CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
FIRST SESSION, HELD NOVEMBER 18TH, 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.
VOLUME CXXIII.—SESSIONS I. TO VI.
STEVENS AND SONS, LIMITED, 119, CHANCERY LANE,
Law Booksellers and Publishers.
On the Queen's Commission of
OYER AND TERMINER AND GAOL DELIVERY
The City of London,
AND GAOL DELIVERY FOR THE
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX AND THE PARTS OF THE COUNTIES OF ESSEX, KENT, AND SURREY, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,
INCLUDING CASES COMMITTED TO THIS COURT, UNDER ORDER IN COUNCIL, PURSUANT TO WINTER ASSIZE ACT OF 1879,
Held on Monday, November 18th 1895, and following days.
BEFORE the RIGHT HON, SIR WALTER WILKIN , Knt., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir ROBERT SAMUEL WRIGHT , Knt., one of the Justice of her Majesty's High Court; Sir HENRY EDMUND KNIGHT , Knt., Sir DAVID EVANS , Knt., and Sir STUART KNILL , Knt., Aldermen of the said City; Sir CHARLES HALL , Q.C., M.P., K.C.M.G., Recorder of the said City; Lieut.-Col. HORATIO DAVID DAVIES , Esq., JAMES THOMSON RITCHIE , Esq., WALTER VAUGHAN MORGAN , Esq., WILLIAM PURDIE TRELOAR, Esq., GEORGE WYATT THUSCOTT, Esq., and FREDERICK PRAT ALLISTON , 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.
CLARENCE BECKFORD, Esq.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
WILKIN, MAYOR. FIRST 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 associates of bad characters—the figured after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, November 18th, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
1. HARRY LAW (27) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing, whilst employed in the Post-office, letter containing three postal orders for 10s. each, the property of the Postmaster-General.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
2. FREDERICK GEORGE ANDREW GRIFFIN (27) , to stealing, whilst employed in the Post-office, two letters, one containing a silver watch and the other forty-eight gold rings.— Ten Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MESSRS. H. C. RICHARDS and HEWITT Prosecuted.
CHARLES WHITE RULE . I am a schoolmaster, of 163, Northumberland Park, Tottenham—on September 27th, about half-past two, I purchased this postal order for 15s. at the Post-office in Leather Lane—the number of it is N 448,385—I took it outside and posted it in the box outside the Post-office—it was addressed to my father, "Mr. Joseph Rule, 20, Wellington Street, Cambourne, Cornwall"—I had a communication from him, and in consequence, I wrote to the General Post-office.
JAMES JOSEPH FOX . I am an overseer in the General Post-office—the prisoner has been employed there as a collector, to collect from sub-offices and pillar boxes—on September 27th he was on duty to collect there Leather Lane Post-office at 11.20, 11.45 and 2.45—a letter posted there from a quarter to one to a quarter to three would be collected by the prisoner up to 2.45; and would arrive at Cambourne next morning.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. Only one other man collected up to 6 p.m.
LAURA PATCH . I am a clerk in the Post-office—on September 27th about a quarter to seven, this order was presented by an old woman, filled up as it is now—I paid it—in consequence of instructions from the Post
office; I carefully noted the time—I think I could recognise the woman who presented it.
JOSEPH GEORGE STEVENS . I am a clerk in the General Post Office—on October 3rd I saw the prisoner at the Post-office—I told him who I was and said, "I am making inquiries with reference to the loss of letters in your district from various boxes"—I produced a number of orders to him, amongst them the one in question, and said, "This order was issued at Leather Lane, on the 27th September, and was cashed the same evening by a woman who answers the description of your mother"—he said "I know nothing at all about it"—I saw him again about five, and then said, "I have seen your mother, and I ask you again what you know about this matter"—he said, "I will tell you all I know about it"—she then made a statement which I took down, and he signed it (read, "I identify the order produced No. 21 for 15s. About 12.50 p.m. on the afternoon of September 27th, I met a man named Noble in Leather Lane; I don't know where he lives; I asked him to go to the Post office in Leather Lane, and purchase for me an order for 15s.")—I gave him the money for it—he came out and gave me the order, about two minutes afterwards—I filled it up, signed it and the same afternoon, about four, I gave it to my mother; I don't know what she did with it afterwards; I knew it was necessary to fill in some name, and Noble was the first name I thought of"—I saw him when he was given into custody—I produced the postal order to him again on October 18th—I did not know when I first saw him where the order had been taken out—I did not know when "On October 3rd you made a statement concerning this," he said, "Exactly so;" I said, "You will be charged with stealing an order on September 27th," he said, "Very well," and he was given into custody—this (produced), is my original note of what he said.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner It was about twenty minutes past two on October 3rd when I stopped you coming in with your collection of 1.45—I took you into a room in the General Post Office—I asked you several questions—I asked you to deliver your bills and dockets to Mr. Fox, and you did so—I asked you about a registered letter, and then referred you to Mr. Fox—I did not search you—I asked you if you had any objection to be searched—you said "No"—an officer searched you, on paper; you did so—I am sure that I produced the 15s. order to you at the time I asked you about it—you said you had purchased it, and who went with you.
MR. FOX (Recalled). I was present when the prisoner signed this statement, it was read over to him distinctly.
GUILTY .— Fourteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BLACKWELL Prosecuted.
February 4th I received this letter, purporting to come from H. Rideont, the late sergeant-Major of my battery—(This letter, addressed from 214, Vauxhall Bridge Road, stated that returning from abroad he had suffered severely with a bad chest, and been unable t work, and that he solicited help in his present need)—I thought the letter was genuine, and as Rideout had almost taught me my recruit's drill, and I had an affection for him, I sent a cheque for £5 on Cox and Co. by the seven o'clock post (within half-an-hour of receiving the letter) to the address given in the letter—I heard certain matters which led me to make inquiries, and I communicated with my bankers, and got this cheque back in its present condition—they had informed me that they had paid the amount—(the cheque was endorsed: "Received the above amount, H. Levy," and"H. Rideout.")
HENRY RIDEOUT . I am a Sergeant-Major in the Royal Artillery—I formerly belonged to Captain Dunlop's battery—I did not write this letter—I did not authorise anyone about the date of this letter to write to Capttain Dunlop or anyone—I did not receive a cheque for £5 from him about that time—I never received this cheque—this endorsement, "H. Rideout," is not in my writing.
Cross-examination by Prisoner. The letter was addressed H. Rideout; I never delivered a letter addressed to J. H. Ridgeway.
JOHN WILLIAM BRONTE BRAMWELL . I am a clerk at Cox's Bank, Charing Cross—I received this cheque when it came there with another cheque and a letter. (The letter dated February 9th, 1894, and signed H. Rideout, was a request to cash the cheques as he was too ill to go out.) I sent back the letter with the cheques, and have not seen it again—a man brought the letters and cheques; I cannot say who it was.
JOHN FRANCIS DODDRIDGE . I am a sergeant in the Pembroke Artillery Militia—the prisoner was a bombardier gunner, and non-commissioned officer in my battery, and was a clerk in the Quatermaster-of-Arms' office—I know his writing—this letter of February 4th, the endorsement H. Rideout on this cheque, and these other three letters, are, I believe, In his writing—I know the prisoner as John Henry Ridgeway.
CHARLES ERNEST FISHER . I am deputy chief constable of Suffolk, stationed at Ipswich—I know the prisoner and am acquainted with his writing—I saw him write once in July this year—he wrote this paper—this letter of February 4th, 1895, and the endorsement, H. Rideout, on the cheque are in his writing—I knew him in the name of John Henry Ridgeway—I don't know the writing of the name of "John O'Leary" on the cheque—I say these Durrant letters are in the prisoner's writing, and also the letter of February 4th—I have other letters admitted by the prisoner in a former case to be in his writing.
Cross-examined. I saw you write in the guard-room at Ipswich station.
JOHN MCCARTHY (Detective-Sergeant, Scotland Yard). I arrested the prisoner on a Wednesday evening in September, after following him from a certain address—said, "Hulloa, Ridgeway; how are you?"—he said, "That is not my name"—I said, "Well, then your name is Spelane"—he
said, "You have made a mistake"—I said, "Well, you answer the description of a man I hold a warrant for; I am going to take you into custody"—I read the warrant to him in respect of this case; he said, "I don't know Captain Dunlop; you have made a mistake; you will have to prove my identity"—I took him to the police station—he was charged—he made no reply.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he wrote two letters for a fellow lodger, who said he was an old soldier named Rideout, and that the man afterwards showed him two cheques and asked him to cash them, and that as he could not go himself he sent another man to do so.
There was another indictment against the prisoner for a similar offence. The prisoner had been convicted at Ipswich of a similar offence.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
6. AMHERST RICHARD JONES (49) PLEADED GUILTY ** to obtaining by false pretences from Richard Jones and other persons money with intent to defraud; also to a conviction of felony in July, 1895. The detective stated that since the prisoner's last conviction he had tried to get employment.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
7. FREDERICK SAVAGE (23) to stealing an order for the payment of £11 19s. 2d., the property of John Bolding and Sons, Limited, his masters; and also to forging and uttering an endorsement on an order for the payment of £11 19s. 2d.— Discharged on recognizance. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
NEW COURT.—Monday, November 18th, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
9. ARTHUR WILLIAM JOB (24) , to forging and uttering a form of application; also a receipt for £14 8s., with intent to defraud.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
11. ARTHUR GOOD (21) and CHARLES PRITCHARD (20) , to breaking and entering St. Luke's Church, Hammersmith, and stealing a lock, the property of the Churchwardens; Good having been convicted at West Ham in September, 1889, and Pritchard at Clerkenwell. Three previous convictions were proved against Good and eleven against Pritchard. GOOD— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. PRITCHARD— Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. GRAIN Prosecuted, and MR. MONTEFIORE Defended.
BRODIE MANUEL DE ZULUETA . I am one of the firm of Zulueta and Co., merchants and bankers, 41, Moorgate Street—it is part of our duty to collect coupons for customers here and abroad—it was part of the prisoner's duty to assist us in the general business—the coupons are obtained and sent in due time by cheque, or if small they are sold to a
dealer—on September 24th we had to collect Australian 5 per cent, coupons value £35 11s. 6d.—I left at four o'clock that day, leaving Coben there; the had been engaged after mid-day in cutting and listing coupons; that would require care—he was there when I got there—about twelve o'clock on, the 25th, and I saw him off and on during the day performing his duties—on the 26th Wyatt made a communication to me with reference to the prisoner, and a telegram had been received before I got to the office and a clerk had been sent to the prisoner's house—on the 27th I got there about 12.30 and Mr. Wyatt and the prisoner were there—he was called into my room and I said, "How is it you did not come yesterday? Mr. Wyatt saw you in Finsbury about 10.30 a.m."—he said that he had been working all the previous night in a stock broker's office, which had brought on a return of the gout which he suffered from and he was then going home—on being told that the clerk had been told that he was not at home, he said that that was a mistake of the servant—I said that if he made himself unfit for our work by working elsewhere we could not allow it—he sometimes said that he sent the telegram before he went to Finsbury and sometimes after—I dismissed him summarily, paying him to the end of the month—my brother was abroad—I spoke to him when he came back and wrote a letter to the prisoner after I found the coupons had been cashed, and sent it by the same clerk Stolger to Englefield Road—I then wrote him another letter to the same address and posted it—he came on the 14th and repeated what he had written in his letter that he had received the money at Mr. Ironmonger's office, and put it into his hip pocket, and forgot all about it till next evening, when he felt for it, and found it was not there—I asked if he did not search his pocket when he went to bed—he said he never did—I asked him if all the coupons had been eat—he said "Yes" but that did not recall it to his mind—I asked him why he did not say anything about it when he came to the office—he said he was afraid—I asked what he was afraid of—he said he did not know—I wrote to him on the 19th, and said that the matter was in the hands of our solicitor, and on the 21st a warrant was applied for—his wife and mother came and saw me after he was arrested—this book (produced) is in pencil; just the top of the "C" is left, and the "le" in Englefield Road—that is in his writing, I know it well.
Cross-examined. A large quantity of coupons passed through his hands—he kept the books in Spanish—we paid him about £120 a year—during the seven years he has been with us nothing has gone wrong with him—a list of the coupons is kept in a book; I have not got it; it would be in his custody—the cash-book will show the money he received, it is not here—there is no book in which a falsification has been made—every amount was paid into the bank unless it is given to us to put in our safe—since this was discovered, we find that he has kept back two or three small sums which he asked for, and they paid the amount after he was discharged; it was not given to him to be given to the collector when he called—I do not know whether the collector did or did not call—I was not present when he cleared out his desk before he left—I do not know that the money was paid a day on two after to the collector, it was paid in the office—he had a sum in July or August, and it was paid in September—it was about £1 4s, 6d. altogether—we had no reason to
suspect him of anything dishonest, or we should not have kept him—we took him with a written character from Messrs. Barnato—this is his ordinary signature.
SIDNEY WALTER HART . I am a clerk to Ironmonger and Hall—on September 24th, about noon, I received this cheque, and paid Mr. Goodban £36 11s. 6d.—there was a £20 note, a £10 note, a £5 note, and £1 10s. in money.
Cross-examined. I have known the prisoner for some time—I have done business with him three or four times a year, and have paid him large sums from time to time.
CHARLES JOHN WILLIAMS . I am a clerk in the Bank of England—I produce this note; it was paid in by the London and County Bank on October 1st—in the process of cancelling part of the name has disappeared.
MR. DE ZULUETA . On my return from my vacation I had a conversation with my brother, and on looking through this book I find references to these Australian bonds—I have heard my brother's evidence—a large proportion of the coupons we collected are to persons in London, and we send them to see if they are correct; they give us a ticket and we collect the cheques—I do not think the prisoner received any money that day.
HENRY TAYLOR (City Detective). I received a warrant, and on October 21st, went to the prisoner's lodgings at 137, Southgate Road—I said to him, "Is your name Cohen?" he said, "Yes"—I read the warrant to him and took him in custody.
Witnesses for the Defence.
MRS. COBEN. I am the prisoner's mother and live with my husband at 137, Southgate Road—the prisoner lives with his wife in lodgings in Englefield Road—they do not keep a servant—on September 24th he spent the evening at my house and said, "Oh! look what I have here; I quite forgot to pay them into the bank"—he had more than one note—his father told him to pay them in next morning—he did not look at them—he said, "That will be all right"—it was about 7 or 8 p.m.
PIERS MARTIN . I am a mariner; I was in the P. and O. service—I have known the prisoner several years—on Wednesday, September 25th, I saw him at the corner of Moorgate Street and Fore Street about 4.30 or 5 o'clock very drunk; I talked to him and tried to get him home but he would not come—I generally went home with him—he did not appear to be able to control himself properly—I saw him two days afterwards, Friday the 27th; he was then in a state of muddle from the effect of two days before.
Cross-examined. I met him nearly every day in Finsbury—I am an inspector for the Old Kent Road district on the P division—I sometimes go into the Globe Hotel and wait for him—he does not wait for me—he leaves his office at 4.30—I did not see him in a Hansom's cab—there was
no lady there—it could not be that he was seen getting into a Hansom's-cab with a lady.
SIDNEY HARRIS . I am clerk to my father, a solicitor of Finsbury Pavement—I know the prisoner—I saw him about mid-day or a little after, on Friday, September 27th—he was recovering from very heavy drink and trembling; I advised him to have something to eat; he had some sandwiches but could not eat them.
Cross-examined. I adhere to my statement, I said "about mid-day"—I usually take my mid-day refreshment about 1.30, and I met him before that, about one o'clock.
ROBERT LANG . I am a traveller for Messrs. Ede and Fisher—I have known the prisoner about fifteen years—I called at the office one morning, and he said that he had an account waiting for us whenever our collector liked to call—as far as I know his character is respectable, straightforward, and honest.
Cross-examined. I did not notice whether it was in July that he called, because the collectors call about once in three months.
B. M. DE ZULUETA (Re-examined). I got to the office about 12.30, and he was waiting—the interview lasted ten minutes or a quarter of an hour—he was perfectly sober, there was no sign of his recovering from drink—he had been there a day or two before—I had a long conversation with him, so as to see his condition—I leave the office about four o'clock, and I do not suppose the clerks stop long after—I was at the National Bank about 12.30.
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury. — Six Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, November 19th, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. ROACH Prosecuted.
GEORGE INWOOD . I am a cart minder in the Central Market, and live at 110, Farringdon Road Buildings—the market closes at five—on November 15th, about 5.30 p.m., I had in my charge about seven carts, including a cart belonging to Mr. Alfred Knowlden, loaded with meat and with the tarpaulin tied down—I walked away from Mr. Knowlden's cart to another one, and when I came back I saw the prisoner and another man at the side of the van and a third man at the horse's-head—the van was backed into the kerb—directly I came to the back of the van they turned away from a pig which they had drawn out from the van, and pretended they had been making water—I held the prisoner, the other two got away but returned, and one of them said, "Come on, Bill, never mind him; come and have a drink"—when the two men saw Mr. Knowlden (who had gone for a policeman) coming back they went away—I handed the prisoner to Mr. Knowlden who charged him—I saw the prisoner drawing the pig out by force—I said, "Put that pig back where you took it from"—he gave me a volley of abuse—I said, "If you won't put it back you will have to go into custody"—I was as sober as
I am now—when I told him to put the pig back he said, "Who the b——f——h——are you? I don't want your f——pig. I could do with some oxtails."
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I could recognise one of the other two men—I have not contradicted any statement I made before—I have been for seven years a cart minder in the Meat Market—I never knew tarpaulins to slip untied—the two pigs were in front of the van, between the splash-board and the body of the van, and the tarpaulin was tied to the foot-board and side of the van, and it had been untied and loosened from the splash-board and a pig forced out—it would take a good deal of pressure to get it out, because the nose was almost touching the ground and the body resting on the wheel—if I had been a minute later it would have gone—I had had two or three drinks on that day between 5 a.m. and 6 p.m.—I have not known a pig slip off when it has been securely packed and tied—this was a very wet night, and the pigs were covered over with other cloths as well—I was on the kerb when I told you to put the pig back—I did not leave you for half-a-yard—a man working for Bartington passed and re-passed the van several times—I did not load the van or tie the tarpaulin on, but it was securely tied down.
WILLIAM GEORGE BILSON . I am a market porter, living at 32, Market Road, High Street, Peckham—about 4 p.m. on November 15th I saw the prisoner and two men together in the Central Market loitering about the vans outside the market—I came out three or four times, and each time the prisoner was pretending to make water by the side of the vans.
Cross-examined. I do not think I could recognise the other two men—I was watching you for an hour or more, and recognise you—I took particular notice of you; you had a basket on your arm—I saw you being taken to the station; I was working at the time—you were standing in the light, the other two men in the dark—I may have seen you before; I know nothing about you.
ALFRED KNOWLDEN . I am a butcher, of 127, Salmon Lane, Limehouse—on November, 15th I left my van in charge of Inwood—when I came back I saw the prisoner in Inwood's custody, who said he had been stealing a pig, which was nearly out of the cart—I valued it at 30s.; two of them cost me £3—Inwood charged him—I had seen the pig in the van about ten minutes before—they were securely packed in the front of the van, lying on the board—they could not have slipped out the way they were packed—the tarpaulin was not tied round them, but on each side—the tarpaulin would not prevent them slipping; but they would not slip unless anyone interfered with them, I am certain—it was put back in the same way, and I drove them to Limehouse in safety.
Cross-examined. I should not be surprised if one slipped from the top of the van, but this was packed on the footboard—a porter packed them—I went round the van to see they were loaded in a proper manner, and then left to pay the porter—I have to see these things are properly packed, or I should lose them.
FREDERICK RICE (Central Market Constable 29). On the afternoon of November 15th I was called and the prisoner was given into my custody—he said, "I was there for the purpose of making water"—I took him
to the station; he went willingly—Inwood was sober—before the Alderman the prisoner elected to be tried by a jury.
Cross-examined. You asked Inwood whether he saw you touch the pig; he said, "I saw you leave go of the pig;" he said another man was with you—you said you would come to the station with me.
The prisoner in his statement before the Magistrate, and in his defence, stated that he stopped at the van to make water, that he saw the pig as if it had slipped out, and that Inwood was three parts drunk.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. DRAKE Prosecuted.
ERNEST REED . I am a jeweller, of 146, Ladbroke Road, Kensington—about 11 p.m., on October 29th, I closed my shop securely—about 1.45 a.m. I was called, and I found my side window had been broken, and I missed three trays, and brooches and things that had been in it; they had been taken out through the broken window—the window was not protected at all; there was nothing of any great value in the window; the value of the articles taken was £2 14s.—the police subsequently showed me these things which I identified as those stolen from my window.
WILLIAM GUISE (398 X). I was on duty about 1.30 a.m. on October 30th in Cambridge Gardens—I heard a smashing of glass, and went towards the direction and examined the shops, and found that a window of this shop had been smashed—I saw the prisoner fifty yards away—I followed her; she turned into Oxford Gardens—I searched about in several gardens and eventually saw her inside one of the gardens, sitting on the coping, and taking these brooches off and pinning them inside her jacket and on her breast—I asked her where she got them from—she said they had been given to her—I asked her by whom—she said she did not know—I picked up some of the things from the pavement and took her to the station, where she was charged—she had been drinking previously, but she was not drunk at the time—she appeared to know what she had been doing—she could walk straight and speak distinctly.
The prisoner stated in her defence that she was drunk and did not remember anything about the matter.
GUILTY .— Three Months' Hard Labour.
15. WILLIAM WATTS (23), and GEORGE BAKER (24) , Unlawfully attempting to commit burglary in the dwelling-house of Alfred Impleton, and stealing his goods. Second Count—Being found by night with housebreaking implements in their possession without lawful excuse.
BAKER PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. BARKER Prosecuted, and MR. E. PERCIVAL CLARKE Defended Watts.
CHARLES WARNE (Sergeant 96 Y). About 2.30 a.m. on November 2nd, I was with Hardiman in the Holloway Road—when we were about ten yards from the doorway of 2, Rupert Road, I saw the prisoners come from that doorway; I did not know Baker, but I knew Watts well by
sight before—they walked hurriedly away down Rupert Road—I examined the door and found a jemmy mark by the lock—a constable came along at the time and I directed him to go one way while I and Hardiman went round the Hampden Road—there we met the prisoners coming into Holloway Road again, returning in the direction contrary to that in which they had left the doorway—we stopped them and told them we should take them into custody for attempting to break into 2, Rupert Road—neither of them made any reply—Hardiman searched Watts; I searched Baker, and found on him this jemmy in his inside jacket pocket; this rope was wound round his waist underneath his jacket; these silent matches and a knife were found in his pocket at the station; all those are tools that might be used in housebreaking—I tried the jemmy on the mark on the door.
Cross-examined. Watts was searched; no implements that would be used in housebreaking were found on him—we were on the same side of the Holloway Road as is Rupert Road—we saw the prisoners come out of the door and walk hurriedly away—I did not know they had done anything till I went in the doorway and examined the door—it was a clear night—Hampden Road is about thirty or forty yards from Rupert Road.
GEORGE HARDIMAN (Sergeant 58 Y). At 2.30 a.m. on November 2nd, I saw Watts coming out of the doorway of 2, Rupert Road; I knew him by sight before; I have no doubt he is the man—I accompanied Warne to the Hampden Road—I heard him tell the prisoners they would be charged—Watts made no reply—I searched Watts—I found on him a purse, 5s. 6d., and a pawnticket.
Cross-examined. I found no housebreaking implements on Watts—as soon as we got to the corner I saw the prisoner come out of the doorway and turn sharp round and walk in the opposite direction to us—I have made enquiries about Watts; I have heard of no previous conviction against him—he told the magistrate "I had nothing to do with it; it was only by accident I met the man."
Re-examined. He said that next morning at the Court.
Witness for the Prisoner.
GEORGE BAKER (the Prisoner): I have pleaded guilty to attempting to break open this door on morning of November 2nd—Watts was not with me—I left the door and went up Rupert Road, and met Watts at the end of Hampden Road and got into conversation with him, and we walked together up Hampden Road—I asked him for a piece of tobacco, and he gave me about half an ounce of tobacco, two or three cigarettes and a penny to get some coffee with, as I was hard up—another man who lives in Rupert Road was with me, not Watts.
Cross-examined. I do not choose to say who the other man was; it is enough for one to get into trouble—I was not disturbed by the sergeants—I left the door because I could not open it with this jemmy—I tried to do it—I have been convicted several times before—about ten minutes after leaving the door I was arrested—I was coming back to go home—when I left the door I walked away from the direction of my home, because I saw the sergeants; they did disturb me—I do not know Watts, only by sight. I do not know that I know him at all. I have only seen
him once or twice, I think—I do not know Willis; I never lodged in his house.
A witness deposed to Watts's good character.
GUILTY . Baker had been convicted seven times, and had served Five Years' Penal Servitude. BAKER— Five Years' Penal Servitude. WATTS— Six Months' Hard Labour.
16. THOMAS MURRAY (38), and MARIE STUART NICHOLSON (32) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of Mary Eleanor Vere Cust, and stealing a clock and other goods, the property of Matilda Cox, Second Count—Receiving the same.
MURRAY PLEADED GUILTY. MR. DRAKE Prosecuted, and MR. BOLTON Defended Nicholson. MATILDA COX. I am engaged by Miss Cust, and live at 20, Vincent Square—at 11.30 p.m., on October 11th, I locked up the premises—next morning I was down at seven, and at 8.30, on going into the breakfast room, I found it in disorder, and I missed this clock, umbrella, boots, underclothing, shawls, and different things—I saw this umbrella in Nicholson's possession at Rochester Row Police-station—I was afterwards shown the clock, boots, underclothing and shawls, and I identified them as belonging to my mistress—some of them are marked "M.E.V.C."
Cross-examined. She had not the appearance of having been struck in the face when she pawned the clock, "but afterwards she had—she pledged other things with me.
RICHARD MAISEY (Detective Sergeant). After Bowden had arrested Nicholson I went to 72, Charlotte Street, with Taylor, and the landlady showed me a room occupied by both prisoners, where I found a black bag, locked—it contained this flannel petticoat, two pillow-slips, a shawl, two other handkerchiefs, and other articles, which belong to Mrs. Cox—I also found a cigar-box, which belonged to Mr. Morris, of Camden Road, and had been stolen; a brooch stolen from Miss Piper, and other proceeds of burglaries—on the 22nd I was at the Police-court, where the prisoners were jointly charged—Nicholson said she pawned plated goods that belonged to Miss Piper at a pawnbroker's in Leicester Square for 30s., with her own bag, and that she pawned a jacket belonging to Miss Piper in Hampstead for 4s., in her own name of Nicholson—when she was searched at the Police-court this table-cover was taken from her, she was wearing it made up as a petticoat—she was carrying this umbrella—she made a statement to Bowden.
Cross-examined. I was present when she was arrested in the precincts of Marylebone Police Court.
THOMAS BOWDEN (Detective Sergeant). I arrested the prisoner in the precincts of Marylebone Police-court—I told her I was a police-officer, and should arrest her for being concerned with burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Miss Cust at 20, Vincent Square, and also 82, Vincent Square, and stealing a clock
and other articles—she said, "Yes, I know the clock you mean; I did have it"—she said she wanted to make a statement—a week after Murray said in her presence that the cake basket he stole from 82, Vincent Square was pledged by her at 15, Hampstead Road for 16s. at the same time as an umbrella was pledged—she replied, "No; that was a salver"—a few minutes after the male prisoner had spoken to me she said, "It was a basket I pledged for 6s., but I do not know what name I gave, and I did not know that it was stolen"—on October 15th I spoke to her at the Marylebone Police-court about an umbrella, and she said, "That is mine"—at Rochester Row she said, "I may as well tell you that this umbrella was given to me by Murray, and I daresay he has stolen it, but I don't know"—she made this statement in writing; it is signed by her and me; it was read over in Murray's presence: "I did not steal the clock, and am perfectly innocent of stealing anything. I know the clock you mean; I pawned it for the man, whom I have been living with, who has had me for a dupe. This is what he gave me for not getting more than 5s. for it (pointing to a black eye)—I thought he was a gentleman, but I find he is a thief, and I will tell you everything. I found him out to be a thief last Saturday afternoon, and went away and left him—I know that there are other things stolen, linen; I will tell you what it is; two pairs of drawers, with embrodiery at the bottom, one chemise, one pair of plain drawers, and some night-dresses, and one pair of boots. They are pawned with the clock at the shop opposite where I live. He pawned them; I mean he pawned the clock for 30s., and I think he gave the name of Fairfield, but he has destroyed the tickets. I pawned the linen, and I think I gave the name of Fairfield, while he waited outside. I saw a detective last night. I told him I would tell him all that I knew. I think that the detective's name was White. I only returned to 72, Charlotte Street, last night; I secured the door to keep him out, and intended to go home to my mother to-day. I again say I will help you all I can. I never stole anything in my life." I visited their lodgings in Charlotte Street, and gained access with the keys of the street door and of their bedroom, which she gave me—they occupied one small room, divided into two by a partition.
Cross-examined. Mills pointed her out before I arrested her in the precincts of the Court—she gave a correct address when I asked it, and the key of the room—when the prosecutrix pointed out the umbrella and said it was hers, Nicholson said, "I may as well tell you Murray gave me this umbrella; it may have been stolen, I don't know."
By the COURT. When I charged Murray he, in her presence, made this statement, which I wrote down at the time—I read to him the statement she had made about his giving her a pair of black eyes for not getting more than six shillings, and he said, "She is a liar, and her late landlady can prove it—let her say where she lived—I shall plead guilty to stealing everything you have here and all the charges you have made against me, for I stole them and she knew it, and helped to pawn the things and spend the money, but I did not give her the black eyes; she had them when I picked her up helpless in Piccadilly"—I said, "You might as well tell me about a basket missing from Dr. Archer's"—he said, "She pawned that at the same shop as I pawned the umbrella at, Hampstead Road, for six shillings"—she said, "That was a salver"—he
said, "I have made a mistake, I remember now; I thought it was silver and broke off the legs and found it was not and gave it away to a man—I gave him two goblets as well"—afterwards she said, "I did pawn the basket for six shillings; I do not know what name I gave; I did not know he had stolen it."
GUILTY.—The JURY recommended her to mercy as they believed she had been very much under Murray's power. — Discharged on recognisances. MURRAY also PLEADED GUILTY to three other indictments for burglary, to one for attempted burglary, and to a conviction of felony in January, 1894,. at this Court.— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
18. WILLIAM HERSEY (23), and JOSEPH GOODWIN (21) , to attempted burglary in the dwelling-house of William Paley Bauildon, with intent to steal therein, and to being found by night with housebreaking implements in their possession without lawful excuse. (See page 27 and 28). [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, November 19th, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Sergeant.
FRANK HULLUM (Detective, City). On the afternoon of November 9th I was in Princes Street with Mann, and, saw Smith and Horwood in company—we followed them to Mansion House Street, and the other two prisoners joined them—Knight placed his hands in the folds of a lady's dress, and some money fell; Smith picked it up—this was during Lord Mayor's Show—I also saw them surround a gentleman—they were all taken to the station, and I found this watch with the bow broken off in Tuhill's pocket—he made no reply—they were all acting together.
Cross-examined by Smith. I saw you take the watch and hand something to Tuhill.
HENRY MANN (Detective, City). I was with Hullum in Princes Street and saw Smith and Horwood together first—they joined the others in Mansion House Street—Smith put his hand in a gentleman's pocket; and took something—he was arrested, and I arrested Horwood—Knight was attempting to pick pockets with the other three—I watched them for half an hour.
PERCY ERNEST VODDEN . I am a clerk at 36, Gutter Lane—I was at the corner of Princes Street and Mansion House Street, and saw Smith and Horwood; Smith was just in front of me—this is my watch, I did not see or feel it taken.
The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate. Tuhill says: "I know neither of these three prisoners, somebody must have put the watch in my pocket." Smith says: "I did not take either of the watches."
Tuhill's Defence: I denied the charge, but the police took me. They must have dropped the watch into my pocket unknown to me.
Horwood's Defence: "Smith never took nothing."
Knight's Defence: "I was not there."
Tuhill's mother gave him a good character.
TUHILL and KNIGHT— NOT GUILTY . SMITH and HORWOOD— GUILTY. SMITH then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at the Mansion House on January 18th, 1894, and four other convictions were proved against him.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
HORWOOD— Discharged on recognisances.
No evidence was offered— NOT GUILTY .
GUILTY of an indecent assault.
Nine Months' Hard Labour.
MR. TODD Prosecuted.
GEORGE HOLTON (Policeman E). On Sunday, October 20th, about 2.15 a.m., I was on duty in Victoria Street, and saw the prisoners loitering at the corner of Orchard Street—they went to the right, and we had scarcely got into a doorway when I heard a cry of "Murder" and "Police"—we ran, and saw the prisoners standing over a man in the gutter—Harris ran in the direction of Smith's Street, Jackson and Driscoll ran to the right to Old Pye Street—I caught Jackson without losing sight of him. I was six yards behind him all the way, and saw his face when he turned round to see how far I was behind him—on the 25th I picked out Driscoll at Gloucester Road Station—I afterwards saw Robinson at the station, and the prosecutor identified him.
Cross-examined by Jackson. You were not standing at Pye Street, but at the corner of Orchard Street; there was a constable in Pye Street, and on seeing him you partially stopped; that is how I secured you. I did not say to the prosecutor, "Is that the man?"
Cross-examined by Driscoll. I did not see you several times before I went in to identify you; I was fetched from my home.
ELIJAH ROBINSON . I am a coachman, of Bromley, Kent. I was coming from Victoria Station at 2.15 a.m., and met three men—I recognise Harris and Jackson, and Driscoll is very like the other—Harris said, "Give me some money to pay my lodging?"—I said that I had none to give him; he made a grab at my throat, and we fell in the road—they tried to put their hands in my pockets, and to throttle me—I hallooed, a policeman came, and they ran away; I got up and went after them—Harris and Jackson were taken—I never lost sight of them.
Cross-examined by Jackson. I did not pick you out from other men, but I never lost sight of you—I got up as quick as I could, and saw you running away, followed by a policeman, and saw him take you.
identified—he said nothing—I know all three of them well—I saw him that night going over Vauxhall Bridge—I have seen Duggan in bed in the hospital.
Harris's defence: "I was coming along, the worse for drink, and met the prosecutor. He was four or five yards from me, when the policeman called out, 'This is the man, is it not?' He said 'Yes.'"
Driscoll's defence; "I was not there." (The case was here adjourned while a messenger was sent to the hospital.)
GEORGE HANCOCK . I am House-surgeon at Westminster Hospital—Thomas Duggan 683 A is there, suffering from abscess of the peritoneum, and is confined to bed and unable to come here—he is under my charge.
GEORGE HOLTON (Re-examined). I was present at the Police-court when Duggan gave evidence on October 20th, and on the remand on the 25th—the prisoners had the opportunity of cross-examining him—they were not represented by any solicitor.
The Deposition of THOMAS DUGGAN (683 A). Read: "At 2.15 yesterday morning, October 20th, I was on duty in plain clothes with Police-constable 91, Holton, in Victoria Street. I saw the two prisoners with another man, not in custody, in Orchard Street. They were standing about. We concealed ourselves in a dark doorway. We had scarcely been there a minute, when I heard shouts of 'Murder!' and 'Police!' coming from Orchard Street, about sixty yards from where we were. We ran out from our hiding-place, and I saw the figure of a person lying in the gutter. The two prisoners and the other man bolted off. We gave chase. I caught Harris, after a run of about three hundred yards. He slipped my hands twice, and I had to throw him to the ground. He looked up and said, 'What are you going to charge me with?' I replied, 'I do not know yet; you come back with me to Orchard Street, where I saw a man lying down, and we'll see what you'll be charged with.' Just then the prosecutor met us, and, pointing to Harris, said, 'Ah, that's the man that tried to rob me just now; that's one of them.' I said, 'Are you the man that was lying in the roadway just now?' He said 'Yes, and that man tried to rob me; there's some more of them.' Harris then said, 'Be careful, now, you'll have to prove that.' I said to the prisoner, 'You'll likely be charged with attempted highway robbery with violence.' He replied, 'That will have to be proved.' Just then the constable Holton came up with Jackson in custody. They were taken to the station, and the prosecutor charged them both. The prisoners denied all knowledge of each other."
GUILTY .—HARRIS and DRISCOLL then PLEADED GUILTY to previous convictions, Harris at Lambeth on May 4th, 1891, and Driscoll at the South Western Police Court on May 12th, 1895, and several summary convictions were proved against all three prisoners. HARRIS— Twenty Months' Hard Labour. JACKSON— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. DRISCOLL— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
MR. AVORY Prosecuted.
Leadenhall Street—they have been solicitors for many years for Mr. Henry Ashurst Hawkins, who is the freeholder of 157, Jubilee Street, Stepney—on January 14th this year we discovered through our agent that the premises were out of repair, and I served a notice to that effect on George Chandler, the then tenant—it is a private house—in conesquence of what I heard I wrote a letter to Mr. C. Fraser, 44, Seton Street, Hampstead—I do not think it was registered.
HARRY BECKETT . I am a clerk to Messrs. Laing and Co.—on January 25th I posted a letter directed to Mr. C. Fraser 44, Seton Street, Hampstead; and another on May 2nd to C. Fraser, 42, Portland Road—this. (produced) is my postage book in which I enter each letter I post—I posted another on May 9th, and on May 10th, June 5th and 23rd—I posted the notice to produce on November 15th by registered letter.
C. J. Fraser. I was in business at 44, Silver Street and I never received any letters whatever.
L. HARDING (Re-examined). This is a copy of the letter of June 25th. (Informing the elder prisoner that notice had been served on him, and that he must do certain repairs within three months.) I subsequently inspected the premises and found that no repairs had been done, and in April we issued a writ of ejectment on George Chandler on the premises—this is it—no appearance was entered to it—we received this letter (produced), of May 1st, 1895, purporting to come from C. Fraser, of 42, Portland Street, Commercial Road. I heard Fraser deny at the Police-court that he wrote that letter—we replied to 42, Portland Street, on May 2nd (As the letter was not produced a copy was read, stating that as no notice had been taken of their letter of April 7th, proceedings had been taken and judgment would be given in a few days and placed in the Sheriff's hands.)—we then received a letter of May 3rd, purporting to come from Mr. Fraser, of 42, Portland Street, to which we replied on the 4th (This not being produced, a copy was read; it requested the prisoner to defend the action which had commenced and requested him not to increase the expenses already incurred.)—we waited till May 10th, and then signed judgment (This gave possession to the plaintiff.)—on May 10th we wrote this letter (Stating that judgment was signed, and unless some satisfactory arrangement was come to they should proceed.)—on May 13th the two prisoners came to our office; I had never seen them before—I know no way in which they could have known, our office except by our letters—the elder prisoner said that he was a very poor man and had no money, but that he was a practical builder, and enquired whether we would not give him further time—he described the property by name—he did not say, "I have come about Jubilee Street" but his name was brought in to me, and I knew he was calling about that—I said, "We will allow the matter to stand over for a fortnight, and then we will make further inspection to see whether any work has been done"—I asked him how he obtained his interest in the property; he said that ho had paid ground rent—I said, "Who to?"—he said he did not know, and left—we waited a fortnight and then made an inspection; nothing had been done, and the house was empty, our surveyor was with me—on June 5th I wrote this letter (Stating that, unless some arrangement was made, they should proceed to take possession.)—we received no reply, and on July 22nd
we instructed the Sheriff of Middlesex—this is his return to the writ (produced)—in consequence of something which came to our knowledge, we wrote to the same address again on August 30th.
L. HARDING (Continued). Mr. Cook took possession on our behalf, and we were negotiating for a lease to him (The letter stated that a trespass had been committed, and that they believed the elder prisoner had committed it, and informed him that the police would watch the place.)—on December 4th both the prisoners called on us, and the elder prisoner said, "You have taken possession of the premises without giving us notice; we intend to retake possession"—he threatened violence to anyone who should interfere—I warned him that if he did so he would render himself liable to a criminal prosecution.
Cross-examined by C. J. Fraser. 'I suggested to you that it would be advisable to sell the house, in order to get somebody to do the repairs.
JOHN GEORGE COOK . I am an agent and live in the Commercial Road—in July I was negotiating with Mr. Hawkins for a lease of 157, Jubilee Street, and on July 23rd I took possession from the Sheriff—I put a new lock on the door, but did not stay there—on August 30th I found the lock had gone, and put on a fresh one and a padlock—I bolted the back door inside, and nailed up the windows which were accessible from the ground floor; in addition to the usual fastenings—on September 20th I went to the premises and found the defendant and others in possession; the staple, in which the padlock had been, removed, and the padlock was gone—I knocked at the door, and the two defendants and other people opened a window upstairs and looked out—I said that they were trespassers and had no right there—they used filthy language and threatened to lay me out and knife me, if I tried to effect an entrance—I went away, met a constable and went back to the house with him—they spoke to the constable without opening the window, and I did not hear what they said—they did not open the door—on October 3rd I went there again with Redpath, and tried to get admission; they both appeared at the window, and the bailiff opened the outer shutters, which had been closed, and broke the window, and a saucer was thrown at him by someone in the room, breaking another pane, and striking the bailiff at the corner of his eye—we had to go away.
Cross-examined by C. W. Fraser. July 21st was the first time I saw you.
Cross-examined by C. J. Fraser. This was in September; I made a note at the time.
ARCHIBALD REDPATH . I am a certified bailiff—on October 3rd I went with Mr. Cook to take possession of 157, Jubilee Street, for Mr. Hawkins—I saw the two prisoners at the window, and read the authority out to them—they said that if I came in they would lay me out—I then opened the parlour shutters, and saw the younger prisoner in the room with a hammer, and another man with a bar of iron, and there was a third man—I broke a pane of glass and tried to lift up the window—a saucer came through it and broke another pane of glass, and came close to my face—I retreated; I went again on the 3rd and tried to break the door in
with a small hammer, but it was barricaded—they did not use bad language.
Cross-examined by C. J. Fraser. I did not see that you were mending your boots.
HENRY HATCHMAN (237 H). On September 20th, at Mr. Cook's request, I went to 157, Jubilee Street—I saw the two defendants looking from the upstairs window—Mr. Cook asked them to come down and open the door—the elder prisoner said, "I will not"—Mr. Cook said, "Who took the padlock off?"—the elder prisoner said, "I had it taken off."
Cross-examined by C. J. Fraser. You said to me, "You are the constable who was here before"—you were there at 12.30 on the morning of the 20th.
C. W. Fraser, in his statement before the Magistrate, and in his defence, said that his son came and told him that the door was open, and he went and found that the premises were left with nobody to look after them, and the tools and lead had been stolen, for which a man had been tried at the Thames Police-court; that the house had been willed to him by Jane Chaplin in 1823, and he believed it was his property and he paid the ground rent.
C. J. Fraser, in his statement before the Magistrate, and in his defence, said that when the first letter was sent in January or February, he was living in Seton Street, that he did not go to Portland Street till March; that his father saw the door ajar, pushed it, and it went in and he saw no padlock.
GUILTY.— Judgment respited.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, November 20th, 1895.
Before Mr. Justice Wright.
24. TIMOTHY MCCARTHY (32), was indicted for and charged on the Coroner's Inquisition, with the manslaughter of George Thomas Hoskins, and also for attempting to kill himself.—To both of which he PLEADED GUILTY — Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. MALLINGTON, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence on the felony. The prisoner stating that he wished to PLEAD GUILTY to unlawfully wounding; the JURY found that Verdict — Six Months' Hard Labour.
(For other cases tried this day, see Surrey Cases.)
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, November 20th, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. GILL and MR. HORACE AVORY Prosecuted, MR. GEOGHEGAN and MR. NOBLE appeared for Baron.
MR. ETON. I am a theological student—in January this year I
went into 47, Strand to the first floor, to be shaved—Goldberg attended me but I did not know his name then—while shaving me he said that my teeth wanted doing, that he would clean them for me, and it would not take more than a minute—he used some liquid which made them smart—when he had finished he said the charge would be £3, that it was a very low price, and if I had gone anywhere else it would have been considerably more—I said that it was ridiculous and exorbitant, and I had not got the money—I only had a little more than a sovereign—he said that I must pay; I paid £1 and I told him I could get the money by going to Charing Cross station; they sent a boy there with me, and I got some money from a friend who was waiting for me there—when I went back I was introduced to Baron, and said, "Are you Mr. Bromley?" he said, "Yes"—I saw a show-case like this (produced) and believed him to be what he represented—they said that if I had the thing thoroughly completed they would charge me £5; I consented to have it done—they pulled two teeth out, and tried to pull a third out, without success—I then parted with £4 more—they asked me to come back in the evening, and they stopped some teeth and said that they could not possibly do it for the money, but I must pay another 30s.—they showed me some liquid and said that it was very expensive—they addressed Baron as "Doctor"—Goldberg and I had an altercation; Baron came from the back of the shop and Goldberg asked him if it could be done for the money; he said, "No," but they came down to £1, and then 15s.—I did not part with any more—I went to a doctor in consequence of the painful condition of my mouth.
Cross-examined. I went back from Charing Cross, not because I thought I had got value for my money, but because I had promised to return.
DUNCAN CERAR . I come from Glasgow; I came up with Mr. Nash in January, and went into 164, Strand, to be shaved—the man who shaved me said, "Would you mind having the tartar taken off your teeth?"—my friend then came over and asked if I was aware of the price; I said, "No"—I asked the assistant the charge; he said 30s.—I got up and went to a desk, and saw Baron, who corroborated it—I refused to pay it—he said, "Would you mind coming into this side room?"—we followed him with two assistants—Baron said that the price was 35s.—I refused to pay it—he said, "30s."—I refused that—he said, "£1"—I said I would pay 10s. at present and remit the other amount—he agreed, and asked me for the 10s.—I said that I would not pay it till he gave me a receipt—the assistant wrote out a receipt, and I gave him the money—they told me if I refused to pay they would put it in the hands of a solicitor, and have me summoned—the assistants stood in the ante-room, all in a row.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. The assistants appeared to be Germans, two grown up and a boy—Baron wan not one of the assistants—I was not frightened in the slightest, but I did not want to get into a Police-court.
Re-examined. My friend and I went to Bow Street, and, having seen a gentleman there, I did not send the 10s.—this is the receipt.
liquid was put on—I asked the price; he said 35s.—immediately I heard that I got up and spoke to my friend, and he got up and spoke to Baron—we went into the ante-room with the two assistants and a boy, and Baron spoke to us—we only parted with 10s. each—this is my receipt.
Cross-examined. No one prevented our leaving, or put a hand on us—I was not frightened—the receipt was ready written but I said that it was no use without a date, and "December 2nd" was put on.
ALBERT ANSTELL . I am a house agent of Leicester—I was staying in London and went into 164, Strand, to be shaved—the prisoner Browett attended to me—he asked me what sort of weather we were having in my part of the country, I said, "About the same as you are having here"—he could only have known that I came from the country by seeing "Leicester" in my hat—this was before breakfast—he said, "Your teeth are very bad, sir; I could put them right in a very short time"—I said, "I can't stop now, I have ordered my breakfast"; he said "It will only take a very few minutes"; and that he had scaled the teeth of titled people; and people drove up there in their carriages—while he was scaling my teeth, he said that Lord Portland had paid him £10, and it was nothing to receive £5—he said, "You see we are qualified dentists," and pointed to the diploma of Dr. Baron, and said that if I had not come just in time it would have cost me £20—when he had finished the front I began to get a little nervous and I got up and told him I thought I had better come in after dinner—he said, "It will not take much longer, you will have to pay now for what you have had done; "I said, "What charge?" he said, "Four guineas"—I said, "What do you do in a barber's shop if you can earn money like this, you have not been at it a quarter of an hour?" He asked me into a back room—I said I should not pay, and offered him ray card—he said, "That is no good"—I said, "I have only a few shillings on me;"—he said, "I will go round to the hotel with you"—I had said that I was staying at the Norfolk Hotel—a lady came in and two assistants; they stood at the door—he came down to £3, and I gave a cheque for £3 to Baron—the assistants then went away—I went to the hotel, got some information, and telegraphed and stopped the cheque—next morning, soon after eight o'clock, I went to the shop; Browett came about 8.45, and I said, "I have come to demand my cheque back which I gave you yesterday"—he said, "Why?"—I said, "Because I have discovered that you are the biggest frauds in London"—he said, "Somebody has been setting you against us; your cheque is cashed by now"—I said, "You will be rather surprised to find I have stopped it"—he said, "I shall consult my solicitor"—I said, "I shall have a solicitor too"—on 14th August I received this letter from a solicitor, endorsed P. Baron (Demanding payment of the cheque which had been dishonoured.)—my solicitor answered that (Stating that the cheque had been obtained by threats, and that as his name did not appear in the register of dentists it would be laid before the Society of Dentists, but offering him 10s.)—I then received this letter (Stating that the witness said that he was satisfied, and took a bottle of dentifrice away with him.)—that is not true.
Cross-examined by Browett. You did not say, "I daresay that man's qualification cost him £1000."
REV. WILLIAM COLEMAN WILLIAMS . I am Vicar of Ebbw-Vale, Monmouthshire; I was in London in August, and went into this barber's shop to get shaved—Browett shaved me, and another man told me that my teeth wanted scaling, and before I could say "No" he began scraping my teeth, which did not take more than two minutes—he asked for 15s.—I expressed my surprise, and Browett and the other man closed up to me, and I had to pay—the man who scraped my teeth said he was a professional dentist from Vienna—I did not part with the 15s. willingly, but because I was in their hands and was a stranger.
Cross-examined by Browett. The other man shaved me and scaled my teeth, but you joined in the conversation, and said that the charge was usually more—I did not attempt to go out; I saw that the door was very narrow, and two men were standing there.
MINTON (A Hindoo). I am lecturer at the Agricultural College of India—I went to 47, Strand, to be shaved, and saw Baron and two or three other men—while I was being shaved something was said about having my teeth scaled—I consented to have it done, and when it was done I was asked to pay £2; I refused—Baron said that I should have to pay—I pulled out 3s. and gave my card—Baron stood at the door—I tried to push my way out; he pushed me back, and I shouted "Police"—he said I was a dirty nigger, and no gentleman—one of them put his hands on me in Baron's presence, but I got out.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. Baron did not lay his hands on me—I had a big stick with me, and the moment they saw it they moved away.
FREDERICK RATCLIFF . I live in the Isle of Man—on September 3rd I went into 164, Strand—Browett shaved me and said that my teeth were very bad and he could clean them; it would only take a few minutes—I consented; he used a white liquid on a bit of wood and said it was worth five guineas an ounce; I asked the price; he said it would not cost me much, they did it cheaply as they did a lot of work from recommendation—when he had done he asked for £2—I said that I could not pay him—he said that the work had been done and I should have to pay—he told his assistant to put his coat on and go with me to my lodging—he had asked where I came from, and I told him the Isle of Man—I paid 30s.; it was the only way of getting away—he gave me a guarantee that my teeth would keep white ten years. (Produced.)
Cross-examined by Browett. I saw another assistant, and I gave the money to a lady.
EDWARD WHITE . I am pupil to a surveyor, and live at Tulse Hill—I went into 164, Strand, and was attended to by Browett—he asked when I came to London, and whether I had ever been shaved in the Strand before—after I had been shaved he said, "Your teeth are in a bad condition," and scraped a little tartar off them—I asked him how much it would be—he did not answer direct, but told me some tale; I pressed him again, and he said 50s.—he had then scraped three of my bottom teeth—I said I had not got the money in the world, I was only a student—he said that he had used 18s. worth of stuff, and that his father paid
£1,000 to apprentice him to a dentist, and showed me the diploma—a woman came up—I produced 2s. 6d., and said I would not pay any more, but I afterwards gave the man 6d. more—the woman said that if I had not any more money I had better be allowed to go—Browett said he was not going to look over my vile mouth and clean my vile teeth for nothing—he stood between me and the door—I had 6d. in coppers, and gave them to him.
ERNEST GALLICHAN . I live in Jersey—on October 2nd I was in London, and went into 164, Strand—Browett shaved me, and asked if I would have a shampoo—I said, "Yes"—he took something out of a bottle and put it on my head, and scrubbed my head with a hot towel, and produced an electric battery, and then got a sponge and rubbed it on my head—he said that a number of Q.C. had had it done, and carriages stood at the door—he said that Baron bought the right in Germany and somebody had infringed it, and Truth was showing them up—when it was done he asked me for 30s.; my wife was in another room and rather than have a disturbance, I paid the money to Baron—he was not present at the conversation but he could hear it inside the room.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. No diploma is required for scaling teeth, but they are not dentists.
EDWARD JAMES BROMLEY . I am registered under the Dental Act—at St. Martin's Lane, in 1895, I was introduced to Baron by Mr. Rosenberg—Baron asked me to let him have two show cases, and he had some of my cards to send persons to me, but he never sent anyone—this (produced) is the framework of the case.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. Rosenberg is a barber—I have not had complaints about him—my name is on the case but not my address—I have not seen teeth scaled in Baron's shop; I have been shaved there twice; I received no payment from him and heard no complaint.
By the COURT. Rosenberg sent me one patient, but I could not do anything—Baron never sent me one—it was a verbal dealing.
BERNARD CLINE . I was in Baron's employ at 164, Strand, from September, 1893, till after the arrest—he was the proprietor of the shop—I was always employed at 164; the shop at 47 was opened in December, 1894—a man named Goldberg was employed; I have not seen him since he left, or Watkins who was employed there—when customers came into the shop Baron gave us the tip, otherwise we were instructed to ask a customer where he came from—the instructions were to charge him as much as possible—there was no friction when I went there, but Goldberg introduced it afterwards and an electric battery was bought for each shop—the charge for it was as much as I could get—people's teeth were stopped and acid was used; it was spirits of salt which is got at any chemists for a penny—pumice powder was also used—the most I got was 3 guineas for teeth cleaning, or £4 for teeth and friction—Mr. or Mrs. Baron were always there to take the money—if persons did not part with their money willingly they were invited into the next room, and if they had not got the money they took the name and
address, or some person was instructed to go round with the customer—I remember Inspector Marshall coming there, and a policeman before him—I heard Baron tell him he did not know what was charged, and he should have to discharge his foreman, that was me—when the police left the same thing went on, but he did not discharge me—Marshall came again—I left on September 20th—I got 2d. in the shilling, but not on hair-cutting.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I have been six years in London as a barber—I was at Wilton's and at Slipper's—I was in the habit of scaling teeth there—there was no fixed price—I do not know that Baron never scaled teeth till I went there, nor did I introduce it—cleaning teeth with pumice stone was Goldberg's invention—I was responsible for ammonia and oil—I did not tell Baron I had had no education in scaling teeth—I did not teach any other assistants to scale teeth—I still do it—I charge 2s. 6d. or 5s., I have got a tariff up—I did not set up in business on my own account till the police came and made inquiries about this place—my salary was 22s., and 2d. in the pound commission—the kitchen-maid was some times present, Baron never trusted me—that did not make me angry with him—I did not tell Baron what spirit I used, it was I who brought it there—I did not charge him five shillings for a pennyworth; he gave me a penny and I went and fetched the salts.
JOSEPH BORDON (Policeman ER). On October 5th about 10.50 a gentleman spoke to me, and I went to 164, Strand, and Browett came up to me, and said, "They are strangers in London, and do not know how to go on; you can tell them the Courts are closed, and I will make it all right with you after"—a gentleman from Canada came and said in Browett's presence that he went to 164, Strand, to get shaved, after which the prisoner asked him to have his teeth done; it would only take a few minutes, and after a few minutes he said it would be £4—Mr. Prince told him to stop as he should not think of paying it—I asked him to go to the station, we went to Bow Street Station, and Browett was charged—he said, "Why is not Baron charged? I do not know why I should be charged and not Baron, as he was there the whole of the time"—his friend was present when he said that they were strangers in London and did not know how to go on, but he spoke to me quietly.
JOHN M'CARTHY (Police Sergeant R). On February 20th I went to 47 and 164, Strand—at 164 Baron came in afterwards, I fancy he had been sent for—I told him who we were, and the inspector was in uniform—he invited me into a back room—I told him that the superintendent had sent me to say that various complaints had been made by persons that large sums had been obtained for scaling teeth, and in some cases they had been threatened—he said, "I know nothing about it, it must have been my manager, Cline, and he has put the money in his own pocket; I have got two shops to look after"—I told him he would render himself liable to a criminal charge; he said that nothing of the kind should occur again, and he would discharge Cline—I suggested that he should have a proper scale of charges put up, and pointed out to him that there was no scale of charges—after that, in consequence of further complaints, I went to the shop with Inspector Marshall—Cline was still working in the shop, and I pointed that out to Baron—he appeared confused, and could give no reason.
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I was sent specially from Scotland Yard: I went to 47 and to another shop the same day to warn them against similar practices.
HENRY MARSHALL (Police Inspector E). I am principal inspector at Bow Street—the prisoners' conduct was brought to my knowledge in January, and down to the arrest continual complaints were made, in consequence of which I sent McCarthy and Mansfield—the complaints continued and on May 30th I went to 164 with McCarthy and saw Baron, Cline and Watkins, who has absconded—I asked for the proprietor, he was not in, and I went to 47; he was not there; I returned to 164, and Baron came in and said that he was the proprietor of the two shops—Browett was there and Cline—I said that I was the chief detective at Bow Street, and had been ordered by the Commissioners to give them another caution as it seemed to have had no effect—I said "This is the officer who came before," referring to McCarthy, and they recognised him—I told them all three that people were continually going to Scotland Yard complaining that money had been extorted from them by trickery for scaling teeth, friction, and shampooing, and that in some cases menaces were used, people were kept there and forced to pay—Baron said that it must be his manager—I told them of a row there the day before—he said that he did not know anything about it—I said, "This kind of thing cannot go on, you lay yourselves open to a criminal prosecution and we must take definite measures to stop it," and if we could do nothing else, we should put a constable outside each shop to warn the public—the complaints came from all parts of the globe, one from Canada; they gave evidence, but were obliged to return. I have a list here of over 100, with many from Ireland—eventually there was an arrest, and I charged Browett with attempting to obtain money from Mr. Prince by a trick, and a warrant was obtained, on which I arrested Baron; I told him the matter had became so serious that the Magistrate had issued a warrant for his arrest—I read it to him, and charged him; he still pretended that he did not know what was going on, and put it on his assistants—I reminded him of having cautioned him on May 30th, and said, "You have no dental qualification, nor have your assistants;" he said, "No, I admit that"—Goldberg gave evidence before the Magistrate, after which he absconded, and Rosenberg absconded—subsequently Cline was called as a witness—at the time of the arrest this notice (produced) was up in the shop, but it was not visible—it was behind the door in one shop, and at 164 it was stuck right up at the ceiling, and you could only see the large letters—you could see "tooth scaling," but you could not see the word "from."
Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I have heard that Baron once had a barber's business in Newcastle Street, but went to Germany, and came back.
Re-examined. Complaints came about both shops.
Browett, in his defence, stated that he was only Baron's assistant, who told him to stand by Cline, and hear what he said to the customers, and say the same, and that what he did was under Baron's directions.
GUILTY .—BARON— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. BROWETT— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. CONDY Prosecuted.
LOUISA KILLICK . I live at East Dulwich—on the afternoon of Lord Mayor's Day I was in Queen Victoria Street and felt a band go into my pocket—I turned round, and my purse was gone—Jones was immediately behind me and Baker by his side—Jones threw back his coat and said, "Search me"—a detective came up, and I charged them—I had 3s. 6d. in my purse and a railway ticket.
JOHN OTTOWAY (City Detective). On November 9th I was with Collinson in Cheapside in plain clothes and saw the prisoners together—we watched them and saw both of them put their hands into ladies' pockets—we cautioned them, and they went away—in the afternoon we saw them again,' and saw Jones covered by Baker—Jones put his hand into the prosecutrix's pocket, and Baker pushed up behind him—we took hold of them and asked the lady if she had lost anything—she said, "Yes"—Jones said, "I have not got your purse"—they were searched, but we could not find it—it could have been thrown into the crowd.
JOHN COLLINSON (City Detective). I was with Ottoway and saw the prisoners in Cheapside at 11.45 putting their hands in the folds of ladies' dresses—we watched them half an hour and then cautioned them—in the afternoon we saw them again—Jones put his hand into several ladies' dresses; he was covered by Baker—I saw Jones put his hand into the folds of the prosecutrix's dress—she turned round and said, "You had your hand in my pocket"—I said, "Have you lost anything?"—she said, "Yes, my purse"—Jones said, "I have not got it"—they might have dropped it.— GUILTY .
JONES then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at Clerkenwell on December 3rd, 1894— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
BAKER— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. CONDY Prosecuted.
EMILIE CONSTANCE WEST . I live at 104, Sinclair Road Hammersmith—on October I slept in my dining-room on the first floor—I went to bed before ten o'clock; everything was secure to my knowledge, but I did not look—I was awoke by a light shining in my eyes and said, "What is the matter; are you ill, Emma?"—I then saw two men; they said, "I beg your pardon," and shut the door—I saw one man's face by the light he was carrying, and on the following Tuesday I picked the prisoner out at West Kensington from a number of men—I jumped out of bed, called my servant, and went downstairs and found the door locked—the window into my bedroom was open—I missed a diamond bracelet and necklace, and a brooch with a miniature; they were worth about £80—I am in the habit of sleeping with my bedroom window open—I did not look to see whether it was fastened.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I went down and found that the door leading to the basement was locked, which gave time for you to escape through the window.
EMMA MILLER . I am Mrs. West's servant—she called me in the early morning of October 21st, and I went to the top of the stairs—her bed-room was all right before going to bed, and the window shut—I afterwards went in with a policeman, and found it open.
ROBERT MARKHAM (Police Sergeant F). I was called, and found foot-marks in the back garden under the basement window, which room is used as a bedroom—the drawers were open, and turned over—the prisoner was placed with six others, and Mrs. West identified him.
GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction qt Marlborough Street on November 30th, 1893. (See next page and page 15.)
MR. CONDY Prosecuted.
PERCY RICHMOND . I live at 31, Stanley Grove, West Kensington—my brother-in-law, Thomas Henry Hiscott, went away in September, and I was left in charge of his house—I went over it on the evening of September 16th, between eight and nine o'clock, and everything was perfectly safe, and the pantry window, which was covered with zinc, was in its proper condition—I locked the pantry door—I went again next morning, and saw a constable outside; a window had been opened, and a lock taken off a door—everything was turned out on the floor, and a. cupboard, which had contained clothes the night before, was empty—we found some tools, which were not there the night before.
Cross-examined. You had cut a piece of cardboard out so that it would fit into the window—a man might probably get through if he was very thin.
By the COURT. I have not tried to get my head through because they have had it barred up.
KATE HISCOTT . I am the wife of Thomas Henry Hiscott, of 4, Dewhurst Road, Hammersmrth—we went away, leaving my brother to take care of the house—we came back in consequence of what we heard, and missed coats, trousers, under-clothing and other articles—this scarf (produced) belongs to me—the prisoner was wearing it at the Police-station.
Cross-examined. My brother lives at Tunbridge Wells, but I said that the scarf probably came from Bond Street—it is the exact pattern of the one stolen.
JOHN PERRY (Policeman 109 T). On September 17th, about 6.30 a.m., I was on duty in Dewhurst Street, and saw the door of No. 4 partly open—I pushed it open, went in, and found things strewed all over the place, and these two suits of clothes (produced) laid in the larder with two pairs of boots, one of brown tan—I found this lodging-house ticket in one of the coats—the zinc had been cut away from the scullery window and they had opened it and got through—there was no glass inside the zinc—the window is large enough to admit a man of the prisoner's size—the lock of the pantry door had been taken off, it hung only by one screw—the framework of the window was not open—that is a fixture.
lodging-house, Drury Lane—I know the prisoner; he came there for a bed on September 15th with another man, and I issued this ticket to him—I saw him twice—the clothes he was wearing were very pale; this is the coat, but I did not see his trousers.
Cross-examined. When I came to identify you I picked out another man a short stout man, but I distinctly said that he was not the man who was with you—I had seen him before—one of the officers outside did not give me a description of you—about three of the men put with you were of the same stamp as yourself.
ALEXANDER MCMILLAN (Police Sergeant C). I know the prisoner by sight; I saw him almost daily for three months prior to September—he wore this coat, trousers, cap, and similar shoes to these; he asked me once if I could give him a pair of trousers, as these had got torn in the legs.
ROBERT MARTIN (Police Sergeant T). On September 17th I was called to this house, and received the ticket and clothes from Perry, and took them to Reed—the pantry window is 8 1/2 inches wide and 21 1/2 inches long—I was present when Reed identified the prisoner—he picked out another man afterwards, and said that he looked like the other man.
By the COURT A second suit of clothes was found; that was the suit of a smaller man—a small man might have got through the window and opened the door for his accomplice.
Cross-examined. I said that the window was eighteen inches wide, but I had not measured it then.
Prisoner's Defence: This coat is too long, and the trousers are three sizes too small, for me; the man who wore the coat could never have worn the trousers. Had I known the tie was stolen I should have had the sense to destroy it. The other five men were quite unlike me. He identified me because of my having a bend.
He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Marlbrough street, on November 28th,1894; other convictions were proved again him, and also against Godwin. HERESY— Eighteen Month's Hard Labour. GOODWIN— Sixteen Month's Hard Labour.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, November 20th, 1895
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. BESLEY, Q.C., and GUY STEPHENSON, Prosecuted.
THOMAS WILLIAM SCOTT . I am a draper at Chertsey—I knew the prisoner, who had dealing at my shop, as being in the service of Ladies Estella and Dorothea Hope, at Longcross House, about four miles from Chertsey—on April 16th I received an order for drapery value 7s. 3d.—on
April 24th the prisoner called at my shop, and handed these two cheques for £11 8s. and £10 18s. to my employe—I saw the prisoner, and I saw £11 8s. given to her in exchange for this cheque, I saw the money counted out—the £11 8s. cheque was endorsed when she brought it. (This cheque was made payable to L. Deuchar, and was signed Estella Hope)—I do not swear that she brought this £10 18s. cheque, but at the Mansion House I heard her say, speaking of the two cheques, "I gave them to Mr. Scott"—the small account was paid, and I gave a receipt and the change—I paid the two cheques into my bank on May 12th—the date on the £11 8s. cheque is May 1st.
Cross-examined. I said at the Mansion House that the same person gave me the two cheques—I don't remember if I said my knowledge was derived from my shop assistant—I cannot remember if you said you gave me the cheque for £11 8s., or both cheques; I understood you said both cheques; I know the two cheques came to me.
Re-examined. I said, "I knew the person who handed me the cheques came from Lady Hope's"—the prisoner had spoken of the one cheque then produced for £11 8s., but the same person who gave me that gave me the other, I know—I was doubtful about the identity; but positive that the person who handed both cheques came from Lady Hope's, and they were changed at the same time, within a few minutes.
LADY ESTELLA MARY HOPE . I reside with my sister Lady Dorothea Hope, at Longcross House, Chertsey—I have a private account at Glynn's—this was the cheque-book I had in use in April; on the cover is "Estella Hope" in my writing; but I sign all my cheques "Estella M. Hope"—my sister has a private account at the same bank for which she has her cheque book; and we have also a joint account for house-keeping purposes, and we have a third cheque-book for that—cheques on the joint account we sign "E. and D. Hope"—the three cheque-books are kept in a drawer of a bureau in our bedroom—that drawer is always-kept locked—the counterfoils of cheques 96 and 97 have been torn out from my cheque-book—this cheque for £11 8s. has been written on the form 96, and this other cheque is written on 97—they are not in my writing, nor written by my authority—only those two were torn from my book—from our joint account cheque-book counterfoil 79 is missing—I have dated counterfoil 80 April 8th—this (produced) is the cheque form 79 torn from the book—it is not signed by me nor my sister—it is a forgery—it is dated April 8th—either my sister or I sign "E. and D. Hope" for that account—my sister filled up cheque form 80—she does not appear to have noticed the absence of the counterfoil 79—some time in the spring we were away from Longcross House; only for the day, I think—the prisoner was in our service at that time as parlourmaid—when we came back she said to my sister "You left your keys in the cellarette in the dining-room," and she took them out of the sideboard drawer and put them into my sister's hand—among the keys of that bunch was the key of the drawer of the bureau; it is an outside drawer, you do not have to unlock the bureau to get to the drawer—our lady's maid is named Deuchar she was in our service in April, and is with us still—the prisoner left our service on April 26th—she wrote and signed this receipt for her wages and her week's washing upon leaving—Mrs. Hawkins, a friend who lives with us, paid her; she pays all the indoor servants with the exception of Deuchar,
who is our personal maid—nothing was due to Deuchar on April 24th; there was no reason for giving Deuchar a cheque then—she is paid about every three months—Giles was in our service as stockman and cowman—on Sunday, July 21st, on looking through my pass-book, I first discovered that this £11 8s. cheque was a forgery, and had been debited to me by the bankers—my sister had burnt her cheques, and had not noticed the other—I found that the person who took that form had taken the counterfoil as well—the prisoner had then been gone some months, and had been married and was living at Reading—she left to be married in June, we understood—I did not see her again before she was in custody—I think she was with us for two years—she had been in our service a few years before for a short time.
MAUD HAWKINS . I am a friend of the Ladies Hope, and reside with them, except when I am visiting elsewhere—I superintend the payment of certain of the wages to help them—I paid the four sums represented by these receipts to the prisoner for her wages—this is my writing on the back; all the writing on the face of them is the prisoner's—she makes out the account each month of what is due to her, and I pay it by cheque—the last sum I paid her when she left—I have seen her sign and know her writing.
ELIZABETH DEUCHAR . I have been lady's-maid to Ladies Estella and Dorothea Hope about fourteen years—this cheque for £11 8s. was not given to me by Lady Estella Hope; the endorsement is not in my writing—all my cheques for wages are written out E. Deuchar, and I endorse them E. Deuchar, never L. Deuchar—my wages are paid by cheques, which I endorse—I know nothing about this cheque—I was first shown it on July 21st, by Lady Estella, in Lady Dorothea's presence.
Cross-examined. You were in the habit of changing cheques for me sometimes, but last summer all the cheques were changed by tradesmen who came to the house—I did not pay anything for the ladies before you went away—I never gave you that cheque.
Re-examined. I never had the cheque, and never endorsed it—I never sent it by any other servant to the pantry for the prisoner to get it changed—she never brought me back any change in respect of it—the ladies did not give me any other cheque about that time—they owed me nothing about that time.
WILLIAM WHITE . I am a ledger clerk at Glynn, Mills and Co., bankers, Lombard Street—this cheque was cleared in the Clearing House on May 3rd, and debited to Lady Estella Hope's account—it came to us through the Clearing House; I did not know it was a forgery.
THOMAS H. GURRIN . I have for years devoted myself to the question of handwriting—I have compared these four receipts for wages, given by the prisoner, with this cheque for £11 8s.—I have made a comparative tracing of letters and words from the cheque and receipts—in my opinion the writing on the cheque is by the same person as the writing on the receipts—I believe an attempt has been made to imitate Lady Hope's writing. (The witness pointed out various similarities between the writings, and, at the request of the JURY, Miss Deuchar wrote her name.)
LADY ESTELLA HOPE (Re-examined). I have no cheques endorsed by Deuchar, and no writing of hers with me—I am well acquainted with her writing; this document she has just written is in her ordinary writing—no
wages were due to her on or about April 14th; I think she was paid two months before that, and her next wages would be due in about a month, some time in May, but I cannot be sure—in the ordinary course she would be paid from my cheque-book—on May 24th she was paid £7 4s. 5d.; that would be my half of her wages, my sister pays the other half; sometimes something else was owing—the first counterfoil in this cheque-book is dated April 5th; there was no payment between then and May 24th; the cheque on April 5th was not to her—when we went away in April the keys were accidentally left behind; we always took them with us except in this case—Deuchar would be with us, or she would have taken charge of them—I cannot be sure if we stayed away that night—very likely if we only went to town for the day we should take her with us, but not necessarily; we did not usually take her if we went to town for the day, and then she would be at home—if she had been at home she would have taken charge of the keys; she would be sure to find them, I should think; I am almost sure she was not at home then—if the keys were left in the cellarette, and the parlour-maid found them after we had gone, it would be in accordance with her usual duty to put them in the sideboard drawer and hand them to us when we returned—I am not certain if we were away for more than a day; I think my sister, who is here, is more sure of that than I—I keep the keys under my own control, but I should not mind Deuchar having access to them; I should consider them as safe in her charge as in mine—I should not have hesitated to entrust the keys to the prisoner if I wanted anything fetched—I placed every confidence in her.
LADY DOROTHEA HOPE . I remember the prisoner giving me the keys on our return; in I think the early spring—I had accidentally left them in the spirit case, containing the liqueurs, in the dining-room—the largest key on the bunch was that of the bureau drawer—I find by my cheque-book that we went to town on April 4th, because I see that we paid the South Western Company's bill, and I made the cheque larger than their account, and took the change out—I think we stayed two days, but I would not swear it; I am certain we stayed one night—I think we stayed at our London lodgings, 12, Hobart Place; if we stayed the night Deuchar went with us most certainly—in the ordinary course she would go, and I have no reason to believe she was not with us—if we only went for a day's shopping we might or might not take Deuchar.
Cross-examined. I have turned up the visitors' book and I find that Mr. Otley was staying there, and he asked for a liqueur after lunch; the keys may have been forgotten twice, but it was in the spring the keys were returned to me—in December I asked you if you had seen the keys about, but that had nothing to do with the incident afterwards—I will not swear it was in April that you gave me the keys, but it was in the early spring, and my sister was present at the time you took them from the sideboard drawer and dropped them into my hand.
THOMAS HENRY GURRIN (Re-examined). I have examined this which Miss Deuchar has written in Court, and compared it with the alleged forgery; in my opinion they are not the same writing. (The witness pointed out dissimilarities between the writings.)
"Are you Mrs. Crewte"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "Your name was Ellen Higgs before you were married"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "My name is Cross, I am a Detective Inspector of the City of London Police. You had a little account at Scott's, at Chertsey, which you ordered on 16th April, and paid off on 24th. Did you pay for that by cheque?"—she said "Yes"—I handed her the cheque for £11 8s., and said, "Is that the cheque?"—she said "Yes, I recognise it"—I said, "Who gave you that cheque?"—she said, "Deuchar"—I said, "Who did you give the change, the money you got, to?"—she said, "I must have given it to Deuchar"—I said, "Did you?"—she said, "I must have done"—I said, "You know there have been some cheques stolen from a cheque-book at Longcross"—she said, "I did not know it. Whose handwriting is it?"—I said, "That is what I want to know. Do you know?"—she said, "No"—I asked her if they were in the habit of changing one another's cheques—she said, "Yes, sometimes I changed for Deuchar and sometimes the other girl, and sometimes they changed mine"—I said, "You will hear from me probably in a few days," and I left her—she was living there with her husband, who had been groom to the Ladies Hope, and had left at the same time as the prisoner, to be married to her—he was out of employment at the time I went to Reading—he had been in employment—on October 31st, having made inquiries in the interval, I went to Reading again, and saw the prisoner about eleven a.m.—I said, 'You know me?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "I shall have to take you into custody for forging that cheque for £11 8s. in April last, and also for uttering it on April 24th, well knowing it to have been forged"—she said, "I know nothing of its having been forged; if I had I should not have changed it"—I said, "You said when I saw you last that Deuchar gave it to you"—she said, "Yes; if Deuchar did not give me the cheque one of the other girls gave it to me to change for Deuchar"—I said, "Who did you give the money to?"—she said, "I must have given it back to Deuchar; if not I must have given it back to the girl who gave it to me"—she was brought to London and charged; she said she did not know anything of its being forged—she made no concealment of the fact that she had changed the cheque; she always admitted that from the first. (Elizabeth Deuchar filled up a cheque form in the same manner as that alleged to be forged.)
ELIZABETH DEUCHAR (Re-examined). I have filled up this blank cheque; Mr. Disney, Messrs. Mullens and Bosanquet's clerk, dictated it to me—I have written it in my natural writing, without disguise—I had nothing to do with the making of this forged cheque; I knew nothing about it till my mistress showed it to me—I never had a penny of the money—the prisoner has sometimes changed cheques for me—I sometimes gave a cheque to another servant to give to her; I never left a cheque in the pantry for her to change—I never asked another servant to give a cheque to her, I always asked her if she would change it—I never departed from that custom to the best of my recollection.
By the Prisoner. I have never come to the pantry when you have not been there and asked May, the housemaid, to ask you to get it changed.
no wages were due to her on or about April 14th; I think she was paid two months before that, and her next wages would be due in about a month, some time in May, but I cannot be sure—in the ordinary course she would be paid from my cheque-book—on May 24th she was paid £7 4s. 5d.; that would be my half of her wages, my sister pays the other half; sometimes something else was owing—the first counterfoil in this cheque-book is dated April 5th; there was no payment between then and May 24th; the cheque on April 5th was not to her—when we went away in April the keys were accidentally left behind; we always took them with us except in this case—Deuchar would be with us, or she would have taken charge of them—I cannot be sure if we stayed away that night—very likely if we only went to town for the day we should take her with us, but not necessarily; we did not usually take her if we went to town for the day, and then she would be at home—if she had been at home she would have taken charge of the keys; she would be sure to find them, I should think; I am almost sure she was not at home then—if the keys were left in the cellarette, and the parlour-maid found them after we had gone, it would be in accordance with her usual duty to put them in the sideboard drawer and hand them to us when we returned—I am not certain if we were away for more than a day; I think my sister, who is here, is more sure of that than I—I keep the keys under my own control, but I should not mind Deuchar having access to them; I should consider them as safe in her charge as in mine—I should not have hesitated to entrust the keys to the prisoner if I wanted anything fetched—I placed every confidence in her.
LADY DOROTHEA HOPE . I remember the prisoner giving me the keys on our return; in I think the early spring—I had accidentally left them in the spirit case, containing the liqueurs, in the dining-room—the largest key on the bunch was that of the bureau drawer—I find by my cheque-book that we went to town on April 4th, because I see that we paid the South Western Company's bill, and I made the cheque larger than their account, and took the change out—I think we stayed two days, but I would not swear it; I am certain we stayed one night—I think we stayed at our London lodgings, 12, Hobart Place; if we stayed the night Deuchar went with us most certainly—in the ordinary course she would go, and I have no reason to believe she was not with us—if we only went for a day's shopping we might or might not take Deuchar.
Cross-examined. I have turned up the visitors' book and I find that Mr. Otley was staying there, and he asked for a liqueur after lunch; the keys may have been forgotten twice, but it was in the spring the keys were returned to me—in December I asked you if you had seen the keys about, but that had nothing to do with the incident afterwards—I will not swear it was in April that you gave me the keys, but it was in the early spring, and my sister was present at the time you took them from the sideboard drawer and dropped them into my hand.
THOMAS HENRY GURRIN (Re-examined). I have examined this which Miss Deuchar has written in Court, and compared it with the alleged forgery; in my opinion they are not the same writing. (The witness pointed out dissimilarities between the writings.)
"Are you Mrs. Crewte"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "Your name was Ellen Higgs before you were married"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "My name is Cross, I am a Detective Inspector of the City of London Police. You had a little account at Scott's, at Chertsey, which you ordered on 16th April, and paid off on 24th. Did you pay for that by cheque?"—she said "Yes"—I handed her the cheque for £11 8s., and said, "Is that the cheque?"—she said "Yes, I recognise it"—I said, "Who gave you that cheque?"—she said, "Deuchar"—I said, "Who did you give the change, the money you got, to?"—she said, "I must have given it to Deuchar"—I said, "Did you?"—she said, "I must have done"—I said, "You know there have been some cheques stolen from a cheque-book at Longcross"—she said, "I did not know it. Whose handwriting is it?"—I said, "That is what I want to know. Do you know?"—she said, "No"—I asked her if they were in the habit of changing one another's cheques—she said, "Yes, sometimes I changed for Deuchar and sometimes the other girl, and sometimes they changed mine"—I said, "You will hear from me probably in a few days," and I left her—she was living there with her husband, who had been groom to the Ladies Hope, and had left at the same time as the prisoner, to be married to her—he was out of employment at the time I went to Reading—he had been in employment—on October 31st, having made inquiries in the interval, I went to Reading again, and saw the prisoner about eleven a.m.—I said, "You know me?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "I shall have to take you into custody for forging that cheque for £11 8s. in April last, and also for uttering it on April 24th, well knowing it to have been forged"—she said, "I know nothing of its having been forged; if I had I should not have changed it"—I said, "You said when I saw you last that Deuchar gave it to you"—she said, "Yes; if Deuchar did not give me the cheque one of the other girls gave it to me to change for Deuchar"—I said, "Who did you give the money to?"—she said, "I must have given it back to Deuchar; if not I must have given it back to the girl who gave it to me"—she was brought to London and charged; she said she did not know anything of its being forged—she made no concealment of the fact that she had changed the cheque; she always admitted that from the first. (Elizabeth Deuchar filled up a cheque form in the same manner at that alleged to be forged.)
ELIZABETH DEUCHAR (Re-examined). I have filled up this blank cheque; Mr. Disney, Messrs. Mullens and Bosanqet's clerk, dictated it to me—I have written it in my natural writing, without disguise—I had nothing to do with the making of this forged cheque; I knew nothing about it till my mistress showed it to me—I never had a penny of the money—the prisoner has sometimes changed cheques for me—I sometimes gave a cheque to another servant to give to her; I never left a cheque in the pantry for her to change—I never asked another servant to give a cheque to her, I always asked her if she would change it—I never departed from that custom to the best of my recollection.
By the Prisoner. I have never come to the pantry when you have not been there and asked May, the housemaid, to ask you to get it changed.
receipts wrote the forgery—I feel quite certain Deuchar did not forge the cheque, or any part of it—I believe there are distinct indications of the endorsement on this just written being in a different hand to the endorsement on the forged cheque. (The witness pointed out dissimilarities)—I have no doubt that the writing on these two cheques, one from Lady Estella's cheque-book and the other from the joint cheque-book for £16 17s. 9d., is by the same person who wrote the cheque for £11 8s.; in my opinion they were filled in by the prisoner.
T. W. SCOTT (Re-examined). I paid this cheque for £16 7s. 9d, dated April 8th, into my bankers on May 22nd—I got it from the prisoner and paid her myself over the counter—I cannot say if Giles, the payee, was her fellow servant—I believe I paid it in gold—I paid it in a day or two before the 22nd May—I pay into the bank once a week—I have not been asked about this cheque before—I did not know she had left the service on April 26th.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: I did not know it was forged, otherwise I should not have changed it.
The prisoner, in her defence, stated that she did not know the cheques were forged; that the cheque for£11 8s. was brought to her pantry, and she changed it and gave the money to Deuchar; and that the cheque for £16 7s. 9d. she had received from Giles, to whom she had handed the money.
The prisoner, in the hearing of the JURY, stated that he was GUILTY of unlawfully wounding, and thereupon they found that verdict.
Discharged on Recognizances.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, November 21st, 1895.
Before Mr. Justice Wright.
MESSRS. CHARLES MATHEWS and BODKIN Prosecuted, and MESSRS. MOYSES and CAMPBELL Defended.
ELIZABETH WILLS . I live at 53, Talbot Road, Bayswater; I let apartments—in March last Mrs. Mayston, the deceased, came alone and took an apartment on the second floor, which she occupied for two or three weeks, after which the prisoner joined her, and they lived there together up to August 21st—on Tuesday, the 20th, I saw the prisoner there about nine in the evening; his wife was then out; she had gone out about two that afternoon—the prisoner asked if his wife was in; I said, "No"—he said he was very worried about her; he asked me if it was true that she stayed out till two o'clock in the morning—I said, "Yes"—he said, "Where can she get to?"—I said, "That is what I can t
make out"—he said something about where she could or could not have gone to, that the public-houses were not open till that time in the morning—he then went upstairs to his room—as far as I know, he did not go out again that evening—about eleven his wife came home—I saw she was drunk—she was not able to walk properly—I saw her going upstairs, and followed her up, owing to her condition—she got up without my assistance, and went into her room—I heard the prisoner say, "Oh, Gerty, where have you been?"—she replied, "I will go where I like, and do what I like"—she said that in a commanding voice—the door was then closed, and I went later that night I was in the yard behind the house, and I he is going on from their room—I could not hear the prisoner's voice only the deceased's—that went on up till two in the morning—I then went to bed and heard no more—in the morning the postman brought a letter for Mrs. Mayston—I took it up, and put it in the slop basin outside the door—I noticed the handwriting of the letter—I had seen letters in that handwriting delivered before at the house—I first saw the prisoner that morning about eleven, on the top of the kitchen stairs—he looked very worried—I said, "Is that you, Mr. Mayston?"—he said he was very worried about a letter that his wife had received that morning from her mother—he did not say what it was about—he then went out into the street—I heard him return in about half-an-hour and go upstairs—I did not hear where he went—the next thing I heard was a bang—I heard one bang first, and then two more, I think—the first bang seemed almost directly after he went up; the other two bangs were quickly one after the other—I afterwards heard another bang—I was in the kitchen, in the same place as where I heard the other three—as to the interval between that and the others, I can only compare it to just walking across the room, and then coming back again—Miss Magorrery was with me, and she went upstairs—I did not hear any other bang after she had gone up; I only heard four altogether, I am quite sure about that—I then went up, and I saw smoke coming from under their door—I tried the door, but could not open it—I called, "Mrs. Mayston, open the door," more than once; I heard no answer, only a groan—I then burst the door open and looked into the room—I first saw the prisoner lying on his back; his feet were nearest to me, they did not touch the door, or nearly so—a cabman's badge was near his shoulder, not flat on the floor—I saw a pistol on the floor, near the calf of his leg, not quite close to it, on his right as I entered the room, his leg was nearest the window—I law Mrs. Mayston lying on the floor, near the window—her feet were towards the dressing-table, and her head towards the bed—I went into the room; I did not touch the bodies—I kicked the pistol near to his feet; I nearly fell over it—shortly after the doctor came, and the police afterwards—this (produced) is the letter I took in that morning.
By the COURT. The prisoner had been sleeping in the house every night before this; there was one night I missed him—his time for coming home varied; it was sometimes seven, sometimes eight; he stayed the night. (The letter, in pencil, was as follows:—"I am engaged on Thursday, dear, but will be at the corner of Richmond Road Junction to-morrow, Wednesday evening, at eight. My love to you, dear.—M.")
Cross-examined. There had been letters from her mother at other
tmes—I knew by the handwriting that the letter was from her mother—Mrs. Mayston first came to me in March—she remained entirely with me for a considerable time—the prisoner only came at intervals to see her—at the time of this affair he had been living there a little over three weeks—she had been living there without him from March—when she came in that night he said to her, "Oh, Gerty, where have you been?"—he said it in a tone of sorrow—I never saw him beat her, or saw any symptoms of anger towards her—she answered him in a commanding tone—it was her habit to lock her door when Mr. Mayston came there to reside—she seemed ashamed of having married him; she said so—the nagging went on up to two in the morning; the whole of the nagging proceeded from the female voice—I did not hear his voice much—she was a much heavier body than he; she was very tall, and a very fine-looking person—I have heard that she was by profession an actress—I did not know that she had been on tour with a company in America—she was drunk when she came home on that night—I went upstairs with her, lest she might fall down; I was aware that she was pregnant—she has made the observation to me, "I wish I was dead; I have done all I can to get rid of it;" referring to her condition—the prisoner used to shave; there were two razors in the room; they were kept in a washstand drawer; they were not locked up—the deceased was a very heavy sleeper—she used to have desperate drinking bouts—after those bouts she manifested very violent conduct, hysterical to a degree—she said she had disgraced herself by marrying Mr. Mayston—during the whole of this time he was never violent to her—after the violent bouts she was very sick—the prisoner waited upon her, hand and foot—he cleaned up the mess she used to make—she was violent; he did not hold her down—I did; I had to hold her down and restrain her—he got her the best of everything he could, and denied himself—on one occasion, three weeks before this, I had some conversation with her about suicides—there was a report about a person cutting her throat, and she said it would be much easier to pick up a revolver and do it—on the Tuesday before this the prisoner said to me that the best thing for him to do would be to clear out of it, and the best place to go to would be South America—I was in the yard at the time, listening; the window of their room was open, and I heard him say that—I stopped up till two in the morning, as I felt a little apprehensive till they went to rest; I did not know to what length she might go.
By the COURT. She never said anything to me as to whether the child was her husband's or not.
By MR. BODKIN. During the three weeks before this occurrence she was more or less suffering from the effects of drink—once I sat up with her till six in the morning—I had given her notice to quit—a fortnight before this she fell down a flight of sixteen stairs when in drink—she had had a bottle of spirits before the fall—he afterwards said she wished she had broken her neck—it was a nasty fall—there were bruises about her arms—the doctor came into the room about five minutes after me, and then was there about five minutes before the police came—both the doctor and the police-officer were shouting questions to the prisoner as he lay on his back—I did not use the word "shouting"—the officer was shouting to the prisoner—there was great difficulty in getting the address
of his father, and he did his best to make the man hear—all the answer obtained was a groan—some of the stains and marks about the room, I think, were caused by persons walking or moving about the room—the knife is a small table-knife; it belonged to Mrs. Mayston—I have seen her using it—there is a notch in it; that was caused by a spring on her back—she was doing something to get the spring out on the Monday morning before the Wednesday—it laid on the washstand—as far as I could see, the prisoner was in a state of collapse.
Re-examined. I spoke to him, I should say, more than a dozen times before the police and the doctor came—I kept on speaking to him—at times he gave a faint groan; that was all he uttered, no word—the first stain I saw when I went in was at the prisoner's feet; it was not a large stain; it was very near to his feet—the next stain was at his head—his head laid in one stain—I did not notice any other stain between those two—there was another stain where Mrs. Mayston laid, near her head—I did not notice any other stain of blood in the room—I can't say whether there were any other stains that I may not have seen, other stains that I may not have noticed—the stains about the room were caused by persons walking into the blood, and then walking or moving about the room—the blood where the prisoner lay, lay by his head, and it was smeared by somebody having trodden on it—I cannot mention any other stains that were made by persons moving about—while the nagging was going on, the only words I could hear from the prisoner were about going to South America—I could not hear what words Mrs. Mayston used—it was when she had been with me three weeks that I noticed her getting drink, falling about, and being violent and sick; that would be as long back as the beginning of April; for a few days she would be all right, but, at intervals, it continued throughout the whole time—it was about a week before this happened that I gave her notice to quit—I had never spoken to the prisoner about her conduct—she was taller than the prisoner; I should say he was up to her shoulder, not more.
MARY ADELINE MAGORRERY . I am a governess, and live at 53, Talbot Road—I had a room on the second floor, on the same landing as the prisoner and his wife—on Tuesday night, August 20th, about eleven, I was in my room, and heard voices, just a buzz; I could not tell whether there was more than one voice—it went on till nearly two—I could not distinguish the voices at all—on the following morning (the 21st) I saw the prisoner go out—I heard him come back in about half-an-hour—he went upstairs—I did not see where he went—a few minutes after he had gone up I heard four bangs—first I heard two, then, quickly after, another, then, after a short interval, two more—after hearing those four I went up to my room, and while there I heard another—that might have been nearly a quarter of an hour after I had got into my room—it was the noise of a pistol shot—after that I heard a fall, as of a heavy body going over—I then went for Mrs. Wills—I saw her try the door—I afterwards went for a doctor and a policeman—I did not go into the room before going.
Cross-examined. My room closely adjoined the prisoner's—I remember Mrs. Mayston having a fall downstairs about a fortnight before this—after that she looked wild and excited—I did not hear any screaming or sounds of disturbance or quarrel—Mrs. Mayston was a heavier person
than her husband—from the sound I should say that the fall took place near the window—I have since tested this by experiments, by letting some weights fall in different places—my door and theirs are only a few paces apart; they open on to the same landing—as far as I was able to judge, the fall was near the window.
Re-examined. My room-door was open; the door of the prisoner's room was shut—the room was carpeted all over—one sound was a more muffled one than the other.
DAVID ALLEN WAITE . I am a medical man, of 37, Park Road—I was called to 53, Talbot Road, about twelve, on August 21st—I arrived before the police; I went to a room on the second floor—I first saw the body of the man lying on his back, and on looking round to the right I saw the body of the woman—the man was lying in a line from the door, with his feet towards the door—there was a revolver at his feet—his head was lying in a pool of blood—there were a few stains of blood about, near his body, and stains on the top part of the washstand—the woman was lying with her feet towards the window, slightly under the dressing-table, and the head almost parallel with the bed; the body was lying at right angles to the window—there were stains of blood on the side of her head—I did not notice any on the floor—there were no signs of disorder of things about the room—I cannot say that I noticed any signs of blood except those I have mentioned on the floor—the man was bleeding from several wounds in his head—it is rather difficult to describe his exact condition, more than that his head was more or less covered with blood—he was conscious—before the policeman came I asked him, "How did this happen?"—I am not quite sure that was before the officer came—I spoke fairly loudly—I was not there when the officer spoke to him—he was not completely collapsed—the wounds were serious, but he was conscious—what he did say was in answer to questions spoken loudly—there was not a long interval before the answer came—he said, "She has caused me a deal of trouble," and then, after a slight pause, he added, "She was no help to me"—I did not ask him anything further—that was the only time I spoke to him—the first thing he said when I went in was, "Is that you, doctor?"—I had not known him before—I attended to his wounds, and temporarily dressed them—they were bullet wounds—he was removed to St. Mary's Hospital, and subsequently the body of the woman was taken to the mortuary—on August 22nd I made a post-mortem examination—there was a bullet wound on the right side of the head—the direction of it was backwards and upwards; the edges of the wound was blackened by powder and the force of the explosion—the bullet was retained in the head—that wound must have caused instant death—on finding the bullet I retained it for a time, and I think it was passed to the Coroner—there was no other injury to the body——she was about four months advanced in pregnancy.
By the COURT. I only made a cursory examination of the body at first—I should say the wound had been inflicted only a few minutes before—I could not form an opinion which wound had been the earlier inflicted, his or hers.
Cross-examined. The marks on the temple were those of gunpowder—evidently the muzzle must have been held very close—I have said that it
Was possible that the wound might have been self-inflicted—I found her lying on her back, with her arms on the chest and the elbows resting on the floor—the dress was not disordered—it might have been a little open at the neck—it is possible that the wounds both of the deceased and the prisoner might have been self-inflicted—there was no definite proof either way—I made no close examination of the prisoner's wounds—they were of a desperate character—I had been in the room about five minutes before the constable came—the constable spoke to the prisoner after I did—I believe he asked the address of his relatives—I don't remember that he spoke unduly loudly—the prisoner scarcely uttered his words clearly—he seemed to be suffering pain—they were interspersed with exclamations of pain—blood seemed to run a little from his head to his mouth—I think I have given his identical words—I made a note of the first part immediately after he was removed from the room; I have since learnt that one of the bullets penetrated his body; he must have suffered a great nervous shock, which must to some extent have affected his faculties—my first impression was that he had committed the outrage on the woman—I had not altered my impression—I have said that he might have spoken automatically—I am sure he said, "I did it."
Re-examined. There was not more blood on his mouth than would have come from the wound; there might be a little running from his mouth; I don't think there was when he answered—in making the post-mortem I noticed the woman's arms; if the wound was self-inflicted she must have held the pistol in her right hand; that would have been awkward—the prisoner's forehead was smeared with blood, and there was powder.
WILLIAM WRIGHT (205 F). On August 21st, towards midday, I was called to 53, Talbot Road—in the back room, second floor, I saw the prisoner lying in a direct line with the door, his feet towards the door, and his Lead towards a recess on the opposite side; he was bleeding from the head, which was lying in a pool of blood—Dr. Waite was there—I sent for another constable and an ambulance—the prisoner's hands were covered with blood; near his right elbow I found this carpet bag, and this revolver against his feet, saturated with blood—I saw the body of the woman, lying in an oblique direction from the window and door, her feet under the dressing-table, in front of the window, her elbows resting on the floor, the hands half closed and perfectly clean, the head lying in a pool of blood, a blackened wound on the right temple, and a portion of brain appearing, a small stream of blood running from the corner of the mouth—she was fully dressed, loosened at the neck, otherwise not disarranged—there was no evidence of any struggle having taken place; she had a pair of boots on—I said to the prisoner, "What is your wife's name?"—he said, "Gertrude"—I said, "What is her age?"—he said, "Thirty"—I said, "Is your age thirty?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "Will you give me the name and address of any friends?"—he said, "My father, William Mayston, resides at Horn Terrace, White Hart Lane, Barnes"—that was all that was said—I had not to speak above my ordinary tone—he was then taken on the ambulance to the hospital—I then made a search of the room—behind the door was a washstand; upon
that I found a cardboard box containing forty-two ball cartridges, and at the side of the box I found this knife; the box was full of blood; there was blood on the washstand—it stood in a pool of blood six or seven inches in diameter—about three feet from where the man's head had lain I found this bullet, and there was a corresponding mark on the wall, three feet four inches in height—at the corner of the mantelpiece I found this picture, with a spent bullet embedded in it, and a dent in the wall behind it—I found this letter on the dressing-table, signed "M."; it was in an open envelope—I examined the revolver; it had been loaded in four chambers, which had been recently discharged; I extracted the four empty cartridges; they were the same size as the forty-two in the box; I noticed that one of the chambers of the revolver was defective; there was a catch in it, and you would have to move it with your finger before it would go off—on the 26th I made a further search of the room, and at the foot of a towel-horse, behind the dressing-table, I found an empty cartridge case; it had been exploded, and round the rim I found a notch, as if it had been scraped with a knife; and under a chest of drawers I found two ball cartridges and a lady's shoe; I also found a marriage certificate of August 1st, 1893, and a deed of separation of 1894, signed by Frank and Gertrude Mayston.
Cross-examined. I got to the house at five minutes past twelve, and saw the state of things at once; my impression was that the woman had been shot by the man—the defective chamber could be exploded, but it would not move on to the next without a little assistance—there was blood on the washstand, as if it had dropped there—I do not think the scratches on the cartridge were done by a finger-nail.
Re-examined. I have had experience of fire-arms. I know this kind of cartridge—it is a very old-fashioned revolver—my impression was that somebody had taken hold of the knife with a bloody hand, taken out the cartridge, and replaced it with another; he would then have nothing to do but pull the trigger.
ROBERT ALEXANDER JACKSON . I am a medical practitioner and divisional surgeon, of 11, Portland Road, Notting Hill. On August 21st, about one, I was called to 53, Talbot Road—on going into the room on the second floor, I saw the body of a woman lying on the floor by the window—I did not see the prisoner, he had been taken away—I examined the woman—I found a bullet wound on the right side of the head, large enough for the top of the finger to be put in, there was a charred mark round it about two inches in diameter, black as if from the powder—I could not say positively at what distance the shot had been fired, but I should say from two to three feet from the head—I should think the pistol had not been held by her hand at the time—I was not present at the post-mortem.
Cross-examined. I was not examined at the inquest or before the Magistrate—I was served with a subpoena to be here last Tuesday—between then and the 21st of August I have had no connection with the case—I should think marks of powder would be visible at two to three feet—I cannot swear to it, because I have no personal experience—I am not an expert.
BY MR. BODKIN. I know Alfred Osborn, a constable—I am attending him—he is not in a fit state to attend to give evidence.
The Deposition being read stated: "On August 21st I took the prisoner on an ambulance to St. Mary's Hospital. I subsequently searched his clothes and among other things found one loaded cartridge."
JOHN ALDOUS WRIGHT . I am house surgeon at St. Mary's Hospital—on August 21st, about a quarter to one, the prisoner was under my charge, and remained so until October 5th—when I first attended to him he was lying on a stretcher, and when I began to examine him he began to cry out, and was violently delirious—I first noticed a punctured wound on the right side of the head, about an inch behind the right eye; it passed through the skull about four inches, the bullet remaining in the head—there was another wound right in the middle of the forehead about an inch and a-half, travelling in a backward and downward direction, the bullet being in it—there was a third wound just above the middle of the left eyebrow, that penetrated in a downward direction to the left, it glanced round the bone and came out, and the exit caused the fourth wound—the wound in the temple was the most serious—that might have caused unconsciousness; I don't say that it did, but it was sufficient to do so—I could not say which was the first wound, or the second, but I think, in point of time, the one on the left, the slightest one—from, the appearance of the wounds themselves I could not say in what sequence they occurred.
Cross-examined. The two wounds in the temple and forehead were of a very grave character, either of them might have produced unconsciousness—I think after those two wounds he might possibly have gone through the operation of fixing the revolver for the third wound—I think the possible allows the probable.
CHARLES JAMES CURTIS . I am manager to Messrs. Riley, gunsmiths, of 277, Oxford Street—I recognise this pistol—I sold it on August 21st, as near as I can remember about a quarter past eleven, to a man I did not know, and I am not able to recognise him—the price was 10s., and 2s. for fifty cartridges similar to these—I knew that one of the chambers was defective, and that was pointed out to the purchaser—it is an old pattern—I told him one chamber was defective, that it would not revolve in the ordinary way by pulling the hammer back, but you must just give it a touch with the thumb.
Cross-examined. He said I need not wrap it up as he was going to pack it away in his portmanteau, and he put it in his pocket—he was calm and rational—I noticed nothing peculiar about him—no excitement or anything remarkable in his manner.
ESTHER BOWEN . I live at 30, Argyle Street, King's Cross—I know the prisoner and also knew his wife as lodging with me from time to time—on the Friday before this happened I saw the prisoner at my house—he said he was going to America, that he had had a letter from his father, that his wife also had had a letter by the same post, from Mr. Simpson, with £10 in it—he also spoke to me about lending him £10—I did not lend it to him that day—I asked him if he knew who Mr. Simpson was—he said he did not—he seemed very much upset—he
said he could not make out how he should write—I said, "Perhaps she is off"—that was the last time I saw him.
Cross-examined. He did not show me £5 that he had received from his father—I did not read the letter, I cannot read writing—I was, quite willing to lend him £10, I was going to lend it him—three or four weeks before this happened I heard Mrs. Mayston say to the prisoner, "We had better blow our brains out, or take an organ"; she was a woman of very violent temper and manner.
Re-examined. I saw her three times; once in the January, before her marriage, she knocked at the door and spoke very loud—on any of these occasions she was not violent; she was very excited—I offered him the £10 when I was letting them a house—he would have taken it, but she would not have it—she wanted to go back to America.
MRS. DOUGLAS. I am the mother of the deceased—I knew she was married; I did not know the prisoner—I was in the habit of writing to her occasionally, not very often; we met so frequently—she used to come and see me—I wrote this letter signed "M," not the envelope—I sent it by post on the evening of 20th August.
Cross-examined. I remember some time in July, 1893, going to Paddington Green Station, and seeing my daughter there; that was through the accusation of a man named Fleetwood—she was not charged with attempting suicide—Fleetwood said it; she was given over into my charge.
Cross-examined. I have the occurrence-book here—on that date the prisoner was kept there from half an hour to an hour—she was brought in by a constable who was called on to restrain her, and she was banded over to her friends—we were not told that she had made an attempt on her life; I saw her, as far as I can remember, she was excited—a small bottle was produced with "laudanum" on it—I was told that it was found on her, it was handed over—Captain Fleetwood was there; it was he who informed me—I advised him to throw it away, which he did—he told the constable that she handed the bottle to him directly he spoke to her—she went home with her mother.
THOMAS GREET (Inspector F). On August 21st, from information, I went to the top room at 53, Talbot Road—Constable Wright was there then. The prisoner was taken to the hospital before I arrived—on October 15th I went to the hospital, and saw the prisoner there—I said to him, "Frank Mayston, I am an inspector of police, I shall take you into custody for the wilful murder of Gertrude Annie Constance Mayston, your wife, by shooting her in the head with a revolver on August 21st last—and I shall further charge you with attempting to commit suicide by shooting yourself in the head with a revolver at the same time and place"—he made no reply—I conveyed him to the station, he was charged, and it was read over to him—he made no reply.
Cross-examined. I have attended him; he was suffering from the effect of the wounds—he has made statements to me an to how the affair happened.
This evidence was not pursued, MR. JUSTICE WRIGHT stating he should
allow the Prisoner to make any statement to the JURY which he should think fit.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I plead Not Guilty; that is all I have to say."
The Prisoner then addressed the JURY as follows; "In consequence of my being unable to obtain a situation my wife suggested our going to America, and that we decided to do—on the morning of this fearful affair I had been to a shop in Oxford Street, and purchased a revolver for ordinary protection in America, from accounts I had heard of that country. I then returned home and went into my room; my wife came towards me to meet me; that was not unusual. She then asked me to show it to her. She took it into her hand and looked at it. She then said, 'Load it,' which I did. She then looked at it again, and, for some reason or other, my head was towards the window. I felt myself stunned, whether I fell or not I don't know. I remember nothing more until, some time after, I found myself at St. Mary's Hospital Those are the whole facts."
NOT GUILTY .
There was another indictment against the prisoner fur attempting to kill and murder himself, upon which no evidence was offered, and the JURY found him
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Thursday, November 21st, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. MUIR Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
JOHN ROBERTS (In custody). I am undergoing sentence at Wormwood Scrubs—I have known the prisoner between ten and eleven years—I took some stables for Kunold at Murray Mews, Finsbury Park, in the name of Frank Bowles—I paid the landlord and the prisoner paid me—I also took a stable at Park Yard, Kensal Green for Kunold, in the name of Frank Bowles at the end of May; he paid me and I paid the landlord—I had two cobs and a van at Park Yard, one was a dun and one black—there was a double set of harness on the cob—I got those from the prisoner in June in the City Road, in the open" street—there was a name on the van, but I cannot remember it—he told me to sell the black cob, if possible, and get £12 for it—I took it to a baker at Hendon; another man not at all like Kunold went with me; he was darkish and clean-shaved, he could not be mistaken for Kunold—I saw the baker at his bakehouse, and had the cob with me—I went to a public-house that night with the other man, not Kunold—Mr. Martin is the landlord—at the public-house the baker asked me to leave the cob for a day on trial, and I did so—I went there with the young man the next evening, and got this cheque (Produced, dated June 14th)—this is my endorsement on it—Kunold cashed it at the Hendon Bank—he had £7 10s. of it, and I had 30s., and I gave 10s. to the man who went with me—about three or four weeks afterwards Kunold drove me to the baker's house with a big bay horse—Kunold was then living in White Lion Street, Islington—I went and showed him the cheque on the evening I got it, and he told me
to meet him next morning—the baker said that his brother wanted to purchase a horse—Kunold had no beard then, only a moustache—he is a German and speaks with a foreign accent—I do not remember seeing the baker again until I saw him in Court—I was arrested on July 27th—the van and some of the harness were then still at Park Yard, but nothing at Murray Mews—I got this horse-rug (produced) from Park Yard stable—I was tried on August 18th—between July 16th and August 18th I was in Holloway Prison, and on August 15th I saw the prisoner there—he said, "Halloa, Frank, how are you getting on?"—I am known as Frank Bowles—I said, "As well as can be expected," and asked him how I was going to do without a Counsel—he said, "I will find you a Counsel and see you righted," and shouted out so that the warder could hear, "I believe you are perfectly innocent"; and then, so that the warder could not hear, "For God's sake don't say anything about me, or I shall get into serious trouble; my place has been searched"—he then had to go—while I was in Holloway Hopkins came to see me; he is no relation, but we are known as cousins—he provided me with food, and told me where some of the money came from to provide it—I knew that the prisoner had been convicted of horse stealing; he had just started a business when I first knew him as a job-master at North Street, Poplar—he hired a yard there—I next knew him in York Road, at the mews close to the Copenhagen in Camden Town, till April or May last, when he removed to a yard in White Lion Street, Islington—I was only there once for a very few minutes—I had been to his house in York Road; the front door faces the road, and the back gate opens into the mews, and inside the yard as you enter there is a small shed and a dog in the corner, and you turn round from the kitchen to the washhouse, which is an ordinary washhouse—the kitchen is in the basement—his house is on the left side, entering the Mews—I have been in the house twice, I went in from the back yard—there is a bell on the gate; if anyone touched the gate the bell will sound—I went into the kitchen, but did not pass through the house.
Cross-examined. I have not been four times convicted, only three—the first was three months, I cannot tell you the date; the second was for being concerned in stealing two horses, and I had twenty months—I have never been a witness before—I got the horses from Kunold, and yet I was convicted—I am now undergoing eight years' penal servitude, and Kunold has had all the advantage, but I did not speak put because he looked after me and promised to find me employment when I was released—he only called to see me once at Holloway; we were together about ten minutes—he has called on me in gaol before more than once; he came twice a week, and I was there about four weeks—he called on me at Holloway about August 15th; a warder was sitting between us, and another was not far off—I was examined at the Police-court on August 30th and 31st—when I underwent five years' penal servitude that was owing to the prisoner—he provided me with food, but not with Counsel—he got employment for me when I came out; the present case is through my being employed by him—he went with me to Hendon, and got part of the plunder; the man who drew the cheque saw him—he and the other man were together about a quarter of an hour; the other man was known to Kunold—when Kunold's house was searched he forbade me to go there; he knew where Kunold lived—he was living
at White Lion Street when we went to Hendon; since the police searched the premises he has forbidden my going there, because his wife had not been told about it—a good many people have seen us together—the other man who went to Hendon I had seen twice—we did not have a conversation; I drove in front, and he behind—I do not know his name, but he told me he was ostler in a cab yard—there is two or three inches difference in his height and the prisoner's; nobody could mistake him.
Re-examined. I wrote out a statement after my conviction and gave it to Mr. Wheatley, the missionary—I was not defended by Counsel.
FRANCIS GRAY . I am a metal dealer of 37, Harris Street, Camberwell, and have a yard and stable in South Street—on June 11th I had four cobs, a cart, and harness, whips, and horse-cloths there—a carman aroused me at 6 a.m.; I went to the stable and found the gates unlocked; I missed a van with my name on it, two cobs, four sets of harness, three pair of lamps, six nosebags, and other articles—I have since identified them—I went to the station at once—on September 2nd I saw my black cob in the possession of Mr. Hockey; its tail had been cut, and its mane cut and pulled to make it look thinner—on September 1st or 2nd I met the prisoner in a public-house in White Lion Street, and asked him if he had got such a thing as a cob for sale—he asked what sort of a cob I wanted—I said, "One about 13 or 13 1/2 hands, to match another"—he said that he sold one a fortnight or three weeks ago which would have suited me—he took me into his stable in White Lion Street, and showed me what cattle he had got—we went back to the public-house, and he had two or three different drinks with me, and I asked him whether there was any truth in what was in the papers that Roberts was an enemy of his—he said, "Yes, he knows as much about it as I do"—I asked him to give me information about the two cobs which I had lost—he said he knew nothing whatever about them, and that Roberts had been trying to put him away, for stealing my cobs, and had got him into trouble, and that he had been taken like a dog, and that Roberts had accused him of stealing horses—I said, "Are those two cobs he has stolen mine, do you think?"—he said, "I don't know, but he is trying to do me an injury.
Cross-examined. I had seen Kunold before, and knew he was a cabdriver and owned horses.
FREDERICK HOCKEY . I am a baker of Church Lane, Hendon—I first saw the prisoner in June, at the Green Man, Edgware, about a week before the cheque was given—he asked for the next train for London; a man in the bar said, "There is not one for two hours"—I was delivering bread, and offered to give him a ride—he had two or three horse halters in his hand—I gave him a lift to Hendon; he made a remark about the horse I was driving, and said that he was in the line, and if he came across a pony and brought it to me, would I look at it—he had a moustache then, but not a beard like he has now—about a week afterwards he brought a pony and cart to my shop—that was the day before the cheque was given—Roberts was with him—they had two traps, a horse and van, and a cob and cart—I believe the prisoner had a moustache then—he told me he had a horse for me to look at; I asked him to come up and see a friend of mine, and we went to the Midland Arms; Martin saw the horse, but he did
not see much of it, as it was getting dark—I arranged to have it left overnight on trial, but he did not have it on that occasion; we made an appointment to meet him at Kendal Roy but did not, and they came down next evening—Roberts did most of the talking—I agreed to buy the horse, and on the 14th the same two men came again and the cheque was given to Mr. Martin in Roberts' presence—that was the horse which Mr. Gray has identified—I next saw the prisoner one morning when I was going to the bakehouse; he had got a big red roan horse, and asked me the way to my brother's place—I told him it was no use taking the horse there as my brother would not buy such a valuable one—he went away and I never saw him again till he was at the North London Police Court on the Tuesday—there were several persons there—the detective said, "This is Kunold"—he had a different appearance—he was dressed better; he had still a moustache and no beard—I spoke to the man who came down with Roberts, several times; I did not notice any accent, he spoke to me at the Police-court, but I cannot say for certain whether it was the same voice.
Cross-examined. I have no doubt that the person to whom I gave the cheque was the same who I drove from Edgware to Hendon—I had a telegram to go to the Police-station—I was about a quarter of an hour with the detective before he pointed out Kunold to me—I was to point out the man.
Re-examined. The prisoner spoke to me in the cart—he said in the dock that he was not the man—I did not afterwards attempt to pick him out from a number of men—I was outside the Court with Sergeant Pearce—Kunold passed Gray and slapped him on the back, and Pearce pointed to him and said, "That is the man"—I did not know who Kunold was at that time—the prisoner is, to the best of my belief, the same man who I saw on four or five occasions at Hendon.
By the COURT. I received a telegram from the police to go to the Police-court—I do not know what has become of it—it was sent to Martin—I understood that I was to go there about the pony, not to identify Kunold—I did not know the prisoner—I was rather doubtful whether he was the man who came down with Roberts.
Cross-examined. Martin was present; three of us went together to the Police-court—I have never been examined before.
Cross-examined. I was in charge of this case, and had the sole control of getting it up and calling the witnesses—I had a communication that I should find the black mare with a man named Hockey at Hendon, and went to Martin and Hockey and asked them both what the man was like who sold the horse, and got a description from both of them, but cannot say that I recognised the prisoner in their description—I believe he had then been arrested and was out on bail—I asked them to attend at Dalston Police-station, which is about ten minutes' walk from the Police-court—(Roberts had been sentenced then)—I asked them to come to identify a man who was coming up at the Court—I put him with other men later on—I did not point to him and say, "That is Kunold"—it is not true that outside the Police-court I saw Kunold slap Gray on the back and said to Gray and Hockey, "That is the man," I said nothing till we
got to the Police-court, and then I said, "Did you recognise anybody coming up the road?" Gray said, "I am not sure, I rather think I know that fellow with the light coat coming up the road"—I did not say, "That is the man."
F. HOCKEY (Re-examined). I have heard what the last witness has said, I do not still say that he said that the man was Kunold before I identified him.
RALPH MARTIN . I keep the Midland Arms, Church Lane, Hendon—on June 14th I wrote this cheque for £9, and gave it to Bowler, that is Roberts—the prisoner, to the best of my belief, was with him; I was not in his company more than ten minutes, and had not spoken to him—I did not hear Kunold speak; he wore his hair rather low on his forehead, and he had a moustache, dark, to the best of my recollection—I had never seen him before; I was not at home when he came the day before; I beg pardon, I did see them for two or three minutes the night before—I cannot recollect whether Kunold had a moustache the night before—I went with Hockey to Dalston Police-station, and from there to the Police-court—I was walking with Gray, Hockey, and Sergeant Pearce; Sergeant Pearce asked us if we could recognise him—I said, "No"—Kunold slapped him on the back, and then Gray said, "That is Kunold"; it was Gray who said it—I believe he is the man who was at my house, but his moustache and hair were not the same as they are now.
Cross-examined. I simply swear to the best of my belief that he is the man who called at my house; I had never seen him before—I was at the back of the Court when Pearce was in the witness-box.
JOHN STREET . I am a farmer and carman, of 55, Portlies Road, Finsbury Park—I first saw the prisoner last February at Murray Mews with Roberts—the hair on his face was about the same as now, only not so long—I have seen him about twice by himself and two or three times with Roberts—they seemed to know each other very well—the last time I saw him there was in March; I only know the prisoner by seeing him there; I have had dealings with Roberts.
Cross-examined. I mean that I have seen a man just like the prisoner with Roberts, and if he is not the man I never saw two men more alike—I swear he is the man, I was always certain of it—I should not like to swear to his being the man, but I believe he is.
By the COURT. I was cross-examined about it, and said, "I do not know the prisoner personally; I have seen a man very like him with Roberts—I won't swear positively he is the man; I have had no dealings with him and no reason to pay particular attention to him"—I had dealings with Roberts, but not with this man.
BENJAMIN WALTER DUNNING . I am a costermonger of 144, Kensal Road; I have known Roberts since May this year, and the prisoner since June—I saw them together in a waggonette in June, driving a bay gelding, and I saw them together two or three times on the High Road, Fulham—I have got a stall in a stable there.
Cross-examined. When I identified him he was not put with other men; he was in the dock—I received a telegram, asking me to come to the Police station to identify Karl Kunold, and I knew the most likely place to see him was in the dock.
Re-examined. The prisoner is the man I saw with Roberts.
JAMES HOPKINS . I am a general dealer, of 90, Wentworth Street, Spitalfields—I have known Roberts all my life; he is a sort of cousin by reputation—I visited him at Holloway on August 14th, at two p.m.; I remember the day, because afterwards on that day I hurt my spine and was taken to the hospital—I saw the prisoner, whom I knew, and asked him for money to get food for Roberts—he gave me 8s., and I gave it to a woman outside—I knew him as Charley, and said, "Charley, how are you going on about this fellow's grub?" or I may have said, "Frank's grub"—I cannot say what he said but he gave me the money, and said you have come too late, or else I was going to see him myself—I saw him and Roberts together in Durham Road, and had a drink with them at the Durham Arms, and I have seen him several times since and have had drink with him—I saw him outside Bagnage Wells Station, but except that time in March, I have never seen him in Roberts' company—I never saw him outside the Holloway Castle, except when he gave me the 8s.—nothing was said about Counsel.
Cross-examined. I have known Frank all my life; he is a cousin of mine—I think he is perfectly honest—I do not know that he has been convicted and had three months, and twenty months, and eight years—I lost sight of him for fifteen years—he told me to go to Kunold and get £10 to pay a mouthpiece, and he promised to do so, but left him in the lurch.
GEORGE WHITLOCK (Police Sergeant J). On July 26th I went to 6, Park Road, Camberwell Green, to a stable occupied by Roberts, and found some reins, nose bags, and other articles which have all been identified, and at another place I found a knee rug identified by Mr. Gray—I have known Kunold some time—he went with me to search his yard; he is a Hansom's cabdriver, he has altered his appearance by letting his hair grow; he used to be clean-shaved in February, but wore a moustache—I have got his paper here showing his different addresses—I know he occupied some mews at York Road, Kentish Town; those are the premises I searched—I heard the description of the premises given by Roberts, that is correct; the Mews is at the back of the house, the back door is on the left going in.
Cross-examined. I never crossed the threshold of the house—I believe these are large doors; any person passing by could see, there are vans going up the York Road—I could not identify what I went for—I went from information I received; it was not a pal of Roberts who gave me the information—it was long before I saw Roberts—I did not see him till July.
The Prisoner's statement before the MAGISTRATE: "With regard to Roberts, I do not know the man at all; I buy horses and cobs in a straightforward way—the witnesses have made a mistake, and taken me for somebody else.
G. WHITLOCK (Re-examined). The Roberts referred to in that statement is the Roberts who has been here to-day.
GUILTY .— Three Years' Penal Servitude. There were other indictments against the Prisoner.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, November 21st, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. MCCALL, Q.C., and F. SAFFORD Prosecuted, and MR. ELLIOT Defended.
CAROLINE ELIZABETH SUTTON . I am the holder of ticket 30,413 at the Army and Navy Stores—I have a deposit account there—on the morning of October 10th, I purchased goods, Fellowes syrup, malt extract, etc., in the drug department to the amount of £1 3s. 0d. of an assistant I know now to be Cornell—I did not wish that parcel to be sent down to the parcels department; my servant was going to call for it at the counter, and accordingly the bill was marked to be taken—I then went to the drapery department, taking with me this bill for the 23s. parcel—I directed the parcel from the drapery department to be sent downstairs to the door—I directed my groom to bring the 23s. parcel from the drug counter, and gave him this bill—I waited at the door till he got the parcels—when I got home in my carriage, I found he had brought three parcels; my drapery parcels and the 23s. drug parcel, and this is the third one; it was so large that it was put on the box of the carriage; I had not ordered it—I opened it and saw at once it contained things I had not ordered—I wrote this letter to the stores that afternoon, (enquiring why this parcel had been sent), and the carter from the stores called and took the parcel away—it was an entirely different parcel to the one I had ordered.
ARTHUR HORSMAN . I am foreman in the drug department of the Stores, in room C—that department is divided into three rooms—Cornell was an assistant in the C room, which is the smaller of the two sale rooms—only lie, myself, Morgan Lloyd, and another assistant who occasionally relieved me were engaged there—every assistant has a bill book similar to this—the bills are numbered in triplicate, each three have the same number—sometimes a customer takes goods and sometimes they are sent to the door, where there is a parcels' office—if the customer takes them, the assistant writes "Taken" at the head of the bill after the customer's name to indicate the mode of delivery, but if the parcel is to go to the parcels' office at the door, the assistant writes "Door"—if the goods are to be sent by carman the address would be put after the customer's name—sometimes the customer after determining to take the goods changes his mind and wants them sent down to the door, and in that case the "Taken" would be altered to "Door"—the assistant makes the three copies of the bill at the same time by means of carbon paper—when the customer has given particulars of his order the assistant should call a foreman to check the items of the order, and the foreman should see that the customer's name and number appear there, and the mode of delivery and amount of the order, and initial the bill, and tear out the first two duplicate bills, leaving the triplicate bill in the assistant's book—the foreman files the original and hands the duplicate to the customer—that takes place if the customer has a deposit account, which is indicated by
"Deposit" being written on the bill; if no such word appears the transaction is a cash one—if the customer changes his mind after "Taken" has been initialled by the foreman, and altered by the assistant to "Door" that alteration should be made on the original and the duplicate by the foreman; they should be all replaced, and the alteration made on all three copies—in the case of a "Door" transaction the assistant has to make out a "tally," a slip of paper like this to be tied to the parcel which is to be sent to the door—the tally bears the date, the number of the department, the assistant's name, the name of the customer, and the value of the parcel—the Drug Department is known as No. 6—the assistant would also make out a door-ticket, and give it to the customer; by means of that the customer can obtain the parcel from the parcels' office—the ticket corresponds with the tally and bears the assistant's initials—the assistant should call the foreman to check the tally at the time that he signs the duplicate and the triplicate bills, when the parcel is ready to go to the door—the bills are dealt with in the same way, whether it a "taken" or a "door" transaction—when the parcel is to go to the door, the customer gives up his bill to the assistant—Cornell had this counter-book in use on October 10th; Cornell's number was 19—these are the original, the duplicate and the triplicate of order No. 230,979—the original has been taken from the file—my initial "A. H." is on all three—I was the foreman on that day—this is the duplicate produced by Mrs. Sutton—when I initialled them "Door" was not written here, only "Taken" appeared—on the original and duplicate now only "Taken" appears, on the triplicate the "Taken" written in carbon has been crossed out by "Door" written in pencil—"Door" was not there when I initialled it; on that triplicate there are the initials of Morgan Lloyd in blue; he is another foreman—I recognise these initials as his; they also appear on the tally; my initials are not on that—on the next day, 11th, Cornell left the employment at one o'clock; his usual time for dinner is two—he did not tell me where he was going—he never returned—between ten and twelve on that 11th I saw the prisoner in C room—he was standing there; I only saw him for a moment—I believe he was just going to go out; he was not speaking to anyone—I knew him well by sight; I have frequently seen him in the same room talking to Cornell—he has never, to my knowledge, purchased anything there.
Cross-examined. He may have purchased something there without my knowing it—we have thousands of customers—I have been in C room for about a year—Cornell was there when I went there—I do not know how long he had been there—I am not the head of the department, only foreman of the room—Mr. Peat is my superior—I know that it is not only the person whose name is on a ticket who purchases goods at the Stores with that ticket—different members of a family very often purchase on one ticket, and strangers, to whom the ticket-holder gives permission, also purchase on the same ticket.
ALBERT EDWARD HARE . I am a groom in Mr. Sutton's employment—on October 10th I drove Mrs. Sutton to the Army and Navy Stores—she gave me the £1 3s. bill to get the parcel from the drug department—I went and got the parcel from the assistant—Mrs. Sutton also gave me a door ticket to get a drapery parcel—I went to the parcels' office, but the drapery parcel had not come down, but the assistant gave me a parcel
very similar to this; he took off the tally label from it and put it on a file—I put the parcel on the front of the carriage; Mrs. Sutton could not see it—they sent for the drapery parcel and delivered it to me at the door—when I arrived home the three parcels were taken into the house in the usual way.
WILLIAM MORGAN LLOYD . I am a foreman in the drug department of the Army and Navy Stores—on October 10th Cornell was an assistant in that department—this bill for £1 3s. is in his writing—the triplicate, altered from "Taken" to "Door" is initialled by me; Cornell brought it and asked me to initial it—I initialled the tally at the same time—I did not examine the parcel—I should not know when I initialled the triplicate whether the parcel was a £1 3s. or a £9 5s. parcel; I did not see it, it would be unnecessary—I know the prisoner by sight; I have seen him in the department—I have examined Cornell's book for that day; there is no order for £9 5s. for drugs; there is no order for drugs in the name of Sutton in his book for that day except the £1 3s. order—there is no order in the name of Torr in that book for that day.
Cross-examined. I once saw Torr in the prescription room, having a prescription made up by an assistant who was not Cornell.
AUGUSTUS JOHN HEAD . I am assistant in the parcels' office of the Army and Navy Stores at the door—on October 10th a groom called for a parcel for Sutton, and handed me a door ticket for the drapery department—I could not find that parcel, but I found one from the drug department with a tally on it, which I compared with the door ticket; I found the same name and number—the groom did not object, but he did not exactly seem to know whether he wanted it or not—he then produced a bill he had for the drug department, and we both compared it with the tally and saw they were the same, and he took the parcel away—finally he took the drapery parcel also—later in the afternoon, between three and five, the prisoner called and produced a drug department door ticket to me—I could not find a parcel corresponding with it—I said, "It has not come down," and told him to go to the department and he would find out about it there—he went away and returned in the course of a minute or so; he had time to go up to the department where Cornell was—he returned and said the parcel had been sent to the parcels' office out of the department—when he came back I was looking at the file, and I found the tally on my file—I told the prisoner the tally exactly corresponded with the ticket, and I had given it out in the early part of the day to a lady and her groom, and I showed him the tally—he passed the remark in reply that we ought not to give up parcels without door tickets—I explained that as long as a member produced a paid bill we were quite justified in giving up the parcel—he said he did not wish the other branch of his family to know what he was purchasing—he went away as if to get the parcel, taking the door ticket with him—I had seen the prisoner at the Stores frequently—he has called for parcels from time to time, and I have seen him about the place—on October 19th I went to the London County Council offices in Spring Gardens, and after waiting outside by the door, and seeing people pass in and out for some time, I saw the prisoner come out—I followed him to Wellington Chambers, York Street—I believe he lives there—it is about five minutes' walk from the Stores, I should think.
Cross-examined. Hundreds of people come to my parcels' department in the course of a day—I believe my attention was first called to this, matter on Monday, October 14th.
ALFRED LIDDIARD . I am an assistant in the parcels' office of the Army and Navy Stores, with Head—on October 10th the prisoner, whom I know by sight as coming to the office for parcels, came in the afternoon and spoke to Head—I was within hearing, and heard what was said—he handed me a door-ticket—I have no doubt the prisoner is the man.
Cross-examined. I last saw the prisoner on the evening of the 10th—I believe on the evening of the 10th my attention was called to the matter—hundreds of people call at our office—I have often seen the prisoner calling for parcels this year, I should think, at least; his face is quite familiar to us, as calling at the parcels' office.
JOHN EDMUND KEATES . I am an assistant in this parcels' office—on the afternoon of October 10th the prisoner came and had a conversation with Head, which I heard—I have not the slightest doubt the prisoner is the man—I have known him by sight for a considerable time—I know him well by sight.
Cross-examined. My attention was called to this matter by the Stores-authorities about the Monday.
Re-examined. The portion of the conversation I heard was when the prisoner returned from the drug department to which Head had referred him—I heard what he said to Head—he handed in his ticket and asked for the parcel—Head told him it had been given out to the groom, a man-servant in livery, and the prisoner seemed very much annoyed, and said, "What is the use of my door ticket?"—he also said he did not wish other members of his family to know what he had been purchasing—I saw Head compare the door ticket with the tally which was then on the file; that was all I heard—I am quite certain the prisoner was the man who had that conversation with Head.
ALFRED LIDDIARD (Re-examined). I heard the whole of the conversation before the prisoner went to the drug department and after he came back—I heard Keate's evidence as to the conversation after the prisoner came back; it is substantially correct—before he went to the drug department he handed in the door ticket for the parcel, and Head said the parcel was not there, and referred him to the drug department—I heard the prisoner say, "The parcel has been sent here from the department"—Head said, "I gave it this morning to a lady and her groom," or words to that effect—the prisoner said, "You should not give up a parcel without a door ticket"—and Head said, "As long as I see a paid bill that is sufficient for me"—the prisoner said, "I don't want other members of my family to know what I am purchasing"—I have no doubt the prisoner is the man that had that conversation with Head.
JOHN ALLCHURCH . I am superintendent at the Army and Navy Stores—Mrs. Sutton's letter of October 10th was handed to me on October 14th or 15th, and a parcel of pills was also handed to me—I caused inquiries to be made in the drug department—in the drug department I found an old office coat of Cornell's, and in the pockets were these three slips of paper—one is torn off a letter, and contains "Future send letters to me addressed Engineer's Department, London County Council, Spring Gardens, S.W."—another slip was a receipt for a registered letter, dated
December, 1891, addressed to "John B. Torr, Esq., Engineer's Department, London County Council, Spring Gardens, S.W." and posted near Victoria Station—in consequence I caused Head to go to the London County Council Offices, Spring Gardens, to see if he could recognise the person who asked for the parcel—that was the first intimation at the Stores that the prisoner had anything to do with it.
Cross-examined. I knew Cornell all the time he was at the Stores, about six years—he appeared to be a most respectable young man—I had not the slightest suspicion of anything being wrong with him; he would not have been in the employment if there had been.
JOHN WALL ROBERTS . I was one of the assistants in C room at these Stores, on October 10th and before Cornell was an assistant there—I received Mrs. Sutton's letter on the morning of October 11th—I took it to Cornell and asked him to read it, and he did so—I asked him whether he had any explanation to give—he did not answer then, but walked about the room; he appeared dazed—I turned to speak to one of the assistants, and after about five minutes, I turned and said to Cornell, "Have you found the bill?"—meaning the bill for the £9 5s. parcel—he said, "I have looked; I cannot find it"—I know the prisoner by sight—I have seen him in the department frequently, talking to Cornell.
HENRY GUTTERIDGE . I am a correspondence clerk in the employment of these Stores—in the course of my duty Mrs. Sutton's letter was handed to me—it stated that the parcel was intact at 49, Lexham Gardens, and that if the secretary sent for it he could have it back—I issued instructions to the carman, and it was brought "back; this is the parcel, I should say—I examined it, and found it contained eighteen dozen boxes of pills and a dozen boxes of Homocea—the value of the parcel is £9 5s., I believe—I have received letters addressed to the Stores for Cornell—it is contrary to the Society's rules for the assistants to receive private letters there, but when letters came for him I handed or sent them by a boy to Cornell—the rule is more honoured in the breach than in the observance—I have observed the writing on the private letters for him, they were all directed in the same hand—to the best of my belief I should say that the letters received for Cornell were in the same writing as these cheques—I cannot be certain whether the writing is the same as that on this slip.
JOSEPH PEAT . I am sub-manager of the drug department—with the last witness I opened and examined the parcel of the value of £9 5s.—I knew Cornell and the prisoner—the prisoner I first met at a smoking concert of the Chemists' Musical Society, formed principally of members of the drug department, held at Storey's Gate about six years ago—members of the Society introduced friends—I could not swear who introduced the prisoner, but I was under the impression that Cornell introduced him—I have met the prisoner since from time to time.
Cross-examined. I cannot say if Mr. James Torr holds ticket number 199,546; very possibly he may; I have not been through the list—I cannot say whether the late Mrs. Torr, senior, held a ticket for many years—I knew Cornell for seven years—I thought he was very respectably connected—I did not know that his father was a clergyman—Cornell was in the stores for seven years; I had been there much longer—I did not know him before he came to the Stores—I knew nothing against his
character till this charge arose—he always conducted himself as a respecttable, gentlemanly man—his salary was 38s. a week; he was a bachelor.
Re-examined. I think he was about twenty-eight years old.
ARTHUR TOM LANE . I am an assistant in the C department of these Stores—I knew Cornell—I have frequently seen Torr in that room, speaking to Cornell—I have not seen him purchasing anything in the Stores; he used to come and see Cornell, and talk to him—on Friday morning, about eleven o'clock, the prisoner came in sharp, and spoke to Cornell, and immediately went out again—perhaps an hour after that Roberts brought a letter to Cornell, and had a conversation with him—Cornell would be entitled to go out to dinner at two o'clock—on that day he asked me if I would change with him, and go out at two, instead of one; that would enable him to go out at one—he went about two minutes to one—he never came back—last Tuesday week I saw at Lambeth Mortuary the body of a drowned man, which had been in the water three or four weeks—some of the features were like those of Cornell, but they were very much swollen—my opinion is that the body was not Cornell's; it might have been, but I could not recognise him.
Cross-examined. I cannot say to half an hour what time I saw the prisoner and Cornell speaking in the department on the morning of 11th; it was not as early as 9.30—I will not pledge myself that it was as late as eleven—some day in the next week I was first spoken to about this matter.
HARRY TOOLE . I am employed as a boy in the drug department; I used to arrive at 8.30 a.m., the assistants at nine o'clock—Cornell arrived regularly about 8.40; he came before his time—my first duty was to dust the department; Cornell used to come when I was doing that—after that I took the stock sheets, for the supply of stock for the day, to the stock room, downstairs—when I went down there Cornell was alone in the drug department—during the day I take down parcels from C room to the door parcels' office—on October 10th I made this entry in the door parcels' book—I enter in this book the name and ticket number, the assistant's name who gives me the parcel and my own signature and the date, and when I get to the door the assistant who takes the parcel from me signs his initials—I find by reference to this book that on October 10th I took a parcel "Sutton 30,413, 319 H. T., 10/9/95/," to the parcels' office, where I got it signed for—the last part of the entry is the receiver's signature.
CHARLES BEARD (Sergeant A). I received this warrant for the prisoner's apprehension on October 26th, and on that day I met him in St. James's Park, about 2.30—I said to him, "Mr. Torr, you know me as a police officer"—he said, "Yes, I believe I do"—I said, "I hold a warrant for your arrest for conspiring with a man named Cornell in stealing a quantity of pills from the Army and Navy Stores"—I read the warrant to him; he said, "I have nothing to say, it is a false charge. It is your duty to execute the warrant, and I will go with you"—on the way to the station he said, "Where is Cornell?"—I said, "I don't know, I wish I did"—he said, "So do I, because if he was here he could clear me"—at the station the charge was read to him in the usual way by the inspector; he said in reply, "It is a false charge"—I searched, and found on him £3
in gold, 18s. 4 1/2 d. and a cheque-book with 12 unused cheques in it, and counterfoils of used cheques—nothing relating to the charge—I found a key on him—I afterwards went to Wellington Chambers, York Street, Westminster, where he lived; he gave me that as his address, I knew he lived there—with the key he gave me I opened a top left-hand small drawer of a chest of drawers in his bedroom—I there found these two cheques among others, and also these outside covers and counterfoils of a used cheque-book—these two cheques are drawn by Torr in favour of Cornell, and endorsed H. C. Cornell, one is for £6 10s. the other for £15—I find on some of these counterfoils "H. C. C."—it is an 1894 book—the present book that I found on the prisoner is for 1895, there is nothing in it relating to H. C. Cornell—there were several books in the drawer; I looked through them and could not see anything relating to the charge—I found no counterfoils in them with H. C. C, and no other cheques payable to Cornell.
Cross-examined. There is no other police officer in this case—I have looked through all the documents and cheques, and everything I found in the drawers—when I arrested him in St. James's Park it was the first intimation I had ever made to him of this charge—I am not aware that he had been acquainted by anybody else with this matter—I have made enquiries about him—I understood from good authority that he had a good banking account at the National Provincial Bank; I have no reason to doubt it—from what I saw in the drawer and the present cheque book I was satisfied that he was respectable; I have known him about eighteen months myself—he is in the employment of the London County Council; so far as I know he is a man of unblemished character—I heard that he had deposited £2,600 in securities at the Bank—I made enquiries about Cornell and found he was respectably connected—I did not know Cornell—I am satisfied that the body that was found was Cornell's; I had a description of the clothes he was wearing—the majority of the people who saw the body said it was Cornell's—I believe Lane saw it—the places where, as the landlady said, the linen had been marked, were cut away, the buttons cut off the trousers, the tab cut off the back of the coat, and everything done by the person to prevent being identified.
Re-examined. I had a warrant to arrest Cornell—I went to his lodgings as 26, Hetherington Road, Brixton—I understood that he went home from the Stores about one o'clock, stayed there a few minutes, and then went out and never returned, and was never seen alive afterwards—he went away from his lodgings just as he came in, without taking anything with him—the body was found in the river at Lambeth, and was taken to the Lambeth Mortuary—Allchurch examined some of the cheques.
JOHN ALLCHURCH (Re-examined). I went through the cheques and counterfoils found in the prisoner's drawer with Beard—I saw these two cheques of November 21st and December 7th, drawn in favour of Cornell and endorsed by him—I should think there were nearly a dozen counterfoils with "H.C.C." on them as payee—we did not find the cheques corresponding to those—I found other counterfoils with, in addition, "Lambert and Butler," and "W. D. and H. O. Wills" and other names at payees.
By MR. ELLIOT. The names were not all those of tobacco firms—I
almost remember the name of Rooke on one for £4 or £5; there may be a tobacco firm of that name, but it is not familiar to me.
HENRY JUPE . I am an assistant to Allchurch at the Army and Navy Stores—I have been through the drug department cash books for October 10th—there was no payment in the name of Torr that day, and no parcel was sent down to the parcels' office in that name—I found no sale to anyone named Torr.
GEORGE ALPHONSE DUDLEY . I am an assistant in the tobacco department at these stores—I knew Cornell—on November 18th I went to Lambeth Mortuary where I identified a body as that of Cornell by the teeth, the finger nails, the legs and feet, and the clothes—I have no doubt about it—a match box which I had seen before as belonging to him was found on the body.
WILLIAM JAMES TALBOT . I am managing clerk to Messrs. Tyrrell Lewis—I served a copy of the notice to produce on the prisoner—I obtained an order to inspect his banking account in the National Provincial Bank—I produce the affidavit of an officer and a copy of the ledger account which I have examined with the bank book—I produce a certificate of the incorporation of the company.
GEORGE GLAYSHER . I knew Cornell—I am an assistant in the tobacco department of these Stores—about the end of 1894 Cornell consulted me about taking a tobacconist's shop in Newington Butts—I went with him to see the shop—he said a friend of his was going to lend him money to start in business—about November 20th, 1894, I was introduced by Cornell to the prisoner—we went to the Blue Anchor public-house opposite Queen Anne's Mansions, Westminster, and there the prisoner drew a cheque for £15, I believe, and handed it to Cornell in my presence—I believe my advice was asked as to whether it would be sufficient to start this tobacconist's business on, and I said it was not very much, but we might make a start with it; Cornell had been expecting a larger amount to start with before we met the prisoner—I am not certain whether Cornell or the prisoner asked me the question—Cornell had asked me previously what amount I thought would do to start with, and I said between £50 and £60—he did not say how much he was expecting from the prisoner—when the remark was made on the handing of the £15 that it seemed a very small amount, the prisoner said, "That is all I can give you at present," and he said he would give him something further on if he could afford it.
Cross-examined. I did not know that Cornell's mother was going to manage the business—I understood that she would be in the shop in the day time, and would look after the business—he was going to remain at the Stores—I did not know he was anxious to get married, and that this was done with a view to help him in that direction—I don't remember anything being said at the interview about the prisoner lending him £35 of which this £15 was to be part—when the £15 was handed over, the premises at Newington Butts had been taken—I understood afterwards that the prisoner had guaranteed the rent which was £50 a year, for the first quarter—I have not heard that the prisoner was pressed to pay, and paid the second quarter—I could not say who paid the first quarter—no tobacco was purchased at the Stores to my knowledge—the business was opened and carried on, but it failed and was closed.
Re-examined. I do not know when it was closed—some time this year, I believe—I have only heard about it since.
Cross-examined. I am managing clerk to the firm who are agents of the premises 213, Newington Butts—Henry Cornell applied to me with reference to renting those premises, and referred to Mr. Torr, whose address was the London County Council Offices, Spring Gardens—my principals saw Mr. Torr, I believe, and in the result he gave a guarantee for the first quarter's rent—the first half-quarter's rent was paid—the premises were taken in November, 1894—the tenant fitted them up as a tobacconist's shop—the March quarter's rent was paid by Cornell's mother on his account; she took charge of the shop—we sent notice at midsummer that we should call on a certain day for the rent, but before that date came we had a notification that Cornell could not carry on business any longer; we could not get the rent from Cornell, and I saw the prisoner, and he gave me a cheque for £8, on account of £12 due, and a letter promising to pay the balance within a month, and he paid the balance of £4 10s. on October 23rd—I pressed him twice before he paid anything—the shop was taken for one year certain.
Re-examined. The shop was shut up in the early part of July.
The prisoner received an excellent character.
NOT GUILTY .
There was another indictment based upon the same facts, charging the prisoner with uttering a forged delivery note. MR. MCCALL offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Friday, November 22nd, 1895.
Before Mr. Justice Wright.
MR. HUTTON, for the prosecution, offered no defence.
NOT GUILTY .
There was another indictment against the prisoner for unlawful neglect of the said child. To this she
PLEADED GUILTY .— Discharged on Recognizances.
(For other Cases tried this day, see Surrey Cases.)
NEW COURT—Friday, November 22nd, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. ALLEYNE Prosecuted, and MR. DRAKE Defended Lemaistre.
HORATIO LEE . I am a mantle manufacturer and agent of 6, Friday Street—I produce an invoice of six rolls of cloth, which I bought on October 9th from Messrs. Parker and Co.—each number on the invoice refers to a separate roll of cloth—I gave Mr. Levey this cloth to be worked up—I have identified the three rolls of cloth in Court as three of those rolls—Levey took them away on a barrow.
Cross-examined by Evans. I do not recognize you.
Cross-examined by MR. DRAKE. The trade price is 1s. 8d. a yard—that includes 2 1/2 per cent, agent's commission.
HORATIO LEVEY . I am a mantle manufacturer of 8, St. George's Street, East—on October 10th I employed the prisoner Evans to take six pieces of cloth to my place of business—I went with him to Friday Street, where the cloth was—I loaded his barrow—I have known him the last two years—I sent my boy, Hicks, whom I employ weekly, with two other pieces—Evans never arrived with the cloth—the same day I was with Sergeant Murphy when I found the prisoner in East Road, City Road—he was taken into custody and taken to the Police-court—we could not get him to the station without a cab, because he struggled—when charged with stealing the cloth, he said he had never had it—each roll weighed sixty or seventy pounds.
ALFRED HICKS . I was employed by Mr. Levey to take the cloth to his place of business, with Evans—in Cheapside there was a block in the traffic—the prisoner was behind—I got stopped and he was going along,—he passed and turned down Princes Street, and told me to go down London Wall—when I turned the street he was gone—I could not see him—I took my cloth to Mr. Levey's.
Cross-examined by Evans. I wanted to go down Tower Hill, and you said, "Go up Cheapside and Ludgate Street"—you did not say the barrow wanted greasing as the asphalte was a bit soft—nor that you would stop at Lockhart's.
By the COURT. He never said those things at the Police-court.
JAMES MURPHY (City Detective Sergeant). I received information on October 10th, in consequence of which I went with Mr. Levey to East Road, City Road—I saw Evans with five or six other young fellows, outside the Three Crowns—I seized him, and said, "I am a police officer"—I was immediately surrounded by his companions, he struggled to get away, but, with the assistance of three Metropolitan Police officers, we secured him, and held him in a cab which was fetched, and conveyed him to the station—he so persisted in protesting his innocence, and knowing nothing about the matter at all, that I made further inquiries—he said, "I know nothing whatever about it, I never saw him (Levey) before in my life—he had a hat, a shirt, a collar, and a tie, with boots and socks, all apparently new clothes—I said to the prosecutor, in Evan's presence, "Is there any doubt about this being the man"—Levey said, "No"—I said, "He does not answer the description of the man you gave me"—"No," he said, "he is dressed differently; but I should know the man, however he was dressed"—Evan's new hat had a Shoreditch maker's name—the morning after I had arrested him, I said, "Where did you take this cloth to?"—he said, "As I was going along Moorgate Street I stopped at Lockhart's coffee shop"—I have made inquiries, there is no such shop—he said, "When I went in two men drove up in a van, and moved the cloth off the barrow into the van, and drove away—I said, "Who are these two men?" he said, "I don't know, I think the van comes from over the water"—I said, "What steps did you take to prevent the men doing this?"—he made no reply—I have no special instructions as to cautioning people against saying anything when arrested—about seven days afterwards I went with Sergeant Wise to Silver
Street where I saw the prisoner Lemaistre and Mr. Hankey—I followed them; they entered the Wool Exchange where they parted—I then, with Wise, had a conversation with Mr. Hankey—on putting questions Mr. Hankey handed Wise this receipted invoice, and we all three went to No. 6, Falcon Square, the premises of Messrs. Diamant and Co.—we had a conversation with Mr. Diamant, and saw four rolls of cloth on the first floor; I then went up to the third floor with Mr. Hall, Mr. Diamant's foreman, where I saw one black and one brown roll of cloth—in consequence of something I said to Mr. Hall he handed me this ticket (referring to a roll of cloth numbered 85091)—we all went to the station where, before Hankey or Diamant were charged, in consequence of something Mr. Hankey said we sent two officers to look after Lemaistre, who was subsequently brought to the station.
Cross-examined by Evans, Mr. Levey got hold of you first—while rushing to and fro in the crowd you fell to the ground and said your arm was broken—it was not broken—you said you stopped at Lockhart's—there is no Lockhart's in Moorgate Street—I had not seen you before.
Re-examined. I used no more force than was necessary to secure him.
JOHN WISE (City Detective Sergeant). I went with Murphy to Silver Street, and saw Lemaistre in conversation with Hankey, and followed them to the Wool Exchange—I had a conversation with Hankey, and he handed me this receipted invoice—we all three went to Diamant's and conversed with Mr. Diamant in the first floor front room—I saw four rolls of cloth—I said, "Those are four of the rolls"—the numbers corresponded with the numbers of stolen property—Murphy went upstairs and brought down three rolls—we all went to Cloak Lane Police Station—later on Lemaistre was brought in—on his entering I said, "Mr. Lemaistre, you know me, how about this cloth?"—the whole of the cloth was in the station close to where he was standing—he said he bought it off a man named Robertson, whom he did not know—they were all then called into the room together and charged. I told Lemaistre he would have to consider himself in custody—he said it was a false charge—Hankey said in Lemaistre's presence, "I bought the cloth off Franks and Co. through their traveller Lemaistre"—I said "I know Lemaistre as Franks and Co."—Lemaistre said, "I am Franks and Co"—I asked for an invoice; Lemaistre said he had not any, and then he said that he bought anything and sold on commission—Diamant said in Lemaistre's presence that he bought the goods off Hankey for 1s. a yard, and if he had bought it in the ordinary way of business he should have got it for 1s. 4 1/2 d.—I do not know Evans.
Cross-examined by MR. DRAKE. Franks and Co.'s address is 16, Fore Street Avenue—the name was on the wall; it is not now—Lemaistre said he did not know where Robertson lived; he did not say, "I do know him, but I do not know where he lives"—at the Police-court Hankey and Diamant were represented by counsel; Diamant by Mr. Geoghegan, and the Magistrate took the view that it was a bona fide transaction between them of a sale on commission—they were discharged—after the first day at the Police-court they were let out on bail of £200—I was connected with the case three days, not after the 18th—Lemaistre said that he had received three £5 Bank of England notes from Hankey, and had handed them over to Robertson—he told me
I could trace those notes—he gave me the numbers, and I have traced them to three public-houses, one in the East End of London, one close to this Court, and one in St. Luke's—the landlords all said they took them over the counter in the way of business, and did not know who took them there—Lemaistre could not have passed any of those notes, because he was arrested—he gave me a description of Robertson—in a letter to me Lemaistre say it was a man of the name of Robertson, Hurley, or Harley—he did not say he was selling goods for Harley in the Mile End Road—I have not inquired. (Letter read from Lemaistre: "Her Majesty's Prison, Holloway, 21/10/95—Mr. Wise, if you will come and see me, I will describe Robertson and Harley or Hurley, and will do all I can to find them.")
HORATIO LEE (Re-examined). I have heard the evidence that Lemaistre sold this cloth at 1s. a yard—I paid 1s. 8d. a yard for it—I know that is the trade price—it was not a job lot—the rolls of cloth were prefectly new goods, and had only arrived in London the morning I bought them.
VICTOR THEO HANKEY . I am a commission agent—on October 18th, Sergeant Wise and Murphy had a conversation with me near the Wool Exchange, during which I handed them this receipted invoice—I was then taken to Diamant and Co., and from there to Cloak Lane Police-station—while there Lemaistre was brought in, and I was charged with him and Diamant with having stolen the six rolls of cloth—I bought the cloth from Franks and Co.—Lemaistre offered it to me at 1s. 2d. or 1s. 1d. I cannot remember which—I never answered that offer—I offered it Mr. Diamant for 1s.—I paid Lemaistre 1s. less 2 1/2 per cent, commission for it—he said nothing about its belonging to Robertson—I never heard of Robertson till I got to the station—I paid Lemaistre three £5 notes, two sovereigns and 1s.—I have heard Lemaistre paid the money over, but it was not in my presence; I handed him the money and went upstairs—that was in the entrance door of the premises of Diamant and Co.
Cross-examined by MR. DRAKE. I have known Lemaistre eight or nine years as a commission agent—sometimes I do not see the goods I sell on commission—I have not sold for Lemaistre—I understood he was the agent of Franks and Co.—sometimes the custom is to invoice the goods in the name of the agent—Lemaistre has sold goods for me—he brought the money—he sold by sample and I took the money—he received commission whether the goods were mine or not—I have not seen my goods invoiced as his—he acted as my agent in selling canvases for £50—I have not seen the invoices—he sold them, brought me the money, and I gave him the commission—he met me at an appointed place—these goods are a job lot—I cannot estimate cloth—one shilling was a fair price because the goods were out of season—I would be astonished to hear that a man in the business paid 1s. 8d. trade price—I have not said that in the usual way they can be bought at 1s. 4 1/2 d., Mr. Diamant said it—I do not remember my goods being invoiced in the name of Lemaistre—I should not say it is the custom—it may happen if the agent sells at his own risk—I have invoiced goods in the agent's name.
Re-examined. At the Police-station when Lemaistre was brought in I said, "I bought it of Franks and Co., through their traveller, Lemaistre," and "I did not know Lemaistre was Franks and Co."—I think
Lemaistre, in reply to the officer, said, "Yes, that is my name, I am Franks and Co."
By the COURT. I have bought goods from Lemaistre—he gave me an invoice—I did not ask him where the goods came from—he has a name, and a shop—since last month, I think, he has had a fish-shop—I did not know much about his shop—I have not a shop—I carry on business at 19, Crossland Road—seeing them now, I still say these goods were a job lot.
GEORGE HALL . I am foreman to Mr. Diamant—I remember taking Sergeant Murphy to the third floor of our premises—we are wholesale manufacturers—I handed Murphy this ticket, which was attached to a roll of cloth.
Cross-examined by Evans. I never saw you till I saw you at the Police-court.
Cross-examined by MR. DRAKE. I received these goods at Mr. Diamant's premises from Mr. Hankey and a man about four p.m.—I never saw Lemaistre nor the man till I saw them at the Police-court—there were no delivery notes, that is only usual with large firms—Mr. Hankey being there, I did not think it necessary to ask the man's name.
By the COURT. The price was 1s. a yard—I have bought superior stuff for from 4d. to 5 1/2 d. more—we should not have paid 1s. 8d. for it—I should be surprised to hear that a person accustomed to deal in such goods paid 1s. 8d. for them—they are not this season's goods—winter goods arrive about June—I do not know these were bought in the trade—I should call anything a job lot of that description if a person wanted to clear—I was not present when they were bought—I have not the slightest idea whether inquiries were made as to where the goods came from—when they were delivered four labels were on; two had been taken off—I removed the one produced.
VICTOR THEO HANKEY (Re-examined). I was present when Lemaistre brought the cloth—I had to fetch the cloth from Franks and Co., and at twelve o'clock in the day I called; I had not the money, and promised to come in half an hour with the money, but Lemaistre told me to "Save carriage; I will deliver where you want," and I said, "Very well," and he said, "I will deliver them at two o'clock—I went to lunch, and when I returned the cloth was there, and the man with the van, and when I saw it with the invoice I paid for it.
By MR. DRAKE. I never said I was not present when the cloth was delivered—I was upstairs when the man was bringing the six pieces, one after the other, and I went down, asked to look at the invoice, and paid the money—I now know the cloth was never in the possession of Franks and Co. at 16, Fore Street Avenue—I did not know where it was—I saw Lemaistre standing in the street opposite when the cloth was delivered—nobody was present when I handed Lemaistre the money—afterwards he told me he had handed the money to a man, but nothing occurred to me about it—the man was not the carman who brought the cloth—through the window upstairs I saw Lemaistre go with the man into a public-house opposite, but I took no further notice—I heard the name Harley first at the Police-station—I am not aware that Harley was the principal—I did not see him hand over the money—when I went to Franks and Co. I expected to see the cloth there—I had no idea Franks and Co. were selling the cloth
for somebody else—nothing was said about the cloth not being there—when I went back in half-an-hour, they said, "It is no good to come, we will deliver it where you like, and you will save the carriage," and I agreed.
WILLIAM SERJEANT (100 City). On October 18th, in consequence of instructions, I went with Wyburn to 16, Fore Street Avenue—whilst waiting I saw Lemaistre enter No. 16—on the stairs I said, "Mr. Lemaistre?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "l am a police officer; I shall take you into custody—Sergeant Wise wants you at Cloak Lane Police-station"—he said, "Oh, what is that for this time?"—he went down the passage again, and was going out in the street, when he said, "What is it for?"—when he got out I said, "I think it is about some cloth"—he said, "I know nothing about any cloth, I have never seen any"—he was then taken to the station and charged—he was handed over to Sergeant Wise—"Franks and Co." is painted over the entrance of 16, Fore Street Avenue.
Lemaistre's statement before the Magistrate. I am perfectly innocent of the charge. I simply sold the goods on commission. They were never in my possession, and I never saw them until I saw them at the station; that man Foster or Evans I never saw until last Friday, the second time I was here. The man I sold the goods for delivered them himself at Mr. Diamant's, and Mr. Hankey gave three £5 notes, two sovereigns and a shilling to me. I immediately handed the £5 notes and the gold to the man I sold them for in the presence of Mr. Hankey. He asked me to have a glass of ale at The Falcon. We went in there and he gave me my commission. I asked Sergeant Wise last week if he had tried to trace the £5 notes, and he said he had not heard about them. It was for Mr. Hankey to tell him about them. I have no witness here."
MR. DRAKE submitted, on the authority of the The Queen v. Wiley, in 2 Denison and Pearce, p. 37, and Archbold, 21st Ed., p. 499, that as there was no evidence that Lemaistre had received the goods at 16, Fore Street, there was no case to go to the JURY.
The COURT held that there was evidence that Lemaistre held out that he got the goods, sold them, and was going to deliver them, and did deliver them. Where they came from was a different question, but there was evidence that they were under Lemaistre's control.
Evans' Defence: If I am found guilty on this charge, of which I still maintain my innocence, I hope you will deal with me as for a first offence. The detective said he would do what he could for me at the trial, and he has kept his word. I was arrested a week before the cloth was found.
EVANS— GUILTY. The Police stated that from inquiries Evans was a respectable man who had been in honest employment.—Judgment respited.
LEMAISTRE— GUILTY †.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
OLD COURT.—Monday and Tuesday, November 25th and 26th, 1895
Before Mr. Justice Wright.
MESSRS. CHARLES MATTHEWS, GUY STEPHENSON, and HEWITT Prosecuted, and MESSRS. CARSON, Q.C., and MR. GROGHEGAN, Defended.
In this case the death was alleged to have been caused by the neglect of and injury to the deceased during his attendance as a medical man in her confinement. The details do not admit of publication.
GUILTY .— Three Months '.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, November 26th, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
EMMA KEENE . I live at 23, Wells Mews, Oxford Street—on Saturday night, October 26th, I was in Wells Street and Raw Hoffman being pushed out at the door of The Tiger public-house by the potman—he tried to re-enter and was again put back by the potman—the prisoner followed him out; she lives two doors from me—she took her jacket off and said to Hoffman, "What do you know about it? I will give you what you want"—she put her jacket on the area railings, and struck him I think in the face, and knocked him down in the road—he got up and she knocked him down a second time, he got up and she struck him a third time, and they fell together—he was evidently the worse for drink, but I cannot say about the prisoner—I went to Mrs. Hoffman's and came back with her—I knew her—the police were then taking Hoffman away—he was turned 51.
Cross-examined. I cannot say that you struck him in the face, it may have been in the chest.
JENNIE TURNER . I am a domestic servant at 29, Wells Streets—on the evening of October 26th I was in Wells Street, and saw the deceased put out of a public-house—the prisoner struck him three times, but I cannot say where—he fell each time, and the third time they both went down together, and he did not get up again—I cannot say whether he was drunk—two constables came and helped him away.
AMELIA MANBANK . I live at 2, Margaret Street West—I was in Wells Street on the night of October 26th, and saw the prisoner and Hoffman fighting—she struck him to the ground three times—I don't know where she hit him, or whether he was drunk.
LEWIN LONGHURST (Policeman). On the night of October 26th I was on duty in Wells Street, Oxford Street, and saw the deceased lying in the road, covered with blood—I lifted him up, and took him to Middlesex Hospital—he said on the way, "I do not wish to lock anybody up—I did it myself in falling down"—he had been drinking.
HENRY SMITH . I am potman at The Tiger—on the evening of October 26th the prisoner and Hoffman were there in the same bar—Hoffman said to the prisoner as she went out at the door "Go and—yourself"—he was not drunk; she came back when he made that remark—I turned him out by my mistress' directions in consequence of the filthy observation he made—he tried to come back and I ejected him a second time—he had had plenty to drink, but he was not drunk—Mr. Robins is the landlord.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I saw the deceased follow you round from one bar to another; you had to go into the street to do that.
JAMES CHILD . I am a mineral water bottler—I attend here on behalf of the prisoner—I was passing along Wells Street at 10.20, and saw the prisoner and Mrs. Hoffman having a little bit of a jangle, and she struck him three times, once with her left and twice with her right.
By the COURT. He had had plenty to drink—she put tip her hand as if to defend herself and pushed him, and he fell off the kerb into the road, but regained his feet very quickly—I said to him, "You ought to be ashamed of yourself to strike a woman on the breast—I could not understand his language, he is a bit of a German—the prisoner's jacket was half off and she hung it on the railings.
NOT GUILTY .
MURRAY PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. DRAKE Prosecuted, and MR. STEPHENSON Defended.
CHRISTOPHER WILSON . I am one of the managers of the Electric Company, Limited, 2A, Victoria Street—on October 23rd, in consequence of information, I went to Farringdon Road, and saw a barrow in Fowler's possession on which were three electric lamps bearing our trade mark, "Robertson," which anybody could read—I told Fowler I wanted to purchase some and asked the price; he said 9d. each, and he could get some more—I said that I could do with a gross, and offered him 7d. each; we agreed for 7s. 6d. a dozen, and he took me to his store in Saffron Hill, which was up a gateway, and was like a shed built in the wall; it was packed with odds and ends, magic lanterns and electric apparatus—I saw about a hundred lamps there—he said he had not enough to make up the groan, but would let me have them—I said I would call the next morning, which I did, and while I was there the police came in—the cost price of those which he" was going to sell me at 7s. 6d. a dozen is entered in our catalogue at 3s. 9d. each, but the wholesale dealer would have a discount off—all people who supply lamps do not get them from the same factory, a great many come from the continent—I went next morning, and he had got 169 lamps—Murray was my warehouseman—I have taken stock, and am 168 or 169 short, almost the identical quantity—at present there are no lamps of ours in stock except very old-fashioned ones; we had sold ninety-four since October 5th—there is no truth in our selling dead stock.
Cross-examined. I have been manager close upon two years—I was moved from Stone Street to Hammersmith—there is no one more conversant with the lamps than I am—they were stolen from Upper Thames Street; there is also an office at 69, Victoria Street—these lamps have Woodhouse and Rawson's mark on them; they went into bankruptcy three years ago; 200 of the lamps are theirs; we purchased the bankrupt stock; this is their mark, not ours—a quantity of lamps, with their mark on, have been sold recently—lamps which have been used are sold cheap, but the whole of these 365 are new—it is difficult to see whether a lamp is good till it is tried—a defective lamp is one from which the air is not completely exhausted—we generally break up defective lamps, and take the platinum out of them—it is conceivable that persons buy them cheap,
and break them up to get the platinum—I think there were a few odd lamps of Woodhouse and Rawson's on the stall—there were other articles at his shed, a galvanometer and some magic lanterns—he told me that he had been in the habit of buying electric material largely we do not manufacture Woodhouse and Rawson's lamps—the discount is 33 1/2 off to the trade, and sometimes we do it retail—these lamps might find themselves sold at 2s, 6d. instead of 3s. 6d.—we should not sell them if they were defective—33 1/2 may have been given without the knowledge of the firm if it was a small quantity—I am afraid tere is reason to believe that some servant was dishonest and sold lamps at Is. 8d.—I told Fowler before Ibought them that I should have to see them—these lamps might be sold at public auction—I did not hear Fowler say, "I should like you to go home with me and see what I have got," but we went to his house, before we went to the station—there is no test to the public to tell whether a lamp is good—this (produced) is Mr. Bowne's receipt for Robertson lamps at 3s. 9d. each, we are selling them at Is. 1 1/2 d. each—that is not the only instance, when there are large quantities—we have sold some lamps of this description at 8s. 6d., and some bankrupt's stock we have sold at 6d. each—I value this galvanometer at 30s. or 40s., but galvanometers similar to this are bought for 6d. from the Post-office, to all appearance quite new—I saw several of them at Fowler's, and remarked to Sergeant Murphy that they were new instruments—I saw "P.O." on it; I did not think it was stolen—it was taken to the station, and it was found that he came by it perfectly honestly—these lamps are not perfectly unsalable, they are being sold, but cheap—the Woodhouse and Rawson are sold cheap, because they are a bankrupt stocks—in twelve months the number we sold has approximated 700—Murray was in our service.
Re-examined. Fowler did not say in my presence that he purchased this galvanometer for 6d.—they have altered their type, and that is why they are sold—the 169 lamps I saw in the prisoner's possession were actually in use at the time; they are the best in the market, and are sold 9d.—lamps which have not been used may yet be defective in the manufacture, but if they have been used and thrown into disuse, they are not useless for the purpose of lighting—I have never seen them for sale in the street before—I have never seen lamps sold at 2s. a dozen.
By the COURT. The word "Robinson" is the trade mark on these lamps; they also have our special mark which anybody could see—they are not sold to break up.
JAMES MURPHY (City Police Sergeant). I arrested Fowler on the 24th in a shed built into the wall at the rear of 72, Saffron Hill—Mr. Wilson was with him—I said, "I am a police-officer; I am making inquiries after some lamps which have been stolen from the warehouse of the General Electric Company, 66, Upper Thames Street; where did you get these lamps from?"—he said, "I bought them in Farringdon Road, from a man whose name I do not know"—I said, "How many have you bought from him?"—he said, "About six dozen"—I said, "How much did you pay him?"—he said, "3s. a dozen"—I said, "How many times have you seen him?"—he said, "About three times"—I said, "I am told they are worth 1s. 3d. in the trade;" lie said, "I know the value of them, I used to be in the trade"—I said,
"Have you bought anything else of the man?" he said, "No"—he was then taken to the station and charged—I brought away 163 lamps marked Robertson and Co., and 198 of the others—the Robertson's were quite visible, carefully packed in boxes similar to this—I next saw Fowler on the 28th at Cloak Lane Station, and said, "The thief is in custody, you had better come and see if he is the man who stole the lamps—he went to the cell, saw Murray, and said, "That is the man"—on the further charge, I said, "Murray says he stole these things from his master, and sold them to you"—he said, "That is right"—I said You told me you bought these lamps under the hammer at Theobald's sale"—he said, "I must have misunderstood you"—he had told me that the first day, when I brought them away, but afterwards he said that he had made a mistake, he bought them of Murray—all sorts of persons keep barrows in Farringdon Street, they sell birds and sweets.
Cross-examined. He did not give me a description of Murray or of a man who answered Murray's description—he did not give me every assistance—the prosecutor was with me—there were some good magic lanterns there, but I was not looking towards them when he said that he bought them at Theobald's auction—there was not about £200 worth of other goods there—when Murray confessed he said that he bought them of him—they were goods which would cost a good deal more than he said he had given—when he was charged he did not offer me the key of his warehouse—I believe his man had it—he has occupied the shed about fifteen months, and pays 3s. 9d. for it—Murray lives in Arbour Square—I found these cheques which are drawn by the prisoner.
Evidence for the Defence.
JOHN MATTHEWS . I am a dealer in electrical and scientific instruments at 7, Marlborough Street, Grove Road—this lamp is useless, it requires three of them to go together before it is any use, and if one breaks the other two break as well, and therefore people cannot use them, there have not been 500 lamps used because of that defect—you cannot use one lamp alone, because the current would be too strong—the price of these is 3s. 9d.—I have bought lamps at Stephens's sale at 7s. a dozen; not similar to Robertson's, I do not use any of his, but I bought some of them at the gale at Olympia at 1d. each, a large number of which had never been used—this (produced) is the signature of Mr. Stephens, the auctioneer's clerk, to the receipts—I have known the prisoner seven years, and have had dealings with him—I always found him honest—I bought some of these galvanometers at a sale for 6s. a dozen—they are obsolete—they have "P. O." on them.
By the COURT. They are out of date, because they are too large—they would answer the purpose as well as smaller ones, it is wasting the public money; that is always the way with these new things—they are a little larger than those now used, they are too large, the men won't carry them.
Cross-examined. The Robertson lamp will soon be obsolete; they will not pay full price for it now—I would pay 7d.—I heard Mr. Wilson say that he had sold 700 of them this year, and ninety-four since this ease came on; he might have sold 94,000 instead of ninety-four—700 is a very small quantity—supposing Mr. Wilson is right that 3s. 9d. a lamp is the price for the most recent invention the proper price to sell at would be about Is. 3d.
By the COURT. If I was to buy them in a sale in the ordinary way I should expect to get them at about 2d. each—I have seen them in a sale; the Olympia was a bankrupt sale—I have not had a shop within the last twelve months—I find people come to a barrow or stall and purchase electric lamps; they purchase them in thousands—I expect Mr. Fowler has sold thousands; it was only at the time the prisoners called that the three were there—if he had called the day before he would have seen the box open and full of lamps; I saw it myself.
HORACE LEWIS . I represent Theobald and Co., wholesale opticians; they have a sale every Tuesday—during the past three months Fowler has purchased from them a large quantity of electrical goods, but I cannot give you the value, but you would be understating it at £100—we sell a few electric lamps—he bears a very good character—Mr. Theobalds asked me to come.
WILLIAM JOSEPH ALDBOROUGH . I am an auctioneer, and am conversant with electric lamps—the Robertson lamp is looked upon as not very reliable—if two or three are put in series, and one explodes, the others go out because the pressure is too great—the electric current is stronger than it used to be—the other lamp is the Brighton; there are a large number of them in the market sold at a very low figure—I have known Fowler several years, and believe him to be honest and quite incapable of doing this if he knew it—he buys largely at auctions.
FOWLER, being permitted to make his own statement, said that when lamps were brought to him he understood that they were not up to the standard quality; that his business was to buy job lots which people sold at any price they could get, and that as to his having made contradictory statements when asked about lamps he may have replied about lanthorns.
FOWLER— NOT GUILTY .
Sentence on MURRAY, Six Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday and Thursday, November 27th and 28th, 1895.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. BIRON and GUY STEPHENSON Prosecuted, and MR. DRAKE
In this case the JURY being unable to agree were discharged without returning any verdict.
Before Mr. Justice Wright.
Before Mr. Recorder.
Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Justice Wright
LOTTIE ELIZABETH WRIGHT . I am twelve years of age, and live with my father and mother at 51, Pawson's Road, Croydon—the prisoner is my mother—I had a brother named Gilbert, he was called Bertie—on October 27th I went to school at a quarter to nine in the morning—before I went to school my mother said that Bertie was to stay at home—I went to school, and left my mother and my brother Bertie at home—about half-past eleven mother came to the school and gave me a letter and the key of the front door—this (produced) is the key—I did not open the letter—I took it to my father—mother told me to do so—I asked her where Bertie was—she said he was at home—she then went away—I went home—she did not go with me—when I got home I went into the kitchen, and on the floor I found the body of my little brother Bertie—I left it just as I found it—I then went on to my father, and gave him the note.
Cross-examined. Mother was kind to me and to Bertie—there had not been any unhappiness at all between us.
JESSE WRIGHT . I am sixteen years of age—I am the prisoner's son—I work as a clerk on the railway at the Norwood Junction—I was on night duty about this time—I came home on this morning about eight, and had breakfast with my mother about half-past eight, and then I went to bed, leaving my mother and my brother Bertie in the kitchen—I woke up about five minutes to twelve, and went down and found the constable there—this letter is in my mother's writing; when I got up in the morning I found two purses in my trousers pocket, one had £2 10s. in it, and the other 20s.—one of the purses was my mother's, and the other was my brother's—there was nothing in them when I went to bed.
Cross-examined. My mother had been kind to me—when I left home I saw nothing different about her—she had been ill; she complained of sleeplessness and low spirits, and she had head aches—she was kind to Bertie, he was the youngest of us.
WILLIAM HARVEY (Police Constable 456 W). On October 29th, about 12.15, I was called by the prisoner's husband to 51, Pawsons Road; I went into the kitchen, and on the floor found the body of Bertie Wright, it was covered over with this table-cloth—I removed it and found a rope tied twice round the child's neck and in a knot—his hands were tied with a lady's dress band, and his legs were tied with a scarf—I removed them, and placed the body on the table—he was quite warm—I tried to restore life by artificial respiration—I sent for Dr. Fleming and continued the artificial respiration until the doctor arrived—I have attended ambulance classes, and learnt how to act in such cases.
Pawson's Road—I arrived there at about a quarter-past twelve—I found Constable Harvey attending to the body of Gilbert Wright, which I saw on the table—the body was quite warm—I continued the artificial respiretion for fifteen minutes, but it was useless, he was dead—I saw two circular marks round his neck, and his face was livid and swollen; he presented the appearance of having been strangled—I did not make the post-mortem examination.
Cross-examined. The period commonly known as a change of life is a time when females are sometimes liable to a deranged mind—one condition of that state is sleeplessness, and headache is a very common symptom—I did not see the prisoner.
CHARLES OWEN FOWLER . I am a divisional surgeon of police—I saw the body of the deceased child on October 29th at 2.30—externally it presented the appearance of having died from strangulation—there were bruises round the wrists and legs, lines and slight bruising on the calf of each leg—on the 31st I made a post-mortem examination—the cause of death was evidentiy due to asphyxia—the lungs were congested; that would be due to strangulation.
Cross-examined. I heard the evidence of Dr. Galahan at the Police-Court—he said that he had attended the prisoner for great loss of blood at her change of life—at that period headaches and sleeplessness very frequently lead to insanity of a temporary character—I have never seen the prisoner—those symptoms are consistent with her having been insane at the time.
THOMAS STEMP (Detective-Sergeant W). About half-past five on October 29th I was in company with the prisoner's husband in High Street, Croydon, and saw the prisoner—I arrested her and told her that I was a police-officer and should take her into custody upon a charge of causing the death of her son Gilbert—she said, "Bertie?"—I said, "Yes"; I said nothing more—I accompanied her to the station—she told her husband that she was going to give herself up to the police at the station—upon the charge being read over to her for killing and slaving, she said, "I did not slay him; I did not cut him."
Cross-examined. She was very much distressed—she did not appear to realise where she was going—her husband had to lead her to the station.
WILLIAM LEMMIE (Police Inspector W). On October 29th I was at the Police-station when the last witness brought the prisoner to the station—I was present when she was charged—I produce a letter which I received from Constable Harvey—after the prisoner had been charged, I spoke to her husband, who was present, and asked him, in her presence, if that letter was in his wife's handwriting—he replied, "Yes, that is right enough."
Cross-examined. When she was charged she said, "I did not slay him, I did not cut him"—her manner was peculiar; she was very much depressed; she held her head down in her hands—in my opinion she did not understand what was going on about her.
The Prisoner's letter was read as follows—
"Da.—Come home at once. I have settled Bertie, and I have gone to the station. I trust you will be as kind as you can to the children. I hope you and Rachel will make your home together. Try, for Jane or Kate, to have for your wife. Dearest Rachel, do your best for Da; he
is a good man. I have had this in my head. I tried twice to commit suicide."
Witnesses for the Defence.
ELIZABETH JENKINS . I live at 53, Pawson's Road, Croydon, next door to Mr. and Mrs. Wright, for seven years—I have known the family well; they have been a happy family—there have been no quarrels of any sort, and no question of straitened means—the husband was in receipt of good wages, and the woman helped besides—she seemed a very kind mother to all her children—she has complained of illness every time I spoke to her; she complained of pains in her side and pains in her head—she also complained of sleeplessness; she has appeared very ill indeed.
RACHEL PIPER . I am a sister of Mr. Wright, the prisoner's husband; they have been a happy family—I have seen the prisoner with her children—they were in very good circumstances—I know of no reason for this act—the boy Bertie was a favourite child, more so than the others, being the youngest—I have recently heard the prisoner complaining of pains in her head, and that she could not sleep—she did not know what she has done at times.
DR. GALAHAN. I am a Bachelor of Medicine; I practice at South Norwood—the prisoner has been a patient of mine from August 7th till October 4th—I was treating her for troubles which occur at change of life—she suffered from excessive loss of blood at intervals and from sleeplessness, loss of memory, and from anemia, due to excessive loss of blood—I thought she might become unaccountable for her actions—there is a distinct form of insanity arising from these circumstances, and floodings; it usually passes off in a year or so; about half the cases that go to asylums recover—it is a distinct form of insanity, rendering a person unaccountable for their actions.
Cross-examined. I have not seen her medically since October 4th—such symptoms are not uncommon with females at the change of life—in her case I think loss of blood was more than usual.
GUILTY of the act, but being insane at the time. To be kept in custody until Her Majesty's pleasure be known.
Both the JURT and the COURT commended the prompt action of the constable Harvey in attending to the deceased child.
MESSRS. CHARLES MATHEWS and GUY STEPHENSON Prosecuted, and MR. DRAKE Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. F. H. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. DRUMMOND Defended, at the request of the COURT.
EMMA HATES . I am eleven years old—I live with my father and mother at 7, St. George's Buildings; we had two rooms and a washhouse—I had a little sister named Mary Amelia, three months old—on November 5th when my father went out to his work my mother (the prisoner) was at home with me and my little sister—she went out with
the baby to get some beer—she said she was going to see the superintendent of the buildings, Mr. Price—she came back about eleven—and after a little while she went out again, taking the baby with her; she said she was going to see Mr. Baynton—about half-past twelve she came back with the baby; she put baby on the bed, and began to get things ready for dinner—I went out for a few minutes, when I came back I saw the baby in the room; I had to put some coals on the fire—while doing that mother went into the bedroom—I saw her come out of the room with a knife in her hand—I went into the bedroom; I saw blood there: then father came in, and I said, "Mother has killed the baby."
Cross-examined. She had always been kind to me and the baby.
JOHN PRICK . I am caretaker of St. George's Buildings—the prisoner and her husband have lived there for about two years—he has been a respectable hard-working man—they had six children, they have three alive now; one child died in the hospital in August, another in September, and another was very ill—she complained of the neighbours annoying and beating her, but I saw no foundation for the complaints—on November 5th I saw her with the baby about half-past twelve—about twenty past one I was called to the house; I went into the room where the child was; it was lying on the bed and there was blood on its pinafore—I went to father and said, "Good God, what shall I do?"—she 'said to him, "I told you you would find something when you came home'—I saw a knife on the table, it seemed to have been wiped omen h sheet—I handed it to the police sergeant.
Cross-examined. I had known them two years—the first child died in August—I noticed a great difference in the prisoner after the death of the two children—there were no complaints of the neighbours before that.
ANNIE BARING . I live at Havard Street, Southwark—I have known the prisoner about two years—she came and saw me on November 5th about some rooms—she said she wanted to leave because she did not like the place; that the women were always quarrelling with her—she said she would come in next day if she could.
Cross-examined. I have not seen her lately.
ARTHUR PLUM (226 M). I was called to this house—I saw the prisoner's husband—on the third floor I saw the prisoner—she said, "I have done it, no one saw me do it; I did it with a black-handled knife"—she said the neighbours all laughed and jeered at her—I asked her why she had done it; she commenced to cry and said, "No one saw me do it"—I sent for the Divisional Surgeon.
OSWALD FINNKRTON GERTAR (Police Sergeant, M.R.). I went to the house—Price handed me the knife—the prisoner said, "I done it with a knife; it is on the table now—you don't know the jeers I have had to put up with—I done it; I own it, but no one saw me do it"—on the way to the station she repeated the same words, and added, "I have been sadly served by my friends"—when charged, she said, "It is true."
Cross-examined. Her manner was not strange, but somewhat excited.
THOMAS ADAMS . I am Divisional-surgeon to the M Division—I was sent for to the house—I saw the body of the child—it had an incised wound on the left side of the neck, extending from the spine across the
neck—the spinal cord was divided; that was the cause of death, and might be caused by this knife—the child was well nourished.
Witness for the Defence.
GHORGE EDWARD WALKER (Medical Officer of Holloway Prison). I have had the prisoner under my observation since November 5th—during the whole time she has been very mentally depressed, constantly crying—in my opinion, she is suffering from melancholia—she has apparent delusions—she has told me about her children dying one after the other, and said that persons were following her, crying out, "There goes another of them," and throwing things at her—I asked her what made her kill this child—she said she did not know what made her do it: she was very fond of it—she said her milk had left her after her first child died, and she was very worried because she had to feed it by hand—in my opinion she was suffering from acute homicidal mania at the time.
GUILTY of the act, but insane at the time. — To be detained in custody until Her Majesty's pleasure be known.
MR. LAWLESS Prosecuted, and MR. DRUMMOND Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. ARMSTRONG Prosecuted.
ARTHUR ROOTH . I live at 164, York Road, Lambeth, and am a student—about 8 p.m. on November 13th I was in the street near the Obelisk and met the prisoner who addressed me—I went with him and we had drinks, which I paid for, at two public houses—he then took me along a court and whistled, and all of a sudden he threw his arms round my neck, and another man came round the corner—the prisoner said, "Feel in his waistcoat pockets"—the other man took 10s. in gold from my waistcoat pocket, and the prisoner hit me on my mouth, and they ran away—I halloaed for the police—a crowd came, and I went to the station and reported the matter—my hat and the prisoner's were both knocked off and on the ground—a woman who came out picked them up and gave them to me—I handed over the prisoner's hat at the station—I next saw him at the station with five or six other men and identified him.
By the COURT. I had an appointment with a friend at the Surrey Theatre, and my friend did not come—I was waiting with some evening papers in my hand when the prisoner came and wanted to see the latest racing news—I let him look, and we were talking about racing, and then I gave him a drink—he said he was a printer—I am a foreigner—I had been drinking, but I knew what I was about—when I picked out the prisoner all the men with him but one had their hats off—I have no doubt he is the man—I am a student of law—I have been in England some years, but I spend a great part of my time on the Continent.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not behave indecently to you—I struck at one of the men—you did not go about with me trying to find a young woman.
9.15 p.m. on November 13th I heard screams of "Police! Murder! I am being robbed!"—I ran out and saw Rooth was holding the prisoner, who was trying to get away, and gave a kick—I stood for a moment and picked up two hats and a stick, which I gave to the prosecutor—the prisoner shoved me against the wall and ran away—I halloaed out "Stop thief!"—about ten minutes afterwards I saw and recognised the prisoner at the station—I attended at the Lambeth Police Court, but was not called.
Cross-examined. I saw nobody with you except Rooth—I have lived at that corner fourteen years—I am sure Rooth was trying to hold you, and you gave him a kick and got away.
WILLIAM BIRCH (Detective L). I was in Lower Marsh, Lambeth, on November 13th, about 9.30 p.m., and I saw the prisoner running along with no hat—I ran after him, and while so doing I heard a ory of "Stop thief!"—I stopped him, and asked what he was running for—he said nothing—I took him to the Kennington Road Station, where he made no reply to the charge—afterwards he said, "I shall tell the magistrate he wanted to take liberties with me, so I bashed him and ran"—at the Police-court when asked if he had any questions to ask the officer, he said, "You can ask him to give me my hat"—this is it, Rooth handed it in at the station—Rooth had been drinking but seemed to know perfectly what he was doing.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he had got a bad character, but that he had been trying to reform himself.— GUILTY . Be then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of felony at this Court in February, 1894, in the name of Stephen Cook.—He had twice before been convicted of highway robbery with violence, and twice of other robberies.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour and Twenty Strokes with the Cat.
50. JOHN DAY (21) PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of Joseph Reynolds with intent to steal; also to a burglary in the dwelling house of Caroline Miller, with intent to steal.— Fourteen Months' Hard Labour.
GEORGE JOSEPH FRANCIS . I live at 20, Creedon Road, Rotherhithe, and am secretary to the Rotherhithe New Road Baptist Chapel—on the early morning of November 7th I was aroused by a constable and went with him to the Grange Road Police Station and from there to the chapel, where I found a shutter had been pushed back into the chapel further than usual, and some panes of glass lying below the window inside—the window was broken—I was last in the chapel before that about ten the previous evening; the shutter was then in its proper place—I cannot swear whether the window was then broken or not.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I could not say if the evening before one pane was right out, and the other had its glass broken and hanging.
the prisoner partly through the window, getting in—on hearing me approach he jumped down, and running towards me said, "All right, governor, it is a fair cop; I wanted a night's lodging."
Cross-examined. Two panes of glass were completely broken, and the shattered glass was lying inside and outside the chapel, and a wooden shutter was pushed back.
By the COURT. "It is a fair cop," means "You have fairly caught me," I take it.
The Prisoner in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said that the window was broken, and that lie was removing the broken glass to have a rest inside, and that he had no intention to steal.
FREDERICK KETT (Re-examined). I heard distinctly the noise of the breaking of glass—I was about two yards from the front of the chapel, and the noise came from the back—the noise could not have been caused by throwing away a pane of broken glass; it was a distinct smash.
GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of felony in June, 1895.— Ten Months' Hard Labour.
MR. HODGSON Prosecuted, and MR. ROBERTS Defended
GERTRUDE BURKE . I live at 21, Streatham Hill—on August 9th I desired to engage a cook—I saw the prisoner at the registry office, she gave her name Emma Morrison—I sent her home to see my mother—she came to our house about 4.30 I fancy; when I got home she was there—my mother told her to go downstairs and ask our cook to let her have a wash and some tea, and she left the drawing room—she was in the house till eight o'clock; she came in while we were having dinner and then left—after she had gone I missed my watch and chain, value £7, which I had last seen on my bedroom table before four o'clock—on October 11th I was in a train at Croydon, when the prisoner got into the same carriage and sat opposite to me—I recognised her, and she recognised me when I stared hard at her, and she got out and ran up to the top of the train and got into another carriage—I went after her, and said, "I see you recognise me"—she said, "I never saw you before"—I said, "You must come to Streatham Hill with me, and I shall give you into the charge of the first policeman I see for having stolen my watch"—she said she could not; she had got to go to Balham—I said, "You must," and that if she did not get out I should call the guard and make her get out—when we got to Streatham Hill I said, "You can come to the house with me"—when we got to the gate she walked on and then began to run—I sent a workman for a policeman and charged her—I am certain the prisoner is the woman; I should know her anywhere—she gave me as a reference, Colonel Taylor, 109, Cromwell Gardens—there is no such name or house there—she gave a private address at Telfourd Road, Hendon, as the place where she was supposed to be staying, but there is no Telfourd Road, at Hendon—she was upstairs in our house alone that afternoon—mine is the only room on the same floor as the servants', and I had told her that when I told her the work she would have to do.
Cross-examined. She changed colour terribly in the first carriage, when I looked at her, and in the second carriage she began to cry, and
her hands trembled; she was in such a nervous condition—walking towards home, I said to her, "You resemble a person in my employment in August"—she only got to the gate, not into the house; my people did not see her then—when the policeman stopped her, I went and told our cook, and she came out and said, "Oh, that is the girl that took your watch"—I did not take her home so that she might be recognised by my people; I thought it would be more convenient to get her home, and then send for a policeman—I said I would apologise if I were wrong; I had no doubt—she said she was not the woman, and I said she was—I never doubted her from the moment she got into the train—I never forget a face when I have once seen it—I expressed no doubts about her.
EMMA BRAY . I am a cook at 21, Streatham Hill—on August 9th the prisoner, who gave the name of Emma Morrison, came about a situation about 4 p.m.—she came into the kitchen and said she was going to take the place as cook, and that she had come down to have some tea and a wash—after she had tea the housemaid took her upstairs to have a wash, and she was upstairs about a quarter of an hour—the housemaid left her in the bedroom, and was not up there the whole time—she seemed so long up there that the housemaid was going upstairs to see what she was doing just as the prisoner was coming down—I next saw her on October 11th, in custody, outside the gate—Miss Burke said, "Is not this the girl that took my watch?" and I said, "Yes, that is the girl; that is the one that came here"—she said, "No, miss, it is not me, you have made a mistake"—I said, "No, I have not made a mistake"—I have no doubt about her; I know she is the girl that came to the house.
Cross-examined. She was in my company about four hours—she was waiting for one of the young ladies to come home—before I saw her after wards at the gate, Miss Burke came and said, "I have caught the girl that took my watch"—I went out, and said, "Yes, this is the girl," and the prisoner said she was not.
THOMAS HILLIER (225 W). On October 11th the prisoner was given into my custody on Streatham Hill—she said the lady had made a mistake, she had never been in Streatham before in her life; she had just come from Brighton, where she had been staying since last November—I said she would have every opportunity of proving her innocence—I took her to the station, she was charged and made no reply—she made no reply before the Magistrate, and called no witnesses.
MR. HODGSON Prosecuted, and MR. ROBERTS Defended.
EMMELINE STEWART HENLEY . I am the wife of Anthony Ernest Henley. We live at 12, Park Village West, Regent's Park—on November 2nd, 1894, prisoner came between 9 and 10 a.m. to look after our little girl—we were then in apartments, while removing into a new house, and the prisoner had come for a few days until a German nurse came over from Germany—the prisoner was shown into my bedroom, and was there about ten minutes before I interviewed her—she said her mother lived at Potter's Bar, and she wanted more clothes, and I gave her a post-card, and said she could write to her mother and post it, and then
take my little girl out—she went out about ten to post the letter—she was with me till 8 or 9 p.m.—during the morning I missed my purse, which, so far as I remember, had been on my bedroom dressing table—before ten that night I found the prisoner had left—I had engaged her for a few days, and she was to sleep in the house, and take care of my little girl—I did not think she was going away that night—she brought a small bundle, I believe, and said she was writing to her mother to send her more things—she left nothing behind her—when I went to bed that night I missed this ring, for which my husband had paid £30—I had four rings in a little casket, and there were only four when I went to bed—I next saw the prisoner at Clapham Police-station a few Saturdays ago, with several other women in the court yard, and I recognised her; she looked altered and thinner, and as if she had gone through a good deal, and she was not so well dressed, but she was the same woman—I afterwards saw my ring in a pawnbroker's hand.
Cross-examined. I instructed a detective to find my ring, and gave a description of the prisoner—I had no photograph of her—I had not the slightest doubt when I saw her at Clapham; the policeman in charge said, "Look down the line;" I said, "It is quite unnecessary; that is the woman."
ANTHONY ERNEST HENLEY . I am the last witness's husband—the prisoner is the woman who came to look after our little girl in November, 1894—I next saw her on October 19th at the Clapham Police-station among several other women, and I picked her out immediately—I have no doubt about her—this is my wife's ring—I had it specially made—it cost about £30; I picked out these particular stones myself—I have a little knowledge of diamonds and cat's-eyes: this is a particularly good cat's-eye.
CHARLES HOLMES . I am assistant to Mr. Webster, a pawnbroker, of 296, Fulham Road—on November 3rd, 1894, the prisoner pawned this ring to me in the name of Emily Lawrence for 16s.—that was all she asked—it is a ring that could be bought for £10—I should be surprised to hear it cost £30.
Cross-examined. She has not been in my shop more than once to my knowledge; she was there for about ten minutes—she was very respectably dressed.
Re-examined. I have no doubt the prisoner is the woman.
JOHN SEYMOUR (Detective D). I was present on October 19th when the prisoner was identified by Mr. and Mrs. Henley without any difficulty—when charged she made no reply—I got this ring from the pawnbroker's on November 3rd, 1894, the day after it was stolen—I had had information of the robbery, and made special inquiry, and received information about the ring.
GUILTY .—There were two other indictments against the prisoner for similar offences.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
54. HENRY MEADUS (42) , PLEADED GUILTY to forging and uttering an order for the payment of £49 with intent to defraud, and to two other indictments for forging and uttering orders for the payment of £100 and £355, respectively. The prisoner had since the commission of these offences been sentenced at Norwich, in January, 1894, to eighteen
months' hard labour for forgery in conjunction with other men. It was not known that he was connected with the present cases till October, 1895, when he voluntarily gave himself up to the police and made a confession.— Discharged on Recognizances.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. E. PERCIVAL CLARKE Defended at the Request of the COURT.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. SELLS Prosecuted, and MR. ROBERTS Defended.
HENRY SMAILE (Police Sergeant P). I got this certificate at the India Office of the marriage of Adela Grace Skuse and Edward James Collis on March 14th, 1882—I have compared it with the original; it is a true copy—I also produce a certificate of the marriage of Edward James Collis with Mary Goddard—I have known the prisoner for years—I went to him at Duns tan Road, East Dulwich, and said, "Collis, I hold a warrant for your arrest for bigamy"—he said, "All right, Mr. Smaile, I think I can get out of it; I have expected this for a long time; I have, not seen my wife for a good many years, and I thought you could always marry again after seven years; I have heard of her several times by people from India: is there anything else against me? Don't stir up dirty water."
Cross-examined. I did not caution him before he made that statement; I told him it might be used against him—I entered it in my pocket-book as soon as I got to the station—I read it to the Magistrate—I said, "You knew all the time that your wife was alive"—he said, "I have heard of her several times"—I have known him about eighteen months; I have met him a number of times at Lewisham—I am stationed there—he was a constable in the London and County Police stationed at Lewisham—he is too big a blackguard for me to be on good terms with him—I am not aware that he was at one time in an asylum—he is a Victoria Cross man; no letter came to England from his wife to my knowledge after the second marriage.
GEORGE HENRY COBB . I am superintendent of the Bombay Police, And am on twelve months' leave—the prisoner was a constable in the Bombay Police, and is in the Royal Artillery, where he got the Victoria Cross—I was present at the Mission Church when he was married to Mrs. Scuse, who I saw about eighteen months ago; she lives in Bombay—I knew them living together as man and wife after the marriage—I saw the prisoner there last at the end of 1886 or the beginning of 1887.
Cross-examined. I was a guest at the wedding; he bore a very good character—I do not know why he left; he did not return home straight from the Bombay Police—he served under me for a short part of the time.
months before—he represented himself as a single man—I lived with him up to last Whitsuntide—I told him last March that I had ascertained he was a married man—he did not behave well to me; he came home drunk on Whit Monday, and I left him and went to stay with my sister—I have no family living; I lost one little girl—I did not live with him before marriage.
Cross-examined. A detective told me he was married; he was drunk when he assaulted me—he did not apologise at all—I took his dinner to him that day, and before he came home at night I had left.
MARY JONES . I am chambermaid at the Royal Hotel, Woolwich—I first knew the prisoner in 1888, and lived with him till 1892—he told me he had a wife in India, but was properly divorced from her—he left me to go to India, and came back and said that his wife was living and his marriage would be legal in India but not in England—he told me he had seen his wife.
Cross-examined. That statement was made about six months after I lived with him—I wrote to him in India—I was not aware that before he came back from India the second time he had a sunstroke—I heard it after he came home—he was not placed under restraint when he came home, but he was in an asylum six months—I do not know the second wife—I left him in October, 1892, because he knocked me about.
Re-examined. He was in a special ward of Woolwich Infirmary—he came out, and after that he ill-treated me.
REV. WILLIAM JOHN SALT . I am Vicar of Catford—the prisoner came to me, and I asked him about his wife in India—he said that he had a wife in India and two children—I said, "Have you not got a wife in Catford?"—he said "No"—I said, "Just think"—he said, "No; I lived with a woman in Catford, but I was never married to her"—I said, "Here is the marriage licence"—he burst into tears, and asked me not to put him away—I said, "It is not my business to do that"—the woman lived in my parish, and I was asked to look after the children—he was very much troubled, and said, "I saw my wife in bed with another man,"—he was taking care of the recreation ground at Catford.
Cross-examined. He said that he had been light-headed, and in an asylum, and I understood him that he packed up and came to England through his wife.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BARKER Prosecuted.
MARY ANN SAUNDERS . I am a widow—on October 1st I was lodging in the Mint—on the early morning of October 1st, it might have been two o'clock, I was walking from Camberwell Grove, where I had been to see my sister—I had less than one shilling in the corner of my handkerchief—in Manor Place, Walworth, the prisoner came up and wanted to take liberties with me—I objected—he struck me in the jaw and fractured the bone—he knocked me to the ground, and struck me more than once, I believe, and then I became insensible and recollect nothing more till I
heard the sound of policemen's whistles—I put my hand in my pocket for my handkerchief and found it and my money were gone—the police came up and took me to the station, and then to the hospital on an ambulance—I was kept at the Champion Hill Infirmary for six weeks, all but a day—I saw a man at Kennington Lane Station on the morning I was illused.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I might have said that morning at the station that you were not the man who had illtreated me, because I really could not recognise you then; I was too ill—I know now you are the man.
ALBERT PURCHASE (209 L). On October 1st I was on duty at 2 a.m. in Manor Place; Occupation Place is a turning off it—there is a coffee-stall close handy—my attention was attracted by cries of "Stop him," in Amelia Street—I saw the prisoner dodging round a hansom cab, and followed by people—the cabman said, "This man has done something to a woman in Manor Place; will you take him back?"—I took him into custody, and was taking him back when I saw him throw behind him with his left hand this handkerchief in which were wrapped up 7d.—I found the prosecutrix bleeding very much all over the head; her face was swollen—she mumbled out something, but was almost insensible—she was being held up by two or three men—she said the prisoner had knocked her about—I took the prisoner to the station, and he was charged by her with using violence to her, and stealing her money—she identified him at the station; at the Police-court some three weeks afterwards she said he was not the man.
MARY ANN SAUNDERS (Re-examined). This is my handkerchief—it contained sevenpence, sixpence was for my lodging, and one penny I had saved for a halfpennyworth of tea and a half-pennyworth of sugar: it was in my pocket when the prisoner met me.
ALBERT WEST . I live at 36, Albert Street, Newington, and am employed as a watchman—at 2 a.m. on October 1st I was near Manor Place—I saw the prisoner and a woman scuffling on the ground about twelve yards from me—I opened the gates and came outside, and up to where they were—the woman was on the ground and the prisoner standing up; the woman's face was covered with blood, I turned to look at the prisoner and he was running away—I chased him and never lost sight of him till the policeman captured him.
Cross-examined. I saw you knock the woman over.
JAMES HUGO . I am a registered medical practitioner and assistant medical officer at the Champion Hill Infirmary—the prosecutrix was admitted there on October 1st, and was under my care for a part of the time—I first saw her on October 2nd—she was suffering a good deal from shock—she is an old woman—the right side of her face was very much swollen; she was unable to open her mouth—she had a small wound on the cheek and four lacerated wounds on the cheek and her gums were cut; the result of a blow—her jaw was not fractured—a hand or foot might have caused the injury—I should think that more than one blow had been struck—a great deal of violence had been used, I think—she remained in the hospital for about five weeks; when she was discharged she had a great deal of swelling about her jaw and the side of her face.
The Prisoner, in his defence, stated that he was walking round a cab
to cross the road, when the policeman arrested him, and that he had nothing to do with the affair.
GUILTY .*— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour and Twelve Strokes with the Cat.
GRUNELL PLEADED GUILTY .
MESSRS. C. F. GILL and BODKIN Prosecuted, and MESSRS. KERSHAW, Q.C, and TRAVERS HUMPHREYS Defended Cooke.
GEORGE JOHN SERGEANT . I am a clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies at Somerset House—I produce the file of the Alliance Financial Corporation, which was registered on March 29th, 1887, with a share capital of £100,000, in £1 shares, and £10,000 in £10 founders' shares—the statutory return for 1893 is signed by Hugh Owen, Secretary, and presented for filing by A. Roberts, 21, Queen Victoria Street, Assistant Secretary; it shows that John Grunell is a shareholder of 1,120 ordinary shares, Samuel John Capon of 250, and Henry Stewart Cooke, of 5, Bow Lane, of 1,000—the return for 1894, made by J. H. Smyth, secretary, shows that the same three persons hold the same number of shares—on September 3rd, 1895, an order was made to wind up that company—I produce a file of the Financial World, Limited, which was registered on April 18th, 1886, with a capital of £2,000 in £1 shares; on August 10th, 1886, a return was made, signed by Henry Stewart Cooke, Manager, 120, Salisbury Square, E.C., which shows that 137 shares were taken up at that date, distributed among seven shareholders, who are the same persons as the seven signatories—130 of the 137 shares are sharewarrants to bearer—there has been no annual return since August, 1886—on May 10th, 1890, an order was made to wind up the Company on a creditor's petition, and on March 15th, 1893, an order was made by Mr. Justice Kekewich dissolving the company, and that order directed that the books and papers of the company should be destroyed within a month—since the date of that order no such company as the Financial World paper or the Financial World, Limited has been registered, and no such company appears on the file of Somerset House.
Cross-examined. I have no means of ascertaining whether a person has given leave for his name to be used—the company was in process of winding-up from May 10th, 1890, to March 15th, 1893—I cannot say whether a company was formed to carry on the Financial World newspaper, and did carry it on from 1890 to 1893—I have the file of the Caxton Printing and Publishing Company—the Financial World, Limited, was wound-up on the petition of a creditor.
Re-examined. The Caxton Company was registered on October 9th, 1890, with a capital of £10,000 in £1 shares—on June 21st, 1893, we received a copy of an extraordinary resolution to wind it up, and that is the last we heard of it—there were eleven shareholders holding 7,107 shares; their names were George W. Brewer, H. W. Eason, Harry Seymour Foster (who held 1,7.00 shares), John S. Hollis, A. C. Kendrick, Henry Horatio Lale, John Walter Morris, Noel Charles Alecs, W. J.
Newberg Platts, E. J. Watson—£1 was paid on 1,100 of the shares, and 6,000 were issued as fully paid.
LIONEL LEMON . I am a chartered accountant, of 4, King Street—I was the official liquidator appointed in July, 1890, to wind-up the Financial World, Limited—I carried on the paper for about three months, and then I sold it to Mr. Harry Seymour Foster, of 4, Coleman Street, for £250, on October 7th, 1890—while I was there I employed Cooke; I had to produce the paper weekly, I got permission of the Court to do so—there was a loss during all the three months, about £100, roughly, in that time—we only produced a small number, to keep the thing alive—it was a bad time—I paid Cooke £3 a week—he was part editor, and he used to attend company meetings, to report them for the paper, and try to obtain advertisements.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. That particular time was a very bad time for a financial paper—a financial paper would depend a great deal on the amount of advertisements it had in it, and on the number of public meetings reported in it, which would be paid for by the companies whose meetings were reported—in times of great financial activity, a financial paper would pay from money derived from reports and advertisements, apart from its circulation, and those are the great things it would rely on—Cooke had been connected with the paper since 1886, I believe; I cannot say in what capacity—I found him perfectly honest and straightforward, and a hardworking man—I think he did his best to keep the paper going—he got no commission—I left the paper when it was sold to Mr. Foster—I probably saw Cooke about March, 1893; I saw him from time to time—he asked me whether he could get a sanction from me to use the same name—I understood he was making arrangements to bring out a company to carry on the paper—a large sum would be required for the printing each week—I knew nothing of Cooke's position—I only know by report that he has carried on the newspaper ever since—I understood that he was desirous of having it carried on by means of a company.
Re-examined. The majority of reports of company meetings in a financial paper are paid for by the companies—I should hardly like to say whether the character of the reports depend largely on the amount paid for them.
BYRON DAVIES . I am an accountant at 5, Coleman Street—I was secretary of the Caxton Printing and Publishing Company from about March, 1893, till its liquidation in June—there was a voluntary winding up, after the winding-up I was liquidator—I had known Cooke for some time, as connected with the Financial World—I knew that the Caxton Company was the proprietor, of that paper, and that Cooke was general manager; Mr. Charles E. Pearce was editor—on March 10th negotiations were commenced between the Caxton Company and Cooke to purchase the paper—this is the minute relating to it. (This stated that Pearce and Cooke had an interview with the Board with reference to purchasing the paper, and that it was decided to request the solicitors to prepare a draft agreement,) There was a subsequent meeting on March 28tb, when Cooke and Pearce attended again, and it was agreed that the agreement of a sale should be signed and sealed, and that the registered office of the Caxton Company be transferred from 5, Bow Lane to 4, Coleman Street—the agreement is
dated March 27th, and is between the Caxton Company and Henry Stewart Cooke—it stated that the purchase shall be completed, and the Purchase-money paid on May 19th, when the paper shall be transferred to, and vested in, him, and time was of the essence of the contract—on April 27th there was another meeting, when further time was given Cooke to complete—a balance of £250 was to be secured on mortgage of the paper; the book debts were agreed later—on May 19th. 1893, there was a meeting of the Caxton Company at 4, Coleman Street, when H.S. Foster, G. D. Ingall, Cooke and other were present—Cooke paid a sum of money over in notes and gold—the Caxton Company had carried on this paper from November, 1890, to May, 1893; it was not a profitable undertaking, money was lost on it in the end—it contained reports of shareholders' meetings—after May 19th I saw Cooke from time to time about the balance of £250 due from him; the matter was put off, as Cooke was endeavouring to find someone to help him to pay it—afterwards he made an offer to pay £50 out-and-out for the paper, and my solicitor advised me not to accept that—afterwards a different offer was accepted by which he paid £50 in bills; I said I would take the bills provided a substantial person would sign them jointly and severally with him; that was about June 26th, 1894—I received this letter from Cooke (This stated that Mr. John Grunell, the managing Director of the Alliance Financial Corporation, Limited, 19 and 21, Queen Victoria Street, would be the co-signatory with him in the proposed promissory notes.) The Caxton Company had another paper for a considerable time, Fashion and sport, which it afterwards sold—towards the end of its existence it did printing, and it undertook the publishing for a Dalziel's Breweries Company when it, came out—the Caxton made efforts to buy other papers but unsuccessfully, and then it went into liquidation—I received this letter of July 6th, 1894. (This accepted the conditions in Mr. Davies's letter of 5th inst., But said that he could not send the bills before Monday, as his co-signatory Was away.) I stamped that as an agreement—on July 10th I received these two promissory notes for £25 each, at three and six months respectively, signed by Cooke and Grunell—I did not understand what capital there was to carry on the paper—I made no inquiries of Cooke—neither of the notes was met—I have frequently told Cooke that I should take action against him and claim the whole amount of the mortgage and enforce it; and he said he would make endeavours with other parties to obtain the money and pay the bills off—I never understood him to be a man of paper, because I was merely the vendor—my inquiries to carry on the were going on up to just previous to his arrest.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. Cooke was attending at the business place in Bow Lane up to the time of his arrest carrying on the paper and bringing it out—I understand that Cooke has been editor of for a financial paper—I do not know that the Financial World was a substantial success during those three years—I do not know that City Life, an expensive paper, was associated with it—Cooke has always been very sanguine of making the Financial world a success, on account to the manner in which it paid its way in those three years—he has alleged that if it had not been dragged down by another and more expensive paper
it could make its way—it has always been conducted by a company since I remember—when the Caxton Company purchased it they raised the price from 1d. to 6d. per week, and they spent a great deal of money in cartoons—Cooke, the manager, and Pearce, the editor, protested against the price and the cartoons—Cooke alleged and seemed sanguine that he could make it pay at Id, and without the cartoons—just previous to his buying it the price was reduced to 1d.—I did not expect that Cooke was going to produce the money to pay for and carry on the paper; he told me he was going to endeavour to get financial assistance; I did not know whether he was going to raise a company or obtain a partner, or what—it cost the Caxtoa Company, from October to December, £3,527 to carry it on—the advertisements brought in £2,842 17s. 3d.—Cooke was manager and advertisement canvasser, in conjunction with two other gentlemen—he was reputed to be an excellent advertisement canvasser—that had been his trade, and that would help him in conducting a newspaper, if it were his own—the cartoons, if done away with, would lessen the printing expenses—for the half year his total expenses were £2,983 10s. 9d; during part of that time the sale price was 6d., and the expenses then would be greater than when it was 1d.—it could be produced very much more cheaply if published at Id. and without cartoons—the general circulation of a financial paper would not show what the financial state of the paper was; it might be making a good income though the circulation Was small—a good number would be ordered by the companies that had meetings reported in them, and so a good deal depended on Cooke himself—he Was sanguine of success—he did not disguise the fact that he would have to raise money to carry it on—I knew he had been working for weekly wages, and was a steady man, well-conducted and honest, so far as I knew and that he would have, to depend on his personal efforts to bring the paper out—from the time of the agreement to purchase it from the Caxton Company he carried on the paper, making payments out of his own pocket so far as I knew—between March and May 1893 his printing bills would amount to about £25 a week—he paid his printing and other bills by cheques on the London Trading Bank—he must have paid for printing and other expenses during that time ever £200—times did not mend; the successful days did not come back; if they had there was no reason why the Financial World should not have gone back to its prosperity—it was held to be generally a honest and out-spoken paper; cleverly conducted editorially by Pearce—it exposed the Bread Union—among its advertisers were Gregory and many good substantial advertisers—Grunell had suggested that he could finance the paper for Cooke, so Cooke intimated to me—I did not know till I received the bills that Grunell was managing director to the Alliance Company—I turned to the Stock Exchange Year Book (a well recognised book in London) to see what the Alliance Company was, and I found it entered there, and then I thought I was justified in taking Grunell's name as a joint signatory to the promissory notes—I do not always believe what I read in that book, but I made inquiries, and as Grunell was put forward as a person who who could pay £50, and he said he could pay £100, I thought it was good enough—the agreement of March 27th with Cooke only differed from the last agreement as to a certain sum for book debts, besides a certain sum down in
cash—prior to that he had paid £52 and £23, by cheque I think; those were for two accounts Cooke had collected, and which he paid back to us—a solicitor attended on May 19th, 1893, on behalf of Cooke, and some one else who was going to finance the paper, I understood—sometimes a company is not registered till after allotment, and then if the shares do not go to allotment there is no registration, and the application money ought to be returned.
Re-examined. I have a fair experience of companies—I was secretary of the Caxton Company for about three months, before it was in liquidation, and while the paper was being carried on—Mr. Foster was chairman—at that time I was employed by the London and Colonial Finance Corporation, of which" Mr. Foster was managing director—it was one of many companies at 4, Coleman Street—I don't think the Financial World was engaged exactly in exposing companies at this time; it was engaged as an ordinary financial paper; if it knew of any frauds it would advise its clients—it had exposed abuses during its existence, but that was not its sole object—I got the figures about the money expended on the printing and other expenses of the paper from the Caxton Company's books—the Caxton Company did other printing work—we were able to give the Caxton Company a good deal of work from 4, Coleman Street—there was not much printing of prospectuses, one batch of prospectuses of the Dalziel's Breweries was done towards the end—the paper was sold before the liquidation of the Caxton Company—we were desirous of getting the best price we could for the paper—I have no knowledge of the sale, except that it was suggested at the board meeting that it should be sold to Cooke—I believe Cooke had had interviews before—Mr. Foster and Colonel Alecs, the managing directors were at the board meeting on March 10th—the money was paid for printing by the Caxton Company to other printers—the Caxton Company was a printing company by name, but it did not take much printing to do till just at the end of its career—a financial paper may print a report of the meeting of a company, and the company, if the report is favourable, may take 500 or 600 copies of the paper to distribute among its shareholders—it would depend on the company whether they took a large number of copies if the report were unfavourable—I cannot recall a case where the report was hostile—I cannot say the reports are generally favourable—I have no knowledge of the Alliance Financial Company being advertised in the Financial World in 1893, or of its shares being quoted in that paper in 1891—it was the general practice to give a sheet with all the stocks and shares at the price of the day—the shares of the Alliance are quoted here in 1891 at 20, 25 for founders' shares, and the ordinary shares, £2 10s. paid, 3 1/2 and 3 3/4—they are quoted with the shares of a number of very respectable companies—financial papers get the figures from the daily list, but shares not quoted in the daily list are taken from the last quotation; I cannot say if a financial editor would go to the "Stock Exchange Year Book" for them—I saw Cooke's solicitor—I think it is very probable that the impression left by reading this list on the mind of an ordinary person not acquainted with the mysteries of the financial world would be that there was a. market for the Alliance shares on the previous Friday—this, is a practice in the majority of financial paper, I don't say how far back,
to quote the shares—an honest paper would not put down "closing prices on Friday" when there had not been a quotation for years, or there never had been a quotation—I know a quotation has been kept in a financial paper for a month—I only made application to Grunell for the money on the two dates on which the bills fell due—I did not go personally, I sent in the ordinary way of business—when the bills matured I learnt from friends and from inquiries that the Alliance Company was not any great thing, and that Grunell's name was not worth much, and then I applied to Cooke and made no further application to Grunell—I have never been to the Alliance—I never read any of the Financial World leaderettes on the Alliance Corporation.
ROBERT ARTHUR PETERS . I live at Barking—I have known Grunell since 1889—I worked for him at 19 and 21, Queen Victoria Street—in 1893 I was there—those were the offices of the Alliance Financial Corporation, Limited; that name was painted on the door—my name is printed on this prospectus as the secretary of that Company—the fact of my name being there was not hidden from me, but I was not consulted before it was put there—I knew that Grunell was a director of the Company—I knew Capon, as being at the office—I have seen the name of Odam Bell as a director, but I never saw him—I left Grunell for a time—then I met him about the middle of 1893 and asked him for a berth as I was out of employment, and he said, "Come round to me to the Financial World office and I think I can start you—I went with him to Bow Lane, where I saw Cooke—I was employed there but I cannot say whether Grunell or Cooke started me—Cooke paid my wages at the first going off—Grunell said in Cooke's presence, I was to be a clerk at 30s. per week—either Grunell or Cooke said it, I cannot remember which—I accepted the offer—Cooke paid me 30s. a week for several weeks—I saw at the Bow Lane office a prospectus like this of the Financial World Company printed on the back of the newspaper, and I saw my name put down as Mr. Arthur Peters, secretary—I had not been spoken to about it—I said either to Grunell or Cooke (I am very much inclined to think it is Cooke), that I had given no permission for my name to be there and I thought I ought to have been asked before it was first put there—I have no recollection of receiving any explanations about it—I saw two large piles of newspapers that appeared to have this prospectus on them—I sent some of them round by the office boy to the Alliance Financial Corporation—Cooke spoke to me about the number I had sent, as he seemed to think I had overloaded the boy—I have been to an office at 37, Walbrook, with the name of Bouverie and Co. on the door—I don't know who composed that firm—I have only seen Grunell and Capon there, but no one named Bouverie that I know of—the office there was a small room in the basement—I saw no clerks—I saw no business carried on there—I saw Grunell and Capon at the Alliance Financial Corporation in Queen Victoria Street—I never attended any meeting of Directors of the Financial World; there was no meeting to my knowledge—I did nothing in connection with the Company except some matters with regard to letters, and I carried on the ordinary bookkeeping of the newspaper and distribution of the accounts—on the prospectus I saw on the buck of the paper there was the name of Bouverie & Co. as brokers, and amongst the directors was H. Norman Wilson, of 30, Regent's Park Road—I never saw Mr. Wilson; I do not know if there
is such a person—I wrote this letter of October 12th, 1893, in the name of Peters by Cooke's instructions—he gave me this draft to write it from; it is in his writing—he gave me the name and address, I should say, and I wrote them on the back. (This letter informed Mr. Sutherland that Messrs. Bouverie had lodged the transfer vesting 10 shares in his name). Cooke opened the letters which came to 5, Bow Lane in the morning—I did not open any—I wrote this letter of 20th October by Cooke's instructtions. (This stated that the scrip for 10 shares in the "Financial World" Limited, would be issued at the next board meeting, which would be held early in November.) There was never a board meeting to my knowledge—I wrote this letter of December 1st by Cooke's instructions—he gave me this pencil draft, which is in his writing, and I copied it. (This draft was written on the back of Mr. Sutherlands letter of 30th November, asking If the shares had, been issued, and when the yearly dividend would be paid. The reply, signed "Peters" stated that the scrip had been prepared, and would be sealed in due course, and that dividends could not be expected before May.) I saw no seal of the Company—Mr. Sutherland's draft answer seems written on the back of my letter. (This, answer asked why the delay had occurred in sending the scrip as he wanted to sell the shares and would not be put off any longer, and whether the Company was limited.) This letter of January 24th, 1894, is in Cooke's writing, and begins: "In the absence of the secretary, who has been away on private business"; I had not been away on private business; I had no private business to transact at that time—this letter of 30th January, 1894, is in Cooke's writing. (Stating that the shares were fully paid, and free from further liability, and that the delay in issuing the scrip had nothing to do with Mr. Capon, and that it would be forwarded to him on the completion of certain indispensable formalities.) I wrote this document of February 1st, 1894, on Mr. Cooke's instructions; I copied it from a draft in his writing which he gave me—I sent it to Mr. Sutherland. (This document certified that John W. Sutherland, Esq, of 68, High Street, Dumfries, was the proprietor of 10 fully paid shares of£10 each in the if "Financial World," the numbers assigned to him being 251 to 260.) I saw no share list—I wrote this letter of February 8th 1894, on Cooke's infractions. (Stating that there was nothing to prevent Mr. Sutherland transferring his 10 shares, the certificate for which would be sent when ready.) Cooke always opened letters addressed to the Secretary of the Company—I opened nothing—I remember there not being much to do at Bow Lane, and Cooke saying to me that I had better step over to Mr. Grunell's, at the Alliance Corporation, and see if he could find me anything to do—that often happened the latter part of the time—I have seen copying circulars and so on, and letter-writing going on, at the Financial Corporation—letters were copied there to be sent to people in the country—I was never present at any meeting of the Directors of the Alliance—I do not know that any such meeting was ever held; I should be only there perhaps for two hours in the morning or afternoon—besides Grunell and Capon I saw an old gentleman there named Litchfield—I have copied letters from drafts; I don't know what Capon or litehfield did—I saw the prospectus of a new Company, the Commercial linking and Discount Corporation Limited—I was the Robert Arthur, the Secretary of that corporation, and the offices were at 19 and 21, Queen Victoria Street; the name was on the door there—I never saw Peters & Company, the
auditors—I only knew the Secretary was Robert Arthur by seeing it on the prospectus—I had no conversation with Cooke about it appearing there—my name is Robert Arthur Peters—I think the auditors, Peters & Co., were me—I saw no other Robert Arthur—I never saw Odam Bell or Norman Wilson—I was never sent to 30, Regent's Park Road—I was paid 30s. a week; I never got more—several weeks I might be a few shillings short of my 30s., and then the next week I might get that; upon the whole I might be a sovereign or so short—in these matters I did simply what I was told, and I got nothing as the result of it—an office boy was kept at both places—I replaced the-office boy at both places at the beginning of 1894; his duties devolved on me—this is a cutting from copies I have seen of the Financial World. (This stated that the fast that the Alliance Financial Corporation had declared a dividend was evidence of the sound, progressive nature of the Corporation which preferred doing safe business to launching out into speculation.) I do not know of any businesses which the Alliance Corporation turned into limited companies—Cooke and Pearce wrote the letterpress for the financial World—I did not know that Cooke was a director of the Alliance Corporation—signed this transfer of Gardiner's shares as Secretary of the Financial World, Limited—I do not know' where the indiarubber stamp came from; I do not remember seeing a' stamp like this at the Financial World office—I must have signed atter the stamp was there—I signed the transfer when it was blank—I obeyed my instructions—there signature "Bouverie & Company" looks very much like Grunell's writing—I was never paid any large sums like £10 or £25 by Cooke, I am sure—I do not know of his drawing cheques in the name of Peters—I only received my weekly wages of 30s.; and if I got more it would be only some small sum that stood over—I left at the beginning of August, 1894, of my own accord, with this character (pro duced) from Cooke.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW.—I have known Grunell as long as I remember; my father was his second cousin, I think—he introduced me to Cooke—my sister was engaged by Grunell as an amanuensis until I told tier I thought she ought not to do so any more—I do not suggest that Cooke was connected with her engagement in any way—letters sent: out asking people to take shares in the Alliance and other companies' were written from copies and then taken to Grunell—the prospectus of the Financial World; Limited, was printed by Hazell and Co., and was issued on the back of the Financial World—some of the copies of the Financial World, with the prospectus of the Alliance on the back; were left at Bow Lane—I don't know who wrote the leaderettes—I am almost positive I saw this cutting in the Financial World; I am no judge of type; there seems to be a difference in the colors of the ink—I cannot tell you when it appeared; it was while I was employed there—to the best of my recollection I remember seeing this paragraph in one of the Copies when I clearing up the bundles of old numbers—I cannot say I read it through, or kept a copy of it, or cut it but—I should say Grudell gave me this blank transfer to sign—Cooke attended constantly to his duties at Bow Land—on the prospectus the office of the paper was 5; Bow Lane; there was never any application for shares at 5, Bow Lane to my knowledge; I did not open the letters—I never saw the certificate of shares book—soon after I started there Grunell came round one
morning and told me be had put money into the matter; I did not understand that he was financing or getting up the Company—so far as I know he was a person concerned in getting up companies—I have no recollection of Cooke saying that he had just learned that Grunell had been getting money for shares in the Financial World—he might have said a thing like that and I might have forgotten it—I do not remember his saying that ho should write a strong letter to Grunell, or that he had remonstrated with Grunell, who had promised to get the scrip issued—I think I should have remembered it if it had taken place—I was working between the two places till August, 1894—Webber, the landlord, would know whether I attended at Bow Lane; I attended there every day after April; I went there the first thing in the morning and at some time in the day, and then went back to Grunell's—I was doing work for Grunell at his office—I have written letters for Grunell; a kind of circular letter—sometimes I got my wages at Bow Lane, sometimes at Queen Victoria Street—towards the end of the time I got them mostly from Grunell—I helped to make up the books at the Alliance Corporation—I did not know my name had been used in connection with the General Commercial Discount Banking Corporation till I saw this prospectus; Grunell did not ask my permission; I don't know that he asked Cooke's—I do not know that there was any meeting of that Company—I was never asked to audit the accounts—I never spoke to Cooke about it.
Re-examined. I never heard anything about the scrip—I heard for the first time last night a suggestion of Cooke having told me that he was angry with Grunell—I met Cooke in the street at Barking last night; he was coming to try and find me; and he said, "Good evening; do you remember my telling you, while you were with me, that Grunell had obtained money for the Financial World, and that I was cross and vexed with him about it, and that I had written him a letter or seen him about it?"—I said I remembered nothing of the sort, and that I had made a "statement, and had said everything I remembered, and had spoken what I knew to be accurate, as far as my memory served me, and I was prepared to stand by it—that conversation was partly in the street and partly in a public house, where we went for quietness—I have seen 3, 4 or 12 of these cuttings at Queen Victoria Street, and at Bow Lane, in a cupboard or in a desk—I saw on the outside sheet of the Financial World a list of the prices of the shares of different companies published every week.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. Cooke asked me if I felt inclined to buy the Financial World—I have known him a dozen-years, I should think, in London, as a perfectly upright, honest, hardworking man, and the advertisement manager of the Financial World, and as in the habit of attending public meetings and other places; that is how I made his acquaintance—in 1887 to 1889 there was a great boom in financial matters—I knew nothing of the Financial World except as a public journal till 1890—financial papers exist chiefly on advertisements and reports of company meetings, which in years like 1887 to 1889 would bring in more; a paper like the Financial World is very dependent on the state of the market, and not so much on its circulation—when I took over the Financial World, I formed the Caxton Company—he was a hardworking man without capital, and I expected when he took it over he would get some one to
finance it for him—he was always sanguine about the future of the newspaper—we charged 6d. for the paper—his idea wax to charge 1d.—I think he and Pearce objected that the cartoons were weighting the paper with heavy printing expenses—I had known the paper for some years—as far as I know it hid always borne the reputation of being an honest paper, or I should not have purchased it.
Re-examined. I bought the paper for £250 under an order of the Court of Chancery; at the same time I bought Fashion and Sport—Fashion and Sport belonged to a friend of mine and the Financial World to me, and we formed a Company between us and took up the shares; we did not invite any one else to take any interest with us—it was not a success—a financial paper can make money by puffing a particular Company and by putting in leaderettes—the ways of many financial papers are devious—the way of this one was not devious—I only knew it up to 1893—it is by no means necessary to believe all you see in them.
JOHN CROWLE SMITH . I am manager to Hazell, Watson & Viney, printers, of Kirby Street, Hatton Garden—Cooke has acted for customers of that firm since 1886; we had the printing of the Financial World from that time onward—we discontinued it for a little time—in March, 1893. Cooke came for a tender for reprinting it; I gave him a tender, and the first number, some 2,500, was printed on 3rd June, 1893—275 were posted to various addresses supplied by Cooke—a few days after we got instructtions to print a one-page advertisement like this, and we printed about 500 copies of a four-page wrapper for the Financial World, with the page forming one of the four—we had back 500 espies of the previous week's issue to enclose in the wrapper—288 of those copies were sent to the Alliance Corporation, 19 and 21. Queen Victoria Street—I did not know Gunell then; I had nothing to do with him in taking these orders for printing—I sent the papers to Grunell at the Alliance Corporation offices, in consequence of this tatter of 12th June, 1893, in. Cooko's writing—I cannot any where the remainder went—this is a receipt of Nth June, 1893, for good sent from us to the Financial World offices—we printed 500 application forms for shares in the Financial World, Limited; 288 were inserted in the Financial World delivered to the Alliance Corporation, and 260 were delivered at the office of the Financial World—the next issues of the paper we printed without the advertisement, but on July 1st we began printing with the advertisement again; we printed 2,000 copies, 1,000 with the advertisement and application forms, and 1,000 without either—1,000 copies were sent to the Alliance Corporation with a similar number of application forms; these are the delivery notes, signed by S. J. Capon and A. E. S. Lambourn—on June 29th I got this order from Cooke. (This asked him to set up the enclosed on pink paper and deliver 1,000 The enclosure was a request addressed to Messrs. Bouverie and Co., of Walbrook House, to procure£10shares in the "Financial World," Limited, at£10 10s. a share.) That form has stood for both the Alliance Corporation and the Financial World, Limited—this is the copy from which we executed the order; it evidently came with the letter which is in Cooke's writing—we printed 991 and then 295 of those pink forms; this is one—this is the delivery note for the 295, dated July 4th, 1893, and signed A. E. S. Lambourn for John Grunell;
the delivery note for the 991 is signed by S. J. Capon on July 1st—the next issue of the Financial World with the advertisement was dated July 8th—about 900 copies were printed with the advertisement, and, delivered at the Alliance Corporation office—on. July 7th I order from Cooke for 1,000 envelopes, printed with, the address, "Messrs. Bouverie and Co., Walbrook House, London."—that is Cooke's writing—we printed 994—the delivery note for them is, signed by Capon—on July 8th we delivered 312 copies of the Financial World, 1,000 of these pink slips, 984 subscribers' forms, and 194 envelopes—on July 15th we printed about 1,000 copies with the, advertisements, and pink slips—the pink slips were packed separately, but delivered with, the newspapers—on July 22nd, there was an issue of about 1,000 copies with the advertisements, and on July 24th we had an order from Cooke to repaint the issue without the advertisement—those were all delivered at the address supplied by Cooke—we continued to print the paper week by week up to about the middle of August when £58 18s.11d. was owing—previous to the middle of August I had received a cheque, which was not honoured—that occurred more than once; the last time, we refused to print the paper—£55 3s. 5d. is owing.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. We always acted as printers of the paper since 1886, up to when the last bill was not paid, except a short period when we lost the order—it was afterwards given back to us without application, we were ready to take it—off and on since 1886, a good deal of money has been paid to us for printing the paper—I think we lost money before from former proprietors of the paper; I cannot say how much without referring—we were paid large sums—we were quite willing to take the printing again—Cooke paid us about £200 after he tock it over—I understood afterwards that he was attempting to carry on this newspaper by himself—I sued him for the £58, and I believe he paid £25 on account—our practice was to send the newspaper to subscribers in wrappers, which Cooke supplied—those did not contain the prospectus—the balance of the ordinary issue of the paper without the wrapper was delivered at Bow Lane—those with the prospectuses were all sent to. Grunell—we carried out Cooke's instructions.
CHARLES EDWARD PEARCE . I am a journalist, living at Mecklenberg Square—I have been connected with Cooke for about eight years—I was editor of the Financial World for some time, Cooke then being the business manager and advertisement canvasser—he managed all the business of the paper, and I did the literary part—I knew of Sir. Foster buying it, and bringing out the Caxton Company—after that the Caxton Company was in liquidation, and the paper was sold—I ceased to be editor of the paper at the end of 1893—I knew nothing about the Alliance Corporation, and I did not write about it—I attended one annual general meeting of the Alliance Corporation at the end of December, 1893, as a reporter—I was there within a few minutes of Cooke I should think—I went to report the proceedings, for the Financial World but I took the report from the Financial News, and incorporated, it with, the report in the Financial World—I cannot say if any other journalists besides myself were there; there might have been twenty people there—Cooke took the chair, and read the directors' report from a paper; he made no speech himself, so far as I recollect—a solicitor on behalf of a shareholder
made several objections—I cannot say that he said the debts were treated as assets—I adopted the Financial News' report—I attended no other meetings of the company—I had my name on the prospectus of the Financial World, Limited, as a director, with my consent—I was then living at 39, Lauriston Gardens, South Hackney, and was late editor of the South London Press and Funny Folks—no qualification was necessary to be a director; nothing was said about qualification—I, was never, introduced to my brother directors; I never met Norman Wilson, or the brokers, Bouverie and Co.—I have some knowledge of the City—I read the prospectus—I never attended a, meeting of the company—I did nothing in regard to it—I did not know Arthur Peters was secretary—I knew him as a useful, man, the publisher of the, Financial World—I was aware that Cooke wanted, capital to carry on the paper, and that a company was in process of formation, and Cooke showed me the prospectus, and I read it, and he suggested it would be a good thing for me if I were a director, because it would strengthen my position on the paper; it seemed to me reasonable, as I had been connected with the paper almost from its start—I have been; connected with journalism—directors names should be inserted to inspire confidence, that the public should be impressed by the names of men who have come forward to-be directors, and have put money into the concern—I was not asked to put money into the, concern, on I should have done so—I knew the history of this paper from the first, and that it was possible to do great things—I did not know how much Cooke had paid the Caxton Company for the paper, I knew it was not very much—I knew nothing about the financial arrangements of the paper—I knew nothing about the auditors—at times a list of share quotation was published in the paper—it was a list of market prices of the day—I read it—the prices; were got from Wetenhall's List or the latest edition of the Evening Standard, which is generally very correct—I had never seen the the Alliance Corporation quoted in the Standard, but in the Stock Exchange Year Book I had; if there is no mention of a price, probably no business is done; that might go of for two or three years, and there would be no means of getting the information—the price of the Alliance Corporation shares did not attract my attention—I never saw this leaderette about the Alliance Corporation before; I did not write it, and I do not think it appeared in the Financial World—I saw this prospectus, which is on the back of the Financial World, in a proof—I read there "Guaranteed Dividends of not less, than 10 per cent per annum"—that bears my name—1891 and, 1892 had been exceedingly, bad years in financial circles, and there was every reason to believe that 1893 and 1894 would be good years, and the Financial World had paid very large dividends in former years—I cannot explain who was to guarantee the 10 per cent.; it did not occur to me at the time, and I did not enquire whether there was any such guarantee; I assumed the thing was bona fide; I had no reason to doubt it—I had seen what the paper had made, and it seemed reasonable that whatever was promised would be performed—after 1893 I believe Cooke did the work along; I was not there—I visited the office occasionally; I did not know much about t the paper in 1894—I was subpoenaed in this case; I did not go to see Cooke as soon as I was subpoenaed—after the prospectus was issued I asked Cooke
how his company had gone—he said there was no response, the company was a dead letter, and from that day for four or five months afterwards I assumed the thing was dead, and asked nothing more about it.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. I asked him how the company was going on, about the summer—he said there had been no application for shares—this cutting is not in the same type as the Financial World, and is on different paper—like many other papers, I took clippings from other papers, and introduced them into my paper—clippings are taken which are never used—this may have been a clipping taken from another paper and never used—I do not recollect anything like it appearing in the Financial World and I have a very good memory for what has appeared in the paper—I was editor from about 1888—the Financial World Company, Limited, was then carrying it on—towards its close that company also carried on City Life, an expensive paper—during 1887, 1888, and 1889 the Financial World paid very well—City Life was a dead weight to it; there was no profit to it—the next Company, the Caxton, that took the Financial World did not go about things in an economical way—they published cartoons which I and Cooke objected to because we thought they would not make it pay—it was carried on at 6d.—there were reasonable grounds to believe that, with good times, abolishing the cartoons, and selling at 1d. the Financial World would become a paying paper—there was no reason why it should not have paid at 1d. when Mr. Foster had it—Cooke said there were no applications for shares at 5, Bow Lane—I left towards the end of 1893; Cooke was then disappointed in what Grunell had done—he told me that the company was dead, and Grunell was supposed to finance the paper from his private resources, but he failed to do so; and Cooke told me he was very annoyed when he found out by accident that Grunell had been receiving money for shares—I understood him to say that he was not aware that any money had been sent for shares, but by accident he discovered that Grunell had received money from the country for shares—that was about September or October, 1893—he said he had written an indignant letter to Grunell, complaining about it—I wept to the meeting of the Alliance Corporation after Cooke, to take a note of the meeting—we used to go to meetings, he to get orders for reports, I to take notes—at this meeting I met Cooke outside, and he said, "Grunnell wants me to take the chair"—I said, "Why, you are not a shareholder"—he said, "There may be a little disturbance," and Grunell said, "You are accustomed to the procedure of company meetings, to regulate them, and I know no one who would do so well as you, and will you take the chair?"—he only read the report, and when questions were asked him he bent down to Grunell, who told him what to say—he made no statement as coming from himself about the Alliance Corporation—I believe the paper would have paid in 1895—Cooke, in spite of difficulties, made it pay in 1895—the last issue of September 28th, 1895, would have brought in a large profit, if the advertisements were bona fide and the reports were paid for.
Re-examined. I have had a fair experience of attending company meetings, but I have only been in my reporting capacity—I could not know if in other instances the chairman of a general meeting was neither shareholder or director—I heard the statement Cooke made as chairman of the Alliance Corporation meeting on December 23rd—I could not say
how much of this report of his statement is accurate. (This report contained the statements that the affairs of the Corporation were in a less discouraging position than might have been anticipated, that the investments were sound, and valued at too low a figure.) We took the report from the financial News, which seemed to give a fair account of it, I writing the opening portion—I do not remember Cooke saying that the company's investments were sound, or that Mr. H. Wilson did not offer himself for re-election, or that Messrs. Peters had been appointed auditors—there was a demand for a poll, I cannot say for what purpose.
By MR. KERSHAW. This is Cooke's signature—when he told me Grunell had asked him to take the chair—I said, "You are not a shareholder?" and I think he said, "No."
WILLIAM WEBBER. I am a bootmaker at 5, Bow Lane—I have known Cooke for six years; he carried on business there in June, 1893—for two or three years before the Caxton Printing and Publishing Company had carried on business there, and during that time Cooke was frequently there—he has been my tenant since June, 1893; he had two rooms first, and since then he has had one room on the second floor at £2 1s. 8d. per month rent—the Financial World was on the street-door, and on the door of the room—he was a regular attendant there, so far as I know—I knew Peters as a clerk there—I have a shop on the ground floor—when letters came for Cooke or the Financial World, if the street-door were shut; they would be put in the letter-box, and we should take them up to Cooke's office.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. The Financial World had had offices in the building since 1886—Cooke attended there everyday; no one asking for him or the Financial World would have any difficulty in finding him or the place—Cook has paid the rent regularly—the office is there still with the door-plate.
WILLIAM FLINT . I am a housekeeper at 37, Walbrook, which is known as Walbrook House—I know Grunell and Capon, and Cooke I know by sight—in 1893, No. 9 room in the basement was occupied by Grunell—the name Bouverie and Co. was on the door—I did not see the company—Grunell used to come there—Capon came there, almost daily—I have seen Cooke in the house, but never in that room—Grunell told me to deliver all letters for Bouverie and Co. at No. 9 room—the rent was £35 a year—it was paid—Bouverie and Co. occupied the room till a little over a year ago—Grunell was away some time, and we let it to another tenant.
Cross-examined. Over a year ago Grunell left—he was there over a year—I could not say whether he came before Midsummer, 1893; I think so—I had seen Cooke about in the City—a great many persons have offices at 37, Walbrook—whenever I saw Cooke there he went upstairs, I never saw him in the basement—Newsom-Smith, a well known accountant, has chambers upstairs, and Cooke went there—Newsom-Smith has rooms there still.
WALTER JAMES WHEELER . I am a clerk in the National Provincial Bank of England, Bishopsgate Street—I produce a certified copy of the account of J. Grunell, managing director of the Alliance Financial Corporation, 19 and 21, Queen Victoria Street—that account was opened in December, 1891, and continued open till August, 1895—on May 16th
1893, there was a credit of £125 15s.—the letters, "C. B." against it mean it was a country bill, or a Scotch or Irish cheque—this is the Scotch cheque, payable to Capon, representing that credit—on October 23rd, 1893, I find "C. B., £125"—this is another Scotch cheque, drawn by Gardiner to Capon; representing that—on May 19th, 1893, the account is debited with this cheque for £120 to Cooke, drawn by Grunell—that cheque was paid by £100-note 79,387 and £20-note 02,932—on May 4th there is a cheque for £50 to Cooke or order; oh May 11th a cheque for £25, and on July 3rd a cheque for £10; all those are endorsed by Cooke—on November 1st there is a cheque for £155, endorsed "For the Financial World, Henry Stewart Cooke, Manager."
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. There was a cheque in favour of Cooke on January 24th, 1893, for £5—air these cheques were made payable to Cooke, except the one for £155—the £50 and £25 cheques of May 4th and 11th were paid through the Trading Bank, the others seem to have been paid over the counter—it was all done openly—the £155 was made payable to the Financial World, and was paid into the City Bank, Queen Victoria Street—Mr. Sutherland's cheque of May 11th, payable to S. J. Capon or order, is endorsed "S. J. Capon," and was paid into Grunell's account at our bank, and a cheque for £120 drawn to Cooke on May 19th—it would take about three days to collect a Scotch cheque.
ERNEST REGINALD HALFORD . I am a clerk in Lloyds' Bank, Law Courts Branch—the Caxton Printing and Publishing Company had an account there in May, 1893—on May 19th, 1893, I received from that company and placed to their credit £100-note 79,387 and £20-note 02,932.
ALLEN LUSH . I am a clerk in the City Bank, Queen Victoria Street branch—I produce the paying-in and pass books of the Financial World account; it was opened on November 1st, 1893, with a credit of £155 by this cheque—the account lasted till April 28th, 1894—there were many payments put to Peters and Cooke.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. 15s. 10d. remained on April 28th, 1894—none of these cheques are marked wages, or anything like that; there is nothing to show for what they were drawn—the cheques are signed both by Grunell and Cooke.
MATILDA LAWRENCE . I am housekeeper at 19 and 21, Queen Victoria Street—in 1893 there was an office of three rooms there on the third floor, with the "Alliance Financial Corporation, Limited," on the door—I used to see Grunell and Cooke, and Capon there—I live on the premises, and do the cleaning, and so on, but I did not clean their office—I attended to their letters only for about two months—about the early autumn of 1893 I was, sent for to the office, that Mr. Cooke might near what I had to say in relation to a letter which was supposed to contain a cheque from Scotland; Grunell told me that in Cooke's presence—I did mot find the letter—Grunell told me that Capon had disappeared with that cheque, and that I was not to bring any more letters to give to him in the office—I understood him to say that Capon had absconded—I did not see Capon for quite two years after that—I next saw him at the Police-court.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. Cooke sat in the room and never spoke when I was sent for and asked about the letter; he listened to what was said.
house at 30, "Regent's Park Road in 1893 and for three years, leaving last September—no H. Norman Wilson lived at that address to my knowledge; I did not know the name—I knew Grunell as B. Odam Bell—I did not carry on any business as a stockbroker in the name of Bouverie and Co.
JOHN WILLIAM SUTHERLAND . I am a chemist of High Street, Dumfries—in 1893 I received a communication from the secretary of the Alliance Financial Corporation, and in the result took some shares in that company—on May 10th I received this letter from the same person. (This was signed, "S. J. Capon,"on paper headed "The Alliance Financial Corporation," and stated that a batch of£10fully-paid shares in the "Financial World" newspaper had been put on the market, and nearly all taken up by the directors of the Alliance, and that he, Capon, had the option of ten at a lower price than they had purchased; that he sent Mr. Sutherland his option, and would take back five of them in June, that the shares had paid fifteen per cent for several years past, were strongly held, and very valuable property.) Believing that letter to be true, I took the shares, and sent a cheque for £125 15s., which came back through my bank paid—I received this letter of May 12th. (This was signed by Capon, acknowledging letter and cheque for£125 15s. and stating that the transfer would be sent next day or Monday.) I received this letter of May 17th. (This, sighed Capon, enclosed transfer for ten shares, and stated that the shares were well worth holding as an investment, and that he believed he could get five more through Messrs. Bouverie at£13 10s,.and that if Mr. Sutherland bought them he, Capon, would take them from him at the same price.) I would not have any more—the ten shares were not forwarded to me—I wrote asking for them—I received this letter of September 1st. (This, signed H. Owen, stated that Capon was away for a holiday). I wrote again, but got no reply, then I received this letter of October 12th from the Financial World, 5, Bow Lane. (This, signed Peters, stated that Messrs. Bouverie had lodged the transfer of ten shares; that the scrip had not been yet issued, but would be forwarded in ordinary course.) In answer to another letter of mine I got this letter of October 20th from Peters. (Stating that the scrip would be issued at their next Board Meeting in November.) I wrote again as I did not receive the scrip, and received this letter of December 1st from Peters. (Stating that the scrip had been prepared and would be sealed in due course.) I wrote and received this letter of January 24th, signed by Cooke. (Stating that the Secretary was away on private business; that unavoidable delay had arisen over the scrip, which was otherwise prepared, but that certain indispensable legal formalities that were not anticipated had to be complied with.) After further letters I received this document of February 1st. (This was headed "The Financial World and signed by Peters, and certified that John W. Sutherland was the proprietor of ten fully paid shares of£10 each in the Financial World and that the numbers were 251 to 260.) I wrote on February 2nd. (This letter stated that he wished to sell his shares, and asked whether he could do so.) I received this reply. (Stating that there was nothing to prevent his transferring them.) I wrote this letter on July 24th, 1894. (Stating that as he had not received the, scrip nor any report or dividend, he should put the matter into his agents hands
unless he heard by return what they proposed doing.) I never got any scrip nor my money back, or any report of any matter—some time afterwards I was called on as a witness for the prosecution by the Public Prosecutor.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. I heard about Peters in a letter of October 12th; until then my correspondence was entirely with the Alliance Company and through Capon—I did not receive a prospectus at that time, and, therefore, did not know that the office for applications for shares was 5, Bow Lane, and I never came in contact with Cooke till the following year—I brought an action here against the Alliance Company for the money I had paid for the shares; it was against Grunell personally—Mr. Carritt was my solicitor, and I know he called on Mr. Cooke after Cooke's letters of January 24th and 30th to make inquiries about the shares—he did not tell me at Mr. Cooke's that he had never received the money—he had gone there repeatedly to see if he could get any satisfaction, and found the place at how Lane closed—he said that Mr. Cooke said that the money had been paid through the corporation—I issued some interrogatories in that action.
(MR. GILL objected that this was not evidence, and the COMMON SERJEANT did not admit it.)
JOHN GARDNER . I am a solicitor of Paisley—I became a shareholder in the Alliance Financial Corporation, and a few weeks, afterwards, on October 16th, I received this letter. (Signed S. J. Capon, Secretary: marked "Private and Confidential" offering him 10more shares at a lower price than he had paid, and stating that he could not do better than buy them, and that he had hoped to take them himself; this enclosed a letter signed "B. and Co." to Capon offering him the shares for£12 10s. net, and stating that there were only 10 left.) My reply is on the back in pencil. (This stated that he relied on Capon's advice, and enclosed a cheque for£125 for the 10 fully paid up shares and asked for a prospectus.) A slip of paper was enclosed with a prospectus—I was told in the letter that the minimum guaranteed dividend was not less than 10 per cent, per annum—when I sent my cheque I believed that this was a real company with real directors and a real firm of stockbrokers, and that for years past it had paid 15 per cent.—this is the letter of October 31st enclosing the transfer of the shares. (Asking for 15s. for the transfer stamps.) I forwarded the 15s.—this is the transfer; it has not been stamped or registered—Capon said in his letter that he would get it stamped—later on I desired to realise the shares, and received this letter from Capon. (Dated November 13th, 1893, stating in reply to his letter that there were not many shares changing hands, that it was too late for the meeting, and that the next meeting would be in three weeks, when balance-sheets would be sent in.) I did not attend the general meeting, I placed it in the hands of my solicitor—I never had any dividend or shares; I have not even seen the certificate.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. One letter began: "There are only a certain number of these shares unsold"—I relied on the letters.
SERGEANT WILLIAMSON. This letter of the 14th, signed "B. and Co." (Staling that there were only ten shares), and this transfer, are in Grunell's writing to the best of my belief.
are the names of Grunell and Capon, a draft prospectus of the Financial World, and a white book, which shows how the shares have been disposed of—on July 8th, 1893, I find "Used for post, 232; Slater, 100; office of Alliance Corporation, 914"—I found some private papers with reference to Cooke there—this letter (produced) is Grunell's writing—I found a large number of papers of the Financial World there—the office consists of one room.
SERGEANT WILLIAMSON (Re-examined). I have had charge of the police enquiries in this case from the commencement. I arrested Cook on a warrant, at 2 p.m. on September 30th—I told him we were police officers, and held a warrant for his arrest for conspiring to obtain £125 10s. from Mr. Gardner—he said, "I know nothing about it; the money was paid without my knowledge; why have you taken this step at this late date?—when was the warrant granted?—I have had a solicitor watching the case for me at the Police-court, and I have also engaged a barrister to do the same at the Old Bailey"—I made no reply—he said at the station, "Mind you make a report of what I have said; I want it to be understood that I know nothing of these frauds, I am innocent"—On October 11th I charged the three prisoners together at the Police-court with stealing Mr. Sutherland's cheque and Mr. Gardner's cheque, and money from a person unknown—Capon and Cooke made no reply—At the office in Victoria Street I saw a large number of documents and the paying-in book and pass-book of the Financial World—this (produced) is the minute-book of the Alliance Corporation (several extracts from this book were put in showing a transfer of 1,000 shares to Cooke and his election as a director and taking his seat on the Board; also of a transfer of ten shares to James Collendar when Grunell was in the chair, and Cooke was present, Grunell being generally in the chair, but sometimes Cooke.) This is the share register of the Financial World—the name of Henry Wilson appears in it—there is no such person—the water mark of the paper is 1893, and it begins at No. 101—in the share register of the Alliance Financial Times, at page 203, I find Henry Cooke, of 5, Bow Lane, entered as the holder of 1,000 shares for which £500 appears to have been paid—I find a note of the appointment of Peters as secretary, and of Peters and Co. as auditors of the Alliance Corporation—among the papers found at the Alliance was a prospectus of the Commercial Discount Company, Limited, Grunell being one the directors—I arrested him at the company's office—there was an old man named Litchfield there, and a young fellow named Smith—Owen was not there—I arrested Capon at 70, the Grove, South Lambeth—he lodged there—that was some time after I arrested Grunell—these are some of the letters I found on him; one is a draft letter from Capon with instructions to write to some of the Scotch gentlemen, also this letter, "Dear Capon, please pay into our account, by ten to-morrow morning, enclosed cheque; see Miss Peters does her 18, or I shall stop her rise"—nearly all the letters are from Grunell—this is the call-book of the Alliance, in 1893; I find Cooke's name mentioned continually, he was an almost daily caller—I found a large number of copies of the Financial World and some slips of copy, and among the things found at the Alliance was about 1 cwt. of these
slips (cuttings from newspapers)—after Grunell's arrest, the brokers went into possession, and there was an end of the company.
Cross-examined by MR. KERSHAW. I arrested Grunell on August 9th, and Capon on October 9th, they were committed for trial on Angust 22nd—I had all the documents I have got now from the Alliance Company., and all the documents I found at the Financial World, and they were then before the Treasury—Cooke was arrested on September 30th; the Sessions here had been held, and the trial was adjourned—the minutes of the Alliance are in Grunell's writing; I have not seen any signature of Cooke's to them—on December 23rd, when Cooke was in the chair, they are not signed at all—"B. O. Bell" is Grunell—I have not been able to discover any documents at the Alliance or elsewhere to show that Cooke applied for any shares, only by the minute-book, which is not in his writing—I have no evidence that he was a director except these minutes—one document found at Capon's is a draft in Grunell's writing—the first letter to Mr. Gardner, of August 14th, is in Grunell's writing, and the next is in Capon's writing; I have found the drafts of those letters—this letter, "Pay enclosed into my bank to-morrow morning," etc., is in Grunell's writing—I think Hayter found these two agreements at Grunell's office; one is between Cooke and Grunell. (Read.)
Re-examined. These letters to Sutherland and Gardiner are, to the best of my belief, in Capon's writing.
Cooke's statement before the Magistrate. "I am wholly innocent of the charge."
Capon put in a written defence stating that all he had done in connection with this matter was under the direction of Grunell, who engaged him as clerk, and that he had no intention to conspire or defraud; and that he only knew Cooke by sight.
GRUNELL, who had also PLEADED GUILTY to another indictment for conspiracy and false pretences— Four Years' Penal Servitude. CAPON— Ten Months' Hard Labour. COOKE— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
MARY FARRER . I assist my son, a pastrycook, of 156, Commercial Road—on October 14th, near eleven p.m., I served the prisoner with twopennyworth of eels—she gave me a shilling; it was very light and greasy, and I said to my daughter in the prisoner's hearing, "Look at this"—she said, "Oh, mother, that is bad; don't take it"—the prisoner said, "Don't you like the look of it?"—I said, "No," and she took it from my hand—I consider it thoroughly bad, and I have been forty years in business—she then gave me a florin—my son came in, and I said, "Is this good?"—he said, "Certainly not," and said to the prisoner, "This is a bad two-shilling piece"—I said, "She gave me a shilling before, and has taken it from me"—she pleaded very hard for my son to let her go, but he sent for a policeman—a man was waiting in the shop; I did not know him—when a policeman came the prisoner produced her purse with a shilling in it—my daughter said, "Is that the shilling, mother?"—I said, "No; that is a good one."
saw the prisoner hand a shilling to my mother; she looked at it and gave it to me; it was very greasy and I said, "Don't take it, I think it is bad."
HORATIO FARRER . I am the proprietor of this shop—I came in and my mother showed me this florin (produced)—I asked the prisoner if she had got any more money—she said, "Yes"—I said, "Did you give this two-shilling piece?"—she said, "Yes"—I told her it was bad; she wanted to take it away from me, but I sent for a constable—she said, "Here, take my puree and let me go."
GEORGE WILLCOX . I received information from Louisa Farrer and the coin was handed to me—I showed it to the prisoner and asked if she had tendered it—she said, "Yes"—I asked her where the shilling was—she took a shilling from her purse and said, "Here it is"—Mr. Farrer looked at it and said, "That is not the coin you tendered"—a shilling and three halfpence was in the purse—I took her to the station and she was charged—she said, "My God, I did not know it was a bad one"—she was searched by a female who handed me a key with which I went to 28, Glendale Street, and in the front parlour pointed out to me by the landlady I found a piece of metal and some plaster of Paris.
MART ANN CANTWELL . I am the landlady of 28, Glendale Street, Lambeth—I let my parlour to the prisoner on July 27th, and she remained there till October by herself—on October 14th or 15th a constable came with a key, and I pointed out the room to him—she had her own furniture,
By the JURY. I never saw any visitors come—she told me she went out charing—she never passed any counterfeit coin on me.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to Her Majesty's Mint—this florin is counterfeit; this is antimony; and this is plaster of Paris; they are used in making counterfeit coin, but antimony is not often used.
Prisoner's Defence. I did not know it was a bad florin.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Justice Wright,
MR. GILL, for the prosecution, offered no evidence.— NOT GUILTY .
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, DECEMBER 9TH, 1895.