CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
SEVENTH SESSION, HELD APRIL 22ND, 1895.
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., Q.C.,
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW.
Vol. CXXII 1894-95
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, April 22nd, 1895, and following days.
BEFORE the RIGHT HON. SIR JOSEPH RENALS, Knt., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir ARTHUR CHARLES , Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice; Sir JAMES CLARKE LAWRENCE , Bart., Sir REGINALD HANSON , Bart., Sir DAVID EVANS , K. C. M. G., Sir STUART KNILL , Bart., Aldermen of the said City; Sir CHARLES HALL , Q. C., M. P., K. C. M. G., Recorder of the said City; GEORGE FAUDEL PHILLIPS, Esq., Lieut.-Col. HORATIO DAVID DAVIES , Esq., Sir JOHN VOCE MOORE, Knt., Sir JOSEPH COCKFIELD DIMSDALE, Knt., JAMES THOMSON RITCHIE , Esq., WALTER VAUGHAN MORGAN , Esq., WILLIAM PURDIE TRELOAR, Esq., JOHN CHARLES BELL , Esq., other of the Aldermen of the said City; and Sir FORREST FULTON, Knt., Q.C., Common Serjeant of the said City: Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
RENALS, MAYOR. SEVENTH SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—a dagger (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment, denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, April 22nd, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. C. F. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. ROSE INNES Defended.
HENRY GRIFFITHS . I am a solicitor, practising at Montpelier Lodge, Brighton—I married a sister of the prisoner—the post-card upon which this prosecution is instituted reached me through the post on the 17th—I know the prisoner and his handwriting—this card is in his writing.
Cross-examined. I have known him for a number of years—he was never in partnership with his father, or ever a member of the firm—he was an employe—some years ago he went to America; whilst there he was confined in a lunatic asylum—I should not say that he is a man of weak intellect—I do not say that he was improperly confined—I have not seen much of him since his return to this country—differences between him and his father have taken place; they were differences on his own part—he has made claims which his father has disputed—the claims existed in his own imagination—I have been solicitor for his father for twenty years, and I know all the circumstances of the case.
The prisoner stated that he admitted writing the card, but had no recollection of having posted it.
GUILTY .— Four Months' Imprisonment and to find a surety.
351. CHARLES WILSON(18), HENRY MITCHELL(19), and GEORGE WILSON(22) , to breaking and entering the ware-house of Michael Marks, and stealing twenty-three coats and a vest; also to previous convictions. Two other convictions were proved against each. [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] CHARLES WILSON— Ten Months' Hard Labour. MITCHELL— Fourteen Months' Hard Labour. GEORGE WILSON— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
352. HENRY AUGUSTUS DAWE (21) , to receiving a postal order for £7 17s. 10d., the property of the Postmaster-General, well knowing it to have been stolen.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Judgment respited.
353. HERBERT EMERY (21) , to stealing a post parcel containing 9d., the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Fourteen Months' Hard Labour.
354. WILLIAM DAVID JENKINS (36) , to stealing from a post letter four penny stamps; also to stealing from another post letter four penny stamps, the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
355. LAWRENCE REGAN (21) , to stealing a post letter containing £1 and three penny stamps, the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed in the Post Office.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Nine Months' Hard Labour.
356. ALFRED LAWRENCE (26) , to stealing a post letter containing two postal orders for the payment of 20s. and 5s., the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Four Months' Hard Labour.
357. WILLIAM EDWARD BLAVER (25) , to stealing a post letter containing a tobacco pouch, the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office; also to two other indictments for stealing letters containing six penny stamps, and 10s.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Six Months' Hard Labour.
359. THOMAS ENWRIGHT (26) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of George Way, and stealing a coat and other articles and 10s.; also to a conviction in October, 1892, at this Court in the name of H. Austin. Nine convictions were proved against the prisoner. — [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Five Years' Penal Servitude. And
360. THOMAS EDWARD MORGAN (40) , to forging and uttering an order for the payment of £5; also to forging and uttering an order for the payment of £35 7s. 6d.; also to uttering an order for the payment of £170; and also to forging and uttering a request for the delivery of a cheque-book.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Sixteen Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Monday, April 22nd, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
361. WILLIAM HENRY DE HORNE (19) PLEADED GUILTY to forging and uttering an order for the delivery of a cheque-book; also to forging and uttering a cheque for £25, with intent to defraud.— Nine Months' Hard Labour
362. CHARLES ALBERT SMITH (20) , to forging and uttering a cheque for £994 15s. 8d., with intent to defraud.—He received a good character.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.]; Judgment respited. And
363. WILLIAM DELLOW (42) , to burglariously breaking into and entering the dwelling-house of Arthur Tuck, with intent to steal.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Discharged on recognisances.
364. GEORGE WILSON (53) and GEORGE HOWDEN (25) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of Thomas Randle, and stealing six spoons, a pair of sugar tongs, and other articles, his property, to which HOWDEN PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. HERMAN J. COHEN Prosecuted.
Southwark Police-court in custody, and showed him these two spoons (Produced)—they had been found in his possession, and he was charged with the unlawful possession—I said, "Do you wish to give me any information?" and asked if he desired to give evidence as against the other man—he had previously told me that a man gave them to him—I told him he would be charged with burglariously breaking and entering 1D, Camden Hill Road, on February 27th—he said, "I did not do it, a little man with a fair moustache, wearing a dark coat, gave me the spoons on that morning." He said, 'Well, I will give you the spoons," and asked me to take them"—I asked him if he was desirous of giving evidence against the man, and went outside and arrested Howden, who was brought in, and Wilson said, "It is no use denying it"—I took them to the station—he said to the inspector, "The reason I did not give my name and address is because I did not want to be stopped in going to Rowton's lodging-house; the manager searched me going in, and I did not go out of the house till my mate," pointing to Howden, "made me at 7.30 a.m.; he came and knocked me up, and asked me to meet him down at Westminster Bridge Road, and in Black-friars Road he gave me these two spoons, and told me to go and pawn them"—he did not point to Wilson, but he nodded his head—Wilson had been previously searched, and this brace top found on him, which is part of the other instrument found at Rowton House—he gave no account of how it came into his possession—Wilson had no locker at the lodging-house, but one of the keys opens a locker to which he had access, and I found in it this brace and a jemmy—I found this jemmy and two keys on Howden—there are no marks of a brace on the kitchen window, but there are jemmy marks—no pawntickets were found.
Cross-examined. The jemmy was not found in your locker.
THOMAS RANDLE . I am a solicitor, of 1D, Camden Hill Road—on February 26th I saw the house locked up—I was disturbed at 5.30 by a noise, but thought it was a cat, and did not go down—I went down at 9.30 and into the basement—I found the place had been ransacked, and a window forced, and the fastening on the floor—I missed three dessert spoons and three silver teaspoons, a pair of sugar tongs, and an overcoat from the hall, value altogether £10—these articles (produced)are all mine, but the sugar tongs are not here.
EDITH JACKSON . I was housemaid to Mr. Randle—on the night of February 26th I examined the house and made all safe—when I went down in the morning I found the door at the top of the kitchen stairs open, and the window open.
WALTER BROOKS (459, City). On February 27th, about ten a.m., I was at Mr. Hyams' pawnbrokers' shop—Wilson came in and offered these spoons for 6s.; they were not taken—he left and I followed him to St. George's Circus, where he was met by another man, who to the best of my belief was Howden, but I cannot swear to him—they went to Mr. Bul worthy's, a pawnbroker at 16, London Road—Wilson went in and I followed him; he saw me and came out—I asked him to show me the spoons, and he did so—I told him he would be charged with unlawful possession—this centre-bit was found on him, and this other part of it—that is used by burglars, but by carpenters as well, for making holes—Wilson
was remanded for seven days on the charge of unlawful possession, and discharged and re-arrested and charged with burglary.
T. RANDLE (Re-examined). These sugar tongs, boots, coat, and handkerchief are mine—the coat and handkerchief were in the hall.
ERNEST PEARSON . I am clerk at a lodging-house at Vauxhall—Wilson has occupied a room there for twelve months on and off in the name of Oxley—he had the exclusive use of a locker—this is the key of it—there is only one key in existence—only a piece of bread was found in the locker—Howden had also lodged there about twelve months, in the name of Howden, and I have seen them together—I do not know what Wilson is; he took a ticket for a bed the night between 26th and 27th, but I do not know whether he slept there—he must take a ticket before nine o'clock or the bed may be occupied by somebody else.
Cross-examined by Wilson. I do not say that you slept there every night.
By the COURT. He may come in at any hour of the night, but the majority are in before one—we have a night porter—the lodging-house is two or three miles from where the burglary took place.
Wilson, in his statement before the Magistrate, and in his defence, said that he could prove by the books that he slept at Rowton House that night, and that Howeden knocked at his door at 7.30 a.m., and asked him to meet him in Westminster Bridge Road; that he found the "bit" on the bed, and Howden said, "Put it in your pocket," which he did; that Howden asked him to pawn the boots and spoons, which he did, and gave him the money, and did not know they were stolen, but thought they were pawned for a friend, who had gone to sea.
Witness for the Defence.
GEORGE HOWDEN (the prisoner). On February 27th I called Wilson by arrangement at 7.30 a.m.—he asked me to meet him in the Westminster Bridge Road and went away—I may have handed him this brace when I was sitting on his bed, I cannot say—it belongs to me—I may have pulled both pieces out—I do not remember his showing them to me in Westminster Bridge Road—he met me, and I left him for three-quarters of an hour to go and see a friend—I had a parcel under my arm which I have pleaded guilty to stealing from this house—he pawned
the boots and sugar tongs for me, and I was to give him twopence in the shilling for doing so.
Cross-examined. I have known Wilson four or five months—I made his acquaintance by lodging in the same house—we are both painters, but have not been seeking work together—he did not see this overcoat—I carried away all these things from Mr. Randall's house, unassisted—I got to the lodging-house about 6.30, and went to the prisoner's bedroom at 7.30—I suggested the name he was to use at the pawnshops—I knew I was involving him in considerable risk by sending him there, but I was not far off.
by the COURT. I did not see a policeman following him—I am the man who joined him outside—as soon as he saw the detective he came out without pawning them—I went away—I had the key of his locker because he asked me to mind it for him—I cannot say that he told me he was going to commit a burglary that night—when I went at seven a.m. he did not ask me where I had been in the night—when I met him in Blackfriars Road I had this parcel under my arm—he did not ask where I got the articles from or why I could not pawn them myself.
WILSON— GUILTY of receiving. He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Newington December 19, 1892, and five other convictions were proved against him.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
HOWDEN— Judgement respited.
OLD COURT.—23, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. CLARK produced, and MR. DRAKE Defended.
HENRY HITCHINGS FRENCH . I am a produce broker, of 7, Mincing Lane—on 28th March, about a quarter to eight in the evening, I was in King William Street, going towards London Bridge—I was wearing a gold albert chain—at the corner of the railway arch that goes over Thames Street a man, who I had seen coming towards me for some time, bent down and took my chain and went off—I followed him, and shouted out, "Stop that man; stop thief!" as loud as I could—I was going down King William Street—some person said, "He has not gone there; he has gone down the steps"—I went down the steps—some man said, "He has gone up the other side"—I saw the man ahead of me—there was no one running in front of him—he turned up Arthur Street West—I followed him—when I got halfway up I seemed to lose him—a telegraph boy said something to me, and I followed on into King William Street, where I found the prisoner being held by the witness Murphy, and a crowd—to the best of my belief he is the man that took my chain—I seized him by the collar, as well as Murphy—some persons in the crowd said, "That is not the man you want; he is over there"—the prisoner said, "It is jolly hard lines to be taken like this; I was running after the man you saw; I did not take your watch"—a detective came up, and I gave the prisoner in charge—I was present when this watch chain was brought into the station; it is mine—it cost fifteen guineas.
Cross-examined. When I was going towards London Bridge there were
a number of people going in the same direction—when I felt a tug at my chain I turned round and went down the steps into Thames Street—the road was clear—there were three or four persons standing there; they were not moving at all—I did not see any policemen there, the policeman I first saw was the one who took the prisoner into custody—a man named Seborne was charged as an accessory in the case—he was discharged—when I was at the station I saw a little boy there—the prisoner said that he was coming up the steps and was knocked down by a man running down the steps, and his hat was knocked off—he produced his hat at the station—when he was first charged he was in the dock; the inspector came in, and after a time he was taken out of the dock as he could not be identified—then a policeman came in and said he had taken the address of a witness who could identify him—Murphy was not there then—the prisoner was put into the dock again; but the witness failed to identify him.
Re-examined. When he was put into the dock again the chain was brought in.
JOHN MURPHY . I am a clerk, and live at 56, Tottenham Road, Kingsland—on the evening of March 28th, about a quarter past eight, I was going over London Bridge, and passing Fishmongers' Hall my attention was attracted by a man jumping on to the bridge from Thames Street—I looked to see what it was, and I saw the prisoner running along, and another man behind him—he ran up to the corner of Arthur Street—there was no one running in front of him, the street was clear—I did not run after him, I ran round to the other corner of the street and I caught the prisoner at the other end, just walking—I caught him by the collar, and said, "You are just the one I want"—he was out of breath—I took him over to the lamp-post in the middle of the road, and held him there for some time—the prosecutor came up afterwards—in the meantime one or two of his friends tried to get him away from me—Seborne was one of his friends, and he was given into custody, but was discharged—the prisoner is the man I saw running up Thames Street.
Cross-examined. I have no doubt about it—I never had any doubt—I swear that—I did not say at the station or at the Police-court that to the best of my belief he was the man—I told the inspector what I had seen—the inspector asked the prisoner to come round from the dock—I said I thought Seborne resembled the man that tried to rescue the prisoner—he resembled the man—I saw him speak to one or two in the crowd while I had hold of him—the prisoner said, "Give me a chance, let me go"—I might have said before the Magistrate that I did not hear the prisoner speak to Seborne or the other man—I did not see a boy there.
Re-examined. I am quite sure the prisoner was the foremost of the men running.
HERBERT BILLING (771,city). At 8.15 p.m. on 28th March, I was on duty in Thames Street, about sixty yards from the dry arch, on the east side of it—I heard a cry of "Stop thief!" and I looked and saw a man, who to the best of my belief is the prisoner, come from down the steps on the east side of King William Street into Thames Street, and run through the arch up Upper Thames Street and Arthur Street West—I ran up
Fish Street Hill, and got to the other end of Arthur Street West, where I found the prisoner in Murphy's arms—the prosecutor, who was there, said, "I have had my chain stolen; this is the man who stole it, I believe—the prisoner said, "You have made a mistake; I was running after the man that did steal it. I was running after the thief"—when I saw the prisoner running Thames Street was comparatively empty; he ran in the carriage way—I did not see anyone in front of him, and I do not believe there was anyone in front of him—he was taken to the station; I was in plain clothes on his left and a uniform man on his right; we walked three abreast—when we got to the Police-station gates we could not pass in abreast—the uniform man stepped in front, leaving the prisoner's right hand disengaged—at the station Mr. French seemed not quite certain as to the prisoner, and another man was sent for, who failed to identify the prisoner—Maroney brought in the chain, and then the prisoner was placed in the dock, and charged again—Maroney said he had found it about ten yards north of the station door—that would be on the prisoner's right hand as he went in—it is quite possible that the prisoner could have thrown something without my noticing it as we went in at the gate.
Cross-examined. The prisoner said he was coming up the steps from the urinal, and that his hat was knocked off by a man who ran down the steps—there is a urinal there—he produced his hat at the station; it had some dirt on it—I did not notice if it had been dented—after French had failed to identify the prisoner, he was taken out of the dock, and then after the chain was found he was put back again—another policeman came in and said he had seen a man who had met the prisoner on the steps and made a grab at him, and that he doubled back and ran down the steps again and along Upper Thames Street followed by this man—I took that man's address, and he was brought to the Police-station—he failed to identify the man who he said knocked against him on the steps—when I first heard cries of "Stop thief!" I was coming along Lower Thames Street from the direction of Billingsgate Market towards the dry arch—I was about fifty yards from the archway—I saw a boy in Thames Street or Monument Square on the way to the station, five or six minutes after the arrest—I did not hear anyone say "You have arrested the wrong man"—there was a crowd—the boy came to the station and made a statement to the inspector on duty—I don't think anyone took down that statement—the boy came of his own accord to the Mansion House—I did not subpoena him to go there—I served a subpoena on him to come here by Mr. Douglas's, the chief clerk, instructions—I have spoken to him since, not with reference to this charge—he is not here as a witness for the prosecution—a number of men walked by our side to the station—the gate will admit two at a time, and I and the prisoner went in together—French and Murphy were behind us, and followed us in—they must have been immediately behind; it may have been a few yards—a large crowd followed us—it was then about 8.30, and was comparatively dark; there was no daylight, but there were electric lights on the right and left in Tower Street, and a small gas lamp at the corner.
JAMES MARONEY (city Detective) About 9.5 on March 28th I came along Seething Lane, and I picked up this gold chain in the gutter about eleven yards from the Police-station gates, and to the north side of the station door—I handed it to the inspector, and French identified it as
his—there was nothing intervening to prevent it being thrown to where I found it by a person going into the Police-station.
Witness for the Defence.
WALTER MARTIN . I was 13 last June—I live at 8, Corbett's Court, Spitalfields—on Thursday evening, March 28th, I was playing at London Bridge with a lot of schoolmates, and I saw the prisoner come down to the urinal, and he went up the other side, and another man came running down, and very near pitched him over and knocked his hat off—the prisoner stopped to pick up his hat, and then ran after the other man and I ran too—if he had not stopped to pick up his hat he would have caught him, but he got out of sight—no policeman came on the scene—I saw a crowd of people—I went to the station, and made my statement to the inspector—the prisoner was then in the dock.
Cross-examined. The prisoner when he was in custody asked me to go to the station—he said, "Come along with me, Tommy, and tell the Magistrate I did not do it"—I did not know the prisoner—I had never spoken to him before—the prisoner came down the steps on the east side—I saw another man running away in front of the prisoner—he and the prisoner turned up Arthur Street, and I ran up Arthur Street—I cannot say where the other man went to; he got out of sight so quick—I ran close after the prisoner, who was seven or eight yards from the other man—he was close in front of him; I could not say what became of him. I had never seen the prisoner before.
Re-examined. I had never seen the prisoner before.
GUILTY .—PLEADED GUILTY†*to a conviction of felony in Februrary, 1893,in the name of William Nash.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
366. ROBERT COULSON PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully committing acts of gross indecency with Joseph King, and to indecently assaulting the same person. the person had twice been conflicted in a lunatic asylum. His father undertook to be surety for upon his release.— Judgement respicted. —
LUCIE BELLAMY PLEADED GUILTY to stealing.
MR. HURRELL Prosecuted.
The evidence was interpreted to the prisoner.
VICTORIA MARTIN . I am the wife of Thomas Biddulph Martin, of 17, Hyde Park Gate—on 2nd or 3rd March Lucie Bellamy entered my service as cook—I saw an advertisement in the paper, and wrote to 71, Weymouth Street, and she came in answer to my letter—after being in my house three nights she left on the fourth night early in the morning, about the 9th March—she gave the name of Lamotte—she brought a letter purporting to be given to her by a Mrs. Campbell, in whose service she had been for three years at St. John's Wood—it was a very flattering recommendation, and I was satisfied with it—on the morning
she disappeared the servants came to our room and announced the fact that someone had been in the dining-room, and taken different pieces of silver and a clock—they had disappeared—I have since been shown some pieces—these are two of the pieces of silver—these are three of the four silver salt-cellars which were taken—a clock was taken; I have not seen it since—it was a week after she disappeared that I saw her at the Police-court.
Cross-examined by Alfred Bellmy. I never saw you till you were at the Police-court.
HARRY COLEMAN . I am an assistant to Mr. E. Attenborough, a pawnbroker, of 11, Charles Street, Fitzroy Square—these two silver salvers were offered to me in pledge by the male prisoner on Saturday, 9th March—he spoke in English—he first offered me the larger one—I said I could not lend him on that—he then produced the smaller one, from a bag, I think—I asked him what initials were on the salver—he said they were his own and his wife's—he told me initials which were not the same as those on the salver; he did not know what initials were on it—I told him I was not satisfied with his account, and that I should detain them and make inquiries as to whether his statements were correct—he then told me he had taken them out of pledge at a pawnbroker's in the Edgware Road—he gave me the name and address of "Sippop Benoist, 14, Berners Street"—I detained the salvers and gave information to the police, and they discovered the owners—the male prisoner said he would return in about an hour—he never returned.
Cross-examined by Alfred Bellmy. You told me of some initials—if you were not satisfied you could have called a policeman, and I would have handed him the goods—I did not see if you had other things with you.
JOHN MARTIN (Police Sergeant F) About 3.30 p.m. on 15th March I and Detective Yeo were in Tottenham Court Road—we saw the male prisoner and took him to Tottenham Court Road Police-station—Coleman came to identify him—I told him he would be charged with his wife with stealing a considerable amount of property from 17, Hyde Park Gate, and I pointed to Coleman and said he had identified him as having offered the salvers in pledge—he said, "A man gave me the salvers, but I do not know where he resides, and I have not seen my wife for several months, she is in France"—he said he did not know who the man was that gave him the salvers—he gave the address 84, Cochrane Street, St. John's Wood—I directed Yeo to take him to Kensington Police-station—I found there was no such person as Sippop Benoist at 14, Berners Street—I went to 84, Cochrane Street, and there I found in a book an address, "28, Euston Crescent," and at 28, Euston Crescent, I found in a top back room the female prisoner—I told her she would be charged with her husband with stealing some silver from 17, Hyde Park Gate, belonging to Mr. Martin—she said "Me don't speak English," or "Me don't understand English. Me speak to Madame Martin"—she was taken to the station—they were both charged and neither made any reply.
Cross-examined by Alfred Bellamy. You said nothing when I arrested you—you told me at the Police-station that someone had given you the things—you did not give me the name of Cramer as that of the man who gave them to you—I don't know if Cramer came to the Police-court—I never saw a witness there for you—I did not forbid him to enter the
Police-court—I have these papers of yours—I did not find at your house any stolen article or pawnbroker's tickets—there were clothes, but nothing referring to this charge—I found 15s. on you.
ALBERT YEO (Detective F) (I was with Martin when the male prisoner was arrested—I took him to Kensington Police-station—on the way to that station he said he had not seen his wife for several weeks; she was in France, he was unable to give her address, but if I went to her land-lady she would do so—he did not give me the landlady's address.
Cross-examined by Alfred Bellmy. You did not tell me that somebody had asked you to pledge these objects—you said something to Martin which I could not understand—you did not mention Cramer—Cramer did not come to the Police-court—he was not forbidden or prevented from coming into the Police-court—you told the Magistrate something about Martin having stopped a witness in your favour from coming into the Court—he did not do so so far as I saw.
Re-examined I have nothing to do at the Police-court with keeping the doors or anything of that sort, or with people coming in or out, nor has Martin.
JOHN MARTIN (Re-examined by the COURT). The male prisoner said something to the Magistrate about a witness having been kept out of Court; we know nothing of the Police-court doors, and have nothing to do with ingress and egress there; proper officers are told off to keep the doors.
KATE MCNEILL . I live at 28, Euston Crescent—about 9th March, on the Saturday before I gave evidence at the Police-court, at half-past seven p.m. the prisoners came to my place—a week previous the male prisoner had engaged my back-room—the female prisoner stayed there from the Saturday; I believe the male prisoner stayed there one night, but I have not seen him—they brought this white portmanteau with them.
Cross-examined by Alfred Bellmy. I never saw you eat in my house; I think you slept there one night—your wife was ill in bed; she went to bed the morning she came.
MARTHA DALLY . I am the wife of Henry Dally, of 17, Portland Place—the male prisoner called at my house and asked if there were any letters for him in the name of Bellamy; none came—he called again for letters in another name, and said he had advertised, and ten or fourteen came; he called for them—he afterwards asked me to take in letters in the name of Madame Lamotte, and two came—it extended over a fort-night or three weeks—it was in February, I think—I have the letters.
Cross-examined by A Bellmy. They were for an advertisement in the papers, and I have some more.
JAMES BLUNDELL . I assist my father, a gold and silver refiner, of 162, Wardour Street—on 9th March I bought of A. Bellamy these salt-cellars and three spoons and two saltspoons for 37s.; that was at 2s. 6d. perounce; they are much worn—he said he bought them of a dealer, and gave his name and address, Berham, 11, Colliseum Street.
Cross-examined by A Bellamy. I do not know of you bringing things before—I did not say the first time you came that the things were not silver—it was between nine and ten a.m. on March 9th.
prisoner brought this pair of salt-cellars(Produced) and a muffiner—I think he said they were a present to his wife—he also brought a patent egg-boiler, but we did not buy that, he said he had it some time—I believe there were three initials on the muffiner which he said were his initials—I forget the name he gave—the muffiner was by Elkington, it was rather small, with festoons round it.
Cross-examined by A Bellmy. You came in the afternoon the first time.
JOHN BIDDULPH MARTIN . I am a banker, of 17, Hyde Park Gate—these salt-cell are are mine—I missed from my house a clock from the dining-room, an ordinary plated egg-boiler for four eggs in the shape of an egg and a lamp under it, a little muffiner not higher than a spoon, with little festoons on it and my initials, and my greatcoat—the jug which has been referred to is American; it is not silver—there were three salvers, and I produce the fourth, which matches exactly, though it is not of the same date.
JOHN LOVE (207 S)On March 8th I was on duty ac Hyde Park Gate about ten o'clock, and saw a man loitering about for a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes—I followed him—he passed quite close to me—I looked well at his features—I bad a suspicion of him—next day I heard that a robbery had been committed—Sergeant Martin spoke to me, and I made a report to him—I described fully to him the man I had seen the night before—I picked him out from a number of men at the Police-court.
Cross-examined. I saw nothing in the man's hand—he was dressed in dark clothes; he had a dark overcoat and a hard felt hat—I Saw him for a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes—I am positive that you are the man—this coat(Produced) is like the coat that the prisoner was wearing.
JOHN MARTIN (Re-examined) I found this coat at 28, Euston Crescent, where the prisoner's wife was living—I have made inquiries at 12, Colliseum Crescent—it was an empty house; at one time I believe the prisoner was living there.
LOUIS HENRY MOYSE . I am a bank clerk, living at Rosemount, Bramley Hill, Croydon—the female prisoner was in my father's service—she came in on the Monday and went away on the Thursday night about half-past eleven—after she had gone we missed a claret-jug, two salt-cellars, a sugar-basin, a teapot, a coffee-pot, a milk-jug, and an overcoat—we did not know that she was going—she was engaged through an advertisement in the Morning—letters were to be addressed to 87, Shaftesbury Avenue—I have not seen any of the articles since.
Cross-examined by the male prisoner. I do not know you at all—the intrinsic value of the articles stolen was not much, but they were very old family relics of value to us—the salt-cellars were of the Empire pattern.
JOHN LOW . I am a watchmaker, of 138, Wardour Street, Oxford Street—on February 18th last the prisoner came to my place—he gave the name of Hugh Bernard—he ultimately sold me a pair of Empire salt-cellars—I gave him £2 7s. 6d. for them—they are rather rare—he told me they had been in the family for years, and belonged to his grandfather—I
afterwards sold them—he called again eight or ten days after and offered me a French egg-boiler and other things.
Cross-examined by the male prisoner. When you sold me the salt-cellars you gave me an envelope with this name on it: "Hugh Bernard, 2, Gray's Inn Road."
(the inderpreter translated a letter written by the female prisoner from Hollow prison to the Magistrate, in which she whole guilt upon herself, and in the strongest manner declared the innocence of her husband.)
Witness for the Defence
ELLEN WILLIAMS . The male prisoner came to live at my house in Cochrane Street at the end of September or the beginning of November—both the prisoners lived with me—the female came for a fortnight, but she left long before Christmas—he always paid the rent regularly—during the time he lived there he was always sober—I never had occasion to find fault with his conduct—I believe he was writing a book—I believe he received money from his parents every week—I used to tidy his room for him—I never saw any things in his room which did not belong to him—he only had one large box; that was locked, I never opened it—on the Friday when the police came his overcoat was being repaired; that was being done by a person upstairs; she is not here—at eleven o'clock that night he was in my house—I found no hat box in his room; the hat was there, but no box—I do not know a man named Cramer, I saw him at the Police-court—I believe he was told to stop from coming in, that foreigners were not allowed, that was what the people told me—I believe it was the police that said so—I spoke about it at the time and Sergeant Martin apologised before me—the prisoner showed me some letters that he had got from the Post Office—I have received many annoyances from his wife—they have quarelled—he has received insulting and menacing letters, and people have come to the house and made a row.
Cross-examined. I have several times visited the prisoner in prison—I am married—my husband is at sea—it was not on my account that there were rows between the prisoners—I never knew of it—I have seen the female prisoner in prison once or twice—it was sometimes one and sometimes the other—my husband has been away six months—he was then at Alexandria—he is in the merchant service—I last heard from him two months ago—I let one room in my house, and that was to the male prisoner—I was called as Witness at the police-court—I did not know whether I was called for the prosecution or the defence—when the prisoner was arrested, Sergeant Martin told me to be at the court in case I was Wanted, and I Went—I did not Magistrate that I had never seen the two prisoner together—I don't think that question was asked me—my deposition was read over to me before I signed it.(The deposition being read stated: "I have never seen the prisoner together")—that is a mistake; I could not have said that—I don't think I said it—I was not asked about the prisoner having his coat mended in the house.
MRS. McNEILL (Re-called). I knew the prisoner before christmas—he came with another foreigner, to stop in same room.
the prisoner, in his defence, protested his innocence, and asserted that the man Cramer was the guilty party.
GUILTY Of receiving. He also
PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at Clerkenwell on 2nd January, 1894.— three years' Penal Servitude.
LUCIE BELLAMY.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, April 23rd, 1895.
Before Mr. common Sergeant.
368. JANIE RING (22), ELIZABETH SMITH, alias ROSS (31), and ANNIE RING (20) were charged on four indictments with stealing six spoons, eight forks, a bottle of whisky, 2s., £1 4s. 8 1/2 d and 18s. 6d., the goods and money of Henry Price, the master of Janie Ring, and Louis Hall Hagier, the master of Annie Ring.
JANIE RING PLEADED GUILTY to all the indictments, and ANNIE RING to one only MR. PAUL TAYLOR offered no evidence against ANNIE RING on the two larceny indictments—NOT GUILTY. JANIE RING and SMITH— [GUILTY] six months' Hard Labour. ANNIE RING— Discharged on Recognisances.
370. BERTRAM OAKLEY (26), JAMES TAYLOR (35), and ARTHUR WRIGHT (24) , to breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Ebenezer Bedgood, with intent to steal. Oakley [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] also
PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a gold watch from the person of Paul Alexander Greenwood, and Wright to breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Thomas Speight with intent to steal. Oakley and Wright having been before convicted.
OAKLEY**— Five years' Penal Servitude. WRIGHT*— Three years' Penal Servitude TAYLOR— Nine Months' Hard Labour
371. STEPHEN GEORGE MILLEN (36) , to unlawfully falsifying the accounts of Henry Houseman, his master, to stealing a cheque for £47s. 6d., and postal orders amounting to £14s. 4d., also to forging and uttering the endorsement to a cheque for £4, also to forging and uttering a receipt for £5 16s. 9d., with intent to defraud.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Recommended to mercy by the prosecutor.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
372. WALTER COLEY ** to stealing a watch, the property of Wilfred Bear; to stealing two rings, a locket, and £59s. of George Sproston, having been convicted at Clerkenwell on February 19th, 1894.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Ten Months' Hard Labour.
373. ARTHUR WELLS (35) , to unlawfully obtaining £77s. from Alfred Upster Ibberson, by false pretences; also to feloniously receiving.—Several previous conviction were proved against him. [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.]— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. And
MR. MORGAN Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended Stone.
THOMAS OLIVER (Policeman T) On April 14, about 7.30 p.m., I was in Tagg Road, Bedfont, and saw a cart by the roadside, and the horse grazing—Stone was standing on the grass—my suspicions were excited, and I spoke to a coachman, who walked back with me to where I had seen the cart and horse—they had gone, but Davis was leading the horse in a field—it was a bay gelding—I told him I was a police officer and should take him to the station—he began
to cry and said that a man up the road was going to give him a shilling to take the horse to him—he had the nosebag on his shoulder, and said that Stone told him to take the nosebag and go in the field and bring it to him—the gate had been taken off the hinges and opened about three feet—I took the horse to the station—it had a headstall on—I communicated with the police at Hounslow, and afterwards saw Stone there, and the same horse and cart—he was taken back to Bedfont.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. This was Easter Sunday—I know now that Stone is a licensed cabman, and that his father is a tradesman in Notting Hill—this cart was not Stone's, he had borrowed it—when he was standing by his horse the prosecutor's horse was about thirty feet off—when I called Stone I could not see Davis, but I could see the prosecutor's horse—I went to the prosecutor's coachman and returned with him, and the prisoner's horse and cart had then gone, but the boy was just coming out of the field with the other horse—I did not hear Stone say, "The boy was going to steal a horse and I left him because I did not want to get into trouble"—I have made inquiries about Stone, but find nothing against him—they do not grant licences to persons whose characters do not bear inquiry.
Re-examined. When I first saw the horse the boy was holding it in the high road, fifteen feet from the gate—it is a light gate, about nine feet long, and the boy could lift it off the hinges.
WILLIAM BELCHER . I am coachman to Mr. Marks, of Bedfont—on April 3rd I saw this bay horse safe in a meadow in Tagg Road—the gate was padlocked, and had two staples and a chain—on April 14th, about 7.30 p m., Oliver spoke to me, and I went with him to the meadow, and saw the boy coming out holding the horse by the headstall—Oliver detained him—the horse is worth £10.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I locked the gate—I was there at 5.30 p.m.—people do not get out of their carts and picnic in the fields there on Easter Sunday.
Cross-examined by Davis. You were not in the main road when I saw you with the horse.
ROBERT WILLOUGHBY (Policeman). On April 14th I received information at the Hounslow Station from Bedfont, and looked out for the prisoner, and about 7.40 that evening I stopped Davis driving a horse and cart, about two miles from Bedfont—he said he came from Latimer Road, Notting Hill, and had only been as far as the public-house on the heath—I took him to the station, and then asked where his nosebag was—he said he left it with the boy—I said, "What boy?"—he said, "The boy down the road"—I said, "Why did you leave the boy?"—he said, "Because the police were after him."
Cross-examined. MR. PURCELL. I made a note of the conversation in my book, but did not use it before the Magistrate, I relied on my memory—I hear that his father lives at Notting Hill—he said, "I only came down to give the horse a run, and I gave him a feed of grass; I have only been as far as the public-house on the heath"—he said he left the boy because he did not want both to get into trouble.
GEORGE SYMES (Police Sergeant T) I am stationed at Bedfont—I was present when Stone was brought in—Davis had been previously detained—they were both put in the dock and charged with stealing a horse—Stone
said that he was passing the road with Davis, and saw the horse in the field and gave him something to eat because he thought he wanted a feed—Davis said, "No, you gave me the nosebag because you wanted to get the horse, and said you would give me 1s."—Stone said, "It is a lie."
Davis's defence. He said, "Go into the field and put the nosebag on the horse"; he never told me to steal the horse, and never said anything about Is.
Stone father gave him a good character.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the JURY . STONE— Six months' Hard Labour. DAVIS— Three Days' Imprisonment, and Twelve Strokes with a Birch.
MR. GREENFIELD Prosecuted.
JAMES WALWYN HINE . I keep a music shop at 275, Fulham Road—on March 21st all my windows and doors were fastened; none of them were broken—I was called by a constable about two a.m., went into the street, and saw that the plate glass of the shop door was smashed in—there are no shutters—I missed this banjo from a case in my window—a hand going through the window could take it; the opening was wide enough to admit a man's head and shoulders—the case has two doors inside the shop, and inside the case I found a large piece of concrete—these two pegs were broken off the banjo—I swear to it by my private mark—it is worth £2 10s.
RICHARD COOMBS . I am deputy at a lodging-house, 7, Venables Street, Marylebone—the prisoner has lodged there about two months—Richardson, who was originally charged with him, lodged there too—on Friday, the 22nd, at 3.30 a.m., I met him in the passage with this banjo under his arm—I said, "What a beautiful instrument it is"—he was alone—he went up to Richardson's bedroom, and I went up with him at eight a.m., and they had a conversation about putting now keys into the instrument—the prisoner did not say where he got it; he said he would give Richardson 2s. to pledge it—I thought it was his property.
JOSEPH LAKER (Detective Sergeant D) In consequence of information, I took the prisoner at nine a.m. on the 22nd, and took him to the station where Richardson was—when he went in Richardson said, "That is the man who gave me the banjo to pawn"—the prisoner made no reply—they were taken to Chelsea Station, and on the remand Richardson was discharged.
EDWARD GASTON (321 D) I was on duty with Laker near Charlotte Street on March 22nd, and saw Richardson with this banjo—I followed him into Mr. Booker's shop, told him I was a policeman, and took him to the station, where he was charged, and afterwards, on explanation, discharged.
Prisoner defence. I am guilty of taking the banjo home; I found it. I never broke into the shop; it was no good to me, and I took it home and handed it to the man to pawn; he can play, and if he had had
any money he would have bought it. As to breaking into the shop, I was never near it I carried it home publicly.
GUILTY .— Six Moths' Hard Labour.
377. In the Case of WILLIAM CRABBE (see page 451),indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury MR. MUIR moved to quashed the third and only remaining (the other counts having been quashed at the last session) upon the ground that there was no evidence in the deposition upon which it could be supported. The affidavit as to certain facts required by the COMMON SERJEANT was produced and read. After hearing MR. MUIR,and MR. MOYSES in reply, the COMMON SERJEANT ruled that there was a variance of substance between facts in the depositions and assignments contained in the Third Count, and there fore quashed the Third Count also.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, April 24th, 1895.
Before Mr. Justice Charles.
378. BARNET COHEN (28), PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully committing wilful and corrupt perjury before A the Is ton Braxton Hicks, Esq., Coroner for Surrey; before Alfred Slade, Esq., a Magistrate; and for subornation of perjury.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
Upon the evidence of MR. GEORGE EDWARD WALKER, Surgeon of Her Majesty's Prison, Holloway, the JURY found the prisoner to be insane, and not in a fit state to plead to the indicment. To be detained until Her Majesty's Pleasure be Known.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. ST. AUBYN Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.
CHARLOTTE LUCAS . I live at 79, Cogshall Street, Hoxton—I have known the prisoner, and lived with him—on the night of 5th April I went to bed at nine—the prisoner came home with another man about half-past twelve—I was then in bed—he went out again, and came back at half-past two—he knocked at the door—I opened it—he came up to the bedside, put his hand to my face, and asked me how I was, and with that he punched me with his fist, as I thought, behind the ear—he had a knife in his hand—I did not know that he had it till he stabbed me behind the ear—I looked up at him, and he stabbed me in the back; he stabbed me three times, the third time in the blade-bone and part of the arm—he then went out at the door—I screamed; the police came, and I was taken to the hospital.
Cross-examined. This is the knife—my brother gave it me as a present—it is mine; it was not on a table in my room on this particular
night—I have known the prisoner fifteen or eighteen months; I was very much attached to him—we were on very affectionate terms—sometimes he lived with me, and sometimes he visited me—he had been with me on the Sunday before, and left me on the usual affectionate terms—we had no quarrel—I had given him no cause of offence—he was in drink—he did not commence to say anything angry to me—we had had lovers' quarrels, but made it up again—the knife was not lying on the table; I did not catch hold of it—I know James Burchell; I lived with him four years ago, and had a child by him—I never stabbed him in the face—I did not say to the prisoner on this night, I will stab you like I stabbed Jim Burchell"—I did not live with a man named Honeyball; I did not have a child by him—I have only had one child—I know a Mrs. Knill; I did not live with her; she did my cleaning—the prisoner did not urge me to go to work, and not keep in the company of Mrs. Knill—I did go to work, and took a room with the prisoner—I did not know that Mrs. Knill was charged with keeping a disorderly house—I know that the back of the prisoner's hand was cut; he did it himself, by hitting me in the mouth in the middle of the night—I did not scratch his hand; this injury was all the work of a minute, and after it was done he seemed horror-struck at it—before I knew Burchell I worked at boot-machining—I first met the prisoner at a music-hall—I was not living with my friends then.
Re-examined. He has been in the habit of ill-using me and kicking me.
WALTER PAGE . I am an assistant divisional surgeon at 2, Kingsland Road—at four in the morning of 6th April I was called to 79, Cogshall Street, and saw the prosecutrix in bed—she was rather blanched; she had lost a good deal of blood—I found on her three stabs, one behind the left ear half an inch long and three-quarters of an inch deep; it was in a dangerous position; another on the left shoulder one and a half inches deep in an oblique direction down to the bone, and another at the back of the left arm half an inch long and half an inch deep—I saw this knife at the station; there was a slight stain of blood on it—it could hare inflicted the wounds.
Cross-examined. I did not see the prisoner at that time; my attention was not called to his hand—I do not think the wound behind the ear could have been caused by the woman holding the knife in her hand and having it forced back upon her—the direction of the wound was rather forward—I have not examined her wounds since—they will probably heal, and no ill effects will follow.
JOHN WITNEY (59 G) Early on the morning of the 6th I was in St. John's Road—I heard some screams, and went to this house—I met the prisoner coming out—I said "Hallo, what have you been doing here?"—he said "I have stabbed a woman; fetch me a cab"—I handed him over to another constable, and took the woman to the hospital.
Cross-examined. He did not seem excited.
GUILTY of unlawfully. — Six Months' Hard Labour.
JAMES KIDDY . lam a cab-washer in Warren Mews, Clerkenwell—on 2nd April, about half-past one in the morning, the prisoner came home with his cab—he is a cabman in the same employment as I—Preston came in shortly afterwards—I did not see what happened then—I took Elliott's horse out and took it into the stables, and when I came back in about three minutes I found Preston lying on the ground, and Elliott close against him—he asked me to help him up; he was bleeding from the back of his head, and appeared insensible—we picked him up and I put him in a cab, and Elliott drove him to the Royal Free Hospital—I was inside with Preston—I saw that Elliott had two black eyes—I said, "Who did that?"—he said, "Preston"—I noticed the black eyes as soon as he came into the yard.
Cross-examined. I have known Elliott twelve months, and Preston about eight months—as far as I know, they never had an angry word in their lives—Elliott showed a most kindly feeling towards him—when we took him to the hospital we both undressed him—I heard no words between them—they only quarrelled over an old india-rubber mat, which, belonged to Elliott—Preston claimed it, but it did not belong to his cab.
GEORGE ALLABONE . I am a cab-driver, of Branch Place, Hoxton—on Monday, 1st April, about a quarter to six in the afternoon, I was in Warren Mews—I did not see anyone at first—I afterwards saw the prisoner and deceased struggling together—I went and parted them—they then took off their coats and began sparring—they fell to the ground, Preston undermost—I did not hear what they were quarrelling about—the only words I heard were, "There is No. 10 on the mat and No.10 on the cab"—when they fell Preston's head went on to the gulley, which is paved—when Elliott got up I rubbed him down with wash-leather, and he went to the tank—his left eye was bleeding—I did not notice any injury to Preston—they were both perfectly sober.
Cross-examined. I did not see the beginning of it—I don't know who struck the first blow—Preston did not seem any the worse for the encounter; they both got up without any assistance—it did not last more than five minutes.
EDWARD CANNELL ,(Inspector N). About a quarter past seven in the morning of April 2nd I went to 5, Coldbath Square, Clerkenwell—I found the prisoner there, in bed—I said I should take him into custody for causing bodily harm to Preston—he said, "Has anything serious happened to the gentleman? I expected this"—I said, "What gentleman?"—he said, "Joe Preston, my fellow-workman, with whom I was fighting last night"—after a time he said, "This comes of fighting; and all over that mat"—I afterwards heard that Preston had died, and I then charged the prisoner with manslaughter—he said nothing to that charge.
Cross-examined. He said at once that there had been a fight.
EDWARD ARTHUR PERRARN . I am a registered medical practitioner, and am one of the medical officers of the Royal Free Hospital—I saw the deceased on his admission there on the morning of April 2nd—he was unconscious, and bleeding from a wound at the back of his head on the
right side—it was about an inch and a quarter long—he had a cut lip, and a tooth had been displaced backwards, and he had a black eye—there was some dried blood on the eye—he did not recover consciousness—he died at six the same morning—I made a post-mortem—there was a fracture of the skull on the back of the head, along the base of the skull, on both sides, and extensive hemorrhage—the fracture was the cause of death—that fracture might have been caused by a stone, or a fall, or a blow.
Cross-examined. The fracture at the back of the head would not be caused by a blow in the face—it would be due to the fall.
The prisoner in his statement before the Magistrate said that the quarrel was about the mat, and in the struggle for it they fell, but it was quite an accident.
GUILTY. Strongly recommended to mercy. He received a good character.— Discharged on his own recognizances.
MR. SANDS Prosecuted.
JOHN WILSON . I live in Stanhope Street, Westminster—the deceased was my son—on Friday, 12th April, about eight in the evening, there was a noise in the street; there had been a noise all day—I heard a knock at the door; my wife went to the door—I went up the area steps and saw my wife standing on the pavement with a pail of water, which she threw over the boys—there were about forty or fifty of them—they had been annoying us all day; indeed, for the last eighteen months, ever since we had been in the house; it was wilful mischief, nothing more, that I could see—the water did not go near them—my wife pointed to a boy named Bellinder, and said, "He has struck me in the face"—I went and spoke to him, and said I should take proceedings against him—my son went and said to the prisoner, "Go back"—he had just been wakened out of his sleep; he was in his shirt sleeves, and had no boots on—he said, "Who struck my mother?"—the prisoner must have heard him, and he came round and said, "What would you do in it?" and my son said, "I would take the best of you"—the prisoner said, "Then that is you and me," and he pulled off his coat—my son made a rush at him, and another one, a companion of the prisoner, made an attempt to strike my son—the prisoner struck my son in the face, and he fell flat on his back—he did not get up; he was senseless—with the assistance of another man I lifted him up and carried him into the house—next morning he was not fit to get up, and I did his work for him—he was a milk carrier—a little after three he went up to bed—I afterwards went up and found him lying on the floor in a senseless condition, and he expired—he had no doctor—he would not; he said it was not necessary.
ROBERT HOLDER . I am a baker, at 23, Chichester Street, Paddington—on 12th April, about eight p.m., I was passing through Stanhope Street, and saw the deceased come out of the house, and I heard him challenge anyone in the crowd—the prisoner accepted the challenge—the deceased struck him; there was a little stand-up fight—the prisoner struck him, and he fell.
Terrace—I was called to see the deceased lad on the 14th, about half-past four—he was then dead—he had recently died; he was about nineteen—I made a post-mortem—I found large extravasation of veinous blood on the right cover of the right hemisphere, which had evidently proceeded from a rupture of one of the lung veins inside the skull—my opinion was that the bleeding had been arrested for a time, and a clot had formed—there was a contused wound at the back of the head that might have been caused by a fall; that would account for the hemorrhage—the broken vein was about an inch from that part of the head—the cause of death was the hemorrhage on the brain; that might have been caused by a fall, or a severe blow on the head—I was told that he had run upstairs two steps at a time, and then fainted—that might have caused the hemorrhage to recommence—of course he ought to have been kept perfectly quiet; if he had had medical attendance there would have been a chance of recovery.
MARY ANN WILSON . I am the mother of the deceased—I do not remember his falling the day after the fight, or his hurting his face and nose—there was nobody with him at the time he got out of bed—I was, told that he had injured his face and head—when I went up to him he was lying on the floor—he had come down—he did not run up the stairs; I put my hand under his arm, and he went up like that—he seemed very poorly and distressed, as if he was insensible.
Witnesses for the Defence.
ARTHUR FRENCH . I saw this affair—I saw Jenkins take off his coat—I saw Wilson strike him in the face while he was taking off his coat—when he had got it off they started fighting—Jenkins hit Wilson, and he fell to the ground.
MRS. HARRIS. I saw the deceased strike the prisoner first.
MRS. CHILD. I saw the two lads fighting—I did not see the first blow struck—I saw the deceased picked up unconscious.
The prisoner in his statement before the Coroner said: "The deceased offered to fight any of us boys; he walked up to me and hit me in the face. I did not strike him first; I agreed to fight him; before I took off my coat he struck me again. I then took off my coat and struck him, and knocked him over, and he fell on the ground in the roadway."
NOT GUILTY .
384. LEAH BRADLEY (38) , Feloniously attempting to set fire to the dwelling-house of George Clarke, Margaret Jane Bradley and other persons being therein. Second Count, feloniously setting fire to a mattress and other things in the same dwelling-house, under such circumstances that she would have been guilty of felony if the house had been set fire to.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted.
MAGGIE BRADLEY . I am the prisoner's daughter—I have been living with her, my father, and brother in a room at 4, Chigwell Road, St. George's-in-the-East—on the 8th April I went to bed about eleven—my
little brother was then undressed and asleep in bed; my mother had fallen asleep on the bed, dressed—my father was not in the room—my father came in just as I was going off to sleep—I woke up and found the bed-clothes on fire—my father was then lying on some chairs—my mother was sitting on the bed dressed in her day clothes, the same in which she had laid down on the bed—my father and the landlord put the fire out—an oil can was lying on the floor—it was kept on the top shelf of a cup-board in the same room—I had last seen it there the day before—before I went to bed there was a tin oil lamp alight in the room, hanging on the wall near the window—I did not see who lighted the fire.
CHARLES CLARKE . I live at 4, Chigwell Road, St. George's-in-the-East—the prisoner, her husband, and two children occupied a room there, I being the landlord—they furnished the room—on the early morning of April 9th I was aroused by screams—I put on my trousers and came downstairs with a candle to the prisoner's room—I found children's wearing apparel and bed-clothes burning, some on the bed, and some on the ground—the prisoner's husband was there; he was trying to put it out, and I helped him—there was paraffin on the bed-clothes that were burning—I picked up the clothes on the floor, and put them in the stove, and put water on them—you could smell oil on them, and you could smell paraffin burning—the only paraffin I saw in the room was what was on the clothes—I saw a paraffin oil can on the floor, about a foot from the bed-stead—when I went into the room the prisoner was sitting on the side of the bed, dressed in her day clothes; her boots were not on—I saw three chairs, as if they had been put alongside the bedstead to make it wider; they were close against the bed.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. The fire was burning when I came into the room.
WILLIAM WALSHAM (166 H). On the early morning of April 9th I was called, and I found the prisoner in the room, standing by the bedside, fully dressed; the little girl and a little boy were in the bed at the time—clothing was about the floor, and there were some burnt things on the bed—the sheet the children were lying on, on the bed, was saturated with paraffin oil—the children's clothing and wearing apparel on the floor was saturated with paraffin in the same way as the sheet—the oil can was lying on its side on the floor between the bed on which the children were lying and the bed that had been made on the chairs—there was no cork or anything in it; it was quite open; there was a very small portion of oil at the bottom—there was a little paraffin oil spilt on the floor close by the side of the bed, and close by where the can would lie—I took the prisoner into custody, and told the prisoner the charge—she said, "Take me where I ought to be, and I will explain. I think it is time all my grievances were settled up. It is supposed to be me that did it. Prove that I did it, and I will be satisfied"—I saw no lamp in the room.
0 The prisoner in her statement before the Magistrate said: "I deny that I did it."
The prisoner said in her defence: "I never intended to hurt anyone; it must have been purely an accident."
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, April 24th, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. ROOTH Prosecuted, and MR. DRAKE Defended.
WALTER HURST . I am a collector—about 2.30 a.m. on Sunday, 7th April, I was walking home, as I had missed my last train to Forest Gate—passing by Wentworth Street, the prisoner and two other men came up and struck me on my eye end chin, and knocked me down—I had not said anything to them, nor they to me—they held my legs and head, and covered my mouth, and the prisoner took £2 5s. from my back trousers pocket—they ran away—as soon as I regained my feet I saw two of them turn to the left, and the prisoner went to the right—I followed and called out "Police"—a constable chased him—I lost sight of the prisoner about half a minute, not more—I then saw him in custody—it is not true that I struck the prisoner and knocked him down, and that he ran away from me.
Cross-examined. It was rather dark—there were very few people about—I was not many seconds on the ground—they turned me on my face on the ground—I do not say that the prisoner struck me, or did anything to put me on the ground—I had not seen him before—when I saw him again he was in custody—he did not say he was walking home, and that I rushed against him and knocked him down—I did not see the policeman catch him; I saw the policeman take up the chase—the policeman caught him about thirty yards from me.
Re-examined. Only the three men in the street were running.
By the COURT. I was running after the prisoner, and the policeman took up the chase and got ahead of me—I saw the prisoner go round the corner, and when I got to the corner I saw him in custody.
JOHN SMITH (305 H). At 2.30 on 7th April I was on duty in Commercial Street, and heard cries of "Murder" and "Police" from the direction of Brick Lane—I ran in that direction and saw the prisoner running, and the prosecutor after him—I did not see anyone else in that street—I tried to catch him; he dodged under my arm by the public-house at the corner, and started across the road; as he crossed the road he threw some money from his right hand—I followed him into Old Castle Street, where I caught him—I did not lose sight of him from the time I started chasing him—as soon as I caught him he said, "All right, governor; I will go quiet"—he made no charge against the prosecutor of having hit him then, but he did after he had been charged at the station.
Cross-examined. The prisoner bent as he went across the road and threw money along the street; I heard it rattle—I went there afterwards, but found nothing—the prisoner did not say that 2s. 10 1/2 d. had fallen out of his pocket—I was standing at the junction of Wentworth and Commercial Streets when I heard the cries, about 150 yards in a direct line from where the robbery took place—I was too far off to see the assault—I started and saw the prisoner and prosecutor coming towards me—I saw no other men there—the prisoner did not say that he was walking home, when the prisoner pushed against him, calling out "Murder" and "Stop thief;" he said after he was charged that the prosecutor knocked him
down, and he ran away from him—he never said that the prosecutor was rushing along, calling out "Stop thief," and knocked him down.
By the JURY. The prosecutor was perfectly sober.
GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in March, 1893.— Nine Months' Hard Labour and Twenty Stroked with, the Cat.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, April 24th, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
386. WILLIAM JOHNSON(17), and CHARLES HILL(18), PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of Alfred Joseph Billing, and stealing three clocks, one teapot, twenty-three forks, and other articles, his property; also to burglary in the dwelling-house of Domenico Zaini, and stealing two clocks, thirty forks, and other articles, his property; and JOHN WALL (61) , to feloniously receiving the same; also to burglary in the dwelling-house of John Short, and stealing thirty-one spoons, twenty coats, and other articles; and JOHN WALL to feloniously receiving. The Police stated that there had been seventeen burglaries within the radius of a mile during the last few months, but none since the prisoners had been in custody. JOHNSON— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. HILL— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. WALL— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. And
387. ALEXANDER STEWART McLAREN (44) , to three indictments for obtaining £1 by false pretences from Sarah Ann Baines, and other sums from two other persons.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. KERSHAW Prosecuted.
JOHN BATES . I am a chimney-sweep, of 22, Round Street—I lent the prisoner Henry a cart on a Wednesday, which he was to bring back on Saturday, the 16th, at five o'clock—I exchanged a pony, trap and harness with him for a cob and harness, and he signed the paper, "March 14th, 1895. Exchanged cob and harness for pony, trap and harness; lent trap"—he did not return the trap I lent him, and I gave information to the police, but I did not see it again till I identified it at Reading.
BERTHA MOSES . I am a widow, of 43, Amberley Road, Paddington—on March 9th the male prisoner took lodgings for his mother at my house—he said that he travelled with a pony and cart, taking out washing or moving—his mother came that day and stayed eight days, and left on Friday, the 15th, when the son called with two ponies and two carts—Mr. Bates's cart was one of them—he left, leaving his mother there—she left at nine o'clock, and said that she was going to her daughter at Sydenham—the prisoner came two or three times a day, while the woman had the rooms.
EDWARD HADLEY . On March 20th I saw the prisoner at Reading in the stable yard—I said, "I hear you have a small pony and harness to sell"—he said, "Yes," and showed them to me in the stable—I asked him to hold them till one o'clock, which he did, and met me at Whitefriars Road, where I live, and I bought the pony, trap and harness for £3 10s.—this is the receipt—I know him as "Harry."
M. A. FROST— NOT GUILTY .
H. B. FROST— GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Clerkenwell on April 23rd, 1894, of a like offence. Other convictions were proved against him, but he was stated to be of weak intellect. He also
PLEADED GUILTY to another indictment for a like offence.— Eight Months' Hard Labour on each indictment, to run concurrently.
NOT GUILTY .
SMITH, WAKEMAN and JOHNSON PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. HARVEY Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended Cashman.
ALFRED DOBSON . I am watchman at the depot of the Commissioners of Sewers, 83, Upper Thames Street—last Friday night I was on duty as watchman—all was safe at 11.30, but about 12.45 I was sitting in the basement, and heard a sound above of footsteps—I ran up, turned the gas up, and noticed that the window was broken and the sash pulled up—this jemmy was lying on the floor—I went to see whether the money was safe, which is kept in an office opening out of the room, and it was—I opened the door and called a constable, and Sharplin blew his whistle—Cashman had been employed in the night gang to clean the streets, and he ought to have been at work on this night—he goes to this office to get his wages, and would see them taken from the cupboard.
Cross-examined. All the workmen would know that—Cashman has been employed in the City two years—if he was not going to work, his duty would be to report it to the office.
EDWIN SHARPLIN (613 City). Last Friday night, about 12.20, I was on duty in the neighbourhood of Upper Thames Street, and saw four men standing near Queen Street—I did not recognise them then—I afterwards saw Smith and Cashman at Brewer's Lane, beside the Commissioners' depot, and Wakeman on the opposite side of Thames Street; he could not hear what was said—I spoke to Smith, and the three went away up Dowgate Hill, one behind the other—Dobson came out of the depot and made a communication to me, and I went after them—they walked; they had a good start of me—Berg came to my assistance, and I caught Smith, whose hand was bleeding—Berg took charge of him a little way, and gave him to another constable—they were all taken to the station.
Cross-examined. I asked Smith what he was standing there for—he said, "I have just come out of the sewer; I work there"—I did not see Cashman run, or the others.
CHARLES BERG (533 City). On Saturday morning, about 12.30, I was on duty near Cannon Street Station, and saw a policeman running and blowing a whistle—the four prisoners came towards me—I ran across the
road and followed Johnson—he ran up some steps, and I took him—Cashman was walking away; I caught him at the east end of Cannon Street Station—he said, "What is the matter? I have just been to see the foreman of the sewers"—I gave him in charge—I had seen all four prisoners at the London Stone public-house conversing together at 11.45.
Cross-examined. Cashman was walking at a quick pace—I was in uniform—he did not say that he had seen the foreman of the City Sewers—I knew him working at the sewers.
HERBERT STEWARD (City Police Sergeant 67). Early last Saturday morning I was called to the premises of the Sewers' Commission, Upper Thames Street—I examined the window, and found two marks on it corresponding with this jemmy, and a pane of glass broken in the top sash, large enough to admit a man's hand—I found on Caahman a memorandum book and a cash-book.
CASHMAN, GUILTY **— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. SMITH*— Eight Months' Hard Labour. WAXEMAN and JOHNSON— Judgment respited.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, April 25th, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. RAVEN Prosecuted, and MESSRS. C. F. GILL and HUTTON Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. LYNE Prosecuted, and MR. BALL Defended.
FANNY RYDER . I am the wife of Alfred Ryder, residing at 206, Euston Road—on 18th February last I saw this advertisement in the Daily Telegraph: "Required immediately, a capable manageress West-end lodging-house; small security necessary.—Address S. D. Miller and Co., E.C."—I answered that, and on the following day (Tuesday) the prisoner called at my house—she told me that I was the most eligible candidate she had seen, and asked if I would come and see her at her solicitor's office, Mr. Grain—she gave her name then as Mrs. Denny; she said that was for business purposes—I went to Mr. Grain's office, and saw the clerk Collins—I asked to see Miss Denny—he said, "Oh, Miss Spong!" and he appeared to be very much excited about it—the prisoner came in immediately, and said, "Oh, I forgot to tell you that is my business name"—I asked her what deposit she required; she said £50 at first, but she would take £40—I said I thought that was more than requisite, and it would not be convenient for me to let her have it for a day or two—she appeared upset at that, and said she had had some people who would find it—I said I had got £10; I had not got it with me, but I would go and get it, and show that I would be very straightforward—she said she would be very pleased—I asked where the house was—she said at the West-end; that it was a good house, a large business house, and she made from six to nine guineas a week—I asked what security I should have for my money—she said, "You will have the house and furniture and everything; my health
has been very bad lately, and I am going away for the benefit of my health, and when I return I intend to take the house next door and furnish it, so you will be able to have the one house, and I the other"—I said, "In case you go away how shall I secure my money?"—she said, "You will have the house and furniture entirely, and you will be able to repay yourself from the money from the lodgers"—I went home and brought the £10 to her, and I said, "I must ask you again, do you require the use of this money?"—she said, "Certainly not, I don't want to use it; but I had a housekeeper before who was dishonest"—I said, "Then you don't require to use it?"—she said, "Certainly not"—Mr. "Collins, the clerk, was there—I then said, "You are sure that the house and furniture are yours?"—she said, "Yes, I have a perfect right to sell the house to-morrow if I wished; is it not so, Mr. Collins?" and he said "Yes," and he asked Mr. Grain what he should do, and Mr. Grain said "Give Mrs. Ryder a receipt for the money"—he said, "Where will Mrs. Ryder pay the rest, here or at the house?"—I said, "Either here or at the house"—he said, "When I go to the house to make the agreement you can pay the remainder of the money then, and let Mrs. Ryder have the receipt"—Mr. Grain drew up the receipt—she said she had four Servants, and that she kept a man to valet the gentlemen, and when I came there my duties would, of course, be light, because she was going to stay with me a short time till I got thoroughly acquainted with the duties, and then she was going away for her health—on Thursday, the 21st February, I went to the house with the money in my pocket, six £5 notes—at first there was no one there but Miss Spong—she left the room and went upstairs—then Mr. Collins came to the door, and then Mr. Grain came in and sat down—I was waiting for him to speak; he looked very strange—I said, "I must ask you once more, does the house belong to Miss Spong?"—she was not there then; she was upstairs—he answered the question, and in consequence of that I had my money back—Miss Spong came down, and I said, "Miss Spong, I am surprised to hear what Mr. Collins has now told me, that the house and furniture are not yours. I think it most disgraceful, therefore I must demand my £10, and have nothing more to do with it, why was not this told me when I was at the solicitor's office? I thought everything was going to be straightforward"—Collins looked stupid; he did not say anything—he looked perfectly guilty—I said to him, "For God's sake go down and see Miss Spong, because she has something to say to you"—she said, "Well, I have got into a hole, and I must get out of it the best way I can"—only the caretaker and his wife were present, no servants—she called them Mr. and Mrs. Wilson—I would not have parted with my £10 if I had known that the house and furniture were not hers—I did not sign any agreement.
Cross-examined. I am married, and reside in Euston Road with my husband—I have been accustomed to let lodgings—I have a boarding establishment of ray own—I have had one or two, one in Percy Street, Tottenham Court Road, and one, a large one, in Grafton Chambers—at this time I was desirous of obtaining a position as manageress, because I had given up my boarding establishment, and I had a good deal of time on my hands; and I had children—Miss Spong called at my house—that was the first interview—she did not give me her address then as 10,
Cleveland Row; she told it me either at the house or at the office—the plate and linen was not mentioned at the first interview—it was when I was asking for security for my £10—she said, "I will offer you some plate of my own," and I said, "I will take it"—she said, "Shall I offer Mrs. Ryder the plate?" and the clerk said, "Yes"—she did not tell me the plate was her own until after I had paid the £10—at the solicitor's office they said an agreement would have to be drawn up when the money was paid—the £10 was paid on the 21st—the receipt is dated the 21st—I think the money was paid that afternoon—she had told me I was to come to the office about two; then she telegraphed to ask me to come later on—there were two interviews with her that day, both at the office—I was shown the agreement after I had paid the 10—not till then; I am quite sure of that—I had not seen the draft copy before—Collins wan present at the first interview—on the 21st I was told it was not convenient to Mr. Grain to be there, but the clerk, Collins, was to take his place—it was at that interview that the statement was mode with regard to the furniture; I had nothing else particular to be there about—she said the furniture and the house was hers, and she might sell it to-morrow if she wished, "Why do you doubt it?"—I said, "Of course I want to know if the house and furniture belong to you"—she said, "Yes, I could dispose of it to-morrow; is it not so, Mr. Collins?" and he said, "Yes"—he did not say, "Under the right to purchase"—the plate was not mentioned then—he did not say, "I believe the linen is her own property"—I went to the office re-peatedly, and found I could not get my £10 returned, and then I said, "What security can I have?" and she said, "I will give you the plate and linen"—at the interview on the 21st no letter was drawn up, giving a charge over the plate and linen; nothing of the kind—I placed my money honourably in the solicitor's office, and when I applied for it, and could not get it, he said if I did not go out he would send for a policeman, and have me put out, and he kept Miss Spong locked up—I said I should remain there till I saw her, and he locked the door, and he and his clerk went away—I went and saw Mr. Sheridan, the proprietor of the house—I did not ascertain from him that the £10 had been paid to him; they never told me about it—I understood that part of it was to have gone to him—Mr. Grain said he would be there with Miss Spong to give me the £10, and when I went there she had absconded—Mr. Grain did not tell me then that she had gone to Brighton to get the £10—he told me so on one occasion—I was not dissatisfied with the house in Cleveland Row on account of its size; it was not at all suitable as a business house, only for a private office—I said to her, "I don't think you will ever make it pay, it is not suitable for a business house; you told me it was a large house and it is a small one"—she said, "Don't dishearten me"—she told me she could make a great deal of money by it—at Cleveland Row I asked Collins again whether the house and furniture belonged to Miss Spong, and he said "No," and then I said I should not pay any more money—I was shown this agreement (produced) at the Mansion House, and I said it was not what I had seen before; it was longer—looking at it now I say it had been added to—I cannot tell what the part is that has been added, but there has been something more put on it—it looks longer—the clause is in it about my depositing the £10, and that Miss spong agrees to pay interest
on it at 5 per cent, and that the agreement is determinable at one month's notice, and the £40 to be returnable—when I paid the £10 I had fully determined to pay the other £30—I went to the house that morning with the full intention of paying it, because I wished, of course, to accept the situation.
Re-examined. I should have paid the £30 had it not been for what Collins said at last—I am quite sure I was told that the house and furniture were Miss Spong's before I paid the £10.
FITZROY SHERIDAN . I am by profession a singer—I reside at 10, Cleveland Row, St. James's—I have a conditional lease of it—the furniture belongs to me, and the plate and linen also—I had an interview with Miss Spong with regard to letting her the house, she was very anxious to take it; she had been about three weeks negotiating the matter—I came over from Brussels to let it to her—she was to take it from Monday, February 18th, but eventually she took it from the 20th—the rent was to be six guineas and a half a week, paid monthly in advance—this is the agreement—I gave the keys to her lawyer, no t to Collins, I think it was another clerk—she paid me a cheque for £20, and £10 in cash to the agents—they deducted their commission—I think I received about six guineas—I paid the cheque into my banker's and it was dishonoured—I did not part with the possession of the furniture—I took my plate away and locked it up—I took possession of the house again, three weeks afterwards; I think from the 22nd, but I cannot quite tell the day—Miss Spong gave me three very good references; one was Mr. Grain the lawyer, one from a tailor, and one from Chabit and Mullet, estate agents—I applied to Mr. Grain and had a written reference from him.
Cross-examined. I have had 10, Cleveland Row since last September—I am not married—there are eight or ten rooms in the house—I have let part of it—at present it is empty—I let the drawing-room floor for four and a half guineas a week in October to a friend—I pay £180 a year rent, and the taxes are about £50.
PATTY RYDER . I am a daughter of Mrs. Ryder—I am seventeen—on February 21st I went with my mother to Mr. Grain's office—I saw her pay £10—Miss Spong asked Mr. Grain what she should do; he said, "Give Mrs. Ryder a receipt for the £10"—it is a long time ago, and I forget whether my mother asked Miss Spong about the house and furniture.
THOMAS DOWSE (City Detective) On 25th March I arrested the prisoner in Fetter Lane about half-past four in the afternoon—I followed her to Mr. Grain's office—she was in company with Mr. Grain and another gentleman—I said, "Miss Spong"—I got no answer—I again said, "Miss Spong, I am a police-officer"—I then said to Mr. Grain, "You are a solicitor; do you know this lady?"—he said, "I refuse to answer"—I then said, "This lady answers the description of the person named in the warrant, and I shall take her into custody"—after some moments' hesitation he said, "Come this way into the office"—she then said, "Cannot this be arranged? Would Mrs. Ryder be satisfied if she got her £10 back?"—I said, "That is a matter not for me, but for the Court"—I conveyed her to the station, and Inspector Outram read over the warrant to her—she was advised by Mr. Grain not to say anything.
Witnesses for the Defence.
GODFREY COLLINS . I am clerk to Mr. Grain, solicitor—I think it was on 20th February that Mrs. Ryder called with Miss Spong—they discussed the question of preparing an agreement—she told me what she wanted, and I took down the headings of the agreement, and said it would be ready for them by the next morning—I knew that the defendant was asking Mrs. Ryder to part with £10; that was part of my instructions—I knew nothing about the prisoner's position at that time—I believe that she had given Mr. Grain as a reference to her respectability—he told me so, and I believe it was copied into the letter-book—on the morning of the 21st Mrs. Ryder came accompanied by her daughter—Miss Spong was at the office—I was asked to give her a counterpart of the agreement, and I sent over to Shaw's, the law stationers, for the agreement—I gave her one part into her hand, and I read over the other part of it—Mrs. Ryder said it was all right, but she had not brought the money with her—no question was asked about the house and furniture on that occasion, I think that was at the first interview, on the 20th, Mrs. Ryder asked Miss Spong whether the house and furniture did belong to her, and Miss Spong replied that she had the right and the option of disposing of the lease and the furniture, and she turned to me and said, "Is it not so, Mr. Collins?" and I said, "Yes, certainly you have the right of disposing of the lease and the furniture if you like."
By the COURT. That was true, under the option—she would hare to pay £550 first—I said she had the option of purchase—I said, "Under your agreement you have the right of purchasing, the disposal of it"—that was the answer I gave—I thought that was a truthful answer—in answer to the question I thought so—I did not know whether it was worth more than £550—the only knowledge I had was what Miss Spong told me—I had seen the agreement—I knew she could not sell till she had first bought it, and paid £550 for it—Miss Spong told me she could get £700 for it—I thought that very good security for the £40—I did not tell Mrs. Ryder the terms of the agreement—I did not know that Miss Spong had a farthing—I knew she had a small interest in a reversion, that was all I did know.
By MR. BALL. I think it was on the 23rd that something was said about the plate and linen—I do not know if I saw Mrs. Ryder on three days or two days—so far as I was concerned there was only one interview on the 21st—Mrs. Ryder asked what security she would have for her money, and Miss Spong replied, "I can give you my plate and linen"—I could not say that was on the 21st—Miss Spong said to me, "Can you draw up a memorandum?"—I explained to her and Mrs. Ryder that no valid security could be given on the plate and linen, except by a bill of sale, and that she could not afford to give because of the registration, the publicity—further conversation took place, and I think I said, "Of course, if Mrs. Ryder is going to be there, in possession of the plate and furniture, you can hand them over to her on a memorandum"—I wrote out a memorandum, and read it over, and gave it to Mrs. Ryder—I have not got it; I gave notice by letter to Mrs. Ryder to produce it.
MRS. RYDER. I never had notice to produce it.
The Witness. I sent the notice to 89, Euston Road.
MRS. RYDER. That is not my address. 206 is my address. I never lived at 89.)
The Witness. I wrote the letter thinking that was the address—it said, "Madam,—Please produce at the trial of Miss Sponge, at the Central Criminal Court, the letter I handed to you, relating to this matter"—that was copied into the letter-book in the ordinary course of business—I sent the letter the day before yesterday—the memorandum about the plate and linen was copied into the letter-book—this is it—it is dated 21st February from 10, Cleveland Place—"Dear Madam,—I hereby agree that the plate and linen on the above premises should stand as security to you for the due repayment of £40 deposited with me this day in terms of agreement this day entered into," and the following words were added at Mrs. Ryder's request," An inventory of the said plate and linen to be made and handed to you on Monday next—Yours faithfully"—that was not signed; it was never executed—I am not quite certain whether on the 23rd Mrs. Ryder was there before me, or whether she came while I was there—I was there about quarter-past ten in the morning—I can answer that now; I was there before Mrs. Ryder—I was upstairs with Miss Spong, and she asked me to go down and see Mrs. Ryder; she did not say why—I went down to Mrs. Ryder in the front parlour with the two agreements—I thought Mrs. Ryder was going to sign one that had a stamp on it, ready for the receipt to be given—Mrs. Ryder then asked me, "Is this house and the contents Miss Spong's own absolute property?"—I said, "I am bound to tell you that she only has the option to purchase the same, under an agreement with Mr. Sheridan; but the plate and linen, I believe, is her own absolute property"—Mrs. Ryder said "Oh, I thought it all belonged to her!" or some words to that effect; "I am awfully disappointed, I am awfully annoyed, because I was not told this in the first instance," or words to that effect; I cannot say exactly to the words.
By the COURT. Q. Have you since realised that Mrs. Ryder may have thought, when you gave the answer, that there was an option to purchase, or a right to dispose of it; she might have misunderstood you, and thought that Miss Spong owned the house?—A. I did not think so; I thought Mrs. Ryder was a perfect woman of business when I prepared the agreement for her. I ought to say this in justice to Mr. Grain, that I asked her if I should act on her behalf as well as on Miss Spong's, and she said "No, I don't require any solicitor."
Cross-examined. I had known Miss Spong about two years, or longer than that since I first knew her; I think it must be eight years ago that I sold a reversion for her—I never knew that she lived in Duke Street, Portland Place—I know she had a house in Great Russell Street, but I was never there—I don't know that she went away without paying her rent—I have not acted professionally for her on and off during that time; I believe Mr. Grain has—I did not know that after she left a cheque was returned dishonoured—I don't know where she was before she went to Great Russell Street.
HENRY GRAIN . I am a solicitor—I acted as solicitor for Miss Spong in this matter in preparing the agreement for the tenancy; I mean the agreement with Mr. Sheridan—I was asked for a reference with regard to Miss Spong, and I gave one—I was not generally her solicitor; I had acted for her in one matter; perhaps in two matters—I have known her upwards of six years, and have pleasure in testifying to her
respectability—I had known her as a lodging-house keeper, and I believe she always conducted it respectably—I had advised her in the matter of a reversionary interest—I took no part in the negotiation with Mrs. Ryder; I may have been in the office—I was there when the £10 was paid.
Cross-examined. I knew her when she was in Great Russell Street—I do not know that she left without paying her rent—I did not know her in Duke Street, Portland Place—I don't know that she went there from Great Russell Street.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Thursday, April 25th, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
393. GEORGE WILLIAM COX (32) PLEADED GUILTY to a common assault on Louisa Cox, and no evidence was offered on the First Count for shooting with intent to do grievous bodily harm. He received a good character.— Four Months' Hard Labour.
MR. MAHON Prosecuted.
JOHN MEASURES . I am a baker—on 17th April I fastened upmy premises at eleven o'clock and retired—I heard a crash of glass about 2.15 a.m.—I partly dressed and went down and heard the electric bell ringing in my bake house—I found the plate-glass window broken, and missed these three prize medals, two silver and one gold, in cases—I received them from the constable—I value them very highly, but the intrinsic value is £5—when I got down, I found the prisoner in custody.
JAMES CAMERON (298 E). In the early morning of April 18th I was on duty in uniform two hundred yards from this shop and heard a crash of glass—I went in that direction and met the prisoner and a man named White running rapidly—I stopped the prisoner and asked him what the row was—he said, "Nothing"—I said "You must come back with me" I thought he had something in his right pocket, and said, "What is that?"—he said, "Nothing"—I found his right hand in his pocket, and these two medals, one gold and one silver, in cases which were shut—I went back to the prosecutor, who identified then—I found this brick about two feet from the window—the aperture was big enough for a hand to be inserted—I charged the prisoner with burglary and stealing three medals—he said, "The medals were given to me"—I asked his address, but he did not give it me—I found this case of the third medal in the gutter at the spot where I stopped him.
J. MEASURES (Re-examined). This is the third medal, it has my name on it.
The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said that a man gave him two of the medals in Grays Inn Road.
GUILTY .—He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at this Court on
November 14th, 1892, in the name of John Dellar, and four other convictions were proved against him. He was still onticket-of-leave.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
THIRD COURT.—Friday, April 26th, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. MAY Prosecuted.
DAVID GUNNELL . I am a solicitor, practising at 2, Arthur Street West, City—last year I bought the business of another solicitor who asked me to employ the prisoner to tide over the vacation, and he acted as my clerk—John Williamson was one of the clients of the business I took over—I brought an action for Williamson in the Brompton County Court against Mr. Allen for a debt—Allen paid £1 into Court, of which I had notice early in December—on 13th December the prisoner suggested he should go and get it out—he also said he had a dog license summons to attend to for Mr. Williamson, and I assented—the prisoner was to bring the £1 back to me; it was due to me on account of costs—on the 14th December I asked the prisoner for the £1, when he said Williamson was summoned for this dog license; his brother had promised to furnish the money but had failed to do it, and "the man would have been sent to prison if I had not produced your £1 to save Williamson from being arrested"—the amount was £1 8s.—the prisoner said the Williamsons or Mr. Williamson had made up the 8s., and I believe he said that the money was taken at the time—Mr. and Mrs. Williamson were in my office on the 8th January; we talked about money matters, and I referred to this pound—the prisoner was called in—I said, "How is this? Mr. Williamson denies that the £1 was paid on account of his dog license," and Williamson drew from his pocket this receipt for £1 13s. 6d., and said, "I believe Harcourt only paid £1 8s., but he got more than that out of my brother, and he gave me this receipt for £1 13s. 6d."—I pointed out to Harcourt the figures had been altered—he said he did pay £1 13s. 6d., and it was the warrant officer, Adams' receipt for that amount, and he said, "I did use your £1 towards the payment"—that receipt is dated 13th December—the body of it is in the prisoner's writing: "Paid into Court on account, £1 13s. 6d."—I do not know the writing of the signature, "Charles Adams"—I subsequently found in the prisoner's diary an entry on 13th December: "Re Williamson, Gas Light Company, and dog license; see Mr. Williamson at one o'clock sharp, pay dog license, arrange as to further time for payment of gas; paid £1 8s., Williamson v. Allen attending; obtaining £1 out of Court"—when the prisoner suggested he had given me a receipt for £1 8s. I did not re-collect his having shown it to me—I found this receipt for £1 8s. amongst his papers, which Adams says is his receipt—as this was the first offence I knew of I deducted the £1 from the prisoner's wages—Williamson went away, and the prisoner adhered to his statement that he had paid the £1—he remained in my service—I did not give him into custody till a lot of other things turned up.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not mention the receipt for £1 8s. before the Magistrate in my examination-in-chief—I had no recollection of having seen it—I found it among your papers where it should be—I had your I O U—I did not demand it—you repaid the £1—I treated it as a matter of account.
WALTER JOHN WILLIAMSON . I live at 59, Rowston Road, Fulham—I was fined for not taking out a dog license, £1 8s. at the West London Police-court, Hammersmith, in June of last year—I was given time to pay it—on 13th December the prisoner said if I did not pay it I should be taken up—that was at my house—the money was paid that morning—the prisoner said that with the expenses it would be rather more than £1 8s.—I gave him this cheque for thirty shillings—he said, "Have you got money?" I said, "No, but if you will come with me to my brother, he will lend me it," and I got the cheque—my brother is dead—the prisoner said, "That is not sufficient"—he wanted another two shillings—I went back to my brother, and he gave me another two shillings—the prisoner said, "Since you have been gone I find it will be £1 13s. 6d.; I want another eighteenpence"—I said, "I cannot keep going backwards and forwards to my brother"—he said, "Never mind, I will pay it myself; I will lend it to you"—he came back later in the day and handed me this receipt (For £1 13s. 6d., purporting to be signed "Charles Adams, Warrant Officer")—the body of the receipt and the signature appear to be different hands—on the 8th January I went to Mr. Gunnell's office, and the prisoner was called in—I produced the receipt from my pocket—the prisoner said the receipt was a true one, and that he had paid it, and he denied my story that I had got the money from my brother—he said he had paid it out of the money from the County Court—I repeated that I had got the money from my brother.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I called at your house for other business, because Mr. Gunnell told me to—I did not ask you to get the money from Mr. Gunnell—you told me if I did not get the money that day there would be trouble about it—you left word I was to get the money by a certain time—you said, "I will find the money if you will take it up to-morrow morning," and I said, "My brother will lend it to me"—you said the warrant would be five shillings—you said you could not cash the cheque, and we cashed it at the Baron's Court Hotel—I did not deduct fourpence for a drink from the thirty shillings—you were to meet me at West Kensington Underground Railway Station, because you had to go back to the City—you did not say anything about £1 8s., you said you had to go back at two—you said, "Come and have a glass of beer"—I did not ask you for money—you never showed me the receipt for £1 8s. till I was at the West London Police-court—you showed me a little paper, bur I did not know what was on it—I saw it at a distance—I never read it—I asked you to come back when you had settled with the warrant officer—it was after two when you gave me this receipt at May Street—you said you paid £1 13s. 6d., and that was the only receipt you could get from the Court—you did not say to me the warrant officer never gave receipt, only memoranda—you said, after giving me the receipt, you had to go to the Brompton County Court to get out £1, or that it was due that day—you did not give me the receipt three days afterwards—I said I wanted a receipt of some
description from you or Mr. Gunnell to show my brother—it was on the 13th December I asked you to bring the receipt back with you—my brother had lent the money, and I wanted to satisfy him I had in fact paid it, and you said that was the only receipt you could get from the Court—I do not remember your making a copy from memory of the receipt three days afterwards in a public-house to show my brother.
GERARD GUNNELL . I am articled to my father—I remember on the 8th January the prisoner and my father coming into the outer office, and my father speaking to the prisoner about a receipt—my father said it might prove a serious thing for him, and the prisoner said it would be all right—I understood them to refer to the receipt for the dog license.
CHARLES ADAMS (35 T). I am warrant officer at the West London Police-court—the receipt for £1 8s. is my writing throughout—I received £1 8s., no more—it was for an excise distress warrant in connection with not taking out a license for a dog—the receipt on the back of this summons for £1 13s. 6d. I know nothing at all about; that is not my signature—I never saw it till it was produced in these proceedings—it is not signed by my authority—no one is authorised to give receipts in my name—I cannot delegate my authority to any person to sign my name.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I told you it was not usual to give receipts—you said you had not been very long with your principal and preferred some sort of memorandum—I tore off the top of the paper and gave you the memorandum produced (the receipt for £1 8s.) on the day it bears date, the 13th December—the figures "13/12/94" are my writing.
ROBERT DAY (Detective Sergeant E). On April 7th I arrested the prisoner—I read the warrant to him—it was for forgery—he said, "£1 13s. 6d.? I don't remember the item"—after a few seconds he said, "I have a perfect answer to the charge; there is a difference of £4 odd between me and Mr. Gunnell, which I have made arrangements for."
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I have made inquiries, and find you have never been charged with felony.
The prisoner', in his defence, said Williamson was not a witness of truth, but he was involved in difficulties, and all he had from him was £1 10s. Three days afterwards Williamson wanted a receipt to satisfy his brother that he had paid, and he wrote the receipt for £1 13s. 6d. from memory for the amount.
GUILTY . There were other indictments for larceny— Fifteen Months' Hard labour.
MR. THORNE COLE Prosecuted; MR. MATHEWS and MR. PAUL TAYLOR Defended Lindsay; and MR. HORACE AVORY Defended Spring.
The accused received a good moral character.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Friday and Saturday, April 26th and 27th, and Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, April 29th, 30th, and May 1st, 1895.
Before Mr. Justice Charles.
397. OSCAR FINGAL O'FFLAHARTIE WILLS WILDE (40) and ALFRED TAYLOR (33), were indicted for unlawfully committing acts of gross indecency with Charles Parker and other male persons. Other Counts, for conspiracy.
MESSRS. C. F. GILL and H. AVORY Prosecuted, and SIR EDWARD CLARKE, Q. C., with MESSRS. CHARLES MATHEWS and TRAVERS HUMPHREYS, Defended.
At the close of the case for the prosecution, MR. GILL stated that he should not ask for a verdict on the Counts for Conspiracy; and the JURY were directed to find a verdict of
NOT GUILTY as to those Counts, and also as to four of the other Counts, charging acts of indecency with certain of the witnesses. As to the remaining Counts, the JURY, being unable to agree, were discharged without returning any verdict, and the case was postponed until the next Session.
NEW COURT.—Friday, April 26th, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
398. JAMES FOOTMAN (21) PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of John Barnett Burland, and stealing cigars, cigarettes, and other article, his property. He was further charged with having been convicted at the Thames Police-court on April 17th, 1894, and pleaded
CHARLES THOMLINSON (355 K). I was present at the Thames Police-court on April 17th, 1894, when the prisoner was convicted in the name of James Footman, and sentenced to three months' hard labour by Mr. Mead—this is the certificate (Produced).
The prisoner. I was at Aldershot and can prove it, but the colour-sergeant is invalided—I was out with my militia at the time.
Witness. I had you in custody; I have not got your photograph, but I took your description: Age 21, complexion fair, hair dark brown, eyes blue, scar on right side of face, near the cheek-bone, and a scar on the right arm and right leg, dark trousers and hat, and black spotted tie—you were also convicted on August 11th at Worship Street, and sentenced to three months, for highway robbery with violence; I picked you out then as the same man who was convicted on April 17th, and you denied it.
Prisoner's defence. I was not convicted on 17th April; the first time I was convicted was in August, and I can prove it.
GUILTY.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. KEELING Prosecuted.
FREDERICK EMMOTT . I am a solicitor—I employ Rachael Baker—this letter was sent to me by registered post—I received it on April 6th, and the same evening the prisoner called—I opened the door—she said, "I want to speak to you"—I said, "Leave my premises"—she said, "The letter I wrote you is perfectly true"—there had been some disturbance between her and her sister, and her husband came and made a row at my house—I had never seen him in my life—he abused me in the public street, and I summonsed him—he was bound over, and had to pay a fine.
The prisoner. I did not write it.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "What I have to say I shall say in open Court, so that her character can be sifted; she has been a bad girl ever since she was ten years old. What I have said is perfectly true."
Witness for the Defence.
ARTHUR WEEKS . I am a private detective—I am with Mr. Slater—I have not been in the police—Mr. Gibbs wrote this letter—I know that because I have seen his writing—I should say that if I knew that the prisoner had said that it was her letter—I have compared it with her writing, which I have destroyed.
GUILTY .— To enter into recognisances to come up for judgment if called on. SAMUEL GIBBS, her husband, who was reprimanded by the COURT, became bail for her. He had also been bound over to keep the peace.
MR. BAYLIS Prosecuted.
GEORGE WILLIAM RICHARDSON . I am a tin-plate worker, of 17, Leslie Street, Barnsbury—I am blind with one eye; I lost it at seven years old—I was outside the Angel at Islington, waiting for a tram car, when a woman whom I do not know caught hold of my arm—I pulled it away, and said, "Be off"—she pushed me, and we pushed each other three times—I was just going to get on the tram car, and saw something come across my head like a pin—I did not see a woman's hat, but I saw a person's hand, and the pin struck me in my eye—I put my hand up and said, "Oh, dear, I am blinded"—I have been attending the hospital since—the pin was in the hand of the same person who pushed me, and I am able to say that the hand belonged to the prisoner, because she threatened me because I would have nothing to do with her—she said, "I will stick this in your eye"—she had her hat in her hand, and said, "I will give you this"—she had come with another woman into the Red Lion public-house, and a friend with me paid for drink for her and all round.
FREDERICK WILLIAM LIND . I am a hairdresser, of 10, Penton Street, Clerkenwell—on Good Friday morning about 12.10 I was standing outside the Angel public-house and saw the prisoner coming round the corner—I did not know her before—she was pushing people about, and was rather unsteady, but not drunk—the prosecutor was standing about half a pace from the corner—the prisoner pushed him and he pushed her back; she pushed him again and stepped back a few paces, took her bonnet off, took a pin out of it, and kept the bonnet in her left hand, walked up to the prosecutor again, lifted her right hand and struck him with the pin in her hand; I could see the head of it, it was a black one—she had the head between her fingers, and used it downwards to his face, and then said, "How are you, old fellow? How do you like that?"—there were a few people about, but nobody at that spot.
By the COURT. I explained to the Magistrate the way she held the pin.
FREDERICK HARRIS . I am a horsekeeper, of 121, St. James's Road—on Good Friday, at a few minutes after twelve, I was outside the Angel, Islington, and saw the prosecutor and prisoner face to face—she had her bonnet or hat in her left hand and a pin in her right, and she deliberately raised her hand and struck him in his face with the point of the pin—it was an iron pin with a black knob—he walked back and wiped his eye—I said, "You had no business to do that"—she said that she did not do it.
By the COURT. I do not know whether she at one time had the bonnet, and the pin in the same hand—she had the pin in her right hand, but not the bonnet.
JOHN GREENING (236 G). I was on duty at the Angel, Islington, and saw the prosecutor—he said, in the prisoner's hearing, "I have been struck in the eye by a woman with a hat-pin; it is someone in the crowd. I could, tell if I heard her speak"—the prisoner was brought into the crowd, and said, "I do not know the man; I did not do it"—several persons said, "That is the woman."
FRANK THORPE (Police Inspector). On April 12th, about 12.30 a.m., Greening brought the prisoner to the station—I asked her if she had a hat-pin in her possession; she took this out of her hat, and handed it to me—she was sober; Richardson was drunk—she made no answer to the charge.
HENRY ROBINSON , M.R.C.S. I am a house surgeon at the Opthalmie Hospital, Gray's Inn Road—about two a.m. on Good Friday, Richardson was brought there suffering from a clean-cut triangular wound in front of the eyeball; it was punctured, but not produced simply by a point—it was a quarter of an inch long, and not the sort of wound you would expect from a stab, but even then you would expect more laceration—it was more like a wound caused by a knife—it is possible that a pin could do it—he may recover partially, but his eye is seriously affected, and he is blind with the other eye.
Prisoner's defence. I would give the man one of my eyes if I could I did not do it.— GUILTY of unlawfully wounding .— Judgment respited.
MR. MORGAN Prosecuted.
SARAH BAKER . I am the daughter of Benjamin Baker, a coffee-house keeper, of 108, Curtain Road, Shoreditch—on, I think, April 17th, the prisoners came in with a fourth man, and each ordered for himself—two of them had eggs and bacon—the value of it was 2s. 7 1/2.—they consumed the food—I did not know them, and should not have supplied them on credit—when I asked them for their money they all laughed—I gave the prisoners in charge—the fourth man paid, but not till my father went after him—he tried to get away.
BENJAMIN BAKER . I am a coffee-house keeper, of 108, Curtian Road—on April 17th I came home—my daughter told me something, and I saw four men—she asked them for the money, and one went out—the other said that he had got to pay for the lot—I went after him and brought him back—he paid for what he had had, and the prisoner said that they had
no money—I have a notice up, "No credit given; please pay on delivery"—they were sober.
JOHN HUGH (148 G). I was called to this coffee-house, and saw the three prisoners—the prosecutor said that they had eaten some bread and cheese and refused to pay, saying they had no money—they were quite sober, and so was the man who got away.
The prisoners, in their statements before the Magistrate, said that it was done when they were under the influence of drink, and that the man with them promised to pay for the lot.
Four Days' Imprisonment each, having been nine days in custody.
MESSRS. C. MATHEWS and BODKIN Prosecuted, and MR. SANDS Defended.
PERCY HOWICSON . I am in the employ of Messrs. Twining, tea merchants and bankers, 216, Strand—in December, 1893, the prisoner called on me, and said that he had the authority of the Lord Chamberlain to publish a book, showing the names of all persons authorised to serve Her Majesty and the Prince of Wales—he showed me a book similar to this (produced), which gives the address of the Royal and Imperial Publishing Syndicate, in Regent Street and Bucklersbury—I did not give him an order on the first occasion—I spoke to one of my principals, and Mr. Twining saw him afterwards.
Cross-examined. The first part of this book seems to be the same, but there is added matter in which the name of our firm appears—he showed it to me as a specimen, but he had a larger book—the book he showed me did not contain this portion of printed matter which hats the name of our firm printed in it—I cannot say whether a book has ever been published with a correct list of the Royal tradesmen's names—he told me the list was going to be a correct one when he had got the full information; I think he said it would take considerable time—it was to contain a list, not only of the purveyors to Her Majesty, but to the other members of the Royal Family.
By the COURT. Whether it is the same book or not, I have no doubt that the book he showed me had on it, "By Authority of the Lord Chamberlain."
SAMUEL HARVEY TWINING . I am one of the firm of Twining and Co., of 216, Strand—Mr. Howicson showed me this circular, and in December, 1893, I saw somebody in reference to it who I cannot identify; we gave him a cheque and he gave us this receipt—it was understood that it would be an advertisement of all the Royal warrant holders, which was to be circulated on the Continent, and in which our name was to appear, but my impression is that the book was to be a larger one—I agreed to insert an advertisement in the book, and gave him a cheque for £2 12s. 6d. made out to the Royal and Imperial Syndicate, or bearer, and he gave me this receipt. (Signed "W. H. Franklin")—the figures are filled in in ink—I saw no such book, nor the advertisement—I believed there was a syndicate in that name when I gave him the cheque, and that he was acting under the authority
of the Lord Chamberlain, and that the book was going to be published, with my name.
Cross-examined. It did not strike me that he was a gentleman from the Lord Chamberlain's office; I thought it was being got up to make money—the book was shown to me as a specimen of what the book was going to be.
CLEMENT DONALDSON . I am in the employ of Messrs. Twining—the prisoner called in December, 1893—I was present when he saw Mr. Twining—I remember the circular being produced, and a red book—he said that he was going to bring out a book of all the Royal license holders, and wanted me to give him a list of the Royal houses which we supplied—I did not see the cheque paid, but I remember him asking for £2 12s. 6d.—he said that the book was to be published in about six months, and it was to be placed in all the hotels, and we were to have a copy of it—we have not had a copy.
Cross-examined. It was a red book—I do not think this (A black one) is it.
FREDERICK WILLIAM RUHMANN . I am a provision dealer, of 81, Charing Cross Road—on September 27th the prisoner called and said, "I come from the office of the Lord Chamberlain; I see by your advertisement that you are patronised by Royalty; do you supply Royalty?"—I said, "Yes," and showed him a letter from the Duke of Teck—he then showed me this document (produced), and said that the Royal and Imperial Publishing Syndicate were going to bring it out, and would like our advertisement in it—he showed me a red book like this, with the Royal Arms on it—I agreed to advertise in it, and paid him a guinea—he gave me this, receipt—I believed that he came from the Lord Chamberlain and had his authority, and that there was a syndicate such as he described—I did not receive the book or the advertisement—he called again on February 28th this year, and I told him we were going to make a new price list, and showed him the letters—he said, "Yes; certainly you can see the Royal Arms"—he gave me this certificate with the Royal Arms on the top, to the effect that my name had been duly registered in the books of the syndicate, and that I was entitled to use the Royal Arms—he asked if I should like any more advertisements, and I paid him another guinea, for which he gave me this receipt—I paid that for the same reason—I received no book.
Cross-examined. I am a German; I have been six years in England—I paid the prisoner the money because I thought an advertisement under the authority of the Lord Chamberlain would do me good—he did not tell me he was engaged in the Lord Chamberlain's office, but that he came from that office—it was not that he would have to verify the information at the Lord Chamberlain's office, or that the information would have to be got from there, and from other offices—I should say that the words, "By consent of the Lord Chamberlain" were printed in this corner of the circular when I saw it—he left it with me, and several other papers—when he came the second time I knew that the book was not published—I wrote to him and asked him to come because I wanted some information about the Duchess of York—he did not tell me that the 1894 book was published; he said that it was not—he did not tell me he could not publish it because the Duke of York's appointments
were not out—I showed him letters from the Duke of York, and asked what steps I was to take to get the Royal Arms; he said that it was all right and I made use of the Royal Arms—my traveller wrote a letter to him—the prisoner did not draft a letter for me to the Duke of York, nor I did write one.
Re-examined. When he first came he said, "I come from the Lord Chamberlain's office," and then asked to see my letter of appointment, and read it, and said "That is good"—this is the letter I wrote. (Dated February 2nd, 1895, and inquiring whether he was justified in using the Royal Arms, as he, was about publishing a new price list.) It was in answer to that that the prisoner wrote, and I paid him the second guinea.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months Hard Labour.
MR. POCOCK Prosecuted, and MR. TORR Defended.
DOUGLAS JAMES HAMILTON . I am a captain in the Royal Fusiliers, and at this time I was adjutant to the 5th Battalion—I was the officer in command at Hounslow Barracks at the time this letter was sent—it is my duty to open all letters not marked confidential, which this was not.
Cross-examined. I open the letters, acting as private secretary to the commanding officer—no one else sees the letters unless I show them. (The libel in the letter was a charge of drunkenness against John Sullivan and Charles Smith while driving, and causing a collision.)
JOHN SULLIVAN . I am colour-sergeant of the 5th Battalion Royal Fusiliers—on March 18th, about 7.30, I was driving with Colour-sergeant Smith in a small pony-trap from Kingston Barrracks to Hounslow Barracks, and when near the New Inn, Ham Common, a collision occurred—two ladies were in front in the trap, and a little boy, and I was thrown out—I did not see anyone thrown out of the colliding trap—it went about 130 yards, and Colour-sergeant Smith ran after it—we exchanged names; Smith gave his name as Colour-sergeant, and, addressing me, said, "This is Colour-sergeant Sullivan"—I was perfectly sober—we went to the New Inn, and a blacksmith named Chamberlain repaired the trap—we waited about an hour and left about nine, and drove to Hounslow in about an hour—we met Hawkes and Bates, who is unwell and is not here—we took the trap home to Mr. Varley, the owner—I saw the prisoner on the Sunday; he said that it was a very sad affair, and could not we come to some arrangement—he said he was very sorry he wrote the letter; he wrote it in the heat of passion, through his wife—I said, "It is a very serious charge, but I am quite willing if you will write to, the commanding officer and apologise and withdraw the letter, and pay for the damage to our trap"—he said he was quite willing to apologise, but not to pay for the trap—he has never written the letter—on the same day Colour-sergeant Smith wrote this letter to the prisoner after I had seen him. (Stating that if every imputation was withdrawn, and a letter written to the commanding officer, a personal interview would, no doubt, satisfy all parties concerned.) I got this reply from the prisoner's wife: "In answer to yours, the matter is quite out of my hands, having written to the family solicitor to claim for injuries received. It may be months before I can attend to my
business"—I saw a solicitor, and in consequence of instructions a summons for libel was obtained before the Brentford Bench, and after Captain Hamilton and I had given evidence, the Magistrate asked him to make a public apology; he said that he would justify.
Cross-examined. When the Magistrate said that, his wife got up off her seat, and he spoke to her and said that he would justify—Smith and I were in a small trap with nobody else in it—four people were in the other trap: Mrs. Johnson, a barmaid, Mr. Johnson, and a little boy—I was driving—it was dusk—I am quite sure we were on our right side when the collision happened—I did not see Mrs. Johnson thrown out into the road—I did not notice that the wheels of the trap were on the grass, because they had driven on 130 yards—after the collision a gentleman in the trap took the names; I saw him making an attempt to write—I saw him with a piece of paper in his hand; I cannot say whether this (produced) is it—I was never addressed as Saunders in the regiment; my Christian name in John, but they call me Barry—after that conversation I saw Mrs. Johnson in her own house—I gave evidence before the Magistrate—if Smith and I had put on full speed we could not travel more than five miles an hour; the pony is only registered for that; I did not encourage it—I started from Hounslow Barracks, which is about nine miles from the races—we did not stop once for refreshment going back—we had one glass of beer each at the races—we also went to Kingston Barracks, and had a small glass of sherry and a small bottle of lemonade; after that we called nowhere—I had nothing at the New Inn, but I called for some beer for the men who helped to put the cart together, and I won't swear whether Smith had anything—I know that the name of Cornelius Saunders is put in the libel, but when inquiries were made I was certain it meant me, and I said, "You have got mixed up here altogether"—it was quite a level road, but the night was rather dark, and nobody had any lamps—nobody called out—I did not see the other trap before we came in collision.
Re-examined. A horse was in the other trap—there were lamps in the road, about a hundred yards apart.
Witnesses for the Defence.
ELEANOR JOHNSON . I am the prisoner's wife—I keep the Criterion at Kingston, and he is an ironmonger—I was driving this trap; there were four people in it, a publican's daughter and Mr. Crane, and a little boy—the soldiers were driving first on one side of the road and then on the other—Miss Flambock was driving our trap; she was on the left side of the road, and she got on the grass and gave them the whole road nearly—it is fairly wide there—she was pulling as much as she could to her own side—we were very near a gas lamp, but it was not quite dark; it was dusk; you could see the trap at the distance quite plainly—the other trap ran into ours, and struck us on the right side, and threw me out on to the grass—they picked me up—the soldiers got out of the trap; one gave the name of Saunders—he said about a dozen times that I was not thrown out at all; but I was in fearful agony, and said, "You must be a coward to say so; that is a libel; I shall have you up for that"—I have had the control of a licensed house eight years, and if I serve people who are drunk I am liable to lose the license, and I form the opinion that Smith and Sullivan were both nearly drunk—they
were driving as fast as they could, and not driving properly—Sullivan afterwards knew that I had been injured; he came to my room—before the Magistrates General Tremenhere threw out a suggestion that an apology should be accepted, and my husband came to me; I told him not to apologise—he wrote this letter; he got the information from me.
Cross-examined. We had been to the Bear at Esher—we started between three and four—we did not stop there more than five minutes; we were talking to Mr. Saunders, the proprietor—we had some refreshment there—I had one glass—from there we came home—we stopped at Richmond and had a glass of bitter—I had some whisky at the New Inn, but only one go—I am quite sure I did not have a little brandy as well—I had not got my boots off when I got into the trap—I did not say to anyone, "It will be lucky if you get home without a cannon"—I had little velvet shoes, and they were thrown off in the accident.
LILY FLAMBOCK . I was driving with Mrs. Johnson; I was holding the reins—I saw a cart coming from Richmond a little way ahead, with soldiers in it—they came right on to us, driving very quickly—I drew up on the grass to give them an much room as possible, but we were on the grass when they came into us—Mrs. Johnson was thrown out—Mr. Crane took down the soldiers' names on a small piece of paper, or in his pocket-book—both traps were damaged by the collision—I am quite sure the men were not sober.
Cross-examined. I daresay the shock would sober them—in my excitement I could not tell whether they were sober, I was so frightened—the tall one was not sober, certainly, because he kept repeating the most idiotic false-hoods—he said that Mrs. Johnson was not thrown out—she was not helped out by a witness—I know they were not sober by their looks—I think I am an expert.
By the COURT. I do not say that they were very drunk—there was a good deal of excitement—I am accustomed to drive in my father's trap.
ALFRED CRANE . I live in New Wandsworth—I was in the trap with Mrs. Johnson on March 18th—a young woman was driving—I was sitting at the back—I saw them going at a great rate, and thought an accident was inevitable—I saw nothing else till her horse ran away—I jumped out and asked where Mrs. Johnson was, and she was fifty yards behind the trap—I went and helped to pick her up, and Miss Flambock turned the horse round—he was very frightened, and ran away again—the men seemed to turn off, to try to get out of the way—the trap was on the proper side of the road—I asked the soldiers for their names and addresses—I cannot say where I got this paper from; it may have been in my pocket—I wrote down the names and addresses of the two colour-sergeants—I believe this is the paper—Cornelius Saunders is Sullivan, and Lane is one of our witnesses—in my opinion the two soldiers were drunk, but I hardly know where to draw the line; they could walk and talk, but they kept repeating their statements—there was naturally a good deal of excitement—I should say they were fresh—they gave their address as "Hounslow Barracks."
JOHN ARNOLD OLDRIDGE . I live at Kingston—I was in Richmond Road on March 18th about 7.30; I heard galloping, and stood by the lamp, and a two-wheeled trap passed me, driven furiously and recklessly—there were two soldiers in it with red coats, who I cannot identify, going
towards Ham Common—they were either drunk or mad—they drove from one side of the road to the other all down the road.
ROBERT LANE . I am foreman to the last witness, who is a market gardener—on the evening of March 18th I was with him and saw these two soldiers driving pretty fast across the road zigzag—I thought they were the worse for drink or could not drive—I have never seen soldiers or sailors drive before.
MR. TORR submitted that the prisoner wrote the letter for his wife, and that it was a privileged communication. The COURT considered that it was not privileged, and the question for the JURY was whether it was written to obtain money.
GUILTY , the plea of justification not being proved.— Discharged on recognisances, and to pay the costs of the plea of justification.
NEW COURT.—Saturday, April 27th, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. POLAND and ENRIQUEZ Prosecuted, and MR. CLARK Defended.
BARON HENRY DE WORMS . I live at Henley Park, Surrey, and 42, Grosvenor Place—my age is fifty-four—this is my certificate; I was horn on October 20th, 1840—I was called to the Bar in 1863, and practised on the South-eastern Circuit—I represented Greenwich in 1885, since when I have been member for Stockport—I was a member of the late Government, and am the writer of several works—in September, last year, I came into a considerable fortune, which appeared in the Blackburn and other papers, after which I received a letter beginning, "My long-lost, dear father"—it is not dated—it must have been about the beginning of January, 1894—before I received it I had never seen or heard of Henry Slater—all these letters are in the same writing. (There were a great number of letters giving the prisoner's supposed pedigree, and signing himself "Your affectionate son." In one letter he charged the Baron with bigamy, signing "your determined son." One letter stated, "If you do not come to some arrangement before long I can assure you that it shall be no longer secret. I know full well were I to write to several well-known persons I should receive their support. You know very well that, I am your son" Other letters were addressed to the Baroness)—some of these letters were registered, and I had to give a personal receipt for them—there is not the slightest truth in them—I was only four years old at the time of my alleged marriage—I do not know Uncle Ralph—I was never in Australia—I received these photographs—before taking these proceedings I took every step I could to put a stop to it—I wrote to the chief constable, and gave him instructions, and also to my solicitor—my first marriage was on May 5th, 1864—I have only been in Blackburn twice in my life: once at the general election of 1885 in the afternoon, and once in 1887—I have two daughters by my first wife.
Cross-examined. I was ill last August and September—I stayed in London till the races, and then I went to Henley Park and then to Paris—the
Baroness and I may have gone to Brighton at the end of August, and from there to Folkestone and Paris in September—we returned at the end of September; I cannot give you the date—I did not stop in London, because it was the shooting season; I passed through London, and stopped there two or three days before I returned to Henley Park—my letters were forwarded to me twice and sometimes three times a day to Brighton, Folkestone and Henley Park, and some of those which have been read—this one, dated September 8th, was sent to me at 42, Grosvenor Place—I cannot say where I received it—the letter of the 15th would also have been forwarded, if I was not there—the letter of September 29th followed me from Grosvenor Place to Paris, and if I was not there it was sent to Henley Park—if I was going to entertain a shooting party, I was not in London—I received the first letter at the beginning of January last year, and it induced me to believe that the writer was out of his mind; but the tone of the second letter was totally different, and I did not consider him a lunatic afterwards, nor do I now.
Re-examined. The letters up to August 28th were when I was living at Grosvenor Place, and I occasionally went to Henley Park, and they would all be opened and read by me there—the envelopes of March 8th and 22nd, 1894, are directed to Grosvenor Place; they are not re-directed—those of May 3rd, July 3rd, 16th, and 28th are directed to Grosvenor Place, and so is that of December 8th, and here is one to Henley Park on the same day—July 28th and August 11th are to Grosvenor Place, August 22nd and September 1st to Henley Park—September 8th and 14th to both places; September 24th to Paris, but I did not get it there, it was forwarded to Grosvenor Place, and then on to Henley Park—that of the 18th was to Paris, but I cannot remember where it reached me—I passed through London coming from Paris, and should open any letters at Grosvenor Place—this letter of September 29th was sent to Grosvenor Place, and I received it there—I stayed some time at Henley Park, but I occasionally came up to London, and found letters and opened them—I received the last registered letter at Henley Park, and the last letter of all in London on April 5th.
MR. CLARK submitted that there was no jurisdiction to try the case. MR. POLAND contended that if on any day the prisoner threatened the Baron within the jurisdiction of the Court, with intent to extort money, that was sufficient. THE COMMON SERJEANT overruled the objection, as, if the Baron had put his letters in a bag and not read them till tie got to Brighton, that would not alter the venue.
ISAAC GEORGE LEWIS . I am chief constable of the Borough of Blackburn—I received last May a communication from the Town Clerk, in consequence of which I sent two officers to the prisoner and requested him to come and see me—he came, with his wife, to my office on the evening of May 10th—I produced this book, "Men and Women of the Time," and showed him the entry about Baron de Worms, which I read to him. (This stated the pedigree, birth, marriage, and family of Baron de Worms, and the offices field by him.) I then put the book in front of him, and he read it himself—I said, "Now what do you think after reading that; don't you think this is an absurd thing, you writing to the Baron in this way?"—he made no answer—I said, "Don't you think so?"—he said, "Well, I must be mistaken,
I am wrong;" and his wife said, "Yes, I think so too"—I said, "Will you promise that you will not write to the Baron any more?"—he said "Yes," and I reported the matter to the Town Clerk—I received information that the letters continued, and the prisoner came again to the station at my request on June 1st—I said, "I find you have again been writing to the Baron"—he said, "Yes"—I endeavoured to get a promise from him that he would desist—he said, "No, he should write again," because he believed the Baron to be his father—I told him it was a very serious matter, and he would have to be very careful or he would get himself into trouble; he said he was prepared to take the consequences—I reported that to the Baron.
Cross-examined. I did not know the prisoner before he commenced to write the letters—I find that he is a respectable, hard-working man; a labourer with a wife and two children, and his wife is not in very good health.
CATHERINE TOOMEY . I am housemaid to Baron de Worms in Grosvenor Place—on August 14th the prisoner called there and asked for the Baron—I told him that he was in Paris—he asked for his address—I said, "What is your business?"—he said he could not tell me, but he wanted to see him particularly, and that he came from Lancashire on purpose, to see the Baron—I asked him if the secretary would do—he said, "No," and gave me this card, "Mr. Joseph Slater, Botligate, Blackburn"—he said he wrote to the Baron last Saturday—I then gave him the Baron's address—he joined another man on leaving, who I think I saw at Westminster Police-court, but cannot be certain—he was called as a witness for the defence.
JOHN POLLOCK . I am one of the firm of Pollock and Grant, of Liverpool, the solicitors to the Baron—I produce a certificate of the birth of James Slater, born April 12, 1852, at Hodenden, near Blackburn; father's name Henry Slater, weaver; mother's name, Mary Slater, formerly Talbot—I also produce a certificate of the death of Mary Slater on January 1st, 1887, widow of Henry Slater, cotton weaver—I was consulted by the Baron in February last, and on February 12th I went to Blackburn, and saw the prisoner at his cottage—Mr. Edward Waterworth, with an accountant, was present—I handed him my card, and told him I had come to see him about some letters which he had written to the Baron—I placed them on the table, and said, "Those are the original letters;" he said, "Yes, I wrote them"—I asked if he would give me some information as to his birth and parentage—he said that his father was Henry Slater, a weaver, and that he was married at Blackburn Church in 1844 or 1845—he gave me the names of the children, and said that he was born on April 20th, 1853; that his father left home when he was a year and eight months old, and he had not heard of him till quite recently; and his uncle Ralph had frequently told him and his brother that if they would only be quiet they would some day have a considerable sum of money, and that Ralph told him about eighteen, months ago that Baron Henry de Worms was his father—I said, "The Baron is only fifty-four now," and pointed out to him that, according to his own statement, the Baron was only four years old when his father married his mother—I then read him paragraphs from two of the letters, and said, "Now, what is your motive for writing these letters?—he
said, "I have never asked for any money"—I said, "No; but I think no one can read these letters without coming to that conclusion"—I think he repeated again, "I never asked for any money"—he produced a photograph of the Baron, and I said, "No one would take that to be seventy years of age"—he said, "I know he is seventy years of age"—he produced an extract from the "Peerage," similar to what has been read, giving the age and lineage of the Baron—I said, "Now, I may as well tell you straight that you will have to discontinue writing these letters or we will prosecute you"—he did not answer, but Mr. Waterworth said, "That is what we want; the sooner you do it the better, as we have something which we have up to the present kept secret"—I said, "I shall go to the Police-station"—I have seen Ralph Slater; I saw a photograph of the Baron at his place hanging up in a frame—he is a little over seventy—he lives at Wadgate, near Clitheroe, ten miles from Blackburn—I have not seen him here, but he was subpoenaed by my directions—I am conducting the prosecution—Eustace, who was called at the Police-court, is here.
Cross-examined. I have not seen Ralph Slater since the trial at the Police-court—when I saw him at his house I asked him whether he had told the prisoner that the Baron was his father—he said that he had not—Mr. Williams was present at these interviews—he is a private detective—Ralfe did not tell me that the photograph up in his house was the Baron's brother—Waterworth was present on behalf of the friends—he is a rate collector—he went there at my invitation—he had written a letter to the Baron on behalf of Slater, and I went to Blackburn to try and explain the matter, and as I did not know Slater, I called on Waterworth, and said, "Will you accompany me to Slater's house, as I am representing the Baron?"—he said, "I will go with you," and he went.
By the COURT. Waterworth did not draw his attention to the fact that the Baron would have been only four years old.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
OSMAN FREDERICK GIDDY . I am an auctioneer, of Pall Mall—the prisoner was my clerk in the letting department for about ten months—he left, I think, on December 6th—this cheque (produced) is dated November 22, 1894—he never informed me that he had received it—this is his endorsement, to the best of my belief; it is not mine—if he received it it was his duty to pay it to the cashier; but he was not a collector—he had no authority to endorse cheques—I have no partner, but my two sons assist me; they are the only persons who are allowed to endorsed cheques.
Cross-examined by MR. WILD. I trade as Giddy and Giddy—I have two branches, one at Sunningdale and one at Maidenhead, managed by my managers—the prisoner came into my employ about June 18, 1894, at £1 a week—I did not give him an increase in June—on 18th June the manager had left, and the prisoner managed, temporarily; he was the chief one there—an entry was made in a private book, and I have cut the leaf out. (This was dated June 11, 1894, and was an arrangement, terminable at any time, to allow the prisoner a commission from June 24 on all business done
except on certain advertisements; the prisoner to be allowed to draw ten shillings a week on account of such commission: his engagement to be still a weekly one. Signed by initials only,—he did not bring me a considerable amount of business after that, not up to the average—he had the whole management of the letting department from June—it was not part of his duty to collect money for me; he was not a collector, but if anyone called at the office and offered him money he was right to take it—my two sons have not the management of the Sunningdale and Maidenhead businesses; they are local managers—they have no authority to endorse cheques; there is no Mr. Russell who had authority to endorse cheques—Tray is my cashier; he had no authority to endorse cheques—I had a client named Northcott, of 27, Charing Cross—I thought it a very good introduction—he had a portion of a house to let, and instructed us to let it—I had done business for him, I think, once before—the Bovril Company gave instructions to take a room from Northcott, and the prisoner had the conduct of the negotiations—if the rooms were let for a quarter at £15, our commission would be 15s.—I expect we charged a guinea for the agreement—this cheque was crossed and not negotiable; it was dated November 22nd and paid November 24th—the prisoner paid me £1 8s. 6d. on November 26th—that consisted of £1 1s, for our charge for preparing the agreement and 7s. 6d. for the stamp, but that was a charge against the tenant, not against the landlord; that was a portion of the ££14 15s. 2d.—the balance, £13 6s. 8d., was the amount the Bovril Company would pay to the landlord, and Mr. Northcott received that from the prisoner after I had found out the forgery—I discharged the prisoner on December 6th for another matter which I found out—I made a mistake before the Magistrate, I meant that the prisoner left ten days before the fraud was found out—if you will allow me to amend my evidence, he was discharged about December 6th for a fraud which I found out, and I did not find this out till about ten days afterwards—a letter from Mr. Northcott was received at my office, directed to the prisoner, containing a receipt—I opened it, because I had found out the forgery—that was not the first intimation I had—it is not the fact that the money was paid by the prisoner to Northcott long before I had any communication with him about it—a letter directed to the prisoner, care of Lovell Keys, Esq., was not directed to my office—I believe it is the fact that of the £14 15s. 2d. £1 7s. 8d. was received by me, and not a single farthing by the prisoner.
Re-examined. I received the letter after the prisoner left my employ—the sergeant has it, and it will speak for itself—I think the money was remitted to Northcott by dost-office orders, which were taken out in Lombard Street—the cheque was first found out in the office in my absence—it must have been on December 6th or 7th—I communicated with Mr. Northcott, and he called on me.
ALEXANDER LEWIS MORGAN PEATE . I am cashier to the Bovril Company, Limited, Farringdon Street—I gave the prisoner the cheque at our office, and he gave me this receipt (Produced)—he had not, made any application previously for it to me.
Cross-examined. It was in payment for rent for 27, Charing Cross, which the company were hiring according to the agreement—this letter; of November 16th, was sent by the prisoner and Mr. Shorrock, the
traveller. (Enclosing a copy of the agreement, and stating that he would call on the directors on Monday, and requesting the cheque for £15 to be drawn to the order of—Nortlicott, Esq.)—I do not know that it had been arranged with Mr. Shorrock that the cheque should be drawn to Northcott—the small preliminaries reduced it to £13 6s. 8d. for rent and £1 8s. 6d. for Giddy's charges—the managing director gave me instructions to draw the cheque before I saw the prisoner that morning—when I gave the prisoner the cheque he did not say, "You have drawn this to Giddy; it should have been to Northcott," he made no suggestion whatever—I said at the Police-court that I had not seen any letter—that was perfectly true.
Re-examined. When I made my statement at the Police-court this matter had not come under my knowledge—I have another letter of the same kind, also written by the prisoner. (This was addressed to Mr. Shorrock, sending a revised agreement.)
HERBERT NOSOTTI . My father is too ill to attend—the prisoner brought this cheque to his office and asked me if I would cash it for him; I had not got enough; I gave him what I had, and two days afterwards, when the cheque was cleared, I gave him the balance—he gave no reason for wanting me to cash it, but I knew he held a good position, and did not think there was anything wrong—I knew Messrs. Giddy.
EDWARD POLLARD (Police Inspector A). I arrested the prisoner at two a.m. at his house, St. Catherine's Lodge, where he lived in the name of Harwell, with a woman—I read the warrant to him—he said, "I heard you were after me; I have not committed forgery; I always endorse cheques; I went to Mr. Northcott, and he handed me the receipt"—he was charged at King Street Station, and made no reply.
Cross-examined. I said, "Is your name Brophy?"—I had been looking for him three months—this is a note which I made directly I got to the station at four a.m. on Sunday—he said, "I have not stolen the money," not "I have not received the money"—I did not tell the Magistrate that he said, "I heard you were after me," as he made a lot of statements, and I did not recollect them all at the time—he said he had got my card.
By the COURT. This is an official book given to us, and this entry was made as soon as I could afterwards—he said, "I have not committed forgery; and I have not stolen the money; I sent it to the owner, Mr. Northcott, at Charing Cross, and he gave me a receipt"—I have not got any receipt which was in the letter to Mr. Northcott.
H. NOSOTTI (Re-examined). I handed him the balance of the cheque, as near as I recollect, two days afterwards, November 24th—I gave him £3 or £4 on the 22nd.
Witnesses for the Defence,
MR. NORTHCOTT. I am a surveyor, of 27, Charing Cross—I have known the prisoner a considerable time—I had a portion of my premises to let, and entered into negotiations with the Bovril Company to let the upper portion—the prisoner conducted the negotiations, which culminated in an agreement to let them the premises at £15 a quarter—the prisoner informed me that it was settled, and that conditions were to be exchanged, and I received from him £13 6s. 8d. by postal orders early in December—I had not applied to him for it—that was the right amount that he should pay over to me—the cheque was £14 15s. 2d. with the agreement
and stamp—I sent him a receipt under cover to Mr. Lovell Keys, his solicitor, of 26, Charles Street, St. James's—that covered a receipt for the £13—I had had previous dealings with Giddy and Giddy, and just prior to this we had a disagreement on what I said was the exorbitant amount of their charges—the amount I had from the Bovril Company was £1 13s. 6d.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. HARRISON Prosecuted.
GEORGE GIBBONS . I live at Linton Villa, Leytonstone—I am an officer in the Post Office—on 19th March, about quarter-past seven, I was going back to my house; it is a semi-detached villa—as I went up the garden path I noticed the prisoner hiding behind a tree in the front garden—on seeing me he immediately made a bolt to the garden gate, making an excuse for his being there; it was a very disconnected and contradictory one; that he was hiding away from a woman as a joke—it was a dark, wet night, and not a likely thing to do; he made that as an excuse for his hurry to get away—I said I was not at all satisfied with his excuse, and I should like a little more explanation—we walked together into the rood, he continuing to make excuses—I let him run on in order that I might see a constable or get help—he said if I continued to remain with him he would cut up rough, and then, without any warning, he gave me two heavy blows, one on the back of my head and one over the right temple—I immediately closed with him, threw him down, and called "Police"—three gentlemen came up and rendered me assistance, and I gave him into the custody of Police-constable Darling—I went with him to the station—he afterwards said that he was guilty of all that I had said—while we were on the ground he called out something; I don't remember very well what he said—it was some name, as if calling for assistance—I went back to the house and inspected it—on the front window I found marks of some tool—there were five marks between the framework and the lower sash, and the sash was raised about an inch—there was a mark of exactly the same kind on the side gate, the tradesmen's gate—the prisoner was about a yard or two from the window when I first saw him.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. The house had been unoccupied from Saturday, the 16th March, to Tuesday, the 19th—it is my father's house—I had a lodging in the neighbourhood, and I visited the house two or three times a day—on this evening I had been to the Police-station to get someone to supervise the house, in consequence of something I had heard—the gas was not alight—I did not stay in the house that night—it was about twenty minutes past nine when I went back and found the marks—it is about six or eight yards from the front gate to the house.
and also for assaulting him—he mode no remark—I took him to the station, and he was charged—he refused his name and address—he said, "I am guilty of what the gentleman says "; and he said to the prosecutor, "You had better get back, or someone may attempt to do a crack"—I searched him, and found this piece of candle, some matches, and string.
JAMES CORQUREL (Inspector J). On 20th March, about half-past two in the morning, I examined the house—I found five marks of a blunt instrument on the parlour window, which was raised about an inch, and one mark on the door leading to the tradesman's entrance—I saw the prisoner at the station, and said I should further charge him with attempting to break and enter the house—he replied, "I am not particular what you charge me with"—I read the charge to him—he made no reply.
Prisoner's defence. It is true I was in the garden, but I had nothing: at all to do with housebreaking. I had no jemmy; how could I make the marks? I was by myself; no one was with me. I was taken short with diarrhoea, and I popped into the garden and got under the bushes. When the prosecutor came in he struck my forehead open with his umbrella. I struggled with him, and he had me on the ground and knelt upon my chest. I was not near the house.
GUILTY .—ARTHUR BIRD (Police Constable M 322) proved a conviction of the prisoner for burglary on 24th July, 1887, at this Court, in the name of John Pollardy when he was sentenced to ten years' penal servitude, and other convictions were proved against him .—Eighteen Months Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. OLIVER Prosecuted.
MARK KNIGHT (426 R). On 3rd April, just after one in the morning, I was coming off duty in plain clothes, when in Evelyn Street I heard screams—I immediately proceeded towards the spot, and close to Black Horse Passage I saw the prosecutrix and the prisoners—the female prisoner had her arms round the prosecutrix's neck—she was struggling to hold her hands—I said I was a police officer, and I asked the prosecutrix what was the matter—she said, "The man has stolen my purse"—I told them I should take them into custody—the female prisoner said, "It is my mother"—I took the man; he became very violent, he threw me to the ground several times—435 was with me, going off duty; he took the female—whilst struggling with the man 6d. in silver and 1/2 d. in copper fell to the ground; I found it after I had the prisoner on the ground—the female prisoner had a bag on her arm which the prosecutrix afterwards identified—the prosecutrix had been drinking—I charged her with being drunk.
Cross-examined by the male prisoner. You were not forty yards away when I came up; you were struggling with the prosecutrix, and the female prisoner had her arms round her neck.
Cross-examined by the female prisoner. You did not say you had picked her out of the gutter—she had not her bag on her arm—she was up to her neck in mud, and very drunk—she was in the same cell with you all night—the bag was at the station when I got there.
HANNAH SKEGGS . I live at 59, Atler Street, Deptford—on 2nd April at midnight, just before one, I was in Deptford Road going home—I was sober; I met the two prisoners—the man punched me in the chest and head and knocked me down, and the woman held me while the man took my purse away—I felt him take it; I had a rare struggle for it—my dress was torn all to pieces—I had the purse in my hand under my cape—they took my bag also—they snatched it away while I was struggling for my purse—there was some flannel in it—I screamed, and the police came up—I saw my bag at the station; I have not seen my purse and money since—she said at the station that the bag was hers; and she had some plates and other things in it.
Cross-examined by the male prisoner. You came behind me—I am sure you took my purse—there was another man there; he did not do anything—I know you both well by sight living about Deptford.
Cross-examined by the female prisoner. You did not pick me out of the gutter—the man punched me on the back of the head, and knocked me down.
By the COURT. I had not had much to drink; I should have gone home all right if they had not ill-used me.
WILLIAM SANDY (435 R). I was with Knight on the morning of 3rd April—I heard a scream, and went with Knight, and saw the prisoners in Evelyn Street near the prosecutrix—the female prisoner had her right arm round her neck—the male prisoner was standing by her side—he was struggling with the prosecutrix when I got near him—I told him what we were—he was quiet—I took the female prisoner into custody—the prosecutrix pointed to the man, and said he had stolen her purse from her hand containing £3 5s.—she had been drinking very heavily—I think she was capable of knowing what was going on—when I took the female prisoner to the station she had a bag containing some wearing apparel—she had it in her possession the whole time—we searched it at the station, and there was a parcel by the bag with some crockery in it, not in the bag itself—the prosecutrix was Charged, and kept there during the night.
Cross-examined by the female prisoner. You had the bag and the crockery all on one arm together at the station—I am positive of that The male prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I was not in Deptford Road at all. I am quite innocent; it is all a mistake. The crockery I bought."
Witness for the Defence.
ELIJAH GAZE . I am a corn porter at the Commercial Docks—I know nothing about this affair—the only thing I know is that I met this man at nine o'clock on this night and he never left me till twelve; both the prisoners—they had some crockeryware with them when I left them at the Royal Oak at twelve o'clock—I bade them good-night there, and next day I heard they were locked up—I hoped to go down to the Court and was fetched in.
GUILTY . JOHN ROBERTS— Ten Months' Hard Labour. ELLEN ROBERTS— Eight Months' Hard Labour.
MESSRS. TORR and MOORE Prosecuted.
JAMES MCILVOGUE . I am an army pensioner—on 1st April I received a quarter's pension, £3 0s. 10d., and having other money I had close on £4 2s. altogether—I went into a lodging-house, No. 50, High Street, Woolwich, for a night's lodging—I went into the kitchen, where there were a lot of people—the prisoners and another man all asked for a drink of beer—they knew I had my pension—I was never in the house before—. I did not meet either of the prisoners outside before I went in—I paid for some beer, which they all shared—I might have had one or two drinks; but as soon as they got what they wanted they knocked me down, and held me while they robbed me—they kicked me in the stomach—the three prisoners knocked me down and robbed me—I picked them out at the station afterwards—I did not know them by sight before that night—they blacked my eye and took all my money, which was in this pocket-book in my pocket—they took the pocket-book, and afterwards threw it in the fire—somebody picked it out, and gave it to me afterwards—Carney assisted them in kicking and knocking me about—I had no quarrel with Carney or with anybody—I swear I did not fight with him—I could swear to the three prisoners taking my money—they all got me down and held my hands behind my back—I was on the ground on my book—some held me down, and the others rifled my pockets—there might have been nine or ten men in the kitchen at the time—I cannot say whether the deputy was there when they robbed me—I think it was he who gave the men in charge—it was not me—I picked out the prisoners at the station from others at once, and the Inspector said, "You see you have no chance now; you see the man knows you."
Cross-examined by Lynch. I know you were implicated in holding me down while the rest took the money from me.
Cross-examined by Donovan. You were one that held my hands behind my back—you helped to hold and to kick me.
Cross-examined by Hawkes. You held my hands behind my back while Donovan and Lynch robbed me—I accused Gordon and Lynch at the first hearing of robbing me—I did not accuse Donovan of giving me back the purse, and not interfering with me you three robbed me, and took my money away up to the Castle public house.
JOSEPH HANDS . I am deputy at the common lodging-house, 50, High Street, Woolwich—Donovan and Lynch have been lodging there for three or four months off and on—I know Hawkes well—between six and seven p.m. on the 1st April, McIlvogue came to the door and asked for lodgings—he was under the influence of drink, but he was not so drunk as not to know what he was doing—after talking to me he went to the kitchen—when he came in by himself someone was standing in the passage—I could not say who it was—Donovan was at the street door previous to this matter—I am sure the three prisoners were in the kitchen—when McIlvogue went in there were also there a man that was released, and Sears and Carney—there were about five there, I should say, no more—about ten or 10.30, I went into the kitchen and saw McIlvogue and the prisoners there—I came up to my own room again,
and a few minutes afterwards McIlvogue came up—he had been robbed—I went into the kitchen, but there was no one there then—just a few minutes before McIlvogue reported the robbery Hawkes came and asked for a candle to go to bed—when I found the kitchen was empty I went up to the bedroom—Hawkes was not there—McIlvogue went outside and reported to a constable, who came and asked whether it was true—I said I did not know, but he had reported it to me—I believe the constable went into the station—Gordon was arrested—McIlvogue swore to him at first, but he had left the house about nine in the morning, and I did not see him again till half-past twelve, and that was in the street—he was not in the kitchen at that time—McIlvogue swore to the three prisoners and to Gordon—Gordon was afterwards discharged—Hawkes was in the kitchen at the time.
Cross-examined by Hawkes. You tendered me 6d. for your lodgings, and I gave you twopence change—I gave you a candle to go to bed before McIlvogue came up and reported—I heard someone call someone else to go out, but I cannot tell you if you were called out—when I came into the kitchen I think you were all sitting on one form, and McIlvogue on another.
FREDERICK KEMP (59 R), On the 1st April I was told of an alleged robbery at this lodging-house—I went to the Castle public-house with four other constables—I there found the three prisoners and Gordon, who was subsequently released—I took them to the station—McIlvogue there, identified the prisoners as the men who had assaulted and robbed, him—he had a cut over the right eye, which was bleeding, and he complained of being kicked in the ribs and stomach—a doctor dressed his eye, and stated that he was in great pain, but he could not find any marks of violence about his body.
By the COURT. McIlvogue also picked out Gordon as one of the men who had robbed him—he was just as certain about him as he was about the prisoners.
Cross-examined by Hawkes. There were about twenty men drinking in the Castle.
WILLIAM KLEIN (117 R). On April 1st I was informed of a robbery that had taken place at the lodging-house, and in company with Kemp I went to the Castle public-house, which is about five minutes' walk from the lodging-house—at the Castle I saw the three prisoners and Gordon, and several other men, all drinking at the bar—McIlvogue, was not with us—I arrested Donovan, who said, "All right, sir, I shall come with you, but I took no part in it. Carney and the old man had a fight, and the money all fell on the floor"—McIlvogue identified him immediately—1s. 6d. was found on Donovan—we have not been able to find Carney.
Cross-examined by Donovan. When we entered the house we told you what you would be charged with, and nothing was said afterwards.
HARRY BAKER (510 R). I went to the Castle with Klein and arrested Hawkes—he said, "All right, sir, I will go to the station quietly with you. I did not have anything to do with it"—I searched him at the station, and found twopence on him—he was with the other two prisoners when I arrested him in the public-house.
Cross-examined by Hatches. Other people were in the house—you were sitting with the other two prisoners.
WALTER CHAMPION (Sergeant 73 R). At the station, in answer to a statement by McIlvogue; Lynch said, "I did not take the money. Jim Carney took it, and struck him in the face; I want him brought here."
Hawkes' statement before the Magistrate: "I am innocent. I was not in the kitchen when it happened."
WILLIAM SPIERS . I am a dock labourer—I saw the prisoners in the kitchen, and McIlvogue was sitting down—there was an argument going on, I believe, but I passed out of the kitchen at 10.50, and did not go in again till afterwards—I did not see anyone leave the kitchen; I saw no one hit.
Cross-examined. I know the time because the deputy was doing the tables in one room, and I passed out of the room to do the tables in the other kitchen, and it was then after ten.
Cross-examined by Hawkes. I think you said good-night to all when I went to scrub the tables—that was before the row commenced.
Lynch, in his defence, stated that when Carney and McIlvogue started fighting he and Donovan walked out of the house.
Donovan stated that he saw McIlvogue standing intoxicated at the door, and fetched the deputy to him, and that afterwards Carney and McIlvogue began to quarrel and fight in the kitchen, and that he and Lynch left, and went to the Castle.
Hawkes stated that he was going to bed when Gordon called him to the street door, and that they went to the Castle, where they met the other prisoners.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. GRIFFITHS Prosecuted. NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
410. GEORGE MORDAUNT (28) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a quantity of jewellery and 15s., the property and money of Ann Maria Gibbons, in a dwelling-house, and ac the same time putting Jessie Hastie in bodily fear; alto to assaulting Jessie Hastie, with intent to steal the goods and money of Ann Maria Gibbons.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
412. LEONARD LONGLEY (18) , to unlawfully obtaining 12s. 6d. of Henry Edward Reed by false pretences, and a conviction at this Court in March, 1894.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Eight Months' Hard Labour.
413. FREDERICK FRIZELL (28), HENRY FELIX BEST (20), and ALFRED HINTON (20) , Stealing a necklet and other goods, the property of Gita Millicent Bland, in the dwelling-house of Charlotte Gita Bland. Second Count, receiving the same.
MESSRS. GUY STEPHENSON and MARSHALL Prosecuted; and MESSRS MOYSES and DRAKE Defended Beat and Hinton,
CHARLOTTE GITA BLAND . I am a widow, living at Melrose, Overhill Road, Honor Oak Road—between nine and 9.30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 27th, my adopted daughter and niece was playing the piano, and I went upstairs to my bedroom on the first floor, and lay down in my dress—I was dozing, not asleep, when I was aroused by a pillow put over my face—I tossed it off, but before I could look round a second pillow was put over me—I had a fight to put the pillow off my face—I saw a black figure; I could not see a bit of the face—the figure wore a hood, and had a cloak to the knees—I could not say whether it was a man or woman—I said, "You had better take care what you are doing"—we fought together, and then the figure disappeared—I bolted my door, and then called to my adopted daughter, "Save yourself"—she came upstairs—I identify this property—it was mine; I gave it to my, adopted daughter—it cost 13 guineas, and 4 1/2 guineas to mount these beetle necklace and bracelet—they are of considerable value—the pillows were brought from my adopted daughter's room, which is connected with mine—I have seen Frizell twice; he came into my dining-room one night—he was the sweetheart of one of my servants—the figure I saw was about his height,
GITA MILLICENT BLAND . I am the last witness's adopted daughter—on Wednesday, March 27th, I was playing the piano, and about 9.30 p.m. I heard sounds from upstairs, of which I took no notice—then someone came rushing downstairs and passed through the hall, and opened the door—my mother called out, "Save yourself"—I got assistance and went upstairs—the pillows had been taken from my room, and I missed my jewel-case, in which were these jewels—altogether I lost about £50 worth of jewellery; besides the beetle bracelet and necklet there were coral necklet, brooch, and earrings, a pearl necklet, a silver chain with a Maltese cross, and other things—I know Frizell as attending at our house to see one of our maidservants—my bedroom is on the same floor as my mother's.
ALBERT THOMAS CLARK . I am a jeweller at 1, Queen's Road, Peckham—on April 1st, between ten and eleven a.m., Hinton and Best came with a coral necklet, a coral brooch and earrings, a pearl necklet, and a silver necklet with Maltese cross—Hinton carried them—he said they belonged to a sister who was now dead, and he asked if I would buy them—I said I did not care about them, but if he would leave them I would try to find a customer for them—he left them—he came back about five o'clock the same day with someone I did not know—I said I had shown them to a lady who I thought would be a probable customer, but she did not care about them, and therefore I should have to return them to him, and he took them away.
Cross-examined by MR. MOYSES. Best did not say a word.
THOMAS TAYLOR FLEETWOOD . I am assistant to Merrel, a jeweller, of New Cross Road, about a mile from Queen's Road, Peckham—on 1st April, at noon, Hinton came with a man, who I believe was Best, but I could not recognise him—Hinton produced these beetle necklet and bracelet, and asked me what we would give for them—I took them to Mr.
Merrel, and spoke to him, and then came and asked Hinton what he wanted for them; he said 15s.—that was much under the value—Mr. Merrel said to me it was a lot under value, and they took the things away—I do not think that Best spoke.
Cross-examined by MR. MOYSES. I believe the man who came with Hinton took no part in the negotiation.
FREDERICK HOLMES (Detective Sergeant). Best used to work in my neighbourhood, and knew some of the officers, and he asked one of them where he could sell some jewellery—the officer said, "You know, down in the Ditch," and then Best and Frizell went to James Lazarus's shop in Houndsditch, and offered jewellery for sale—on 1st April, about 5.30, I saw Best and Frizell at Bishopsgate Street Station—they were not in custody—Lazarus told me in their presence that they had offered this bracelet and necklet for sale for 25s.—I said to them, "How do you account for the possession of it?"—Frizell said, "It belonged to my sister, who died two years ago. I wanted some money, and I was going to sell it"—I said to Best, "What have you to say about it?"—he said, "I only know Frizell said it belonged to his sister, and he was going to sell it, and he asked me to come with him"—I shortly after saw Frizell alone, and I said, "I don't believe what you have told me. I believe it is a lot of lies"—he said, "Yes, it is; I will tell you the truth now. I picked it up at eleven a.m. last Thursday morning in the Overhill Road, East Dulwich"—that, would be 28th March—I said, "How did you find it? Was it in a case or in a parcel?"—he said, "It was wrapped in tissue paper"—I said, "What did you do with the paper?"—he said, "I threw it away"—I said, "Where have you kept the jewellery since?"—he said, "In a biscuit-box in my bedroom at 14, Dorvell Road, East Dulwich"—I said they would be detained while I made inquiries—as the result of my inquiries they were handed over to Fox.
Cross-examined by Frizell. You may have said Grovehill Road and not Overhill Road.
Cross-examined by MR. MOYSES. The police constable of whom Best asked where he could dispose of the jewellery was named Lloyd—the prisoners happened to go to Lazarus's shop—the assistant there said he did not care to buy it unless he had a reference—they said, "We can give a reference; Police-constable Lloyd sent us here"—and then the assistant and the prisoners went to see Lloyd, and so they all came to be at the station—Lloyd and Lazarus are not here.
WALTER MILNER . I am a clerk, living at 66, Avondale Road, Peckham—I have known Best for ten years and Hinton about six months—about a month before I gave evidence at the Police-court I was with Best and Hinton one evening, and Hinton said he knew the place where he could get some money if he had someone to go with him—Best said, "You have not got pluck enough"—Hinton said the place was Upland Road, Dulwich—on Tuesday evening, March 26th, I called for Best, and he said Hinton had told him that they were going up to that job to-night, but he was not to tell me; and that Hinton had told him that a little dark fellow was going with him (Hinton)—Best did not say that he was going with Hinton—about ten next morning, Wednesday, 27th, I saw Best, and eventually, about 12.45, I went to Hinton's house with him—Best said before he went in, that he would go and see whether Hinton went to
this place—he came out and said Hinton had told him they could not get in, and that Best was not to tell me—on Wednesday, 27th, about six p.m., I met Best, and was with him till 10.10—neither he nor I were near Overfull Road that evening—I am certain Best could not have been at that road at nine or 9.30.
Cross-examined by MR. MOYSES. Best assists his father, who is a Queen's taxes collector—a great deal of money passes through his hands—I was a witness on April 2nd at the first hearing at Lambeth Police-court—Mrs. Best (Best's mother) asked me to go there—I saw Fox the same morning there—he put questions to me—I had never seen him before—he took me and Hinton into a room—he asked Hinton questions; it was before Hinton was taken into custody—he did not caution Hinton in my hearing—at that time Frizell and Best were in custody—on the Friday and Saturday afternoon, the 30th, I had conversation with Best—I was at the library on the 26th and 27th.
FRANK KNELL (Detective Sergeant). On the morning of April 8th I went with Best to the Queen's Road and New Gross Road—he said to me, "I went with Hinton to the two shops, and Hinton tried to sell some jewellery at No. 1, Queen's Road, a pearl necklet, a coral necklet, a pair of coral earrings, and a coral brooch; at the other shop he asked the value of the necklet and earrings "I am charged with stealing"—he afterwards made this statement, which I took down; he signed it. "On Monday, 1st April, 1895, at 10.30 a.m., I met a man, named Hinton, in Choumert Road; he showed me the necklet and bracelet, which I am charged with stealing, also a coral necklet, and a pearl necklet, and said he was going to sell them. I said, 'I will go with you.' We then went together to No. 1, Queen's Road, where Hinton showed the two necklaces, a coral brooch, two earrings, and something silver to the man in the shop, and stated it was the property of his sister, and asked the man what the coral necklace was worth. The man said about 4s. The property was left there by Hinton, as the man said he would try and find a buyer. Hinton and I then went to a shop at New Cross, and Hinton asked the manager what the beetle bracelet was worth, at the same time producing it. The manager examined it, and said, 'Oh, it's only worth about 10s. for old gold.' Hinton then took the bracelet, and we left the shop. Later on we met Frizell in Blenheim Grove. He and Hinton had a conversation, which I did not hear, and I saw Hinton hand the bracelet and necklet to Frizell. Frizell said to Hinton, 'I called for you this morning.' Hinton then went towards home. Later on Hinton,. Frizell, and myself met outside Hinton's house, and went together to Camberwell Green. There we met a man named Hearn. I then went with Frizell to the City, where we were subsequently arrested as Frizell was trying to dispose of the bracelet. I had previously gone up to a policeman in Broad Street and asked him where we could sell some jewellery, I am sorry to have gone with either Frizell or Hinton; it was done unthinkingly. I had nothing to do with stealing the property, and can call witnesses to prove where I was on the night of the robbery. I also, wish to render every assistance to the police in the matter.—HENRY FELIX BEST.")—after that statement I arrested Hinton at 6.30 on the evening of 8th, at his address, 65, Chetwynd Road, Peckhara—I said he would be charged with Best and Frizell with stealing jewellery from Melrose,
Overhill Road, and also with assaulting Mrs. Bland—he made no reply then or when charged at the station.
Cross-examined by MR. MOYSES. Best was remanded on the first day he was brought up on one bail of £50—the night after he was remanded I Called at his house and had a game of cards; I had an appointment there in connection with these inquiries—I know some friends of his named Green—from the first Best has been perfectly frank and straightforward, and has given me all the information in his power—his parents are highly respectable—he showed me the shops, and went into one of them with me.
FREDERICK Fox (Inspector P). On 1st April I went to Bishopsgate Street Police-station, where I found Frizell and Best detained—I charged them with stealing from a house in the Overhill Road this necklet and bracelet and a lot of other property on a date and at a time which I told them—Best said, "I can prove I was in Peckham Road with Mr. Milner's son that night"—Frizell said nothing—I put them in a cab and conveyed them to Peckham—on the way Best was asking me if I would inquire for his witnesses and get them to the Court, when Frizell said, "You need not trouble; this is my affair, and if it comes to anything I will clear you, but I shall wait and hear the evidence first"—when I got them to Peckham Police-station I told them I had to go to various places to make inquiries and get the property identified, and I took their names and addresses, and said I should detain them—Best said, referring to Frizell, who was present, "He told me his sister gave them to him"—Frizell said, "Yes, that is what I told him, and he went with me to help me to sell it"—Best gave me the name and address of his witness Milner—I made inquiries, and at 1 p.m. I saw Hinton in bed in the presence of his father and mother, who admitted me into the house—I told him what had happened with regard to the locking up of Best and Frizell, who were found dealing with this necklet and so on, and I told him where it was stolen from; and I said, "Can you tell me anything about it at all? I want to get information with regard to it if I can"—he said, "I saw Henry Best and Fred Frizell at 2 p.m. to-day" (it would be the night of the 1st or the morning of the 2nd that I was speaking to him) "in Camberwell Grove; Frizell produced this necklet and bracelet, and said What do you think it is worth? Where do you think I can sell it?' I said, 'Spinks, Gracechurch Street.' We then parted"—I told him to be at the Police-court in the morning, and wired Milner to be there as well—I returned to the station, and Best and Hinton were formally charged—Best said, "All I can say is I was never up there"—Frizell said nothing—I said to Frizell, "You bought a pair of boots last Thursday"—he said, "I gave 6s. 6d. for them, they were second-hand, in a pawnbroker's shop in the Borough"—the following week, at the Police-court, he said, "Did you find where I bought the boots?"—I said, "Yes, and you offered an article of jewellery at the shop there"—he said, "Yes, I know, a brooch"—on the morning of the 2nd, at the Police-court, I found Hinton there, waiting in the ante-room—he said a young man standing by his side was Milner—Milner made this statement, which I wrote down: "Best said he was told they were going to do the job; I understood him to mean Hinton and another"—I said to Hinton, "You hear what he says; do you wish to say anything about that?"—he said, "Yes, Frizell asked me to go up a long time ago, in the middle of last summer. Frizell said the woman where his girl lived was
nearly always drunk; it would be a good thing for anyone to get engaged to the daughter;" and he went on to make further statements, which amounted to pretty much the same—I said, "What did you say and what did he say?"—he said this, which I wrote down: "In the middle of the week before last Frizell and I were on Peckham Rye; he said, 'I know of a place in the Upland Road' (Upland Road is near Overfull Road) 'Where my girl used to work'; he referred to what he had previously said as to knowing a place where he could get money. I said, "Have you heard anything more about that place you spoke about'? He said, 'It is no good now; someone has been up there; some counterpanes have been taken out of the back garden next door where his sister lived; then at the beginning of last summer Frizell said, 'Will you come up to a place I know of at the Upland Road? it is worth anyone's while to go up there; you can get money'"—I said, "You keep on saying pretty much the same thing over and over again; if you can tell me anything do so; write it down yourself;" and I left him with the paper, and Hinton wrote down this: "Frizell said to me last summer that he knew of a job in the Underhill Road; I did not give him any definite answer, and did not see him for some months after, and eventually the thing fell through, because he said someone had been there before"—when I came back after fifteen or twenty minutes I read that—I told Milner and Hinton to think it over, and come to my office at Peckham at eight p.m., and I would then take their statements—I had Milner in at that time, and took his statement—I was told he and Hinton had arrived, but when I sent out for Hinton after taking Milner's statement he had gone, and the next I saw of him was when he was brought in by Sergeant Knell, after we had got the additional evidence.
Cross-examined by MR. MOYSES. The statement I read first was written by me as representing what Hinton said; I took it down before he wrote his own statement—I tried to avoid asking him questions—I was with Hinton in the ante-room and in the warrant officers' room, and finally in the usher's room—I found Hinton at the Court; he had been told he had better go there—I saw Hinton in bed before he was arrested, and took a statement from him, which I wrote down—the story he told me resulted in this: that the contemplated matter had gone off—I did not warn Hinton; I expected he could tell me something, so that I should be able to make a witness of him, from a hint, from other people—I kept Milner in my inner-room for nearly half an hour, I think—I kept Hinton waiting outside during that time—I told the officer to tell him to wait—I do not suggest that he bolted away—within the last twelve months I took a statement in the case of a young woman accused of drowning her child at Lewisham; the statement she gave was excluded; it was said undue pressure was put on her.
Witness for Hinton.
ALFRED HINTON . I have been a cashier at one of the Metropolitan County Courts for thirty years—the prisoner Hinton is my only child—there has been nothing against his honesty in any of his situations—he is not in any employment now.
Cross-examined. He was last with Messrs Peters and Bridge, furriers—he was only there a few weeks—he was dismissed—the manager told me he was careless—before that he was clerk to the Trade Protection
Society, 16, Berners Street, for about six months, or it might have been two months—he was dismissed from there—before that he was a clerk at 23A, Great St. Helens' for about twelve months, I should think—he was dismissed from there—before that he was at Spiers and Pond's for eighteen months or two years, I should think—he was dismissed from there—at none of these places was any imputation made against his honesty; he has been careless and negligent.
BEST— NOT GUILTY .
FRIZELL and HINTON GUILTY of receiving, Hintons father was willing to become surety for him FRIZELL— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. HINTON— Discharged on recognisances.
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted, and MR. ROOTH Defended.
GUILTY. —The JURY very strongly recommended her to mercy on account of her youth. The prisoner's father was wiling to become surety for her.— Discharged on recognisances.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted.
SARAH GOODALL . I keep a provision shop with my husband, at 289, St. James' Road—on March 30th, just after eight p.m., the prisoner came in for a quarter of a pound of cheese, price 2d., and gave me a half-crown—I told him it was bad, and bent it in the tester—he said, "I am very sorry; I did not know it, give it to me back again"—I showed it to my lodger, Finch, who was in the back parlour—he came with me, and I told the prisoner I should fetch a policeman—he said, "I will fetch one "—I went out, and returned with Bartlett, handed him the coin, and charged the prisoner.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You offered to pay me in other money.
CHARLES FINCH . I am a saddler, and live at Mrs. Goodall's—on the evening of March 30th she showed me a coin in the parlour—I went into the shop and asked the prisoner where he got it—he said, "I took it in a bet of 11s."—Mrs. Goodall went for a constable, and while she was gone the prisoner said, "What do you want to make all this fuss for? I would have paid her for the cheese"—I walked into the road to look for a policeman, and he followed me—he did not go off the pavement, but right to the edge—he went into Roll's Road—the carriage road was rather muddy.
EDWARD BARTLETT (222 M). I was called to the shop, and found the prisoner there—I asked where he got the money—he said, "I got it in racing; I did not know it was bad"—I searched him in the shop, and found five good shillings and eighteenpence in bronze, all in his waistcoat pocket—I took him to the station—Mrs. Goodhall handed me this coin—this other coin was shown to me by Mountjoy on 31st March, about six p.m.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I told you I found it opposite the door.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: " I did not know the half-crown was bad. I know nothing about the other half-crown."
GUILTY. SERGEANT RODNEY stated that the prisoner had given valuable information to the police.— Discharged on his own recognisances.
416. FRANK REID (30) PLEADED GUILTY to being found by night with housebreaking implements in his possession. Second Count, to unlawfully attempting to steal by forcing open a window, having been convicted of misdemeanour on December 5th, 1892. He was also indicted for burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Annette Augusta Vidal, with intent to steal, upon which
MR. DE MICHELE offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY . Sentence on the first indictment, three Years' Penal Servitude, two other convictions being proved against him.
417. CHARLES WALTERS (24), GEORGE SHERLOCK (61), JAMES SMITH (24), and HENRY MOORE (28) , Feloniously causing to be inserted in a register of deaths a false entry relating to the death of Henry Schroder.
MR. H. AVORY and MR. BROADBRIDGE Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended Sherlock and Moore.
MARIA GRANT . I am fourteen years old, and I live at 29, Buckley Street, Lambeth Walk—in December last I was living in Dr. Beid's house, 176, Lambeth Road, but not as a servant—on December 29th, between 5.30 and six p.m., I was sitting in the kitchen and heard the surgery door open—I went there and saw the prisoners Smith and Moore—Smith said, "Is the doctor in?" I said, "No, he won't be home before seven"—he asked if the mistress was in—I went to call her, and Mrs. Stewart, the housekeeper, came and asked one of them what he wanted—he said, "I want the doctor to call at 6, Stamford Street"—they then went out—on January 22nd I answered a knock at the surgery door to the same two men—they both came into the surgery and sat down—I spoke to Isabel Stewart, the doctor's sister-in-law, and then went for a policeman—when I returned they had both gone.
Cross-examined by Smith. I went to Larkhall Lane Police-station to identify you—I went on the 15th of the same month to the South-Western Police-court and failed to identify you again—I only saw yon twice before I went to the Court. (Moore here stated that he wished to
PLEAD GUILTY, on which the JURY found a verdict of
Re-examined. Smith's whiskers have grown since I saw him in the surgery: they were growing when I first saw him at the Police-station—he was with other men on January 15th, when I could not identify him—I identified him, I think, the week after—he had a little bit of moustache when he came to the surgery.
ISABEL STEWART . On January 22nd I was living at Dr. Reid's house I am his sister-in-law—on January 22nd, between five and six o'clock Maria Grant spoke to me—I went to the surgery and saw two men—one of them, the prisoner Smith, had a book of forms for removal of patients
to hospitals, which was kept in the desk—the other, who was sitting on the couch, said, "Is the doctor in?" and stamped his foot on the floor—Smith threw down the book and they ran out—I went to the door and saw them both running.
Cross-examined by Smith. I first saw you at Lavender Hill Police-station, but did not identify you because your appearance was altered; you were clean shaved—I saw you Again two days afterwards, and identified you directly—you were rather rough on February 8th, and in that respect your appearance was altered—I saw you next some days afterwards; I knew you directly by your manner and your voice—I had not heard you speak before—on the day that I gave evidence I identified you in the dock—I gave evidence five times at the Court—I identified you the second time—I had heard you speak on February 8th—I heard you speak on January 22nd at the surgery, but did not hear what you said—the detectives did nut speak to me outside the Court.
ROBERT GALBRAITH REID , M.D. I live at 176, Lambeth Road—this first form on this bundle was formerly in my possession—it is a certificate, a printed form from one of my books; I got it from the local registrar of deaths—I missed some of the forms in the first week in January this year; I generally kept one book upstairs and one down, this one upstairs on a shelf—I sometimes left it in the inner surgery on a shelf—I have also missed forms out of other books—I know nothing about the filling up of this form, nor did I authorise anybody to fill it up—this "R. W. Reid" is not my writing.
HENRY SCHRODER . I am a butcher, of 42, Greyhound Road, Fulham—I am insured in the Liverpool Victoria Legal Friendly Society—a life policy was issued to me; this ("G 3") is a bit of it—on 9th January this year, Smith called at my shop and asked for me, and I stepped forward and said, "I am Mr. Schroder"—he opened a book and said he came from the chief office, as there was a mistake between the numbers of mine and my wife's policies—he said, "Your wife recently died, and there is a mistake in the number of the policy"—my wife had died on December 9th—she had been insured—the prisoner called the office by its name—he said, "I sympathise with you on the death of your wife; I must take the policy to the office to have it rectified"—I had made a claim under the policy on my wife's life; it had been paid about three days after she died—the prisoner asked me for my policy—I said, "It is a long time for the society to find out the mistake; they ought to have found that out before"; and I fetched four policies down, mine and three of my daughters', and he looked them all over and said, "This is the policy I want," taking mine—he also took the books in which my weekly payments were entered by the collector who comes every Monday—the prisoner asked me when the collector came, and I said Mondays—he said the collector would bring the policy back—he wished me good-morning, and left—I know nothing of the receipt on one of the forms of the Liverpool Society for £10—I never received any such sum; I did not authorise anyone to give a receipt for it—I can write; I always write my name in full—I have only one son, Henry Schroder, who can write perfectly well—I have no son James—on the following Monday the collector called as usual—I asked him whether he brought the policy back—he said, "I know nothing about it."
Cross-examined by Smith. I have four daughters—they cannot look after the business without my son, who must be outside cutting the meat—I have been obliged to get another man to do his work to-day—the first time my son went to the Police-court he was too late—he identified you the second time he went—I noticed that at my shop you had on a pair of striped trousers similar to mine, and a heavy moustache—I identify you by your face—on February 8th, when I went to identify you, you stooped down and I did not notice you, but on February 15th I picked you out—you were then in the dock—you were only once put among men to be identified—my daughter came up to identify you, out she was not sure of you, and the second time I brought my son up—I might have 100 people in my shop in a day.
Re-examined. I have not the least doubt that Smith is the man—I had not the least doubt when I gave evidence at the Police-court—I said in cross-examination, "I am positive about Smith being the man."
HENRY SCHRODER (junior). I am the last witness's son—I live with him—on 9th January I saw Smith come into the shop with a book in his hand, and ask for Mr. Schroder—Mr. Schroder was there—I went out to the back, and when I came back I stood at the back, and Smith said to me, "What are you going to do with these skins?"—I said, "I am going to fill them out for sausages"—he was looking at the insurance cards while my father was upstairs—I saw my father hand the prisoner the policy on my father's life, and the prisoner took the cards with him out of the shop—I was in the prisoner's company for ten minutes on that day—I next saw Smith on 20th March, the day I went before the Magistrate.
Cross-examined by Smith. I went to the Court before then, but I was too late—I did not go before to identify you, because I could not get anyone to take my place—you were put among a lot—I did not notice if they were boys or men, because I knew you by your face when I went in, and I did not look at the others, but I touched you—I knew you again because of the way you came into the shop—we don't have such men as you come into the shop every day with a book in your hand—we all stared at you.
WILLIAM JAMES LYLE . I am registrar of births and deaths for the Borough Road district of Southwark—on 11th January Moore called on me to register a death—he produced this, which purports to be the certificate of death of Henry Schroder, from bronchitis, after seven days, and to be signed by Dr. G. W. Brown, M.R.C.S.—I asked Moore what relation he was to the deceased—he said, "Son"—I therefore entered in the register of deaths the death of Henry Schroder, as it now appears: "No. 55, 10th January, 1895, at 16, Lancaster Street, Henry Schroder, forty-seven years of age, butcher, journeyman"—I requested Moore to sign the column for the signature, description, and residence of the informant, and he put a mark as that of an illiterate person—he gave me the name of James Schroder, and I entered it, and "Present at the death, 16, Lancaster Street"—I signed it—in the usual course I sent to the Registrar-General copies of all these entries—we make a return of the number of deaths in the district, and at the end of the quarter they have details, which are sent to Somerset House and examined—the record is kept at Somerset House, and anyone going there can get a copy by paying 3s. 7d.—they come to Somerset House from all over the United
Kingdom at the end of every quarter—having registered the death I issued the ordinary certificate for the burial of Henry Schroder and I gave it to Moore—I have not seen it since—I also issued to him a certified copy of the death entry on one of the special forms for friendly societies, which are for the purpose of collecting insurance money—I was afterwards taken to the Police-station for the purpose of identifying the man.
CHARLES ALFRED HEATH . I live at 250, Richmond Road, Hackney—I am a clerk in the chief office of the Liverpool Victoria Legal Friendly Society—it is part of my duty to see to the payment of claims on that office—on 12th January Smith came in and produced the certificate of death, card of membership, and policy relating to Henry Schroder—£10 10s. was paid in my presence to Smith on that occasion by a clerk, Chapman—Smith signed the receipt with his mark—£10 10s. was the amount of the claim—Smith said he was Schroder's eldest son, and that his name was James Schroder, and his address 16, Lancaster Street, Borough—each week our society publishes a printed list of claims that they have paid—I know of the previous payment to the Schroder family on the death of Mrs. Schroder; it appeared in our circular for the week commencing 6th December, 1894: "No. 6,444, Schroder, Laura, 42, Greyhound Road, Fulhara, £7 13s."
Cross-examined by Smith. I was almost as far from you when you came in with the claim as I am now—I heard you say you were the eldest son—I can swear it was you—I believe the man who paid you is here—on 8th February I went to the Police-station and identified you—I did not pick you out from others; you were in the dock—I was not quite confident of you when you were with others; you had taken off your moustache since I had last seen you.
ARTHUR SEWELL (Inspector W). On 14th February I arrested Walters bout two a.m.—I went with Neighbour to 100, Henley Street, Battersea—I saw Walters enter, and directly afterwards we got in at the front door by pulling a string, and I went and knocked at the door of the front room in the house—I heard a voice inside say, "Who is there?" and then I heard Walters' voice: "It is the blooming lecs, after me; I will give them tecs. Do you want me?"—we did not answer—he opened the door with his left hand, and he had a hatchet in his right hand—we went in pretty quickly, and fell upon him before he had time to strike, and secured him—there were two of us—I said, "We are going to take you into custody for being concerned, with others in custody now, for committing frauds on insurance companies"—he said, "Very well, I don't care so long as you have got me straight. Don't take any liberties"—I had a struggle with him outside, and succeeded in getting him as far as Battersea Road Police-station, and there we had to put the handcuffs on him—he was very violent, and we took him on to Clapham—in consequence of a letter which I received afterwards from Smith, who was then in prison, I went on February 16th to Holloway and saw Smith—I told him that I had come in consequence of his letter, and that anything he wished to say would be taken down in writing and be given in evidence against him on his trial—he then made this very short statement, which I took down: "On the way to the prison on the 8th inst., in the police van, the prisoner Moore said he reckoned we had been taken for someone else; that
is all I know"—in addition, he said, "I have been advised by my solicitor not to say anything"—that was since he had written the letter—I took it down and asked the prisoner to sign it, and he refused to do so unless I left that out—Mr. Armstrong was his solicitor—he signed the statement" James Smith," written in a back-handled way—after I had seen Smith, Walters was arrested on February 14th—I was told that Sherlock wanted to make a statement, and I saw him at the Southwestern Police-court—on March 9th, in consequents of a letter from Walters, I went to Holloway Prison, where Walters made this statement, which I took down in writing—I cautioned him first—he signed the statement: "About four p.m. on February 1st, 1895, I was told that Sally Jones was inquiring for me. I went to the Cricketers public-house, Battersea Park Road, and saw Jones. He said, 'You're just the fellow I've been looking for; will you stand in? I said, 'What is the business?' Jones said, 'I sha'n't tell you the strength of it unless you join in.' I said, 'I'm not going to stand in unless I know the strength of it.' He then took a doctor's certificate from his pocket. I read it; it was the death of William Snapes. I said, 'Where does he live, and is he dead?' Jones said, 'No, he is not dead; but you must say he is if you join in with this.' I said, 'How is it you come to me to do this?' He said, 'Because I know it is rough with you, and I thought of putting a pound or two in your way.' I said, 'I can do with a bit, but I want to know more of it.' He then said, 'It is sixteen pounds odd.' I said, 'How much am I to have for my share?' Smith was there, and Sherlock too. Jones spoke to them, and then told me I should have three pounds ten. I said, 'How many to take a corner out of this? If it is sixteen pounds, I ought to have more.' Jones said, 'How's that t I've done a feat to get this to-day,' showing the certificate. 'I've had this old man, Sherlock, with me to-day, and he and me has done some other business, which you will see tomorrow.' Then Jones explained to me what to do. Jones and me left the public-house, and followed Smith and Sherlock to another public-house close to the death office in Clapham. We all four went in together, and waited till five o'clock till the registrar's office was opened. Jones said, 'Say you live at 11, White's Square.' Smith then said, 'Is that to be the address?' Jones said, 'Yes.' Smith said, 'Get a pen and write down the stroke.' Jones got a pen and ink from the landlord; put it on the table in front of me. Smith picked up the pen and wrote the address on the certificate, 'No. 11, White's Square, Clapham, S.E.' Smith then handed me the certificate and told me what to do with it. I took it in the registrar's office, and the registrar gave me the undertaker's certificate. After I had told him the tale, I told him my brother was insured. He said, 'Give me a shilling and I will fill the form in for you.' I told him it was the Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company. He filled in the form, and gave it me. I signed the name of Charles Snapes. I brought it outside. Smith and Jones were waiting for me. Jones came up. I handed him the certificate. He clapped me on the back and said, 'This is no good, the burial one,' and tore it up; 'the other will get the stuff. To tell you the truth, I have been in and had one tumble with the old man, Sherlock.' He then handed the certificate to Smith, who put it in his pocket and said to me, 'The business is done now. All you have got to do in the morning is to get the stuff. It's just
like cashing a cheque.' We went back to the same public-house where Sherlock was waiting for us. Jones borrowed 4s. from the landlord, and gave us a shilling apiece. We then left there and went to the Westbury in Wandsworth Road, close to the railway-station. We talked about the business. Jones asked if I knew anyone that was insured. I said 'No.' Smith said, 'If you know anyone that's insured we can play on them if they ain't in the Prudential; they always want to see the corpse.' Jones said in there that the best way to play this game would be to insure a lot of people, then draw their oof after they're clear. When Jones first introduced me to Smith, Jones said, 'Do you want to go away in the country down to the north?' I asked him what was the good of going away without some money. He said, 'This bit of business will get us the stuff to take us away. Three-handed we'll go; we don't want the old man with us,' meaning Sherlock. We then parted for the night. Jones said, 'Come to my house at nine o'clock in the morning, and then we will go to the Westbury and meet Smith.' I went to Jones's house the next morning and saw Jones. We afterwards went to the Westbury, and Smith came there just afterwards, about half-past nine. Smith then put the insurance cards and two policies into my hand. He took them out of his pocket and said to me, 'We have got to go and draw the stuff at 186, Battersea Park Road.' I said, 'You are sending me to Scotland Yard, or as bad, for I am known down that way too well. I live there; you had better go.' Smith said, 'How can I go? There's your handwriting.' I said, 'What are you taking the biggest corner for; what have you done?' He said, 'You bring me the money, I'll make it all right with you; I'll corner it out.' I said, 'You told me last night that I had done my bit when I went to the death office.' He said, 'Yes, but I didn't think of this. You have only got to go in and say you have a claim to make.' We then went to the Prince of Wales public-house, close to the office in Battersea Park Road, and waited till just after ten, and agreed what was best to be done. We went outside the public-house. Me and Smith walked together; Jones was close behind us. Two detectives came across the road and spoke to me. No sooner than they spoke to me Smith and Jones left me. Smith walked on as if he didn't know me; Jones went back somewhere. The detectives asked me what was the matter with my hand, as it was bandaged up. I had poisoned it working at the exhibition. I worked there about five days; a fortnight before I told them that I was working on the roads. They said they had heard so, and left me. I didn't tell the detectives what I was doing there, you can bet. I then went up towards the office, and Smith met me. We went to walk back for Jones, and saw the detectives coming to us again. Smith then went down the Calvert Road. I watched the detectives go away, and came back to look for Smith and Jones, as we had arranged that they should walk up and down outside the office while I went in to get the money. I didn't see them, so I went in on my own up. I signed for the money; it was £16 14s. 10d. I signed the name of Charles Snapes, for my poor brother William. The clerk paid me the money, and I went outside to look for Jones and Smith. I couldn't see them about. I expect the detectives had frightened them away. I made up my mind then that I would stick to the lot. I then went down to Jones's house and saw Smith and Jones. I said, 'What do you mean by
running away?' They made no reply to that, but said, 'How did you get on?' I said, 'Well, when I got inside the office there was an old man in there. I told him I had a claim to make, and he said, "I don't do the business, but my friend here does." The young man looked at the cards, and asked me my name, and said that he had a doubt in it, and he called the old man on one side and said something to him which I couldn't hear. The old man went out,' and I said, 'I soon hopped out after him and come away.' Smith and Jones looked at each other when I told them that I hadn't got the money. Jones said, 'This will be wired all over the place, so let us get rid of the books of stiffs' (meaning the doctors' certificates) 'and the other things we've got.' Jones said to me, 'If I was you I should go away into the Militia, or somewhere away, or else disguise myself.' I said, 'How can I disguise myself? I have got no other clothes but those I have got on;' he said, 'Let me cut that off,' meaning my moustache. I agreed to it, and Jones got his scissors and cut it off. Smith was very fidgety to get away, so was Jones, so we all three went out down to Vauxhall Walk, while Smith said he would go and get me half-a-crown to get away. We waited about half-an-hour, but he didn't come back. I saw Smith no more till I was arrested, and saw him at Holloway. Jones and me then went to Nine Elms Lane, and there we parted. I went about my business. I didn't see Jones again till the day I was arrested, I mean in the morning, and Jones showed me the newspaper with the account of the charge against Smith, and the others. He said, 'Hullo, I didn't think that you would cut me up about the money.' I said, 'I would not have cut you up if you had done your share towards it.' I said, 'Come and have a drink; you've cut me up many a time, so I have only got my own back if I have cut you up.' He said, 'If I was you I should edge away out of it.' He then left me. I was afterwards arrested the same night. I saw Smith at the Police-court. He said, 'Jones has put me here, as I was drinking with him the same night with Sherlock.' I have something more to say if I am allowed to speak at the Police-court.—C. WALTERS."—on March 5th I took this statement in writing from Sherlock—he signed it: "I desire to make a statement regarding this matter, and I do so voluntarily to Inspector Sewell. On the 1st of January last I went to the house of 'Sally Jones' (I mean a man called Sally Jones) in some street off the Wands worth Road. He asked me if I would go with him to get some of these policies and cards for some parties that he knew. He said as I was out of work a few shillings would do me good. 'We go and get Mrs. Snapes' first; I think that is in Compton Street' Now he said, 'I and another one we will call to,' and we went. I have seen the woman since, at Court and at the Police-station; both of them, in fact. When we had got them he said, 'Come on to Lambeth, towards your home.' Then after that he came for me, and asked me if I would go up into Endell Street to get them registered. He had a death certificate then; he meant to get the death registered. When we got to the office he says to me, 'Old man, it will look better for you to get this registered, as yon will represent his father' (he meant young William Snapes); so I went, and he with me. When the registrar looked at the 'Medical Directory.' he found that there was no such doctor as Freeman at No. 1, Compton
Street, Soho, and said, 'I think there is something wrong in this'; and Jones said to me, 'Father, I always thought there would be a trouble to get money when you were insured.' The registrar said, 'I must keep this certificate, and make inquiries about it.' Jones said, 'When can we callagain?' The Registrar said, 'About this time to-morrow.' Jones then said, 'Come on with me to Lambeth, and I can get someone there to do it properly.' I said, 'I think I have had enough of it; I'll go home.' But on his persuasion, we got on the tram at Vauxhall and went to Battersea Park Road, near the steam laundry. Then he said, 'Let's go in here and have a drink.' This was the Cricketers' Arms public-house, and Jones went out and fetched Friday (Walters), and he then proceeded to explain matters to him. I, Jones and Walters then left; I went first, and Jones close behind me, so that I saw them leave. We went towards Clapham, and all together into a public-house close to the registrar's office. I remained in the house whilst Jones and Walters went out, and returned together. Then we went to the Westbury public-house, in the Wandsworth Road. We remained there a short time and departed. I never saw Jones again till I was arrested. I was with him in Lambeth Walk shortly before Smith introduced Jones to roe the night previous. I have only seen him (Jones) about three times, and that has been in the company of Smith. I have carefully listened to the reading of this statement, and say it is all true.—GEORGE THOMAS SHERLOCK."—on 18th March I again saw Smith at the prison, after he had sent me another note through the gaolor at the Police-court. He made this statement: "March 18th, 1895. Her Majesty's Prison, Holloway. I, James Smith, wish to make a statement to Inspector Sewell, after being cautioned. On January 31st I was in the Jolly Gardeners public-house, Lambeth Walk. I was having a glass of ale with a friend, Mr. Baker, a greengrocer. I was in there about half an hour when my father-in-law looked in. This man Jones was sitting reading a paper, the Sporting Life. Whilst in conversation Jones came over to me, and asked me whether I was a bricklayer. I told him that he had the advantage of me, and asked him, 'How do you know I am a bricklayer?' He said that a couple of weeks ago he saw me with my kit in the same bar, and that was how he knew I was a bricklayer. He said, 'Are you going to have a drink, old man?' I said, 'Yes, I don't mind.' He said, 'What are you going to have?' I said, 'A glass of ale.' He paid for a glass of ale with half a sovereign. He then said he would get me a job if I would give him 10s. out of it. I said, 'What sort of a job?' He said, 'To build a copper for £4 10s. 'I said, 'I shall see what sort of a job it is before I give you 10s. 'He said, 'I shall meet you outside here at eight o'clock to-morrow morning.' I was there at eight next morning, but could not see him there. Before I left him that night he asked me where I lived, and my name, as, he said, it was necessary to tell the man who was going to give me the job. I told him my name and where I lived, and asked him his name. He told me his name (Sally Jones). I said, 'All right, if the job suits, I will give you 10s., and give my father-in-law a day's work,' but he disappointed me. He said, 'Is that your father-in-law, that grey-headed old man there?' I said, 'Yes.' He said, 'I can give him a job to-morrow for five or six shillings.' I said, 'All right; I'll call him over.' I called him over and said to him, 'This man has got a day's work
for you,' and then I left them. I saw no more of Jones till the 7th of February, when he was outside the Jolly Gardeners public-house, at about eight o'clock—I and my father-in-law had been to Deptford, and this man (Jones) was outside. He ran over to me and my father-in-law, and said, 'I am sorry for making you a fool the other morning; the man who wanted the copper built got someone else to do it.' I said, 'It don't matter, as I am going over to-morrow morning to Mr. Trollope's after a job.' He said, 'Will you have another glass of beer? I hope you will get it,' meaning the job. I went in the Jolly again, had another glass of beer with him and my father-in-law. When we came out he bid us goodnight, and we were arrested.—JAMES SMITH."
Cross-examined by Smith. I received the letter from you before Walters made his statement—I gave Walters a dinner at the Southwestern Police-court because he wanted it—the other prisoners did not want it so much—no doubt I should have given you one if you had asked for it—Walters was half-starved—he heard our conversation—I did not say that if you were placed among men you would not be identified—you were never placed among less than nine men.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. Sherlock is Smith's father-in-law—Sherlock is a brass finisher—he gave me the names of three firms among which he has worked almost constantly for nearly twenty years—Smith married Sherlock's daughter four or five years ago—Sherlock has borne the character of an honest and hard-working man—he is sixty-one.
Cross-examined by Walters. I heard you say to a prostitute you had with you when we knocked at your front room door, "It is the b—tecs."—you did not open the door at once—you inquired three or four times who was there—I waited for you to open it—at last you opened it and we went in, and I said I was going to arrest you—I might have asked you what you were going to do with the chopper in your hand—later on you said, "I did not mean to hit you with the axe; I was going to open the door with it."
Re-examined. Sherlock lives in the same house with Smith—I don't know that I have the address.
THOMAS CLOAKE (Detective W). On February 7th I was with Neighbour in Lambeth Walk, and I there saw Sherlock and Smith together, and stopped them—Neighbour said, "We are police-officers, and shall arrest you for stealing life policies and doctors' certificates, and thereby defrauding the Liverpool Victoria Legal Friendly Society and other insurance companies"—I took hold of Smith, and said, "You must go with me"—he said, "Where are we going?"—I said, "To Clapham Police-station"—he said, "What is this for?"—I said, "The facts of the case will be more fully explained to you at the Police-station,"—he said, "This is a mistake"—on the following morning I went to 53, New-port Street, the residence of Sherlock and Smith—in Smith's room I found two insurance policies in the Refuge Company, dated 3rd December, 1894, one in the name of James Smith and the other in the name of Joseph Smith—in Sherlock's room a life policy in the Liverpool Victoria Legal Friendly Society, in the name of Walter Messenger, dated 13th January, 1894, was handed to me.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I cannot say how long Smith, had been at that address.
WILLIAM NEIGHBOUR (Detective Sergeant W). On 7th February I and another officer arrested Sherlock, Smith, and Moore—I told Sherlock and Smith they answered the description of two men who had stolen two life policies and some cards from 34, Compton Street, Clerkenwell—Sherlock said, "I think you are on the wrong scent"—they were taken to the station—I have seen the death certificate, signed apparently, Dr. Brown, of 70, York Road, Lambeth—I have made inquiries there—it is a cheesemonger's shop kept by Mr. Hastwell, who has resided there for two years—no Dr. Brown lives there—I produce a copy of the "Medical Register"—the only G. W. Brown in it is "George Wilson Brown, of 34, Elmfield Avenue, Aberdeen, N.B., Master of Surgery, 1894, University of Aberdeen."
Cross-examined by Smith. I did not hear Sewell say that if you were placed among men you would never be identified; I should have heard it if he had said it—I should say about thirty people came in to identify you; there may have been thirty-nine—seven or eight picked you out, I suppose—I don't know how many picked you out from among other men.
Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. Sherlock lived at 53, Newport Street—Smith was living there at the time of the arrest; he had only been there then for five days—he had lived there previously, I believe, but he was not in habitual residence there.
Cross-examined by Walters. Several people identified you—about thirty-nine people were taken for the purpose of identifying any of the prisoners; some of them identified Smith, some Walters, and some Moore—every effort has been made to arrest Sally Jones, but we have not found him.
Witness for Smith.
Cross-examined. I am the gentleman who paid the £10 10s. at the time Mr. Hall was present—I am not prepared to say that Smith is not the man I paid it to.
Smith's defence. Some of them came to identify me, but failed to do so. Is is fair that we should be put in the dock and the witness asked, "Do you know any of these men?" And he has only to take a pick out of the four. The little girl says that when she fetched the servant down we were gone, and the servant says I was there with a book in my hand. I have a wife and children to support. I have been in prison three months, and they are starving.
SMITH—[and Walters (see next trial)] GUILTY .
SHERLOCK and MOORE— NOT GUILTY .
PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. AVORY stated that the charge of the prisoner's previous conviction had been omitted from the Indictment. Two convictions were proved against Moore, eight against Walters, and seven against Smith. WALTERS and MOORE— Five Years' Penal Servitude each. SHERLOCK— Nine Months' Hard Labour. SMITH— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
420. AUGUSTUS ROLL (33) , to embezzling £3 7s. 6d., £5 Is. 6d., and 13s. 7d., the moneys of Billinghurst Wilson Baggs and another, his masters, having been convicted on February 9th, 1891, of unlawfully obtaining goods by false pretences. Two other convictions were proved against him.— [Pleaded guilty. See original trial image.] Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BROXHOLME Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.
JOHN MEAD . I am a tobacconist, of High Street, Marylebone—on October 14th I went into the Merrick Arms, Battersea, with a man named Pyne, about ten o'clock—there were five men in the compartment—the prisoner and his brother were two of them—I called for half-a-pint of bitter ale, and the man with me had half-a-pint—one of the men wanted me to fight—I said I did not get my living by boxing—they asked me to buy them some beer—I said "I don't know you"—I was struck five or six times over my head and body—the man who has been tried got my purse and £4 5s.—I am not prepared to say that the prisoner struck me—I told the Magistrate that he did—I cannot say where he struck me—I was hustled out of the house—I did not see the prisoner outside—the man who is sentenced to seven years punched my nose and took my purse—I was taken to the hospital, and remained there six weeks.
Cross-examined. The last time I was here you blamed it to this man—I said then, "We were not going into the public-house at first, we were going round the corner for our own purpose, and somebody pushed up against me and I said, 'I am going into the house to see what they meant'"—outside the public-house I was knocked down by one man who took my purse, and the others took a running kick at me and broke my leg; I want to get the prisoner off.
NOT GUILTY .
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BUTLER Prosecuted.
CHARLES WILLIAM BROWN . I am a chimney-sweep, of 11, Cannon Street Road, Peckham—the prisoner is my wife—on Saturday night, April 7th, at 11.40, I was in bed and my wife came home very drunk—she said "Get up out of there"—I took no notice; she said, "If you don't get up I will burn you out of it"—she had a match in her hand—I jumped out of bed and took it from her, and she struck me with a fork; I was. a month under treatment, and unable to attend to my business—she has assaulted me before; she had a month for cutting me with a butterdish; that was from drink, and the same day she came out she took a quilt off the bed and pawned it.
point duty, and the prosecutor came to me bleeding very much from his head—I went with him to his room, and found this plated fork bent in this state—the prisoner said, "Yes, I did it with that; I should like to do it again"—there was no blood on it—the prisoner was in the room; she had been drinking—when she was charged she pointed to her husband and said, "I have not done with him yet; I will be the death of him before I have done."
ROBERT HESLER . I practise at 4, Ernest Row, Rotherhithe—I was called to the station, and found Brown bleeding from his left temple—there were three marks such as would be made by this fork—I stopped the hemorrhage—it was not a serious wound, but it was in a serious place.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: " He has threatened my life, and he aggravated me till I done it."
C. W. BROWN (Re-examined). We have been married ten or eleven years—when the prisoner is sober she is all right—she keeps sober for about a week, and then takes to drink—we have two children—a lot of drunken women wait for her outside, and take her out—she is a good mother when she is sober, but she is only sober for a week at a time—she is drunk quite three-quarters of the year.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. — Ten Months' Hard Labour ,
MR. POYNTER Prosecuted, and MR. WARDE Defended Leonard.
ALICE GILL . I am assistant shop woman in the service of Mr. Debus, baker and confectioner, 230, Wandsworth Road—I have known Leonard About twelve months before 3rd April—I first saw Strickland on 2nd April—he called at the shop—he asked to see Mr. Debus—I told him he was not at home—he promised to call the next day, and he went away—the next day he came again in the afternoon—he asked to see Mr. Debus—I told him he was not at home—he said, "He promised if I would call about three o'clock he would be in"—a few minutes afterwards this telegram came, and Strickland came in again and asked if Mr. Debus was not in yet (The telegram was to Gill, 230, Wandsworth Road, "Pay Simpson £3, or what you can," from Debus)—I said Mr. Debus had not come in, but having this telegram I gave him £3, and he gave me this receipt—he had said on the Tuesday his name was Simpson. (The receipt was, "Received, A. Simpson, £3 April 2nd, 3rd, 1895 ")—I did not see Mr. Debus between the Tuesday and the Wednesday—he has a private address—he had not been to business—I have seen Leonard write—the draft telegram produced is his writing—I knew him through his coming to see Mr. Debus.
Cross-examined by MR. WARDE. I did not know Leonard and Debus were in partnership—I knew nothing of their business—he has left a note on one or two occasions for Mr. Debus, and wrote it in my presence.
Leonard, as a gentleman of means named Simpson—Leonard wished mo to join Simpson as a partner in a racing concern—I declined at first, but afterwards said I would see him first—I had not seen him—I did not tee him on 3rd April—I entered into no partnership with him on 3rd April—I sent no telegram to Miss Gill—I gave no one authority to send a telegram—I did not owe Strickland any money—I had not promised to meet him at my shop on 3rd April—his writing on the draft telegram is not disguised.
Cross-examined by MR. WARDS. I have not done a great deal of business with Leonard—there was no partnership between us of any kind—Leonard had an office at Stonecutter Street, and I financed him—it was with reference to racing, where printers' boys could get straight tips to make fortunes—I provided the money, and Leonard carried on the business—I did not make any profits—the business was not established for the benefit of printers' boys, but for the benefit of the public—there was a loss made—that office lasted about three months, till Leonard, instead of paying the rent, kept the money, and the furniture in the office was seized for the rent on January 6th—I did not afterwards open any other business with Leonard; I severed all connection with him—I had not any establishment with him in Clerkenwell—a dancing saloon was open during the time the Stonecutter Street office was running, and ceased before the Stonecutter Street office was closed—Leonard had the management of the dancing saloon as well—it was a financial failure to a certain extent—during these transactions I saw Leonard's writing—he did the greater part of the writing for the business—he would write telegrams and letters, and keep books—Leonard would have had something out of these businesses had the profits been equal to it—he had out of them what he took—I suppose he had a right, he took it whether he had or not—I have seen him four or five times since the closing of the dancing saloon and the Stonecutter Street business—he had no authority to use my name.
FANNY SAUNDERS . I am the wife of George Saunders, of 8, Sussex Road, Brixton—on Sunday, April 7th, between eleven and twelve a.m., I went to 24, Sussex Road—the prisoner Leonard lodged there—Strickland's wife was with me—I went at her request as her friend—Strickland was in custody—I saw Leonard at the door—Mrs. Strickland asked Leonard what he was going to do about her husband, as she was without food—Leonard said he would do all he could for Albert, as he was no more to blame than the others; and he said he (Leonard) wrote the telegram and another man sent it off, and Albert Strickland received £3; kept £1 himself and gave £2 to Leonard.
Cross-examined by MR. WARDE. Leonard did not say he got someone to write the telegram; he said he wrote it himself.
JOHN GILBY (Detective Sergeant W). I took Strickland into custody on a warrant on Saturday, April 6th—I told him he would be charged on a warrant for obtaining £3 from 230, Wandsworth Road, on April 3rd—he said "I had it, but others are in it"—I took him to the station, where he was charged—when the charge was read over he said, "I had the money, but others were in it"—after receiving the telegram which
was identified, I arrested Leonard at Kennington—I told him he would be charged with Strickland with obtaining this money—he said, "All right"—he made a similar remark at the Police-station—I showed him the original telegram, which I had in my possession.
Strickland's defence was that he was in employment when Leonard sent him for the money; that he was in the Swan at Stockwell when he sent the telegram; that he asked Leonard about it, and he said, "You won't be locked up;" that he told the other gentleman, who said he had got none of it at all; he said it was his first offence, and his master had offered to take him back into his employment.
GUILTY . STRICKLAND was recommended to mercy, as the JURY considered he was a tool of Leonard — One Month's Hard Labour. LEONARD— Six Months' Hard Labour.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, MAY 20TH, 1895.