been delivered I should not have possession of it—no authority has ever been given for its leaving our place—I saw it in the sold fixture about a week after I sold it—I did not know it was gone until the police came and told us of it, about two days before I went before the Magistrate—I looked for it, and it was gone; the sold fixture is in the carpet department; it is a part of a room on the basement—I gave no authority for its removal—a carman was employed to take out goods, when he had a delivery note; he would then go to the fixture and take it out—it would be put on the delivery platform with the delivery note attached—no one but the porter would have a right to take anything out of the fixture.
Cross-examined by MR. TAYLOR. There are not hundreds of carpets of the same size and number—I should not know if there are hundreds of such carpets outside the eight-mile area, supplied by Crossleys to other firms—in the course of years I may have sold carpets of the same pattern and size—I only identify this carpet by the entry in my book; it is a usual size.
Re-examined. No other carpet was delivered between 8th July and 2nd August.
GEORGE STEPHEN DAVIS . I am employed by Maple and Co.—I am one of the managers of the packing department—my duties occasionally take me into the basement—I recollect seeing Kerslake on the premises about four weeks before I gave evidence—he was in the service about the middle of July—he was on the ground floor in the packing department—I asked him what he was there for—he said he was working for Wilson, the carman occasionally employed by Maples—I said, "Why did you go upstairs?"—he said, "I want to see Gable"—he is a man in our employ—he then went downstairs leading to the basement, where the sold fixtures are kept—it was about ten minutes to two in the day when I saw him.
Cross-examined by Kerslake. I did not see you take anything out of the-place.
Cross-examined by Kerslake. I did not see you take the carpet
out—I saw a man take it out, I could not say whether it was you—this was on the 2nd August—he took it out of the sold fixture, where the sold carpets are kept—I thought he was one of Maples' men; he had on a white apron, and looked like one of our men—he did not produce any delivery order to me—I did not look after the sold fixture, there should be a person there to do so.
Re-examined. This was, I should say, between four and five in the afternoon—the man that looks after the fixture was absent—I knew the carpet from the back of it—I could identify it—this is the carpet, I am sure of it—I first heard that it had been stolen the day after I was sent for to Bow Street—I then stated that I had seen a man take it away—some men were brought up to see if I could identify the man, and I could not, because I could not see his face—he was close against the sold fixture, and I saw him put the carpet on his shoulder and take it away, and I followed him—he was a man of about my own build, perhaps a little taller—I could identify the carpet by the back of it—I have had charge of this class of carpet ever since they were made.
CHARLES GABLE . I have been employed at Maple and Co. for six years—I knew Kerslake when employed there in the packing department; he left about twelve months ago—I recognise Price as a carpet-packer there; he left about two years ago—I have never had any business transactions with Kerslake—I had no visit from him there in July; I did not know he was on the premises; he had no business to ask for me—I met him in the street months back, and merely nodded to him—we were on friendly terms, but not close friends—I did not tell him to call upon me at Maples'.
HARRY BINNS . I am employed in the packing department at Messrs. Maples—I have charge of the department during the dinner hour—about a fortnight before I gave evidence before the Magistrate, between one and two in the day, I saw Kerslake there, on the first floor, in the packing department—I asked him what business he had there—he said he had come to see Gable—I knew him as having been formerly in the service—I told him he had no right there, and he had better go downstairs—Gable was at his dinner.
Cross-examined by MR. TAYLOR. This was before the Bank Holiday—I did not see Kerslake between that time and the date of my giving evidence before the Magistrate—I have not seen him since.
HENRY LAWRENCE GILL . I am chief clerk to Crossley and Sons, Limited, manufacturers of carpets at Halifax—they have a special make called the seamless Brussels carpet—it is marked with a design number and a colour number—we only supply them to Maples in the London market—they are marked 6996 and 2—this carpet produced is of the same design, I am not a sufficient expert to speak to it; it is identical with those we make.
Cross-examined by Price. The cost price to Maples would be. £4 10s.
JAMES MITCHELL . I have been for twelve years the London agent for Crossley and Sons, of Halifax—I have looked at this carpet—I am able to say it is one supplied by us to Maples only; the figures 6996 and 2 are on it—I have compared it with our standard patterns, and have not the slightest doubt about it.
which house is side by side with Duke's shop—I can from my windows back and front see next door—I have been lodging there two years—I occupy the top floor—on 2nd August I was off duty and in plain clothes—about 5. 30 p. m. I was about 200 or 250 yards from Duke's shop, and saw two men (one was Kerslake, he was carrying this carpet, the other was Price, walking by his side); they were coming from Holborn towards Duke's shop, in conversation—having suspicion I watched them for a short time to see what they did with the carpet; it was very large and heavy—I followed them to the corner of Lascelles Place; they placed the carpet on the ground—they had a conversation, and Price picked up the carpet and took it into Duke's shop—Duke was standing at his door—Price went straight through the shop into the back without taking notice of Duke, without speaking to him—he was in there five or ten minutes—I lost sight of him, and thinking to get a better view from my top room I ran up to the staircase window, and I saw Duke and Price examining the carpet, and Duke was measuring it with a 2 ft. rule—it was laid flat out on the leads at the back—the carpet was then rolled up after some conversation, which I could not hear, and carried inside—I then kept observation again from the street; I saw Price come out hurriedly and join Kerslake at the corner of Lascelles Place—after having a short conversation with Kerslake he again went into Duke's shop—he was inside a short time, when Duke came to the door and looked out in all directions, shading his eyes from the sun, and looking everywhere, as though he was looking for a policeman—the first thing he did was to look to the fixed point, where there is generally a policeman in uniform, but he was not there—it is about six houses from Duke's—he then made motions with his finger to Price towards the back premises—Price ran out to the corner of Endell Street and entered the "Oporto Stores public-house—he was there joined by Kerslake—I went into the public-house in the same bar—they called for two glasses of stout—they had a conversation and shared out some money—I saw some money passing between them—Price was leaning over Kerslake and counting money out to him into his hand—I saw half sovereign in Price's hand—I could not say whether that was given to Kerslake or not—I also saw silver—I remained in there till they left; I never lost sight of them—they left together; I followed them—on the way I met Detective Temblett—he was not in uniform—he accompanied me—they went to the corner of Tottenham Court Road, to the Horseshoe Hotel—we did not go in there, we waited for them; they were in there about three minutes, then they came out and shook hands, and bade each other good night, and separated—I stopped Kerslake as he was leaving Price, and Temblett stopped Price—they were only a few yards apart—I asked Kerslake what he had done with the carpet he was carrying—he laughed, as though I was having a joke with him—he said, "You have made a grand mistake, I have seen no carpe"—I said, "Well, we shall have to ascertain something more about it, if you say you know nothing about it"—on the way to the station I think Kerslake said, "Where are you going to take us?"—I said, "I am going to take you where the carpet is"—he still said he knew nothing about it—he said,. "I don't know what you mean; I and my friend have been boozing in the public-house for some time"—we then all four went to Duke's shop—
Duke was at the door—we asked him if he had bought a carpet—he hesitated, and changed colour a good deal, and said, "Yes"—we then went inside the shop—Temblett went upstairs, where he found the carpet—I was left in the shop with the three prisoners, but I had called in the fixed-point constable as well—in reply to Temblett, Duke said he had given 30s. for the carpet—that was before the carpet was brought down—he was also asked by Temblett where his books and papers were—he said, "I keep no books, and have nothing to show"—he was told he would be charged with receiving stolen property—we then went to the station, and the carpet was taken away at the same time—at the station Duke said he bought it in the way of business—he was searched—no receipt or anything was found on him—the other two prisoners were searched, I think by Temblett—Duke's shop is a sort of old curiosity shop, old pictures, guns, swords, and antique things—there was no other carpet on the premises, or any new furniture of any kind—there were several lodgers in the upper rooms—Duke had recently lived on the premises—I believe the rateable value of the premises is between £50 and £60 a year.
Cross-examined by MR. TAYLOR. I have been in the police about five years—I have not stated that Duke changed colour a good deal, only "he hesitated"—I said, "He changed colour—I believe he took Temblett upstairs to see the carpet—I am positive that I said at the Police-court that I saw Duke standing in the doorway—I did not notice that that was omitted from the depositions; if I had I should have insisted on its correction—the depositions were not read over to me at the Police-court—I signed them three weeks afterwards, butt I am sure they were not read over to me—Mr. Saville was the clerk—the prisoners were first charged with unlawful possession, or something similar—there were several remands; ultimately the carpet was identified by Maples—the charge was then made for receiving—I say that my deposition was not read over to me on the 4th August—it is the practice to have the depositions read over after a witness has given his evidence, but it is not always done—if the deposition omits that I saw Price pass Duke at the door, I should say it is an omission on the part of the clerk—I also stated about Duke shading his eyes from the sun and looking round, as if for a policeman; that was not put down; Sir John Bridge did not allow it to be put down—I have never occupied a superior position in the police.
SIDNEY TEMBLETT (Detective E). On 2nd August, about a quarter to six, I was in Broad Street—Oxley spoke to me and called my attention to Price and Kerslake, and I followed them—they walked to Tottenham Court Road, and went into the Horseshoe—when they came out they separated—I spoke to Price; I told him I was a police officer, and said, "Where did you get the carpet you were carrying just now?"—he said, "I know nothing about a carpet, you have made a mistake, I have been in the public-house drinking quite an hour with my friend"—he had been there under five minutes—I took him to Duke's shop, and Oxley took Kerslake—we entered the shop—I saw Duke there—I said, "I want to see the carpet you bought of these men a few minutes ago"—he hesitated some moments, and then said, "Come this way"—he took me through the shop, upstairs to a room, unlocked the door, and showed me the carpet, standing up in a corner of the room; it was a bedroom, I imagine; there was a bed in it—I asked
him what he gave for it—he said, "Thirty shillings"—he was taken down to the shop, and I told him he would be charged with the other two in stealing and receiving the carpet—he said, "I did not know it was stolen"—I said, "Have you any books or receipts to show how you conduct your business?"—he said, "No; I keep no books, and I have no receipts"—he was then taken to the station—Oxley searched the prisoners—I do not know what was found on them—I saw no new stuff in Duke's shop—it is an old curiosity shop—I found six new ivory-handled knives wrapped up, with the stamp of Spiers and Pond on them, and one plated fork, not new, bearing the same name—there were other new knives, five table-knives, six forks, and a carving-knife and fork, stamped "Oetzman"—I showed the Spiers and Pond knives to Duke, and said, "How do you account for these?"—he said, "I bought them of a man in the shop"—I said, "What is his name?"—he said, "I don't know"—I said, "What did you give for them?"—he said, "I don't remember."
Cross-examined by MR. TAYLOR. He had slept there for some time—he has carried on business with his mother for years past—he was not away from there very long—he did not say he wanted, the carpet for the first-floor front room; there was a splendid carpet there—there was no carpet in the back room; that is a very small room; the carpet was too big for that—the front room was a parlour—there was no parlour behind the shop—I examined the house—I found no other room with no carpet on it—I have known him carrying on business there between thirteen and fourteen years; it was. formerly carried on by his father—I have very seldom seen his mother there—there may be many such shops in the neighbourhood, not in Broad Street—I can't say that there were things bought at auctions; it is quite possible—it had the appearance of that class of business—there is no charge against him about the Spiers and Pond's things, or Oetzman's.
Re-examined. He never said, "I bought the carpet for my own room"—I had never seen a carpet hanging up there.
Cross-examined by Kerslake. I have no knowledge of having employed you; I may have done so as an odd man.
Duke received a good character.
Price, in a written defence, stated that some months ago Duke had asked him if he came across a carpet to let him know, as lie was in the habit of attending sales; that on 25th July, meeting Kerslake, he told him this, and two or three days afterwards lie brought this carpet, for which he wanted 30s., and lie went with him to Duke's shop, and lie sold it, and all lie got by it was a commission, and that he was quite innocent in the matter.
Kerslake's Defence: I bought the carpet as a secondhand one of an entire stranger. I took it to Price, and he took it to Duke's; that is all I have to say.
GUILTY .—PRICE — Nine Months' Hard Labour. KERSLAKE—
Twelve Months' Hard Labour. DUKE— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
The COURT and the JURY commended the conduct of Oxley.
MR. ELDRIDGE Prosecuted.
CHARLES L'ENFANT . I am an official of the Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of proceedings in the bankruptcy of Robert Lewis, trading as Lewis and Co., of Dyer's Buildings, Holborn—he was adjudicated bankrupt on 29th December, 1884, and is still undischarged—the order for this prosecution was made on 16th August last.
GEORGE BEAUMONT . I am a manufacturer's agent, of 27, Basinghall Street—in the early part of 1892 the prisoner came to my warehouse and selected thirteen or fourteen dozen shirts to the amount of £23 4s. 7d.—I had previously had small dealings with him; I knew him as Mr. Hawley—he promised to pay for the shirts—he never told me he was an undischarged bankrupt—he said he had a cart outside, and wanted the goods, that night particularly, and if he had them he would certainly pay next day—I let him have them—next day he came and gave me these two cheques, which were both returned unpaid, and also these two bills, drafts on some friends of his, which were also returned, one marked "Orders not to pay," and the other "N. S."—I gave credit to the prisoner as. Mr. Hawley—I knew him by no other name—if I had known he was an undischarged bankrupt I should not have parted with the goods.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. The £23 was for the one parcel of shirts—I had a traveller at the time—I have not seen him for more than three months—I cannot say if he called on Hawley and Co.—I went to see what sort of a place Hawley and Co. had—I saw your manager, or shopman, as I supposed him to be.
GUILTY .**— Four Months' Hard Labour.
787. JAMES THOMAS MERRIKIN* (15), ARTHUR ALFRED WOOLSTON*(13), and RICHARD MERRIKIN* (11) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of James Cox, and stealing a loaf of bread and other articles. After the prisoners had been given in charge to the JURY, they stated their desire to
PLEAD GUILTY to larceny, and the JURY thereupon found them
GUILTY of larceny. Mr. Wheatley, of the St. Giles's Christian Mission, stated that he was willing to look after James Thomas Merrikin JAMES THOMAS MERRIKIN—Discharged on Recognisances. WOOLSTON and RICHARD MERRIKIN— Fourteen Days' Imprisonment, and to be kept in a Reformatory for Five Years.
MR. ABINGER Prosecuted.
ELIZA LEWIS . I am a widow—the prisoner lodged with me—on Whit Monday the prisoner came home about three p. m., staggering drunk—he sat down for a minute or two, and asked for his dinner—I fetched his dinner—jour of my children were having their dinner, and he started quarrelling with the children—I said he must not quarrel with the children—he said, "For
two pins I would do for you"—ho had this tableknife in his hand—he ran at me, and stuck the knife in my throat—I took the knife from him—he knocked me down and attacked me when I was on the floor, with his two knees on my chest—I screamed "Murder!"and he put his hand over my mouth—my girl knocked at the front door and could not, get in—the prisoner was tearing the body of my dress open to get at my throat, but I kept my hands over it—he gave me another gash on the throat and across my neck; the knife was not very sharp! and I kept my hands up—I had two distinct cuts, and my finger was cut round as I wrenched the knife from him—he was more like a wild beast—I asked him if he was mad, but he only kept gritting his teeth—when he heard the knocking he released me—my girl came in the back way, because the prisoner had bolted the street door—I went to the London Hospital—I went every day for a month to have my wounds dressed.
MARY ANN LEWIS . I am the last witness's daughter—on Whit Monday I came home and knocked, but got no answer—I went into the next yard and up the passage—I heard my mother screaming "Murder!"in the street—the prisoner came out of the kitchen door and into the passage, where I was, and said, "I will kill her"—I said, "Don't, George"—he said, "I will kill her"—I went into the kitchen and saw my mother lying on the floor by the window bleeding from her throat—the prisoner was very drunk—my mother and I both got over the wall—the prisoner was in the habit of getting drunk—he is married, and has two children.
WILLIAMS, M. R. C. S. I was house surgeon at the London Hospital—about five p. m. on Whit Monday the prosecutrix was brought to the hospital suffering from an incised wound in the throat about three inches long, and becoming very jagged—it was quite superficial; only through the skin—I should have thought it was one wound, but it might have been two—there was also a cut on the finger—the wounds were not serious—she was attended to—the wounds would have been serious if the knife had been sharper, and had severed the jugular vein; then she would have bled to death in a minute or so.
JAGGERS (Constable J) On Whit Monday I was informed of what took place—the prisoner absconded, and I did not see him till 27th July—I then saw him detained at Seething Lane Police-station, and I told him I should take him into custody for attempting to murder Eliza Lewis by cutting her throat with a knife on 22nd May—he made no reply—I said, "Did you hear what I said?"—he said, "Yes"—when charged he made no statement—on 23rd May I found this knife in the yard next to the prosecutrix's; there was blood on it then—every endeavour was made to find the prisoner, but we could not meet with him before.
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he had lodged with the prosecutrix on and off for ten years; that he had always been sober till Whit Monday; when lie was out with friends, and came home drunk.
GUILTY .— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. FARRANT Prosecuted, and MR. CAMPBELL Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
FOURTH COURT.—Saturday, September 16th, 1893.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MR. WILSON Prosecuted.
STEPHEN MURPHY . I am a painter, of 77, Dockhead, Bermondsey—on the early morning of Wednesday, 9th August, I was walking home through Markham Street, Chelsea, and sat down on a doorstep to tie up ray bootlace, when Nolan threw himself upon me; we struggled together, and were clenched for a minute or two—I called for assistance, two constables came, and I gave Nolan into custody, and charged him with stealing my watch, which I missed—as near as I can say, I had last seen it in the Brompton Road an hour and a half or two hours before—I also missed this little purse, with half a sovereign and 3s. in it, from my left trousers pocket, which was nearly torn out—I afterwards saw the purse at the Police-court—just previous to the constable arriving I noticed Brookhouse and Fitzgerald about twelve yards from me—they appeared to be in the middle of the road; I could not say whether they were on the pavement or not—when the second constable came I imagined they were coming towards me, and I gave them in charge—I dont know if they were coming to me, and I should not like to accuse them wrongly—I was sorry for doing so afterwards—I might have been wrong.
Cross-examined by Nolan. I told the Magistrate that it was at twelve o'clock, but if I had considered I must have known that it was later than that—you had your hand in my trousers pocket—I caught you by the wrist, and you released your hand and struck me in the eye—I cannot swear that you had any means of getting rid of my watch before the constable came up—I don't think I saw you searched on the spot—my cap and tie were found on the scene of the struggle—I might have said on the way to the station that you struck me in the eye—my watch was gold, I don't know the number; its value was about £5—I had been walking about that night for pleasure, and was going home—I do not know that you had the means of getting rid of anything on the way to the station.
Cross-examined by Brookhouse. I cannot swear that I saw you nearer than twelve yards from me.
HENRY SHARMAN . I am a builder and decorator, of 24, Markham Street—from 1. 30 to 2 a. m. on August 9th I was sitting at my ground floor window smoking—I saw three men a little way below my door on the opposite side of the road—one of them crossed to my side, and the other two walked up the road—when one of them got a little way up the road I saw him fall in a doorway, but whether he was struck or pushed I cannot say—then I saw the other two prisoners cross the road to him—saw a constable running underneath the railings on the other side of the road, and when I looked up I saw another constable coming down in the
other direction, and I went to my top window to look—I saw no one in the street but the four men till the constable came—there was a lamp facing the place—I recognise all three prisoners as the men I saw that night, and I also saw the prosecutor.
Cross-examined by Nolan. I did not know you before this night—I recognised you when I saw you at the Police-court.
Cross-examined by Brookhouse. I don't remember telling the Magistrate that I did not recognise either you or Fitzgerald.
By the JURY. A man went down the street a few seconds, or perhaps half a minute, before the prisoners; I did not notice if he was the prosecutor.
CORNELIUS CHARGE (500 B) About 2. 30 on August 9th I was on duty and I heard someone shouting for police in Markham Street, and I ran there, and found the prosecutor struggling with Nolan—he charged Nolan with stealing his watch—I found the prosecutor's cap and tie about ten or twelve yards from where they were—I felt in Nolan's jacket pockets on the spot, but found nothing—I saw the other prisoners on the opposite side, and they crossed to about the middle of the road, and stopped there—the prosecutor was sober; he was very excited—Nolan had been drinking, but was not drunk—I took Nolan to the station and searched him, but found nothing on him.
Cross-examined by Nolan. When the prosecutor charged you with stealing his watch I put my hands in your pockets—you had no means of getting rid of anything going to the station—I searched you as soon as I got there.
WILLIAM JACKSON (245 B). I was on duty—about 2. 15 I heard cries of "Police!"from the direction of Markham Street—I went there, and saw the prosecutor struggling with Nolan—I went up—the prosecutor said, "I will charge this man with stealing my watch"—Charge seized the prisoner—the prosecutor went into the road, and said, "Here are two more of them," indicating the other two prisoners, who were about eight yards off—the prosecutor said, "I will charge these two with being concerned; they are two more of them"—I told them they would have to come to the station with me—they came quietly, and made no resistance—I searched Brookhouse and Fitzgerald at the station, and found nothing on them—I afterwards went back to Markham Street, and down the area of No. 20, which is directly opposite the spot where I saw the struggle going on, I found this purse, which has since been identified.
GEORGE PAINTER (Sergeant 29 B). On 9th August, about 2. 25 a. m., I was in charge of the station when the prisoners were brought in—Nolan said to Charge, "Did you see me strike him?" meaning the prosecutor, "in the eye?"—Fitzgerald said, "This man," meaning Charge, "came to this man," the prosecutor, "before I came to him"—Brookhouse said, "I was on the right-hand side of the street, going towards King's Road. I heard this man," the prosecutor, "shouting out 'Police!'Going across the road to see what was the matter, he came and caught hold of me, and told the constable to take us to the station. We had been together all day."
Nolan, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said that he was walking along when the prosecutor rushed from a doorway, seized hi in by the, throat, and shouted "Police!"He contended that if he had stolen the watch it must have been found on him, as he had no chance of passing it away. Brookhouse and Fitzgerald stated that they were coming along the street and saw the prosecutor and prisoner struggling, and that the prosecutor charged them.
GUILTY of assault with intent to rob. Nolan then
PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of felony in February, 1892, and Brookhouse to one in December, 1891.
NOLAN and BROOKHOUSE— Twelve Months' Hard Labour each.
FITZGERALD— Six Months' Hard Labour.
JAMES THOMAS GRAY . I am warehouse keeper to William Henry Fox, spice merchant, of Narrow Alley—on 31st August at 6. 10 I secured the warehouse door outside with a padlock, and fastened the other door with a bar inside—as far as I know, everything was properly secured—next morning I found the premises in the possession of the police—I saw at Seething Lane Police-station four bags of nutmeg and a sack of barley, and I recognised them as my employer's property; there was writing of mine on the bag—the value of the property is about £70.
ALFRED LEE . I keep the George, Mansell Street, Aldgate, which is about thirty yards from Fox's warehouse—about 9. 30 p. m. on 31st August. the prisoners came into my place with another man, and each had a half-pint of ale—they went out, and afterwards Millhouse came back with a man; I did not notice who that man was.
HARRY GALSWORTHY . I am a carman in the London and North Western Railway Company's service—I live at 20, Hay ward Road—on the evening of 31st August, about 9. 30, I was in the Still and Star, about twenty yards from Fox's warehouse—I was told to come outside, and when I got outside I saw the van going away from the firm, and the two prisoners came out of the warehouse—I saw them distinctly, and am sure of them—they jumped up on the van as it was being driven away at a very rapid rate—I and Godfrey followed the van, which did not stop till it got to Backchurch Lane, when only Tillett was in it.
Cross-examined by Tillett. You were outside the warehouse with the van between 10. 20 and 10. 30.
Cross-examined by Millhouse. I cannot say who was driving when the van came out of the warehouse—I said at the Mansion House that you were one of the men to the best of my belief.
Re-examined. I can say that it was the prisoners who came out of the warehouse.
WILLIAM GODFREY . I live with my father at the Still and Star public-house, near Fox's warehouse—about 10. 30 on 31st August I saw a horse and van, into which Tillett and other men were loading bags of stuff out
of the warehouse—I went back to our house and told a man who works, at Fox's about it, and he came out with me—just as we were coming round' the corner the prisoners drove away—we went round and found the door open, and the men at work there told us to give chase—we did so, and' caught the van and Tillett, who was given into custody—I saw two men leave the van as it was going.
Cross-examined by Tillett. When I got the shutters up I saw a van draw up and stop outside Fox's—I saw a man like you and two more going into the warehouse—you were loading the van out of the warehouse—the horse and van stopped there by itself—you drove away in the van with the two men.
Cross-examined by Millhouse. I recognise Tillett, but I am not sure about the other two men.
WILLIAM OSBORN (392 H). On 31st August I saw Tillett drive into. Leman Street, and Godfrey pointed for me to, stop it—I put up my hand and asked what he had done—Godfrey spoke to me, and I ran after the van—Tillett stopped suddenly, turned round, and said, "What are all the people running for, constable? what is the matter?"—I said, "I don't know; you have got some bags of stuff inside that van"—he said, "Yes, sir, I have; the two men that jumped down and ran away know what is in there; they employed me to do this job"—I ordered him to get down; he did so, and asked for his coat, and said, "A pretty mess they have left me in now"—I said, "You will have to come with me to Leman Street"—I took him there, and from there to Seething Lane—in the van were four bags of nutmeg and one of pearl barley.
JOHN EGAN (City Police Sergeant). On the early morning of the 7th I arrested Millhouse at his lodgings in Lucas Street, Shadwell—I said, "I am a police officer; I shall arrest you for being concerned with George Tillett, in custody, in breaking and entering a warehouse in Narrow Alley"—he said, "I know nothing about it"—I took him to Seething Lane Police-station, where he was placed with twelve others—Galsworthy and Lee picked him out separately, without any hesitation.
Cross-examined by Millhouse. I put you with men as near as I could get them like you; it could not have been done fairer.
Tillett, in his defence, said that two men employed him to hire the horse and cart to drive the bags for them, and that they jumped from the cart and ran away. Millhouse said that he met Tillett standing at Hit corner of Marshall Street; that Tillett told him lie was employed to do a job for two men who were not quite ready for him, and that the men coming up, they all drank together, and that then he (Millhouse) left them and had nothing to do with the matter
MILLHOUSE— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. METCALFE Prosecuted, and MR. BLACKWELL Defended.
through, and called me a b——bastard, and I knocked him down—I went into a public-house, and he came in and struck me with a knife—a constable came, and I was taken to Guys Hospital, and remained then seventeen days—I am quite well now—I think the prisoner was very drunk, and did not know what he was doing.
Cross-examined. I do not think he intended to injure me—there was no struggle in the public-house, nor did I strike him with a glass bottle, or try to—I had a glass of ale in my hand—we were not all turned out by the potman—I struck him outside two or three times—he was not eating bread and cheese with a knife, nor did I attack him again after he came in—I do not know whether my companion Clark struck him, or whether he was bleeding from the head when the constable came—I was once convicted of assault innocently—I did not have fourteen days for assault—I had six months for an assault, but another man did it—I have done a little boxing in my time—the prisoner fell down; I was right against him, but I was still on my feet—I had never seen him before—the knife was similar to this.
WILLIAM HENRY LAURENCE (City, 756)'. On 7th July, about 6. 30, I saw a mob outside the Swan Tavern, and saw the prisoner on the ground, with a knife in his hand, and the prosecutor on top of him—I gave my truncheon to another constable, who struck the prisoner's hand, and made him drop the knife—this blade was open—at the station after being; cautioned, he said, "I was standing near the Swan public-house in Mr. Brooks' doorway, waiting for Euston; he came back and hit me again, and I had to take my own part."
Cross-examined. I have heard that he has been employed fifteen years at Bayley's in Leadenhall Street; there is nothing against his character—I have a slight recollection of a little blood on his forehead, and he had a slight black eye—he seemed sober at the station—I saw no bread and cheese.
TOM ROBINSON TAYLOR . I am house surgeon at Guy's Hospital—I was on duty on 7th July, when Euston was brought in, suffering from an incised wound—there had been considerable bleeding—this knife could produce the wound—the danger of the wound was through opening the space between the lungs and the side of the chest.
Evidence for the Defence.
THOMAS MAXWELL . I was potman at the Swan public-house—the prisoner used the house occasionally—he came in on 7th July in the afternoon, and had some bread and cheese, which he was eating with a penknife—I was called down from above in consequence of a disturbance—there were three men in the bar, one of whom was in the act of striking Parsons with a water bottle on his head—I ejected Parsons, and the others followed, and I saw Parsons lying on the ground, with a knife in his hand—three men were punching him, and one was hitting him over the head with a basket.
Cross-examined. When I came down he was not defending himself with a bottle from the blows which were being: made—I have known him as a customer ever since I have been there—I put him out because he was the first man I came to.
By the JURY. Euston was in the bar—I cannot say whether he had the water bottle in his hand, but one of them had—the first sight that
met my eyes when I came down was one man eating bread and cheese and another going to strike him, who was in front of him—he was striking at him over a part of the bar.
EDWARD LEARY . I am night watchman at Brooks', Leadenhall Market—I have known the prisoner about ten years—he has always borne the character of a respectable, peaceable man—I was with him on July 7th, but not in the public-house—he was talking to me, and was struck and knocked into a basket, and struck again when he was in the basket—I took him through our shop, and put him out the back way.
CHARLES SMITH . I am engaged in Leadenhall Market—on July 7th, between six and seven o'clock, I was in the Swan public-house—Parsons, came in, and there was a little bit of a rally, I could almost call it a squabble—I went outside and saw Parsons on the ground; they were having a row—there is a partition in the public-house between the two. bars—it was a friendly affair, but it turned out tragical—I never saw a knife—I have known Parsons twenty years working for Mr. Bayley and Mr. Cohen, and I do not believe anybody could cast a slur on his character, but he was in liquor the day before, which was the Duke of York's wedding day, and I do not think he was accountable for. his actions; but he is a peaceable man, and I never knew him to row with a soul.
ARTHUR BOOTHER . On 7th July I was outside my shop, which faces. the Swan, and saw the prisoner and prosecutor having a little altercation—Euston went into the Swan, Parsons came down the passage and talked to Leary—Easton came out of the public-house and said something, and struck him a deliberate blow, and he fell against a column and then into. a basket—I then went in to serve a customer, and saw no more.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HUMPHREYS Prosecuted.
SAMUEL STRANGE . I live at 9, Broadway, Hammersmith—on August 7th I went to bed at eleven o'clock—I fastened the house securely—my wife awoke me at 1. 30 a. m.; I got up and took a police whistle to the sitting-room window and blew it, and two officers came up immediately—I went down and lit the gas, and then went to the station and saw the prisoner there—my back door had been forced open, and a desk broken open, but I missed nothing from it.
GEORGE GEEMAN (Policeman) On 8th August, at 1. 30, I was in the Broadway; I heard a whistle, and saw the prisoner come over a wall—he ran across a yard and got into a bus yard—I chased him round one omnibus, and missed him going round a second—I saw him throw something away—I doubled, and be ran right into my arms and said, "All right, governor, I am done for; I will go quietly"—he struggled for a few minutes—his boots were on his arm—I found on him a sixpence, one penny, and some cigars.
HENRY BIRD (544 7'). I was with Geeman, and saw the prisoner leave the premises—next morning I found this chisel in the backyard at the foot of an omnibus—it corresponds with the marks on the doors in four or five places.
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence,
said that he was drunk and went into the yard to sleep, and took off his shoes; that he heard a whistle, and the policeman came.
GUILTY †.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
794. HENRY JOHNSON (21) and HENRY LAUNDER (20) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of Helen Gotz, and stealing eighteen knives and other articles, her property. Second Count, Feloniously receiving the same.
ALICIA READ . I am housekeeper at 48, Westbourne Park Road, where Miss Helen Gotz lives—on 29th August I went to bed about eleven p. m., and saw everythiug safe—there is a barred window in the back kitchen—the baby awoke me about four a. m., and I got up, but did not go downstairs till a little after six, when I found a lamp burning on the kitchen table, the bar removed, and the window open—I missed some dessert spoons and forks from the dining-room, and two pairs of boots, and a coat which had hung on the kitchen door—some of those things belong to me and some to the house.
JAMES BRISTOW (Police Inspector X). On August 30th I went to 48, Westbourne Park, and found a large iron bar had been forced and the window lifted up—things were lying about in the back kitchen, and silver plate about the parlour.
JAMES DOWN (258 S). On September 1st I was in Latimer Road in plain clothes—the two prisoners passed, and Johnson said to Launder, "If we can get rid of that stuff we shall have a bit to be going on with; you meet me at three"—I saw Johnson pass a parcel to Launder, which contained six knives—I found them on him—Mr. Read identified them.
WILLIAM BAKER (170 S). I was with Down and saw the two prisoners together—I separated from Down, went to Holland Street, and met Launder—I told him I should arrest him on suspicion of burglary, with another man in custody—he said, "You have made a mistake."
Cross-examined by Launder. You were with another man—I had been watching you from Argyle Street to Holland Street.
Launder's Defence: The other prisoner has pleaded guilty to the charge. He had never seen me before; he did it all himself.
JOHNSON— GUILTY .
LAUNDER— GUILTY on the Second Count. He then
PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at Middlesex Sessions in September, 1892. Twelve Months' Hard Labour each.
CHARLES GILL . I am a painter—on the night of July 23rd I was at Chalk Farm, and asked three men my way—the prisoner was one of them—they said they would show me, and the prisoner knocked me down and took my money out of my pocket—the other men assisted—a lady came up, and they ran away—I was in the hospital.
JANE FITCH . I am the wife of Robert James Fitch, of Ferdinand Street, Kentish Town—on July 23rd I was standing at the door, and heard Gill ask the prisoner the nearest way to Hampstead Heath—he said he did not know another man said, "Are you going to see the man home? if you don't I will"—he said, "No," and gave him a blow and knocked him down—he called for help—I said, "Oh, you brute, to serve
a man so!"—he got off the prosecutor, and said, "The b——woman has not got you, and she has not got me"—a woman came up with her skirt over her head, and I cannot recognise her—I recognise the prisoner—I Slight identify the man who gave the blow, by his walk.
JAMES NICHOLSON (10 Y R). I took the prisoner on August 7th—I took him to the station, and told him there was a most serious charge against him—he said, "Yes, why don't you take the others? If I go before a Magistrate I intend to round on the lot."
Witness for the Defence.
MRS. PACKER. I was present from beginning to end; it was not the prisoner who knocked the man about; it was Fatty's brother.
Cross-examined. I live with my father and mother at 17, Ann Street—I know a man named Dine; I have been keeping company with him, but not for six weeks—I have spoken to the prisoner—I was in Ferdinand Place about 1. 15—I did not see two men besides the prisoner; Fatty was there, but not with the prisoner—Dine was not there—the prosecutor picked up the man on the ground as he got up—I had my skirt over my head—I saw Mrs. Fitch there; she came up afterwards.
GUILTY .**— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted, and MR. PICKERSGILL Defended
ELIZABETH CUTLER . I am the wife of Albert Springer Cutler, a master mariner—I accompany him when he goes to sea—we lodged with. the prisoner when we were ashore—on August 24th I had a trunk containing a box with three £5 notes in it, and £21 in gold, and this diamond and sapphire ring (produced) was in my jewel case—one stone is missing now; it was perfect when I saw it last in the jewel case, which was a fortnight before the 28th—on Monday, the 28th, in consequence of something my husband said, I opened the jewel case, and the ring was gone—I did not see the prisoner till the following night, the 29th, when my husband stated the loss, and I said, "Have not you seen a diamond and two sapphires?"—he said, "No"—I said, "Have you seen a ring of any description?"—he said, "No"—I had received information, and I said, "Oh, do confess, Mr. Greenwood!"—I left the room, and when I came back the ring was on the table—my husband was present, and I believe Mr. Simpson—I had been to Henley on August 19th, but did not take the ring with me.
Cross-examined. We have lodged with the prisoner three or four years at different times, and on the present occasion since June 13th, but the trunk had only been in the bedroom three or four weeks, since my visit to Scotland; it contained the jewel case and money, and a few articles of wearing apparel—there was a cheque in the trunk before August 24th, but no notes or gold; they were put in by my husband on August 24th—I believe there were eighteen £5 notes—there had been twenty, but my
husband took out two I counted £100, but I did not count the gold—the jewel-case was not locked when I discovered my loss—I was in the habit of keeping it locked, and I had the key in my possession—I did not go to the trunk between the 24th and 28th, because my husband had the key; I asked him to keep it—I did not often wear this ring; I have had it eight or nine years—there is no hall-mark, I believe, or any mark—I do not see a dent on it, as if someone had trod on it—I last wore the ring about a fortnight or three weeks before the discovery of the loss; I have another which was made at the same time—at the time of the conversation I believed the prisoner had stolen the ring—what I said to the prisoner was, "Have you seen a ring?"—I don't think I said, "My ring."
Re-examined. This is my ring. (Trying it on)—there is no hall mark on it, because it was made in Ceylon.
ALBERT SPRINGER CUTLER . I put £121 into my wife's box in August, and on August 28th I went to the box and missed three £5 notes and £4 10s. in gold—my wife examined her jewel case at once, and a ring was missing from it—I saw Mr. Simpson on the afternoon of the 28th, and on the 29th I invited the prisoner to my room, and said, "I have something very unpleasant to say to you; I have missed three £5 notes and £4 10s. in gold, and my wife's diamond and sapphire ring; do you know anything about it?"—he said, "No"—I said, "Do you know anything about the ring?"—he said, "No; I never had a ring of any sort"—I called Mr. Simpson in, and said to him, "I have asked Mr. Greenwood about the ring, and he don't admit any knowledge of it, or having seen such a thing"—Mr. Simpson said, "Why, you know you showed me the ring"—he mumbled something and walked out of the room, and came back and threw the ring on the table, and said, "I found it at Paddington"—I said it looked as if the person who had taken the ring had taken the money—I examined the trunk; the key had been in my pocket; I experienced a little difficulty with the lock—I gave him the night to think of it, and next morning took him to the station and charged him—he made no answer to the charge.
Cross-examined. I originally put into the trunk £90 in notes and £21 in gold in the same pocket-book—I locked the trunk—I took two £5 notes out on the night I deposited the money there—I drew a cheque for £121, and I went to the bank the following morning and attempted to stop the notes, as I had never spent a penny of it—I told your learned friend that I placed £121 in the trunk, but a slip in the gab is nothing; it was £90 in notes and £21 in gold—I recounted the money on the 28th, and found £75 in paper and £16 10s. in gold—when I had this conversation with the prisoner I could not help believing that he had taken the ring, because Mr. Simpson had already told me he had seen it in the prisoner's possession."
FREDERICK JAMES SIMPSON . I am a draper—on the Thursday or Friday before Monday, August 29th, I saw the prisoner in possession of a ring; it was then perfect—he said he found it at Paddington—I was present when he threw it on the table—before that I had said, "You showed me a ring of that description, which you said you had found at Paddington."
Cross-examined. He told me he intended to watch the newspapers to see whether it was advertised—I may have said before the Magistrate,
"I don't remember him saying he should advertise it himself, or go to the police if he did not find an advertisement in the newspapers"—I am not sure that he said so—my wife told me that the prisoner showed the ring to her before he showed it to me, and that he said he had found it at Paddington—the prisoner told me that he had mentioned the same thing to other persons.
JAMBS BUCKLE (Detective Sergeant). On August 20th I saw the prisoner at 20, Northold Road, and said I should take him in custody for stealing a diamond and sapphire ring during the past fortnight, the property of Mr. Cutler—he said, "Very well, I shall say nothing about it at present"—I said that I should probably charge him with stealing three £5 notes and other money—after he was remanded I went to his house and found a bunch of keys which I tried to a trunk which the prosecutor showed me, and one of them opened the lock—I examined the lock—there was no sign of any forcible entry from outside—I got the ring from Mrs. Cutler on September 4th—the stone was then missing; she missed it that morning.
The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Monday, September 18th, 1893.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
797. WILLIAM WALLACE DOUGLASS (48) was indicted for that he, being a director of the Swift Beef Company, Limited, did fraudulently apply to his own use the sum of £550 11s. 2d., belonging to the said company. Other Counts, for applying other sums to his own use.
MR. WILLIS, Q. C., with MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS, Prosecuted, and MR. MCKEEVER Defended.
HARRY FREDERICK CHITTOCK . I am a clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies—I produce the file of papers relating to the Swift Beef Company, Limited, including the memorandum and articles of association—it was incorporated on July 4th, 1891—one of the signatories was William Wallace Douglass. (MR. HUMPHREYS read from the memorandum of association certain paragraphs as to the objects of the company. The first object was to act in the United Kingdom as agents for the sale of live cattle &c.; and the eighth, to invest and deal with the moneys of the company not immediately required, upon such securities and in such manner as might from time to time be determined. MR. HUMPHREYS further read a paragraph authorising the holders for the time being of two-thirds of the issued shares to, among other things, by notice in writing to the company, appoint any persons to be directors of the company, and fix their remuneration, and to make any regulations in regard to the conduct of the business of the company by the directors, and to make regulations as to who should be entitled to sign, on (lie company's behalf, cheques, bills, &c., and to annul and vary such regulations.)
Cross-examined. The other signatories to the memorandum are Gustavus F. Swift, Edward Carlton Swift, Francis Ashby Ellis, a meat salesman; Samuel Hackett, solicitor's clerk; Alfred Robinson, solicitor's clerk; and G. A. F. Bertie, solicitor's clerk—the last register of shareholders is dated February, 1893, and gives Gustavus F. Swift 595 shares; Edward Carlton
Swift, 150; Louis Franklin Swift, 125; Edward Foster Swift, 125; Francis Ashby Ellis, 1; William Wallace Douglass, 1; Samuel Hackett, 1; Alfred Robinson, 1; and G. A. F. Bertie, 1; total, 1,000 shares—I do not see the names of Houghton or Bartlett on the list—the nominal capital of the company is £10,000, divided into 1,000 £10 shares—the three Swifts hold 870 shares among them, and the other persons hold five shares among them.
ALFRED HOUGHTON . I am a director of the Swift Beef Company; the prisoner, who was secretary and manager in this country, was also a director—the registered offices of the company are at 64, West Smithfield, and they also have an office in Liverpool—I live at Birkdale, near Southport—this is a certified office copy of the prisoner's appointment (This was to the effect that the signatories holding two-thirds of the issued share capital cancelled the authority of Francis Ashby Ellis to draw and endorse cheques, and sign and accept bills of exchange, and authorized William Wallace Douglass to draw and endorse cheques in the company's name, and sign and accept bills of exchange drawn upon the company)—his salary was 5,000 dollars per annum, payable monthly—he had the entire management of the company's business in London—this is the company's minute-book—there is no minute authorising him to deal with the moneys of the company, except for the purposes of the company—I find no entry of any Stock Exchange transactions with Mr. Cornforth, Mr. Read, Mr. Wurtzberg, or Mr. Browning—the Board met in Chicago, and made minutes which were forwarded to this country, and pasted into this book—the prisoner would be the person to receive them here—I was not aware that the prisoner was using the moneys of the company for Stock Exchange transactions; I never authorised him to do so.
Cross-examined. It is not necessary for a director to be a shareholder—I am the Liverpool manager—I was in the business before this present company was formed—Mr. F. A. Ellis had the business, and at the time the change was made the whole staff was carried over from F. A. Ellis's firm to the company—I have no appointment in writing—the document that has been read is the prisoner's appointment as manager of the' company—he was appointed about 27th September, 1891, if I remember right—the appointment was drawn up in Chicago—I do not know when it reached this country—the prisoner would be managing from the time Mr. Ellis's resignation was accepted, and Mr. Ellis's resignation was read at the same meeting as that at which the prisoner was appointed, the 29th September, 1891—I have not been to Chicago, but these resolutions bear dates, and I recognize the signatures of Mr. G. F. Swift and Mr. L. F. Swift—they have not visited the Liverpool office since they were in this country in 1890—I attended one meeting of the directors on 10th July, 1890, in this country; Mr. Ellis, Mr. G. F. Swift, and Mr. Rawle were also present—the prisoner's duties were generally to manage the company's affairs in London; he was manager of the entire business in this country—this is the prisoner's appointment as secretary on 29th September, 1891, and his appointment as director is of the same date—his appointment as manager has been read—he was appointed to hold the same authority as Ellis had had, which is defined in the minutes—I have known Ellis for almost three years; I worked for him before the formation of the company—Ellis was
carrying on business in London and Liverpool, prior to the formation of this company, as agent for Swift and Co., of Chicago—here is a minute of 10th July, 1891, appointing Ellis secretary of the company; there is no definition of his duties in that resolution; but next day there is this resolution. (Authorising him to draw and endorse cheques, and to sign fund accept bills of exchange)—he had to manage the company's business—he took delivery of the beef sent over by the company, and arranged for its sale and the commission to be charged—I have seen no other document defining his duties than the minute which has been read—I know the system of account keeping in the Liverpool portion of the business, and it is practically the same in London—the prisoner arranged the system—in accordance with the system it is my duty to make a monthly trial balance-sheet, and also a monthly report, which is sent to Chicago—I know nothing about the Chicago ledger—I last saw Mr. G. F. Swift at the latter portion of July, 1891, as near as I can remember, on the tender as he left Liverpool for America—I took my instructions from the prisoner—I do not know of Mr. Swift ever having given any other authority than that which appears here—an order from Mr. Swift would not be sent to me, but to the secretary, and I should act on his instructions—the audit of the Liverpool books was completed about the first week in August—the books are closed annually on 31st July.
Re-examined. I believe ray accounts pass through the secretary in London before they go to Chicago—the prisoner was responsible for everything—I have acted as director since my appointment, so far as there has been necessity—no instructions were ever given to Mr. Ellis, or anyone "else, to speculate on the Stock Exchange with the company's money—as far as I know, Mr. Ellis did nothing of the kind, unless it was with his own money.
WILLIAM CORNFORTH . I am an outside broker, carrying on business at 4, Queen Victoria Street—in July, 1892, the prisoner opened an account with us in his own name—that account was continued all that year, and some portion of this year—the last transaction was in July this year, he paid me by his own cheques—I don't think I can say upon what bank; some were on the Imperial Bank, and some on the London Joint Stock Bank—the differences were carried over to stock from account to account—between July, 1892, and May, 1893, the account was carried over, and the differences paid; if the transaction was successful it was paid to him, if unsuccessful he handed me his own cheque—up to 30th March this year. he lost about £741—he sometimes won, but that was the net balance between us—the accounts will show the amount of the speculations—the amount of stock he was dealing in was about £30,000, consisting of American railway stock, shares in Hammond's and Eastman's (two American meat companies), and Spanish bonds—they were sold, not bought—they were things on the Stock Exchange—the amount of the Spanish bonds was £15,831, and there were Great Easterns—the stock Was carried on to the next settling day, 28th April—the account shows £179 8s. 4d. paid by this cheque for that amount—on 13th May stock was again carried over, and on that account he owed me £1,012 13s., which he paid by this cheque; it is a cheque on Hill and Son, drawn by the Swift Beef Company, Limited, and signed "W. W. Douglass" on
their account—the next account is 29th May; on that account he owed me £969 18s. 5d.—he then gave me a cheque signed by him as secretary to the company—that cheque passed through my hand—I said nothing to him about that; we very often have paid cheques other than cheques of the person paying the money—so far I should assume that Douglass was in funds—up to that time he had always paid by his own cheques—I had no idea that the cheque was drawn, except on Douglass's account—I naturally assumed that he was in funds—I did not put any question to him as to whether he had any authority; he was very respectably introduced to us, and such a thing as the money being misused did not enter into my head—I knew he was with the Swift Beef Company as managing director—on 29th May he owed me £969 18s. 5d., and paid it with this cheque of the company on Hill and Sons, signed "Douglass, Secretary"—the stock was not carried over; it was paid by another broker—just about this time the affairs of the Stock Exchange were in an extremely unsettled, uncertain condition; the amount of stock we had open was very low, and in a conversation which I had Douglass offered, in order that there might be no misgiving on either side, to deposit a sum of £5,000; we on our part to do the same, so that there would be a total of £10,000 with some good bank; the London Joint Stock was mentioned—to that I replied that we on our side were not principals, only agents; therefore there was no need that we should find £5,000; I was glad to know he had money, as it gave me an opportunity to say that the account was larger than I thought—arrangements were consequently made, and the bulk of the stock was made up by Mr. Read, a member of the Stock Exchange—after that he kept a very small account, the total of which was only £15,000—on 29th June he paid me this cheque for £79 15s. 2d., that again being his private cheque on the London Joint Stock Bank—there Mere two other accounts after that, on which he owed us £133 10s. 8d., which has never been paid; it is still owing—these (produced) are the two statements I sent him.
Cross-examined. The last settlement was on 26th April—on that day, or immediately after, the prisoner settled with me—the 28th was pay-day; the 26th was carrying-over day—on the 28th he was clear with me—he told me, in the course of conversation, that he had associates in this matter—I cannot fix the date of that; we had a good many conversations, it would be impossible to recollect the dates of particular matters, but it came out in this way: I spoke of the account as a large one, involving heavy sums; it was then he said, "I have associates in this matter"—I should say that was before he began to pay me in cheques of the company—I should say that conversation was before the 23rd of May; I think I ought to explain that when the £5,000 deposit was mentioned, it was suggested that the account should be taken over, but we had conversation before that, and he mentioned that he had associates—he said he was prepared, if necessary, to take the whole of the stock over—I was always prepared to get stock for him if it had been demanded.
JOHN WILLIAM BRIGSTOCK . I am a member of the Stock Exchange—I was formerly managing clerk to J. F. H. Read, 5, Austin Friars, a member of the Stock Exchange—on 18th April, 1893, an account was opened by the prisoner in the name of W. W. Douglass—on the 13th April, settling day, nineteen guineas stood to his credit—I paid that to
him by this cheque, marked "J"—this is the account; the stock was carried over—on 13th May he lost £515 11s. 2d.—the total amount of the transactions was £18,000—he paid me the amount of, £515 11s. 2d. with this cheque of the Swift Beef Company, signed "W. W. Douglass, Secretary"—this is the account—the next account was on May 29th, the stock being carried over; his loss was £1,061 18s. 3d., the amount of purchase being £52,000—on 15th June, the next settling day, he won, and I gave him a cheque for £258 6s. 3d.—on the account of 29th June he made a loss of £1,111 10s. 6d.—he paid that with this cheque, which is one of the company's cheques, the total amount of the stock being £53,000—on the next account, of 13th July, there was a balance of £584 3s. 8d., which he did not pay; he still owes me that—the stock was always carried over, nothing was taken up, I believe.
Cross-examined. Mr. Read was declared a defaulter on 11th July—July 13th was the account day; in all probability the prisoner would have heard on that day that Mr. Read was declared a defaulter; under these circumstances there would be a difficulty in the account being carried over—the account day in April was the 28th; he settled up with me on that day, and we were perfectly straight—I had a discussion with him as to the advisability of taking up some stock; that was a few days preceding the 31st May; it was decided that it should be carried over if possible—he offered that if there was any difficulty in carrying over the stock with Mr. Cornforth,. he would arrange to have it taken up—I believe there was some mention about a certain bank re-discounting Swift's paper—there was a general uneasiness all round at that time—I do not remember his saying that owing to his bills having been re-discounted he was only able to take up one out of four, which he was desirous of paying before maturity—it was common knowledge that immediately after May set in there was considerable uneasiness among banks and commercial undertakings.
JOHN H. D. TODD . I am a partner in the firm of Whish and Todd, stockbrokers—in February this year the defendant opened an account with our firm in his own name; I have the ledger here—at the end of March I think his loss was £346 8s.—on 14th April it was £151 7s. 3d.—he paid that with this cheque on his private account, and this is the account—on 28th April he won £36 3s. 6d., which I paid him with this cheque, and this is a copy of the account—on 13th May he won £24 3s. 2d., which I paid him with this cheque, and this is a copy of the account—on 29th May his loss was £32 11s. 4d., which he paid me with this cheque on his private account—on 15th June he paid me this cheque for £89 3s. 7d. on his private account, and this is the account—on 29th June he gave me this cheque for £182 9s. 10d. on his private account; this is the account—on the settling days of 13th July and 28th July there was a loss amounting to £1,714 2s. 7d.; that has not been paid, it is still owing to our firm—he did not at any time pay with a cheque of the Swift Beef Company that I know of.
Cross-examined. I do not think that most of his transactions were with my partners—Mr. Browning was generally present—I carried on a good deal of the business. (MR. WILLIS put in three letters from the prisoner to the witness's firm, dated respectively July 11th, 22nd and 25th.)
firm is Charles E. Wurtzberg—in June this year the prisoner opened an account with us in the name of W. W. Douglass—we had two or three transactions with him, which came into the account on 29th June, and were all settled by this one cheque for £190 7s., which he paid us on that day—it is on his private account, at the London Joint Stock Bank.
RICHARD PALMER BRAY . I am a cashier in the service of Messrs. Hill and Sons, bankers, of 66, West Smithfield—the Swift Beef Company, Limited, have an account at our bank; the prisoner also had an account there—this is a certified copy of his account; there is a balance against him now of £1 5s. 9d.—this is his pass-book—the account was opened on March 10th, 1892—on 29th April I find he borrowed £800 from us on the security of forty-five shares of Swift and Co., the American company—he drew all that out, and the balance against him on 1st May was £1 5s. 9d.—these cheques, A, C, D, E, F, and G, are all on the Swift Beef Company's account—they have all been paid and debited to the company's account—they are all signed by the prisoner.
Cross-examined. We have security for the £800 he owes us—I presume the bank considered the security ample for the advance—the debit of £1 5s. 9d. was due to a draft which Swifts, of Chicago, drew on him at, sight—I know nothing except what appears in the account—it appears, that a sum of £200 was paid by him to the Swift Beef Company on May 1st—Mrs. Douglass, the prisoner's wife, also had a small account of her own at our bank, and she occasionally drew cheques on it.
Re-examined. I have made out this paper showing the Swift Beef Company's balance at our bank in July; it is correct—these are the balances.
By MR. MCKEEVER. I cannot give you the balances in April and May; I could get them.
GEORGE DENYER FINCH . I am a ledger clerk in the service of the London Joint Stock Bank, Limited, Lothbury, which took over the business of the Imperial Bank on 1st January by amalgamation—the prisoner had an account with us; I produce a certified copy of it—it was opened on 22nd April, 1892—on 9th August there was a balance of £10128. Id. in his favour—I produce a paying-in slip marked "J," referring to £255 10s. 10d. paid in by him on 29th April, including a cheque for £19 19s. and £56 6s. 6d. from Browning and Todd, and £179 8s. 4d. drawn by Cornforth and Readier—this is a cheque marked "G" for £400, which was paid in on 28th June, 1893; it is drawn by the Swift Beef Company, W. W. Douglass, Secretary, on Hill and Sons, and was paid into the prisoner's private account with this paying-in slip—I produce a paying-in slip, "K," and Mr. Read's cheque, "K," for £258 6s. 3d., dated 14th June, 1893, payable to Douglass—it is placed to the credit of his account.
Cross-examined. On 29th April £56 6s. 6d., £19 19s., and £176 was paid in, and on 1st May a cheque for £239 1s. 7d. was paid by the prisoner to the Swift Beef Company—on 2nd May there is a cheque for £10 12s.; on the 16th May a cheque for £11 16s. 10d.—there are cheques, to Browning on 31st for £32 11s. 4d., and on 15th for £89 3s. 7d.; on 29th for £182 9s. 10d.; cheques to Cornforth for £48 17s. 9d., and on 29th for £79 16s. 3d.; and to Wurtzberg on 29th for £190 7s.—on 13th May the cheque for £24 3s. 2d. was paid into his credit—there are also sums
of £258 6s. 3d. and £400—I should say the balance of all those sums would be on the debit side.
IRA ALBRO BARTLETT . I was formerly deputy-manager at West Smithfield for the Swift Beef Company, from about 1st February, 1892, to 7th August this year, when I was appointed secretary of the company—besides myself 'at the West Smithfield office doing business for the company; there were Mr. Conning, cashier and book-keeper, and Mr. Croger, clerk, and an office boy, and the secretary—all the papers that I have seen here purporting to be signed by the prisoner are in his writing—he was the head of the office—he received the correspondence from Chicago, and was the only person authorised to open it—he would receive the amounts passed at Chicago for the regulation of the business in England; they are pasted or written up into the book that has been produced here—the prisoner was secretary and general manager of its affairs in England; he had to see to the handling of the goods sent here, and was a sort of financier of the company—he had to do with the cash of the company, and the sale and disposing of the goods—he drew cheques and accepted bills—I was not aware that he was speculating on the Stock Exchange with the company's money—I knew he was speculating with his own money; I should think I first knew it in May this year—I think on 3rd August this year I first knew that he had taken any money of the company for the purpose of fulfilling an engagement on the Stock Exchange—I did not know till then that any of the company's money was being used for the purpose of such speculation—we had a purchase and sale account at our bank; it would indicate to anyone looking at it purchases made of goods to be resold—we buy mutton here to sell again, and beef would come from America to be sold here—I left Chicago in November, 1891—Mr. Swift returned from England in July of that year—Mr. G. F. Swift has not, to my knowledge, been here since July, 1891—some of the younger sons have been here since—I was in their business house in Chicago for about seven years—I have never been informed of any speculative transactions on the Stock Exchange by any of the Swifts—I had a conversation with the prisoner about the end of July, 1893, in Charles Pritchard's public-house, 105, Charterhouse—he asked me if I had heard anything regarding him upon the market—I said, "No, only that people have inquired where you have been"—he said, "I have been dealing on the Stock Exchange, and I am now unable to meet my losses, and I tell you this so that you will be prepared if you should hear anything"—shortly after I received a communication, and I subsequently made inquiries into the books and accounts—I think the prisoner was in the City when I did so—I found that these sums of money had been taken for gambling purposes—I communicated with Mr. Swift, and this prosecution followed.
Cross-examined. I was a clerk in Swift's Railway Claims Department, and kept certain books in Chicago relating to that department—their business is carried on at their head office, the Union Stock Yards, and they have also an office connected with the Board of Trade, at 142, La Serle Street—the Board of Trade is where merchants meet, and buy and sell produce in advance—some of that business is speculative—they deal in "futures" for forward delivery—I never knew of Mr. Swift buying railway shares—the Hammond, Morris, and Eastman Meat Companies are well known in Chicago—I have no knowledge of whether there is buying
and selling of shares between the Swift and those other companies, or that they united and formed a syndicate—Mr. Ellis was employed by the company before I was employed by them—I never was appointed as deputy-manager; I acted in that capacity—I do not know that on 31ht May I owed the company £339—I did not owe the company a large sum of money on 31st May, nor £360 at the end of July; I did not owe them anything—I don't know if it is a false entry in the books; the secretary may have some arrangement with the company on the other side—I don't know if Mr. Swift knew of this debit to my account—my wages were forty dollars a week—I had nothing to do with keeping the books in London; it was Mr. Conning's business—I managed the disposal of the beef in the market.
JOHN CONNING . I went into the service of the Swift Beef Company in August, 1891, and was book-keeper and cashier—during most of that time the prisoner has been superintendent of the office and business—there has been an account opened between him and the Swift Beef Company—my attention was called to a cheque drawn on 14th April, 1893, for £500—I was not aware of it at the time—I did not part with that cheque, and knew nothing of its contents till it was returned from the bankers, except what was told me—it was our custom to state on the counterfoil for what purpose the cheque was drawn—the prisoner told me to enter the cheque to his own private account temporarily—he said he was about to open a special account, to which this cheque would have to be ultimately entered, but that he would give me the name of that account later—he did not tell me what the £500 was used for—I charged it Accordingly to his account in the cash-book, and then posted it in the ledger on 14th April—at that time there were certain other items to his debit and an item to his credit, but practically the account was balanced with the exception of this £500, which was owing on 14th—on 29th April he said, "How much will be necessary to close my account?"—I. gave him the figures; after giving him credit for his month's salary there would be £431 9s. 7d.—he gave me two cheqnes, one for £200 on Hills' Bank, and one for £231 9s. 7d. on the London Joint Stock Bank—about 13th May the prisoner spoke to me about some more cheques—these two cheques are dated the 12th—I did not see them when they were drawn, and had nothing to do with the parting of them to anyone—I saw the counterfoil entries, which were in the prisoner's writing, "J. H. Read, charge W. W. D. £515 11s. 2d. "; and "W. Cornforth and Co., charge W. W. D. £1,012 13s."—I charged those to the prisoner's private account—the prisoner told me to enter them—he called me into the private office on 12th May, and began by telling me that he had something to tell me in confidence—he said, "In order that there may be somebody in the office, should anything happen to me, who may know the nature of the entries you are about to make," and he then told me he had invested money in stocks; that Mr. G. F. Swift favoured certain stocks (he mentioned Milwaukee, I don't remember the other names), and that as he had not decided upon a name for this new account which would have to be opened, I had better in the meantime put the amounts to his own private account—accordingly on the 13th I debited his private account with £1,528 4s. 2d. out of these two cheques—I certainly was not aware then that this money was going to pay for differences on the Stock Exchange;
he did not say anything to me about that—at the end of the month I had in the ordinary course of my duties to go through my ledgers, and make out a trial balance-sheet, and I noticed that we had a page headed "Purchase and Sale Account" with only one line used on it; and as he had not decided on the name of the account for the investments I suggested that we should utilise this blank page, headed as it was, "Purchase; and Sale Account"—the prisoner adopted the suggestion and said, "That will do very well"—he told me I must transfer the entries £1,528 4s. 2d., which were placed to his debit in the middle of the month, to that account, and I credited his account with an entry against purchases and sales £1,528 4s. 2d., and then I debited the purchases and sales with the £1,528 48. 2d., so that the prisoner's account was cleared of that £1,528—at the end of May I found, on looking at the cheque-book, a cheque drawn and entered in the counterfoil in the prisoner's writing: "May 29th, 1893, W. Cornforth and Company, charge purchase and sale account £969 18s. 5d."—on May 30th there is another entry: "J. F. K. Head, charge purchase and sale account £1,061188. 3d."—I charged those in the ordinary way—the cheques were entered in the cash-book and were posted in the purchase and sale account in the ledger—the next cheques I charged to purchase and sale account were those of June 29th—in the ledger is a debit of £400—the counterfoil, in the prisoner's writing, is "June 28th, London Joint Stock Bank, charge purchase and sale account £400"—on June 29th, 1893, is "J. F. H. Read, charge purchase and sale account £1,111 10s. 6d."—I never heard from the prisoner that they related to differences or losses on the Stock Exchange; I believed they represented purchases, and that we had scrip for them—at the end of each month I sent to America a trial balance-sheet—the prisoner would sign each sheet; he knew of them being sent—this is the one for 31st May; the debtor and creditor account is sent to show the state of the English company—I find the debit market investment £4,046; that is the price of the purchase of the stall in the market—I find purchases and sales are £3,560 6s. 10d., that is the first four cheques—in the trial sheet of 30th June I find the purchase and sale account £5,071 11s. 4d.—we did not as a rule write a letter with these statements, but simply remitted them—I don't know that the prisoner did not write a private letter and enclose it. (MR. WILLIS read a letter of July 31st from the prisoner to Mr. G. F. Swift. This stated that he enclosed the monthly statement; that he deeply regretted to inform him that the amount to the debit of the purchase and sale account, amounting to£5,000, was a total loss; that this loss had beet made by investments in railway and other shares; that he did not believe there was any danger of an eventual loss till the failure of J. F. U. Read; and that, as he did not believe it would be possible for him to give by letter a correct idea of how the loss was brought about, lie asked to be given permission to go to Chicago)—that letter is a manifold copy of the prisoner's writing—I produce the company's pass-books—in August, apart from these matters, his private account was overdrawn—the company had paid his salary, and did not owe him anything—there is no credit entry of £19 from Mr. Read, or any other sum to the credit of the purchase and sale account—I was never told of any sums as due to the credit of that account.
Cross-examined. On 29th April the prisoner's account with the company
was closed, and as far as they were concerned his private account was square—I purchased a book at his request for the purpose of making entries of the details of the investments—I last saw that book when I gave it to the prisoner, after buying it in the middle of May, I believe—when the detectives came to the office after the prisoner's arrest a book was taken out of his private drawer of the safe, which he kept locked—I understood it was the same book, but I will not swear it was—I have not seen it to certify to it since the middle of May—I never saw the contents, of the book—I have not seen it here—the entries in my journal referred to the folios in the purchase and sale account—I believe the book was produced by a detective before the Magistrate; I could not tax my memory as to that—it was a book similar to this (Produced)—the prisoner said that the book I bought we should use to enter these transactions—the Swift Beef Company in Chicago, after sending a consignment of meat, used, to draw on us, and sometimes they would draw before sending it—this amount in the trial balance-sheet for May represents the amount standing to Swift and Co. 's account in our ledger, which is made up of bills payable upon acceptance, and so on—towards the end or middle of April Messrs. Swift changed the length of time at which they drew their bills from eighteen to sixty days, and the effect of that was we began to carry larger balances at the bank, the meat being sold before the bills were due.
JOHN MITCHELL (Inspector H). I arrested the prisoner at the Exchange Hotel, Liverpool, on 9th August—I had no warrant, but I had received information by telegraph that one had been granted—I charged the prisoner with stealing, on 11th May, 1893, the sum of £515 15s. 2d., the money of the Swift Beef Company, Limited, his masters—he said, "I cannot understand this; there must be some mistake"—he wanted to know at whose instance the proceedings were taken, and I told him by the solicitors to the Swift Beef Company.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
FOURTH COURT.—Monday, September 18th, 1893.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
WILLIAM WATSON . I am assistant to Henry Towell, of 7, Golden Square—these three fur coat-linings are his; they are worth about £10—the ticket appears on two of them—I was called about 5. 45, and found that a fan-light at the back of the premises had been taken out and placed on a dung-heap—we always believed it to be a fixture; it had been there, to my knowledge, four years—the other side of the door was very dirty, and there were marks in the dust and on the brass handle.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. The door was only opened once about three years ago—you asked the constable half a dozen questions, perhaps. more.
turned sharply away—I saw a lot of tailors' cuttings and furs—I went, into Beak Street and signalled for a constable, but could not get one for a quarter of an hour—I took the prisoner in custody, and the other man ran back into Golden Square—I took the prisoner to Vine Street Station, and another constable carried the furs—the prisoner said he had been to get a cup of coffee—the inspector examined the prisoner's clothing and found some hairs.
Cross-examined. There was only one man at first, but another came two or three minutes afterwards—I had hold of you; I did not turn my lamp on—you were at the corner of Marshall Street when I stopped you; that is twenty or thirty yards from Rydon Lane—you said you were going for a walk—you did not tell me that your landlady had bolted the doors—no implements were found on you—I did not say that there were a great many hairs on your coat; I could not count them; I said there were a few.
NATHAN MANSFIELD (Police Inspector, C). I was on duty at Vine Street about 3. 30, when the prisoner was brought there in Carew's. custody, and Bord brought these furs—I took off the prisoner's coat, and found a number of hairs similar to these—I put them on white paper and showed them to the prisoner; I also found some on his left trouser leg—I found a great number altogether, and a smaller number on the clothing of the policeman who carried them to the station—I charged the prisoner at 5. 30 with the unlawful possession of the furs—he said, "I know nothing about them."
Cross-examined. You said you had been at work for Hope Brothers—I went there and found you had worked there a few days.
Prisoner's Defence: I was going home and two men asked me for a. light; they dropped the furs, and I assisted in picking them up. I earned £2 a week, and had no reason to get my living by dishonest means.
GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY**† to a conviction at Clerkenwell on November 18th, 1892. Five Years' Penal Servitude.
ELIZABETH ANN ROBERTS . I am single, and live at 33, Kilvey Road, Highbury—on August 22nd, about 8. 40, I was in Aldersgate Street with a friend, and saw the prisoner and two other men—one made a snatch at. my chain, but could not get it off, and pushed me into a dark passage, and kept pulling till he got my watch—the prisoner was two or three yards from me and came up, and I fainted away—he got away with my watch and chain—I afterwards picked him out from several others—I am positive of him.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. The whole matter took about five minutes;—it was Sunday night, the shops were closed, and the only light was. from the street lamps—I gave a description of the prisoner that night to a, policeman who is not here—it was not suggested before the Magistrate that the prisoner did not answer the description I had given, or that he was not the height, and had not the same coloured hair—I described him
as fair, and rather tall and stout, with a brown check coat on—I was taken to the Old Street Police-station on the Tuesday morning and saw men, some fair and some dark, some tall and some short—they had not the appearance of men who had been locked up all night—my friend was not in the room with me—I went in first.
Re-examined. I had a good look at him; he was standing by a lamp, post; I have no doubt he is the man.
JANE JONES . I live at 22, St. Paul's Road, Canonbury—on August 22nd I was with the last witness, walking arm-in-arm—the prisoner came in front of her, pushed her, and put something in my eyes, which made me blind for a minute—he pushed her into a place, but I was too frightened to go after her—I saw the prisoner run away with a watch—I saw him again on the next Tuesday at the station, and have no doubt he is the man.
Cross-examined. I screamed—I was very frightened and excited, and my friend was almost in a tit—I did not see the watch in the hand of the man who was running away—I described him as wearing a brown coat—Miss Roberts said that he was about her height or a little taller—I have never seen the prisoner before.
GEORGE FROST (18 G). On August 21st, about 11. 30, I was in the Crown beerhouse, St. Luke's, and saw the prisoner—I told him I should take him on suspicion of stealing a watch and chain from a woman in Goswell Road on Sunday—he said, "All right, I will go"—I put him with several other men, and she identified him.
GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at this COURT on March 28th, 1887. Five Years' Penal Servitude.
JAMES MITCHELL . I am a newsagent at 140, Cambridge Road, Bethnal Green—on August 26th I had my two lads with me waiting at the corner of Cambridge Road for my papers—I had about £1 2s. in my pocket—somebody seized me, one in front and another behind—we fell and struggled together—I kept calling "Police!" all the time—I lost about eighteenpence—they kicked me on my ribs and got away, and left this hat behind.
THOMAS COOPER . I sell papers for Mr. Mitchell—on August 26th a man came up and put his hand in Mr. Mitchell's pocket and took out eighteenpence—it was the prisoner—I went for a policeman—the prisoner ran into a coffee-shop; I saw him caught.
EDWARD EDNEY . I sell papers for Mr. Mitchell—I was with him, and the prisoner came up and put his hand in Mr. Mitchell's pocket and took eighteenpence out—they fell on the ground fighting, and another man came up and pulled the prisoner away, and he and the other man ran into a coffee-shop—the police could not find them, and they came out and ran down Cannon Place, the police following—I am sure the prisoner is the man.
ZINA CHANDLER (Policeman J). I took the prisoner in Whitechapel Road on August 28th, and told him it was for stealing eighteenpence from a man in Whitechapel Road and assaulting him—he said, "That is a fine
thing"—he was placed with six others, and the two boys identified him, but the prosecutor failed to do so.
Prisoner's Defence: If I had done it I should not have stopped about there.
GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Worship Street on June 26th, 1893. Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. LAWLESS Prosecuted.
LOUISA WATSON . I live at 13, Church Street, Chelsea—I have been living with the prisoner—on July 30th he came in about 12. 30 the worse for drink, and began throwing things at me—I went to my aunt next door, and he threw a china plate at me, and struck me on the eye—I have been under a doctor ever since—I had had a drop of drink, and I aggravated him, or I don't think he would have done it.
THOMAS ALLEN (23 B) On 23rd July I saw the prisoner outside No. 12; he told me he wanted his wife who was inside; she came out, and they went into their own house—shortly afterwards there was a. smashing of crockery—I went in and he said, "Quite right, I did throw a plate at her."
THOMAS SEWELL . I am divisional surgeon—I saw the prosecutrix on July 30th, suffering from a wound in her eye, and the lower lid was lacerated—she can see the light now, but it will require an operation before she can see properly.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. — Six Months' Hard Labour.
PETER JOHN CALLAGHAN . I am a hatter, of 5, Cutler Street, Houndsditch—about November 12th the prisoner called about business—I was very short of money, and he said he would see me in the morning, which he did, and said, "Are you really in want of money?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "£20 or £30?"—I said, "That would be a great help"—he said, "I don't want anything out of it unless you put me on a new hat," which I did—he produced this bill for £20 17s. 10d. at three months; it is now four months—it was not altered by my authority—he called in a few days and said his friend was out of town; could I rub on till Christmas?—I said "Yes," and on January 2nd he said, "I can't get that d—d bill done; you must give me two smaller ones. Give me one for £9 and one for £13"—he filled them up and I accepted them, and said, "Give me the other bill"—he said, "I threw it on the fire this morning"—if I had believed he had kept it I would not have given him the two smaller bills—George Payne was present—I was sued on the £9 and £13 bills, and execution levied on me—about January 25th I heard that the £20 bill had not been destroyed, and I saw it and pointed out an alteration on it—these bills are in the prisoner's writing—I have no doubt that the alteration from three to four months is his writing; I did not authorise it.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I have known you about three years—you made a beggar of me—I paid the execution by instalments.
GEORGE PAYNE . I work with Mr. Callaghan—I was present about January 1st, when the prisoner said to him, "I can do nothing with that £20 bill; I must have two smaller ones"—he asked for the return of the other bill, and the prisoner said, "I have destroyed it; I put it on the fire."
LEVY COHEN . I am a clothier, and know the prisoner—about January 14th or 16th he came to me and said he was rather short, and asked if I would lend him some money on a bill—it was for £20 17s. 10d., drawn by the prisoner and accepted by the prosecutor—I hardly noticed what period it was to run, but it is four months now—I asked him how he got it—he said he took it in payment for some hat-bands, and asked me to give him £5 on it, and said, "Give me £1 for my trouble"—T did so—I knew Mr. Callaghan, and communicated with him—I have not received anything from the prisoner; he has promised to pay, but has not got it.
LEONARD SHEPHERD STARVAI I am clerk to Joyce and Co.—I produce a bill for £13 15s. 10d., drawn by Thomas Marshall, and accepted by Callaghan—I produce a cheque drawn in payment of that bill by my firm, payable to Marshall—that is the defendant—it is endorsed, "Thomas Marshall"—we got judgment against them both.
Prisoner's Defence: I went to Bow Lane to get the bill discounted—I waited some time, he did not come, and I asked him to give me two small bills, but I never said that the first bill was destroyed.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
JOSEPH JOHN HANDLEY . I am a publican of 20, King Edward Street City—on September 23rd, about 11. 15 p. m., I was in Bloomsbury with two friends—there was a bit of a row and the two prisoners were in it—we got knocked down though we took no part in the disturbance—I saw the prisoners come out of the house; Eley knocked me down and I missed my watch and chain and walking-stick—I have only found the stick—five of them attacked us—I am twenty-three years old; I had not provoked the prisoners—they were both there when I was knocked down.
LEWIS BURDON . I live at 15, Bernand Street, about fifty yards from Masham Street—I was with Handley and Hughes and saw five men about 11. 15; the prisoners are two of them—we wanted to go home—four or five men rushed on the prosecutor and I received a blow on my chest—I went home and found Mr. Hughes with his nose bleeding—I went back to the house—the prisoners were there—I am quite sure of that.
ANDREW SANGSTER (172 E). I was in Masham Street on September 3rd, about 11. 30, and saw a crowd—the prisoners went inside the house, and a little later they came down the street again—the prosecutor spoke to me, and I went to No. Ill, the house where I saw the prisoners go—Eley came to the area, and Handley said, "That is the man who stole my coat"—I took him in charge—he said, "You have got the wrong man"—three constables were there.
there was nobody else in the room—I found this stick in the room—this was on the third story—I know Mr. King; he is not here.
The prisoners, in their statements before the Magistrate, stated that they had had a lot of drink, which led to blows, but denied striking or robbing the prosecutor; and Sweet stated that the stick was taken away by Mr. King and found on the second floor, and not in his room.
NOT GUILTY .
ANNIE DAVIES . I am single, and live at 65, St. George's Street—on July 20th, between seven and eight o'clock, I went from the shop down to the kitchen, and saw the prisoner come with a red-hot fork to Dehue and stick it into his eye—he was talking to me at the time—she did not say anything.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not arrive just at the moment the man fell down; I was standing talking to him a few minutes before it happened.
HENRY THOMAS HAMILTON . I am divisional surgeon—on the evening of July 20th I attended the prosecutor—there were abrasions on the bridge of his nose, a punctured wound on his eye, and a punctured wound of the orbit—I formed the opinion that his eye would not be saved, but I have not seen him since.
MAX DEHUE did not appear.
Prisoner's Defence: I was in the kitchen with the gentleman. He had been drinking a good deal, and was going to seize me by force. I was defending myself, and he fell on the stove. There were several forks there, and no doubt he wounded himself. I went up to my room, and was there when the police arrested me. I did not cause the injury to him. He caused it himself.
H. T. HAMILTON (Re-examined). Whether the wounds could be caused by the prosecutor falling would depend greatly on the position in which the fork was lying, or whether it was fixed; if it was lying down it would not do it; there were wounds on his face and on the bridge of his nose which are consistent with a fall—all the damage done to his face could be done by this fork, but I think there must have been two blows—I should say the abrasions on his cheek must have been made in two directions.
NOT GUILTY .
CHARLES HORLING . I live at 33, Clarendon Street, Somers Town—on August 31st, about 12. 35 early morning, I was at the corner of Wardour Street—the prisoner came up and said, "Can you fight?"—I said, "No. sir"—he Wd, "I will show you how to fight Yankee style," and struck me—my two friends defended me, and he ran away—they followed him, and he fired a revolver at Robert Clark.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I heard what he said distinctly—I
told the Magistrate that he said, "How they fight in Lancashire"—I had had three or four drinks of ale—the inspector said at the Police-court that I was drunk—the prisoner had two friends with him; I did not see one of them knocked down, or see his face bleeding—I did not ask him and his friends to give me drink—I am a horsekeeper—I was last at work last Saturday week.
Re-examined. I did no work last week because I was here waiting for the trial to come on.
ROBERT CLARK . I am a cab-washer, of 56, Clarence Square, Somers. Town—I was with Horling in Wardour Street, and the prisoner said, "Can you fight?"—he said, "No"—the prisoner said, "I will show you the Yankee style," and struck him on his face, and then struck me, and I struck him—I then heard the report of a pistol, and heard something whistle over my head.
Cross-examined. I did not tell the Inspector at the station that the prisoner fired in the air and broke a lamp—I had had six glasses of ale—I was once charged with drunkenness—I was drunk then, but not on this. occasion—I was charged at the Mansion House with attempting to steal, and said that I was the worse for drink—I had been drinking all day then—I was discharged on that account.
NATHAN MANSFIELD (Police Inspector, C). I was at Vine Street on August 31st when the prisoner was brought in—Horling and Clark came in with him; they were both the worse for drink—Horling told me he had had a quarrel in the street, and that the prisoner fired a revolver behind them in the air and broke a lamp—the prisoner said, "I only did it to. frighten them, I thought they intended to rob me again. I have been robbed of £26 since coming from America"—he said that he had been robbed that night: but he had £6 or £7 on him.
NOT GUILTY .
NOT GUILTY .
GATSEL ROSSEN (Interpreted). I am a general dealer, of 13, Regent Street—on September 8th I went to bed, everything was locked up—I was sleeping downstairs, and my wife upstairs; she called out about 3 a. m., and I found the prisoner on the stairs half naked, and with his trousers down—I collared him, blew a whistle, and held him till the police came, but they let them in next door—I saw the prisoner on the wall, and a policeman took him as he was getting over it—I missed £5 from the bedroom where my wife was sleeping—I had seen it safe about 6. 5—he had broken some glass in the backyard and effected an entrance.
BETSY ROSSEN . I am the wife of the last witness—I was awoke about 3. 30 by somebody opening a chest of drawers—I spoke; there was no answer, and I said, "Who is this?"—he stooped down so that I should not see him, and went out; I ran after him and screamed, and my husband stopped him—I am quite sure it was the prisoner I saw; he lives next door.
the prisoner in Goswell Street with nothing on but his shirt—I caught him four or five gardens off, and found on him £3 15s. 6 1/2 d.
Prisoner's defence. I heard a noise in the next yard and went out to see what was the matter, and the police took me.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. PIGGOTT Prosecuted and MR. HUTTON Defended.
SAMUEL GILES . I am a caretaker, of 345, Mile End Road; it was formerly a fish shop, it is nothing now—on August 11th I had been sitting up all night, and at 4. 30 I heard a noise in my yard, and went down in my shirt, and saw three or four men in the yard—they went over the wall and I went over too—there was another forty yards off—I chased him, knocked him down, and. gave him to the police—I told them I knew them—I described the prisoner to the police—I live next door but one to him—in the morning I found a sheet of glass had been taken out of the back door and the door was undone—nothing was lost but the glass of the window—I did not hear the glass taken out—it is a covered yard.
Cross-examined. My house was not broken into—I found nothing wrong with it—the prisoner was not charged with burglary on that occasion.
NOT GUILTY .
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, September 19th, 1893.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. A. GILL Prosecuted, but offered no evidence on the felonious charge. MR. HUTTON, for the prisoner, stated that he hoped to make compensation to the persons wounded before the next Session.— Judgment respited.
After MR. TAYLOR had opened the case a verdict of
NOT GUILTY was taken as to Coltman, and the JURY, after hearing some evidence, stopped the case, and found Evento
NOT GUILTY . This was a voluntary prosecution, under the Vexatious Indictments Act, the Magistrate having dismissed the case The COMMON SERJEANT ordered the prosecutor to pay the costs.
FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday and Wednesday, September 19th and 20th, 1893.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
812. GEORGE SMITH MOUNTFORD (36) PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully obtaining a pianoforte from George Davies, and a suite of furniture from John Paterson, by false pretences, after a conviction for obtaining goods by false pretences. Five Years' Penal Servitude.
813. JOSEPH STANLEY JEWELL was again indicted (See page 1121) for unlawfully obtaining a cart and a landau and mare by false pretences; second Count, Falsely pretending that he had authority to draw on a certain bank for £48.
MR. C. F. GILL and MR. A. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. COHEN Defended.
ROBERT JOYCE . I am a butcher—in June this year I advertised a cart mare for sale, and received a letter signed "Jewell," which I did not keep—it had a printed heading like this (produced), describing him as a horse contractor and cab proprietor—he came and saw the mare, and asked me her price and age; I said £50, and that she was six years old—he offered me £47; I said I could not sell her for that—he offered me £48, which I took, and we went and had a glass of ale—I asked him what he was contractor for—he said for roads, that his father and mother had just died and left him with the business—he came back to the house with me and gave me this cheque, post-dated six days, for a trial of the mare—I allowed him to take her away in the afternoon; he said he had to meet some horses coming up by the Great Western Railway—on July 3rd I received this letter from him: "Dear Sir,—Please do not present cheque, if possible, for two or three days; I have a heavy bill to meet, and if you will do me this favour I shall be very much obliged"—I wrote to him and told him I would keep the cheque back—I paid it in on July 6th, and it was returned on the 10th marked "N. S."—I went to his house, but did not find him at home—I met him in the Seven Sisters Road, but he did not appear to notice me—I followed him to some stables and told him the cheque was not right—he said, "I have just come from the bank and have placed money there which will meet your cheque"—I sent the cheque to my bankers the next day and it was returned on the 14th marked "Account closed"—I had no knowledge that he had sold my mare—I asked him where she was—he said, "At the stable that I have just come from when you saw me drive up the hill"—after the matter was in the hands of the police I saw her at Mr. Clarkson's and identified her.
Cross-examined. I have not instituted these proceedings in the hope of recovering my money; I never attempted to get a debt through a Policecourt in my life—I went to his mother's house before these proceedings commenced; that was his address—I did not say that if I did not get the money I would take criminal proceedings—I said I saw Mrs. Jewell, and said if it was not paid by six I would show them what I would do; if she had paid me I should not have come here—I have a very good memory, but you caught me making a mistake—the false pretences which caused me to part with the mare were, first, the letter headed, "Horse contractor and cab proprietor"; second, he said that he had fourteen
horses and carts at work, upon which I made up my mind to give him credit—before we went to the Grapes I had agreed to seven days' trial—I did not know he was going to pay by cheque—I do not rely on the cheque as a false pretence—86, Amhurst Park, is a very nice house, and very well furnished—I prosecuted in the first case, and afterwards by counsel; that was not by the advice of Mr. Diver, the solicitor in the last case—I received a letter from him; I have not brought it—I went to see the prisoner after I had the cheque returned to me on the 10th, and asked him why it was; he said he had just come from the bank, and there was more than sufficient to meet it—he had stables at St. Andrew's Mews—I think he is a kind of horse coper, buying low-priced horses and selling them again.
Re-examined. I have been in business about three years—I never took criminal proceedings against anybody to get money, but I have collected many debts—I found that this well-furnished house was not his at all.
RICHARD NEWTON STOLLERY . I am manager of the Repository, Barbican—I had an auction on Friday, June 30th—the majority of the horses usually come in on Wednesdays—I received instructions from the prisoner to sell a brown mare on June 30th; she was. entered for sale on the 29th, and was in the yard that day; a letter came by post putting a reserve of £35 on her, and saying she was a good worker—I was in the box selling; I do not think she reached 32 guineas—she was afterwards delivered to Walter Clarkson—I believe £27 was her price.
Cross-examined. Thirty-one guineas was the highest bid.
JOHN BAXTER . I am a horse dealer, of the Seven Sisters Road—I was at Rymill's Repository on June 30th, and bought a cart mare of the prisoner for £27—I sold her a few days afterwards to Mr. Clarke for £30.
Cross-examined. I never spoke to the prisoner before—I do not know him as the owner of cabs, but he has ten or twelve brick carts and horses.
Re-examined. I saw his carts. twelve or eighteen months ago, but I did not know this was the Jewell who owned them—I have seen him driving about frequently.
HUGH EDWARD BROWS repeated his former evidence. (See page 1123), and added: This cheque was presented on July 6th or 7th, and returned, and presented again when the account was closed—it is dated June 27th—on June 27th an acceptance of the prisoner's for £20 was returned, and on July 1st another—on July 2nd a cheque to Payne for £46 5s. was presented, and on 11th July a cheque for £102. 4s. to Joyce.
Cross-examined. I was here a few days ago—I do not remember the solicitor's clerk going into the box and saying that he had the conduct of the prisoner's affairs, and had taken up all these cheques and paid for them—I heard something about a mortgage.
Cross-examined. No person can own a cab and let it out without a license, but there are persons called jobmasters.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, September 20th, 1893, and six following days.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
814. GEORGE STOW HILL (42), FRANK GOLDRING (42), JAMES WILSON WEIR (32), ALFRED FRENCH (64), JOHN HENRY (68), and FRANK BOWERMAN (58) were indicted for unlawfully conspiring, with each other and other persons, to cheat and defraud divers persons, who should hereafter bargain for the discounting of their valuable securities. Other Counts, varying the form of charge.
BOWERMAN PLEADED GUILTY .
MESSRS. BESLEY, GEOGHEGAN and MUIR Prosecuted; MR. PAUL TAYLOR appeared for Hill; MESSRS. WILLIS, Q. C., and CLUER for Goldring; and MR. AUSTIN METCALFE for French and Henry.
Before Plea, MR. TAYLOR submitted that the first Count of the indictment could not be sustained, being bad for uncertainty, not setting out the means proposed for effecting the alleged frauds; in support of his contention he referred to Peg. v. Kain, 15th Cox; Reg. v. Peck, 8 "Law Journal," Magistrates' cases; and Peg. v. Fowle, 4 Carrington and Payne, page 592. The COMMON SERJEANT having referred to Reg. v. Sydserff 11 Q. B. reports, was of opinion that he was bound by the decision in that case, and therefore field that the Count was good. MR. TAYLOR then stated that Hill, as to the facts, would conduct his own defence.
MARY WELCHMAN . I am a widow, of 72, Dean Street, Soho—in 1888 I carried on business there as Welchman and Co., manufacturing goldsmiths—about 8th November, 1888, I advertised in the Daily Telegraph for a partner with capital—in answer I received this letter, dated 9th November, 1888, from Mildred and Cousins, 5, John Street, Bedford Row. (This stated that they might arrange for financial assistance to the extent of £1,000 on Welchman's acceptances, without partnership, at a moderate rate of interest; that if Welchman would call they could enter into particulars; and that they were not connected with loan offices, and charged no preliminary fees)—in consequence of that letter I called with my brother-in-law, Mr. Jackson, at No. 5, John Street—I saw Hill, whom I addressed as Cousins; he answered to that name—I said I had called respecting the letter—he said, "I can arrange a loan for £1,000"—I said I wanted £500—he said I had better have £1,000, or words to that effect—he said the money was to be raised by bills, that he had several rich friends abroad who would get them discounted—he first asked me if the business was mine—I said, "Yes"—he asked if I could give a reference to my bankers; I said I could, and I mentioned the City Bank, Bond Street Branch—he told me to call again in a day or so—that interview was about 12th November, 1888—a day or two afterwards I called again with Mr. Jackson—nothing of consequence then took place, except that Hill said he had not heard from his friends abroad—at the third interview I had with Hill, Mr. Jackson being present, I accepted seven bills altogether on the day they bear date, 15th November—these are five of the bills I then accepted, all payable at four months; they are for £98, £58 7s., £183 4s., £97 3s., £192 8s.—with the other two bills it made a total of £1,000—there was no drawer's name on the bills when I accepted
them—I said I had never been accustomed to bills drawn as these were, with the words "mutual accommodation" on them; he said it was merely a matter of form, and quite right—the words "mutual accommodation" had not been mentioned; he said he had discounted thousands and thousands of pounds worth of bills—he said I was to get the money in less than a week—I believed his statements—on the same day, after accepting the bills, I received this letter from him, dated 15th November. (This stated that Mildred and Cousins, with Welshman's authority, undertook as principals to draw upon Welchman, either by themselves or nominees, for their mutual accommodation, to the extent of £1,000, and would endeavour to get the acceptances discounted at a moderate rate, not to exceed, as to interest or renewals, 6 per cent, and half cost of bill stamps; that of the net proceeds Welchman was to be credited with 75 per cent., and when the bills were ultimately paid off, Welchman undertook to provide in that proportion, the drawers being responsible for the remainder; and that the bills were to be kept renewed for five years if required. On the back was written, "In reply to your letter of 15th we agree to fulfil the conditions therein")—I know something was said about the words, "mutual accommodation before I signed the bills—I objected to it, and Hill said it was only a matter of form—I wrote to Mildred and Cousins, after receiving the letter of 15th, in the terms of the draft on the back—on November 17th I received this letter, purporting to be signed by Frank Goldring. (This stated that the acceptance for £122 12s. of November 15th, 1888, had been placed before him for discount, and that he was prepared to do so subject to the bank references, and to a letter from Welchman to die effect that Goldring was authorised to draw and endorse the acceptance for £122 12s., the same being in order and given for value, and that he must be protected in this manner, as the matter had been introduced to him by an agent, and he had to pay the money to them)—I wrote an answer to Goldring and Co., 7, South Square, in the terms of this endorsement on the back of the letter—I said to Hill, "I have had a communication from a Mr. Goldring"—he replied he knew him very well; he was a most respectable man; and that he had known him for years, I think, he said—I waited for several days before X called again, but my brother in-law went up—I waited for the money, but finding it did not come I called on Hill again in a few days—I asked him why the money had not been sent—he said he had not heard from my banker, which had caused delay—I went to my bank and made inquiries, and then I returned to see Hill, but he had gone—I waited a little longer and the money did not come—I wrote and then called, but Hill was not in—several days afterwards, later in November, I saw him and had a conversation with him—he said the reference at the bank was quite satisfactory, and that I should have the money in a few days—I never had any money—I called several times at 5, John Street, and he offered me some of the money—when I called a young boy answered the door—I saw Hill again before 12th December—I said I was very much annoyed at the delay, and I should like my bills back again—he said, "I am responsible for the bills; if you will only wait a few days you shall have your money"—on 12th December I received this letter, enclosing the bills for £58 7s., £97 3s., and £192 8s.—the drawer's name had been torn off them. (This letter from Mildred and Cousins stated that they enclosed the acceptances
in accordance with the desire expressed in Welchman's letter, but without prejudice to their rights under the agreement for mutual accommodation, and that the other bills were not at present in their possession, but that they would communicate with the various holders)—this is a copy of my reply on 17th December. (This stated that she had received a letter from Messrs, Holt and Son, of Willenhall., stating that Mr. F. Goldring had offered them one of her acceptances, and asking if it was correct, and that she had written to Messrs. Holt stating it was correct, and would be paid by her if discounted; that she was. much annoyed at the delay, and that unless all her bills were returned on Wednesday,19th ins., she should take means to get them)—I received this letter of 19th December from Mildred and Cousins, enclosing my acceptance for £98 1s.; the drawer's name was torn off—afterwards my acceptance for £183 4s. was returned in another letter—the drawer's name had been torn off that—I wrote this letter of 29th December to Mildred and Cousins. (Stating that she should instruct her solicitors to take proceedings if the acceptances for £248 and £122 were not returned by Tuesday, January 1st)—I put the matter into the hands of Messrs. Marshall and Haslip, my solicitors—while I was waiting for the money Hill asked me if it would be convenient for me to take £100, as he had not discounted the bills yet—I said, "No, I would have it altogether"—I have never received any money for the bills—I have had to pay my solicitor's costs, amounting to over £80—no proceedings were taken against me upon the two bills that were not returned to me—there were proceedings against Mildred and Cousins.
Cross-examined by Hill. I made no note of my conversation with you five years ago—I have not been called on to pay any of the bills.
JACKSON. I am Mrs. Welchman's brother-in-law—I went several times to the office at 5, John Street—I saw Hill there, who went under the name of Cousins—I have seen French there—I think I saw the name Mildred and Cousins on the door.
JOSEPH MONTAGUE HASLIP . I am a solicitor, practising in partnership as Marshall and Haslip, at 6, Martin Lane, Cannon Street—we were solicitors for Mrs. Welchman in the Chancery action of Welchman against Mildred and Cousins—Messrs. Norris and Son acted as the solicitors for the defendants—an order was obtained, drawn up on 8th March, 1889, in the action—I had an interview with Mr. Norris on 25th February—he said the larger of the two bills had been paid away, and that a sum of £25, I think it was, had been borrowed on the smaller of the two bills, and I think the suggestion was made that we should pay £25 to get the smaller bill back, but that he could do nothing with the larger bill—I declined his offer—on 8th March, 1889, this order was made in the action. (This restrained the defendant or his agent from parting or dealing with the bills mentioned in the summons, and ordered the defendant to pay into Court within four days £178 10s., being three-fourths of the amount received by him on discounting the bill for £248)—notice of that injunction was served on Goldring—on 12th March, four days after the order, I saw Goldring, who came to my office with another gentleman, who was a solicitor, I believe, and he stated that he had discounted the £122 bill at the Central Bank, and suggested that we should pay something to take it up—I declined to pay anything, and said he must give me the bill back—on 18th March he called again, and said. he had the bill—I told
him to give the bill to me—he said, "I have not it with me, but I will send it on," or "You will have it," words to that effect—he never sent it to me—I wrote to his address once for it, I think; I never got it—the injunction was all we required at that time, and we discontinued the action in consequence of an arrangement we made with Mr. Norris—in the result Mrs. Welchman had nothing to pay but my costs, which were over £70.
Cross-examined by Hill. She never had to meet any of her bills—you were ordered to pay £178 into Court—we applied for an attachment, but failed—it was proved you had not had the money, but your affidavits in the action swore that the bill had been discounted, and it was stated in Court that you had received £175; afterwards it was stated that instead of receiving money you had passed the bill away for another bill, and that was why the motion for attachment failed—it was proved on your affidavit that you never had the £178, because it was ascertained what the real facts were.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. We got the order on 8th March—we never went to any statement of claim—I should say the greater part of the £70 costs was over the injunction, because the affidavits were made for that—the motion for attachment was dismissed, and Hill had to pay the costs, because he had stated that he had received £175 for the bill, and it was afterwards ascertained that he had done nothing of the sort—about £20 of the costs were for the application for attachment.
By the COURT. We delivered a bill of costs—I knew Mrs. Welchman was not very wealthy, and I sent in my costs almost as between party and party, and not as between solicitor and client.
CHARLES WITHERS . I am clerk to the London and Midland Bank, Newgate Street, with which the Central Bank of London was amalgamated two years ago, and of whose books we have possession—I produce discount account of Frank Goldring and Co., taken from books in possession of the bank—I have compared the account with the books, and find it correct—on 26th November, 1888, the account is credited with a bill for £122 12s.—Welchman and do. are the acceptors—also on 11th March, 1889, a bill for £95138. 6d., accepted by E. H. Newby—I also produce a copy of the current account of Frank Goldring and Co.—I have compared it with the books and find it correct—it extends from 29th January, 1887, to 31st December, 1889—on 26th November, 1888, I find the account is credited with Welchman's bill for £122 12s.—the account is still open—at the end of 1889 the amount was 6s. 6d.—on 11th March, 1889, I find the account credited with Newby's bill for £95 13s. 6d.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. The current account was practically closed when Goldring became bankrupt in November, 1889—from January, 1887, to November, 1889, the total discounts by the Central Bank for Goldring amounted to £11,122 7s. 10d.—the 6s. 6d. was in Goldring's favour—the Central Bank did not lose anything by his account—when he became bankrupt the bank held a large number of his bills not due—I cannot say the amount—the bank did not lose by his bills ultimately—Goldring had had a discount account with a Mr. Hazell from February, 1880, to July, 1882—there was a break in the discount account between July, 1882, and January, 1887, the discount account of Hazell and Goldring having stopped in 1882—I think Goldring had a current account running
then, but no discount transactions—I will bring the dates of the current account.
Re-examined. The discount account was closed on the dissolution of the partnership in 1882, and the bank realised the bills in their possession—New by paid the £95; we generally expect the acceptor to pay—Newby's bill was not met at maturity—it was paid subsequent to the bankruptcy, within a few days of it becoming due—I now find it had matured on June 29th, and was paid by Newby a few days after the due date—the exact due date was the 4th July—the £122 12s. bill was due March 18th, 1889—it was not met at maturity—it was debited to Goldring's account on May 17th, 1889—it was dishonoured by the acceptor—it was kept in our hands; we keep a bill if there are not sufficient funds to debit it—there was not sufficient—later there was, when we debited it and gave it up to him.
By MR. WILLIS. On the 19th March, 1889, the balance in our hands was £305; there might have been something else held over, or probably there was a reserve on the accounts—the fact of our holding over the bill indicates there was not enough to meet it—there was not enough till 17th May, when in fact he was debited with it.
EDWIN HENRY NEWBY . I am a merchant, of 8, Bucklersbury, City—in February, 1889, I advertised for a partner with capital—in reply I received a letter which I have lost, in consequence of which I went to 5, John Street, Bedford Row—I saw Hill, who answered to the name of Cousins, about 26th February, 1889—I said who I was, and produced his letter, and said I had called respecting it—he said he would be able to supply any financial assistance I might require, without a partnership, upon certain terms—I asked his terms—he said, so far as my memory serves me, "Six per cent, per annum"—I agreed to his terms, but I simply heard them on the first occasion—this was the second occasion—on the 26th, when I went again, I entered into a written agreement with Hill—I signed the three bills of exchange, and this acceptance of an agreement (Produced)—this bill for £96 8s. at four months, from 26th February, 1889, drawn by G. Willington, was not so drawn when I accepted it, but the drawer's name was in blank—on the bill for £57 18s. 6d. for four months, from 26th February, the drawer's name is so obliterated I cannot read it—there are two endorsements in a similar condition—the bill for £95 13s. 6d. is drawn by Frank R. Goldring and Co.—the drawer and endorser had not their name upon it when I endorsed it—I got this receipt for the bills of 26th February, 1889. (Produced receipt for bills amounting to £250, stating: "We anticipate to hand your drawer proceeds about Friday next")—I think it must have been about Tuesday when I signed it—I did not get my share of the proceeds—I called upon Hill on several occasions for the money, but never got any—he said they had passed out of his hands for discount when I asked for the bills back, and that he was waiting for the proceeds—this went on for two or three weeks—later I wrote for the return of the bills—my solicitor, Mr. Badcock, got the bill for £57 18s. 6d. back after the proceedings were commenced for the whole of them—I had to pay the acceptance in full on that bill, also my solicitor's costs.
Cross-examined by Hill I have no doubt the date was on the bills when I signed them—the word "our" before "order" on No. 147
looks as if written at a different time—I cannot from memory say definitely whether "my" or "our" was on the bills when I signed—I do not think I should have accepted the bills without the dates on them, but I cannot swear to anything of that kind five years ago—I read the letter of 26th February before agreeing to it, and at my suggestion you made this addition at the foot of the agreement: "And undertake to provide the same"—that refers to the twenty per cent—that was before I signed my acceptance—my solicitor will be able to explain the details; I know very little of the matter after it passed into his hands—I thought the office in John Street was a very respectable office, and the business entirely bond fide.
Re-examined. The receipt he gave me for the bills is dated 26th February, 1889.
JOHN BADCOCK . I am a solicitor of the High Court; I have practiced upwards of twenty years—my office is 23, Rood Lane, City—Mr. Newby consulted me in reference to an action brought by him against Mildred and Cousins, Frank Goldring, and G. Willington—the writ was issued on April 6th, 1889, for the delivery up of the three bills of exchange, for damages, and an injunction—Willington made an appearance, but we. obtained judgment through his default of pleading; he put in no statement of defence, I think, and the matter was referred to the sheriff—I believe the writ was served on all the defendants—Goldring was served on 25th April by my late clerk, and he answered interrogatories—I think issue was joined, but my managing clerk attended to the matter—the notice of trial would be on the record; I have no doubt it wad given—we did not proceed against Goldring further than the notice of trial, as I was informed he was an undischarged bankrupt; therefore I do not think we gave him notice of trial—the end of the matter was: shortly before the action came on for trial I had a conference with Mr. Newby; he thought nothing would be obtained from them if the thing went to trial, and as he did not want the publicity and expense of a trial it was decided to discontinue the action, each party paving his own costs—my managing clerk made those terms—Mr. Newby had to pay one bill in full; that was discounted by Goldring at the Central Bank—with regard to the bill discounted by Willington at the National Bank, an action was brought to recover; we paid, and as we had a balance against Willington we deducted it—; £95 13s. 6d. was paid to the Central Bank, and £71 9s. 6d. in respect to the second bill to the London Provident Bank, I think; and the third, the small bill for £57, we got back—I cannot tell you what the costs were.
The record of the action or recovery of the bills toot put in and read, MR. MUIR put in 23 office copies of affidavits of George Cousins in an action of Goldring v. Midgley, also an affidavit by Goldring in the same action.
WILLIAM TREMNER . I am manager of the Carlisle branch of the Clydesdale Bank, at which a Mr. Gibbins had an account—I produce a copy of his account—I believe he was charged as a co-conspirator before the "Alderman; the case against him was dismissed.
Cross-examined by Hill. I think he had a bond fide business at our bank; he had a genuine account there.
Re-examined. I knew that he carried on business in London—I presume he is living in London now—his father-in-law was residing at
Carlisle, and he indemnified us to the amount of £1,000; we held cover to that extent in connection with the discounting of bills and other drafts. (MR. BESLEY proposed to use this as evidence, on the ground that although Gibbins was not charged, he was named in the indictment as connected with the defendants. The COMMON SERJEANT expressing his opinion that this was a novel practice, and one of which he did not approve, the evidence was not pressed.)
THEODORE WALSH . I am a member of the firm of Walsh and Lovett, general commission agents, at Birmingham—on 25th February this year I received a circular purporting to come from Hill, of 36, Parliament Hill Road, Hampstead Heath—I really forgot the nature of the circular, but in answer to it, on 27th February, I wrote this letter. (This requested information as to how the proposed transaction was to be effected)—in reply to that I received this letter of 28th February, signed "Hill. "(This stated, "Security required, your own acceptance only. I will, as a principal, take them, and cause the same to be drawn, and negotiate them, if satisfactory, when you will be entitled to 80 per cent, of the proceeds. The bills may be renewed for three years, if you prefer")—we had a long correspondence; some of the letters I gave to my solicitor, and some I have searched for and been unable to find. (A number of letters passing between the witness and Hill were read, extending from 4th March to 14th April, the result being that the witness accepted a bill for £497 5s. 9d., drawn by Gibbins, at four months, but not being satisfied, he requested the return of the acceptance)—in reply to that request I received this letter of 14th April, expressing regret at the delay, and stating that the matter should be completed on Tuesday at latest—a few days after I came to London and saw Hill at 56, Parliament Hill Road—I had a conversation with him, and asked him for the bill; he said he had not got it, but would get it next day—he did not tell me into whose hands it had gone—next day I received this letter. (This proposed other bills for larger amounts)—prior to that I had discussed with Hill the likelihood of doing further business—I think the amount of £20,000 had been mentioned—of course I was bound to listen, but my only object was to get my bill back, I had not intended to do other business with him; I found I had got into wrong hands—on my return home I wrote this letter of April 19th. (Requesting the immediate return of the acceptance)—I cannot charge my memory whether I received an answer to that letter—on 24th April I wrote to him again. (Pressing for the return of the acceptance, as had been distinctly promised)—I had received a letter from Flanagan—on 25th April I received this letter from Hill: "Dear Sir, I beg to inform you that Gibbins and Co. have negotiated your acceptance, and have given me a crossed country cheque as part of the proceeds. On Thursday I shall remit you the proceeds. I never heard of Flanagan, and neither I or the drawer ever offered your bill to him"—on 28th April I received this letter enclosing £100 in notes, and two bills of exchange, one for £259 17s. 11d., dated 24th April, at four months, drawn by Oswald and Co., and this bill, accepted by J. C. Gibbins; this is for £104, drawn by Taylor and Co., and accepted by Lloyd Watson and Co., "being ninety per cent, as agreed; please acknowledge receipt"—I kept the note, and afterwards handed it with these two bills to my solicitors—I wrote to Hill acknowledging the receipt of the £100 note and the two bills—in
reply, I received this letter stating: "I negotiated the acceptances, given for our mutual convenience, and I think, on consideration, you will not take legal proceedings"—I had put the matter in my solicitor's hands before receiving that letter—beyond the £100 note I have never received Any value for my acceptance—I was sued upon it by Stubbs and Co.—by advice I declined to pay—the action is pending—I made no use of the two acceptances.
Cross-examined by Hill My first letter stated that the bills should be accepted on commission—it is not a recognised practice in the commercial world for bills to be accepted on commission, if you say bills like. these, I say "No," decidedly; I have no experience of it whatever; it has never been my practice—I do not recollect saying so at the Police-court—if I did I could not have understood the question—I presumed it referred to ordinary commercial transactions, and not to these accommodations only—it is quite a customary thing for banks and firms to accept on commission where there is a security or lien, which I do not understand to be the present case—I was prepared to raise money on the terms mentioned in my letter to you if you had furnished me with acceptances on those terms—I should have inquired of my bankers whether they were negotiable or not—it would depend on them, not on me—if they were good enough for them they would have been good enough for me; I should act upon their opinion—if I took these bills, I should inform them that they had been accepted on commission; it is not easy to answer that—I should have told them they were accepted, and asked whether they would negotiate them or not; if not, I should have considered them useless—I should not have intended the bankers to infer that they had been accepted as against produce; I should let them go in as remittance paper; if not I should have made a special arrangement, and the bankers would accept or refuse them, as they pleased—Barclay, Bevan, and Co. are my London bankers—these bills would be sent to London people, not necessarily to Barclays—I had a long interview with you on the 14th April—we discussed the manner in which to arrange the capital required on accommodation acceptances which could be supplied by me on commission—I mentioned the names of the Merchants' Banking Company and the International Company—I have been in the habit for some years of drawing on those terms, accepting a small commission, and discounting by my bankers, they having a lien, a security—all the letters that have been produced were written by me in my private name, and the replies were so addressed—that was not because the clerks should not know anything about the transaction; or perhaps it was, it was outside the ordinary business, and I did it after business hours—I wrote from my private address—I no doubt discussed the matter with Mr. Lovett—I never did anything secretly—I have no doubt I was willing to try the experiment, and I did try it, in the interests of the firm, not privately; it was quite a partnership transaction—I received the letter of 23rd March and read it, and assented to the terms of it—if the terms had been carried out, it would have been all right—I, did not retain the £100 and the two bills as the 95 percent.—I passed them on to my. solicitor, telling him that was not the agreement, and I would have nothing to do with it—I did not return them to you.
Cross-examined by Weir. I think it was about a fortnight after. parting
with the bill for £497 to Hill that I produced some of the bills—the date is on the letters—it not being in accordance with my view; I took no notice of it—I never saw you till I saw you at the Police-court.
WILLIAM LOVETT . I am a partner with Theodore Walsh, in the firm of Walsh, Lovett and Company, general merchants, Ludgate Hill, Birmingham—I was acquainted with the correspondence with Hill—before the first acceptance was sent down I went alone and saw Hill at his house—he said his usual process was to discount, and to pay 80 per cent, of the proceeds in cash—we said we should not agree to anything of that sort—he said with a firm of our standing he would discount and pay us 95 per cent.—I said we would consider it—my partner concealed nothing from me, and we had general conversation of the matters contained in the letters—I concurred with him in wanting the acceptance back immediately, but we did not get it—I concurred in all the steps taken by my partner.
Cross-examined by Hill. We have received £100 in cash and two acceptances, and we have not met our acceptance, by our solicitor's advice.
Re-examined. Our acceptance was not due when Hill was in custody, and the police had his papers—I did not know he had a place at Copthall Avenue.
EDWARD GEORGE MOON . I am secretary to the Trade Auxiliary Company, Limited, the proprietors of Stubbs' Gazette—I conducted the negotiation as to discounting the acceptance for £497 5s. 9d. which I first saw on 17th or 18th April, and discounted on 19th April, advancing £400 for it, believing Mr. Gibbins was respectable—this is the cheque. (This was endorsed "Gibbins and Company.")
ASA CLARK . I am an engineer, of Luton, trading as A. Clark and Company—in November, 1891, I advertised for a partner with money, and I received this reply. (This was dated from Combehurst, Hastings Road, Southend, and signed A. Harrison. It stated that if he would call at 13, Lime Street, City, where the writer was engaged during the day till three o'clock, he should be pleased to go into matters with him)—I went to 13, Lime Street, and asked for Harrison, and I saw Bowerman, and entered into this agreement with him. (This was practically in the sum form as the agreements in the previous cases; Clark to receive and repay 85 per cent., and Harrison the remainder)—the name of Harrison was on the door—he endorsed this receipt upon the agreement: "12th January, 1892. Received, in pursuance of this agreement, acceptances of the face value of £2,000"—I signed these seven acceptances, all dated 12th January, 1892, for four months, and for £134 18s. drawn by George Alexander and Co.; £500 drawn by Harrison and Co.; £166 18s. 4d. (The drawer's signature was cut off this, and the endorsement, was obliterated), £500, accepted in blank; £300, drawn by Harrison and Co.; and £98 3s. 8d. accepted in blank—when I accepted those bills there was no drawer's name on any of the bills—I was to have the money in a day or two he told me, and I could have it either in Bank of England notes or cash—I told him I should prefer either the one or the other, I did not care which—when the few days had elapsed, and I did not get either notes or cash, I went to Lime Street several times—I saw Harrison, and asked him why he had not kept his promise—he made the excuse that it took
some time to pass these matters through—all my bills were recovered with the exception of the one for £134 18s.—we were sued upon that, and had to pay it, with our own and the plaintiff's costs, £6 or £7.
Cross-examined by Hill. When I accepted the bills they were all "Pay to our order"—the word "my" has been written over this one since—I cannot swear if the date was on it—to the best of my belief, they were all filled up before I signed them—I cannot swear that "12th "' was there, but I believe it was—I never heard your name in connection with this matter.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I communicated to Mr. Cumberland the circumstances under which I accepted the bills; I told him substantially what I have told to-day.
EDWARD CUMBERLAND . I am a member of the firm of Cumberland and, Sons, auctioneers, Luton—Asa Clark is a friend of mine—I was aware of the negotiations going on with Bowerman (whom I knew as Harrison) about these bills—I assisted Clark in endeavouring to get the bills back, and I both wrote and called on Bowerman with reference to their recovery—on 3rd February, 1892,1 received this letter from Harrison and Co., enclosing the bill for £100; and on 11th February I received another letter from them, enclosing the acceptance for £166 18s. 4d. (This letter contained a postscript, "We consider we have a good cause of action for breach of agreement")—I knew Goldring, who lived and carried on an architect's business at Dunstable, near Luton—in February, 1892, he called on me; that was before the date on which the bill was sent back by Harrison; I had not communicated with him before he called—about eleven on the morning of the day he called this acceptance had been brought by Frederick Hucklesby, a straw-plait merchant, who asked me if I knew anything about it—the drawer's name on the bill was George Hill—I did not see any endorsement; I only had the bill a few minutes, and then Hucklesby took it away; he said he had been offered £20 to discount it—Goldring came; about four o'clock, and said he had come about the bill that Hucklesby had shown me that morning; that it had come into his (Goldring's) possession from a man who owed him about £80, and had sent him this bill to discount, and sent him the balance after deducting the amount—I told Goldring this bill and others had been obtained by fraud from Mr. Clark, and they must be returned—Goldring then said, "The man must be a d—d scamp to send it to me," referring to the debtor, and he would take care the bill would go back, and not be dealt with—he did not mention, and I did not ask him, the name of the person to whom he owed the £80—he went away—that was the only conversation I had with him with reference to this bill—I have known him ever since he has been at Dunstable, two or three years—I did not know him intimately.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I knew him as an architect, and I have had some transactions with him—my father is the head of my firm—we had an articled clerk named Scroggs—I don't remember Scroggs speaking to me. before I saw Goldring, asking me what I knew about the bill—I think after I saw Hucklesby I spoke to Scroggs, and said I understood the bill was in Goldring's hands, and he was offering it to discount, and would he tell Goldring about it? and on that Goldring and Scroggs and a lady rode over and called on me, and then this conversation took place
with Goldring—I had been to Harrison and Co. with Mr. Clark—I might have mentioned Harrison and Co. 's name to Goldring when I was giving him an account of the transaction—Goldring did not say the man who had done it was a d—d scamp, but the man who had sent it; it was the same conversation when he said the man owed him £80—I never heard anything against Goldring's character till these transactions; I never knew anything of him—I got the £166 18s. 4d. bill back by post from Harrison two or three days after my interview with Goldring.
CHARLES MIDGLEY . I carry on business as Charles Midgley and Sons, dyers, at Huddersfield—on 13th August, 1890, I received this letter. (This was headed 56, Parliament Hill Road, Hampstead, and signed George Hill, and stated that if at any time he should be in need of financial assistance the writer would be pleased to arrange for the same upon acceptances only, on favourable terms)—I kept that by me for twelve or eighteen months, and on the 28th January, 1892, I sent this letter on my memorandum form to George Hill, 56, Parliament Hill Road. (This acknowledged the receipt of Hill's letter of August, 1890, and stated that having extended his plant, and made a bad debt of £500 or £600, if Hill could lend him that amount on reasonable terms lie could use it to great advantage)—in reply I received this letter of January 29th from George Hill. (This stated that the security required would be Midgley's acceptances, which Hill would draw or cause to be drawn, and would negotiate if they were satisfactory; that Midgley would be entitled to 80 per cent., and Hill to 20 per cent, of the proceeds until the bills were paid off, when Midgley should find the 80 per cent, and Hill be responsible for the remainder, and that the bills might be kept renewed for two years if required, Midgley paying interest at 5 per cent, on his portion)—shortly afterwards I went to London, and I wrote to Hill from the Salisbury Hotel. (This letter asked Hill to meet him at 4, Great Tower. Street, the next day)—that address is the. office, of Mr. Findon, who does business for me in London—I found a message at 4, Great Tower Street, and I went with Findon to 56, Parliament Hill Road, where I saw Hill—the effect of our conversation was embodied in a letter—I accepted at that interview four bills, of the face value together of £500; these are three of them. (These bills were dated 1st February, at four month, and were for £137 0s. 6d., £187 9s. 6d., and £96 3s.; the drawer's name was torn off the first two, and was left blank in the third)—I received this letter from him at the interview. (This was similar to that in previous cases; to the effect that Hill undertook as a principal to enter into the arrangement for their mutual accommodation upon the terms expressed in the previous letter)—at that time I handed back to Hill this letter headed "Seed Hill, Huddersfield," but written at 56, Parliament Hill Road: "We are in receipt of your letter of this date, and agree to the contents therein named"—I received from Hill this receipt for the four bills on the terms of his letter—the fourth acceptance was for £84 7s.—I believe that there were no drawers' names to the bills at the time I signed them—I went back to Huddersfield—I received these letters of February 3rd and 4th from Hill. (The first requested him, if lie received a letter, asking whether any of the acceptances were in order, to reply in the affirmative, as it would facilitate the negotiation. The second stated that lie had not yet succeeded in negotiating any of his acceptances, hit that there should
be no delay, and that he should remit immediately they went-through)—on Monday, February 1st, Hill had told me that I should get my money in bank notes on Wednesday or Thursday at the latest—on 6th February I wrote this letter to him. (Stating that he expected him to carry out the arrangement, and trusted he would do so by Monday; that if lie could not send all lie should send part on Monday, and that he had better return die remainder of the bills if lie could not negotiate them—on 8th February I had this letter from Hill. (Stating that it was necessary to conduct the business with great tact and delicacy, in order that his bankers might not have an inkling of what was taking place; that he was using his best exertions compatible with caution, and should remit part at an early date)—I got the telegram of February 8th. (Hill objected to this being put in, upon the ground that it was a copy)—in reply I wrote this letter of 8th February, 1892. (Stating that the address given in the telegram "Goldring, Dunstable," was too indefinite, asking for a fuller address, and hoping to receive something in the morning)—this pencil writing scoring out the "your," and writing above "This wire was sent by Goldring, not by me," was not on the letter when it left my place of business.
FREDERICK DOWNES (Inspector). I found this telegram at 27, Copthall Avenue, in the occupation of Hill. (The telegram was "Midgley, Seedhill Works, Huddersfield.—Frank Goldring, Dunstable, is sufficient He sent wire. Settle to-morrow.—HILL.")
CHARLES MIDGLEY (continued) I received the telegram which has just been read—I wrote this letter to Hill on 10th February. (Stating that he hoped to hear from him personally in the morning, and that time was of importance)—I sent a telegram, of which this is a copy, on February 12th, "Wire reply to my letter of 10th"—I received this letter of 16th February from Hill. (Stating that in compliance with his desire, but without prejudice to his (Hill's) rights under the agreement, he enclosed the acceptance for. £96 3s., which he regretted he was unable to negotiate that day)—I also received this from Hill of 17th February. (This referred to his endeavours to negotiate the bills, and stated that he thought some of them would go through, and that he would call at Mr. Findon's the next day)—I was not in London then; the letter was really sent to my son-in-law—I received these letters from Hill, of February 20th and 23rd. (The first referred to the delay, and stated that for both their sakes he was using his utmost exertions to complete the matter, and that he would see him on Monday morning at Findon's office; the second stated that he expected to be able the next day to settle one way or the other)—(MR. MUIR put in other letters, Nos. 62 to 72, without reading them)—up to 23rd February I had no idea that any of my bills had been discounted, and that Hill had received the money—I received this letter from Hill of 24th February, 1892, enclosing a bill of exchange for £262 4s. 11d. at four months from 5th February, drawn by Ferdinand Desportes and accepted by Messrs. Hayford and Sons, West African merchants, 137, Cheapside, and endorsed by Messrs. Johnstone and Co., merchants, of The Exchange, Swansea. (The letter concluded that Hill had no doubt Midgley's bankers would at once place the bill to his credit, and relieve his necessities pending the final settlement between them, which could not be long delayed)—I sent the bill to Mr. Findon in London. (The bill was marked, "Not provided for")
I received the letter from Goldring, dated Dunstable, May 8th, 1892. (Stating he had discounted Hill's bill at his bankers, and would bring cash, less £5 7s. to Huddersfield, probably leaving King's Cross by 10,15 train)—I had an interview with Goldring at Huddersfield, I daresay about 10th or 11th May, at the Imperial Hotel—my son-in-law, Mr. Bradbury, was there—Goldring said he was anxious about this bill for £84 7s. being taken up, and he offered to give me an acceptance of his own for £150, on condition that I would lend him £50 and take up the bill, and that his name was good at the bankers for £500—I refused then he wanted to give me a bill which he could discount at his bankers—this I declined—I never got any money from anybody for my £84 bill—the other bills I got back—Goldring sued me upon that bill—the Jury disagreed—I am not certain that I did not learn from Goldring himself that he was the holder of this bill—I think it would be in the early part of May; I remember getting a post-card from London—I was made a bankrupt on 20th March last—I believe the date of the trial was Thursday and Friday, 9th and 10th February, 1893.
Cross-examined by Hill. This bill of yours for £262 4s. 11d. was sent to me, and I sent it back to Mr. Findon for inquiries, and as the parties were not known, and it was worthless, I never tried my bankers—I cannot say whether he returned it to you—Mr. Findon was my agent—I know nothing about its being presented at the bank—Mr. Findon told me he could not find any of the names—I do not know if I said at the Police-court, but it was the fact, I was to get bank notes. (Deposition read: "Hill said it would be sent in bank notes; that was the stipulation.")—all I mentioned to you about my financial position was correct at that time—I was then in business, and solvent—the trial in London damaged me—the Huddersfield Banking Company were my bankers—I have banked there something like ten years—I often had accommodation—at that particular time I wanted money, and you having written to me some time before, I happened to put that letter in my drawer—some time afterwards I came across it, and then wrote to you—this is my first transaction of an accommodation bill, therefore I never tried my bankers—I had an overdraft—I do not think I had gone to the extent of it—my bankers always accommodated me; I have never been refused—I did not apply to you in consequence of their refusal—I could not say whether "our" in the £96 3s. bill or "my" in the £187 9s. 6d. bill was in the bills before "order," but the "my "is in violet ink, which leads me to believe they were in blank—I did not telegraph you on 24th February that if you could not send cash to send a bill; I objected to bills altogether—I am still being sued by Goldring on the £87 bill.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I only saw Goldring in the early part of May—his proposal in Huddersfield was to raise money, some of which each of us might have—the proposed bill was for £150, which I was to meet, I think at four months—I declined—I did not say I would inquire through my bankers, of his bankers, whether he was likely to carry out the transaction; he suggested it—he suggested my bankers should inquire of his bankers at Huddersfield, the London and County Bank—I believe I have given up all the letters I had from Goldring—T was cross-examined at the trial. (Read from notes of cross-examination by MR. TERRELL at the trial: "You received a letter from Goldring in these words: 'My
banker tells me he has received no inquiry from your banker. Will you kindly instruct them not to make one, as on further thought I would rather not make myself liable in the manner proposed. A. Yes, I dare say I did")—I could not say whether I said that—I do not remember receiving the letter—I would not say I did not—I might—I cannot say.
Re-examined. Mr. Terrell was counsel for Goldring—I do not remember his showing me such a letter, nor his asking me to produce such a letter as led me to stop inquiries at my bankers—I sent this letter, of February 25th, 1892, to Hill. (Stating he could not use the bill enclosed as suggested, but had sent it to Mr. Findon, and asking for the notes stated.)
HENRY FINDON . I am in business at 4, Great Tower Street, City—I went with Mr. Midgley to Hill's house on 1st February, 1892—Hill produced the four bills out of his pocket already filled up with the names, and dated 1st February—Hill said either the bills would be returned on the Wednesday or Thursday at the latest, or bank notes sent; the bill for £462 4s. 11d. was sent to me, and I inquired who the people were—I handed it to Mr. Collyer, the solicitor acting for us in the matter—I do not remember if "Not provided for" was on it—it was not overdue when I first saw it—I was present at all interviews with Midgley and his son-in-law—I went to Hill on two or three occasions; first to Hampstead Heath on Monday, 1st February, I think—I went once or twice, and could not get an interview with him—I got no money from him—I saw him when I went with Midgley's son-in-law—when I could not see him the servant who opened the door said he was not in, or I could not see. him—Bradbury and I always pressed Hill, and he put us off—he mentioned he had sent a bill to Dunstable to negotiate, to discount—I saw and wrote to him several times, and I saw his clerk, each time asking for the money or the bills back.
Cross-examined by Hill Midgley had told me he could do with more money in his business—he was not in my debt—the terms were first mentioned verbally that you would deliver bank notes of the proceeds on Wednesday or Thursday at the latest—you handed Midgley a letter which he assented to—I understood he was to have the "face value" of the bills—I should not like to swear the words "face value" were used at the interview—you did not make any reserve, but said the money would be there or the bills returned on the Wednesday or Thursday, and that you would negotiate the bills—I gave Mr. Collyer verbal information, which was taken down by a shorthand clerk for use at the Guildhall—I first saw Mr. Collyer in reference to this case at the Law Courts—I could not give the date—I cannot recollect reading a report from Buckingham's information, nor Buckingham saying at the Guildhall he expected to be paid in bank notes—Mr. Midgley never wrote me before these proceedings that you were conspiring against him—I have heard of an action pending by Goldring against Collyer for slander.
BENJAMIN HALL BRADBURY . I am manager of Mr. Midgley's dye works at Huddersfield—I am his son-in-law—this letter was written by me to Hill—the pencil writing interpolated in the first line was not there when I wrote it, "This wire was sent by Goldring, not by me"—on 15th February I went to Parliament Hill Road with Mr. Findon—I have been present on several occasions at conversations between Hill and
Findon when Hill has been asked for a return of the bills or money—we got no money—I gave Hill the £487 12s. bill, and he gave me this receipt—I heard the conversation at the Imperial Hotel, Huddersfield, between Goldring and Midgley as to drawing a new bill—Gold ring said he had only had one transaction with Hill before, which had left Hill owing him £50—he asked if Midgley was going to meet the £84 7s. bill, and Midgley said, "No"—Goldring said it had been discounted at the London and County Bank, Huddersfield, and that he (Goldring) had paid Hill two cheques, and the amount of the bill, less £5 7s. for discount—the £187 bill I kept in my possession—this letter from Hill to Findon and Co. is similar writing to Hill's letters.
Cross-examined by Hill. At the time of these transactions I thought I was Mr. Midgley's partner, but I was not so legally—the receipt for the £487 12s. bill was returned to me—I had not discussed this matter with Mr. Midgley, particularly before he came to London—I had an idea what he came to London for—it was after the bankruptcy that I discovered I was not a partner in the firm, I am quite sure.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I was not examined on the trial of Goldring v. Midgley; I was not there; I was not in London at the time—I received a telegram from Goldring asking whether a certain bill was in proper order; I could not toll you the date; I don't know whether it was before the 8th of February; I think it was in March last year—I sent a telegram back to Goldring stating that it was in order—I don't remember getting another telegram from Goldring asking me to write—the signature to this letter is mine—looking at this letter, I can say that the telegram must have been before 9th February—I sent that letter at Midgley's instruction—besides that telegram from Goldring to Hill, he requested me to communicate with Goldring—Goldring did not produce or show me a receipt at the interview at Huddersfield—I was there the whole time—I don't know that I have ever seen the letter of 8th May, 1892, from Goldring to my firm—I think I have seen this letter before; I see it refers to a receipt—I don't remember Goldring showing a receipt; he showed his cheque-book, in which he showed me three counterfoils of cheques payable to Hill, the proceeds of the bill—I don't remember what I saw on the counterfoils—I do not say that he did not produce a receipt; I don't remember it—in his letter he said nothing about bringing the cheque-book—he conversed with me about the consideration for the bill; he told me it was partly in cash, by cheque, and partly in respect of money due and owing from Hill to Goldring; I think he said three cheques; the discount was less than £5 7s.—he also told me there was an old debt as well—I don't remember that he said how much—he said there was £40 or £50 owing to him by Hill—I saw the amount of the cheque—I could not swear to the amount—the cheque and the amount he told me, and the £5 7s., made up the amount of the bill—I do not recollect a letter from Goldring about not making further inquiries at his bank after he had been to Huddersfield.
Re-examined. When he came down to Huddersfield the bill was within a month of being due—he showed the cheque-book—I cannot tell whether the whole of the cheques in the book had been used; he turned to the stumps of three cheques—he took the cheque-book and the cheques away with him. JOHN WILLIAM EVANS DOWSE. I am a clerk in the London and County
Banking Company, Dunstable Branch—Goldring was a customer there; this is a correct copy of his account—on January 10th, 1892, he is credited with the proceeds of a bill for £84 7s.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I have lived at Dunstable nearly five years—Goldring came to live there in November, 1890, and practised as an architect and land agent—he had an office—he was agent for Major Brown—he opened the account in November, 1891, prior to which he tanked at Bassetts', a country bank of long standing—until this charge was made I never knew anything to his discredit.
Re-examined. I do not know when he came to England—the account is not closed now, there is a balance of a few shillings; it has been inoperative since May 27th, 1893, when he was debited with a small cheque for 12s. 6d.—on 25th April, 1893, there was a cheque to Lord for £10 19s.—at Michaelmas, 1892, he had an active account; he paid in £900 2s. 8d., and on that date there was a balance of £2 1s. 6d.—in the previous quarter, June, the account was fluctuating; it was sometimes overdrawn—there was a balance of £4 18s. 11d. in June; we charged him with that—£275 was paid in on September 5th—about that time, I think, he opened an account at the Civil Service Bank, a small bank in London—the balance now is not made up; it is only a few shillings.
By MR. WILLIS. His wife kept an account at our bank for her separate I estate, which came through my hands—the cheques are paid in by her trustees—that account still continues; it is, roughly speaking, between I £300 and £400 a year.
SAMUEL HENRY ELLIS . I am manager of the Civil Service Bank, Charing Cross Road—Goldring had an account there from November 3rd, 1892, to June 13th, 1893—this is his pass-book (Produced)—£1,043 5s. 8d. was paid in in one quarter; it was not such a bad account; it was a fair private account.
FREDERICK DOWNES (Police Inspector) I found this document, No. 83, at Hills' office—I produce it from the High Court of Justice; it was given to me to produce—these two office copies of affidavits were also entrusted to me—they are between Goldring, Midgley, and Mr. Benjamin Hall Bradbury—they are both Goldring's, and his solicitor or Counsel produced this third one, No. 174, at Guildhall. (The affidavits were here read; also a letter from Hill, enclosing a draft at four months for £84 7s., for which consideration had been given, cash £37, old debt £42, discount £5 7s.)—this is the letter-book of 1881; I found it at Hill's office. (Letters from Hill to Goldring, in the letter-book, were read, dated between February 3rd and September 13th, 1892; they enclosed bills for discount or return on demand, some of which were accepted by Midgley and Co., others by Austin and Co., and were for £408 12s., £490 12s., £198 10s. and other sums)—I do not find in the letter-book any press copy of a letter of February 4th, enclosing an affidavit in the action of Goldring—I also found at Hill's the letters addressed by Goldring to Hill, which were produced before the Alderman; they are exhibits, 85 to 97 inclusive—they were in pigeon-holes, tied up with other papers—the name of Bright and Co is on a brass plate outside on the doorpost—Hill occupied two rooms on the first floor, (In these letters Goldring inquired as to whether Hill could get certain bills discounted, and made appointments to meet him)
—Mr. Lovett has died since he was at Guildhall—he was represented by Counsel—the defendants were all represented—I saw Mr. Lovett signing his depositions, but I did not see the signature; his Christian name is Fountain.
ALFRED MORRIS COLLYER . I am articled clerk to Messrs. Collyer and Collyer—on 8th June I took this bill for £262 4s. 11d. to the London and North-Western Bank, 53, New Broad Street, and presented it for payment in the ordinary way, and it was marked, "Not provided for."
HAROLD PELHAM RANGER . I knew the late Mr. Lovett, of Finsbury Pavement; I was draughtsman to him—he interested himself a good deal in patents—he died on 27th August—I produce the certificate of his death—I know his signature to this deposition. (After objection, this deposition of Mr. Lovett was read. It related to a transaction with Tourges, an alleged co-conspirator, who had absconded, and to whom the witness had handed three bills, of £198 10s., £76 13s., and £194 13s., for which he was to receive half the profits of the discount, less 5 per cent., and for which he received no consideration.)
HENRY CLARKSON . I am a member of the firm of Clarkson and Sons, solicitors, 9, Ironmonger Lane, City—I produce a bill for £198 10s., drawn by George Moffatt, and accepted by Lovett and Co., dated 6th May, 1892, payable at four months—it bears the endorsement of F. Goldring—we held the bill for Armstrong and Co., bankers, Old Broad Street—we brought an action against Lovett and Co. on 4th March, 1893, and obtained judgment on 24th March—before that date £10 had been paid off the amount—we recovered judgment for £148 13s. Id., with costs—we also obtained judgment against Moffatt, the drawer, under Order 14—he put in an appearance—all we have received is the £10 from Lovett and Co., nothing from Moffatt—I have no knowledge of the circumstances under which Messrs. Armstrong became possessed of the bill, except what I have heard.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I have nothing to show at what time the £50 was paid, for which we gave credit in the action—there is no date of it on the writ—the writ was for the full amount, and was dated 12th September, 1892—it has been stated and sworn to that it was paid by Goldring.
Re-examined. It came through our clients—it was not paid by Harvey; it was brought by Goldring, and placed on a deposit account to his own account, and our clients said they would place it against the bill—that was after the action was lost—our client stated distinctly that Goldring gave them the £50 towards this, if the other people did not pay, and it was to go to this, and as it had not been paid, they had put it to that account; if the other parties did not meet the bill, it was to go against the bill.
FREDERICK DOWNES (Recalled). These five exhibits, marked L, B, M, C, and N, I found at 27, Copthall Avenue—"N," I think, was produced by the accused at the Police-court ("L "was a memorandum from Tourges and Co., Coleman Street, to Gray, Ward and Co.; "B" was a receipt for £40 by Hill for drawing Lovett's acceptance for £138 10s., per George Moffatt; "M" was a memorandum to Hill, signed F. Goldring, promising to send a cheque for £27, being balance due on £198 bill; "N" was from Hill to
Goldring, dated May 21st 1892, respecting a bill for £198 10s., drawn by Moffatt, accepted by Lovett and Co.
CHARLES L'ENFANT . I am an officer of the Bankruptcy division of the High Court—I produce a file of proceedings in the bankruptcy of George Hill, of 56, Parliament Hill Road, Hampstead Heath, bill negotiator—the petition is dated 6th August, 1891, by a creditor; the adjudication. is 12th September following—the liabilities are stated at £2,011 13s. 2d., and assets nil—I have here a public examination of Hill, taken on 12th November, 1891, and sworn and signed by him on 20th November—there is no order of discharge—I also produce bankruptcy proceedings in the matter of Frank Goldring, of 40, Hop Exchange, carrying on business at 17, South Square, Gray's Inn—he is not described as anything—the petition is by a creditor, filed on 4th July, 1889—the Receiving Order is dated 22nd November, 1889—he was adjudicated bankrupt on 14th December, 1889—the statement of affairs shows liabilities, £1,801 2B. 5d; assets, nil—he was discharged by an order of the Court on the 17th April, 1891—he had previously filed a petition for liquidation in 1878, his unsecured indebtedness being £4,020—he obtained his discharge; it does not give the date—the reason given for the suspension of the discharge is rash and hazardous speculation, and that he had previously made arrangement with his creditors.
Cross-examined by Hill. £1,000 of your liabilities are contingent upon other liabilities; I don't know what is meant by that—no proof was tendered in respect of them—to my knowledge the amount of the petitioning creditor's debt is £215 15s. 5d.
By MR. BESLEY. I have not the file of Gibbin's bankruptcy.
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. In Goldring's bankruptcy there is a deficiency account—£531 9s. 3d. is in the list of unsecured creditors—there are liabilities on bills, other than the debtor's acceptances, to the amount of £1,472 17s. 11d.—in the statement of affairs there is £150 expected to rank as assets, and £138 5s. 11d. in the hands of bankers—there is a total of £543 3s. 4d. expected to be proved against the estate—bad book debts £386 17s. 5d.—those two items are included in the £2,004—if they are made good I believe they would not rank against the estate—I know of no books belonging to Goldring having been lost by the Bankruptcy Court—I had no control over any books; they were not under my charge.
(Mr. Registrar Brougham's report, with observations on Goldring's trading transactions, was put in and read, in which his present insolvency was attributed to losses in accommodation bills, and other transactions for which he received only partial consideration.)
WILLIAM BALDOCK . I am landlord of 27, Copthall Avenue, which was formerly No. 5—it is divided into offices—Hill was tenant of two rooms on the second floor from April, 1890—this is the agreement, dated 29th April, 1890, between me and him. (This stated the yearly rent as £48, and £12 for taxes and expenses, and contained a covenant that the tenant would not use the premises for any other purpose Hum the business of an inquiry agent)—he paid Ins rent—the name of F. Trail and Co. was on a plate by the side of the door—about Christmas last the name on the door was changed to Bright and Co., but I know Hill remained on as tenant.
JANE AITKEN . I am the wife of John William Aitken, and am housekeeper at 60, Queen Victoria Street, a building let out in offices—a small room on the third floor was occupied by someone in the name of Henry Peters and Co.—he left on 12th November last—no clerks were kept—the company to whom the offices belong, in January, sold his furniture for the rent, but as there was only a table and two chairs there was not enough to pay £15 odd, owing. for rent—he never came after that, and all letters were returned to the Post Office—I know French and Weir as calling on Peters at the office; I only saw each of them once; they came separately—French asked for Mr. Lawrence—I said we had no such name he gave me a description, and I whistled up the tube and Peters came down into the hall, and he and French met—he was the Mr. Lawrence French had asked for.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. French did not mention the name of Peters; that name could be seen on the tablet in the hall; I was in the hall at the time, and I asked him for whom he was looking, and he then said Mr. Lawrence.
Re-examined. I may have seen Peters' writing, but I don't think I could swear to it.
EDWIN HOLLAND . I am housekeeper at 54 and 55, Leadenhall Street, a building let out in offices—Weir was tenant of one room on the third floor; the name J. H. Allen and Co. was on the door, and I knew Weir as J. H. Allen, and by no other name—this is the agreement; it is signed "James Wilson." (This was an agreement between the landlord and James Wilson, an agent, of 37, St, Mary Axe, for letting the room for two years from 1st September, 1892, at £7 10s. a year, payable quarterly)—he left about 13th February; the landlord told me he did not pay his rent, and gave me instructions, in consequence of which I fixed a bolt on the inside of the door, so that he could not get into it—the fixtures and furniture belonged td the landlord, and Weir had no stock-in-trade—he had no clerk—after Weir left these slips were left in his letter-box; they are notifications of the dishonour of bills—since the committal for trial other documents of the same description have arrived at the office—I do not know any of the other prisoners.
Cross-examined by Weir. I am in business all day—I only know from what the landlord told me that you did not pay any rent—I know nothing about it myself—the room was furnished suitably for the size of the office you paid your account, and owe us nothing.
GEORGE MONCKTON . I have been housekeeper at 37, St. Mary Axe for five or six years—Natzler had an office of two rooms there on the third floor at £30 a year, and then he came downstairs, and had one room at £10 a year—before he moved downstairs he had with him Weir, whom I knew as Barclay Wilson; Natzler allowed him to have his name on the door and to have letters addressed there—after the £30 office was given up, and the £10 office taken, the name of Wilson was not up, but letters came addressed in that name—there was no other name up—French came and asked for Natzler once or twice a day, or perhaps not once or twice a week; sometimes he came often, sometimes seldom—Natzler has been away for some months now; I believe he is ill—we have taken over his office, and taken his furniture for rent; I have not seen him for over three months—he paid his account for March, but he has not paid since—he
might have been there in the early part of May—I could not say if he was there in the latter part of May—I have not seen him since these proceedings—he gave no notice; he only said he was going away for a few days, and he might be back, and we have not heard anything more about him—his furniture has been sold for rent, and the landlord has retaken possession.
Cross-examined by Weir. You owed us nothing—the principal part of your correspondence was from America, and bank porters have come with remittances which I have handed over to you.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Natzler was a financier, or something of that kind, I believe; I believe he had something to do with bills.
WILLIAM CONNOLLY . I live at Buckhurst, Redhill, and I look after my own property—I own 72, Leadenhall Street, which is let out in offices—the housekeeper of No. 92 looks after No. 72—in 1885 I let an office on the ground floor of No. 72 to Norris, and in 1891 I let to the same man another office on the second floor; he gave up the ground floor office after a few months—Henry was, I think, clerk to Norris; he was in the office; I do not know in what capacity—Norris paid the rent—Henry very often brought it to my office—it was not paid punctually—the name on the ground floor was "Scott, Ball and Co.," and that on the second floor was "Lloyd Watson and Co."—Norris and Henry, the people who occupied those offices, were the same.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Henry was not there the whole of the time from 1885; I cannot remember when he first came, but it was before the second floor office was taken—he was there two or three years, I think—I could never ascertain what business Mr. Norris carried on—I was very seldom on the premises; my housekeeper knew more of the tenants—certain complaints were made that bills were being taken, and so on—I judge from complaints that were made that the bills were chiefly from abroad—Norris was my. tenant during the whole time—I never looked to Henry for the rent—I had no agreement with him, only with Norris.
PHILIP SERGEANT. I am a timber merchant—up to the beginning of 1893 I had offices, two rooms on the third floor, at 30, Finsbury Pavement—I sub-let one of the rooms, which had a separate entrance, to French about the beginning of 1891 at £10 a year—the rent was not paid very regularly—the name put up when I first let it was Wessen and Co.; that was altered about eighteen months afterwards, the middle of 1892, to Tilly and Co.—the tenant was the same the whole time—I did not see anything of his business.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. I left the office before French's arrest, leaving him behind.
CHARLES TATE . I am housekeeper at 30, Finsbury Pavement—French occupied a room on the third floor—the name of Wessen and Co. was up at first, and that was afterwards changed to Tilly and Co.—I have seen Weir on the stairs and outside the office, sometimes with French and sometimes putting something into the letter-box—after French was arrested, on 26th June, and before the committal, I found in his letter-box these notices of bills lying over-due and not paid—since his committal these four other notifications of dishonoured bills have been left.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. I examined them before I gave them up to the police—I know nothing about the character of the bills—French was at the house on the day of his arrest—he told me he had been subpœnaed by the police—I saw him at the Guildhall on one occasion.
Re-examined. I was called as a witness, and while I was giving evidence French was called on his subpoena to come forward, and I identified him—that was all he did at the Police-court.
ABRAHAM LEVI BENSUSAN . I am a house agent, trading as Patterson, Kerr and Co., at 20, Finsbury Pavement—I let an office at 69 and 71, Finsbury Pavement, in November last to Mr. B. F. Oswald at £30 a year—he gave as references Allen and Co., 54 and 55, Leadenhall Street, and Natzler and Co., 37, St. Mary Axe—I wrote to them and had these replies. (These stated that they knew the person referred to, and considered him good enough for the rent mentioned)—Oswald was let into possession soon afterwards—the name Oswald and Co. was put on the door—he still holds possession; I don't know whether he goes there—he sends for his letters; it was given out a few days ago by someone that he has been ill—he has not paid his last quarter's rent—he paid two quarters; I could not say for certain as to the last quarter.
Cross-examined by Weir. I think Oswald gave us a third reference, but that was a verbal answer; there was no other letter.
EDWARD CLARK . I am housekeeper at 65, Fenchurch Street—in June, 1892, an office on the second floor was let to Only and Co.—the name put on the door was Foster and Co.—Only represented Foster and Co.—another person named Sutton came afterwards—Only came in May, 1892, and left about April this year—he gave no notice that he was going, he flew away—he only paid one quarter and owed two when he disappeared.
LOUIS AUGUST GIET . I am a clerk to Mr. Smallpiece, of Tokenhouse Yard, who let an office on the second floor of No. 4, Catherine Court, Seething Lane, on 25th February this year, to Francis Dastis—this is the agreement; it is dated 7th March, 1893, and is between the landlord and Francis Dastis, of 32, Brownhill Road, Lewisham, the rent being £15 a year—I presume he entered into possession on February 25th—he is supposed to be there still, so far as I know—the rent is payable in advance; he did not pay at Midsummer for the quarter ending Michaelmas—he gave as a reference Lloyd Watson and Co., of 72, Leadenhall Street, and as his last office, 11, Miles Lane.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. I have not got the letter from Lloyd Watson and Co.; we applied to them and no doubt had an answer, but it is evidently mislaid.
JAMES THOMAS FITZGERALD . I am housekeeper at 137, Cheapside—in the early part of February, 1892, I caused to be painted on the door of an office on the second floor, "Hayford and Company, West African Merchants," and on the slips by the door, "Hayford and Co."—that was at the request of people who were coming in, but they never occupied the office—the name remained there till nearly May, 1892, and then I took the slides down and scraped the name off the office door.
returned—there were several names on his door, one of which was something like Larreachea—this is the name. (Looking at a paper.)
JAMES FREDERICK TOWNSEND . I have offices at Birmingham and Manchester—I did this business at 16, Princes Street, Hanover Square—I discounted these two bills for £75 each—both were brought to me at the same time by Mr. Braithwaite, and I gave him £110 for them—they are dated February 22nd, 1893, and I discounted them within a few days—they matured on June 25th, and were dishonoured—before that several of the defendants were in custody—the acceptor was the Rev. D. L. Thomas, Gransley Rectory, near Grimsby,—the drawer is Harrison, and they are endorsed by Harrison and myself—I produce another bill accepted by Mr. A. B. Pike, drawn by "J. H. Allen and Co., dated January 14th, 1893, at four months, for £162 5s. 6d., endorsed J. H. Allen and Co., with a stamp" J. H. Allen, Leadenhall Street"—I discounted it within seven days of January 14th—Mr. Braithwaite brought it—I think I gave G. £138 for that bill—when it matured it was presented and dishonoured H.—I have taken proceedings in all those bills in Pike's bankruptcy—I knew they were accommodation bills—I also discounted this bill, dated January 10th, 1893, at four months, for £207 12s., accepted by Messrs. Buckingham and Co., and drawn by A. Harrison—I discounted it within three or four days of the date, and gave either £210 or £220—altogether I got six bills from these men and discounted them—I did not discount the Earl of Dudley's bill—it has been duly honoured by the acceptor—this other is a bill dated November 2nd, 1892, at four months, for £191 11s. 6d., accepted by Mr. James W. Chenhall and Q. A. Harrison—I gave £150 for it—I did not discount any of Mr. Buckingham's bills.
Cross-examined by Hill. I should not have discounted a bill on which no drawer's name appeared—I discounted Buckingham's bill within seven days of its date—all these bills were within about seven days of their dates—before discounting I always made inquiries of the acceptor, and sometimes, but not often, of the drawer, because as a rule they are men of straw—I went and saw Buckingham on the day I discounted the bill—I showed him the bill, and said it had been offered for discount, and asked if it bore his signature, and he said "Yes;" and that it was in the market for discount—I said, "To whom am I to pay the proceeds?"—he said, "To the drawer"—I asked him if it was an accommodation bill, and he said it was—he did not say if he was to receive any of the proceeds—I have had about eighteen years' experience of bill discounting—I have discounted bills that have not been met, and when I have sued people in many cases they have set up defences that they could not sustain—I think I took about 25 per cent, off the gross amount for Buckingham—I charged him about £60, and I think I gave him £220—the thing was rather rushed on me; I had no time to make enquiries; I saw his warehouse, and he seemed to be carrying on a good business—I took the risk of the bill being met—I think bill discounting is very risky—I discount a good deal of accommodation paper—I believe that, speaking generally, when business firms begin to float accommodation paper they are getting into somewhat low water—as a rule the drawer is a man of straw; if he is a good man he runs the same risk as the acceptor, because he is collaterally
liable—I have received nothing from Mr. Pike, who has gone bankrupt; they would not allow him to put a defence in unless he paid the money into Court, and so he filed his petition.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. I only know from hearsay that that there are a number of people in London and elsewhere ready to accept bills for a commission; I do not doubt it—if there are two tottering firms they will accept each other's bills—I don't think it would be uncommon for a firm to get men of straw to accept bills on commission; I don't say it would be done for the purpose of lodging with the bank to keep up their credit; my experience only goes to discounting.
Re-examined. Bankers very often receive bills for collecting, and do not collect them; they receive them as security for overdrafts—I never saw Harrison—I know Braithwaite by his coming to my office as a sort of tout and agent; he calls himself a financial agent, and he brings a lot of bills all round London; his hat is full of them, he has any number of them—he lives at Cricklewood, and I believe his office is at 21, Piccadilly—Buckingham said the proceeds had to be paid to the drawer—I gave the money to Braithwaite—I did not see Buckingham afterwards until this trial.
REV. D. L. THOMAS. These two bills for £75 each produced by Mr. Townsend are accepted by me; there was no drawer's name on them then—they are dated February 22nd, and were due on June 29th, 1893—I am being sued on both those bills by Mr. Townsend—I received these seven letters in reference to those two bills—I received this one on March 10th, enclosing a £10 note, four £5 notes, and a bill for £97 10s. drawn by Peters and Co., or Weston and Co., and endorsed J. Allen and Co.—they have got indiarubber stamps to represent Allen and Co. and Peters and Co.—I sent the bill to the bankers, but it was worthless—I gave it to my solicitors—I made efforts to find somebody who would give money for it, but never got anything.
Cross-examined by Weir. It was not stipulated that the two parties to renew the bills were to take bills in exchange; I expected cash for them, I would not take a bill—I had never seen you before to my knowledge.
CLEMENT GEORGE MORRIS . I am a shipbroker, of 3, India Buildings, Liverpool, trading as Morris and Co.—I never saw any of the defendants; the whole matter was done through correspondence—these letters, Nos. 225 to 255, passed between me and Hill—this is a bill for £179 11s. 6d. accepted by me on October 26th, and dated October 23rd, 1892, drawn by James B. Gibbins and Co., at three months—that was sent to Hill on October 26th, with exhibit 233—it was due on January 25th. (A letter was here read from Hill to the witness entering into an arrangement with him as to the bills, requesting him to endeavour to negotiate them at a moderate rate, and stating that they might be kept running for two years if necessary; and a letter from the witness accepting the proposition on the understanding that they could always take up the bills themselves without renewal, and THE COURT considered that these two letters constituted a direction in writing.) This is a bill for £35 18s. 3d., dated October 28th, 1892, payable at the Middlesex Banking Company, Limited—I retained that as security—it was sent to me accepted, and we added our names as the drawers—we presented it for payment and it was
returned marked, "No orders"—it was due at the bank on January 28th—many letters and telegrams passed between us—I pressed him for the return of the bills, as I did not get the money—that continued up to November 14th, 1892—I got £40 on November 14th, and two bills—I put my name on this bill No. 250 for £60 2s. 6d. by the advice of my solicitor after I received it—it was never presented. (A bill for£41 5s. 9d., dated November 12th, 1892, at three months, accepted by Allen and Co., with the drawer's name, Clark, was here put in.) On the receipt of that I wrote and telegraphed to Hill, repudiating the document as not being in accordance with the agreement—I then received this letter. (From Hill, stating that he had strictly carried out the agreement)—I became acquainted with Hill's writing—this letter appears to be in his writing. (From Hill to the witness, enclosing a copy of the account, and a cheque for £25 to balance matters between them.)—I was sued on that bill, and consented to judgment—I had no defence—I have settled the action—I do not know what the costs will be, but they will be over £200, I know, for the thing is going on still.
Cross-examined by Hill. I made inquiries, and the result was that the man did not exist, or could not be found—I did not make any inquiry as to Dossett's solvency till after I had put my name to the bill—you sent me this bill (another), without the drawer's name—to the best of my knowledge the date was on it, or I should not have accepted it—I never do bill business, and I got a book on purpose—I have not got it here—I made inquiry about Gibbins and Co. before accepting the draft, and, found they were respectable people—I never offered to return the bills, and from inquiries we made we could not find them to return—we sought to know whether you were a member of Knight, Hill and Co., but we never made an affidavit that you were.
By the COURT. We got leave to defend after hearing Mr. Hill's evidence—I may have sworn that I had been informed, and thoroughly believed, that Hill was a member of that firm.
Cross-examined by Weir. It was not a condition or stipulation that I was to take these bills in part payment of my bills—we did not expect bills; our agreement was for cash.
Re-examined. This is a letter from Hill to me. (This stated that the cost of negotiating a three months' draft for £180 would be £2 5s., and enclosing as security a draft at three months for £179 11s. 6d. for Morris to accept.) The drawer's name was not on the bill—I sent this reply, dated October 24th, 1892. (Acknowledging the receipt of the draft, mid requesting the drawer's signature to be attached to the bill, when they would accept the draft, and make it payable at the Bank of England)—that document came to me in a letter dated October 22nd, the same date as appears on the bill—it states, "You will kindly remember our instructions to send us a draft on demand, and not a cheque."
Cross-examined by Hill. The bill was not drawn by Gibbins and Co., and I returned it to you, and subsequently sent you one drawn by Gibbins—to the best of my knowledge it was the same piece of paper, but you might have drawn a fresh one.
CLENPAKT (Re-examined). I have here the whole of the proceedings in J. B. Gibbins's bankruptcy, of 72, Mark Lone, chemical merchant and commission agent—it was on a creditor's petition, dated May 5th, 1893—
the liabilities are £8,250 19s. 4d., and the assets £600 5s.—the last paper on the file is the public examination, adjourned from July 20th to November 2nd; it is now actually pending.
FREDERICK JOHNSON KNIGHT . I am one of the firm of Knight and Co., chemical merchants, of Billiter Street—George E. Gibbins was one of our customers—he owed us about £170 at the end of last year, for goods supplied, for which we held his acceptance, and which we exchanged for the acceptance spoken of by Mr. Morris for £179 11s. 6d.—shortly before October 22nd Gibbins told me that he should not be able to meet his bill, and asked for indulgence—I gave, in addition to the acceptance I received from Mr. Gibbins, my cheque for £7 15s. 4d., the difference between the two—I went into the witness-box and consented to judgment against him.
Cross-examined by Hill. Mr. Morris has not paid his bill.
JAMES WARNER CHENHALL . I am a consulting engineer and metallurgist at Totnes, Devonshire—on January 11th, 1892, I had a letter from Hill, and these documents (produced) passed between us—on 15th or 16th February, I called on him at 56, Parliament Hill Road, Hampstead—he said he was prepared, upon the terms of his letter, to discount, and that he was accustomed to do a very large business in this direction, and to deal with large sums, from £10,000 to £20,000 in a few days at any time—he said that he had been in the discounting line for some years—nothing definite took place at that interview—afterwards we had some correspondence, and on October 21st, 1892, I saw Hill and asked him whether he was still willing to discount my acceptances—he said, "Yes"—after that I received these letters of 21st October, and 1st and 2nd November—the last letter contained these five bills of the face value together of £600; there was no drawer's name on them—I accepted them and returned them to Hill. (These bills were £63 8s., drawn by F. Dastis; £191 11s., drawn by A. Harrison; £151 11s., £98 17s. 6d., and £94 12s. ; the last three having the drawer's name and the endorsement cut off)—all those bills were at four months from November 2nd. (The letter accompanying the bills was read. It was similar in terms to the letter in the previous cases, stating that Mr. Chenhall would be entitled to 80 per cent, of the proceeds, which he would have to repay when the bills were presented)—after accepting the bills further correspondence took place between me and Hill, and on 28th November I received a letter from Hill enclosing a Bank of England note for £50, and a bill of 4th November, 1892, for £48 3s., accepted by James B. Gibbins and Co.—I signed it as drawer—there was in the letter also an acceptance drawn by J. H. Allen and Co., and accepted by Holgate and Co., dated 21st November, for £128 7s. 7d.—I telegraphed and wrote to Hill, repudiating it as not in accordance with the agreement—I presented the two bills for payment when they became due; they were dishonoured—not being able to get any satisfaction, I instituted proceedings to recover such of my bills as had not passed out of his hands—I received from Hill this letter of 3rd December, enclosing the acceptance for £151 11s., and this letter of 7th December, enclosing the acceptance for £98 17s. 6d., and I also received this acceptance for £94 12s.; they were all mutilated—my two other bills for £63 8s. and £191 11s. I was sued upon by the holder, and had to pay, and I also had to pay the costs—I got leave to
defend upon the ground of collusion—I was advised not to take criminal proceedings, as we thought mine was an isolated case, and then I paid—I have lost £254 19s. 6d., less the £50 bank note I received, and my costs will come to between £300 or £400—there was an application for an injunction to restrain Hill from parting with my bills—I have no intention to proceed with the Chancery proceedings—afterwards I was subpoenaed by; the City Solicitor, and came as a witness—Mr. Mercer, a watchmaker, of Coventry, sued me upon the £63 8s. bill.
Cross-examined by Hill. I understood that when you said you could discount £10,000 or £20,000 worth of bills it was subject to their being good bills—you asked for my authority to get the bills drawn, and I gave it to you—the £50 note and the bills you sent were not in accordance with our agreement; my solicitors, Ingle, Cooper and Holmes, kept them; I did not return them to you—my solicitors advised me to begin Chancery proceedings for breach of contract and damages—we have given no notice of discontinuance of that action, but practically it is dead; nothing has been done for months—I believe my solicitors made inquiries about Gibbins; I left the matter in their hands—I drew the acceptance of Gibbins and Co. the day before it became due—so far as I remember the bills were dated—it is not at all likely I should have accepted them without a date, but I will not swear the date was there.
Cross-examined by Weir. I do not know anything about you—Hill offered me bills three weeks after I parted with mine—among them was one drawn by Allen and Co.
By the COURT. I will swear the November was on the bills, but I will not swear about the date; I am unaccustomed to sign anything without-a date—I had never accepted a bill before—I made an entry at the time of the date they fell due, and that confirms in my mind the fact that the bills were dated—the entry was on a sheet of foolscap which is among the papers in the Chancery action, at my hotel—I saw my son make the entry. (The witness was directed to fetch the papers.)
THOMAS JAMES MERCER . I am a watch manufacturer at Hertford Place, Coventry—in February, 1890, Hill opened communications with me, and asked me whether I would take bills for watches—I consented upon certain considerations—I had transactions with him, and in one of them one bill was drawn by Hill and accepted by Oates and Runciman, of 2, West Nile Street, Glasgow, and another bill was accepted by Argles, of Haslemere, Hampshire—Oates and Runciman's bill was not met—I recovered only £30—in November, 1892, Hill sent me a bill for £68 3s., drawn by F. Dastis, of 72, Mark Lane, and accepted by J. W. Chenhall, of Totnes, in Devon—when Hill sent that bill he offered to make me an allowance of £30 in consequence of Oates and Runciman's affair; it was not a debt from Hill to me, but I had made loss over the previous transactions in which Hill had watches and jewellery—I supplied him with watches and jewellery for the balance—Chenhall did not meet his bill, and I issued a writ and recovered judgment—I received this letter from Hill, of 7th March, 1893. (This stated that it was not his fault if there was any dispute over Chenhall's acceptance, as Its (Hill) held Chenhall's authority, in writing, and Chenhall had had full consideration)—this is the bill for £63 8s. which I discounted—altogether I received four bills from Hill, giving him watches and jewellery for them—this was the last
—at the time I received this my ledger showed a loss of about £48 in my transactions with Hill.
Cross-examined by Hill. I wrote to Chenhall, and he wrote that the document was in order.
ALFRED BICKLEY PIKE . I am a general produce broker, of 4, Prince's Street, Bristol—these letters passed between me and Hill—on 14th January he sent me five bills of the total face value of £800, at four months, and I accepted them on 16th January—I sent them back to Hill, and said in my letter, "Please send cheque in due course"—I then had a long correspondence with him, without any result so far as money was oncerned, and I instructed my solicitors, who wrote to Hill—on 27th April I received this letter from Hill. (This stated that with reference to Mr. Pike's acceptances Hill enclosed £47 10s. in cash and a bill for£109 8s. 6d., drawn by Barclay, Wilson and Co., and accepted by Tilly and Co.; a bill for £73 18s., accepted by J. B. Gibbins and Co., and a bill for £33 11s. 11d., accepted by M. Larreachea, amounting in all to the 80 per cent, mutually agreed upon, and that proceedings were still pending with regard to the £181 11s. 6d. acceptances, but that no claim could be made upon Mr. Pike in respect of it. Letters of 14th January, 1893, and 13th October, 1892, were also read. In that of January Hill asked Pike to return the five drafts accepted, and he would deal with them on the terms of his letter of 13th October, 1892. The letter of 13th October, 1892, set out the terms, which were the same as those in previous cases)—between the letters of October and January I had been abroad—this is one of the bills I sent to Hill accepted for £162 5s.—the drawer's name was not on it when I sent it; the name on it now is J. H. Allen and Co.—I would not pay it; I tiled my petition after an action was brought—the bills sent accepted by Larreachea, Tilly, and Gibbins I did not take any steps to realise, but handed them "over immediately to my solicitor—apart from the bills I sent to Hill I was solvent—it was in consequence of them that I was compelled to file my petition.
Cross-examined by Hill. I don't remember what my liabilities or assets were apart from the bills—I do not remember exactly what my answers were at my public examination—it was contrary to our agreement for you to send me cash and bills; I handed the bills over to my solicitor, and did not return them to you—no claim has been made upon me with regard to the bill for £181 11s. 6d.—I have received from you £47 in cash and certain bills which I have kept and not paid in, and I have met none of my bills—I did not keep a bill-book for these bills, because they were not in business.
Cross-examined by Weir. Hill's offering me the bills was not in accordance with my agreement with him, and consequently I would not have anything to do with them.
Re-examined. Silby and Dickinson were my solicitors. (A letter by Hill to Silby and Dickinson of 1st May was read, in which Hill stated Pike's acceptances were given for mutual accommodation, and that he had carried out his part of the agreement. The affidavit of the petitioning creditor and the notes of the public examination of Goldring in his bankruptcy were read.)
day or two before he sent this letter for another gentleman to have his key. (Read: "Thursday, 29th June, 1893.—Mr. Lane—Dear Sir,—Kindly give bearer ray key to the office, as I feel very unwell, and am unable to come to the office for a day or two.—Yours truly, B. F. OSWALD"—he did not appear at the office afterwards.
J. W. CHENHALL (Re-examined). Refreshing my memory by" this document written at the time by my son in my presence, at my dictation, I am able to say positively that the bills were fully dated at the time of acceptance, 2nd November.
E. G. MOON (Re-examined). I produce bill for £96 13s., which my society discounted for J. B. Gibbins and Co.—also the cheque given for it for £94 3s. 4d.—£2 9s. 8d. were the charges—I think we discounted it at the time it was offered, or within five minutes—I had not seen it before then, 28th January this year—the due date is 17th May.
Cross-examined by Hill. We had information in our possession as to the acceptor—we believed Gibbins and Co. to be respectable people, but it was not on their financial credit that we discounted the bill—if they had not been a respectable firm we should not have discounted it—it has not been met.
Cross-examined by Weir. I do not know you in the transaction.
A. B. PIKE (Re-examined). This bill for £96 13s. is one I accepted and sent to Hill.
Cross-examined by Hill. I could not tell you what my assets and liabilities were, I have not the figures.
HENRY RICHARD BUCKINGHAM . I am a hat manufacturer, of 8 and 10, Jewin Crescent, City—on 6th January, without any previous communication, I received this letter. (Addressed from Parliament Hill Rood, sffering financial assistance, and signed "George Hill")—I replied, and received this letter of 7th January (Requesting interview), in consequence of which I called on Hill at Parliament Hill Road on 9th—that was the first time I saw him—I said I wanted to raise about £1,000 on a mortgage on some property I held the deeds of—he listened, and then said, "I do not do business exactly like that on mortgages; I can do this business far better and cheaper for you, and save you the cost of a mortgage deed if you will give me your acceptances for the amount you require; I will give you 80 per cent, of the sum, keeping the other 20 per cent, till the bills become matured, charging you 5 per cent, per annum on the 80 per cent., only"—I said, "How do you make your profit?"—he said, "I do a very large business in this way; by my retaining that 20 per cent, it enables me to have a large capital to work my business on—he said he did an enormous business in that way in bill discounting—I told him that was not exactly what I wanted, I required a mortgage on my property, but I would think the matter over, and let him know—on the 10th he called on me at my City office, and said, "Have you thought this matter over?"—I said, "I have just thought of it, and that is all"—he talked of his enormous business, and said how much simpler it would be to do it his way, and that he had discounted £7,000 or £8,000 for a City firm last week—he said he had no office in the City; he did his business at his private house—he said, "I can give you the highest references; you will find everything quite satisfactory. I could do this business for you at once," and that he had been an East Indian merchant
—after he had talked me into it, to my surprise he brought out the bills from his pocket-book, which I accepted—they were already drawn, but without the drawer's and acceptor's names, but with the dates and amounts—the face value of the bills amounted to £1,008, the amounts being £95 17s. 6d., £92 9s., £155 13s., £278 12s., £194 2s., and £191 8s. 6d.—I called his attention to the amount being £1,008—he said, "It does not matter; you will receive 80 per cent, of the value, so it will not make any difference to you"—I said, "Let me distinctly understand you before I enter into this business: if I hand you acceptances for £1,000 you give me £800 in cash, and on the due date you hand me the remaining 20 per cent."—I am sure the word "cash" was used—he said, "That is exactly what I mean, Mr. Buckingham"—then I accepted the six bills—at the time I believed he was a retired East Indian merchant, a person of financial means, credit and reputation, then carrying on a genuine, honest business as a discounter of bills of exchange; that he was able, willing and prepared to give references to honest and reputable people, and that he was prepared to do a large discount business, and had plenty of capital, or I should not have accepted the bills—after I had accepted these six bills I gave them to him—he put them into his pocketbook—I said, "Where is the cheque?"—he said, "I do not pay by cheque, Mr. Buckingham; I pay in bank notes"—I said, ""Where are the bank notes, then?"—he said, "Well, Mr. Buckingham, I cannot give you those for a day or two; I do not lock these bills up in my safe; I discount them"—I asked for, and he gave me this receipt: "Received 10th January, 1893, from Messrs. Buckingham and Co. six acceptances of the face value of £1,008 on the terms of my letter of this date," and he produced this letter from his pocket-book, already written out. (Dated 10th January, 1893, and stating the terms deposed to)—I sent the letter to Somerset House, and paid five shillings for stamping it—he asked me, and I gave him this acknowledgment of the letter: "Mr. G. Hill.—Dear Sir,—We beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of this date, and agree to the same.—Yours truly, BUCKINGHAM AND CO."—he went away—I did not receive cash or notes, and on the 13th I wrote Hill this letter. (Asking for cheque)—I received his answer. (Regretting inability to send cheque, and returning acceptances for £191 8s. 6d. and £194 2s., requesting witness to keep them intact, and let him have them again)—before that letter I had an interview at my office; I asked him what was causing this long delay—I was away at Manchester all the week on business—he said, "Oh, you are sure to have it before Saturday, I will see to that; I will pay the amount into your bank; Mr. Harrison, the drawer of one of your acceptances, wants an authority from you to draw it," and he wrote this in my presence, which I signed: "Sir,—I hereby authorise you to draw on my acceptance £278 12s., and receive proceeds of same.—Yours truly, B. ANDCO."—that bill is discounted by Townsend—then I wrote him a letter, and received his in reply: "Dear Sirs—I have been obliged under peculiar circumstances to take a post-dated cheque in part payment of one of your acceptances; the same is due on 30th inst., on which day I shall be able to settle up with you"—I then wrote him, complaining of the delay, and said that people were calling on me to know if the acceptances were mine—not receiving a satisfactory answer I wrote him, asking him to pay up at once—I got a letter from him,
regretting payment mentioned in my letter of 23rd January was. not paid when due, that he had placed the matter in the hands of solicitors, and hoped to get the money to-morrow—then I wrote, saying I would not wait any longer; the matter must be settled, or my acceptances returned tomorrow (Wednesday), or the business would be put in other hands—I had an interview on 21st January, and sent a telegram—Hill said then the money was not forthcoming, on account, of Harrison—on 1st February I received this letter, enclosing £110 in bank notes, a postal order for 5s., two acceptances (one for £165 14s. 6d. and another for £140), and a bill for £29 18s. 6d., making £445 18s.—the bill for £165 14s. 6d. was for four months, drawn 18th January, and accepted by Watson and Co.—the £140 bill was dated 13th January, for four months, drawn by Peters and Co., and accepted by Weston and Co.—the £29 18s. 6d. bill was for four months, accepted by Alexander and Co., and was taken up and paid two days after Hill was in custody—in reply I wrote declining to accept drafts, and that I should be in till twelve on the morrow to accept cash—Hill did not come—I then sent another letter refusing to accept any other payment than bank notes, and concluding, "I will have (and the sooner I hear the better) cash, or the whole of the acceptances returned"—at the time I took Lloyd Watson's bill I believed they had an account at the Consolidated Bank—so with regard to the £29 bill—not getting cash or a return of my bills, I called four or five times at Hill's private residence after I had put the matter into the hands of my solicitors, Messrs. Godfrey and Welch—I was told he was not at home—I then wrote Hill the letter of 17th February. (Stating the solicitors had taken Counsel's opinion, and advised taking out a warranty but he could see them before twelve on Monday)—the last letter I received from Hill was of 3rd May, 1893. (Stating that personally he did not require the bills given for their mutual accommodation, but he hold the witness's acceptances for Evan's, of Nottingham, £185 13s.; Townsend, £278 12s.; Crawford, £95 13s.; and Hall, of Wood Street, £192 9s. Letter also read from Hill to witness of 4th February, 1890, staling that notes and documents sent actually represented 80 per cent. "Of your acceptances given for our mutual accommodation, and therefore carried out the agreement entered into between us")—Weston's bill for £140, and the £29 bill became due on 16th May—live days before that I went to 30, Finsbury Pavement—I could not find "Weston and Co.," but I did find "Tilley and Co. "on the lintel—I saw French there—I said to him, "Is this Weston and Co's?"—he said, "No, they have gone away"—I said, "How long have they been gone"—he said, "About two months"—I said, "Do you know where they are gone to?"—he said, "No"—I said, "I think Weston and Co. and Tilley and Co. are the same firm"—he made no answer, but made a bit of a tremble, and looked at a man who was writing at a table, whom I cannot quite recognise—he seemed embarrassed—I then went to the I drawers of the bill, Messrs. Peters and Co., Queen Victoria Street—I saw the housekeeper, but found no trace of Peters and Co.—the £140 and £165 bills were not met—Hill returned two of my acceptances, and kept four of the value of £622 11s. 6d., which I have had to meet—all I have in return is a bill for £29 18s. 6d., £110 in notes, and a 5s. postal-order, so that I have paid £622 11s. 6d., and received I
£140 3s. 6d.—this is my first bill transaction, and I hope my last, my net loss being £482 8s.—I instructed ray solicitors to take the opinion of counsel—they took out a warrant, under which Hill was arrested, and appeared by counsel, Mr. Geoghegan, at Guildhall—in the interval of the hearings a mass of papers were found at Hill's house—with the Alderman's approval the City Solicitor took up the prosecution.
Cross-examined by Hill On 9th there was no arrangement to meet again—you did not ask at what time you would best find me at my office—I cannot remember your asking that—you gave me the letter of 10th February when you got my acceptances—I accepted, not having anything in writing showing the terms, taking your word, as I thought you were an honest man—I made no note of our conversations—when you handed me the letter from your pocket-book you said, "This embodies the terms of the agreement," and I read it—you dictated my letter of acceptance, and I wrote it and signed it—that occupied five or six minutes, but you were in my office much longer—on 9th I understood you would do the business yourself; that you were the actual lender—I see nothing stating that in your letter of 5th January, but I should think you would be the lender by sending out a circular like that—you told me you made your profit by the use of the 20 per cent, during the currency of the bill—you told me that to private individuals you charged 30 to 40 per cent., but to men of business with references like mine 20 per cent.—I did not examine the agreement so minutely as I ought to have done, though I read it, because I thought I was dealing with an honest man—I cannot explain how you made profits in your business—you put me off, or I should have had the acceptances returned—you gave me a receipt, and were not in the place many minutes afterwards—I believe you had a box of hat ribbons, which you said were for view at the Chicago Exhibition, and I may have said I had been in the export trade—in the information that I swore I believe it is stated you said you were a retired East India merchant—I have a few customers that I draw bills upon—you told me the 80 per cent, was on the face value of the bill—I waited till your bogus bills were not met, and then applied for a warrant—bank notes of cash are not mentioned in the agreement—I did not keep your bills on account—I kept the notes on account—the small bill for £29 was not met because Alexander and Co. had no account at the Cripplegate Bank in Fore Street, but it was taken up after you were in custody—I sent the bills to my bank for inquiries—before receiving your letter of 6th January I had not applied to anyone for pecuniary assistance.
Cross-examined by Weir. There was no condition that I was to take a bill in exchange for my own—Hill's sending me that bill did not conflict with my bill.
PERCY HENRY WEBB . I am one of the firm of Godfrey and Webb, of 4 and 5, West Smithfield, solicitors for Mr. Buckingham—on 10th February Mr. Buckingham consulted me with reference to the three acceptances—one was for £165 14s. 6d. drawn by J. H. Allen and Co. upon Lloyd Watson and Co.—on the 16th I went to the address on the face of the bill, 72, Leadenhall Street, to inquire about Lloyd Watson and Co.—I found the name on the lintel of the door—I went nearly to the top of the house—I saw the name in the lobby outside the door—I went into the room—a third of it was partitioned off
by a partition which did not reach quite to the ceiling—there were no signs of business—there was a table, I think—I saw Henry—I said, "I want to see Messrs. Lloyd Watson and Co.—he said, "I am the firm," or "I am one of the firm," I am not sure which—I produced the bill for £165 14s. 6d.—he spoke with a strong German accent—I said, "This bill has come into the hands of a client of mine; I want to inquire if it is all right"—he said, "Oh, yes, that is my signature, I do not deny that; but I shall not pay it; but I drew it for the accommodation of the other gentleman," and pointed to the words on the bill, "J. H. Allen and Co.," the "drawers" I think he said, but I think he meant "acceptors"—I said, "That is no defence to the bill in my client's hands"—lie said, "I do not know, but I shall not pay it. If you think you can anything out of me you can look round, or you can ask the Sheriff of London," and he waved his hand round—I said, "What about the other gentleman, will he pay?"—he said, "I do not think so but I do not know"—I said, "What, has not he money?"—he said, Well, that depends if he is fortunate," or something to that effect—then I asked him if he knew how the bill had been dealt with, and if he knew the name of Hill in connection with it, and he said, "No" to both questions—seeing that it was accepted payable at the Consolidated Bank, I asked if Allen and Co. had an account there, and he said "I think not"—then ascertaining the address I went to Alien and Co., of 54 and 05, Leadenhall Street, twice that day—on both occasions I found a notice on the door, "Return shortly," and no one in—the same day I went to Weston's, 30,. Finsbury Pavement—the office was closed, and I saw no one—the names, "Weston and Co." and "Tilley and Co." were en the door—then I went to the office of a drawer of one of the other bills shown me by Mr. Buckingham, at 60, Queen Victoria Street—I found no trace of them—a communication came down to me through the pipe.
Cross-examined by Mr. METCALFR. Henry spoke clearly, but his sentences were constructed somewhat on the German model—it was not difficult to understand him—I do not recollect hearing Conolly's evidence; I left the Guildhall directly my evidence was read.
Re-examined. Henry understood me, I think.
JOHN GRIBDALK . I am a member of the firm of Holl and Grisdale, ribbon merchants, 100, Wood Street—the bill for £95 17s. 6d. was discounted by me for the drawers, Alexander and Co., on 18th January, 1893, for £68, and a receipt for a debt due to me by them for £25 9s.—I knew Alexander as Loris de Lindendorff.
Cross-examined by Hill. I believe he was a respectable man—he had two rooms in Monkwell Street—I never heard of your name in this matter.
Re-examined. I last saw Alexander about the middle of May last—I did not know him in Silver Street.
WILLIAM HENRY CRAWFORD . I carry on business at 13, Addle Street, Wood Street—I live at Ilford, Essex—I discounted this bill for £92 9s.—Mr. Alexander brought it to me—I knew him as Lindendorff—I gave Kim cash for £9, a cheque for £37 17s. 6d., my hill for £30 5s., which I met and paid, and an open cheque for £10—Alexander's business was in Monkwell Street about nine years, and afterwards at Silver Street, Shaftesbury Avenue.
Cross-examined by Hill. I did business with Alexander for some years—it was a respectable firm.
Cross-examined by Weir. I do not know you.
ARTHUR WIDDAKER . I am cashier to Messrs. Thomas Adams and Co., Limited, lace manufacturers, of Nottingham, who have a place at 44, Bow Lane, London—I discounted this bill for £155 13s. for Messrs. Alexander and Co., of 3, Monk well Street, on 13th January—I gave them a cheque for £7017s. 8d.—the rest was for goods, and our charge of 5 per cent, for discounting—I first knew Alexander, who told me his name was Count Loris de Lindendorff, in May, 1891, at another number on the opposite side of Monk well Street—he traded there as Alexander and Co., Limited—the last time I saw him was early in March—I had not seen him frequently up to the time of this bill, when I saw him several times running—my cheque came back paid; it was all in order—I have seen him once since.
Cross-examined by Hill. I believe Alexander and Co. were a respectable firm.
ROBERT HENRY HAMMOND . I am a cashier in the Aldgate branch of the City Bank—I am acquainted with the general custom in London with regard to the payment of bills of exchange—if a person, not a customer, makes a bill payable at a bank where he has no account, he would not be allowed to pay money into the bank to take it up—that is the general custom among bankers—the firm of J. B. Gibbins and Co., of 72, Mark Lane, had an account at our bank—I cannot state from memory when the account was opened or when it was closed; I know they were bankrupt—I cannot tell why it was closed, it was in fact closed—under date of 21st March, 1892, I find an entry of a bill for £140 13s. 9d. accepted by J. B. Gibbins and Co., presented for payment, returned "Effects not cleared"—we refused payment; we never paid it—on 7th June, 1892, a bill for £182 10s. was presented and not paid; it was marked "Ordered not to pay"; that bill was accepted by J. B. Gibbins and Co.—I do not know who the drawer was—we do not keep a record of that.
Cross-examined by Hill. I have been in the bank about seven years.
FREDERICK DOWNES (City Police Inspector. Recalled). I held a warrant to take Hill into custody—it was granted on the 17th or 18th May—it was with reference to Mr. Buckingham's charge of obtaining credit for £52 11s. 6d., without saying he was an undischarged bankrupt—about four o'clock I saw Hill leave 27, Copthall Avenue—I stopped him in London Wall and said, "I am a police officer, I hold a warrant for your arrest; "he said, "Oh!"—I conveyed him to Moor Lane Police-station and read the warrant to him—he said, "There is not the slightest foundation for the charge"—I said, "You have an office; will you tell me where it is?"—he said, "I decline to say"—I said, "I believe it is at 27, Copthall Avenue, and I am going there"—I found on him a key with which I opened the door—the name of Bright and Co. was on the door—with assistance I searched the premises; it consisted of two rooms on the second floor divided by a partition, and a clerk's room—I there found these two press copy letter-books (Numbered 80 and 81) I did not notice other letter-books—I found letters from Goldring to Hill—all the letters from Goldring that have been read I found at Hill's—there were pigeon-holes in one of the rooms, and the various letters were in them, initialed—I found this document of 4th February, 1892, on Hill's
paper: "Dear Sir,—Herewith I hand you my draft on J. Midgley and Son for £84 7s., for which you have given me full consideration.—F. GOLDRING."—on the other side is "Cash £37, old debt £42, discount, £5 7s.; £84 7s. Correct, GEORGE HILL"—I have looked at the index of these two press copy letter-books—in 81 there are forty-five letters addressed to Golding from 1st December, 1891, to 3rd November, 1892, and there are seventeen in the other book, from 12th November, 1892, to 8th May, 1893. (Several of these letters were read, relating to bill transactions between Hill and Goldring)—the letter of 3rd February from Hill to Goldring relating to a bill for £166 18s. 4d., drawn by Hill on Clarke and Co., is not copied in the press letter-book—I also found this bill-case, containing five bills, with blank for drawers' names. (These were for £100, £87 3s. 6A, £113 11s. 6d., £148 12s., and £95 15s. 6d.)—I also found there six circulars, a copy of the Larceny Act, two copies of "Byles on Bills," this original opinion of Mr. Daniels, dated 30th June, 1888, and this copy of an opinion by Mr. Poland (These were read. They were opinions given in answer to cases put by Hill as to the legality of certain proceedings in connection with bill transactions)—I found an india-rubber stamp at Hill's, with "F. Trail "on it, and a number of papers relating to Newby's action; also this receipt: "Received of Mr. George Hill, 18th October, 1892, an acceptance for £39 11s. of J. H. Allen and Co.—F. GOLDRING"—after inquiries before the Alderman on two or three occasions other persons were taken into custody—on 3rd June I received a warrant against Goldring, and went to Dunstaple, where I saw him at his, house in West Street about seven p. m.—he answered the door—I went indoors with him—I told him I was a police officer, and held a warrant for his arrest—I read it to him, and he read it himself—it was for obtaining a bill for £108 10s. of Lovett's, and one of Midgley's for £84 7s., and for conspiring with Hill—he said, "I don't understand this, there is some spite somewhere; I have given full value for Lovett's bill to Moffatt, and full value for Midgley's bill to Hill. Who is prosecuting in this matter?"—I said, "Messrs. Collyer; they are solicitors to Messrs. Midgley"—he said, "Oh, I have just had an action with them about Midgley's bill, and I am now suing them for libel"—I said, "Will you give me all the correspondence you have had from Hill?"—he said, "I have had none"—I said, "Yes, you have; I have seen copies of letters in Hills letter-book to you, and I have found letters from you to Hill"—he said, "There may have been one or two, but their number. is very small; I destroy them as I get them"—I said, "I want to search your room"—he said, "Very well," and he assisted me in doing so—I found a number of cancelled cheques and other things—I found no bill-book—there was a diary, but with very few entries in it; it did not appear to be a business diary; nothing about a bill—there was no ordinary business book with reference to bill discounting—I brought him away at once to Moor Lane Station, where he was charged—Goldring said he thought the matter might be met by summons, and if he had been written to he would have surrendered—on Monday, 26th June, about three In the afternoon, I met Weir in Leadenhall Street—I stopped him and said, 11 Is your name Allen?"—he said, "No, I am the representative"—I said, "But your name is Barclay Wilson?"—he said, "No"—I said, "I know your right name; it is Weir. I have a warrant for your arrest, for
conspiring with Hill and others"—he said, "I don't know Hill; you have taken the wrong man into custody. It is Natzler you want; he absconded five weeks ago; he has defrauded me, and I am looking for him. I heard my name had been mentioned in connection with the matter, and I was coming to see you"—I took him to Old Jewry, and left him there in charge of another officer—I searched him and found 3s. 4 1/2 d. in money and some letters; this is one of them—it is in pencil on a telegraphic form, among other documents. (Read: "Dear Weir,—I want two or three bills to accommodate a party, so will be at Daly's office at 3 a. m. tomorrow. Stamped, LLOYD WATSON AND CO., London"—about half-past three the same day I went to the Globe Public-house in Moorgate Street, and there saw French—I said to him, "You know me as a police officer; I have a warrant for your arrest for conspiring with Hill, Wilson and others"—he said, "I know nothing about it"—I took him to Old Jewry and searched him, and found on him 4s. 9d. and this rubber stamp in his coat pocket—he seemed in trouble about his coat, so I searched it—the stamp is "Accepted, payable at the National Bank, Limited, London, E. C."—I think there are several bills produced upon which this stamp has been used—I produce a list of the impressions used, eleven altogether accepted payable at different banks; one is Hammond and Co.—I searched French's office, 30, Finsbury Pavement; I found no money there—I found twenty-six pawntickets, from 1s. to £2 10s., and dated from 15. 6. 93 to 9. 6. 93—I also found six notices of the dishonour of six bills, most of them foreign bills—there were hundreds of blank bill forms—the same afternoon I found Henry in custody at the Old Jewry—I said to him, "I am a police officer, and your name is Henry, trading as Lloyd Watson and Co., 72, Leadenhall Street, and 11, Miles Lane"—he said, "Yes, that is right, but I am not Lloyd Watson; Norris is Lloyd Watson"—I said, "Well, you are the man that Mr. Webb, a solicitor, had an interview with"—he said, "I don't know Mr. Webb"—the prisoners were then all conveyed to Moor Lane Station and charged; they made no reply—I went to 11, Miles Lane, and found Henry's name on the door on a brass plate—I found 6s. 1 1d. on him, but no money at his office—there was a letter box labelled "Bills for acceptance"—there was only one room—there was a sort of couch, where someone had been evidently recently sleeping—I got into the rooms by a key found on Henry—two pawnbrokers' duplicates for small amounts were found there, his own articles; and a number of bill forms, several score, on some of which were lithographed "L. W. and Co.," and two rubber stamps with "J. Henry "on; all the other stamps were found at 72, Leadenhall Street—on 6th July, about ten, I saw Bowerman at the police-station; nothing material passed there—at his place at 2, Wilson Road, Southend, I found a printer's copy of the Bills of Exchange Act, "Byles on Bills," and this manifold type-written copy of Mr. Poland's opinion, and six bottles of whisky—when I was giving my evidence at the Police-court, French and Weir and Henry each asked me if I found at the different offices any communication either from them to Hill or from Hill to them, and I said, "No, I found only one small document at French's office, making an appointment; it was simply a memorandum left in the letter-box by Weir."
Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I searched Goldring's room, his place
of business; I did not find there any correspondence between Hill and Goldring—when I asked him if he had any correspondence, his answer was not, "I have no correspondence with Mr. Hill"—I am perfectly clear on that; I am as positive as I can be—I did not take a note of the conversation.
Cross-examined by Mr. METCALFE. I took French on the 26th—Henry was taken by somebody else—on 6th June I served French with a subpoena to attend at Guildhall—I did not tell him that it was to give evidence for the prosecution; I have no doubt it was so—I served him with it in the Globe Public-house—he was brought forward for identification—he did attend on three occasions, first to be identified by Mr. Tate, the housekeeper at 30, Finsbury Pavement, and twice afterwards—he had an opportunity of hearing what was said against him—I had no warrant against Natzler; I did not apply for one—I know that he is included in this charge of conspiracy—I did not apply for a warrant against Norris—I heard Mr. Conolly state that Norris took the place, paid the rent, and was his tenant—Henry was taken by Hobson by my instructions—I have never seen Norris, to my knowledge—it was by the City Solicitor's instructions that warrants were taken out against French and Henry; it all arose out of Buckingham's case, from inquiries I made—the City Solicitor took up the case, and what I did was under his direction and reported to him—I only know from information I received from Weir that Natzler has absconded—I have no doubt he is out of the way, because he has not been seen at his office lately—I have every reason to believe he has gone, and perhaps Norris also.
SAMUEL BACON (City Detective). Acting upon instructions, I kept observation upon Weir, French, and Henry between the 14th and 26th of June—during that time I have seen Weir and French together, and Weir and Henry, several times, at public-houses and in the street; they would come out of the public-house, walk a few paces, and then separate—on the 26th June I saw Weir at 37, St. Mary Axe, speaking to the housekeeper; and on the same day I saw him at 72, Leadenhall Street, where Lloyd Watson and Co. 's place was—on the 19th June I saw him at 69 and 71, Finsbury Pavement, and saw him go into an office on the first floor, where the name of B. F. Oswald and Co. was on the door—on 3rd July I was watching 31, Great St. Helen's; that was Bowerman's office—a boy fetched some letters from the letter-box there; he unlocked the door, went in, and came out with the letters in his hand, and then went into Leadenhall Market, where he met a woman, who I now know to be Mrs. Bowerman, and gave her the letters, and I then followed him to Suffolk House, Suffolk Lane—I did not see Bowerman go into that office; the name of Hamilton and Co. was on the door, and on a brass plate as well—the woman afterwards went to 56, Parliament Hill Road, and stayed there for an hour and a half—I then followed her to No. 2, Wilson Road, Southend—while keeping observation there I saw the same lady go in and out of the house on several occasions; she is now in the gallery of this. Court.
SIDNEY HOBSON (City Detective). I watched Henry from the 14th to the 26th June—on the 14th I saw him go to an office belonging to a society for the relief of distressed foreigners; I believe he is a German—during the time I was watching him I have frequently seen him in com-pany
with Weir, except on Sunday, and I will not be sure about the 17th—I have seen him at No. 72, Leadenhall Street—I have seen him go to the letter-box with Lloyd Watson on it, and take letters from it—sometimes he would open them, sometimes he would go upstairs with them; sometimes he read them and put them in his pocket, and did not go into he office—on the 26th June, in company with Bacon, I arrested Henry at his office, at 72, Leadenhall Street—I said, "Are you Lloyd Watson?"—he said, "No, I am Henry"—I said, "We are police officers; Inspector Downes has a Warrant for your arrest. You will have to come with me to the Police-office, Old Jewry"—he said, "What is it for?"—I said, "For conspiring with others to defraud certain persons"—on the way to the Old Jewry he said, "It is Natzler you want; he has had the oyster and we have had the shell; I have accepted a few bills"—I said, "To what amounts?"—he said, "Some were blanks; those that were filled in were never for very much"—I took him from Old Jewry to Moor Lane and searched him—these documents were found by another witness.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. I took no note of the conversation at the time, I did afterwards—when I was at 72 I saw another person there—I heard the name of Norris mentioned—it was not said that he was representing Natzler and Co.—I do not know what Henry said—he pointed to Norris and said, "Don't you want him?"—I said, "I don't know anything at all about him"—he did not come forward and say that he was Norris; he was sitting in a chair; I don't know that he said anything—I had not before then made any inquiry of Mr. Connolly as to who had taken the office; I had heard that inquiries were made—I don't recollect that it was said that Norris had taken the office—I was not told that Norris was the master, and Henry the man—Henry said, "I am only clerk here"—he did not say who his master was—it was after he pointed to Norris that he said, "Don't you want him?"—it was after we left the office, not in the presence of Norris, on the road to the Old Jewry—I don't remember his saying so in the office.
By the COURT. When Henry pointed to Norris he said, "This is Norris, don't you want him?"—I had not the opportunity of taking Norris then, or preventing his escape; my actions are ruled by my superiors—I was told to apprehend Henry—I have not made any inquiries about Morris since, Inspector Downes has had charge of the case—I do not know whether Norris has gone; I have heard that he has never been seen in the office since.
SAMUEL BACON (Re-called). I found-these notices of dishonoured bills at various times in the letter-box of 72, Leadenhall Street, since the arrest of Henry—they are for the amounts of £562, £57, £51 5s., £175, and £60 3s. 7d.—these others I found in the letter-box at 11, Miles Lane, since the arrest.
HENRY JAMES BOYS . I am secretary to the Society of Friends of foreigners in Distress; our office is at 20, New Bridge Street—I recognise French and Henry—Henry I knew as Henri Zilz—on 31st March, 1886, he applied to our society for relief—he said he was a commercial traveller—since then we have relieved him from time to time with small sums of money, from 15s. to 6s.; the last time was on 14th June this year, when he had 6s.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. I submitted his applications to my
committee, who would make inquiries into his character as far as possible—nothing was known against him to debar his having relief.
RICHARD GEORGE PUTTENHAM . I am a shipping and Customs House agent, at 72, Mark Lane—I have been there for thirteen or fourteen years—Dastis had an office on the second floor from September, 1891, for six or nine months—on several occasions I cleared goods through the customs House for him—after the six or nine months he came there, but he occupied no office; the housekeeper let him take certain things away—his name was not up—I should say that he was not in the occupation of that office after June, 1892.
HARRY FITCH . I am a clerk—I entered Hill's employment when he was a member of Hill and Heath, stationers, Little Britain, about February, 1886—I don't think he was a partner then; he had been—in January, 1887, I entered Hill's employment at 5, John Street, Bedford Row, where he carried on the business, as Mildred and Cousins, of business agent or. broker, and accountant—I should think I stayed at that office about two years, all the time that Hill was there—when he gave up that office he took his business to 56, Parliament Hill Road, Hampstead Heath—I saw Goldring at 5, John Street; he came there during the latter end of the two years—sometimes he would come twice a week, and then perhaps not for a month or two—latterly Hill discounted hills at 5, John Street—I acted as his clerk at Parliament Hill Road, where he carried on exclusively the business of a bill negotiator—he took an office in Copthall Avenue in June, 1890, I think—laid not know that he kept any books except letter-books—I do not know that he left any at 5, John Street—I was a kind of office boy then, and sat in the outer office—I did some of the correspondence at Hampstead—I cannot remember if he had any press copy letter-books at Hampstead—I don't think the correspondence was copied—after the office in Copthall Avenue was taken I performed my duties there—I did not write much of the correspondence—I copied the letters into the press copy letter-books—the letters had the address, 56, Parliament Hill Road, but they were written at 5. Copthall Avenue—the name on the door there was F. Trail at first—I think no business was done in that name—I think one or two letters was written in answer to inquiries in that name—at the beginning of 1893 the name was altered to Bright and Co.—no business was done in that name that I am aware of—Hill put up the name of F. Trail for the purpose of starting a private "inquiry "agency; he advertised and sent out circulars—I had at Copthall Avenue to address envelopes for circulars like these, and do some of the correspondence and make calls—I took the names of the people to whom I addressed the circulars from the Directory—Hill took out the names of particular trades, one after the other—Hill subscribed to an agency, who sent him cuttings from the country papers—the cuttings went to Hampstead, but I saw them afterwards; they were advertisements for partners—I also made calls—I did not see Goldring at Copthall Avenue at the beginning; I should think it was the latter part of 1891 I saw him—I usually saw him at the Wool Pack Tavern in Gracechurch Street—it has a side entrance from St. Peter's Alley, Cornhill, by the side of the churchyard—I saw him eight or nine times, I should think, in the course of 1892, in the passage at the bottom of the church
yard—I went by Hill's direction to meet him, as Hill could not go, to make another appointment with him for Hill—that was the only sort of message I ever took to Goldring—I knew Weir as Allen and Co., of 54, Leadenhall Street—Hill sent me to him on three occasions—the first time was in November or December, 1892, I think—I went to get him to draw some bills which Hill gave me to take to him—I paid him 10s. or 16s. each time; Hill gave me the money—Allen was the only name I knew him by—I do not know French or Henry—I knew Natzler; he procured drawers to some bills for Hill—he had 30s. to £2 per cent.; for getting a £100 bill drawn he would get 30s.; he got the bills drawn, he never drew them himself—I knew Loris de Lindendorff by going to his office with messages from Hill, that Hill could not meet him at the time he had arranged, but would meet him later—I could not say if he did business with Hill—I never saw him at Hill's office—I did not know Dastis, Henry Peters and Co., Lawrence, Oswald, Larreachea, Foster and Co., Norris, or Lloyd Watson and Co.—Natzler, of 37, St. Mary Axe, I knew; I have been at his office—I never saw Weir there—I don't think I ever saw the name of Barclay Wilson and Co. on the door—I heard of the name of Hayford Brothers as acceptors of the £464 4s. 11d. bill sent to Midgley—I wrote the body of this receipt from George Moffatt for drawing Levett and Co. 's bill, and the signature is Powell's, a friend of Moffatt—I don't think Powell was Moffatt's agent—this document as to the distribution of the proceeds of Moffatt's bill is in my writing; I wrote it at Hill's dictation—" Pay drawer £30 "is here—Moffatt had £40; I had £1 10s.—I held an I O U of Mr. Ward—Hill is "self," £15 108.—it also says, "Paid Ward £30; balance to come to Ward £10," and at the top is "Received from Levett's bill £77; cash to come £87"—this document from Goldring to Hill: "I promise to send you cheques value £27 at various dates, being balance due to you upon bill of £198 10s., accepted by Levett and Co., and dated May 6th, 1892," is in Goldring's writing—these letters from Hill to Goldring relating to the bill for £198 10s., and from Hill to Midgley, were written by me at Hill's dictation, and. he signed them—these letters, numbered 85 to 97, from Goldring to Hill, are in Goldring's writing—the body of No. 98 is in my writing, and the signature is Goldring's; Hill dictated it—these two letter-books are Hill's, and were kept at Copthall Avenue—where there is no address heading to letters in the letter-hook, the letters had a printed heading, 56, Parliament Hill Road—the stationery at 5, Copthall Avenue had that printed heading; we had half a ream of it at a time—all the letters copied into the letter-books were written at 5, Copthall Avenue, if the dates correspond with the time he had the office there—I do not think Hill ever brought letters from Parliament Hill Road to be copied into the book—before and after 3rd February the letters go on regularly in order of date—the letter-book was always kept at Copthall Avenue, and generally in the press—I put it there when it had been used, and after it was filled up it stood on the shelf—I do not remember any occasion when the letter-book was taken away from the office—this document, showing the distribution of the bill from Gibbins, Clement D. Morris draft, is in my writing, signed by G. Hill—the body of document 172 is in Goldring's writing, and it is signed by Hill. (By this Hill acknowledged to Goldring the receipt from Moffatt of fall consideration for the £198 10s. bill)—I wrote
this document, and Hill signed it. (By this Hill acknowledged the receipt of two cheques for £5 each on account of the £20 owing to him on Levett's acceptance, leaving a balance of £10 to come)—this document of 4th February, 1892, is in Hill's writing; the figures are Gold ring's; and it is signed" Correct.—GEORGE HILL"—I have no knowledge of it, apart from recognizing the writing—I first saw it at Guildhall, I should say. (In this letter Hill stated that he handed Goldring his (Hill's) draft on Midgley for £84 78. at four months, for which Goldring had given him full consideration.)
Cross-examined by Hill. I should say that this document, 154, George Alexander and Co.," is not in Lindendorffs writing—when you were at Bedford Row a lot of business agency and accountant's business was done—several businesses were sold—after I left Bedford Row I seldom saw Goldring—he never called at Parliament Hill Road or Copthall Avenue when I was there—you told me you took Copthall Avenue to start the Trail Inquiry Agency, and for the convenience of writing letters—every letter written with regard to bills was signed in your own name, George Hill—you saw no person at Copthall Avenue with regard to bills; every interview was at Parliament Hill Road—as far as I know you did not know Weir's French or Henry—the only time" I went to Weir's office was to get him to draw acceptances, which you have taken under the agreement—I never got any of the prisoners to accept for you—I never went to Wesson and Co's or Lloyd Watson and Co. 's offices—all you made out of Levett's bill was £5 10s.—when you wrote to Midgley, "Return me the bill to avoid unpleasantness," you told me that Midgley was threatening you, and that you would have to give up Goldring's name as the holder of the bill—you instructed your solicitors to write to Goldring threatening proceedings unless he I returned or settled for the bill—I believe Shooten was the. Petitioning creditor in your bankruptcy—the debt was on a bill drawn by you, 1 think—you never, to my knowledge, received consideration for the bill; I should say it was taken under an agreement—judgment was given against you, and you were made bankrupt, as the drawer—I usually wrote out the drafts before they were accepted—I always left the space before the word "order "blank, by your direction, because at the time you would not know who was going to draw the bill—sometimes the date was filled in afterwards; the space for it was left blank, so that it could be put in on the day the bill was signed, in order that it should not appear stale—I don't remember that Heath and Co. were constantly exporting goods when I was with them; I cannot say they were not—you and Mr. Heath told me that you had formerly been a member of that firm—I am generally acquainted with the contents of the letter-books—I should say there is not a single letter in which you describe yourself as a retired East India merchant, or say that you have a large amount of capital—you made inquiries about acceptors of bills through Stubbs' and so on, and as a rule you found the firms were going down; Stubbs' did not give a glowing account about them—you had many transactions besides those which are the subject of this charge—you had some acceptances of Mr. Pearce, of Hull; in the result he went bankrupt, and you had to pay all the bills, losing about £500—in several cases you returned acceptances to people because you could not get from them what you thought was a
fair consideration—you had a bill for £500, which you sent back because you could not get £450 for it—you had two acceptances for £500 back from an eminent Q. C.; I think you could have got £420 for them, but you returned them to him—in consequence of a telegram or communication from Midgley you sent him Johnson's bill—I used to fasten certain letters relating to one case together—when Midgley took proceedings I fastened all the papers relating to his case together, and all the papers would be there—at the Police-court when Midgley was examined, Mr. Collier, his solicitor, handed some of the letters up to him there—you made inquiries about Johnson before sending off this bill, and heard they were in business, and very respectable, or something of that kind—I don't remember anything about Hayford and Sons, or Desporte, the drawer and acceptor—I do not know that you were ever acquainted with either of those firms, or that you had ever done business with them—in returning bills you always mutilated them, so that they should not be used; that was whether they were drawn or not—I think I remember taking the letter of 13th January, 1893, from you to Buckingham by hand; he returned it and said he would not do what you asked—you usually got to the Copthall Avenue office between eleven and twelve; sometimes it was before eleven—I occasionally came to Parliament Hill Road when I was engaged at Copthall Avenue—on one or two occasions I think letters were written there; not more than three times, I should think—I think the letters had been already written—I took them to the office to copy them, by your direction—sometimes I made a copy of a letter by hand on a sheet of paper, instead of taking a press copy—I could not say if this document, No. 174, is a copy so made.
Cross-examined by Mr. WILLIS. I actually paid Powell the money.
Cross-examined by Weir. I was six or seven years clerk to Hill—I only knew what he told me—I was his only clerk—no bills came to the office, they went to his house—I knew he had bills from Wallace and Buckingham—I never had any money to pay you as the proceeds of the bills—as far as I know, you would not have any reason to know any of these people before coming into Court—you would not know anything about Hill's business—I only came to see you on two or three occasions—it was through Natzler that Hill knew you, and I knew you through Hill—I was sent by him to your office to get the acceptances drawn—I never saw Hill and you together—you drew these two bills of Buckingham on 10th January—you would receive 10s. for drawing this one, and perhaps 15s. for this one for £155—I. saw you on three distinct occasions—bills have come from Natzler in a good many names—I had no acceptances from you; you only drew bills.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Natzler was a man to whom you Mould go and say you wanted some bills, and he would go and get them for you without knowing the object for which they were required—he was paid 30s. to £2 per cent.
Re-examined. I saw Weir sign these bills J. H. Allen and Co.—I did not see him sign this one Tilly and Co.—to the best of my belief the Barclay Wilson bill is in the same writing as the Allen bill—I only know Weir as Allen and Co.—I do not know Weir's writing.
By Hill. I was always careful when filling in the dates, and the "my" or "our," to use exactly the same kind of ink as had been used in writing
the bill; I bad a fountain pen, and so I always used the same kind of ink.
THOMAS HENRY GREENFIELD . I am a shorthand writer—I was present in the Queen's Bench Division on the 9th and 10th February, during the trial of an action of Gold ring against Midgley and Sons, before Mr. Justice Bruce and a Common Jury—I took shorthand notes of the evidence—this is a transcript of my notes of the evidence of the plaintiff, examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and re-examination—it is complete and correct. (This was put in and read in full.)
At the, close of the case for the prosecution MR. TAYLOR, on behalf 'of Hill submitted that there was no evidence to support the charge under the 75th section of the Larceny Act: first, that he was an agent within the meaning of that section; secondly, that there was any direction in writing (see Beg. v. Portugal, 11 Q. B.). He contended that there was no direction, but the evidence simply amounted to an agreement between His parties, and in no case had it been decided that two such documents as these in the evidence of Mr. Morris did constitute one, so as to be looked upon as a direction in writing; it must be a direction by the prisoner, but not by the witness, which was a necessity to make out the case.
The COMMON SERJEANT was clearly of opinion that there was a direction in writing, and declined to reserve the point.
Hill, in his defence, reviewed the evidence against him, and contended that there was no proof of his having conspired with any of the persons named in the indictment, nor of his having used any false pretences; but that on the contrary, he had carried on an honest and bona fide business in bill discounting, and that speculative transactions of tins character sometimes resulted in loss to the drawer and acceptor, and sometimes in loss to himself the discounter.
Golding received an excellent character from many witnesses.
Weir denied having had any intention to defraud or having conspired with any of the other prisoners. He stated that he had great confidence in Natzler, who had been in business in the City for 25 years, and that to him he had given his signature when fie wanted it, without asking the name of his client, and that he never thought he was doing anything wrong, A witness deposed to the good character of Henry
Mr. PAUL TAYLOR moved, in arrest of judgment, upon the ground that the Magistrate having dismissed the case against Gibbins, and the prosecutor not having applied under the Vexations Indictments Act to be bound over to prosecute, the Counts charging Hill with conspiring with Gibbins were bad, and that therefore evidence had been improperly received upon those Counts. Q. v. Fuidge.
After hearing Mr. WILLIS, Mr. CLUER, and Mr. AUSTIN METCALFE in support of and Mr. MUI. against the motion, the COMMON SERJEAN. ruled that although he regretted that the name of Gibbins was inserted in the Counts he was clearly of opinion that it did not invalidate them.
HILL* Ten Years (two periods each of Five Years' Penal Servitude on two-separate Counts). GOLDRING— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. WEIR and FRENCH Eight Months each; and HENRY— Seven Months' Hard Labour. BOWERMAN*— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
The COURT highly commended the conduct of the police in the case
Before Mr. Justice Lawrance.
MR. MUIR Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
KELLY SMITH . I live at 47, Mornington Road, Leytonstone—on 20th July I was walking in Epping Forest with my son—I saw the prisoner kneeling almost on the ground, with his head and shoulders in a furze bush; he got up and walked towards me; he had not gone more than half-a-dozen yards before I noticed the bush was in flames, which were about a foot above the top of the bush—I spoke to Baxter, and we followed the prisoner as far as the Green Man, Leytonstone—we spoke to a constable, and the prisoner was given into custody—he was charged with setting fire to the furze—he said he knew nothing about it—in the Police-station he said he was lighting a pipe.
Cross-examined. I was about twenty yards from the prisoner when he was crouching—it was a clump of bushes among long, loose, dry grass; he was smoking a pipe.
Re-examined. I pointed out to Mr. Mackenzie, the Superintendent of the Forest, the place of the fire.
JAMES MAY BAXTER . I live at 8, Burnett's Terrace, Colworth Road, Leytonstone—on Sunday night, the 20th July, I was walking alone in Epping Forest—I saw the prisoner kneeling down in a bush about the distance of this room—when he got up I saw the bush where he was kneeling on fire—he walked away about ten yards—he turned his head and looked towards the fire, and went on towards his friends—I spoke to Smith, and we followed—the prisoner was given into custody at the Green Man.
Cross-examined. When he turned and looked round the fire was on my right—I had not got up to it—I saw his face—I did not notice his smoking—I cannot say if he saw the fire.
Re-examined. The fire was between him and me—about two yards from this path on the plan produced.
By MR. GEOGHEGAN. I can tell you exactly the spot from this photograph—he went on the road—there were other furze bushes.
ARTHUR WILLS (383 J). At 7. 20 p. m., on 20th July, I was on duty in the Leytonstone Road—from what Baxter and Smith had told me, I said to the prisoner, "I want you for setting fire to some furze in the forest"—he said, "I know nothing about it"—I told him I should take him into custody—on the way to the station he said he remembered stooping down to light his pipe, and the furze got on fire; it was an accident—he was taken to the station and charged—he made no reply—on searching him I found two pipes and a box of matches; one pipe had not been used.
Cross-examined. I found no tobacco—Sydney Smith was present.
SYDNEY SMITH (44 J) (Cross-examined). The prisoner was searched in my presence—it is correct to say two pipes, two boxes of matches, and a pouch of tobacco were found on him—I have made inquiries, and find he bears an excellent character—I have heard that a thousand people signed a petition for him—his defence is paid for by public subscription.
Cross-examined. The grass in the forest this summer is exceedingly dry.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. C. H. SMITH Prosecuted and MR. MUIR Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
ROBERT EDGAR HARRINGTON . I am a grocer, of East Ham—on August 22nd I was called, and went down and found three boys at my door—three pots of jam were missing from my window, the glass of which was taken out—it had been cracked previously—I afterwards saw some jam similar to what I had in the window.
HENRY JAMES SCARBOROUGH . I am a baker, of Beatrice Terrace, West Ham—on 23rd August, the day after this, I saw the prisoner coming to my shop, and from information I received I arrested him and sent for a constable—he said he knew nothing about it.
WILLIAM LAURENCE . I live at 14, Vespalian Terrace, Roman Road—on August 22nd I saw the prisoner and two more about three yards from the shop—the prisoner took Neville's plate off the window, which was cracked, and Neville's plate put over it—he then took a bit of glass out, and took the jam out of a corner of the window—I am sure he is the boy—I called the prosecutor up.
WILLIAM CASBORNE . I live at 42, Oakfield Road—on August 22nd I saw the prisoner about 4. 45 opposite Mr. Ranken's shop—I next saw him standing at Mr. Harrington's window, and when I came back I saw him put his arm through the window and take the pots of jam out—I did not know him before—I am sure he is the boy.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I was at Beckon at a quarter to six that morning. I was not down the street at all; I was not out."
Prisoner's defence. I was not there. I do not know anything about it.
GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at West Ham on July 28th, 1893.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
818. JOHN WALKER (34) , PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of Alfred Le Voi, and stealing a bottle of wine, his property; also to a burglary in the dwelling-house of Arthur Harrison, and stealing a pair of boots and a shirt, his property, after a conviction at Chelmsford on March 28th, in the name of Frederick Smith.
Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WARD Prosecuted and MR. OGLE Defended.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. ROOTH Prosecuted.
ALICE NEALE . I am the wife of John Neale, of 14, West Street, Stratford—Henry Neale, my husband's brother, lodges in our house—previous to 27th July he kept a box at the foot of my bedstead in thefront parlour, where I and my husband sleep—the box contained £7 in gold, three waistcoats and a coat, a pair of trousers, a pair of boots, and some bicycle fittings belonging to Henry Neale, and some things also belonging to my husband—about twenty minutes past six p. m. on 27th July I left home to go to the Royal Theatre, Stratford—the box was safe then—later in the evening, as I went from the theatre into a public-house, the prisoner said "Good evening"—I spoke to him, and gave him a few halfpence—he asked me where I was going, and I said I was going back to the Royal Theatre, and had to make haste, or I should lose the next act—I left the prisoner in the public-house—he had been my lodger for three years previous to this, but my husband had forbidden him the house—next morning I missed the box from the foot of my bed, and I went to the police—this is my husband's waistcoat; it was placed in the box on the Monday, and I next saw it at the Police-station.
Cross-examined. I did not lend you this waistcoat because you pawned your own—I was never intimate with you—I know nothing about where the box or its contents are.
ELIZABETH NEALE . I am the last witness's daughter, and live at home with her—the night my mother went to the theatre I and my younger sister were left in the house—while mother was away the prisoner knocked at the door, which was open, and he came into the washhouse, where we were—he was alone—he said, "I believe I saw Uncle Harry at the top; will you go and get a pennyworth of apples and see, and I will go in the parlour, and you tell me if anyone comes"—my sister went to the top of the street; he told me to go to the door to see if anyone came, and he went into the parlour, and was there about ten minutes—then he came out of the parlour into the washhouse, and shut the washhouse door, and began playing with us—my little sister had come back, saying she could not see anyone at the top—we played for about a quarter of an hour, and the prisoner said, "I will go and get you a pennyworth of apples and a pennyworth of sweets"—while he was in the washhouse with us I heard a noise, and I said, "Let me go and see who that is"—he said, "No, never mind, that is nobody"—he left the house—he did not come back—I knew him very well; he had lodged in our house.
Cross-examined. I did not see you or anyone else take anything out.
JOHN NEALE . I am a fellowship porter of the City of London—this is my waistcoat; I last saw it on the Monday morning, the 25th, when it was put into my brother's box—Mr. Clayton gave me the waistcoat about the middle of June—I did not miss it till my wife told me the box
was gone—when the prisoner was in custody I saw the waistcoat on him—I can identify it; one side is worn.
CHARLOTTE CORKER . I am the wife of William Corker, of 31, West Street, Stratford, on the opposite side to Neale's house—on 27th July I was standing at my door shortly before ten—I saw the prisoner go into Neale's house, and a few seconds afterwards I saw two men go in—they were in the house about three seconds—I did not see them with Lee before he went into the house—they all came from the same direction down the street—when the two men came out they carried a tin box—they went in the direction from which they came—five minutes after they came out Lee came out, and walked in the direction they had gone.
HENRY NEALE . I live with my brother and sister—I am an engineer—on 25th July I owned a tin box, which was kept by my brother's bed—I had in it £7 in gold, six pairs of bicycle cranks, parts of two suits of clothes, and my brother's waistcoat—my sister-in-law met me at the station, and told me the box had gone.
WILLIAM EUSTACE (Police Constable). I arrested the prisoner at two p. m. at 14, Cemetery Road, on 9th August—I had been searching for him since 28th July—I told him I should charge him with being concerned with another man in stealing a tin box containing money and articles, the property of Henry Neale—the prisoner replied, "I know nothing about it; I never took the box"—he was wearing this waistcoat—when charged at the station he said to Alice Neale, "What about that waistcoat? Did not you give it to me when I pawned mine?"—she said, "No"
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he was wearing the same waistcoat on 26th May, when he had six weeks for assault; and that on 26th July, when he told Mrs. Neale he would have nothing more to do with her, site said she would get him and his wife parted.
GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in September 1891.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. HARDY Prosecuted, and MR. HOME Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Justice Lawrance.
MESSRS. HORACE AVORY and A. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. PASSMOR. Defended.
GUILTY of endeavouring to conceal the birth. — Three Months' Hard Labour.
MESSRS. HORACE AVORY and A. GILL Prosecuted.
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the JURY.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted.
DAVID COX (Detective L). On the morning of 25th July, about eight, I was in Kennington Road in company with Kamber—I saw the prisoner standing on the kerb, apparently rubbing something between his fingers—I went to him, and told him I was a police-officer, and asked him what he was loitering about there for—he said, "Nothing"—I said, "I shall search you"—he became very violent, and tried to throw himself down—Kamber held him—in his ticket-pocket I found this counterfeit half-crown—I took him to the station, where he was searched by Kamber, who found other coins—when charged he said, "I found them this morning "—he was violent all the way to the station.
ALFRED KAMBER (Detective L). I was in company with Cox, and assisted in taking the prisoner to the station—he was very violent; he threw himself down; we had great difficulty in conveying him to the station—at the station I searched him, and found two counterfeit half-crowns and two counterfeit florins in his right-hand trousers pocket, wrapped up in tissue paper, with paper between them—when finally charged he said, "I picked them up this morning"—I found no other money on him.
The prisoner, in his defence, alleged that he met a man who owed him money, and who must have placed the paper containing the coins in his pocket.
GUILTY .—He also
PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at this COURT in December, 1891, for uttering counterfeit coin. †*— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
gave her ninepence change, and she left—as soon as she had gone I put it in my teeth and it bent, and found it was bad, and threw it into the fire—on the 9th of August Flowers came in for a half tin of sardines, at fourpence halfpenny—he gave me a half-crown, and I gave him two shillings and three halfpence change—after he left I put the half-crown on a stone slab and found it was bad, and I put it in the fire—about a week afterwards I saw the prisoners at Stones End—I saw Flowers first; he was with a lot of other men and I picked him out—I saw Clark in the Court at the time, and identified her as the woman who had given me the bad shilling.
DAVID COX (Detective L). I know the prisoners by sight—I have frequently seen them together—on 10th August, shortly after eight p. m., I was with Kamber in the Old Kent Road, and saw them with another man not in custody—I kept observation of them, and followed them to the Duke of Kent public-house—they left there, and I caught hold of Clark—the men ran away—I saw Clark throw something in paper from her left hand, which glittered—she became violent; I held her—Kamber brought Flowers back, and I said, "We are police officers, and are going to take you into custody on suspicion of uttering counterfeit coin"—Clark said, "I expected this; I thought there was something wrong as soon as I saw you—Flowers said, "It is my luck; I expected this, as soon as I saw you turn the corner I knew it was all over"—I took them to the station, returned and examined the place where I arrested Clark, and on the ground I found these two half-crowns in paper, and one lying on the ground in a dark corner—I then returned to the station and told the prisoners we had found the counterfeit coins—they both said they knew nothing about them.
Cross-examined by Flowers. I saw Clark throw the packet from her hand as I held her round the waist—I did not know that it was counterfeit coin—I did not pick it up then because you were both so violent—it was about three-quarters of a mile from the station, and it took three officers to get them there and to keep off the crowd.
ALFRED KAMBER (Detective L). I was with Cox—when Flowers ran away I ran after him about two hundred yards—I caught him; he became violent—a gentleman came up and helped me—I took him back to where Cox and Clark were—there was a second man, but I was unable to catch him—Flowers was very violent; it took six persons to get him to the station.
GUILTY .—Several convictions were proved against the prisoners.
FLOWERS**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. CLARK†*— Six Months' Hard Labour.
DE LA PORTE PLEADED GUILTY . Discharged on recognisances.
827. JOHN TANNER (50) was again indicted for unlawfully obtaining from James Bird and others £2 5s. and other sums by false pretences, and conspiring with Regina Florence de la Porte to obtain money from other persons by false pretences.
Tanner having stated in the hearing of the JURY that he was guilty, they returned a verdict of
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
828. EMILY TRUNDLE and WILLIAM ALLEN FITZRAYNE (45) , Unlawfully conspiring to obtain by false pretences £3 8s. from the Admiralty of England. Other Counts, for obtaining £3 8s. from the Postmaster-General, etc.
CHARLES EDWARD GEORGE WEBB . I am a clerk in the Accountant General's Department of the Admiralty—in December, 1891, a pensioner, Charles Edward Trundle, was entitled to £13 12s., which would be paid in advance on 3rd October, 1891—I received this life certificate in the first six days of December—it is sent in to me to check, and is then posted on the schedule, and on 2nd January a money order would be dispatched to the pensioner, and paid on the 3rd—upon a non-application for the payment of pension for the last months of 1892, an error was found out—I noticed the person certifying the pensioner to be alive was W. Allen Fitzrayne, 9, Tooley Street.
ERNEST WILLIAM STAFFORD . I am a clerk in the Accountant-General's Department of the Navy—I dispatched this money-order, "B," on 2nd January, 1892—it is for £3 8s., and is addressed to Charles Edward Trundle, 8, Bull Court, Tooley Street.
LILIAN LARDNER . I am a clerk in the post-office at 171, Bermondsey Street—these initials on this money order for £3 8s., paid on 4th January, 1892, are mine—they indicate that I paid the money—at the Police-court I noticed no signature authorising anyone else to receive payment—I have no recollection of paying it.
WILLIAM CLARKE . I am registrar of births and deaths for the sub-district of St. Olave—I produce certificate of the registration on 29th December, 1891, of the death of Charles Edward Trundle, aged forty-three—the medical man was W. A. Fitzrayne, L. S. A, and the informant Emma Trundle, widow of deceased, present at death.
Cross-examined. I have often seen Fitzrayne, also his signature to certificates of death—I know his writing—I saw him write once—this is Fitzrayne's signature on the order, also on the life certificate—he is a Licentiate of the Society of Apothecaries, which entitles him to medical practice—the neighbourhood is very poor—Fitzrayne has the reputation of being charitable, often foolishly—I am surprised to hear that latterly he is poor—he has served as churchwarden and overseer, and is in good repute.
CHARLES EDWARD GEORGE WEBB (Cross-examined). For official convenience the life certificate is required a month beforehand—the one for the three months in advance, payment on 1st October, is sent to the office on 1st September—that for the payment on 2nd January is sent in by 1st December—that payment is intended to cover the pension till March—if the pensioner had lived four days longer he would have been entitled to that pension by receiving it three months in advance, and the fact of his dying would not have necessitated a return of the pension
—on the new form it is stated the pension is payable in advance—there is nothing about that on this one.
HUGH EDWARD SHAYLOR . I am a police constable employed by the Post Office—on the 8th April I called at 8, Bull Court, Tooley Street—I told Mrs. Trundle my name, and showed her the money order, and that it was dated eight days after her husband died—I asked her when her husband died, and she told me—I asked her what she knew about it—she said she knew nothing about it; then she said she received the money order by post, but it was stolen from her—I asked "By whom?"—she said she did not know—I asked her the circumstances of the robbery, and if she reported it to the police at the time—she said, "No"—she became confused, and then said it was not true, but she had had the money, she had been put up to it by a pensioner—I wanted to know who it was—she said he was dead, and then said, "I will tell you the truth about it. When my husband died the doctor who attended him told me to bring the pension paper to him and he would get the money, and when I took it to him he wrote something, I am not sure what," and told her to take it to the post-office—the clerk told her it was not complete, and she went back to the doctor's house to say so, and saw either the doctor or his wife, she was not sure which, nor what alteration was made in the order; but she went to the post-office a second time, received the money, and went back and told the doctor's wife she had got it, and she asked how much she had to pay for the certificate—she was told five shillings, and paid it—two days afterwards I went to Fitzrayne's house, 217, Tooley Street, and showed the sick certificate and the money order to him—I told him who I was, and asked if he wrote it—he said, "Yes"—I asked him if he remembered under what circumstances he wrote it—he said, "No," he had no recollection—I asked if he remembered attending the late pensioner—he said, "Yes;" and if he could tell me when he died—he said he had no recollection or record of that—then I told him all that Mrs. Trumble had told me about his signing the certificate, and he said, "I do not remember, but I daresay her account is correct"—I said, "This certificate shows that the man is unable, in consequence of bodily illness, to attend at the post-office, and purports to he dated eight days after the man died; can you explain that?—he said, No. but sometimes one is inclined to strain a point for these poor people."
NOT GUILTY .
MR. KERSHAW Prosecuted.
CARLO ANDREAZZI . I live and keep a restaurant at 20, Kew Road, Richmond—I got a dispensation from the Pope, and married the prisoner bout sixteen years ago, and have lived with her—at 11. 30 on the night' 5th August I heard a ring at the bell—I sent one of my servants down, and then went down myself—I saw the prisoner outside the gate—she as not sober—I said, "I will not allow you inside the place;. I will give you money to get lodgings, and will not recognise you as my wife"—after that she took a bottle out, and gave me a blow on the top of the head with it, smashing the bottle, and making my head bleed.
Cross-examined by the prisoner You struck me with the bottle.
FREDERICK NATHANIEL JONES . I live next door to the prosecutor—on his night I saw the prisoner come up to the prosecutor's house and ring the bell—the prosecutor came down and spoke to her—she pulled at the gates, trying to pull them down, and eventually she took a bottle from under her cloak, and it seemed to me she threw the bottle at him—she was about a yard and a half from him—the bottle hit him on the top of his head; it smashed, and cut open his head, which bled very much—she seemed to be the worse for drink.
ANDREA PINI (Interpreted). I am cook at 20, Kew Road—on this night, at 11. 30, I was in the shop—I saw the prisoner outside—the prosecutor went out to speak to her, and she threw a bottle at his head—it hit him and cut his head open.
Cross-examined. I came just at the time you threw the bottle—I did not hear what he said before that.
JAMES AMERY (489 V). I was on duty in Kew Road, and saw people outside No. 20—I saw the prisoner strike the prosecutor over the head with this stout bottle—his head was cut—I took the prisoner to the station and charged her—she made no answer.
The prisoner, in her statement before the Magistrate, said that she had done it under great provocation, as the prosecutor said she was not his wife. The prisoner, in her defence, stated that she did not remember striking the blow; that she was bringing home the bottle of stout for supper, and her husband, who had kept company with another woman, provoked her.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the JURY on account of the provocation she received from the prosecutor. — Discharged on recognisances.
Nine Months' Hard Labour.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
JAMES WAGSTAFF . I am a hosier and draper, of 125, Wandsworth Road—on 18th July, about 9. 30 p. m., I bolted my shop window and turned the gas out—I heard the crashing of glass, ran out, and saw Smith with the prisoner in his charge—he showed me a shirt, which I identified—these are my shirts (Produced)—I live on the premises.
GEORGE SMITH (394 W). On 18th July I was on duty in Wandsworth Road, and heard a smashing of glass; somebody made a communication to me, and I went to Rydal Road and saw the prisoner cross with something under his arm—I asked him what he had there—he said, "Nothing; only my old smock which I have been working in"—he had been drinking, but he knew perfectly well what he was about.
GUILTY . He then
Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
833. JAMES ASHBY (46) and FREDERICK KNIGHT ,' Unlawfully conspiring to obtain divers sums of money by false pretences. MR. C. F. GILL, MR. A. GILL, and MR. BIRON Prosecuted; MR. ROOT. appeared for Ashby; and MR. HUTTON for Knight.
LAURENCE HENRY CALLAN . I am in the employ of Driscoll and Co., advertisement agents—I know Ashby and know his writing—I have received various advertisements from him for insertion in the papers—I received this from him: "Fish, fried, superior shop; great trade being done. £10 of the amount can be paid at 2s. 6d. weekly"—that was put in the Daily Chronicle—I have got three other advertisements, "N," "0," and "P," also "W "and "X"—they are all Ashby's writing, and he handed them to me for insertion—some were inserted in the Daily Chronicle and some in Lloyds—I received about fifty advertisements from Ashby altogether; some were fish businesses.
GEORGE ALBERT RADFORD . I am a fishmonger, of Deptford—in June, 1892,1 saw this advertisement in the Daily Chronicle: "Fish, fried," etc., as before. "Landlord, 49, Bellenden Road, Peckham"—I went there and saw Ashby—I said I had come in answer to the advertisement—he said, "I have just come from there, and will take you there"—he took me to 53, Wakely Road, Dulwich, and said it was a good little property, and he had lately kept a manager in it, but had to discharge him that morning; that he was doing about 11 1/2 cwt. per week, which would represent £15 a week takings, and there was no opposition within a mile; that the shop on the right-hand side was his, and he had let it as a stationer's, and it would be open the following week; that I should find everything in working order, and as to repairs, he was quite willing to have anything done and deduct it out of the rent, and that he and his father had a lot of property round Peck ham—I agreed to give him £20 for the shop, £12 down and the rest by weekly instalments, and paid him £2 deposit—next day I went to 49, Bellenden Road, and paid him the balance of £10—he gave me this receipt (Produced)—on the same day I heard something which led me to go back to the house, but did not see him—I saw his wife, and called again in the evening, and saw him in Talbot Road—he caught sight of me, and turned round another street—I followed him, and said I had come to see him about the shop, as I had heard he was not the landlord, and was not authorised to let it, and that the agent, Mr. Haycock, had let it on the Saturday previous—I asked him if he would return my money—he said he could not, because he had banked it, but he would give me a sovereign and send me a cheque, which he never did—I sued him in the County Court, and got judgment, and that was all.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. I am a carpenter—I had experience in the fish business about seven years back, but sold the business and opened another, and sold that at a profit—this is a populous neighbourhood.
went there and asked for the landlord—a female opened the door, but as I left I met Ashby—he asked me if I was making inquiries about the shop—I said, "Yes"—he said he was very tired, but would take me and show me—as we went he pointed to a block of houses and said, "All those belong to me"—he took me to 53, Wakely Road, and showed me over the place; he said he had two lodgers there, and I did not go into their rooms—he said that there was more than I could do, but he would help me till my young man came—after paying him £2 as an instalment I paid him £10, and subsequently £8—this is the receipt for the £10—I heard something from Mr. Nichol, and went and saw Mr. Haycock, who told me he was selling things that did not belong to him—I went to and fro till he showed me the County Court summons from Radford—I got back 30s. and this I O U (Produced)—after I had paid the £8 I got this letter. (This was from Ashby to the witness, stating that as he was going out of town he could not give him possession on Saturday, and not till Tuesday.)—I believed his statement, or I should not have parted with my money.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. I used to fry fish forty years ago—I went to the police soon after I found out what Mr. Haywood told me—I never asked Mr. Haywood to let me go in—a man named Pomfrey went in; he asked Mr. Haywood.
Re-examined. The shop was in a most dilapidated state, filthy in the extreme—I took two of my daughters to clean it—it was in consequence of what Mr. Haywood told me that I did not open the shop.
GEORGE ACOCK . I live at 289, Lordship Lane, and am agent to Mr. Terry, the landlord of this house—on 20th June, 1892, I let the shop to Ashby as a weekly tenant at 11s. a week rent, including shop fittings, but not gas fittings—the fittings belonged to the landlord—he had no right to sub-let the shop—he paid five weeks' rent, and went away owing one week, and without giving any notice that he was going; I did not know he was going,—I went and found Mr. Pomfrey in occupation about the beginning of August—I accepted him as tenant.—I did not know anything about his going in until I found him there—I am agent for the shop next door and for two others there; they belong to Mr. Terry; none of them have belonged to Ashby for the last five and a half years.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. Before he let the shop to Pomfrey I gave him notice to leave, because of the way in which he was acting—he begged me to let him stay on—I should have allowed Pomfrey, Scott, or Radford to be in the shop, because I should think they were better tenants than Ashby—Pomfrey stayed for some months, and was a good tenant, and improved the business—it had been a fried fish shop before—there are several opposition shops about, and anybody could have found that out if they had made inquiry; it is common knowledge.
Re-examined. The shop was never open during June—I never saw it open till Pomfrey was in it—I have passed it, and seen a lad there minding the empty shop.
ELIJAH POMFREY . I am a labourer, living at East Dulwich—in July, 1892, I saw an advertisement in Lloyd's newspaper about an old-established fried fish shop, with no opposition, at 53, Wakely Road, East Dulwich, for £12—I went there, and one of the lodgers sent me on to Bellenden Road, where I saw Ashby—he took me and showed me over
the shop at 53, Wakely Road—he said there was no opposition in the neighbourhood; that there was no other fried fish shop within a mile; that I could not manage the business alone, I should want someone to help me—I agreed to take it, and to pay him £12, and 11s. a week rent; he said he was the landlord, and he should call every Monday for the rent—I paid him £1 deposit—all the fittings were included in the £12; I bought them of Ashby—I went in on 28th July—he gave me this receipt. (This was for £4, received as part payment of £ 12 for fish shop and fittings)—I commenced on the next Saturday—a week after I had gone into the shop Acock called for the rent—he refused to accept me as tenant unless I paid the week's rent, and I paid it, and showed him my rent-book, and he was satisfied—in consequence of what Acock told me I did not pay the balance of £8 to Ashby—he never asked for that balance—he sent his father-in-law with a note on Monday morning saying he should not require any more money from me—I stopped there about nine months—I worked up a trade (there was none when I went), and afterwards I sold it.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. Ashby told my daughter that we should do a trunk of fish a day, and two on Saturday, and 3 cwt. of potatoes a week, and we did not—there was no trade when I went there—the passage in my depositions, "The takings are up to what I had been told," is not correct—I signed my depositions—the trade improved, and I sold the business for more than I gave.
Re-examined. I sold it, for £5 after I had worked it up—at the end of the nine months we did five trunks a week, at the most.
By the JURY. I opened on a Saturday, and that day we did not sell a quarter of a trunk—during the first month I sold about a trunk and a half a week—when I gave my evidence at the Police-court I was not aware of what the prisoner had told my daughter.
ROBERT LAURENCE NICHOL . I am a fishmonger, of 34, Milkwood Road—I have known the prisoners for about four years—during that time I have seen them often together, the first six months of the time frequently—I met Knight one day in the market, and talked about a business he had in Rye Lane—I asked him where Ashby was, and he said, "He is working with me now"—he said they had the shop, and he began to tell me about a couple of mugs they had just had—I was called away on business, and he said nothing more—after that I saw Scott, whom I knew; he was sent on to me for information about a business he had bought—I went to meet Scott at the shop to inquire into particulars—I was waiting for him when the prisoners drove up in a trap and called me over and said, "I suppose you are waiting for your pal Scott"—I said, "Yes"—Ashby said, "You are too late, we have seen him first, and I have bought the shop back off him. I have given him his money back; at least I have given him a sovereign deposit and an I O U for the rest"—I told them they were a couple of rogues—Knight said, "It is a pity we saw him first, isn't it? if he had come to you before coming to us we should not have had his money, should we?"—I said, "No, you would not"—he said, "Well, now we have got it."
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. I am in the same business; my business is miles from this shop—this conversation took place in July last
year, and I first gave information about it at the Police-court this year—I thought Ashby and Knight were a couple of swindlers; I did not give information to the police, Mr. Scott did, but they would not take it up—I stopped them having fish from Grimsby.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I went for the purpose of seeing Scott, who was a friend of mine—I have let fish shops—I had not got one to let Scott—he told me about it himself—it was in Billingsgate Market that Knight said, "We have had a couple of mugs"—Whelock, another fishmonger, was with me; he is not here; he did not hear the conversation—no one else heard Knight say it—I said at the Police-court, "I had seen Knight at the market, and he told me he had a shop in Rye Lane, and Ashby was working with him, and that lately he had a couple of mugs; " it is wrong.
Re-examined. He said, "We have lately had a couple of mugs"—he spoke of Ashby as Jim Ashby—I have seen them more often together than alone.
JOSEPH LIONEL ANSON . In August last I saw an advertisement in the Daily Chronicle with reference to a fish shop for sale, and giving an address at 49, Bellenden Road—I went there and saw Ashby, who said the shop was in the Crystal Palace Road—he asked £50 for it at first—I went from Bellenden Road to Rye Lane, Knight's shop, as a recommendation of the place, and there Ashby introduced me to Knight—Knight said the Crystal Palace Road shop was doing a good trade, and that the takings varied, but were never less than about £20 a week—I believed those statements, and agreed to give £40 for the shop—I paid this deposit of £5, and received this receipt—Ashby represented himself as the landlord; he said the shop was his own property—I afterwards paid him £35 and took possession of the shop—I took 14s., 15s., or sometimes not 10s.—I tried to carry it on as well as I could for three or four weeks, and then closed it, as I was losing money every week—I found out who was the landlord, and I went and told Knight I had been swindled, and he admitted I had, but he said that he had nothing to do with Ashby, who was the man I had to look to—Knight said he had not benefited by the transaction, and that Ashby had taken a situation in the country somewhere, and that he really did not know where he was—I afterwards met Ashby in Rye Lane, close to Knight's shop—I was with two others, and we went to a public-house, and I said, "Ashby, you have swindled us"—he said, "Yes, I am a b——swindler, and that is how I get my living; I never have worked, and never b——well intend to"—he turned his pockets out and said, "If you think there is any chance of getting anything back, have a try. Now you have been through our mill, it will sharpen you up," or something like that—next time I saw him he was in Court on one of the other charges—I asked Knight again whether he was going to return any of the money; he said he could not entertain it—I said I knew the place was his, and I asked him what he would give me for the fixtures and fittings—eventually it was agreed that he should give me £9, which I accepted, and he took possession—I said I had been over to the Police-station, but they would not take any notice of it.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. They said they did not trouble about such matters unless I had someone else who would go, and I did not know anyone else then—that was at the latter end of August or September—
Ashby did not say what I have detailed in a charting way, but in a derisive, contemptible way, as much as to say, "I am clever, and you are a d—d fool"—we were drinking together in a public-house at the time—I made a loss over the business; I was out of pocket every week—I daresay Host over £50 in one way and another—I had not been in the business myself before, but I had a man with me who had been in the business for forty years—I made no inquiries beforehand in the neighbourhood; I took the prisoners' word—the appearance of the shop was all right, but there were no customers in the neighbourhood.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. The fittings were worth £9—I saw Knight before I took the shop—Knight said if he had a son old enough he would put him into it—I cannot say if he told me he had fitted up a shop for £28, and carried it on till about 1891; or that he asked Mrs. Lewis to accept his partner instead of himself—Webb was introduced to me by Ashby as his manager, and I found out afterwards that Webb had also been a victim.
Re-examined. I actually parted with £40, and lost my time, and so on.
EPHRAIM FROUD . I am a fishmonger, of 210,. Sherland Road, Paddington—in January last I saw this advertisement in the Daily Chronicle of a fish shop for £35, apply at 162, Crystal Palace Road—I went to 162, Crystal Palace Road, where I saw Ashby—he asked me if I understood the business—I told him I had been fourteen years in it—he showed me over the place, and said he was the landlord and owned a lot of property round there, all the shops. along there, and that the takings at this shop were £20 a week—he said he had a manager there who was long in the arm, meaning the manager robbed him, and that was why he was giving it up—I agreed to pay £35 for the shop, believing it was genuine—he said he would give me a written guarantee that it was genuine, and if it was not what he said he would return the deposit in three months—I paid a deposit and had this receipt—I made inquiries and then saw Ashby again, and asked him for my deposit back, and said it was a fraud, and that no business was done, and that I had been taken in—he said he would send me a cheque for the money, and instead of that he sent a letter saying that he should not think of returning the money—he said Knight was his partner—I called and saw Knight, who stopped me as I was going to see Ashby, and asked my business—I said I wanted to see Ashby—he said, "It is just the same to tell me"—I told him I wanted to see Ashby, and I was going up to the shop to see him—I found Ashby, who promised if his partner agreed to return the deposit—I returned to the Rye Lane Station, and Knight said, "There are warrants waiting at the County Court for Ashby, and it is no use taking proceedings against him," and he thought he had told me a lot of lies—I then went to the Police-station—I had none of my money returned—Knight said the shop had been sold for £20, and he had sold it to Ashby for £30, and he called a man in the shop to prove that what he said was right.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. I paid him £3—I did not go in because watched the trade for two or three days, and found it was a swindle—the trade that was done did not pay for the gas and coals—I paid £3 without making inquiries—I was told there was no opposition, and I found there was—there was a manager in the shop.
Re-examined. I paid the £3 upon the faith of his statements that he was making £20 a week.
HERBERT WALTER DOWNS . I live at Hornsey, and am a waiter—in March I saw this advertisement in the Daily Chronicle, and went to 162, Crystal Palace Road, where I saw Ashby—he said the shop was for sale; he wanted £35 for it, and £30 was the lowest he would take—he asked me if I was married, and if I came from Hoxton—I said, "No"—he said he had been in negotiation with a man from Hoxton, and he thought I came from him—I said, "No"—he said he was the landlord and owner of the place for eighty-six years—I asked him if he would grant a lease—he said he would grant a three years' agreement—we went into a public-house and had a drink, and then he asked me to leave a deposit—I left him 8s. deposit—he said he wanted to let the business, because he had a manager who did not return him sufficient for the business; that before the manager let the business run down he was taking £17 a week—he said he got rid of twelve trunks of fish a week—next day I saw him at Rye Lane, and paid him £1 12s.—he said, "We will take a walk down Rye Lane, and I will show you my father's shop"—he pointed out a shop as one where his father had been a great number of years, and he showed me another fish shop, which he said was his own, and he had got the manager in there who used to be in the Crystal Palace Road—next day I paid him the balance of the £30, and he gave me this receipt—I went into possession on the Monday, and worked the business for over three or four months, but I could not make one halfpenny of profit—I asked him again, after paying my money, about the landlord, and he said he was the landlord—I asked him if he would do some repairs, and he said, "Yes, it was in the agreement"—after I got into possession on 25th June Knight came for the rent—I tried all I could to make a living while I was there; it was impossible—I got none of my money back—I lost £30, besides my time.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. Six weeks after I was in possession I wrote to Ashby asking him to obtain the landlord's permission to erect a stable behind the premises—I had been told then by the superior landlord coming to the shop that Ashby was not the owner—I had been in business about twelve months before with a cousin—we gave up that because we made no profit, but my cousin is now doing well—I did no damage to the shop; the sanitary people did.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I closed the shop on Quarter Day, after these proceedings at the Police-court had taken place.
ELIZABETH LEWIS . I live at 20, Randolph Crescent, Maida Vale—the shop, 162, Crystal Palace Road, belongs to me—I let it to Knight under this agreement in September, 1891—the fixtures are mine; he was to leave them in the shop when he went—he was not allowed to sub-let without my consent, but he did so—I gave him no leave to sub-let—I have received no rent since last March.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. No application was made to me to sub-let.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. Knight was tenant for twelve months last Christmas; he paid rent till last March; I used to call for it.
sale of a fish business, and I went to 125, Rye Lane—I saw Knight, and told him I had come to inquire about the fish shop advertised for sale—he told me Ashby was gone away to show some other people the shop, and would be back in a few minutes—I waited, and then Knight went up to the shop with me—as we walked there Knight gave me to understand that there was a good living to be got there, and he undertook to bring fish home for me and to help me—from what he said I understood that Ashby was his relative, and had retired from business; I think he said he possessed property somewhere in Rye Lane—we went to the shop, 86, Fenwick Road—when we went back I saw Ashby, who asked me what I thought of it, and said he supposed Knight had told me all about it that I wanted to know—I asked him if it was disposed of—he said no, because no one had paid a deposit, and any one of the numerous applicants who paid a deposit would be the purchaser—I said I had not come with a deposit ready to pay—he said if I thought anything further of it I could send a deposit by post, which I agreed to do—Knight was present during that conversation—I sent a letter the same night, and paid £1, and on 27th May I paid £14, and got this receipt for £15—I was to take possession on 15th June—on 1st June I got an anonymous letter, in consequence of which I sent my wife to see Ashby, and then I saw him myself at Fenwick Road, and told him I had information about the shop—he asked me if I would take on the shop, or whether he should repurchase it according to the agreement—I said I would rather he should repurchase it, and he agreed to do so—he gave me 10s. deposit and promised to send a cheque next morning—I have never had the money—I have seen Knight on several occasions about it—he said he did not think there was any chance of my getting the money; Ashby had not got it; he had got sufficient money to go to Ascot races, and possibly he might have a little when he came back—I left my situation to go into the shop—I tried to find Ashby—I followed his daughter on one occasion, and Knight ran by me and told the girl something, and they turned off in another direction; I spoke to Knight about it, and he said he sent his boy to tell him—I complained to the police.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. I have been in an oyster bar—I am a caretaker in a public institution—I only made inquiries of Knight and Ashby, who I took to be honest men—they gave me a full view of the shop; it appeared to stand in a likely neighbourhood—I did not know much about the fish business—I was constantly at the shop seeing what business was done, and looking for Ashby—I never went into it in consequence of receiving the anonymous letter.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I understood I was taking the shop from Ashby; Knight was the landlord.
THOMAS DAVIS . I am a carpenter, of 98, St. Leonard's Road, Poplar—in consequence of an advertisement I called at 208, Rye Lane—I saw the prisoner Knight—I subsequently received this letter of June 1st, signed "Ashby "(Asking him to make an appointment to call.)—on June 2nd I went to 208, Rye Lane, and saw Ashby, who took me to a fish-shop, and then to another, and said, "That woman is robbing me hard and fast. I am sure you will do well here; you have no shop within half a mile"—I agreed to take the shop, and paid a deposit of £3—altogether I parted with £15; the total was to be £25—I went into possession about June
10th or 12th—I saw a man there named Saunders—I had the place open five days—I took 16s. in four days—when I paid the balance it included two £5 notes, one of which I had received from Mr. Simmonds.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. I had been a ship's carpenter—I had to be shown how to fry fish—Ashby said that the profits ought to be £4 10s. a week, but the woman was robbing him.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I was taking the shop from Ashby, with the representation of Knight that it was a thorough going concern.
HERBERT SAUNDERS . I was employed by Ashby in connection with the shop at Fenwick Road—I was there a few days before Davis went in—I was taking about 4s. 11d. or 5s. a day—I remember people coming about buying the shop.
CHARLES GAMER (Detective P). I saw the prisoners together in May in the Reindeer public-house talking to a man named Woods—I was not keeping observation on them, but Ashby came up and said, "Do you want me?"—I said, "What do you mean?—he said, "I know b——well you have been looking after me; if you do I shall have a go for it"—Knight came and pulled him away—I was present when they were arrested—I took Knight to the station; he said he had taken the shop of Mr. Barrow for twelve months and sub-let it to Ashby, and accepted Davis as a tenant—I found among the papers a receipt for rent from a Mr. Whitlock.
Cross-examined by MR. ROOTH. He volunteered that statement—he was not arrested till a month afterwards.
ARTHUR BUTTER WORTH (Police Sergeant). On June 25th I arrested Ashby—I said, "I have a warrant for you"—he said, "Is it about the fish shop?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "You will be going to Knight?"—I said, "Yes; you and Knight have sold the shop four or five times since December"—he said, "If people are foolish enough to buy it, it is their fault"—I said, "The woman at the shop is supposed to be your wife?"—he made no reply—I went to 193, Rye Lane, and arrested Knight—he said, "I have nothing to do with it"—I said, "It has been sold several times"—he said, "Ashby has sold it"—I said, "You had half the money"—he said, "No; when Ashby sold the business he received £7 13s., because he owed me that amount"—I found on Knight £10 in bank notes and some gold and silver—this is one of the notes.
TEDDY WHEELER . I am a tailor, of Dulwich—I know the shop in Fenwick Road—it was opened in February last—I saw several people in it—I did not see any trade done—there is a fried fish shop about five minutes' walk off, and another near the Bellenden Road, about the same distance.
MR. ROOTH called
—it did very well while I had it—I took £6 or £7 per week—I sold it at as small profit.
Cross-examined. I bought it of Mr. Wyatt—I know Knight, because I had a shop not far off him—I sold it to Turner—I don't know whether he continued it—I went away.
Cross-examined. Ashby bought it—I do not know who he sold it to—I was not there above a week—they wanted the room, they were so many in family.
MR. HUTTON called
GUILTY .—ASHBY then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of misdemeanour at Andover on February 25th, 1888, and KNIGHT to a conviction of felony at this COURT on November 9th, 1881.— Five Years each in Penal Servitude.
EYNDMAN PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. COLLINS Prosecuted.
JOHN AGATE . I am a butcher, of 1, High Street, Mortlake—on 9th August I had nine sheep in a paddock—I saw them there myself on the 8th; I sent for them on Thursday, 10th, and only eight were brought to me—the value of the one that was missing was 55s.; I have not seen it since—I gave information to the police.
CHARLES PALLANT . I live at Mortlake, and drive sheep for Mr. Agate—on Thursday, 10th August, I was sent to the paddock in Ship Lane to drive the sheep to Mr. Agate's place—I found eight sheep, which I drove—on Tuesday I had seen nine sheep there; I did not notice how many there were on the Wednesday.
SAMUEL BARS . I live at 68, West Street, Charlton—I work sometimes on a barge—on Tuesday, 8th August, I was home all day, and I went back to the barge at a quarter to 11 p. m.—I found no one on board, and I went ashore and had a drink and waited, and then the captain, Grucka, came with the other two prisoners—Grucka was drunk and said he wanted to sleep: he went aboard and went to sleep—after he had been there about half an hour O'Brien and Eyndman came and sang out, "Where, is Frankie?"—I said "Asleep"—they woke him and said, "Are you coming to get the meat?"—he said, "What meat?"—they said, "Come along with us, and we will show you," and they all three went away—I stopped aboard and went to sleep-after that I heard them singing out, "Shove the boat ashore," and I shoved the boat across, and they came back in the boat—O'Brien and Eyndman came first, and Grucka came a little behind
them—they had a live sheep with them, which they put in the water and shoved in the boat, and put it on the barge "Wandsworth," which was next to ours, and then put it on to their own barge, "Arthur"—Grucka then said, "I am going to have a sleep," and he went down to his cabin—the other two prisoners stopped on deck, and I saw one of them hit the sheep on the head with a chopper—I went down into the cabin and laid down on a locker and slept—I woke about four, I should think—the other three were on board—I had some breakfast and went ashore—when I came back they had gone to get a drink—I saw them again, out O'Brien and Eyndman got off the barge before we were towed down that morning; they went early in the morning.
Cross-examined by O'Brien. I am sure you were on the barge with me and the other two.
Re-examined. I saw O'Brien that night and next morning; I had not seen him before.
JAMES EYRE (55 V R). I took O'Brien into custody—he said, "You have made a mistake, governor"—he said he would go quietly to the station, and in answer to the charge he said, "I know nothing about it"—when Grucka was arrested he said, "All right"—I went in the cabin of the barge "Arthur," where I saw a pair of trousers—I was looking at them when Grucka remarked, "Those are the ones I had on when the job was done; I took the other pair off, and put them on"—when charged at the station he said it was quite right.
Cross-examined by O'Brien. I did not go into Eyndman's cell and tell him to say you were the other man—I did not give you a good character.
Cross-examined by Grucka. The trousers were quite wet, and apparently had stains on them.
WILLIAM STEVENS (Detective B). I was with Eyre on the barge, and I told Grucka the charge—he said, "All right, I know nothing about it"—I told him that we had two men in custody, and that one had made a statement implicating him, and he said, "What we have done is all through the drink. I know we have done wrong, and I expect to be punished for it"—he was charged at Barnes Police-station, where he said, "All right; I helped them to do it."
JOHN WILLIAM EYNDMAN (the prisoner) Eyre came into my cell, and told me to say that you were implicated in it—he told me to tell against you so that it would make it much lighter for me—he said if I was to say you were in it he would try to get me discharged.
By the JURY. I don't know if O'Brien was the man who was with us or not; it was so dark—he was with us drinking, but I don't know any more after eleven o'clock.
Cross-examined by MR. COLLINS. There were a lot of us when we stole the sheep—I don't know how many of us came down afterwards to the barge—I laid on the locker that night—next morning the captain and mate were on the barge—I did not see O'Brien—I was placed in the dock with O'Brien at the station, and I said, "It is quite true; there were three of us threw it over the wall, and it was taken away in a barge, but I don't know who the man is; he is a bargeman in a sailing barge"—I meant by that Grucka—I afterwards said O'Brien was the other man because I was forced to, because Eyre told me—in the presence of Mr.
Stevens, the inspector, and another policeman, and Mr. Pritchard, I put my hand on O'Brien's shoulder, and said, "This is the man"—I was forced to.
Cross-examined by Grucka. Your mate helped me to put the hatches on.
Grucka received a good character from his employer.
Grucka, in his defence, stated that he knew nothing about it.
O'BRIEN GUILTY †*;
GRUCKA GUILTY of receiving; strongly recommended to mercy by the
JURY im account of his good character.—EYNDMAN, Three Months' Hard Labour. O'BRIEN, Six Months' Hard Labour. GRUCKA, Two Months' Hard Labour.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, OCTOBER 16TH, 1893.