CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
THIRD SESSION, HELD JANUARY 13TH, 1896.
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.
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 DELIVEEY FOR THE
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX AND THE PARTS OF THE COUNTIES 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, January 13th, 1896, and following days.
BEFORE the RIGHT HON. SIR WALTER WILKIN , Knt., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir HENRY HAWKINS , Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's High Court; Sir REGINALD HANSON , Bart., Sir JAMES WHITEHEAD , Bart., and Sir JOSEPH SAVORY Bart., M.P., 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., ALFRED JAMES NEWTON , Esq., JAMES THOMSON RITCHIE , Esq., WILLIAM PURDIE TRELOAR, Esq., GEORGE WYATT TRUSCOTT , Esq., and FREDERICK PRATT 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.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
WILKIN, MAYOR. THIRD SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—a dagger (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, January 13th, 1896.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. CALTHROP Prosecuted.
WALTER WILLIAM BROWN . I am a brick master, and live 26, Haydon Park Place—the prisoner is my sister-in-law—her maiden name was Elizabeth Dunning—I was present at her marriage with William West on December 23rd, 1874; I married her sister—she has not been living with her husband for many years—as far as I know he has been living with other women—I believe King to be a respectable man.
JOHN EDWARD KING . I am a labourer; I live at Walworth—I have known the prisoner about five or six years; I went through the form of marriage with her on the 1st of May, 1894, at St. John's Church, Newington; I married her as a widow, and she has been a good wife to me—I had lived with her for about two years before I married her—we had no children—I had no reason to think that she was going to have a child before I married her—she did not tell me that her husband had deserted her, and that he had never done anything for her for fifteen years—her husband came to me, and said he was her cousin, and asked me to take a child of his, because his wife had run away from him—that was before I married her—he did not tell me who his wife was—he visited me three times—I did not take the child; I never saw it.
JOHN MONK (Inspector T.). On December 2nd I was on duty at the station—the prisoner came in with her husband, William West, and a constable—she said that the man was her husband; he had given her into custody for bigamy—at the station she said, "Quite right, I did commit bigamy; I may as well make a clean breast of it now, as I shall get no peace while this man is alive"—I said, "Do you wish to make a statement?"—she said, "Yes"—she did so, and I took it down; this is it—(read) "I now live at 69, Wellington Street, Walworth, where I have lived for the past three years—about eighteen months ago this man, West, came to me with a paper and asked me to sign my name to it, that he would not acknowledge me
as his wife so long as I allowed him to marry again—I said no, considering that I had committed adultery as well as himself; I would not sign anything as he had lived with two or three women in Hammersmith, and had children by them—I thought I would take the law into my own hands and act honourable to the man that I had, and married him; the wedding took place on last Whit Monday twelvemonth, at St. John's, Walworth Road—my own cousin, Mrs. Cousins, Mr. Thomas Hughes and his wife, witnessed the wedding to John Edward King, my present man—I have not been living with West for fifteen years, nor had one farthing from him—I was married to William West on December 23rd, 1874, at St. Mary's, Fulham."
Prisoner's Defence I am sorry for what I have done, but I thought it more honourable to marry him than living with him—he knew I was married because he had a copy of the certificate within a week afterwards.
GUILTY.—Very strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury— Discharged on her own recognizances.
101. EDWARD OLIPHANT (33), PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of Stanley Stern, and stealing a napkin-ring and other articles; also to burglary in the dwelling-house of Elizabeth Walker, and stealing a locket and other articles; also to burglary in the dwelling-house of John George Griffinhoofe, and stealing a box and other articles; and** to a conviction of felony at this Court in May, 1892, when he was sentenced to three years' penal servitude— Five Years Penal Servitude.
MR. PASMORE Prosecuted.
JOHN EDMEAD . I am a watchman on the screw-steamer Rugby, lying at Fresh Wharf—on January 6th I was in the galley, about 9 30, talking to the prisoner—I fell asleep—the prisoner woke me up and asked me the time—I felt for my watch and found it was gone—he said, "Surely, no one has gone down you for it!" and he made use of some expressions, and I concluded he had it—he went down to the starboard galley, and I followed him—he was insulting the steward down there—he was sober—the steward asked me to put him out of the galley—he said, "Neither of you will put me out," and I went and got a constable to put him off—when I charged him with stealing the watch he denied it—I should think I last saw my watch safe about 9 15—it was in my pocket when I fell asleep—I looked at it at nine o'clock—I gave him in custody to a policeman who asked him what he had got in his pockets; would he turn them out—he refused—the policeman said, "Will you give him in charge for stealing your watch and chain?"—I said, "Yes"—going off the wharf I was walking behind the constable and the prisoner, and just as we got by the office of the wharf the constable saw the chain hanging out of the prisoner's pocket, and grabbed for and got it—when we got into Thames Street, under the electric light, the constable asked me if the watch and chain were mine, and I said, "Yes"; he asked me if I could swear to it, and I
said, "Yes"—I had had no words with the prisoner; he said he had permission to come on board if he came sober.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You were in the galley at 9.30.
FREDERICK JAMES . About 10.30 p.m., on January 6th, I was called to the Fresh Wharf where the prosecutor gave the prisoner into my custody and charged him with stealing his watch and chain—the prisoner did not reply—he and the prosecutor were on the wharf, not in the ship—when charged the prisoner said, "I have not seen any watch and chain"—he was fumbling in his trousers' pocket, and I asked him if he would show me what he had in his trousers' pocket—he said, "No, I shall not; I have not seen any watch and chain"—I took him to the station—when we had gone a few steps toward the station, I noticed the chain hanging from the prisoner's trousers' pocket; I took hold of it, and made him pull his left-hand from the pocket, and I then saw he was holding this watch and chain—when we got into Lower Thames Street, I showed the watch and the chain to the prosecutor, and said, "Is this yours?"—he said, "Yes, that is mine"—the prisoner was taken to the station and charged—he said in reply, "I did not steal it; I bought it from a man for 3s. 6d.—he was a complete stranger to me."
JOHN EDMEAD (Re-examined by the COURT). The prisoner woke me up and asked me the time—I had been asleep about a quarter of an hour—the night watchman on the Wharf went and got the constable—I gave the prisoner into custody ten or fifteen minutes after I woke up, I should think.
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he had bought the watch, as he was coming on board to sleep.
NOT GUILTY .
BRADOCK PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. RANDOLPH Prosecuted, and MR. DRAKE Defended Walsh.
SAMUEL NORMAN . I am an oil and colourman of 28, Boston Street, Dorset Square—between twelve and one midday on Christmas day I left my premises in a secure condition—my house is at a corner, and has a side-door which was secure—no one was in the house when I left—I came back between eight and 8.30 p.m. and found the police there; the lock of the door had been tampered with—I missed nothing.
TOM BROWN . I live at 106, Balcombe Street—I am brother-in-law of the last witness and assist him in his shop—on Christmas night I was with a friend at the Boston Arms about 8.30—the Boston Arms is right opposite my brother-in-law's house—coming out of Boston Arms I saw two men standing on the corner, where the shop is—I turned to speak to my friend, and when I turned to the front again I did not see anything of the two men—I heard my brother-in-law's dog bark, and then I went and knocked at the side door—Walsh came down and I asked him what was the matter: he mumbled something, and pushed by me and ran up Boston Street and round Boston Place—there was a light from a lamp-post at the comer, ten yards from the doorway I should say; there is no
lamp in the doorway itself—I could see Walsh's face quite plain—after he had gone away the other man came down and I asked my friend to catch hold of him, and he did so—they struggled, and Bradock pulled out a jemmy from his pocket, and tried to strike Peacey, and then he got away and ran round Hill Street—we ran after him, calling out, "Stop thief," and a constable arrested him—on January 4th I was taken to the police-station and I picked out Walsh without hesitation from about a dozen men—I am sure he is the man.
Cross-examined. I and Peacey left the public-house about 8.30—I saw the men straight across the road—the public-house is brightly lighted—we had been in it about two minutes—I did not see the two men for more than an instant—there was no light in the passage of the house; the lamp-post is not right opposite the door—I stood on the step leading into the passage—I had time to see Walsh's face, because I asked him a question and he mumbled some reply, and pushed by me—I saw him for about half a minute—I identified him at once on 4th January; I said to the Inspector, "I should say that is the man"—I did not say, "I think that is the man"—Walsh wanted to make out that I could not identify him; he said, "That young fellow has not identified me"—I am certain Walsh is the man.
WALTER PEACEY . I live at 106, Balcombe Street, and am an upholsterer—on Christmas night I was with Brown at the Boston Arms for about three minutes—when we came out I followed him across to Norman's house—Brown knocked loudly at the door, which was opened immediately by Walsh, who came out and mumbled a few words to Brown, and ran away—the door is about a dozen yards from a street lamp; I saw Walsh's face as he ran away; he turned towards the lamp—Brown shouted for the police; Bradock came out—I took hold of his collar; he said it was all right, nothing was the matter, and started struggling—he took a jemmy from his pocket and tried to hit me—I caught hold of it; he broke away—Russell came up the other way and Bradock turned into Hill Street, where he put his back against the wall and hit left and right at Russell with the jemmy; it flew out of his hand after some time, and went over the wall, and the constable arrested him—on January 4th I went to the station and identified Walsh without hesitation from a dozen men—I have no doubt about him—my friend had not said a word to me when we crossed to the door; I did not know what we were crossing the road for.
Cross-examined. I was directly behind Brown when we came to the passage; I saw Walsh not in the passage but in the street, facing the street lamp; I identify him from what I saw of him running away—at the police-station I only looked down the row once, and walked straight to the man, and "That is the man"—the inspector said, "Is this the man?" and I said "Yes"; that was after Brown had come out; we went in separately.
By the COURT. I saw the man's face as he got to the doorstep, and then I saw him as he ran—Brown questioned him; I did not hear what he said—I saw him turn to speak to Brown, and then saw him running towards the lamp.
RUSSELL (265 d). I was on duty in Boston Street on December 25th, about 8.30 p.m.—I heard cries of "Police"—I saw Bradock running
towards me; he turned down Hill Street—I stopped and detained him till Brown came up, and from what he told me I took Bradock into custody—he had this jemmy in his hand, and was flourishing it over his head—on the way to the station he threw down this dark lantern and cap—when searched at the station, £1 5s. and a box of silent matches were found on him.
JOSEPH LOKER (Sergeant D) On January 4th I went to 25, Edward Street, Dorset Square, at midnight—I saw Walsh there—I told him I was a police-officer, and should take him into custody for being concerned with another man in breaking into 28, Boston Street, on Christmas night—he said, "I know nothing about it, and can prove that I was here all the evening till eight o'clock, when I went out with some other men to the beershop, and got some beer and cigars, then came back, and did not go out any more till about half-past eleven, when I went to see some friends off at Baker Street Station"—I took him to the police-station, where Brown and Peacey identified him—when the charge was read to him he said, "I am innocent, and can prove where I was on Christmas night"—when searching him he said, "I was indoors from three o'clock until eight, when I came out with some friends; we had some beer at the beershop and took a bottle of beer and a shillingsworth of cigars home, and went in about ten, and afterwards went to Baker Street station and saw my friends off by train."
Cross-examined. The prisoner spoke to me at his house in the presence of Stone; no one else was in the room—Mrs. Chatten was not in the room—she preceded me into the room, but his statement was not made in her presence—I made this note of the statement at the station about two hours afterwards, the same night—I have written down everything that took place on that night, as far as I can remember.
Re-examined. Stone was with me when I arrested Walsh—after following Mrs. Chatten into his room I asked her to leave the room, and I shut the door and only Stone and I and the prisoner were there.
WILLIAM RICHARDSON (Inspector D) I was at the station when Loker brought in Walsh—Walsh when charged made this statement, which I took down, "I am entirely innocent, and can prove where I was on Christmas night"—while he was being searched he said, "I was indoors from 3 till 8 p.m., when I came out with some friends; we had some beer at the beerhouse, and took a bottle of beer and a shillingsworth of cigars home. We went in about ten. Afterwards I went to Baker Street station, and saw my friends off by train."
Cross-examined. The statement was made in Loker's presence—I wrote it down immediately after in the office, not in his presence—I did not show it to Loker—Walsh said, "We went in about ten," not "About ten minutes afterwards"—I understood that he went to Baker Street after ten—I was present in the Police-court on the day of the hearing before the Magistrate—I heard Bradock say that the other man was not with him, or words to that effect—he did not suggest who the other man was.
old lady showed us in; she stood at the door, which was open—I heard the prisoner make a statement to Loker; I took it down when I got to the station—when told that he would be taken into custody on suspicion of being concerned with a man in custody he said, "I went out about eight o'clock. I am entirely innocent. I can prove where I was on Christmas night"—while being searched he said, "I was indoors from three o'clock till eight o'clock that night; then I came out with some friends. We had some beer at a public-house, and took a bottle of beer and one shillingsworth of cigars home. We went home about ten. Afterwards I went to Baker Street station, and saw some friends off."
Cross-examined. I believe Loker told him he was going to arrest him on suspicion; I did not see Loker write his note—Walsh told me he went out about eight, but he did not say how long he was out after eight; he said he came home about ten.
Re-examined. He said he went out at eight and came back at ten—I made my note independently of Loker; I did not know I was going to be called, but I happened to be here on another case—I should say it was eight to ten minutes walk from Dorset Square to Boston Street.
(Witnesses for the Defence.)
HARRIET CHATTEN . I live at 25, Edward Street, Dorset Square, which is let out in tenements—I am known as the deputy, and collect the rents—I and my son occupy the ground floor—Walsh has lived there for about six months, I think—on Christmas day Walsh went out in the morning and returned between 3 and 4 p.m., and during the evening he sat and played at dominoes with my son and grandson; he did not leave the house between four and nearly eleven—Mr. and Mrs. Ray and Mr. and Mrs. Barnes were there, and children, it was a family circle—the four men played at dominoes.
Cross-examined. I collect the rents every week—the men played dominoes part of the time, from three till ten, and the other part they were singing and talking—Walsh and the other three men went out at ten minutes to eleven, just before the houses closed, and brought in some cigars—Walsh wanted to go to see some people off at the station, but I took his hat away, and would not let him go, as I thought he had had enough to drink—I can swear Walsh never left our house from three to eleven—my attention was first directed back to Christmas night when the detectives came and took Walsh out of bed—I showed the detectives in, and left them with Walsh.
By the COURT. While playing dominoes they were drinking beer and smoking—I fetched the first beer about eight; Walsh, Barnes and my son each gave me sixpence—Walsh came in between three and four; some of the others did not come till later, my son's wife and children came at seven, to tea—if Walsh said he went out at eight he told a story—they played dominoes in two rooms communicating by folding doors—the folding doors were opened; they could not get out the back way because I had a little table against the door with refreshment on for the children—we were a largish party.
Christmas evening I was at home; Mr. and Mrs. Ray, Mr. and Mrs. Barnes, and Ray's children and Walsh, who lodges in the house, were there—I am a labourer and work at Audrey and Patterson's, 4, Marlborough Mews—Walsh came in on Christmas day about three p.m., and was there till eleven p.m.—in the early part of the evening Ray, Barnes, Walsh and myself were playing dominoes—I was with Walsh all the time from three till eleven.
Cross-examined. We started playing dominoes about seven o'clock—there were a good many of us there, and a good many children, in two rooms with folding doors between—there was not much beer there—we had cigars fetched from the public-house—about 10.45 we went out and fetched some in—my mother went in the evening for some beer—none of us men went out about eight—if Walsh said he did he would be telling an untruth—some of our friends went to Baker Street to go home—to the best of my recollection Walsh did not go to see them off, I think he wanted to do so—if he had gone he would not have gone at 11 or 11.30; as our friends did not go till 1.30 or 2; they did not five a quarter of a mile from Baker Street—they did not go to Baker Street to take the train, but that was their nearest way—Mr. and Mrs. Ray would go home by Baker Street, but they did not go home till next morning—Mr. and Mrs. Barnes walked home at 1.30 or 2—Ray, Barnes, Walsh and myself fetched the beer and cigars at 11—I have worked on and off for Audrey and Patterson's for ten years, and I have worked for Hobbs in the Hampstead Road.
THOMAS RAY . I live at 23, Cumberland Market, and am a hot-water fitter—I have worked for Hobbs and Sons, 23, Roberts Mews, Hampstead Road, for eighteen years—on Christmas evening between seven and eight I got to Mrs. Chatten's—my wife was there before me—I left the following morning—I knew Walsh as a lodger at my mother's—he was there when I went in between seven and eight, in his shirt sleeves; he did not go out again before 10.50, when we went out to gat some beer and a shilling's worth of cigars—Barnes went too—Walsh, me, my son-in-law, and brother went too—we played dominoes from about 8.30 to 10.45 or 10.50.
Cross-examined. The last witness is my step-brother—it was a good large party, held in two rooms with folding doors between—my mother and my little girl fetched beer at the first onset about eight o'clock—I went in the next room after that and lay down, because I found I had more than was good for my head—I believe my son and daughter went away a few minutes before eleven, to Baker Street.
JESSIE RAY . I am wife of the last witness—on Christmas evening I got to Mrs. Chatten's at seven o'clock, and stayed there all night with my children—Walsh was there then; Henry Chatten and Barnes, my husband, came afterwards—they played at dominoes till about ten—I saw Walsh when I went in, and he never left the house till eleven, when he went to get some beer with the others.
Cross-examined. There were a good many of us there—beer and cigars were brought in—I stayed till next day—Mr. and Mrs. Barnes went about 1.45—no one went from Baker Street at eleven; my daughter did not go home till 1.45—no one left to see them off at eleven.
By the COURT. Everybody had had a good deal to drink; Walsh
was the worse for drink too, and Mrs. Chatten would not let him go out; he wanted to go and see them home, but she took his hat away.
GEORGE BARNES . I live at 7, Little Marylebone Street, and am a wool warehouseman—I have been there about five weeks—I have lived in that district for five years—I have been in the employ of Mr. Bishop, New Bond Street for six years—I got to Mrs. Chatten's house at 7.55 on Christmas evening—Mrs. Chatten, Mr. and Mrs. Ray, and Mr. and Mrs. Barnes and four children and Walsh were there when I went in—I saw Walsh the whole of the evening till 10.50, when we went to a beer-shop to buy some beer and cigars—from 8 till 11 we four men were playing dominoes; Walsh was ray partner.
Cross-examined. No one left for Baker Street at 11.30—Walsh did not go to Baker Street to see anybody off—I was surprised to hear he said that, and that he went out at eight to get some beer—it was a merry evening, but not as regards drink—I believe we only drank a gallon of 4d. ale from eight to eleven; it was only a sociable evening—it would be inaccurate to say a lot of drinking was going on—my father-in-law retired to bed, but not from the effects of drink; I think, perhaps, he cannot stand much drink—Walsh did not have too much beer while I was there; he may have had too much at dinner—towards the latter part of the evening he seemed to be a bit groggy.
ELEANOR BARNES . I am the wife of George Barnes—on Christmas evening I got to Mrs. Chatten's about 7.55 with my husband and two children, and remained till about 1.45 next morning—Walsh was there till a few minutes before eleven—he was playing dominoes with my uncle, father, and husband.
Cross-examined. A few minutes before eleven he went out to get some beer, because my grandmother was laying supper, and she said, "If you want some beer you had better go and fetch it"—he did not go to see us off, he wanted to go, but grandmother did not want him to—I had many children to look after—I did not go out of the room, that is why I knew he was there—the clock struck 7.45, as I passed Madame Tussaud's on my way to Mrs. Chatten.
WALSH— NOT GUILTY .
BRADOCK then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of felony in January, 1881, at Hertford, in the name of Patterson. He had been sentenced to terms of ten, ten and three years' penal servitude.
There was another indictment against the prisoner for burglary.— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
NEW COURT.—Monday, January 13th, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
104. JOSEPH HATTON (62) PLEADED GUILTY to feloniously uttering counterfeit coin. (Sentences of Five Years', Eight Years' Penal Servitude, and other terms were proved against him.)— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
105. JAMES MARTIN (20) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to breaking and entering the counting-house of the Midland Railway Company, and stealing four-parcels of boots, a parcel of cigars, and 11s. 51/2d., their property; also to breaking and entering the warehouse of William Henry Toovey, with intent to steal; also the warehouse of William Henry Horniman; also the dwelling-house of William Robins, and stealing a piece of leather; also to breaking and entering the counting-house of the Midland Railway Company, and stealing cigars, boots, and 51/2d., their property.— Ten Months' Hard Labour.
106. GEORGE KING (28) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to stealing, while employed in the Post Office, a post letter containing two orders for the payment of money; also another post letter containing two orders for the payment of money.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
108. GEORGE HOBBS (48) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to forging and uttering a receipt for money; also to forging and uttering a notice of withdrawal of money from the Post Office Savings Bank, having been convicted at Brighton on April 6th, 1891.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
109. WILLIAM HARRIS [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to stealing a post letter containing an order for 10s. the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General; also to feloniously forging and uttering a receipt for 10s., with intent to defraud. (It was stated that the prisoner had negotiated 350 Post Office orders stolen during the last two years by a man employed at the General Post Office)— Judgment Respited. And
GODSELL and THOMAS SHEPPARD PLEADED GUILTY **
GODSELL received a good character, and the officer stated that he was easily led by Sheppard, who was his brother— Discharged on Recognizances.
THOMAS, SHEPPARD (who had still fourteen months to serve of his previous sentence)— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. PARTRIDGE offered no evidence against
EMILY SHEPPARD— NOT GUILTY .
MR. RICHARDS Prosecuted, and the evidence was interpreted to the prisoner.
HERMAN EBERLE . I live at 71, Huntley Street, Tottenham Court Road—I was a depositor in the Post Office Savings Bank—this (produced) is my bank book—I put it in my coat-pocket on Sunday, December 8th, and left my coat there—the prisoner was in the room with me; we occupied the same bedroom—I missed my coat, book and portmanteau on the Monday night—I did not give anybody authority to sign my name, and I never got the money—I saw the prisoner on the Monday night—he said, "Why are you so sorry?"—I told him I had lost my things—I do not remember what he said.
ANNA HANDKE . I am the wife of Ernest Handke, of 71, Huntley Street—the prisoner and Eberle lived there and occupied the same room—on Monday December 9th, soon after 9 a.m., I saw Eberle's bank book in the room and I put it in the cupboard—when I went in again about
two o'clock it was gone and the things in the room were disturbed—I spoke to the prisoner and told him no one could come in without a key, and that he had taken the bank book and portmanteau—he said, "I did not do it, my friend came in to wash his hands and clean his boots"—my husband sent him away from the house—I saw no other man with him—the boot brushes are kept in the cupboard—the prisoner gave me this photograph and I gave it to the officer—the prisoner paid the rent.
Cross-examined. What you said was, "Perhaps it was my friend"—you did not give me a Christian name and address.
Re-examined The prosecutor and prisoner were the only men who had keys; anybody else would, have to knock at the door and I should open it—their bedroom was not locked; I did not see the prisoner all that day.
EMILY TALBOT ROTHERY . I am a clerk in Shaftesbury Avenue Post—Office on December 9th this notice of withdrawal was brought; I do not remember who by—I sent this telegram in consequence to the General Post Office, directing that it shall be paid at another office.
CHARLES STEPHENSON . I am senior clerk at the Post Office, 10, Oxford Street—on December 9th I received this telegram from the chief office and made out this form of receipt—about an hour or an hour and a-half afterwards, between two and three o'clock, the prisoner came up to the counter and said, "My money"—I said, "What name?"—he said, "Herman Eberle" and handed me the deposit book—I handed him the receipt, he signed it and handed it back to me—I asked if he would have it in gold or notes, he said he preferred gold, and I paid him in gold.
Cross-examined. I was shown eight or ten photographs and immediately picked out yours—I have no doubt you are the man.
Re-examined. I picked him out from half-a-dozen other men; that was not the result of seeing the photograph.
GEORGE EVERETT . I am senior clerk in the Savings Bank Department—I produce the books and documents—I saw the prisoner at the West Strand Post Office on Christmas Day, and asked him if he wished to give any explanation of having withdrawn £10 from Herman Eberle's account—he said, "No"—I gave him in custody, and Mr. Stephenson picked him out from six other men.
MATHEW FOWLER . I am a constable employed by the Post-office—on Christmas afternoon I saw the prisoner in Tottenham Court Road and took him to the West Strand Post Office, and from there to King Street—he said, "I know nothing about it; I have never been in a post office so long as I have been in London—I went to where he lived but found no portmanteau or coat.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I wish to know whether the gentleman who says he identifies me had been shown my photograph, because it is an untruth that I am the man; it is a puzzle to me how he said so, because I am not the man. I also wish the witnesses whose names I gave last week to be called.
The prisoner called
LILY SMITH . I am a general servant, and live at 86, Upper Charlotte Street, Portland Place—on December 9th I was in service at a coffee shop, and you were there between two and four o'clock in the afternoon.
Cross-examined. I do not know what day of the week December 9th was.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he was at the coffee shop between two and four p.m., that he had to borrow a shitting of his landlord, and had to pledge his watch three days after the robbery.
E. T. ROTHERY (Re-examined). I wrote out this paper (produced), the particulars being got from him—I had no difficulty in making him understand English.
GUILTY .— Eight Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, January 14th, 1896.
Before Mr. Recorder.
113. HERBERT KRAHN (32), HENRY CRANE , ERNEST CRANE (38), and JAMES HOOK (23), were indicted for stealing from the person of Winifred Gordon, £1,700, ten certificates of shares in he Pacific Railway, rings, earrings, and other goods, her property.
MESSRS. KEMP, Q.C., SALTER, and SOPER, Prosecuted; MESSRS. COCK Q.C., CHARLES MATHEWS, PURCRLL, HUTTON, and RANDOLPH, Defended.
After the evidence of the Prosecutrix and several witnesses, MR. KEMP stated that as he was unable to establish that the property alleged to have been stolen was the actual property of the Prosecutrix, he would not proceed with the case. The JURY therefore found the Prisoners
NOT GUILTY .
PLEADED GUILTY . No evidence being offered against Hook, he was acquitted, and judgment upon the other defendants was respited to the next Session.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, January 14th, 1896,.
Before Mr: Recorder.
116. CHARLES ERNEST WALLACE (25) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to four indictments for forging and uttering orders for the payment of £71 18s., £17 10s., £225 12s. 8d., and £350, with intent to defraud, having been convicted of forgery at this Court on July 22nd, 1895, when he was discharged on recognizances to come up for judgment when called upon.— Nine Months' Hard Labour on the previous conviction , and Five Years' Penal Servitude on the present indictment, to run concurrently.
117. WALTER STONE (23) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to breaking and entering the shop of James Cape Scudamore, and stealing chocolate and twenty-three brass tokens, his property.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
119. JAMES FENTON WHELAN (25) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to four indictments for forging and uttering receipts for £3 13s. 6d. £2 5s. 6d., 1s. 8d., and 16s., of Charles William Crawley and others, his masters; also to forging and uttering the endorsement to an order for £3 13s. 6d.; also to stealing £2 5s. 6d., the money of Nalder Brother and Co., his employers. MR. LAMBERT, who appeared for the prisoner, stated that he was anxious to reimburse the prosecutors.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
120. WILLIAM AYLING (33) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to stealing two blank cheques of the Holborn Restaurant Company; also to forging and uttering an order for £7, with intent to defraud.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
121. THOMAS CORBETT (18), and CHARLES PERKINS (18) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to burglary in the dwelling-house of Leonard William Compton, with intent to steal, Corbett having been before convicted on July 13th, 1895.— Three Months' Hard Labour each.
122. GEORGE JACKSON (28), [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] † to breaking and entering the warehouse of Richard Mills and stealing twenty-four turkeys and thirty-six fowls, his property.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
123. ALFRED HERBERT THAYER (28) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to stealing £3 2s. 9d., £4 12s. 6d., and £3 7s. 6d. of the Commercial Union Assurance Company, his masters; also to three indictments, forging and uttering a receipt for money with intent to defraud.— Eighteen Month's Hard Labour.
124. ALFRED JONES (23) and EDWARD JONES (20) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to unlawfully obtaining £1 5s., £1., by false pretences; also to forging and uttering a request for the payment of £1 5s.; also a request for money with intent to defraud.— Six Months' Hard Labour each.
125. SARAH GUMMING** (45) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to burglary in the dwelling-house of John Titmarsh, and stealing two clocks and other articles, having been convicted at Clerkenwell on April 1st, 1895.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
126. JOHN DAY (53) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to embezzling £250 of the British Bank of South America, his masters; also to stealing an order for £400 of his said masters; also to two indictments for forging and uttering receipts for £400 and £250; also to making false entries in the books of the said bank.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, January 15th, 1896.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
MR. CHARLES MATHEWS , for the Prosecution, called attention to the prisoner's mental condition, and before his plea was taken proposed to call medical evidence on that subject. MR. JUSTICE HAWKINS was of opinion that the plea should first be taken, it was right to the prisoner that that course should be taken, and right that the JURY should have the opportunity of observing his manner and demeanour. He appeared to be deaf, and upon the gaoler informing him the nature of the indictment, he replied,
NOT GUILTY , and after a pause muttered: "The inspector told me I had killed the boy in the stable." MR. JUSTICE HAWKINS then directed that the medical evidence
should be given. Mr. George Edward Walker, Surgeon of Her Majesty's Prison, Holloway, and Dr. George Henry Savage, of Henrietta Street, Cavendish Square, having severally examined the prisoner, stated that he was congenitally imbecile, and not in a fit condition to plead, or to understand the nature and quality of the act charged, or the proceedings that were then taking place, the JURY found the prisoner to be insane, and not fit to take his trial.— Ordered to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, January 15th, 1896
Before Mr. Recorder
(For Cases tried in this Court this day, see Essex and Kent Cases.)
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday and Thursday, January 15th and 16th, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
He PLEADED GUILTY to the burglary, but
NOT GUILTY to the previous conviction.
WILLIAM SMITH (452 H). I produce a certificate of the conviction of George Chattaway at the Thames Police-court on 6th April for stealing oranges at St. Catherine's Docks—he was in my custody, and I was present at his conviction—the prisoner is the man—he was fined 20s. or seven days.
JOHN NEWMAN (Police Inspector). I took charge of the prisoner on April 4th at the Thames Police-court. I am sure he is the same man—on the night he was brought in for the burglary he recognised me, and said, smiling, "This is not for oranges."
GUILTY.— Six Weeks' Hard Labour.
MR. RICHARDS Prosecuted.
WILLIAM MURRAY . I am a travelling clerk in the General Post Office, and make inquiries about dead letters and letters to be re-directed to persons who have left the neighbourhood—in consequence of inquiries, I made up a test letter containing postal orders for 1s., 3s., and 4s.; they were blank, but "L. Lord" has been inserted—I placed them in a cover addressed Mr. Charles West, 320, Fulham Road, that was his correct address, but he had removed and it would require re-direction—I posted the letter at 3.40 p.m., at the S.W. district office—I gave instructions to Mr. Brookman, one of the overseers at West Brompton—on December 4th, about 6.30 p.m., I saw the prisoner at the General Post Office—I had
received a communication from Cartwright—I said, "I have been making inquiries about the loss of letters at West Brompton," and described the making up and posting them, and told him it was placed among letters which he had been seen to examine, after it was re-directed at West Brompton office, and said, "It was again placed on the table this morning with other letters; it was taken by the old postman, and brought back to be re-directed, and then sent on by post, you were the only person in the office at the time'—he said "I know nothing about it"—I produced the two postal orders for 4s. and 3s., arid said, "You were followed from your house this morning into the Post Office where you received the cash, and as I identify these orders, what have you got to say about it?"—he said, "It is all a mistake. I don't know anything about it"—I asked if the writing was his, he said "No"—I confronted him with Cartwright, and said, "This man followed you from your house this morning, he has been watching you three or four days by my instructions"—he said, "I shall be able to prove where I was at the time"—I told him I was of opinion that the writing was his—I identify the postal orders because I had recorded the numbers.
FREDERICK THOMAS BROOKMAN . I am overseer at West Brompton Post Office; the prisoner was employed there as an extra postman—I had instructions about a letter to Mr. Webb from Mr. Murray—it arrived at 4 o'clock—I handed it to the old postman—I did not re-direct it.
EDWARD FITZGERALD . I am head postman at Brompton sorting office—on December 3rd I received a letter from Mr. Webb; a postman named Hartley re-directed it—about a quarter of an hour afterwards I saw it on the sorting table—I kept observation on it—about 10 p.m. the prisoner came in with his bag and lamp and placed them on the seat which he would occupy, he looked at the letter but did not take it—next morning at 9.15 there was only me and the prisoner in the office; I left at 9.30 for three minutes and when I returned the prisoner had gone and the letter also.
Cross-examined. You did not go out at the back and leave me in the office, you were there when I left—you came back in five minutes.
Re-examined. He had nothing to do with the letters on the table.
FREDERICK CHARLES CARTWRIGHT . I am an assistant in the confidence department General Post Office—I had the prisoner under observation from November 30th to December 4th, when I saw him go home to 96, Archell Road, West Kensington, about 11.30, in uniform: with a lady and child—I next saw him about 4.15 in his private clothes—he went to Fulham Cross Post-office, alone, and presented four postal orders and some stamps to the postmaster for payment—I was right behind him at the corner—the orders were signed, and were for 10s., 4s., 3s. and 1s.—the post-master refused to cash the shilling order owing to some irregularity, but he cashed the other three, and gave him 6d., 4d., and 1 1/2 d. for the stamps—he got 17s. 111/2d.—that occupied five minutes—I motioned to the post-master, who did not know me, to take notice of the prisoner—the prisoner left, and I took the particulars of the orders on this paper—my name is on the back of two of the orders, and they are initialled 12.30 by the post-master—I had registered the time by the office clock—it was 12.15 when he left, by my watch—I do not know whether that was the same time as the
clock at the post-office—I went to the G.P.O., and gave Mr. Murray information—I did not know about the irregularity in the shilling order, I did not even know that they were test orders.
ALBERT WALES . I am post-master at Fulham Cross—on 4th December, about 12.30, the prisoner came in and Cartwright followed him—he presented orders for 10s., 4s., 3s. and 1s.—I did not pay the shilling order because it was not properly signed—I paid him 17s. 11 1/2 d.—the prisoner is the man.
Cross-examined. I had never seen you before—you were in the shop about two minutes, you were not in uniform—there was nothing in your dress to attract my attention; I looked at your face and conversed with you.
JAMES JOHNSON (236 A). I am on special duty at the G.P.O.—on 4th December I brought the prisoner from Brompton Post-office to the G.P.O. and Mr. Murray gave him in custody—I found 15s. 101/2d. in his right waistcoat pocket—he was charged, but made no reply.
Prisoner's Defence. I was not taken at the time; I was left for five or six hours, and than taken to the General Post Office and asked what I knew of it; I said, "Nothing." I have been five weeks in prison, and am sixty-one years of age.
GUILTY .— Ten Months' Hard Labour.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
WILLIAM WILLIAMSON . I am a sergeant of the Criminal Investigation Department—on January 6th, about noon, I was with Mott at the corner of Cockspur Street, and saw the prisoner examining something which he put into his pocket and threw this tissue paper (produced) into the road; there was an impression of coin on it—we took him, and I said, "I suspect you of having counterfeit money"—he said, "I have nothing"—I put my hand in his pocket and found 19s.—I said, "This is all you have?"—he said, "Yes, there ought to be 19s."—I said, "Where did you get it?"—he said, "I cannot tell you; if I did they would kill me."
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to Her Majesty's Mint—these nineteen shillings are all counterfeit, and from two or three different moulds—they are generally wrapped in tissue paper and taken out one by one as required—they are very well made, and are mostly cast from a good coin in a worn condition.
Prisoner's defence. I had no thought of uttering the coin; they were given to me by a man, and I have no knowledge of him.
—He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at this Court on July 27th, 1892, of feloniously having counterfeit coin in his possession and three other similar convictions were proved against him.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. SHERWOOD for the Prosecution offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
They PLEADED GUILTY to a common assault. — Judgment respited.
JOHN LUDWIG JUDKY . I am a stationer, of 89, High Road, Kilburn—on November 30th the prisoner came and asked me to cash this cheque for £3 4s. 6d.; I did so and asked his address, and wrote it on the back of the cheque, "George Moore, 56, Percy Road"—I did not present it for payment in consequence of a letter I received—I do not know the prisoner's writing—I gave the letter to Sergeant Clark—I afterwards received two more letters bearing the same postmark—I did not receive the money for the cheque.
ARTHUR CLARK (Police-Sergeant X). On December 3rd Mr. Judky gave me this cheque—I presented it at the London and South Western. Bank, and received it back marked "No account"—on December 8th I arrested the prisoner, he was charged, and made no reply.
Cross-examined by MR. BEARD. I have known him four or five years, and know nothing against him; he was in the employ of Cooper Bros., oilmen, eleven years.
OLIVER R. OSBORNE JONES . I am a cashier at the London and South Western Bank, Harrow Road—this cheque was taken from a book issued to Mr. Benjamin Pearce, a customer—we have no record of any account of R. Rowland and Co.—I do not know the writing of the signature.
BENJAMIN PEARCE . I am a leather-seller, of 305, Harrow Road, and have known the prisoner; he came to me on November 17th, and said that he had been recently married, and asked if I would cash a cheque for £3 7s. for him—I said, "I have not sufficient, why not go to your father-in-law?"—he said that he had been there, and had been referred to me—I said that if he would call later on if he had not succeeded, I would do it—he returned about eight o'clock, and I asked him to let me see the cheque—it was on a branch of the bank at Kilburn, payable to George Moore, who had endorsed it—I forget the drawer's name—I gave him £2, placed it in the till—and some time afterwards left the shop for about two minutes—I did not leave him there—I have never seen the cheque since—he gave his address at Essex House, and I called there on Sunday morning to get him to stop it, and gave his wife the balance—he called on me on the 29th, and said that he could not obtain another cheque as the drawer was out of town and his cheque-book was locked up, but if I would give him one of my blank cheques the manager would return it to me; I foolishly did so and this is it—he did not say that he was going to sign his name to it and deceive another tradesman—I wrote to him the following Wednesday for the name and address of the drawer, and he called and gave it me, T. H. Parker, at an hotel in Birmingham—I know the prisoner's writing and should recognise the signature to the cheque—I had a postcard from him—this is his signature to this letter—"Dear Sir,—By some unforeseen error the cheque you cashed for me on Saturday, the drawer having closed his account at this bank some years back, it should have been drawn upon the National Provincial Bank, having got his books mixed up. They are sending you a cheque. On,
receipt of same, please return the one you have to Roland, Wood Street, City.—Geo. Moore." Another letter was, "Dear Sir,—I am sorry you have not received the cheque. If I cannot get back from Croydon this morning, I will call and bring it with me.—George Moore." Another, "Dear Sir,—We have heard from Mr. Roland; I will come tomorrow and give you a thorough explanation.—Geo. Moore."—I never got my money back.
Cross-examined. I made the prisoner's acquaintance six months back, before his marriage—he did not tell me that his employer had gone out of town, owing him £9 11s. 6d.
GUILTY — Judgment Respited.
FRANCIS PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. GEOGHEOAN Prosecuted.
MAX MYERS . In November last I kept the Lamb public-house, Whitfield Street, and wanted a barmaid—seeing an advertisement in the Morning Advertiser I went to the address and left my card with the manager, and on the same evening the prisoner Francis called on me and gave her name, Ada Cootes—she said that she was last in the employ, for six or eight months, of Mr. Barnett, a publican at Greenwich, who was now out of business, and left because the house changed hands, and referred to him at 63, Oswald Road, West Brompton—I went there next morning; the prisoner Brooks opened the door—I said, "Mr. Barnett?"—he said, "Yes," and showed me into a parlour—I told him I had come for the character of Ada Cootes—he said, "She has been with me six or eight months at Greenwich, she is honest and trustworthy, but wants looking after like most girls"—I engaged her, and she came into my service the same evening at six o'clock—she went out on the Sunday and did not return till the Tuesday, and I refused to take her back—during the seven or eight days she was in my service the takings fell off—copper is put into a wooden bowl for change, and it required to be replenished more than usual.
Cross-examined by Brooks. I saw you in Court and recognised you—you were not pointed out to me—I afterwards picked you out from seven or eight men—your chin was clean shaved—when you opened the door to me you had a moustache and whiskers—when Francis came back on the Tuesday she did not come for her boxes, but to ask me to let her stop; I said, "No"—a man came to carry her box away.
Re-examined. I recognise Brooks voice, in addition to his face.
ANNIE RUSSELL . I am a widow, and live at 63, St. Oswald's Road, West Brompton—at the end of 1894 Brooks, who I knew, came and asked if I would allow him to see the distiller in my sitting-room—he is stepfather to my servant, who, he said, intended to take a public-house—I consented, and on the same day I heard him let someone into the house, and after he had been there some time I heard the street door shut and did not see Brooks again.
Cross-examined by Brooks. I have lived there two years in March, and you have called there many times—you have a nephew named Barnett, or some such name—I have known you about three years, but by no other name than Brooks.
MINNIE LEACH . My husband is manager to Augustus Arthur Leach, of Pitfield Street, Hoxton—there is a music hall attached to it, known as the Theatre of Varieties—about October, 1895, Mr. Leach was in want of a barmaid, and on October 4th I saw this advertisement in the Morning Advertiser of a barmaid, age twenty-five, apply "L," 22, Leather Lane, Holborn—I wrote there, and between one and two, the same day the prisoner Francis called on me for the situation—she gave her name Lizzie Francis; I asked where she worked—she mentioned a house in Shepherd's Bush, which I do not remember—I said, "Shall I send there for a reference?"—she said, "No; the gentleman, who was there, has retired"—I asked who he was—she said, "Mr. Fowler, Halstead House, St. Ann's Road, Stamford Hill," in whose service she had been twelve months—I wrote to Mr. Fowler, and sent it by Henry Hampton—I kept a copy; this is it. (Inquiring the character of Miss Francis. I received this telegram in reply.
HENRY HAMPTON . I am a labourer, of Albert Bridge, Pitfield Street—on October 3rd, 1895, Mrs. Leach gave me a letter addressed to Mr. Fowler, of Halstead House—I went there, Mrs. Adams, the landlady, opened the door, and I gave in the letter and came away.
Cross-examined by Brooks. The letter was sealed—Mrs. Adams said, "Mr. Fowler is out, he will return shortly"—she did not tell me to wait—she did not say "You must send the letter to my husband"—I did not hear her say that she would tell him.
ADA ELIZA ADAMS . My husband is a case-maker of Halstead House, Stamford Hill—I have known Brooks since about February—letters were addressed there to him in the name of Brooks and in other names—on October 4th, a little after 5 o'clock, Hampton came with a letter addressed, "Mr. Fowler, Halstead House, Stamford Hill," and about an hour afterwards Brooks called and asked if there was a letter there—I gave it to him—my husband had opened it, thinking it was for Mr. Fowler, his tailor, and then returned it to me; I gave it to Brooks, who took it away—Francis came there one evening with Brooks—he introduced her as Miss Francis—she stayed not more than ten minutes—I knew Brooks through his knowing my mother, but I never saw him till last February.
Cross-examined. The letter was brought about six o'clock I think; my little boy opened the door, but letters are put in the box.
ELIZA CATLIN . I am the mother of the last witness, and live at 67, Warren Street, Hampstead Road—I have known Brooks over two years and took in letters for him as Barnard, or Barnett, or Fowler—Brooks used to call for them, and I gave them to him—he said that he was looking out for a berth and was advertising.
Cross-examined. Letters came in the name of Fowler; I will not swear it was not Trowler—seven or eight letters came, some in one name and some in another.
ELLEN MESSUM . I am a telegraph clerk, and am in charge of a baker's shop and post-office at St. Ann's Road, Stamford Hill—on October 4th about 7.15 Brooks handed me this telegram to the best of my belief—I do not remember having seen him before—I believe I recognize his voice—he had a hat or cap on—I next saw him at the Police-court, and I identified him when he put his cap on.
Cross-examined. The message was for Mr. Leach—on November 20th I saw you at the back of the Court, but did not recognize you; your hat was not on then.
MINNIE LEACH (Continued.) This is the draft of the letter I sent, (Requesting a line by the bearer as to the character of Miss Francis as a barmaid). I received this telegram the same evening: "Respecting Miss Francis, reference satisfactory. Eight months. Fowler, St. Ann's Road, Stamford Hill"—in consequence of that I wrote to Miss Francis and engaged her, and she came next day, October 5th, and continued till October 9th, between which dates detectives were communicated with and marked money was passed over the bar—she was arrested, brought to the Police-court and confessed her crime at the North London Sessions and got twelve months' sentence—she passed the money to a woman named Brown, who pleaded guilty at the same time—it was in consequence of this telegram that I engaged her.
AUGUSTUS LEOPOLD LKACH . I keep the White Horse and the Theatre of Varieties—my son and daughter are in my service—before Francis came I never saw Brooks in my house, but I saw him there to the best of my belief the very night she came—she was arrested on October 9th—I saw Brooks there on Saturday 5th, Sunday 6th, and on October 9th to the best of my belief, but he left my house as soon as she was arrested.
JOSEPH MCMULLAND (69 G). I have kept observation on the White Horse public-house with Detective Mellers, and on October 9th, about 2.15, I saw Brooks come into the bar—Francis served him—I did not see what coin he put down, or what change she gave him—I was in private clothes—about ten minutes afterwards I arrested Brown, and Mellers, who was in the next compartment, arrested Francis—Brooks was coming in, but seeing me holding Brown, he ran off.
Cross-examined. I took Brown at 2.15, you were half a yard from us, facing me—you turned your back to me when you called for drink—you paid for the drink and stopped three or four minutes.
FREDERICK MELLERS . On October 9th Mulland and I were keeping observation on the Theatre of Varieties—Brooks came in, spoke to Francis, and had some drink—Brown was then arrested—I held Francis, and Brooks coming in and seeing me holding her, walked away.
Cross-examined. I was behind the bar—you were in the house about five minutes.
ALFRED NICHOLLS (Detective Serjeant G). On November 19th I saw Brooks at King's Cross police-station, he had been arrested by another serjeant—I told him I had a warrant for his arrest for receiving marked money from Lizzie Francis, a barmaid—he said, "I don't know anything about it; I don't know Lizzie Francis"—the warrant was for conspiracy—I charged Francis and Brooks with conspiring to obtain a situation for Francis; neither of them said anything—I have searched the registers of Greenwich, and Shepherd's Bush, and cannot find Brooks, Barnard, or Barnett holding a public-house—I took possession of some property of his, and at the Police-court he applied to the Magistrate that it might be returned to him—he gave me this receipt for it, which I have compared with this telegram, and, in my judgment, they were written by the same
person—he wrote all this, "Received from Sergeant Nicholls, 17s., an eye-glass, and keys, taken from me on my arrest.—F. Brooks."
Cross-examined. I knew you as Fred Brooks, and I said, "Freddy, how long have you sold your house at South Tottenham?"—you did not say that you never had a house at South Tottenham—you never made use of my name—when Miss Messum came into the place at Worship Street, where the prisoners were all together for the purpose of identification, you had a cap on with the peak turned round to the back, and your coat-collar up, and a big muffler; you wanted to go into court like that, but I made you take the muffler off, and turn your collar down, and then she recognised you.
LIZZIE FRANCIS (the prisoner). I am now undergoing a sentence of twelve months for larceny from Mr. Leach—while undergoing that sentence I made this statement to Detective Nicholls, who wrote it down in my presence—all the statements in it are, I believe, correct—I have known Brooks six or seven years as Frederick Brooks—he knew me as Edith Francis—in November, 1894, I went into the service of Mr. Myers, of the White Lamb public-house, Whitfield Street—he wanted a reference, and I gave Mr. Brooks as a reference; I think I gave Brooks the name of Barnett; his real name is Brooks—I went under the name of Ada Cootes—I said I had been Mr. Barnett's barmaid at Greenwich for six or eight months, and gave his address at 63, St. Oswald's Road, West Brompton—I went into Mr. Myers' service, stopped there four or five days, and was then discharged—I had not been in the service of the prisoner for six or eight months—it was arranged between us some time before that he should give me a reference—he was to receive for doing it whatever I could afford to give him after going into the service—I never lived with him—I suppose the money I gave him was to come out of my wages, I did not say where it was to come from—he did not come to Mr. Myers while I was there—on October 4th I went to Mr. Leach, of the Varieties Theatre, Hoxton—I saw Mrs. Minnie Leach, and made certain statements to her before she engaged me as a barmaid—I told her I had been for twelve months in the service of Mr. Fowler, of Shepherd's Bush, and that he had left and gone into private life, and I gave his address as Halstead House, St. Ann's Road, Stamford Hill—that Mr. Fowler was Brooks—I had not been in his service as barmaid for twelve months—I gave him as a reference through my meeting another barmaid advertising for a situation—I did not see or write to the prisoner; I gave his name in consequence of what the other barmaid said to me; I knew from her he was passing under the name of Fowler—I saw Brooks once—I entered Leach's service on Saturday night, October 5th, 1895—while I was serving there on the Saturday night Brooks came into the bar; he came in twice, I think, between the 5th and the 9th, when I was taken into custody—I did not give him anything; I don't know what he came for—I did not expect him to come—I think I gave him a drink when he came; I cannot remember if I gave him anything else—I might have given him a few coppers—I did give him money belonging to my master out of the till on each occasion he came—I was afraid of Brooks and acted under fear—I gave him a very small sum, I cannot remember how much—I had no money when I went there; I had been out of a situation for some time—when I was
at Myers the money I paid Brooks was to come out of my wages—when I was discharged, after a few days for absenting myself without leave, I saw the prisoner and gave him something, I think, for giving me a false character.
Cross-examined by Brook. I gave you money twice at Leach's, the first time on the Saturday night, the first night I was there—you used to give the character to Lizzie Church, not to me—I never knew you in the name of Fowler or Barnett, only by your going by that name—when you took other names, Barnett and Fowler, I knew you by them—on several occasions I saw you in the name of Fowler before I went to Leach—I only heard of your passing as Fowler in this case; I heard it from Church and other barmaids; I don't remember the dates.
Brooks, in his defence, stated that he gave no references to and received no money from Francis, and that he did not pass as Barnett or Fowler.
BROOKS**— GUILTY .
Sergeant Leach stated that the police regarded Brooks as a dangerous character, and a manufacturer of thieves.— Two Years' Imprisonment. The Prosecution recommended Francis to mercy .—Four Days' Imprisonment.
135. GEORGE DAY (63) and ARTHUR JAMES FORD (37) , Unlawfully obtaining by false pretences, with intent to defraud, from Norris Collins, a cheque for £60, and a piano from John Brinsmead and others, and other goods from other persons.
DAY PLEADED GUILTY; and FORD having stated, in the hearing of the JURY, that he was Guilty, they found him GUILTY .
MR. KERSHAW Prosecuted, and MR. LAYTON Defended HILL.
JAMES WOODWARD . I am a gun-maker, living at 40, St. Charles Square, Kensington—on the night of December 23rd I locked up the house; the bath-room window, which is at the back of the house on the first floor, was safe—the plate-basket was left safely in the dining-room—about 5.30 next morning I heard some noise, of which I took no notice; then I heard another noise, much more violent, and I got up, and found the bath-room window-latch had been broken—entrance had been effected through there, the window being reached from the stable yard by means of a ladder—I found the plate basket in the kitchen, empty—about £35 worth of plate was taken, and clothes, boots, a raw turkey, and two Christmas puddings—I identify these four spoons, two of them have my initial "W., and two have not.
Cross-examined by MR. LAYTON. They are ordinary spoons.
JAMES FLYNN . I live at 17, Southern Street, Paddington—the prisoner Flynn is my brother—on Christmas day I was in the Earl Percy—Flynn and Hudson were there—I heard Flynn ask Hudson for the loan of 2s., he said he had not 2s. to lend him—Hudson said "I have got something you can have the loan of for a day or two, which you might
get a couple of shillings on"—we all three left the Earl Percy, and Hudson left us for a short time—I stayed talking to my brother outside the Carnarvon public-house, till Hudson returned, and we then all three walked off together—while walking along, Hudson handed a small parcel, wrapped in paper, to my brother—I saw sticking out the tops of what I took to be spoons and forks.
Cross-examined by Hudson. I said at the Police-court that the parcel appeared to contain spoons.
Cross-examined by MR. LAYTON. I do not know Hill—I never saw him with my brother or Hudson.
EDWIN HOLTON . I live at 4, Hazelwood Crescent, Kensington—on Boxing Day I saw Flynn in the Graven public-house, Southern Street—after that I saw him outside, and he asked me if I could get a couple of shillings on some things he had got, and he showed me some spoons—he gave me these three spoons, which I pawned for 2s. 6d., giving Flynn 2s.
Cross-examined by Flynn. On the following Sunday we met, and you said you would have some money on the Saturday, and we would pay the money, and return the spoons to the man you had them from.
JAMES BROWN (Sergeant X.) At midnight on December 30th I arrested Flynn at 152, Warmington Road—I told him he would be charged with committing a burglary at 40, St. Charles Square on the night of 23rd—he said, "Burglary"—I said, "Yes; you gave a man named Holton three spoons to get money on last Monday morning, and they have been identified as being stolen"—he said, "Yes; I got them from a man in the Craven public-house"—I took him to the station—he gave me the name of Hudson—he was charged, and said, "I know nothing about it"—I arrested Hudson at Netting Hill Station at 12.30 a.m. on January 6th—I asked if his name was Thomas Hudson; he said, "Yes"—I said, "I have a man, Richard Flynn, in custody for committing a burglary at 40, St. Charles Square on the night of December 23rd," and I showed him these three spoons—I said, "Flynn has been found dealing with these, and when arrested he said, "You gave them to him"—he said, "It is false; I know nothing about it"—I said he would be charged with being concerned with Flynn in committing the burglary—he was charged, a list of the articles stolen was read to him, and he was told the value of the things was £15—he said, "£15 is it? that means five years each. He cannot get out of it. If I got ten years I would not round on any people. He thinks he is going to get out of it, but I will see he does not"—neither of the other prisoners were present—I read a statement of what Flynn had said when charged, and then I said in the Craven public-house he had given Flynn the spoons—he said, "The Craven, is it? I can prove different"—I said, "Yes, I think I have made a mistake; I don't think it was the Craven"—he then said, "I don't know nothing about it."
Cross-examined by Hudson. I found these keys at your lodgings, two are skeleton—I said nothing about a revolver, nor did I show it to you.
Re-examined. I wrote down the statement at the time.
Charles Square—he said, "I know nothing about it. She is trying to put me away"—I took him to the station.
Cross-examined by Hudson. I did not see Brown take a revolver out of a box at the station, or a bunch of skeleton keys.
GEORGE WHEATLEY (Sergeant X.) On 27th I searched Hill, and found this silver spoon in his back trousers' pocket—I asked him if he could account for its possession—he said, "I bought it to-day for 15d. outside Debenham and Storr's, in Covent Garden"—he was afterwards charged with burglary at 40, St. Charles Square, I was not present—I arrested him on another charge.
Cross-examined by MR. LAYTON. There are scores of spoons like this—I daresay a pawnbroker would not advance more than 15d. for it. (The COMMON SERJEANT considered that there was not sufficient evidence to go to the Jury as to Hill.)
HILL— NOT GUILTY .
Flynn in his defence stated that he did not know the spoons were stolen. Hudson stated that he knew nothing about the spoons.
FLYNN and HUDSON— GUILTY of receiving.
FLYNN then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of felony in February, 1885, and HUDSON † to a conviction of felony in March, 1895. Sergeant Brown stated that he believed Flynn had been trying to get an honest living for the last twelve months; and that Hudson was the associate of convicted persons.
FLYNN— Six Months' Hard Labour.
HUDSON— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
MR. KERSHAW Prosecuted, and MR. LAYTON Defended.
REV. JAMES SINCLAIR MOORE . I am a clerk in Holy Orders residing at St. John's Vicarage, Oxford Road, Kilburn—on December 4th I went to Bath leaving my house in charge of Edith Slater, a nurse in our service—on the 5th I received information by telegram and came home—I found a panel had been cut out from my scullery door at the back of the house opening on to a back-yard—an arm could be put through the hole so made, and the key turned and the lower bolt pulled back—I missed £40 worth of property, silver salver and spoons, and plated goods, a bag, some money and a cheque—the salver was presented to me by the St. George's Church, Great Yarmouth, two years ago; it had my family crett, an inscription with my name, and the Yarmouth Arms—it has not been recovered—this silver-plated coffee pot, inkstand, paper-knife, and candle-sticks are my property.
GEORGE SMART . I am a watchmaker and jeweller, at 73, Bravington Road, Paddington—on Friday, 6th December, the prisoner brought and showed me a silver salver with a Moor's head, crest, an inscription, and the Great Yarmouth arms, and asked me to erase the inscription—I told him I would not have anything to do with it, and he took it away—he was a stranger to me—I gave information to the police.
Cross-examined. He said he had been recommended to come to me; I imagined he referred to Mr. Rogers, one of the pawnbrokers I worked for—I understood he had bought the salver at a sale.
JOHN WILLIAM SMELLIE . I am assistant to Hoare and Co., pawnbrokers, of 14, Cranbourne Street, Leicester Square—I produce this coffee-pot pledged to me 5th December in the name of John Williams, of 16, Conduit Street, for eight shillings—I do not identify the prisoner.
WILLIAM JAMES BENGER . I am manager to Jay, a pawnbroker, of 142, Oxford Street—I produce a plated inkstand and ink bottles pledged with me on 5th December for £1 in the name of William Harding, 16, Connaught Street—I believe the prisoner pledged them, but I am not quite certain.
Cross-examined. It was an ordinary transaction with no secrecy, and nothing suspicious about it.
ARTHUR HENRY WOOD . I am assistant to Mr. Needs, pawnbroker, of 14, Chapel Street, Edgware Road—this silver and ivory paper knife was pledged with me on 5th December for 5s. in the name of John Williams, of 21, Bell Street, by the prisoner.
BENJAMIN POLLING . I am assistant to George Attenborough and Sons, of Fleet Street—these silver-plated candlesticks were pawned with me on December 5th, in the name of John Williams, of 15, Connaught Street, for 10s.—I do not recognise the person pawning.
GEORGE WHEATLEY (Sergeant X). On December 27th I arrested the prisoner—I told him I should take him into custody for burglary in this house and stealing property—he said, "I don't know anything about it"—he was taken to the station, and placed with other persons and identified by Smart—he was taken to Notting Hill Station, where he said, "I wish to say that I received the property, but did not steal it; I saw a chance to earn a bit, and I did; I own I pawned the stuff, and I wish this to be stated to the Magistrate"—he had been told then of the articles; the property had not been found—when remanded he expressed a wish to see me to give me information where the property was pledged—the Magistrate let me see the prisoner, and he gave me such information that I recovered all the property, except the salver; the prisoner said he did not know where that was; he thought somewhere in the City Road, but he would have told me if he had known.
Cross-examined. The prisoner did not mention any price as paid by him for the salver—afterwards he mentioned the name of Fleming; he said, "I gave it back to a man named Fleming"—I have been trying to find that man and cannot—I do not know that the prisoner is a dealer—George Rogers, when Cross-examined in another case by the prisoner, said he had had several transactions with the prisoner, and knew him to be a dealer, and I think probably it is so.
GUILTY of receiving.
He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of obtaining goods by false pretences in January, 1893.
138. ROWLAND HILL was again indicted for feloniously receiving two silver teapots and other articles stolen from the dwelling-house of Johannis Hendrick Vanky and stolen a silver-mounted claret cup and other articles from the dwelling-house of Percy Hutton Barber, to which he
PLEADED GUILTY — Five Tears' Penal Servitude.
The COURT awarded £2 to George Rogers, a pawnbroker's assistant, who had greatly assisted the police.
OLD COURT.—Thursday and Friday, January 16th and 17th, 1896.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
The JURY in this case, being unable to agree, were discharged without returning any verdict, and the case was postponed till the next Session.
MR. FARRELLY Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
The prisoner, in hearing of the JURY, desired to withdraw his plea of Not Guilty and to plead Guilty.
The JURY Thereupon found him, GUILTY .
His father spoke to his good character, and stated that he had been led astray by reading trashy literature and tales of crime and horror. The prisoner expressed his regret, and the prosecutrix recommended him to mercy.
Discharged on his own recognizances to appear for judgment if called upon.
MR. JOSEPHS Prosecuted.
LOUISE CRESWICK MORRIS . I am the wife of Gordon Sutherland Morris, an Army officer, and live at 21, Courtfield Gardens, South Kensington—the prisoner had been in our service for about six weeks as kitchenmaid—my daughter, Gwendolin Sutherland Morris, is 31/2 years old—about 1.45 p.m. on December 2nd, I was sent for to the kitchen—the prisoner was there and another servant—Emma Longhurst, the cook, showed me, in the prisoner's presence, some mince—it smelt of ammonia—it was the prisoner's duty to take the child's food upstairs—the cook showed me her saucepans and cooking utensils; I noticed no smell about them—I asked the prisoner what she had done to the mince—she said, "Nothing"—I ran upstairs to see if a bottle of ammonia was in the bath-room; it was not—as I came out of the bath-room I met my nurse coming down with the baby's milk in a can—she asked me to taste it, I did so; it was very nasty, and I carried it down—I saw the prisoner in the kitchen, and asked her what she had put into the milk, and she said, "Nothing"—I implored her to come with me to the housekeeper's room; because all the servants were talking at once in the kitchen—she came with me—I said, "Do tell me what you put into the baby's milk"—she seemed to be frightened—I said, "Be quick," or something, and put my arm round her and implored her to tell me, because if the child died how responsible she would be; and then she said she did not know—I said, "Show me the bottle," and she said, "It is in the dustbin"—I said, "Come with me quickly to the dustbin and find it"—we went, to the dustbin, into which she went and took out a bottle with a label, "Poison," and an over-label, "Solution for cleaning gold lace"—it was a bottle I
had ordered to be made up for cleaning the gold embroidery on a fancy dress—a doctor was sent for—I rushed upstairs, and don't know what I did—the doctor gave the baby and me something; ether, I think—the police were communicated with.
EMMA LONGHURST . I am cook to Mrs. Morris—on 2nd December I cooked some mince for the baby's dinner, and gave it in a proper condition to the prisoner to take upstairs, about 1.45—it was brought back a little later by the housemaid, and then it smelt strongly of ammonia—I asked the prisoner what had happened to it—she said, "Nothing."
FLORENCE POWELL . I am nurse to the baby, Gwendolin Morris—on 2nd December I returned from a walk with her—I gave her some milk to drink, which I got out of a little room adjoining the nursery, where we always keep it—it was the prisoner's duty to take the milk upstairs—the baby tasted a little drop and said it was nasty, and spat it out—I tasted a little drop, and found it was nasty—I met the prisoner on the landing, and showed it to her and said, "I think the milk has gone sour"—she said, "Yes, it looks it; shall I take it downstairs and throw it away?—I said, "No, I will keep it, and show it to Mrs. Morris when she comes up"—she made no answer, but went off—a little while after the prisoner brought up the baby's dinner of mince and potatoes; it smelt strongly of ammonia—she put it on the table and went out of the room—I took it out to the housemaid who was on the landing, and she took it downstairs—I afterwards spoke to Mrs. Morris.
ELIZABETH KATE SMART . I am housemaid at 21, Courtfield Gardens—on December 2nd I was standing on the landing when the prisoner passed me with the baby's mince—it smelt strongly of ammonia—I asked her what it was—she said, "Perhaps it is in the milk"—there was some milk on a slab on the landing—the prisoner took the mince into the nursery and then brought the milk to me to smell—it did not smell at all—the prisoner went downstairs—I went into an adjoining room and was there two or three minutes when the nurse brought me the dinner to smell; it smelt of ammonia—she asked me to take it downstairs, and I took it down into the kitchen, and then fetched Mrs. Morris.
PHILIP PERCIVAL WYCKHAM . I am a registered medical practitioner—about 2.45 on December 2nd, I was called to 21, Courtfield Gardens, where Mrs. Morris showed me this bottle labelled "Poison"—the contents smelt of prussic acid—the bottle bears the seal I put on it in the policeman's presence—she also showed me a can of milk which smelt of prussic acid—I gave the child an antidote of ether—about a tea-spoonful of liquid was left in the bottle—I was shown a plate of minced meat which smelt very strongly of ammonia—I subsequently analysed the contents of the bottle, and found by three different tests evidence of prussic acid—I analysed the milk and found evidence of prussic acid in it—prussic acid is a poison—the contents of the bottle were a strong solution of potassic cyanide, which is used principally in photography; I was told that in this instance it was used for cleaning gold lace—there was no ammonia in the milk.
EDITH MARY JACKSON . I am a hospital nurse—before December 2nd I had been nursing Mr. Morris's mother, who was then dead—I was called down by Mrs. Morris—I saw the prisoner produce this bottle labelled "Poison" from the dustbin; she gave it to me—I noticed
written on it "A lotion for gold lace," and the label at the top—I asked the prisoner why she had done it—she said she did not like to take the baby's food upstairs—I asked her what she had done with the ammonia bottle; she said she had put it down the w.c.
WILLIAM HOWELL (156 F). About 2.45 on December 2nd I was called to 21, Courtfield Gardens—Mrs. Morris made a statement to me and gave me this blue bottle, a plate of mince which smelt strongly of ammonia, and a can containing milk—I handed those to Dr. Wyckham—I arrested the prisoner and told her that on the charge made by Mrs. Morris I should arrest her and take her to the station, where she would be charged with putting a kind of poison from this bottle into the food—she said, "I don't want my mother to know"—I handed the bottle to the doctor, who sealed it up in my presence—she made no reply when charged at the station.
GUILTY.—The JURY strongly recommended her to mercy on account of her youth. Two witnesses deposed to her previous good character.— Four Months' Hard Labour.
MR. NOBLE Prosecuted.
JANE REASON . I live at 44, Winchester Street, Paddington—on January 9th I returned home from work about 7.30—the prisoner, who is my husband, was at home, sober—we had a few words and then he struck and kicked me several times—next morning I got up to go to work, but found I could not stand to my work from the kicks he had given me, and I returned home between 10.30 and 10.45—the prisoner was sitting having his breakfast—I took the teapot off the hob and poured myself out a cup of tea; he slashed it in the fire, and said if I wanted tea I was either to work or go in the streets for it—he struck me across the left thigh with this knife; it only cut this apron, and did not go far; then he struck me in the chest with the knife and cut my belt; it bent the knife—I ran to go out of the door, and he tried to twist me over on the bed, and I put up my right foot and wrist to push him back, and the knife scratched my wrist—he said, "You b——cow, I mean doing for you now"—this is the belt, it is marked by the knife; the knife did not go through it, because the knife bent—I went and saw the policeman, and he took me to the doctor, who dressed my arm—I had not attacked my husband on the evening of the 9th in any way.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not start quarrelling with you and calling you names when I came home on January 9th—I was not the worse for drink—I did not go to a public-house at all that evening—I had to go out to escape your violence—I did not say I would do for you—I did not hit you in the ribs—I did not take up a chair against you—I did not take your knife from the plate and run round the table—it is not true that I had the knife between my legs, and that the accident happened as you were taking it away—I had not taken a knife in my hand that morning, for I went away from home without a cup of tea.
January 10th, and found a clean cut wound on the outside of the right wrist, two inches long, and penetrating through all the soft parts, exposing the bone and dividing the tendons of the ring and little finger—I stitched up the wound b——yt he Magistrate's request, at Marylebone Police-court. I examined her and found a bruise of recent origin on her left hip, about three inches long by one inch wide—I think the wound would have been caused by this knife—it would have required very considerable violence to cause it—I don't see, from the position of the wound, how it could have been caused by the prisoner trying to get the knife in a struggle, because it was on the outside of the wrist, and of such an extent—if it were accidental it would have been a mere notch, and not so long or deep—in my opinion it was deliberate—most likely the bruise I examined would have been caused by a kick.
JOHN GODFREY (83 X). About 11 a.m., on January 10th the prosecutrix came to me and made a statement, in consequence of which I arrested the prisoner, and told him I should take him into custody for stabbing his wife—he said, "I won't go to the station with you"—I said, "You will have to," and he came to the station—he said, "I did not do it"—when the charge was made at the police-station he said, "Oh, that will do."
The prisoner, in his defence, denied that he had used violence to his wife; and stated that the cut was caused accidentally when he was trying to take the knife from her.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BERNARD O'CONNOR Prosecuted, and MR. JOHN O'CONNOR Defended.
MR. BERNARD O'CONNOR stated that having read the depositions, he considered there was not sufficient evidence upon which he should ask the JURY to convict the prisoner. MR. JUSTICE HAWKINS thought that the person alleged to be injured should be called.
ALEXANDRINE FRASER . I am the prisoner's wife—I live at 52, Freegrove Road, Holloway—on December 10th I was coming out of my kitchen at one o'clock, to go downstairs, and I collided on the landing with my husband, who was coming down from the sitting-room, and was on the last step—before the collision I saw he had in his right band a tumbler—something came from the glass on to my face when we collided, and I felt my face burning and went off to the doctor, who attended to it, it was a little burnt—my husband and I were quite sober—I saw the glass was nearly half full of a dark liquid.
Cross-examined. We had been married ten years, and had always lived happily together; he was in India part of the time—we had no quarrel on December 10th—I heard him coming down, and I was going downstairs—I was nervous about him, he had been for many nights without sleep—the landing was 32 inches across at its widest part—there is a cupboard at the narrowest part—I was going with some speed when we collided—I did not see him throw anything at me—I afterwards saw marks on the side wall and cupboard—my husband had sunstroke and brain fever in India, and, in consequence, he sometimes suffers from
insomnia—he was a tea-planter in India, and had a knowledge of chemicals—he mixes all his own medicines in his room upstairs—he was coining down with this glass for water, I suppose—he was taking medicine at this time—he said nothing when we collided—I went out; I don't know where he went—he seemed dazed when he was coming downstairs—he was excited and dazed for want of sleep—he did not seem to understand he had done anything wrong, but I went out and had no opportunity of seeing—he has been usually kind to me—I made no accusation against my husband to the doctor—I was not at all afraid of my husband when I came back home—I found constables there when I got back—I did not send for them; the landlady did—I told her my face was burning when I went out; I did not tell her how it came about; I ran out—she was afraid something had happened—the constables asked me how it happened, and I told them—I made no accusation against my husband—I was in pain and excited at the time—I could not swear what I said at the time—I said nothing when I felt my face burning till I got to the door and spoke to the landlady—I did not tell her how it happened—I never had any serious pain before without calling out or saying something—I was on good terms with my husband afterwards—I asked him what it was, and after he was told about it he said it was sulphuric acid—he was coming down to mix it with other things and put water in—there was no water in the bedroom at the time—it was about one p.m.
There being no other evidence of how the acid came to be thrown upon the prosecutrix's face, the JURY returned a verdict of
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Thursday, January 16th, 1896.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. LATHAM Prosecuted.
JOHN NEALON . I am a tobacconist, of 113, City Road—on December 30th I locked up my premises at 11.30—a policeman called me at 3.30, and my goods were lying on the pavement—I picked them up, went indoors and in about half an hour I was called to the station, and found this tobacco and several holders and cases, which are my property, taken from my window—this box is not mine, but the tobacco in it is.
JOHN NEED (363 G). On December 31st I was on duty in the City Road, and saw two large plate-glass windows at No. 113 broken—I called up the owner, spoke to another constable; I got information from a scavenger, and went after the prisoners and overtook them in Great Carter Street—they ran away but I overtook Mitchell, and asked why he was running away—he said, "Nothing"—I searched him, and found this cigarette-holder and some loose tobacco—he said, "I broke the window; I do not want to be locked up all night."
ALEXANDER CLARK (252 G). On December 31st about 3.30 a.m. Need spoke to me; I had seen the prisoners about ten minutes before walking, towards Shoreditch from the City Road—we followed them and they ran away towards Shoreditch—I arrested Connell and asked what he was
running away for, he said, "Nothing"—I took him to Mitchell, he admitted that he broke the window, but said that Mitchell took the goods.
GUILTY .— Four Months' Hard Labour each.
MR. CLARKE Prosecuted, and MR. NOBLE Defended.
EDWARD HAINES . I am a painter, of 324, Lancaster Road, Kensington—on December 31st, about 7.30 p.m., I was in Labroke Grove, and on approaching a turning I saw five men in front of me, and as I slipped off the kerb the first two crossed their hands and pulled my head back with great force—I thought it was a joke, and said, "Why don't you leave off?"—the prisoner butted me with his head, I was thrown down, and the prisoner dived his hand into my pocket—I put out all my strength and they relaxed their grasp round my throat—the prisoner stammered, "Hold him tight, he is getting loose"—I thought I could recognise his voice among ten thousand—I pulled them round and pulled their faces towards a lamp—they let me go, and the prisoner took his hand out of my pocket—I have not the slightest doubt he is the man—I chased them—they turned into a back road and picked up some large pebble stones; I did the same—they let go at me with five stones but I fell back and threw a stone at them—I followed them down Chesterton Road and spoke to a policeman—I caught the prisoner at the corner of Apland Road and gave him in custody.
Cross-examined. Ladbroke Grove is not so well lighted as it might be; there was a lamp fifteen or twenty yards from me—two women were behind the men and they ran away—the men turned round three corners—I can recognise three of the other four, and have been out to look for them, but have not seen them yet—I caught the prisoner opposite a fish shop where the gas was alight.
Re-examined. I was practically in sight of the five men from the time I was assaulted till the prisoner was arrested—I do not suppose I was more than fifteen paces behind—they were sometimes in the dark between two lamps, but I caught sight of them again.
THOMAS PRATT (534 X). On December 31st I was on duty in Portobello Road between 7.30 and 7.45; five men passed me followed by the prosecutor, who said, "That is the man who had his hand in my pocket and took my purse. "I took the prisoner in custody—he said he knew nothing about it—I found 1s. on him and 3d. in bronze—the prosecutor said that the five men had garrotted him And robbed him—he was nearly exhausted, and not able to run after the other four—I have been out several nights to find the others—I know the prisoner well by sight; he occasionally works at a gas factory—he was walking when I arrested him—he said, "I was by myself at the time"
Re-examined. feel sure that the prisoner was one of the five men—I did not lose sight of them before the prosecutor made a complaint—I have no doubt he was with the five men when they first passed me—I heard him speak when the prosecutor took hold of him, and there was a peculiarity in his speech, a kind of stutter.
E. HAINFS (Re-examined). The prisoner stammered stammered when he said, Hold the fellow," and he stammered at the Police-court.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. FLEMING Prosecuted, and MR. KEITH FRITH Defended Pearce.
ANNIE SKIPPER . I am cook to Mr. W. Palmer, at 22, Cornwall Road—on December 24th I left the kitchen at twelve o'clock—I came down on Christmas morning about 7.30 and found the window partly open—I missed a knife, which I found in the garden.
SAMUEL WEST (Policeman X). On Christmas morning I was on duty in Leamington Road Villas, and saw two men moving about in the front garden of No. 1—they came out and closed the gate after them; they looked about, and the tallest one opened an umbrella, as it was raining—they crossed Cornwall Road into Ledbury road—they were the two prisoners—I knew Pearce by sight—there is a wall at the back between Ledbury Road Villas and 22, Cornwall Road—I followed them down several streets, and spoke to Chapman, a constable—they separated in Tadbury Road, Pearce went on—I took Powell, left him with Chapman, and caught Pearce—I said, "Where have you come from?"—he said, "From Portobello Road, I am a railway porter, and am going to Paddington to work"—I said, "You came out of the front garden of a house with a man who is behind"—he said "No"—I took hold of his arm, and noticed his blind left eye—he looked at me with his right eye, so I had a good view of his face—he had whiskers then—he whistled once very loud, and three times more faint, some one shouted "Oh!" as if in pain—I had a good look at his face and let him go—I gazed at him about two moments; the constable and the other man were fighting fiercely on the ground—Powell took a jemmy from his pocket, and was in the act of striking him when I seized him by the throat and the constable got up and said, "This man has thrown some burning fluid in my face"—we got the jemmy out of his pocket, and I told the constable to hit him with it if he was very violent—I took him to the station, and found a brace and bit, a screw-driver, chisel, gimlet, two screws, a wooden wedge, thirteen skeleton keys, a dark lantern, a box of silent matches, a leather strap around his waist with this adjusted to it, and two shillings—on the Saturday I saw Pearce brought in, and at once recognised him as the man I had let go—I said, "That is the man"—he had had his whiskers shaved off—I knew him by sight but not by name
Cross-examined. When I saw the men first they were between thirty and forty yards in front of me, but I had not seen their faces then—it was not moonlight but the lamps were lighted—I am sure no one else came up Talbot Road; I took particular notice—Pearce was twelve yards in front of Powell on the pavement in Talbot Road—I did not see through Powell—I was seven or eight yards behind and gradually gaining on Powell—had not seen either of their faces then—they were not walking exactly in a straight line—if Powell had got away at that moment, I should not have been able to identify him—I only had a short time to see Pearce.
Re-examined. Short as the time was; I noticed his blind eye—he looked at me with his right eye—I caught hold of his left hand, and he had to
turn his head to look at me—if another constable had been there I could have caught Powell.
JOHN CHAPMAN (Policeman T). Early on Christmas morning I was on duty in Cornwall Road, and saw West following two men—I went with him along Ledbury Road into Talbot Road, and saw two men, one went on in front—we arranged that I should see to the shortest man, and he to the tallest—I did not see their faces—I stopped the shorter man, and asked him where he came from, he said, "From Lancaster Road"—I asked what he had in his pocket, he said, "What has that to do with you?" and struck me a violent blow on my mouth, loosening two teeth and breaking two.—I flew at him; we struggled and fell together, he underneath; I pulled out my whistle and blew for assistance—I saw his hand raised with something in it, and felt a running sensation all over my face and right eye; I then saw a jemmy in his hand; another constable came up, and I said, "Hold him, mate"—I then got on to my feet—the man I saw in front of Powell was about the same height and build as Pearce.
GEORGE STONE (17d). On December 28th I watched Catherine Street from 4.15 to 5.15 a.m.—I went to 10A, where there is a large loft, and spoke to the proprietor who took me to the loft, where I saw Pearce standing—it was dark—I said, "You are the man they call Mug's Eye, you have not got your whiskers on now"—he said, "You have made a mistake, governor"—I omitted that at the Police-court—he said, "What station are you going to take me to; Carlton Terrace?" I said, "Yes"—on the way there he said, "I was with him, I suppose I shall have to suffer for breaking into the Eagle Tavern"—I said, "I did not know anything about the Eagle"—he said, "Well, I have done ten years for breaking in there and if I do all my time I shall get fifteen"—I took him to the station, and found these two screws on him, which I should say belong to a lock.
Cross-examined. I had never seen him before—he was perfectly sober, he had not been out of the place since 4.13, and the proprietor is a teetotaler—I thought I had better go in, as people were coming about—I had never seen Powell till he was put in the dock—he has not made a statement to me—I understand from a constable that there had been a burglary at the Eagle Tavern.
EDWARD GASTEN (Policeman). I was with Stone, and assisted to arrest Pearce—he said, "Are you going to take me to Carlton Terrace?" I said, "Yes"—Stone said that he should arrest him on suspicion of being with a man in custody—he said, "I was with him; I suppose I shall have to suffer for breaking into the Eagle Tavern; I know nothing about that; I own I have done ten years for breaking in there before, and I shall have fifteen years to do."
Pearce's statement before the Magistrate: I am innocent; it is entirely got up against me on account of my conviction.
Witnesses for the Defence.
John Powell (The prisoner). I am a house-painter and decorator— I have pleaded guilty to this charge—I have not been seen with Pearce for a long while—he is not the man who was associated with me—I had
not seen him for a fortnight, I tried to keep out of his way, because he is a marked man.
Cross-examined. I have done two months before this—I was by myself, there was no one with me—I only saw his back a fortnight before—I did not take notice of him much—I wanted to keep out of his way.
By the COURT. I was alone on this night—all this evidence of the police is untrue, if he had been with me I should have said so—I left the knife out in the yard—I did not go on with the burglary because I thought I heard somebody, and I have not heart enough to be a burglar, it might have been a spirit—nobody gave me the alarm—nobody was with me—I have had no experience in burglary, and I have failed—I got these tools, some from one person, and some from another, and this bricklayer's chisel I bought for 1s. 8d.
JOSEPH ANDREWS . I gave Pearce a job since the Bank-holiday, painting, building, and carpentering—he did not require screws in the way of his work, he only had to hold the ladder and help me—I have only known him since last year—he is a hard-working man.
By the COURT. He had not got more hair on his cheeks before September than he has now.
PEARCE GUILTY .
He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at this Court on August 3rd, 1886, when he was sentenced to ten years' penal servitude, after sentences of seven years' and eight years' penal servitude, he has still two years' and a-half penal servitude to serve.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.—POWELL†— Six Months' Hard Labour. The RECORDER highly commended the conduct of West, Chapman, and Stone.
NEW COURT.—Friday, January 17th, 1896
Before Mr. Recorder.
147. PERCY JELF TAYLOR PLEADED GUILTY to forging and uttering an order for £5; also to stealing a cheque form, the property of Frederick Leverton Harris, and others, his masters. He received an excellent character.— Discharged on recognizances, on condition that he shall be sent abroad
MR. CLARK Prosecuted, and the evidence was interpreted to the prisoner.
VICENTI VERA Y'LOPEZ . I act as agent for Spanish merchants, and sell their goods on commission—in October last the prisoner bought wine of me, he said, "I am not able to pay cash, I will give you a draft," I refused to take it and said, "You get it discounted for yourself, and bring me the money—he owed me £100—when I asked him for payment he gave me this draft, but before that I gave him some cheques, one of which for £57 14s. 7d., was returned by the bank—I put my name after the acceptance—I made inquiries at the Union Bank, who are also his bankers; they said, "Vercellino is all right," and then I received cash for it—I did not think there was anything wrong about it when I presented it.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. The bill was not for £100 all in one—
you received the wine in different little lots—I have a cheque for £18, which I have never received the money for, because you said, "Don't send the cheque till I send you a notice," and the notice has never come—when you presented the bill to me you did not tell me it was from Juliani—Juliani owed me money—I do not know whether you were afraid I should stop it for my own account—I have known you three or four years—when you presented this bill of Verrioni's you did not present one of Juliani's as well—you said, "I can get drafts from people who know me, and I can get money from Juliani and Verrioni"—and then you brought me one from Verrioni—you owe me a little more than £18, but I have got some of the goods—there is a little more than £10 difference—you have had the goods mentioned in this bill, and a little more.
Cross-examined. I have known you for years, and never knew you do any thing like this before—I signed a bill of exchange for £25 for you some time ago—I cannot say whether I would have drawn you another if you had asked me—you have changed cheques with me many times.
THOMAS WILLIAM PARRY . I am a clerk in the Union Bank, Fenchurch Street—Y'Lopez brought me this bill about a week before the 24th and I discounted it for him—I did not give him the money, I put it to his account.
A. JULIANI. I know the prisoner and know his writing—the body of this bill is his writing, but I do not know the signature—he wrote it at his own house—this is his writing; I do not know the name, but they are both written by the prisoner.
Cross-examined. You gave me a bill of £65 10s. to discount, and that was a forgery—this is my pass book—you paid the £65—you were a partner with me in 1864 but only for the sale of Spanish wines—this letter was translated by my secretary. (By this the witness and the prisoner agreed to deal together in Spanish wine, the expenses to be divided between them, M. Juliani to charge five per cent. on the profit and the remainder to be divided between the parties.) That arrangement was so far as wine was concerned—I did not give the prisoner this bill, I never saw it before I was asked to give evidence—in 1895 I was rather bad friends with my partner, your father-in-law—he did not provide the money when I took the cellar—when he withdrew his money from the bank, in January 1895, a cheque was presented and dishonoured—I had not seven or eight cheques dishonoured after that, but money was useful to me.—(The pass book showed that when the bill for £58 9s. was paid in there was over £200 standing to the witness's credit.) I leave £100 in the banker's hands—I did not go to Mr. Verrioni and ask him for a bill of £50 for four months—I did not give him a draft and tell him to reconcile himself to Mr. Cmapini—you did not give me £30, and I did not pay it in the City between the 15th and 20th—it is not true that this bill was a renewal bill for another—when the time came for the payment of the bill of £50 I had to pay £50 to Campini—perhaps I gave it to you—there was only eighteen days between the date of the two bills—I gave you a cheque for £62, and here it is (produced)—I translated this document. (This was addressed to the
witness and signed by the prisoner, stating that he would return the witness's cheque for £52, and that it would be necessary to withdraw the other bill, that it should have nothing in common with their interest in the wine business) You gave orders to the bankers not to pay the £62 bill, and then received some money from you and paid it in—I did not go to Mr. Verrioni and ask him for a cheque for £60 to make up the amount. (MR. VERRIONI: The witness did not come and ask me to do so; I did not give him a bill for £65 10s.) I passed the bill into my bank; and it was returned when it was due.
The Prisoner. When I arrived from Italy this bill was due for £65; I owed a sum of money to Lopez but could not pay him; I brought M. Verrioni some cheese, he could not pay me, but said he would pay in a few days; the cheese came to £47 15s.; I put the bill in my pocket and next day asked him to sign it—he said, "I am in difficulties; I am afraid this bill may be stopped at my banker's, I will give it to you, you can do as you like with it"(The Witness.) That is not true—I do not know whether I had any of the wine which this bill was given for—the accounts are not finished yet—it was not upon this cheque that I went to my bank to make the inquiry—I have lost £200—you were not with me when you gave the false bill.
The Prisoner. If I had known it was forged I should not have taken it to the same bank.
WILLIAM CROSS (Police Inspector). I took the prisoner on December 20th, at 4, Savoy Street, Strand, and said, "Do you know this bill? where did you get this from?"—he said, "They took it at the Union Bank; and Mr. Lopez was sent for and said, "Yes, I gave him the bill"—he was taken to the station—I sent for an interpreter, and told the prisoner the charge; he then wanted to write a cheque on the Trading bank to send to his wife to pay the bank the money—he said he wanted to see Verrioni, and I sent to him, but he refused to see him.
Cross-examined. I found no letters on you, only some cheques; I found this letter on you. (Dated December 19th, demanding payment tomorrow of the £49 15s. 6d., or a writ would be issued.)—I could not understand you, you might have said that you wanted to fill up a cheque for your wife—I found a warrant for the landing of wine on you, a cheque for £12, and this one for £62 which has passed through the bank and is marked N.S.
Prisoner's defence. As to the cheque for £62, I was there acting like a fool, when I made that declaration that I was going to provide money, and I did not want Mr. Verrioni to be dishonoured. This bill was not a cheque. I paid the £65 out of my own money. I only received that cheque of £47, and that is what I got. If I had known it was forged I should have paid him the money. I had no intention to defraud the bank; of course it was not due for a month afterwards. I had confidence in my friends.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
There was another indictment against the prisoner.
MR. WHITE Prosecuted, and the evidence was interpreted to the prisoner.
WILLIAM ALFRED BUCKLAND . I am an engineer, of 12, Chapman Street, St. Pancras—on October 27th I came home, latched my door, and went to bed—I was awoke a little after four o'clock by a noise and directly afterwards I heard the street door close—I got out of bed, got a light, and found that all the clothes had been taken from the hat-rail; four over-coats and a bag containing tools, worth £10—this (produced) is one of the missing coats, and this small hammer has been recovered.
LOUISA DAVISON . I am single, and live at 8, Whitfield Street, Tottenham Court Road—in October the prisoner called for my man, Giovanni Severa, in the morning and asked him to come out—they left the house together—they spoke in Italian, which I do not understand—Giovanni can speak English—they came back between five and six o'clock and my young man had a black bag, and the prisoner had one or two watches and this coat, which he left at my house.
Cross-examined. I knew you before; you are a friend of the man I live with; he has been convicted of burglary, and got two years.
JOHN ROBINSON . (Police Sergeant G). I took the prisoner on December 26th—he said, "All right"—I told him the charge, and he understood me—I took him to King's Cross police-station, where he was placed with several others, and Davison identified him—he said, "I did not fetch Barron out of his bed, but I went home with him from the club, and can prove it."
Prisoner's defence. On October 27th I was in the Telegraph Club, and saw Ferrari—he said, "Will you come to my house?" I could not go home as my door was closed; when I got into the room I saw that his young lady was in bed, and I declined to stop; from there I went to Frith Street, and remained there an hour. My door is always open after five a.m.—Ferrari gave me the ticket, and I sold it to Napolitano thinking it was the ticket of my overcoat. I am innocent.
GUILTY — Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. KERSHAW Prosecuted.
LOUISA BARRETT . I am the wife of Alfred George Barrett, of 7, Great Church Lane, Hammersmith—I am the prisoner's sister—I was present at St. Paul's Church, Hammersmith, when she was married to Charles Frank Goulden, this certificate refers to her—he went to America on Juna 21st, the year afterwards—she received a letter afterwards, saying that he was ill, and another after that saying that he was dead—I did not see it—she did not say who it was from.
GEORGE ALBERT JAMES . I live at 41, Woodstock Road, Shepherd'a Bush—I met the prisoner in 1893, and married her at St. James's, Norlands, London—this certificate refers to me at 14, Latimer Road—I was a widower, and had two children by my first wife—the prisoner said that she was a widow, but she married me in the name of Florence Cowdrey, her maiden name—I did not know till after our marriage that her
husband's name was Goulden; she was called Florence—I lived with her till December 22nd, 1895—three weeks previous to her arrest she came home very excited, and said that she had seen her first husband, and that I was not her legal husband, and she could leave me if she liked, as she was not compelled to live with me—she left me a fortnight afterwards—we quarrelled about a piece of rice pudding, she asked the children if they wanted any, and then did not give it to them—one is seven and the other five, and she ran at me with a carving knife, and packed up her things and left me.
Cross-examined. I did not beat you, your brother had to leave you on account of your violent temper—I did not defend myself, I only got the knife away from you.
EDWARD JAMES . I live at 12, Bury Street, Bloomsbury, and drive a 'bus—I am no relation of the other witness—I have known the prisoner ten years, and Mr. Goulden, her husband—they lodged with me about three months after their marriage—four of us went to see him off—about twelve months ago I was travelling on a 'bus to Uxbridge Road, and saw him on another 'bus. I shouted out "Charley," and he put up his hand and acknowledged my salute.
By the COURT. I know many people named Charley—if I was on a 'bus, and somebody said "How are you, Charley?" I should not return it—I do not know that it is a very common way of accosting a man—I should not stand up and say "My name is not Charley." I should not acknowledge the salutation—I saw the prisoner after her husband left—she did not tell me that he was very ill, or that he was dead—I saw her last three weeks after he left.
SARAH JAMES . I am the wife of the last witness—I went with him and the prisoner to see Mr. Goulden off for America, in 1890—I know the date by one of my babies; he went away the year after they were married—the baby died in 1889, and after that they lodged with us eight or nine months, and left about September, 1889—I understood that after he left she went to service—she afterwards came and showed me some letters—one of them did not say that he was dead, he was doing well and was sending her money.
EDWARD BADCOCK (Police-Sergeant P). I produce the two marriage certificates—I have examined them; they are certified copies—on December 30th, about nine o'clock, the prisoner was given into my custody by her second husband—I said that she would be charged with bigamy—she said, "I saw my husband off for America, and afterwards I had a letter saying he died from ague-fever"—she said at the station, "I told him he would have to take me on spec"—he said that she was a liar.
Witness for the Defence.
EMILY CLIFF . I am the wife of Thomas Cliff, a bricklayer, of Baron Street, Hammersmith—the prisoner is my sister—I remember her being married—he went to America and she came and lived with us—she received letters from America, two of which came from her husband, one on a Monday and one on the Thursday following—I was confined at that time—she had the last letter on October 2nd—I read the first letter on the Monday; it enclosed a sovereign, and said that he was very ill with ague fever, and that she was to write to him to
the care of Mr. Manning in America—the second letter was from Manning to say that he was very sorry to say that her husband had died from ague fever—I saw my sister afterwards with her mother—I saw her burn a lot of letters, which belonged to her husband—the letter enclosing the sovereign was from Manning—I have never heard anything of her husband from that time, and have never seen him in England.
Cross-examined. After she got the second letter saying that her husband was dead, she stayed with us in the name of Mrs. Goulden—I did not know that she went back to her maiden name, Cowdrey—I saw her after May, 1893—she has been in service, because I was laid up.
Prisoner's Defence: I told him I had been married before. It was his wish that I should go in the name of Cowdrey, as he did not wish his mother and his sister to know.
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Friday, January 17th, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
151. HENRY BARBER (67) and CHARLES RUSSELL SMITH (16) PLEADED GUILTY to a conspiracy to obtain from Wilfred Mahoney and others £10 and other sums; also from John Letts a lease of premises from the Artizans Labourers and General Dwellings Company with intent to defraud. Barber having been convicted of conspiracy in May, 1893, in the name of Sidney Herbert Smith , and Smith of obtaining money by false pretences in the name of Charles Frederick Wood in March, 1891, at Winchester.
BARBER**— Six Years' Penal Servitude.
SMITH**— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. MUIR Prosecuted, and MR. HUTTON Defended.
The prisoner, through an interpreter, stated in the hearing of the JURY that he was
GUILTY — Judgement Respited.
The prisoner in the hearing of the JURY stated that he was
GUILTY of larceny, on which they returned that verdict.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. DRAKE Prosecuted, and MR. THOMAS Defended.
A civil action being still pending in the High Court in reference to the same bill of exchange, in which the prisoner may be called to give evidence the COURT discharged the JURY .
MR. BROUGH Prosecuted, and MR. KYD Defended.
The prisoner in the hearing of the JURY stated that he was GUILTY of a, common assault, and they returned that verdict.
He received a good character.— To enter into recognizances.
OLD COURT.—Saturday and Wednesday, January 18th and 22nd, 1896.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
MESSRS. SELLS and COHEN Prosecuted, and MR. BURNIE Defended.
MORRIS COHEN . I am a tailor, of 36, Hunt Street, Spitalfields—on Tuesday evening, November 26th, a fire broke out in my top workshop about 8.15—I was insured in a French insurance company—I was coming into my house when I heard of it, and I ran out and whistled for the police—when I came back several people were in my house—I stood in the passage to see them go out when the fire was out, and the last of them was the prisoner—he came up and said, "Which way did the fire break out?"—I said, "I don't know"—when all the people had gone he was waiting, and he called me outside and said, "What am I going to have out of the fire, as I have been helping in the fire? I am only a poor fellow, and, of course, if you won't give me some money, I can get you into trouble"—I asked him what he meant, and he said, "You know very well what I mean; you made the fire; I can go and say you made the fire"—I said, "How can you go and say that? You did not see nothing"—he said, "If you don't give me some money I shall go to the company, and I can get £5 if I tell them that you made the fire"—as I was excited I thought it was no good my standing talking to him, and I said, "You can leave it for a day dr two"—he said, "All right; I shall call to-morrow evening, at eight o'clock I shall be here"—the conversation was in Yiddish—he began by asking which way the fire broke out, and said, "Are you insured?"—I said, "Yes"—I had never seen him before—he called next evening at eight o'clock I was not at home—when I came home my tenant spoke to me, and I went to the Commercial Street police-station after nine o'clock, and made a statement to the officers—next morning the prisoner came between 8 and 8.30 a.m.—I asked him if he could wait till I had my breakfast—he said, "Yes, I have to go to work at 11 o'clock; you can have your breakfast"—I gave a sign to my tenant, Joseph Imber—I had my breakfast, and then, to gain time, I said, "We will go over to the public-house, and have a drink"—we went and stayed at the public-house for some time—Imber came to the public-house, and made a sign to me, and I left the public-house with the prisoner, and went across the road to my house and had a conversation with him in the passage in Yiddish—then I said, "Don't speak in Yiddish or my missus will understand you"—my missus is English—he said, "All right, I shall speak in English"—said, "You
wanted £2"—he had mentioned £2 in the public-house, where we had a long conversation—he said, "You only had a small fire, and I only want £2; I have had such cases before; I have had £8 in the Tottenham Court Road, and £5 in other places, but they were bigger fires than that"—I told him I had not got the money with me—he said, "Then I cannot wait any longer, because the surveyor may come and look after your place, and then it will be too late; I shall go to the company"—and then Imber came in—in the passage of my house, I said, "You want £2, as you did not see nothing of the fire"—he said, "Of course I did not see nothing of the fire, but if I should go to the Company I should get £5, it will be worth more to you than £2"—I said, "You did not see nothing of the fire, and you want £2; it is rather too much. You will take less than £2"—he said, "No, if I go up to the Company and speak what I know, what I have got to speak against you, that you made the tire"—I said, "You did not see me make the fire; how can you go and speak to the Company about such a thing?"—he said, "I know, but if I like I can go and say"—I said, "Will you take a sovereign'/"—he said, "No"—I said, "Will you take thirty shillings?"—he said, "No, I won't take a farthing less than £2"—I said, "If you want £2, I must give you two men instead," and I went to the back door, which was half open, and said, "Will you come and take this man for asking money by false pretences?" and the two detectives took him and I gave him into custody.
Cross-examined. The first conversation on the night of the fire was in Yiddish; I was standing on the doorstep, and the prisoner in the street—Mr. and Mrs. Imber stood right behind me in the passage—they understand Yiddish—the prisoner did not say that from what he saw there had been great carelessness, I sure about it—the conversation took about five minutes—he did not say he was sure the Insurance Company would not pay if they knew how careless I had been—I asked his name and address, and he told me, Jacobs, 10A, Booth Street; that is his right name and address—I believed then that he was trying to extort money by threatening to accuse me of causing the fire wilfully—the police had left the house about a quarter of an hour—I asked the prisoner's name and address, so that as soon as he had gone I should get a policeman to give him in charge—I did not go to the police that night; my tenants kept me back—when he came in the morning he stopped with me about an hour before we went to the public-house—we talked about the fire, and other fires he had had—before the magistrate I said that he said he had one other case of fire; I did not have a chance of saying about the other case he mentioned—my solicitor examined me—we had a quarter or half-hour's conversation in the public-house before Imber came, and made a sign—what he said in the house and the public-house was not that I had been very careless, and he was sure that the insurance company would not pay if they knew that; he said nothing about being careless, or anything of the kind—my wife is English, she understands Yiddish—I told the prisoner she did not understand English; it was not true, but the detectives would not have understood him if he had spoken in Yiddish—I wanted more evidence than my own as to what he said—he said that if he went to the company he would get £5 from them for his information—he said nothing about my being careless—we had not been
out two minutes on the night of the fire—it was in the second floor in the work-room—I had not been in that room since about twelve in the morning—I expect the shop girls had been there in the interval, they usually are there—I cannot say whether or no there had been any carelessness—when I ran out and whistled I did not pass a fire alarm—I only knew afterwards there was one in Buxton Street; I went out at the back not the front—I was very excited—I cannot say whether I might have got the fire put out sooner if I had been a little cooler; as I ran upstairs I saw a big flame.
Re-examined. The prisoner did not help to put the fire out—he had never been in my house before—my business hours are from eight to eight; I first went for a policeman to make this charge on the Wednesday evening after business hours—an officer came to my house; I expected the prisoner that night.
JOSEPH IMBER . I am Mr. Cohen's tenant at 36, Hunter Street, Spital fields—I am a machiner tailor—I saw the prisoner after the fire was put out at nearly nine o'clock on November 26th—it took a quarter of an hour to put the fire out—I was in the house during the fire—I saw the prisoner afterwards—I had never seen him before that night—he was in the passage—he said to Cohen in Yiddish, which I understand, "What am I going to have for the fire, as I know that you are insured?"—Cohen said, "What do you mean?"—the prisoner said, "If I won't get nothing off you, I shall go the insurance company and say that you made the fire yourself"—Cohen said, "It is not any hurry."—I next saw Jacobs on Wednesday night, November 27th; he knocked at the door and I opened it; he asked where Mr. Cohen was—I said, "Mr. Cohen is not at home"—he said, "I will call again at 9.30"—he called at 9.30 but Cohen was not in and I told him so, and he went away saying, "I think the best thing will be I shall call at 10.30"—I afterwards told Mr. Cohen, and he went for the police—I did not see the prisoner again that night—I did not overhear the conversation between Cohen and the prisoner on the Thursday morning when the policemen arrested him—I saw him arrested.
Cross-examined. I am sure the prisoner did not say on the 26th that he would go and say Mr. Cohen had been very careless, and the insurance company would not pay him—I never spoke about it to Cohen.
ROSE IMBER . I am the last witness's wife—I was born in England and speak English—after the fire there were plenty of people in our passage; as they went out the prisoner, who was a stranger to me, gave a wink to Cohen, who refused him at first, but afterwards went to him. and stood on the doorstep—the prisoner said to Cohen in Yiddish, which I understand, "Mr. Cohen, what am I going to have from the fire? I was here from the beginning"—Cohen said, "I am upset; leave it for to-morrow night"—I then left—on Thursday morning, the 28th, about eight o'clock the prisoner knocked at our door, I opened it and the prisoner went straight upstairs to Mr. Cohen's place—after that Cohen and the prisoner came in together; I opened the door; they stood in the passage opposite my bedroom door—I went into ray kitchen which is at the end of the passage, next the bedroom—I did not close the door behind me—I heard the prisoner say to Cohen in Yiddish, "I want £2"—
Cohen said, "You had better speak in English, because my missus can understand"—then they spoke in English—Cohen said, "What do you want?"—the prisoner said, "I want £2"—Cohen said, "Will you take a sovereign?"—the prisoner said "No"—Cohen said, "Will you take 30s.?"—the prisoner said, "No, I will not take less than £2; not a farthing; if I go to the insurance company I will get £5 for it"—Cohen said, "Instead of £2 I will get two policemen"—and the two policemen who were in the house at the time took him.
Cross-examined. As the people went out of the house the prisoner stopped to the last—I have stated all the conversation I heard—I said before the Magistrate "I left," not that the prisoner left.
WILLIAM PEARCE (Detective H). On November 28th, about ten a.m., I went with a sergeant to Cohen's house, 36, Hunter Street, and into a back room on the ground floor, and stood behind the door, which was partly open—I saw through the crack of the door into the passage—Mr. and Mrs. Imber and another woman went upstairs—the prisoner and Cohen came in, and spoke first in a language I did not understand, and afterwards in English—they stood at the foot of the stairs, opposite to where I was—Cohen said to the prisoner, "What is it you want?"—he said, "£2"—Cohen said, "Cannot you take £1?"—the prisoner said "No, you know you set fire to the house"—Cohen said, "I did not; you did not see me"—the prisoner said "No, but I know you did. If I take you into court it will cost you more than £2. If I write to the Insurance Company I can get £5" (I made these notes as soon as I got into the charge room)—Cohen came into the room in which we were, and said, "You hear that"—we walked out, and I took the prisoner into custody, and told him we were police officers; and that I should take him into custody for trying to obtain £2 by threats—he made no reply—at the station, when the charge was read to him, he said, "Why should I want £2? I know nothing about it," or words to that effect—he was taken to the Police-court the same afternoon—he said there, "Why do you want to push me into prison? I have not done you any harm"—he was quite sober—I was not at Cohen's that morning by accident.
Cross-examined. I and Caunter were in the charge room together when I made this note; he made his while I made mine—we did not make them together—I did not read mine to Caunter, nor did he read his to me; we made them independently and did not compare them—I was examined about December 20th, and Caunter on January 3rd—I had had no conversation with Caunter about what this conversation had been—I did not hear him examined.
ELI CAUNTER (Sergeant H). On November 28th I went with Pearce to Cohen's house, 36, Hunter Street, and into the ground floor back room, the door of which opens on to a passage—the door was partly open—I saw the prisoner and Cohen there talking together, first in a language I did not understand, and afterwards in English—I heard Cohen say to the prisoner, "What is it you want?"—the prisoner said, "£2"—Cohen said, "Cannot you take £1?"—the prisoner said, "No; you know you set fire to the house"—Cohen said, "I did not, nor you did not see me"—the prisoner said, "No, but I know you done it. If I were to take you into court it would cost you more than £2. I don't want to do you any harm. If I were to write to the insurance company I should get £5"—Cohen
then called us from the room and gave the prisoner into custody and charged him—at the station when the charge was read to the prisoner, he said; "I cannot get £2; I know nothing about it"—he was perfectly sober.
Cross-examined. I made this note at the station in the presence of Pearce, but independently of him—I do not know that his note and mine correspond word for word—I did not use my note before the magistrate—Pearce was examined on December 20th, and I on January 3rd—I think I looked at my note before I went into Court on January 3rd—we did not read over our notes together.
GUILTY .— Five Tears' Penal Servitude.
157. KENT PINCHBECK (58) , Unlawfully obtaining from Charles Eames a large quantity of bricks and other building materials, and other property from other persons, by false pretences with intent to defraud. Other Counts, for incurring debts and liabilities, and obtaining credit by fraud.
MESSRS. ELLIOTT and LISTER DRUMMOND Prosecuted, and MR. ROOTH Defended.
CHARLES EAMES . I am a builder at Market Street, Watford—on September 28th, 1894, I received this letter with the prisoner's signature (I have seen him write), and with the address York Buildings, Adelphi. (The letter stated that the writer was desirous of obtaining tenders for the erection of several pairs of villas at Northwood, and that information could be obtained at York Buildings.) North wood is between Uxbridge and Watford—before I received that letter I had had no dealings with the prisoner, and did not know him—I showed his letter to my son, who works for me, and an estimate was prepared, which my son took to London—in consequence of what he said on his return, I and my son went to York Buildings, Adelphi, and saw the prisoner three or four days afterwards, at the end of September—the prisoner said the estimate was too high, and we had a conversation as to reducing it—he said the houses, were to be erected for a client of his, Miles Atkinson, of Blackheath, a gentleman with a lot of money, and that as soon as we had pressed far enough with the work the money would be paid by him—I believed in and relied on his statement about Miles Atkinson, at the time—I returned home, and prepared another estimate, which. I sent to York Buildings—after that I received this letter of October 3rd, signed by the prisoner. (This letter stated that the estimate was too high, as the houses could be built for £1,000; that he had had at least a dozen built from the same plans; that if Eames could build them for £1,000 a pair he should advise the acceptance of his tender.) I replied, and received this letter of October 6th, (Stating that the written contract was ready, and that he would make the price £1,030.) I went up to the prisoner's office and saw him; he assured me the money would be all right, and would be paid as soon as the work was sufficiently advanced for a draw—he produced this contract. (This purported to be signed by Miles Atkinson and diaries Eames, and was dated October 8th, 1894. By it Eames agreed to provide materials and build a pair of villas at Northwood for Atkinson in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by Pinchbeck, and Atkinson agreed to pay by instalments £1,030.) When I signed that contract Atkinson's signature was not upon it—after
that I went to Northwood, and commenced the work, and went on till about 14th November, when I reached the stage of the building which would entitle me to the first instalment under the contract—on 14th November I wrote the prisoner a letter, of which this is a press copy. (This stated that all the first floor joists would be up on Thursday, and asked for a cheque for £200 on the Saturday.) I received this reply on 16th November. (This stated that Pinchbeck had sent a man to Northwood, who reported that the brickwork was far below the first-floor joists, and would not be up in time for a cheque to be sent that week, and that the value of the work done was about £170.) I say the value of the work then done was £200, and I had asked him not to deduct twenty per cent, from that, and I went on with the work for another week, and on 23rd November I wrote again to the prisoner. (Asking for a cheque next morning, as he was depending solely on it for wages.) I received this letter from the prisoner in reply. (Stating that his client was out of town, but that he would look into the matter on Monday.) I wrote on 26th November to the prisoner. (Asking him to send the cheque at once, as he had heard from the Northwood Brick Company that he could have no mare bricks till they received a cheque from him; and that unless he received the prisoner's cheque he would have to stop the work for want of bricks.) I received this answer on 27th November. (Stating that he should see his client on Friday, and would tend cheque at once, and that delay should not occur again, as he would see to it beforehand; that he would set the receiver to the Brick Company next day, and would tell them to let Eames have everything he wanted.) There were one or two other letters, and then I received this of November 30th. (This stated that the prisoner would have some money coming in next week himself, and enclosed a cheque for £50, and a receipt from the Northwood Brick Company for £100 from Kent Pinchbeck on account of bricks supplied by them to Eames on buildings in the Hollowett Road.) That was the first money I received from the prisoner—at this date I had put about £300 into the buildings—the next instalment, another £200, became due on December 24th—we were entitled to £170 for the first, and £200 for the second instalment—I applied for that second £200 by letter, and received this reply. (Stating that he considered the instalment should be £160; that he had been obliged to pay up the brick account on his guarantee, and enclosing a cheque for £112, and a receipt for £47 15s. 8d.) At the time I received that, on January 14th, I had put £500 into the building—I went on with the work and shortly after applied for some more money—I received £50 on February 13th, and £100 on March 11th—altogether we did work worth £750, and we received altogether £460—we kept on working and applying for money, but we could not get any more, so we stopped work—I applied for money by letter, and I went to the office several times, three or four times in one week—I went three or four times without being able to see the prisoner; I saw Martin, his manager, when I did not see the prisoner—Martin came down to the buildings every two or three weeks, I think—the prisoner said Martin was his manager—when Martin said the prisoner was out, he assured me the money would be all right—I saw the prisoner the last time I called; when I made application before we left off; I told him, "You cannot expect me to finish these buildings and have £570 to get when I have done them"—he said, "No, Mr. Eames, I don't think you can"—he gave no reason
why the money was not paid—Atkinson's name was not mentioned then—that was about April, 1895—my solicitors, Broad and Riggall, of Watford, tried to find Atkinson, but could not—I have had no part of the balance due to me—I was subsequently employed by Mr. Boyce, another solicitor acting for the mortgagee, to finish the buildings I had begun under an entirely different contract—I did not receive from Mr. Boyce any payment in respect of the balance due from the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I did not know what the prisoner's position was when I first entered into negociations with him; I had never heard of Miles Atkinson before I went to the prisoner's office—I depended absolutely on what the prisoner told me; I had nothing else to depend on—he showed me nothing by means of which I could have gathered Atkinson to be a man of property—we were entirely led by the prisoner's representations about a rich client who would pay the money—I made no inquiry about Atkinson at that time, except of the prisoner—I relied on the prisoner—the agreement was between me and Atkinson; the prisoner said the money was placed with him, and would be paid by him—nothing would be due till the drains were laid, and the first floor joists fixed—we depended on the architect for his report; we look on them as honourable men as a rule—when I applied first for money the drains were not laid, the joists were laid; it is a very rare thing to put in drains while the scaffold-poles are about—I did not know Martin before I began to work for the prisoner; he came to supervise the work—he made no complaint about the work; it gave every satisfaction—there was no dispute between me and Martin as to the amount of work that bad been done—I do not remember receiving any letter from the prisoner to that effect after my first application for money—I see all my correspondence as a rule, and my son sees most of it—directly after declining to go on with the work I consulted my solicitor; that was shortly after April—I gave up working at the latter end of April—about two months ago I thought of making a criminal charge against the prisoner—Mr. Gregson, a solicitor, wrote to me, and I attended at his office, and after that preferred this charge—I had taken civil proceedings against the prisoner before that, but no criminal proceedings—under the agreement there is a penalty of £1 a day for leaving the work unfinished, but there is a weather clause that put that on one side; the weather was so bad that it stopped us for about a month.
Re-examined. On May 21st I issued a writ against the prisoner; that action is still pending—when I attended at Mr. Gregson's office in consequence of a letter from him, I met some other builders and had Rome conversation with them, and in consequence I joined in these proceedings—I said to the prisoner at the time that it was a very unusual thing to put in drains while the scaffold was erected, and the prisoner said, "Yes, put them in when you like," and in consequence we went on, so that when the building was up and the scaffolding out of the way we could put the drains in properly—we agreed verbally it should be so—the drains are in now.
DANIEL EAMES . I am son of the last witness, and assist him in business at Watford—in consequence of a letter he received on September 28th I went up to the prisoner's office and had a conversation with him about plans and specifications which I saw—he said the work was to be done for Miles Atkinson, Esq., a rich gentleman, of Blackheath, who was going to have several pairs of houses erected at Northwood—we thought we
were in for a good thing—I went back to my father and an estimate was prepared, and I and my father came to London, and I was present when my father went through the estimate with the prisoner—the prisoner told my father that Miles Atkinson was a rich gentleman living at Blackheath, but the money was perfectly safe as it was placed in the prisoner's hands and would be paid to my father as soon as it was due—I was not present when my father signed the contract, but I saw it in January when I went to the prisoner's with my father, who did not seem satisfied about the representations made, and wanted further proof of Miles Atkinson's ability to pay—that was after we had done a lot of the work—the prisoner then intimated that the contract had been signed by Miles Atkinson, and pulled open a drawer, and showed a document lying there, and I saw Miles Atkinson on it; I cannot swear what it was, but I believe it was a contract; he did not take it out—my father asked him for Atkinson's address, as the one he had got was not sufficient; he refused to give it, saying he was his agent, and that he was not going to have his client bothered with letters—we were applying for money on that occasion.
Cross-examined. I saw the prisoner before my father did; I had not seen him before, and had no previous knowledge of him—I never saw Miles Atkinson—I should try to get money from him if I saw him—I only work for my father; I do not enter into contracts—the defendant seemed to have an appearance of sincerity about him—I do not remember any letter from the prisoner or from Martin complaining of the way the work had been done, while we were working—we have been working on the same houses since on a different contract from the mortgagee for £310. Re-examined. That is for work outside the prisoner's contract; there is more of it, and of better class.
ERNEST VOULKES SCANLAN . I am a member of the firm of Scanlan and Hayes, builders, of Richmond—in the latter part of 1894, plans and specifications were shown to my partner, Hayes, for work at Northwood, and, in consequence, I went to see the prisoner on February 1st, 1895—we had had no previous dealings with him—the prisoner or Martin said the buildings at Northwood were to be for Miles Atkinson—the prisoner said Miles Atkinson was a very wealthy man, living at Blackheath, who could keep us building for years, and that he had a small estate somewhere in South London, I believe, for the erection of twenty-eight houses—I believed and relied on those statements—I called at the prisoner's office on February 5th, and then entered into these two contracts to erect two pairs of houses, one pair at £1,000 and the other at £1,150, at Northwood—the signature of Miles Atkinson was not on them when I signed. (The contracts were in the same form as that entered into by Eames.) I had no counterpart—I wrote to the prisoner for one, and received this letter of February 6th. (Stating that he would supply copies of the contracts on receipt of 10s. 6d. each for the copies, and £2 2s. for previous costs). I did not ask further for copies—I began to work as soon as possible, and carried out work to the extent of £250—I applied for £200; the worth of the work was £300, but we were entitled to £250, as we had carried the work higher than was specified for—after applying many times we got £40 on April 6th and £60 on May 10th—we went on with the work till about £250 was owing; we applied for the balance of the £200; we
were not entitled to more, as we had not got a second certificate—we have never had more than the £40 and £60—as we did not receive any more we refused to complete—we had done about £350 worth of work—I do not recollect seeing the prisoner when we applied for the balance; I went to the office many times; I saw Martin, the prisoner's manager, who said the money was all right, but that it was not paid because the prisoner was out of town—he was out of town whenever we called until we had the £40—the prisoner paid us the balance of £60, and then he said he should not pay more than £60 as the balance of that £100 was all we were entitled to; he or Martin had measured the plans, not the work, and according to their measurements we were not entitled to more—that was not correct—the contracts contain the usual clause to pay on the architect's certificate; the prisoner was to be the sole architect—he still repeated that Miles Atkinson was a man of means—I placed the matter in the hands of my solicitor, Mr. Knight Gregson, and ultimately took proceedings to recover the money; they are still pending—I have not been able to discover Miles Atkinson.
Cross-examined. I never saw Miles Atkinson—neither the prisoner nor Martin told me they were dissatisfied with some of the work—I was not always present at the works—I did not know that one of the walls was built six inches out of plumb, or that the flues were wrongly built; I know now that one three-inch wall had been partly taken down; it was slightly wrong and had very slightly to be rebuilt; I did not know it was wrong till lately—we told the prisoner the joists were not up, but that they would be before the week's end, and he said the money would be there, but it was not—the joists were up before we got the completion of the £100; we had done extra work, and the prisoner said that would be sufficient to make up for the joists—we received the £60 perhaps a fortnight after the joists were up; we applied for pay perhaps three weeks before the joists were up, at the prisoner's suggestion—the district surveyor thought it would be better not to lay the drains till the houses were roofed in—I am not a builder myself—I cannot say if this agreement is similar to those we generally enter into—I never saw an agreement like this before—I do not think Mr. Hayes is here—I never saw the prisoner or heard of Miles Atkinson before we called on him—the prisoner did not show us anything by means of which I could gather that such a person as Miles Atkinson existed; my partner, I believe, made the necessary inquiries in 1894.
Re-examined. We had an independent survey made by Mr. Hall, a Fellow of the Surveyors' Institute, of Chancery Lane—we gave the prisoner notice of that survey—I think he said he was satisfied with the survey he had made, he should make no more.
GEORGE WILKINSON . I am a builder and contractor, of 117, Claren don Road, Netting Hill—in March, 1895, I saw this advertisement in the Builder, and in consequence sent a letter to Box 133, at the office of the Builder—I received a communication, in consequence of which I went to 12, York Buildings, the prisoner's office, a day or two after the advertisement appeared—I saw Martin, who showed me plans and specifications—I afterwards had
another interview with Martin—ultimately I saw the prisoner five or six days after I had first seen Martin—he said the work was to be done for a very rich gentleman named Miles Atkinson, Esquire, of Blackheath, who had a large estate at Northwood which he was going to cover, and wanted to build villas according to the plans that would be shown—I believed and relied on those statements about Atkinson—in consequence of them I went again to the prisoner's office and signed a contract—before signing it he told me Miles Atkinson had £5,000 lying in the bank for him to draw upon, and in consequence signed this contract to erect a pair of villas at Northwood for £1,035, which was to be paid in instalments at 85 per cent. as the work proceeded—I began the work—when I became entitled to the first instalment I applied for it; after a great deal of trouble I got £200 instead of £230—I went on with the work—I next received £50 on 13th September—I had then done about £700 worth of work and I had only received £250 in all—I received no other money—about £445 is now due to me—I applied to the prisoner for the balance of £445 dozens of times, four or five times a week sometimes—I saw the prisoner once or twice; he said his client was abroad, but that I should have the money during the week—the last time I saw him I reminded him that he had always told me the moment payments were due money was lying there and I should have it; and he said his client Miles Atkinson had bolted—I have not been able to find Miles Atkinson—I have not taken any legal proceedings.
Cross-examined. I did not know the prisoner, or Atkinson or Martin before—I made no inquiries about Atkinson before I entered into this business—I never made inquiries yet about a person who appeared to be an architect and a gentleman, and I have been in business for thirty years—I was to be paid my first instalment as soon as the joists were on; I don't know that I applied for it before that—I put the drains in after the roof and everything was completed—when I received £200, we had done over £300 worth of work—I heard no complaints of the way the work was done—the prisoner once wrote saying the work was not going on so fast as he should wish—I could never get a copy of the agreement—the prisoner read it to me—I practically considered the contract broken when the first payment was not made—my books will show that £240 was due when I first applied—I first went to the solicitor for the prosecution about the beginning of December, through some money being owing to Mr. Shadbolt, who supplied material for this work—a month before that I ceased to do any further work on the premises, just about the time the last £50 was paid to me.
Re-examined. That was about September 13th—I should have been quite happy to complete this contract, if I had received the money.
By the JURY. The cheques I received were signed by the prisoner in his own name on Drummond's Bank—he wrote out a certificate and put Miles Atkinson's name to it, and then gave me his own cheque.
By MR. ROOTH. lam defendant in an action in the County-court, Marylebone, which was heard last Monday, in connection with these houses in question—I disputed the price, they charged me more than they agreed to do it for me—I don't remember that I made an affidavit in the case, I might have done, I forget—(a copy of the affidavit was produced, but not the original, and was therefore not read).
WILLIAM JAMES LARK . I am a member of the firm of J. G. Lark and Sons, builders, 44, Fore Street, City—on June 12th last I received this letter—(this was signed K. Pinchbeck, asking for an estimate for joiners' work on two pairs of houses)—I had had no previous dealing with Mr. Pinchbeck and knew nothing about them—in consequence of that letter my brother went to Mr. Pinchbeck, and on his return he gave me some particulars, and we prepared an estimate—with this estimate I went to York Buildings and saw Mr. Pinchbeck—I had a conversation with him with reference to this estimate—a written estimate was sent to him, which was afterwards revised—the work was to be done at Hollowell Road, Northwood. Mr. Pinchbeck told me the work was to be done for a very rich gentleman named Miles Atkinson, who lived at Blackheath—he said Mr. Atkinson had instructed him to accept my estimate—that was all that was said on that occasion, beyond making an appointment for next day, in consequence of which I called next day—on that day I entered into a contract, dated June 26th—this is it (read)—at the time I signed this contract I do not think the name of Miles Atkinson was mentioned again, unless it was to reiterate what he had previously said—after receiving this letter of July 1st I had another interview with Mr. Pinchbeck before starting with the work—I told him I had not been able to find Miles Atkinson's address at Blackheath, and before I started the work I must have either a banker's or a solicitor's address—he was rather indignant at that, saying it was most unusual, but he would see what he could do, and he could even guarantee payment himself—I was not satisfied with his guarantee, and the following day his manager, Martin, took me to the office of Mr. Jellicoe, a solicitor and commissioner, Queen Victoria Street, Mansion House Chambers—I saw the name of Jellicoe on a plate—I had never seen Mr. Jellicoe before—I was introduced to him by Martin—I asked him if he had ever acted for Mr. Miles Atkinson in a legal capacity—he replied, "Yes, on many occasions"—I asked was Miles Atkinson a man of means—he replied, "Yes"—I asked was he a man who always honourably fulfilled his engagements—he replied, "Yes"—Martin introduced me to Jellicoe as a builder who was about doing some work at Northwood for Mr. Miles Atkinson—in consequence of the statement made to me by Jellicoe I went on with the work till about the 12th of August—I then applied for some money on account—at that time the roof was on ready for the slating—on August 12th I received this letter from the prisoner requesting the slating to be done at once, or someone else must be got to do it—at that time I had done work to the value of £235—after that letter I put the battens on to enable him to get the slating done—I then made further application for money—I saw Mr. Pinchbeck on one or two occasions only, he promised a payment within the next week or ten days—I did not receive payment—I called a great many times—I sent a surveyor down to measure up the work—the total amount of the work done altogether amounted to £248 in the one case, and £120 or £130 in the other; roughly speaking £278 on the, two—I did not get any of that money—from first to last I have not received a penny in respect of either of these contracts—it was never suggested by Pinchbeck at any of the interviews that I was not entitled to that money—I had completed the work with
respect of which I asked for the money, at the end of August or the beginning of September—when I did not see the defendant, I saw Martin, his managing clerk—I was present in the High Court of Justice on December 2nd in Mr. Justice Matthews' Court at the hearing of an action of Kollett v. Pinchbeck—I was present when Pinchbeck gave evidence on oath, and was Cross-examined—I heard Mr. Low ask him now long he had known Miles Atkinson—he said two or three years—he was asked his address; he said Black heath, Wemyss Road—he was asked what number; he said No. 5—in consequence of that statement in Court, I tried to find Miles Atkinson—I had searched the local directory, and seen the Queen's tax collector—I made every inquiry and every attempt to try and find him—I never saw Jellicoe again till I saw him in the High Court, and on the Monday following at his own office—I have not seen him lately—after having heard the evidence given by the defendant before Mr. Justice Matthews, I placed the matter in the hands of my solicitors.
Cross-examined. I had no solicitor acting for me previous to that trial—I think my last application to the defendant for money was on November 29th—I went to Mr. Gregson's office about the second week in December; I cannot say the exact date—before entering into this agreement I was anxious to know whether the matter was being financed by a man of money; I wanted to make sure where the money was forthcoming—I should have been prepared to do the work for anybody who was a man of money—Jellicoe looked a substantial, respectable man, and his office also looked respectable; it had the appearance of work having been carried on there—if I had not had the representations made by Jellicoe I should not have done the work—I took it as confirmation of Mr. Pinchbeck—without that I should not have made the contract.
By MR. ROOTH. I knew that the buildings had been commenced by Eames, and I was to be paid as the work was measured—the defendant, never did measure the work; he would not do it—the bulk of the work was done up to August 8th—it was October before we took the men away altogether, not the end of July or the beginning of August—I went on applying for money down to the end of November—on the occasions when I did not see Pinchbeck I saw Martin, the managing clerk—I called at the office, and was told by Martin that Mr. Pinchbeck was away ill—I did not see him again till I was at the High Court—I was written to by Mr. Gregson, the solicitor for the prosecution, and after consultation I went to his office—we agreed as to the price for the first contract, not for the second; that was to be measured and valued.
THEODORE WALROND HAY . I am a shorthand writer, of 11, New Court, Carey Street—on 22nd December last I was present at the High, Court, at the trial of Kellet v. Pinchbeck, before Mr. Justice Matthews—I took shorthand notes of the evidence—I produce my original notes, also a correct transcript.
The transcript of the evidence given by Pinchbeck was put in and taken as ready portions of which were referred to.
ANDREW BATES (Policeman 442 E). On 8th January I went to 11, Queen Victoria Street, City, and inquired for J. A. Jellicoe, I had a witness summons to serve on him—I did not find him there; the chambers were empty—his name was not on the door; I did not notice any address
left—I tried to find him, but did not succeed—I had not been there before.
HELEN GLOW STAPLETON . I have lived at 2, Bennett Park, Blackheath, since June 27th, 1895, and before that I lived at 5, Wemyss Road for eleven years—during that time I did not know, or see, or hear of any Miles Atkinson—I have lived for nearly thirty-five years altogether in Blackheath.
Cross-examined. There are thirty-six houses in Wemyss Road—I do not know the occupants of all those houses—I do not know my next door neighbours personally; they have changed several times—I don't know the names of everybody living in Wemyss Road.
GODFREY HALE BOTCE . I am a member of the firm of Boyce and Sons, solicitors, 8, George Street, Hanover Square, London—I produce six leases from Kent Pinchbeck and Mr. Ellerby to Mrs. Pinchbeck; the first two are dated November 21st and 22nd, 1894, granted by Mr. Pinchbeck and the mortgagee, Mr. Ellerby, and apply to the plot of land known as 71, Hollowell Road, Northwood; those leases, split it up into 71A and 71B—the next two are dated April 16th and 17th, 1895, and apply to 70A and 70B, Hollowell Road; and the last two are dated April 23rd and 24th, 1895, and apply to 69A and 69B—Ellerby had a mortgage on the freehold—these six leases comprise the whole of the building plot at Northwood on which the builders who have given evidence did work—there is a pair of houses on 69, a pair on 70, and a pair on 71—the leases are for 99 years, reserving a ground rent of £10 a year for each house—from my own knowledge I can identify these houses as being those on which the builders worked—I acted for Mr. James Rickett, who made advances to Mr. and Mrs. Pinchbeck in respect of these leaseholds—Mr. Rickett took over Ellerby's and Armstrong's mortgages—the original mortgage to Ellerby was on the freehold, before the plots were divided and the leases executed—when we paid off Ellerby we took a fresh mortgage on the freehold from Pinchbeck—the ground rents had not been conveyed when the mortgage was granted to Ellerby; when he paid him off they had been—the ground rents were subsequently sold, and our mortgage on the freehold was paid off out of the purchase money—on these leaseholds the total advances to Mr. and Mrs. Pinchbeck were £1,700—we arranged with Pinchbeck that the limit of the advance was to be £700 a pair, and upon our architect's certificate—shortly before the first mortgage had been completed, the prisoner handed me this letter, dated May 23rd, 1895, as coming from Miles Atkinson—there had been previously a conversation in which the prisoner had stated that he considered the value of these leaseholds to be £1,400 a pair; I told him that seemed to me very much more than their value, and at the next interview. I think, he brought me this letter—I think he said he had plenty of people ready to buy at £1,400 a pair—I expressed some doubt on the point, and he brought me this letter. (This letter, dated from Millfield Road, Clapton, May 3rd, 1895, and signed Miles Atkinson, stated that the writer would purchase the first pair of houses in Hollowell Road, North-wood, for £1,400, subject to ground rent.) That was brought with the idea of satisfying my doubts as to the value—I never saw Miles Atkinson; that was the only time I heard his name—I asked the prisoner who Miles Atkinson was, and I think he used the expression "a jobbing
speculator in this class of property"—the money in respect of the advances to Mrs. Pinchbeck was paid to the prisoner on her documentary authority—we have taken possession of the houses under our powers as mortgagees, and have employed Wilkinson and Eames to finish the property, and have paid them money in respect of that completion.
Cross-examined. £3,500 was named as a possible limit, but £2,100, £700 a pair, was the limit of advance on the buildings—he had drawn £1,700—we were prepared to advance £3,500 on the freeholds, not on the leaseholds, and with regard to this and other property—he paid interest on £3,500, but there was an advance on totally distinct freehold land of £500, and an advance on the freehold of this land—there was the ground-rent on two plots; we took out of it the mortgage and interest and certain charges, and the balance handed over to the prisoner was £250.
JABEZ HOLLOWAY . I am a clerk in the employ of Messrs. Wellman and Sons, of 9, Southampton Street, solicitors—I produce a conveyance, dated August 13th, 1894, between Percy Mason, the trustee of the property of Reginald W. Kelly, and Pinchbeck—the property was mortgaged to Marchmont, who is added as a mortgagee of the third part—Charles Wells was the first purchaser of the whole property, Lots 69, 70, and 71, for £300—he is a party to the deed of August 13th—the property was then subject to the mortgage to Marchmont for £300, and so the mortgagee just got his money back, and Wells took the property free from the mortgage—in the same deed it appears that Wells sold to Kent Pinchbeck for £900—the witness to Wells's signature is J. A. Jellicoe, solicitor, 16, King Street, Cheapside—I produce a conveyance, dated January 13th, 1895, of two freehold ground-rents of £10 each, arising out of two plots of land, described as 71A and 71B, Hollowell Road—Kent Pinchbeck was vendor, and Ellerby and Armstrong mortgagees, and the purchasers were Neal—it was a trust purchase—the consideration was £510—from the deeds and plans I see that the two plots, 71A and 71B, make up the piece of land described in the conveyance of 13th August, 1894, as 71—the ground was sold free from the mortgage; the two mortgagees concurred—I produce this conveyance, relating to 70A and 70B, dated 30th September, 1895, for £510 between Kent Pinchbeck, Rickett, and Percy E. Beard, the purchaser—those two plots are Plot 70 in the conveyance of August, 1894—I produce this conveyance of 30th September, 1895, with reference to Plots 69A and 69B between Kent Pinchbeck, vendor; James Rickett, mortgagee, and James George Swan Taylor, purchaser, for £510—those two plots are the same as Plot 69 in the conveyance of August, 1894—that was an out-and-out sale—I have no recollection of ever hearing of Miles Atkinson in connection with these transactions.
Cross-examined. I was concerned for the purchasers—I had to see the mortgagees discharged—I do not know what the prisoner received—the mortgage was on the freehold—by arrangement, the first two plots that had been converted into ground rents were sold out-and-out for £1,100—the third plot had hardly been built on then—the Nutleys' £200 was paid to Ellerby, the first mortgagee.
I went with Detective-Sergeant Bradshaw to the prisoner's office in the Adelphi immediately alter the prisoner's arrest—I saw the police take possession of this letter-book, containing this letter to the Singer Company at page 235—it is in the prisoner's writing, with which I am familiar. (The letter, replying to an inquiry as to Miles Atkinson, stated that the writer had known him from a youth, and considered him honest, sober, trustworthy, industrious, and willing to oblige and do his best for his employer's interest, and that lie had no doubt he would be found a valuable servant.) I saw the police find the prisoner's ledger of building transactions, which I went through—there is an index to it of the names of apparent clients—I cannot find the name of Miles Atkinson there under A or M—I find, an entry "New Houses, Hollowell Road, North wood" with "3 pairs" underneath—it purports to be a debtor and creditor account of transactions relating to that property, and shows as the result that he has received on account of the property £3,280, and paid away £1,596 4s., making £1,683 to the good—there is one entry "paid Wells £10"—the full price stated for the purchase of the land is £300—there are Jellicoe's and Ellerby's costs—this pocket-book was handed to me by one of the officers who got it from somewhere in the room—I did not see him pick it up; I say it is all in the prisoner's writing—I never saw the prisoner write; but I have examined his press copy letter book and seen a mass of letters coming from him (MR. ROOTH objected to the witness giving evidence as to any contents of the pocket-book, until the finding of it had been proved).
SIDNEY TEMBLETT (Police-constable). About 9.45 on December 12th I was with Callaghan at York Buildings, Adelphi—I saw the prisoner enter Thames Chambers—we followed him in, and said, "We are police officers; I believe your name is Kent Pinchbeck"—he said, "Yes"—I told him I held a warrant for his arrest for obtaining money, and arrested him—he asked, "Who got out the warrant?"—I said, "George Wilkinson"—he said, "It is a got-up job"—we went into his office—I found this pocket-book on him when I searched him at Bow Street where we took him—I did not mention that before the magistrate because the book had not then been examined and it was not put to me—I and Callaghan gave it with other property to the solicitors—I keep no memorandum about a little thing like that.
HARRY CALLAGHAN (Detective E). After the prisoner's arrest I received this pocket-book from Temblett who took it from the prisoner—I found in it the entry "Miles Atkinson, 49, Packington Street" under date February 21st—I went to 49, Packington Street, Essex Road, and found it was a fish shop kept by Gregory—I could not find Miles Atkinson there.
H. S. KNIGHT GREGSON (continued). I appeared at Bow Street on the first occasion after the arrest, before Sir John Bridge, and was present when an application for bail was made to him on behalf of the prisoner—the prisoner's then solicitor (not his present solicitor) mentioned the name of Miles Atkinson in the prisoner's presence, and said he would produce him—Sir John Bridge said, "I must see Miles Atkinson first, and then I will consider the question of bail," and the case was remanded till next day for that purpose—I was present the next day; when the case was called on, Sir John Bridge said, "Is Miles Atkinson in
attendance?" and a man of twenty-nine or thirty, slight, dark, with a dark moustache, came forward from the back of the court, and entered the witness-box—he was asked, "Are you Miles Atkinson?" and he said, "Yes"—I have not seen that man since.
Cross-examined. I do not think an account appeared to have been opened with each prosecutor in this case; their names appear in the ledger as having received sums of money on account from time to time, but it is not an account between them.
CHARLES GREGORY . I have lived at 49, Packington Street, Essex Road, Islington, for twelve months, and am a fishmonger—last March Charles Wells occupied my first floor two rooms at 7s. 6d. a week—I think he was a clerk; I am not sure—I never heard of Miles Atkinson at my house, or at all—Wells was about thirty, slight, and with a dark moustache.
JOHN WRIGHT . I am manager to the Singer Machine Company—on January 5th, 1895, I engaged Miles Atkinson as a collector—he gave Kent Pinchbeck as a reference when he applied for the situation—he gave the address 103, Hertford Road, Kingsland—he removed from there to 49, Packington Street, on March 23rd, 1895—he remained in our service till June 10th—I heard him described as Wells.
EUGENE BRADSHAW (Detective Sergeant E). I have had charge of this case—I was present at Bow Street on the application for bail by the prisoner to Sir John Bridge, and when a man describing himself as Miles Atkinson went into the witness-box when Miles Atkinson's name was called by the prisoner's solicitor and Sir John Bridge—I had seen that man before in the immediate vicinity of Charing Cross, Craven Street, and Northumberland Passage, adjoining the Thames Embankment—I have seen him acting as agent for a bookmaker, receiving slips of paper from various people—he entered premises where a bookmaker had his office—I have seen him acting on many occasions in that way more or less for a period covering two years, taking it altogether for twelve months—I have seen him also in the City acting in a similar way in the company of bookmakers, receiving bets from customers many times—I have made every endeavour since his appearance at Bow Street to trace and find him, and have failed; I have not seen him since—I went to Blackheath, and made every endeavour to find Miles Atkinson—the houses in Wemyss Road are of a rental of about £45 per annum.
Cross-examined. I have seen thousands of other persons take slips of paper from people in the street—in all probability they were book-makers or betting people.
MR. ROOTH submitted that the first four counts of the indictment failed and, should be withdrawn from the Jury, upon the ground that what was alleged by the indictment to be obtained by false pretences was real property, and as real property could not be the subject of larceny it could not be the subject of false pretences. The prisoner had not obtained anything in the form of a chattel which he could carry away, as no property passed to him until it became part of a house, and it could not he said that labour was chattel, money, or valuable security. As to the remaining counts for obtaining credit, he submitted that they were bad, as in none of
them were the false pretences set out. MR. ELLIOTT urged that the last four counts were framed under Section 13 of Part II. of the Debtors Act of 1869. MR. JUSTICE HAWKINS, in leaving the case to the JURY, directed them to return a verdict of
NOT GUILTY upon the first four counts.
MR. ROOTH applied that the prisoner might be allowed to make a statement to the JURY.
MR. JUSTICE HAWKINS assented to this upon the understanding that he only made a statement of facts and did not attempt to argue the case, that MR. ROOTH in his address did not comment on anything stated by the prisoner, but only upon such facts as were in evidence, and that MR. ELLIOTT summed up his case after the prisoner's statement, and before MR. ROOTH'S address.
The prisoner then stated that with regard to Eames, Scanlan and Wilkinson, nothing was said about Miles Atkinson in order to induce them to sign the contracts, and that he considered they had been fully paid for the work they did; and that as to Lark, he was arranging to pay him when he was arrested; that Atkinson, whom he had known before, had offered to take over the buildings at the contract price, plus the costs, when they were completed.
GUILTY upon the last four counts for obtaining credit by fraud— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
There was another indictment against the prisoner for perjury.
NEW COURT.—Saturday, January 18th, 1895.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. MOYSES, for the Prosecution, stated that the prisoner was convicted in March, 1894, of sending filthy postcards to the same prosecutor, and, after serving four months of his sentence, was sent to Banstead Lunatic Asylum, where he remained twelve months.— Nine Months' Hard Labour. Dr. Walker stated that the prisoner was mad, and was directed to communicate with the surgeon at Pentonville Prison.
MESSRS. BURNIE and KYD Prosecuted.
FRANCIS LYNCH . I am deputy at Thompson's lodging-house, 4, Great Peter Street, Westminster; I know the prisoner by sight—on November 9th, about midnight, I had to go to a house in St. Ann's Court to ask a woman for some keys which I had given her in the morning—she was supposed to leave them in the letter-box at night—I knocked at the door; the prisoner, who was standing in the doorway, asked what I wanted—I said I was there on business; he took up a can and said he would knock my brains out—I asked him if he wanted to fight; lie lifted the can up and I knocked him down—he rushed at me; I struck him again, and we both fell—
I believe I was on top at first, but we rolled over and he got on top of me—I got stabbed, but I did not see the knife—he got up and ran away, and I got up—some men and women were there—next morning an inspector came with the prisoner, and asked me if I knew the man; I said "Yes"—the prisoner said, "You have made a mess of me"—I have come from the hospital to-day—I had five wounds, one over my heart, one on my abdomen, one on my side; my life was despaired of for a fortnight or three weeks.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You very likely said in the court "Halloa! what the hell are you doing there?"—and very likely I said "Mind your own b——business"—I was down hop-picking last season—I did not say, "Stand out Knobby, this is an old grievance of mine, and I am going to have it out," I never saw you in my life before—my fore head did not come in contact with a brick-wall.
Re-examined. I go by the name of Darkey—I was sober.
ANNIE NOBLE . I am a tailoress, of 7, St. Ann Street, Westminster—the prisoner lives in the same house—on November 9th, about midnight, I saw Mrs. Lynch standing in the passage, and the prisoner in the door-way—I heard Lynch say, "Now, Moody, be a man; this is an old grievance" I went upstairs, and saw a man carrying a lamp—he said, "Do you know who has done this?"—I said, "Yes"—I saw him taken away—Knight handed him a lamp, and he went up the passage—I saw this small knife picked up; it was shut.
ELIZA AVES . I am a laundress, and live in the same house as the last witness—on November 9th, at twelve p.m., I was with her at the bottom of St. Ann's Court, and saw the prisoner there—Mr. Lynch came down the court, and the prisoner said, "What do you want here? You do not live down here"—Lynch said, "I came for the keys"—the prisoner said, "What f—keys, you have got a f—white shirt on; I will make it red before the morning"—Moody picked up his chesnuts, and the prisoner said, "Now, Mr. Moody, be a man, come into the road"—I ran away.
MARGARET NASH . I am a bottle-washer, of 4, Laundry Yard, Westminster—on November 9th I was in this court, and saw the prisoner with a chesnut can in his hand going to strike Lynch with it—they had a few words, and he up with the chestnut can; Lynch struck him, and they both got down on the ground, and the prisoner pulled out a knife and stabbed Lynch twice—he was on top of Lynch—Lynch said to me, "I am stabbed"—I said, "Yes, I know you are"—he was bleeding very much and was put in a cab and taken away.
Cross-examined. I am married, living apart from my husband—I am not living with Knight. I have an old lady living with me.
JOHN KNIGHT . I am day manager of Mr. Thompson's lodging-house, Great Peter Street—on November 9th, at twelve o'clock, I was in St. Ann's Street and saw Darkey struggling with the prisoner on the ground, the prisoner was on top and I saw him lift his hand and stab him twice with a knife like this—I ran to fetch a constable, and when I went back the prisoner had gone upstairs—I went up and the constable behind me—I then got a lamp and found this knife shut up; I gave it to the constable.
Cross-examined. A new lodger must be shown the way to his bed the first time—they have boxes—they cannot enter without a key.
RODERICK MCKENZIE (97 A). On November 9th, about twelve p.m., I heard a police whistle, and went to St. Ann Street and found Lynch lying in the middle of the road bleeding very much from wounds in his abdomen and chest; he was unconscious; I got a cab and took him to the hospital—Knight handed me this knife shut up—I could not see any blood on it, but it was rather dark—I took it to the hospital.
HENRY NEW (566 A). On November 9th, about 12 o'clock, I went with another constable to the top floor of 7, Ann Street, and found the door fastened—I asked the prisoner to come out; he did so, and came downstairs—I said, "You are charged with stabbing"—he said, "I am innocent"—he had blood on the knuckles of his right hand.
WILLIAM CHEYNEY (Inspector A). On Sunday morning, November 10th, I took the prisoner from Rochester Row Station to Westminster Hospital, and told him he was going to see Lynch; he said "All right, I had had a drop of drink, and in having a fight with him I stuck a knife into him"—as soon as Lynch saw him, he said, "That is the man who stabbed me; I went to get the keys for a woman who worked for me; we had a bit of a box up, and when he got me down he knifed me."
SIDNEY TIPPETT . I am senior house surgeon at Westminster Hospital—on November 9th, about 12.15, Lynch was brought to me, bleeding very profusely—he was unconscious—he had a wound in the upper part of his chest, gaping wide; it went into his chest, in the direction of his heart—there was another wound on his abdomen, two inches long, upwards and inwards; it went under the skin, but did not penetrate the cavity of the abdomen; a wound on his side, three or four inches long, and one on his temple, which may have been caused by a fall, if he struck his head against something sharp—the five wounds could have been inflicted with this knife—his condition was dangerous; we did not think he would live through the night—he has been in the hospital ever since.
The Prisoner in his defence stated that Lynch attacked him, and they fought and felly and in the excitement he forgot that he had the knife in his hand, which he was using to cut a splint for his chestnuts. He denied saying that he would make Lynch's white shirt red, and said that Haynes did not say so before the Magistrates.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
THIRD COURT.—Saturday, January 18th, and
OLD COURT.—Monday, January 20th, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
160. EDWARD AUGUSTUS INGOLD (30), and ALFRED ATTRIDE (34), falsely applying to 1,080 electric lamp holders a mark so resembling the trade-mark of the Edison and Swan United Electric Light Company as to be calculated to deceive.
MR. C. MATHEWS, MR. C. F. GILL and MR. GUY STEPHENSON Prosecuted; MR. SHULTESS YOUNG appeared for Ingold, and MR. HUTTON and MR. COLLISON for Attride.
THOMAS TUCKER I am a metal stamper—I work at my shop at Mr. Lugdon's, 144, Old Street, St. Luke's—Attride brought me this piece of brasswork about the middle of last October—it had stamped upon it "Edison and Swan, Patent E. Co., Ld."—he said he had a contract
for 25,000 of them; he wished to know what I would charge for making a stamp or marking them with those letters—I said I could mark them if I fixed the stamp on a machine which I used for another purpose, at 7s. per 1,000—he said he would consult his partner, and let me know next day—he came next day and instructed me to get on with the stamp—I asked him for a written order—he said he had not brought one—I handed him this paper, which is one of Mr. Lugdon's billheads, on which he wrote, as it now appears, "James Ford, 22, Downham Road, Kingsland, N.E."—I wrote the words in pencil underneath, the lettering appearing rather indistinct on the brass-work—from that I supposed him to be the person he represented himself to be, and he left this brass with me—he said he would call in a few days with some of the brass-fittings he wished to get marked—the lettering was done by a man I employed, and I fitted the stamp (produced) to the machine—on October 19th he paid me a deposit of 10s.—on the 26th October he had brought me 71/2 gross of these fittings in small quantities—he took them away when they were stamped—I have made this copy of a small leaf of my diary, which enables me to give the dates: on October 31st he received one gross; on November 2nd 11/2 gross, and paid another 10s.; on November 4th he received two gross one dozen; on November 11th one gross eight dozen; 15th, seven dozen; 22nd, six dozen; making fourteen gross ten dozen—sometimes he waited for them and sometimes called again—afterwards the police came, and I made a statement of what I could remember—I was shown some of the fittings, which I recognised as having stamped.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG. I have had no communication with Ingold, that I can remember.
Cross-examined by Collison. I did not know Attride was a roughrider—I know the stamp by the extra pressure I put on the "E"—that is only apparent to me—he gave no reference—I saw no reason for a reference, as he found his own material, and I understood his contract was with the people whose name was to appear—I was paid in advance—he came openly as an ordinary customer—I had no personal knowledge of Edison and Swan.
AUGUSTUS BOWER . I am manager of the Electrical and General Engineering Company, Leadenhall Street—I knew Attride by his applying for a vacancy as traveller in December, 1894—he told me he had been employed by Edison and Swan, and by the Electrical Company—he came again in July Or August, and offered some Edison and Swan holders for sale, with their stamp upon them—he quoted a price which was under the ordinary price, and I inquired how it was that he could sell them so cheaply—he said that a firm with whom he did business owed him some money, and as he could not get it, they handed over these holders as a sort of security against the debt, and, being anxious to get money, he offered them to us at the price mentioned—his explanation seemed satisfactory—I went thoroughly into the matter with him, and believing his statement, I bought two gross and six dozen on August 22nd, and paid him for them—they were sold in two lots—this is his receipt—I paid him £5 on account, and the balance of £21 by cheque afterwards. (The holders were described as a job lot.) He brought some more Edison and Swan holders in November, and quoted a low price—I asked him
why it was so low—he said he got them from a bailiff's assistant, who employed half his time with the bailiff and half with Ingold, and that they were bought in job lots at sales—I purchased from him on that occasion 143 holders for £36 10s., and seventy-two on November 12th for £7 10s.—Attride, who had delivered some of Ingold's holders, called in November, and asked me to buy some holders—I said, "Where is Ingold?"—he said, "He is away travelling, and I want some money, I have a few holders to sell; will you buy them?"—he called three times; I refused to buy at the first interview, but at last I did—he said he was Ingold's servant—I said, "Are you a bailiff's assistant?"—he said, "Yes"—I bought half a gross of holders of him for £2 12s. 6d., marked "Edison and Swan;" this is the receipt (produced); it is an open cheque, endorsed "James Ford"—these are two of the holders, the others are sealed up; I have not disposed of any of them.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG. When Ingold came to me in 1894 I had no reason to believe that his representations were untrue—the holders in August were purchased very cheap—I have not been in the habit of buying holders—I have not a licence—as long as they bore the impression of Edison and Swan, and he paid the royalty, that was all I had 'to see to—there was no secrecy—if they looked right I had a perfect right to buy them—I had no communication with Edison and Swan, nor with any person connected with the company; I had a private communication with another firm; am I right in saying the name?—it was after November that I first suspected something was wrong—I do not think I had any communication before November—between the sale by Ingold and my communication with Ford I had a conversation with Mr. Bevis, of the General Electric Light Company, who said that Ingold had no right to sell the holders—I said, "Why not?"—he said he did not think they were right—I said, "Why not? they are stamped"—after that Ford brought in some more, and I bought them—it was the cheapness opened my eyes—they were holders of the Edison and Swan type, marked with their stamp.
Cross-examined by MR. COLLISON. I always looked upon Attride as Ingold's representative.
PAULINE PASTORI . I am single, and keep a tobacconist's shop at 18, Eldon Street, Finsbury—I know both the prisoners as customers, but do not know their names—that man (Findlay) came with them; I do not know his name—they asked leave to have parcels left there in the name of Walters and Co., and letters and postcards came, like these (produced), foreign letters and postcards from Cologne—I think Ingold took all the letters—there may have been fifteen parcels all from abroad—I knew the prisoners as Inky No. 1 and Inky No. 2—No. 1 was Ingold—I only occupy the shop, I do not live there—both the left parcels there sometimes for two or three days, and called for them, parcels other than those which came from Germany—the police found two parcels there; they had not come from Germany, they had been left—Attride did not tell me what he was—I knew Ingold was in the electric light way, but did not know where he carried on his business; he had parcels left there for five or six months before his arrest—Attride has been coming there five or six weeks, and Ingold a much longer time.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG. One or two postcards came in the name of Warburton; I cannot say who received them—Attride carried the parcels in quite an open manner, and, to all appearance, as Ingold's servant.
Re-examined. This is one of the postcards sent to my place—I am a Laplander; that is next door to a German.
THOMAS MILLINGTON FINDLAY . I am a clerk in the Edison and Swan Electric Light Company at their London office—I knew Ingold as an invoice clerk—he left their service in 1892, and went into the service of the Electrical Company, Charing Cross Road, who are licensees of Edison's patent—I met Ingold from time to time after he left; he was living at Ilford, and I at Walthamstow—at the beginning of 1895 I used to meet him at a public-house, 97, Moorgate Street; he told me he was receiving electrical holders from Germany, and getting them stamped with Edison and Swan's patent mark, and then sold them to different firms as genuine Swan holders—he asked if I would receive a parcel of holders from Mr. Freeman at my house at Walthamstow, and I consented—they were in the name of T. M. Findlay and Co., electrical and railway contractors, and there were almost immediately consigned to me 1,500 holders by Mr. Cramer in that name—these are some of the invoices (produced)—I brought them into the City to Ingold in parcels of about a dozen at a time—they were without a mark—I knew I was doing wrong—we took them to Putney and got them stamped by Cosgrave, who was in their employment, and then brought them to London, and left them at cloak-rooms of some of the railway stations, and they were called for as they were sold—Ingold Always took the ticket, unless I left them, and took the ticket afterwards—I did not leave any at the public-house at Moorgate Street, but sometimes we left them at public-houses—the letters to Cramer were typed, and I signed them, "T. M. F. and Co." Ingold received the money; I got £2 for receiving goods and about £8 besides—I was out of employment, and still am so—I have always been a clerk—I received very nearly 4,000 holders from Cramer from time to time—I have been with Ingold to the cigar-shop kept by Pauline Pastori—holders were also consigned to Ryder and Co., of Wandsworth, Woodcock at Peckham, and Adamson at Clapham—I know Side and Edwards and Attride and Co.—there was no such firm as Walters and Co.—Ingold went to Cologne in August, and told me he had seen Cramer, and arranged to pay by bill, and he would send more goods—bills were sent to me, which I signed and sent back; this is one (produced)—I was the acceptor—Cramer drew them on me—I accepted two, but I never paid them—as far as I know, Walters and Co. never paid any bill—Ingold told me that Ryder was his father-in-law; he did a little in the electro trade, selling lamps—when this had been going on for some time, Cosgrave was discharged from his employment—he used to take the stamp home from Pattesson and Cooper's to his house, and use it at night; but when he was dismissed he had not access to it—I introduced Attwright to Ingold at the beginning of October; he had nothing to do with electrical business—Ingold said that he would have a stamp made, and Ingold said that one had been made, and that he was getting holders stamped at a place in Old Street, and Attride was taking them there,
and that he generally met Attride in Bishopsgate Churchyard—Ingold said that if it was found out he would get away; he said, "When the bills are due I shall go away and give information to Edison and Swan, and make about £20"—I thought it over, and I went first—I gave information on August 14th or 15th, but did not get the £20—whatever I did after that date I was acting under the instructions of the company—I communicated the names of the people where the things were being disposed of after they were marked: Merritt, Lilywhite, Hundred, Young, and others.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG. I have been promised £100 if I am correct, and the persons are convicted. (A document to this effect signed CHARLES GOVER was here put in.) I think you asked me at the Police-court if I had been promised anything if the prisoners were convicted, and I said "No"—that was untrue—I do not know whether he said that he was selling the holders as genuine; I have never seen any holders like these (Tucker's holders) before—those with which I was in the habit of dealing were marked "E. and S., Limited," and these are marked "E. Co., Limited"—the holders I refer to as stamped by Cosgrave were stamped under Marsden's directions, I understand—I do not know that Ingold said that he was going to see Cramer about payment; he said that he had to make arrangements that the thing should be met by a bill—I did not type any of the letters myself; he dictated them and got it done—Marsden was in the country when I informed on August 14th or 15th—I cannot explain why nothing was done till November after I informed—I introduced Ingold to Attride—I had been in communication with the Edison and Swan Co.—he did not suggest to me that I should take Ingold to somebody to receive goods—I have not suggested to anybody else that I would give anybody anything out of the £100. Ingold has not said to me that he would defy the Edison and Swan Co. to touch him; he said that he did not fear them, meaning that he would be able to get out of it—I believe he thought they would bring a civil action against him—I have never discussed the Merchandise marks Act with him—I said at the Police-court, "I introduced Attride as a friend of mine to Mr. Ingold, in order that he might receive a parcel"—the parcel was goods from Germany, and I think it would contain holders—trapping Attride did not come out of my own head; Ingold suggested it—I was with Attride, and Ingold asked to be introduced—it was simply as you might introduce an employed to an employer—I did not know at that time that a person who fraudulently applied a trade-mark was criminally responsible; I thought it was a case for a civil action.
Cross-examined by MR. COLLISON. I know Mr. Leon—he is connected with Attride—Attride was ill About October—it is not true that I asked him to take a parcel into his house for me when he was ill, or that I said I would pay him for taking it in—he may have said, "Very well, Tom, I will do it for you; I will take in the parcel"—he had already got the goods when he met with an accident—it was not true that a box was delivered for me just after his accident, it was for Ingold, he received it, I believe, before he was ill, because he assisted me and my brother to bring some of the goods as far as Haggerston Railway Station.
99, Moorgate Street, and he showed me some sample holders, unstamped; he said he was agent to Mr. Cramer, at Cologne, and asked if I would order some; I ordered 750 through him, and they were consigned direct to me by Cramer—this is the invoice; it is for £24 7s. 5d.—when I got them they were unstamped—I sold 300 to go abroad, but found they would not sell unless they were stamped; I told Ingold so, and he suggested my getting then stamped through him—I was to go to Cosgrave, at Church Road, Fulham; Cosgrave was not in, and I was to call again in the evening—he asked me to take a parcel away for him—I saw Ingold afterwards, and he told me to call in the evening; he asked me to bring a parcel away with me for him—a few days afterwards I went again, and left twenty-five dozen, and received them back stamped with the trade-mark of Edison and Swan—I bought other stamped holders from Ingold—I produced to the police stamped holders I bought from him—I first saw Attride about October in a public-house, but did not speak to him—when I did see him to speak to, he suggested he should get some holders stamped for me; he said he would let me have them the next day—I made an appointment to meet him in the City Road a few days afterwards—I brought him six dozen unstamped holders; he said it would take him about twenty minutes to get them stamped—at that time I was in communication with the Edison and Swan people—steps were being taken to find out where the stamping was going on, and I was acting under Edison and Swan's directions—I had found out that this was being improperly done—they wrote and asked to see me—I did not know where Attride was going to take them to, but I knew he was going to be followed—he came back in about half an hour with the holders stamped—I paid him 7s. 6d.—from first to last I got over 1,000 stamped holders from Ingold.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG. I did not get any stamped holders, from Marsden direct—I knew Marsden to be a foreman of Patterson and Cooper's—twenty-five dozen were my holders—I paid Musgrave 5s. 3d. for stamping them—I did not know the regular price, I paid more afterwards—I met Marsden, and he said he wanted more money—I told In-gold I had paid Marsden more money—I think Ingold was present, but not in communication with us—I paid Marsden without communicating with Ingold—I paid him because I had not seen him previously with reference to the twenty-five dozen—I have no idea what the royalty on the twenty-five dozen would be—information was given to Edison and Swan about the end of August, or the beginning of September—I went to them when I heard what Marsden said about his being stopped, and that his firm had a letter from Ashurst, Crispe, Morris and Company—I asked them how I stood in the matter—they did not threaten me—they told me they could come on everybody afterwards for royalty who had been using the holders—by September I knew it was wrong to get the holders stamped—I believe Ingold sold some unstamped for export—there is a market for them abroad without the stamp, but not in England—I have heard of Campbell—I never met him—I have had no communication with the Electrical Engineering Company—I wrote to Edison and Swan afterwards—they answered the letter—I have destroyed the letter—it said, would I call?—on calling they suggested I should get six dozen stamped for them—I have not received any payment, nor was
I promised any, but I thought as I bought these other holders, I was only getting them stamped out of an obligation to them—I heard of £100 being offered by them for information—I do not know what proceedings they will take against me—I had no communication with them through Findlay—I was not aware he was giving information—I knew it now—I just knew him at the Police-court—Findlay owes me a few shillings he has borrowed from time to time in sums of 5s. and 2s.—I did not enter into betting transactions with him.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. Attride told me he was working for Ingold—Attride first mentioned the holders to me—I met him by chance when he was waiting for Ingold—no one was present when he mentioned the holders—I did not pay particular attention to the prisoner's conversation about the holders.
EDWARD JAMES PATTERSON . I am one of the firm of Patterson and Cooper, Electrical engineers, of 3, Princes' Mansions, Victoria Street, Westminster—the early part of last year Marsden and Cosgrave were in our employment, Marsden as out-door foreman and Cosgrave as store-keeper—our firm has a licence from Edison and Swan to manufacture and sell electric lamp holders—we are bound under penalties to stamp every holder—we cannot sell excepting at a fixed rate and a discount which may vary from time to time, on their standard price—the present rate of discount is 33 1/3—we pay them a royalty of ten per cent, upon the gross selling price of the holder (Licence produced)—the stamp was in Cosgrave's charge at Victoria Street—his duty was to stamp the holders—Marsden had no authority over it—in consequence of information which reached us late in September, I had an interview with Mr. Crispe, of Ashurst, Crispe, Morris and Company, the solicitors for the Edison and Swan Company, on 25th September, which was followed on the 26th by an interview between myself, Marsden, and Cosgrave—as a consequence of that interview I discharged them both.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG. A number of our holders have been made in Germany from a pattern we supply—we are not obliged to make them to a certain pattern provided the essential elements of the patent are present—before our licence we bought them from the Edison and Swan Company and afterwards, but which are those particular holders I could not say—we pay a royalty of £100 a year to Edison and Swan—I consider we are entitled to get them from Germany—we have not received a remonstrance from Edison and Swan for so doing—it is a general custom of the trade—the holders had been made by myself and other people without taking out a licence—I was thus liable to an action—I agreed not to do so—the trademark, "Edi-Swan," was modified—I did not think it necessary to stamp the holders "Made in Germany"—I had an agent named Campbell—I had no difficulty with him—I knew nothing about Campbell selling holders at less than cost price—all I guarantee is that the royalty on the holders shall be paid, and that they are well made, and in accordance with the patents—I take care the holders are as well made as they can be in England—an expert might find something different, but the holders are practically undistinguishable from the holders Edison and Swan sell in England—anyone would say they are as good a holder as sold in the trade—they are perfectly good for the purpose for which they are made.
Broad Street, City—I was with another officer—I said, "We are police-officers. I hold a warrant for your arrest"—it was afterwards read over to him—he made no reply—on the way to the station he said, "Is there anyone else arrested?"—I said, "Ingold is arrested"—he said, "He is the cause of all this"—I then said, "I have been informed that you sold a parcel of goods yesterday"—he said, "That is quite right, I did; I sold about six dozen for £2 12s. 6d. to Mr. Bower, the manager to the Electrical and General Engineers, 85, Leadenhall Street"—I found on him this letter from Cramer, the envelope addressed to Attride and Co.—I went to 26, Richmond Road, Dalston—I was handed by Attride's wife twenty-two parts of lamp-holders unstamped—they would make about a dozen holders—Attride was charged with Cosgrave—he made no reply—there is a warrant out against Marsden, he has not been arrested yet—on December 3rd I went to 17, Eldon Street, a tobacconist's shop, kept by Mrs. Pastori—she gave me this parcel of twelve dozen holders, stamped "Edison and Swan Electric Company, Limited."
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. Attride was a rough-rider for Leon—he has not only a good character, but is respectably connected.
The witness Tucker identified the holders found in this parcel as having been stamped by him.
JAMES SCOTT (Sergeant G). On November 27th I arrested Ingold on a warrant at the Park Hotel, Cardiff—I read it to him—he made no reply—it charged him with forging the Edison and Swan trade mark—I conveyed him to London, and handed him over to Inspector Leach—I found these six holders in his bag—three are stamped, and three unstamped.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG When arrested Ingold was about his ordinary business as an electrical agent—he had the usual travellers samples—he made no resistance.
ALFRED LEACH (Detective Inspector). I have had charge of this case—warrants were issued for the arrest of Cosgrave and Marsden—I have made every effort to execute the warrant against Marsden, but without success—after Ingold's arrest I went to 15, Woodlands Road, Ilford, with Scott—in the top back room I found this press-copy letter-book and a number of letters from Cramer, of Cologne, showing a large supply of holders.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG. Ingold occupied the house as a married man—he gave me liberty to make inquiries in the house—there were odds and ends about, the holders were under boxes—there was no concealment—the place was untidy—he has not been charged before to my knowledge.
HENRY CHARLES GOVER . I am the secretary of the Edison and Swan United Electric Light Company, Limited, at 36 and 37, Cheapside, their London office—the company is the registered holder of the patent, but not the patentee—this is a certified copy of the registration of the trade-mark (produced) obtained from the Branch Patent Office, in Southampton Buildings—our company, as the licensees, have the right to stamp the holders with the trademark, to grant licences to others to use initials or other marks approved by the Company—the mark "Edison and Swan E. Co., Ld.," is granted to the Electrical Engineering Co., of Charing Cross Road"—the object of the difference in the trade-mark
is to enable the company to distinguish their holders from ours—the "Edi-Swan" is another trademark, which our company use exclusively—our licensees mark is "Edison and Swan" invariably—we grant no licences with the mark "Edi-Swan"—since we withdrew the right to use the words "Edi-Swan," the prisoners were not licensees, nor Mr. Tucker, nor Marsden, nor Cosgrave—the royalty on each holder is 2d. or upwards, which should represent 10 per cent, on the standard or fixed price—the selling price of this holder is 2s. 6d. (One stamped by Tucker), of this one the same, this one with the switch for turning on or off the current, from 4s. 6d. to 5s.
Cross-examined by MR. YOUNG. The letters on these holdersare printed in a distinctive manner, though the form of the letter is not the same—our trademark dates from 1875—the holder at 2s. 6d. would be subject to 33 per cent, reduction, which would make it 1s. 8d.—I do not know the cost of making them—our Company make them—one of our licensees have their holders made in Germany—we make no remonstrance—we are compelled to go to America—many licensees do not put initials—the earlier licences were first granted in 1890—on reference I find the date of the alteration made by the company is the 26th August, 1891—none of the holders Ingold is accused of stamping that I have seen are stamped "Edi-Swan"—so far as form is concerned there is very little difference between the prisoner's holders and ours—our board of directors consider every application for a licence, and in some instances, not in all, they grant them, and in those cases they require the holders to be stamped "Edison and Swan"—we manufacture holders in hundreds of thousands—the licensees may make their own but they are bound to put on our trademark—they cannot sell below a certain price, nor contest the validity of our patent—Ingold's name was mentioned some time after these holders were referred to, and at the time I wrote my letter about it I had no knowledge of any names or persons—I did not see Findlay till the date of my letter in September—Davis did not come to me—I heard nothing of Davis until my letter—our firm did not approach Ingold with a view of offering him money to inform the firm respecting the improper stamp; we had been making inquiries, and trying to find out the wrongdoers, and we made the discovery by Findlay coming to us—Mr. Moffatt, our engineer, was looking about a great many months—I am aware he had an interview with Ingold—he had no authority to offer Ingold money, and I do not know that he did so—I did not so instruct him—I knew Ingold was approached with a desire to discover where this making was going on—that was before Findlay and Davis gave information—Ingold did not refuse to give information; he said he knew nothing about it—I did not see him—I never had any communication with Campbell—nor with Patterson and Cooper—I never knew Marsden—I complain of our stamp being imitated—everyone in the electrical trade, looking at them, would consider that the prisoner's holders were royalty paid holders.
Re-examined. My letter to Patterson and Cooper, dated August 26th, 1891, asks them to place the words "Edison and Swan" on their holders, and states that we could continue to use the words "Edi-Swan"—I think Ingold was then in our service—so far as I know only one of our licensees has his holders made in Germany—they are marked "Made in
Germany"—the name of the German firm is Muller—I did not know till this case that Patterson and Cooper had their holders made in Germany.
By MR. YOUNG. The words "Made in Germany" have not been added since this action was taken—I was not aware Williams and Josephs got holders from Germany—the Electrical Company, of Charing Cross Road, are our agents.
MR. YOUNG submitted that there was no case to go to the JURY; that the COURT could not be called upon to protect a trademark which the owners let out on hire to other persons, and over which they exercised no supervision; he referred to several cases in support of his argument, but the Common Serjeant was of opinion that the cases referred to did not apply to the present form of charge, and that the case must be left to the JURY, whether the mark on the goods so nearly resembled the trademark of the prosecutors as would be calculated to deceive.
MR. BOWER (Re-examined by MR. YOUNG). This (produced) is an un-stamped holder found in the possession of Ingold—on examining it I say at once it is an Edison and Swan patent holder; it is their pattern, and has been manufactured in Germany.
Witnesses for the Defence.
EDWARD AUGUSTUS INGOLD (The Defendant). I am an electrical engineer, employed by Cremer, of Cologne—I was with Edison and Swan; I tendered my resignation; they had a manufactory in Germany there as well—Cremer was with them in Germany—fifteen or eighteen months ago Marsden showed me in a book that a trademark must be a fancy word or a name printed in a particular manner, and that "Ediswan" was their trademark, and Edison and Swan was nothing at all, and if contested he would not mind fighting the matter out—Davidson was present at the interview—there were many interviews—I informed Cremer that I wanted holders made, and he promised to send the whole over here to be stamped—I stipulated that the trademark was to be "Edison and Swan," not "Ediswan"—they granted licences—I did not regard the words "Edison and Swan" as a trademark when I applied them—I was always prepared to meet Edison and Swan—last September Mr. Burgess, a clerk in the Edison and Swan Company, came to my house with a message from Mr. Moffat, of Edison and Swan, to come and see them at their London office—I went and saw Mr. Moffat; he offered me a lump sum of money if I would give information respecting licensees who were selling at more than 33 per cent.—he asked me not to stamp holders without a licence—I told him that in my opinion the licensees stamping "Edison and Swan" were using words which were not the trademark, and I refused to entertain his offer—all the bills due have been met except one—I gave my wife directions not to destroy any letter of Savory's, or anyone else's—there was no secrecy whatever; my wife frequently complained that there were holders in every room in the house—I employed Attride, and gave him 15s. weekly, but I only employed him from 9.30 to 3—he was a rough-rider—Sergeant Scott arrested me—I said that I was very sorry Attride was brought into it, as he was my servant at 15s. a week.
Cross-examined by MR. GILL. I employed him to go to Tucker's and get the stamp made, and to get them stamped, and fetch them away—I
did not tell him to pass himself off under the name of Ford—being my servant, I should have to take the consequences of any action against him—I knew he was using the name of Ford—I heard him say he and his partner had contracted to supply 25,000 of these, and should he get them in a different name—I told him for trade reasons he had better not get them all in my name, as, being Leon's rough-rider, he would be known—I did not go myself, because it was out of my way; I had not time to spare; it would take me about an hour—I did not know that he was out of employment and without means; I supplied him with 10s. a week—I know that Attride had apartments at 6, Richmond Road, Kingsland; I never went upstairs—Walters and Co. carried on business at Madame Pastori's—I got some 13,000 holders delivered here from Cologne; I did not have 3,000 at the time of my arrest, because the larger part were stamped—I left them at different cloak-rooms, as any commercial traveller would—I do not know that Cosgrave was in the employ of Patterson and Cooper; I know where he lived—I did not take an order to his house; I sent Ryder, my father-in-law—I did not have them fetched away in the morning—I did not know that this man was taking the stamp home at night and bringing it back in the morning—I was in the employ of the licensee—I swear that I never inquired who Cosgrave was; I never saw him till June 4th, Derby day—I do not know that he was in the employ some time, but at the end of December I think it was, Marsden told me that he and Cosgrave were to be discharged, and Marsden said he was very sorry about Cosgrave, because he did not know anything about the stamping—what he did was under direction—I swear that I did not know that they were being stamped by Cosgrave in the evening—I found that he was a working man employed by Patterson and Cooper; I did not then make inquiry about the stamping—I knew he was not under Marsden's direction, and I think it was about three weeks after that I saw him again—I knew that he was acting fraudulently as far as his employers were concerned, yet I went on just the same—I did not stamp because I had something else to do that is the only answer I can give—I represented to Mr. Bower that I employed a bailiff's man—that was spoken of as a joke; Mr. Bower must have known that—Attride took the part of the bailiff's man—I believe I told Attride what had passed between Mr. Bower and myself—Mr. Bower must have shut his eyes very close not to know that these things had forged marks on them—I don't suggest that he knew it, but the probability was that he did think so—I think he must have known so from the price—that was not the biggest order I had ever given; I had given orders for £1,500 before—I think this was the largest order I had put through Mr. P.; it was given me by Baxendale, of Manchester, a firm established before the commencement of this century—I can't say positively that I had made this jocular remark to Mr. Bower about the bailiff's man; I certainly believe that I did—it was a passing excuse—I was anxious that Mr. Bower, or any other customer, should not be involved in any action with Edison and Swan in the matter—I did not consider this to be a trade-mark—I did not know it was Patterson and Cooper's stamp for some time afterwards—I do not remember saying that I got the goods as security for a debt—I did not tell Mr. Bower so; I deny it entirely—Attride never seriously represented
himself as anything but my servant—I sent him to Tucker because I had had a stamp made there before, last November twelve months; Edison and Swan's stamp—I went myself to Tucker on that occasion—I sent Attride to repeat a similar order, only altering the form of it—I expect he would know about that—I did not know anything about electric light—Tucker would know exactly what I should want—either Attride or I wrote these letters of Attride and Co.—I think the first one was written at Finlay's dictation.
SOPHIA INGOLD . I am the wife of the prisoner Ingold; we have been married about eighteen months—I know Davis; he was a frequent visitor at our house from soon after our marriage up to a few weeks before the arrest—I have heard my husband and Davis speak about a dispute with Edison and Swan, that there was a difficulty, and he was prepared to fight it—I always understood from my husband that I was never to destroy any papers and letters, and if anyone called he would be pleased to keep any appointment they liked to make—somebody did call—I have seen Mr. Cramer since these proceedings.
ALFRED ATTRIDE (The Defendant) Up to Saturday last I was lodging at 26, Richmond Road, Kingsland Road—I occupied one room, a bedroom and sittingroom—I was employed by Mr. Leon as a rough-rider at the Aquarium; I was getting £3 a week for that, and an occasional benefit—in October he was bitten by a big dog, and had to discontinue the business—about 12th October Mr. Finlay introduced me to Ingold, and I was his servant at 15s. a week, and if I worked late he gave me something more—what I did was under Ingold's direction—I gave the name of Ford, that was my professional name; I gave that name on account of my name being all over London as a professional rider—I never described myself as Attride and Co., or gave authority to anyone so to describe me, or that I was a partner of Tucker's—I never said that I had a partner, or that I must consult my partner; I must consult someone.
Cross-examined. Finlay introduced me to Ingold outside a public-house—I did not know at that time that Ingold had no place of business—I thought he had business from his house—I did not know that he had no place of business till after this case came out; I then found that his only business was leaving parcels at public-houses—I left them where he told me, and fetched them from there—I was told by Ingold to order the stamping—I had never heard the name of Edison and Swan—I was in Ingold's employ, and should do anything he told me—I did not know that he had letters from abroad at the tobacconist's shop—I did not know that goods were ordered in the name of Attride and Co. till I received the parcel—I gave the address where I had my one room—Finlay asked me to receive this parcel before I knew Ingold—he gave me the stamp barrow near the Bank of England, in the street—I took it to Tucker, and was simply to ask him what it would Cost to make the stamp—I gave the name of Ford—I was simply acting under Ingold's instructions—he told me not to give his name, for trade purposes—I represented to Tucker that I had an order for 25,000 of these—Ingold had the orders, and I was to let him know the result—I always went to Tucker's to take things there, and brought them away; Ingold never appeared at Tucker's, to my knowledge—I left
parcels at Pastori's, when Ingold told me; I did not sell any to Mr. Bower; I did not say I was a bailiff's man; I heard him say so—I did not leave a parcel on my own account—I got a cheque for £2 10s.—he knew I came from Ingold.
GEORGE LEON . My correct name is George Sexton—Leon is my professional name—I live at 3, Swanage Road, Wands worth—I am a scientific horse-dealer—I have known Attride twelve or fifteen years; he is thoroughly honest and straightforward.
INGOLD— GUILTY [See next two trials] .
ATTRIDE— NOT GUILTY .
No evidence was offered against Attride.
ATTRIDE— NOT GUILTY .
162. EDWARD AUGUSTUS INGOLD was again indicted with GEORGE COSGRAVE (22) for unlawfully applying and causing to be applied to 300 electric lamp holders a mark resembling a trademark of the Edison and Swan Company, with intent to defraud.
COSGRAVE PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. MATHEWS stated that the prosecution were willing that Cosgrave, who had acted under the influence of Marsden, who had absconded, should be released upon recognizances.
COSGRAVE— Discharged on Recognizances.
INGOLD— Nine Months' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. DRAKE and KYD Prosecuted.
BENJAMIN JAMES TUNBRIDGE . I live at Eden House, Maybank Road, South Woodford—I have a fowl-house at the back of my house, where I keep ducks and fowls—at ten a.m. on January 4th I was called out, and found one or two boards at the side of the fowl-house broken down, and the padlock forced; there were marks like a jemmy—there was one dead duck and one dead fowl in the house; their necks had been wrung—I missed a brown, a black, and a speckled hen, and four white, ducks and a speckled drake—I valued them at £4—I received information, and went to the station and gave a description—I had been ill for some days, and had not seen my fowls since the previous Sunday.
RICHARD GAINSTER (22 J R). On January 3rd I was on duty near the prosecutor's house—I received information, and went and saw that the fowl-house had been broken open, and I was informed that fowls had been stolen—I traced feathers to the prisoner's doorway—he is a
hawker—I knocked at the door—a female inside said, "Who is there?"—I said, "Police"—she said, "You are not coming in to-night"—I opened the door and went in—it was eleven p.m.—the prisoner was taking off his trousers to go to bed—I saw by the dressing-table two fowls and a duck—their necks had just been wrung; they were warm—I said, "How do you account for these?"—he said, "You b——well find out"—I took him into custody—on the way to the station he became very violent—he said he bought seventeen ducks and three fowls at Leaden-hall Market, and then he said it was thirteen ducks and seven fowls—these were recognised by the prosecutor as his property.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I found you had been working at the Butchers' Arms from 7 a.m. till 6 p.m., and that it was impossible for you to have been at Leadenhall Market as you said—the Butchers' Arms is about five minutes' walk from your house—your door was closed; the fastening would be very temporary if it was locked—Martin lives in your house; he came out of prison last month—four ducks and a fowl were found by a constable under your bed—I received information about the fowls being stolen at 10.50—you were facing the chickens by the dressing-table.
By the COURT. Martin is not here; I did not see him that night—I did not see him anywhere near where the fowls were stolen.
EDWARD WILLETT (248 J). I was with Gainster on January 3rd, and accompanied him to the prisoner's house—the prisoner's was sitting on the bed undressing; a duck and two fowls were under his dressing-table, and four ducks and a fowl I found in a bag under his bed—his wife was there and a child.
Cross-examined. Your bedroom is on the left-hand side of the passage—anyone coming in could see these chickens under the table—I did not see you near the prosecutor's.
By the JURY. The prisoner's house is about quarter of a mile from the prosecutor's—I and the other officer traced the chickens by the feathers.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he knew nothing about the ducks and fowls; that he had been at the Butchers' Arms till eleven, and that he believed somebody must have put them into his bedroom as the door was always open.
—He then PLEADED GUILTY**† to a conviction of felony in March, 1880, at this Court. The police stated that he seldom worked, and was a terror to his neighbourhood.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
165. GEORGE JACKSON (28) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to unlawfully obtaining 5s., £2, and £1, by false pretences, having been convicted of felony in 1891. MR. PURCELL, for the prisoner, stated that his uncle in America would employ him.— Nine Months' Hard Labour. And
166. EDWARD PURKISS (34) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to three indictments for embezzleing £54 15s., £45 4s. 6d., and £100, of the London and Joint Stock Bank, Limited, his masters. His defalcations amounted to £19,245.— Five Years Penal Servitude.
Before the Recorder.
MR. KERSHAW Prosecuted.
RICHARD JEWRY . I am a clerk, living at 2, Herbert Street, Plaistow, about twenty minutes' walk from Wood, Dixon, and Co.'s premises—on Sunday night, December 29th, I heard a noise at 11.30, and looked out of window and saw a man climbing over into our back yard—I spoke to my father, and the police were informed, and they came and found the prisoners in a water-closet on our premises opening out of this yard—they were taken into custody—I saw certain things found in the w.c.; they had not been there before.
CHARLES PARNAM (583 K). About 11.45 p.m. on December 29th, I was called by Jewry, and I found the two prisoners in the w.c., and took them into custody—I asked them what they were doing there; they said, "We were going here for a sleep"—I detained them—on searching the w.c. I found in the w.c. pan three boxes of wax vestas, a small screw hammer, a spirit level and a candle—I got assistance and took the prisoners to the station—I searched Occulstone and found on him three boxes of vestas, an india-rubber stamp for the London and County Bank, Stratford Branch, a brass file, and briar pipe.
BENJAMIN GULLY (Detective Constable). I went to the cells at 1.30 on the Monday and saw Meredith who was wearing this coat—I said to him, "I want that coat you are wearing"—he gave it to me—I showed it to Mr. Wood, who identified it as his property.
GEORGE THORNE WOOD . I live at 69, Victoria Avenue, Upton Park, and am manager to Wood and Dixon, vesta manufacturers, of Florence Road—I left their premises safe about five p.m. on 28th—about midnight on 29th I was called and found the premises had been broken open—a sash had been taken out of the window of the dipping shed; and someone had broken into the drying rooms and then broken open the door of the office and turned everything into confusion—this is my working coat; it was hanging in the office on December 28th—I recognised it on Meredith at the Police-court—this screw hammer and spirit level are our property; they were safe on the premises on December 28th when I left—the indiarubber stamp (which we use for stamping cheques) and these pipes and the tobacco pouch were safe in the office.
Meredith, in his defence, stated that he was going home when he saw two parcels in the road and a coat hanging on the railings, and meant to take them to the station, but they were found in the w.c.
—Meredith then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction of felony in July, 1893, and Occulstone** to a conviction at this Court in July, 1894.
MEREDITH— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
OCCULSTONE— Twelve Month's Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
MESSRS. C. F. GILL and BODKIN Prosecuted, and MR. GUY STEPHENSON
Defended at the request of the Court.
HENRIETTA DAY . I am the wife of John Alfred Day, of 76, Mill Road, Lewisham—I knew Mrs. Morgan, the prisoner's wife—she lived on the opposite side of the road. On the evening of December 20th, about twenty minutes to seven, I was in Mill Road, opposite the Mill House—I there saw the prisoner and his wife, they appeared to be quarrelling—I heard their voices; I only heard the woman say that she had been a good mother to the children—they walked along in the direction of the corner of the blank wall opposite the Mill House; a little further on I saw the prisoner pull her down on to her knees; I then saw something glitter in his hand—he raised his hand, and struck her twice in the throat, across the neck—she got up off her knees, and ran toward a pony barrow that stood near the Mill—she struck against the pony barrow, took two or three staggers, and then fell on her face in the middle of the road—I did not notice what the prisoner did then—I ran to the Mill House door and raised an alarm—Mr. Catt, the manager, and three others came out—the prisoner was then standing at his wife's head, muttering something, I could not hear what it was; he appeared to be clasping something in his hand—I pointed him out to Mr. Catt—the prisoner walked away—I did not see him again that night—I saw that the woman was bleeding very much from the neck; she was making a very dreadful noise from the throat, a rattling in the throat—I left the prisoner there with Mr. Catt and the others.
Cross-examined. I have heard that the prisoner has been apart from his wife for three months or so; I do not know it—when they first passed me I did not hear what was said; they were both talking loud—the prisoner is deaf—I did not hear the woman say "Bill is coming home directly, and he will murder you"—I could not hear what was said distinctly; I am not very quick at hearing—they were quarrelling; they were both talking angrily—he forced her on to the ground; I could not say whether he had hold of her when she was on her knees—I could not see very clearly—he had hold of her before—I thought he struck her twice—I have heard that there was only one wound found in the neck—I only knew the prisoner by sight before this.
GEORGE CATT . I am a clerk to Messrs. Robinson at the Mill at Lewisham; I live at the Mill House—on Friday evening, December 20th, I was in my office; my attention was attracted by hearing the screams of a woman—I ran to the door at once; I saw Mrs. Day; I also saw the prisoner at the same time—I knew him by the nickname of Rattle; he was standing in the middle of the road, right opposite the door—when I came out the prisoner said, "You b——b——, if you follow me, I told you I would do it"—he was then walking away, and he turned round towards where I found the deceased, looking towards the body—she was lying on her face about a yard and a-half from the path, about two or three yards from him—I realised at once that something serious had happened—she was lying in a pool of blood, it apparently came from under her face—I called someone out, and went for the police and a doctor, and sent for a towel—the woman uttered one groan, it was a gurgling sound
which lasted about two or three seconds; there was no movement whatever—after stating what he did the prisoner walked away; I turned to see if I could find him, and he was gone, I turned first to the woman, and remained with the body until the doctor came.
Cross-examined. I had known the prisoner about eighteen months by the nickname I have mentioned—I knew nothing about his history—it was very dark that night.
WALTER SAKER (59 PR). About ten minutes to seven on the night of December 20th, I was fetched to the Mill Road, Lewisham, and there found the body of a woman lying in the road—she was bleeding from a wound near the left ear—Dr. Barnett came—I afterwards assisted in taking the body to the mortuary.
FRANK SEPTIMUS BARNETT . I am a medical man, practising at 19, High Street, Lewisham—about quarter to seven on the night of December 20th, I was fetched to Mill Road, I there found the dead body of a woman lying on her back on the road; she had been dead only a few minutes—the clothes round her neck were soaked with blood from a wound on the left side of the neck—two days afterwards at the mortuary I made an examination of the body; it was well nourished and healthy—I examined the wound on the neck, it was about an inch in length and between three and four inches deep, its direction was downward, forward and inwards, just below the angle of the left lower jaw; it penetrated the external carotid artery and the internal jugular vein—there had been considerable loss Of blood—there were no other marks or wounds, with the exception of an abrasion of the right knee-cap, that was slight and recent—the wound in the neck was a clean cut wound—this knife was afterwards shown me; the wound could have been caused by it; it must have required considerable force; blood would have spurted either from the artery or the vein—on December 22nd I was shown the cuff of a coat—I found on it two small spots of blood—the marks on the knife I thought were blood marks—the cause of death was hæmorrhage from the wound.
Cross-examined. There was only one blow—I could not say whether the abrasion on the knee was of the same date—it was the sort of abrasion that would be caused by the woman falling on her knee; there were marks of soil above it.
MARTHA MORGAN . I am the prisoner's daughter; I live at 41, Mill Road, Lewisham—my mother was about 53 years old; I lived with her; my father ceased to live with her about three or four months ago, and went to live some distance off—at that time my mother, I, and other of the children went to live at 41, Mill Road; mother had work at the Lewisham Laundry, and supported herself in that way—father did not come to the house at all—I believe he had taken to drink after the separation—mother was a very sober woman—on the evening of December 20th I was at 18, Trinity Grove, Blackheath—about twenty minutes to seven father came there; that is about twenty minutes walk from Mill Road—he knocked at the door, and asked if Doll was there—that is the name I go by—I opened the door—he said, "Is Doll here?"—I said, "Yes; I am Doll"—he said, "You had better get off home; your mother wants you"—I said, "What for?"—he said, "You had better go and
see"—he said no more; he walked away—I am engaged to be married to a man named Bill.
Cross-examined. I am not yet married; there were quarrels sometimes; I believe my father went away from home of his own accord—I do not remember Bill giving my father a black eye; I don't think it ever happened; they did not get on very well together—there are nine of us in family—we were not very comfortable at home while I was at home—about eighteen months or two years ago I remember father falling out of a boat into the water; I can't say when that was—my father has been ill; he had a paralytic stroke—I never saw my father and mother together after they separated.
Re-examined. At the time of the separation I was in service.
GEORGE WILLIAM BRACY . I am landlord of the King's Arms public-house, Trinity Street, Blackheath Hill—I have known the prisoner twenty years—on the morning of December 20th, about five minutes to seven, he came to my house and had half a pint of beer and a pennyworth of tobacco—he seemed as sober as a judge—he looked a little troubled—he looked muddled, as if he had been in a bother—I said, "Rattle, you look a bit upset; what is the matter with you?"—he said, "I am a bit upset"—I said, "You must not be upset, your daughter is going to get married; you ought to keep yourself a bit quiet"—he asked me if I knew where Bill lived—I told him that he lived up the street, two or three doors, but I did not know what number it was—I noticed his right hand, there was some blood on it—he said he had punched somebody in the b——nose—he did not say who it was—he said when they heard the news there would be no wedding come off—I said he rather surprised me; I should like to see him go on happy—I did not ask him anything more about it—he said he had trouble at home—he had been away from his wife three months—he gave me this knife—he said he expected he should be lagged before he went home—he was not in my place more than about five or six minutes.
Cross-examined. I had seen a good deal of him during the twenty years—he went about selling shrimps—I did not know of his having had a paralytic stroke—I heard of it—I was not living at Greenwich then—he was always a hard-working man—I had spoken to him before about the wedding—I knew nothing about his home.
WILLIAM SEXTON . I am a cabman, and live at 12, Creek Road, Deptford—about half-past eleven in the morning of December 21st I found this knife inside the railway arch, about one hundred yards from the Mill House—there were marks of blood on it—I took it to the Police-station.
JOHN CURLING . I am a stevedore, and live at 42, Creek Road, Deptford, a lodging-house—I know the prisoner, he used to lodge there for about four months, until he was taken into custody—I remember giving him a knife—this knife has a different point to the one I gave him, it might have been rounded off easily—he was a hawker of shrimps and fish.
HARRY SMALE (Police-Sergeant P). About eleven on the night of December 20th I saw the prisoner in Creek Road, Deptford, walking along the pavement, alone—I said to him, "Morgan, I am going to arrest you for the wilful murder of your wife, be careful what you say, as whatever
you do say may be given in evidence against you"—he heard what I said, and apparently understood it—he was the worse for liquor—he replied, "Yes, I plead guilty; it is all through my sons and daughters. I met my wife to-night and asked her how we were going on. She said, Bill is coming along directly, and if you interfere with me he will kill you, then I let her go, and I out with my knife and stabbed it into her. I will pay my life for hers; but she was a good one. Bill has given me two black eyes, and that is after keeping him thirty-two years. I have had one or two half-pints now, but when I did it I was honest and sober"—he was then taken to the station, and put in the dock, and as he commenced to speak he was further cautioned by Detective Inspector Fox—he then said, "I went up to my daughter when I had done it, and they are the vagabonds who caused it. I have been sparring about ever since I done it. I will stand to it; I'll tell you straight. I said to her, 'What about the ones that are going to be married?' I had one or two words with her, and asked her to go to the MidKent; that is a public-house just by the Lewisham Station—then I thought that Bill was coming along, and I thought, 'Here goes!' and how I did it I don't know, and I made no more to do, I jobbed the knife into, her neck, and dropped it to the ground"—next day he was taken before the Magistrate, and made a statement in the Male Prisoners' Waiting Room—I had previously cautioned him not to say anything to me, but he said, "Have you found the knife?"—I said, "No"—he said, "I put it through, the railings at the approach to the Lewisham Junction, opposite the Mid-Kent public-house—it was a black-handled table-knife, with the top broken, off"—that is the knife produced by Sexton—the prisoner was wearing a coat when I arrested him—I took it off, and showed it to Dr. Barnett, together with the knife.
DR. BARNETT (Re-called). A paralytic stroke might possibly tend to make a man have less control over his actions; it would depend on the style of blow—I did not attend the prisoner.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. All I have got to say is it was through my sons and daughters keeping bad hours at night and getting up at ten in the morning, and the dear wife working hard and me toiling the streets to keep them. Work, they won't; they won't keep a place a month, just to get outside, show and flirt and play about—the poor soul suffered for it. God bless her! I am satisfied she has gone. I have been good to her, and I will go through it for her.
ALFRED MORGAN . I live at 28, Roden Street, Greenwich—I am twenty-eight years of age—I left home about eleven years ago, and began to work for myself—I was away two years, while I was at work at Greenwich market—that was seven years ago—I have since lived regularly at home.
Cross-examined. I remember my father having an attack of paralysis between six and seven years ago—I was at home then—father has had several accidents—previous to his paralysis he had been a teetotaler ten or eleven years—Dr. Burrows, of Lee, attended him—the doctor is alive—since his illness father took occasionally intoxicating liquors—I saw him at intervals—the only difference when he was in drink was that I do not think he was in his right mind—he was very much more excitable after his illness.
Re-examined. He was in the habit of going about his business in the fish market—there was no change in that respect after the accident.
GUILTY — DEATH .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. HOME Prosecuted.
WALTER FREDERICK QUILLET . I live at 10, Reginald Place—at 12.10 on the night of December 6th I was putting my barrow and baked-potato can away in the yard, and heard someone behind me—I was putting the handles down, and turning to see who it was, when the prisoner took off the barrow a piece of iron which I use as a poker, and struck me on the eye—I fell, and while on the ground I felt his hand in my pocket—I missed 3s.—I knew the prisoner by sight before, and by the name of Simon Cane—I shouted "Police! stop Simon Cane, he has robbed me"—he got away—I afterwards recognised him at the police-station—he and another man had threatened me for nearly a fortnight, for the reason that I would not serve them for their black-guardliness—on the 5th I had applied to the Magistrate for advice about them, and said who it was.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. The first time you came to my stand and insulted me was on the 23rd—it continued to December 6th—you threatened to double me up, and put me in the can and bake me, with obscene language—each time you came you threatened and insulted me—I had other money besides the 3s. in another pocket—you fell with me—I did not take the piece of iron from you; I found it on the ground afterwards—I felt you lying on me when I was on the ground, and I felt your hand in my pocket—as soon as you had the money you made off—I gave information to the police, and they reported it at the station—you suggested at the Police-court that I had threatened you, and struck you with the poker; it was not true.
MARK WRIGHT (426 R). I arrested the prisoner about eight p.m. on December 6th—I was in plain clothes, off duty—I said, "I am a police-constable; I shall take you into custody"—he said, "All right, I know what it is for; it is for knocking the old potato bloke last night"—I said, "Yes, assaulting him and robbing him of 3s."—he said, "All right"—at the station he was placed with eight others and identified at once—when charged the poker was produced—the prisoner said, "That is not the poker; it was a shorter one I struck him with"—afterwards he said, "Why don't you bring a crowbar?"—he also said when charged, "I did hit him, but I did not take his money."
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. The man says I have been threatening him for a fortnight, and I can prove I have not been in Deptford; it is all false his saying I struck him with a poker and took the money from him; he is only putting it on me because another man he wants is not catched.
The Prisoner, in his defence, stated that he went to ask Quilley if he meant to summon him; that Quilley shaved him aside, and then struck him on the shin with a piece of iron, and that he struck Quilley back, and was walking away when Quilley ran after him; but that he went away.
GUILTY .—He had been twice charged with highway robbery on sailors, but discharged as the sailors had gone to sea; and he had been charged with disorderly conduct and stealing from a public-house, and convicted of an assault.— Six Months' Hard Labour, and Twelve Strokes with the Cat.
MR. HARDY Prosecuted.
MICHAEL SHEBHAN . I am a labourer, of 5, Queen Street, Deptford—on Saturday, November 23rd, about seven p.m., I was in the Red Lion and Wheatsheaf, and the prisoner came in—I was living with her, and had given her 15s. for housekeeping—when I went out she said, "What time shall you be home?" I said, "Between 5.30 and 6; I must go to the club"—she wanted me to go to a music-hall, but I would not—some one put her up that I was going to live with another woman to keep me, and when she came into the public-house, she asked if I was going away from her, and said, "Before you go away I shall blind you"—she had a glass in her hand, drinking whisky, and cut my face with it—I was taken to the hospital, and my eye has been extracted—she has lived with me seven years—I have not been carrying-on with any other woman.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not strike you in the public-house, or seize you by your hair; I never touched you—the barman was present all the time. (The prisoner produced a hospital card, stating that she was attended to there for a sprained shoulder.)
By the COURT. She had a sprained shoulder; the party who did that had imprisonment for it; it was two or three years ago—this purports to be a hospital card for 1895, and she had a sprained shoulder on November 25th last—I do not know how that is; it is false—I know of nothing that took her to the hospital on November 25th—I cannot understand their giving her a card stating that she had a sprained shoulder; she may have done it getting away from the police.
By the Prisoner. I did not come to you from Friday night till Monday after this; I only went to get my things—I met you in the street on the Sunday night, and you gave yourself up on the Monday—I met a bricklayer, who took me to a public-house, and I suppose they put something in my drink, for I found myself at home and in bed with you.
HENRY STAFFORD . I am barman at the Lion and Wheatsheaf, Greenwich—I saw Sheehan there on November 23rd, and the prisoner came in and threatened him; I heard a little jangling between them and saw her strike him with a glass, and throw the pieces at him and run away—they were both sober—the glass was not a broken one, she was drinking out of it; I do not know whether she broke it before she struck him with it, my back was turned, but if she had I think I should have heard it—I saw the cut; the glass may have smashed on his face—after she struck him she threw it at him—Jenny Burns was talking to him, but not drinking with him; she came in about five minutes before he did—I handed the glass to the police.
Cross-examined. I did not say that I would fight you—he did not take you by your hair; he could not have done that without my seeing it.
—on November 23rd I was in the Lion public-house—the prisoner and prosecutor were there jangling; I did not see him strike her, but she does no more but pull the glass from under her shawl, and struck him with it—it was whole—she did not chip it before she struck him—I was close to them, he could not have struck her without my seeing it—he did not take hold of her hair—other people were in the bar—I heard her threatening him she said "I will gouge your eye out."
JEREMIAH BIRCH . I am a labourer, of 47, Regent Street, Deptford—on November 24th, I was in the Wheatsheaf, and heard the prisoner and prosecutor talking about 15s.; she said that it was not enough for her—I did not see him strike her, but she struck him twice with a glass before it broke, and again afterwards—he is a friend of mine, we were brought up together.
EDWARD GODDARD (Detective Officer). On December 9th the prisoner came to Deptford police-station, and said "Is there a warrant for a person named Leah Hancock?"—I said "We want a person of that name, are you Leah Hancock—she said "Yes"—the prosecutor was sent for—Stafford gave this glass to the police.
JOHN DONALD SMALL . I am senior resident medical officer at Milter's Hospital—on November 23rd Sheehan was brought there, he had an incised wound on his left eyebrow, dividing his eyelid and exposing his upper jaw—it was a deep wound, and it must have been a deliberate attempt, the glass must have been drawn right round—his eye was removed by the ophthalmic surgeon—it could not have been done if the glass was not broken.
Witnesses for the Defence.
FANNY CROBY . My husband is a labourer—I went into this public-house on an errand and the prisoner asked me to have a glass of ale—they were quarrelling before I got down the street; I heard the noise and went back and they were fighting; there was a crowd outside—I saw the man lying on the ground with blood on his face—he was getting up and the prisoner was getting up too—I live in the same house and I know she was living with him—I had not heard them quarrelling.
MARY ANN BRESLIN . I am single and am a hawker—the prisoner and prosecutor have been bad friends for some weeks; they quarrelled—Sheehan said that he did not want to live with her; he had a woman and was going to leave her—I was at the Police-court, but was not called—Sheehan came home on Saturday and gave her 15s., which was 10s. for his mother and 5s. for herself—his mother lives in the house—I heard him tell the prisoner to pack up her things; he was going—he went out and I heard no more till it occurred.
Prisoner's Defence. He wanted me to go and speak to the keeper, and of course there was a row. I am very sorry.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Justice Hawkins.
171. JIM WEBB (49) PLEADED GUILTY to feloniously setting fire toa barn and two sheds, the property of Edward Waterer Martin, with intent to injure him; also to a previous conviction at Guildford.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
There being no evidence of the prisoner's knowledge for seven years of his wife being living, the JURY found the prisoner
NOT GUILTY .
MR. MORGAN Prosecuted.
WALTER GILL . I keep the Stag, 44, Wandsworth Road—at one a.m. on January 3rd I fastened the doors and windows and went to bed—my dog awoke me; I dressed, picked up a sword, and went downstairs—I had left three lights burning in the bar, and I saw Tucker with the key of the safe—he took up a bowl which contained coppers and seven sixpences, and helped himself to some cigars—he got another box and got head first through the window—I gave an alarm, and he was taken in custody—coming from the station I met Tucker in the custody of Sergeant Hawkins, and identified him as packing the cigars—he had been in the house two or three times, but not Robinson—the property stolen was worth about £2 12s. 6d.—I found a cap outside the window, it is the one he was wearing in the bar.
Cross-examined by Tucker. You were between two port wine casks—the parlour door was not open; I opened the side door—came in from behind the bar; I was on one side and you on the other—I can swear that this is the cap you had on.
HARRY ELWOOD (526 W). On December 3rd, at two o'clock, I was on duty at the corner of Wilcox Road, and heard a noise as if boards were being knocked—I went in the direction and saw Robinson run from the side entrance, closely followed by a man who I do not recognise—they ran towards Vauxhall—I seized Robinson, who struggled—he had some money in his hand, which he threw into the road—we had a struggle, and while I was on the ground he bit my thumb, where there is a slight scar still, and kicked me—another constable came, and he was taken to the station, where I found 5s. lid. on him.
Cross-examined by Robinson. We went down several times—your handkerchief was torn off your neck in the struggle.
Robinson was charged, after which I went straight to Tucker's house at Wands worth—he was in bed—I said, "Tucker, I am going to charge you with being in company with a man in custody, for breaking into a house in Wandsworth Road"—he said nothing—he could not find his cap—I took him to the station, and this cap was shown him—I said, "This cap is identical with the one you have been wearing the last two months"—he said nothing—I found seven sixpences in his light trousers pocket.
Cross-examined. You had no cap on that night—I did not go into York Road; I went in at the back yard, knowing the place, and went through to the front, and let two officers in.
JOHN GOUGH (34 W). I went with Mr. Gill to his house, and on the way met Tucker in custody—Gill looked him in the face, and said, "That is the man who was behind my bar"—I went to the house, and found two windows broken and pulled down—the hole in the window was large enough to put your arm through and open the catch.
Cross-examined by Tucker. I went to see if your cap was there, and found a hat and cap which were owned by two other men.
Robinson's defence: "I had only just come there."
Tucker's defence: "He said if he could have got near me he would have cut me down with the sword; I was no sooner out of the window than he was on top of me."
GUILTY .—They were then charged with previous convictions—Robinson at the North London Sessions on January 7th, 1893, and Tucker at this Court on April 2nd, 1894, to which they
PLEADED GUILTY, and several other convictions were proved against each. ROBINSON— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. TUCKER— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. GALVERT Prosecuted.
JOHN BURLEIGH . I carry on business as the Eagle Mineral Water Company at Church Road, Camberwell—the prisoner's duties were to take out a load of mineral waters and sell them to shopkeepers and regular customers and hand in what money he received every night—some of our customers have ledger accounts—he has to get the signature of the customer to the counterfoil in this van book for the goods he leaves on credit—the goods he takes out are checked and entered in the loads book, which he, as vanman, signs and these are checked on his return, and the difference between what is returned and sold on credit is accounted for by him each day—he gives the credit customer the delivery-note from the van-book and records the entry on the counterfoil, which is brought back to us—in the van book of November 16th, on the counterfoil is recorded 5s. 5d. as discount, signed "Leaver," of the Star public-house, Regency Street, Westminster, who has been our customer for some time—we allow discount to customers, which is often taken in goods, and this counterfoil records goods allowed in lieu of discount—the entry is Dillnutt's writing—on November 23rd there is a similar entry to Warne, of 58, St. George's Road, for goods amounting to 9s. 4d., signed "A. Warne,"
which is a true signature—the 3s. for "splits" is not mentioned in the delivery note which records 6s. 4d.—we have no other check upon the vanmen than the counterfoil, the delivery note and what is brought back—in October last the prisoner was imprisoned for failing to pay for the maintenance of his wife, but, in consequence of a letter we received, we took him back into employment and advanced him money to buy clothes—I believe this letter is his writing. (Dated December 8th, 1895, regretting the circumstances occurring in November, and asking forgiveness, as having obtained a new customer, he had accepted an invitation to drink and play at billiards, and had forgotten his duty.)
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. We allow you to pay in money which is short of the day's account, but deduct it on Saturday if there is sufficient. A foreman goes round with the van to see if the vanman is respectful and behaves; and he generally superintends the vanmen—I remember a discussion about it, but not the fact of the foreman being out with you on November 23rd—I do not recollect any complaint of the foreman.
WILLIAM GORDON . I am a clerk to the prosecutor—I produce the loads book—it shows the goods taken out by the prisoner on November 16th—it shows goods delivered to Leaver to the amount of 5s. 5d. out of a total of 7s. 5d.; and on November 23rd to Warne to the amount of 9s. 4d.—the delivery note of November 23rd is 6s. 4d.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You paid me £2 2s. received from Warne on November 22nd—I knew about the £2 2s.
JOSEPH LEAVER . I kept the Star public-house, Regency Street, Westminster, on November 16th—the signature on this delivery note is not mine—I received no goods from the prisoner that day—5s. 5d. has since been allowed me.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. Your van chap was with you when you came—he brought in the goods which you did bring while you had a glass with me—the discount was allowed me about three weeks ago—the firm took my word that I was entitled to it.
A WARNE. I am an oilman, of 58, St. George's Road—on November 23rd I received the goods amounting to 6s. 4d. represented by this delivery note—the 3s. for split lemonades was not on the counterfoil when I signed it—I never buy split lemonades—the prisoner put down six instead of four lemonades, and I corrected the mistake—I always look at the counterfoil to see that it agrees with the delivery note before I sign for the goods.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. The foreman was with you on the 23rd—the night before you paid me two guineas.
WILLIAM GORDON (Re-examined). I allowed prisoner for 9s. 4d. on November 23rd—I know it because when he hands in the ledger account I look in the books to see if it is properly entered—it was not entered 6s. 4d.—I have brought the loads book (produced)—the entry informs me that when the prisoner came back he purported to have sold Warne goods to the amount of 9s. 4d., and not 6s. 4d.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I have accepted your I.O.U. for deficiencies in paying in.
By the JURY. The prisoner has an opportunity of agreeing the entries with me.
The prisoner in his defence said that the amounts agreed when the counterfoil
was signed, the foreman and vanman being present; that he had no intention to defraud, or he might have taken the two guineas he received on November 22nd. If altered, the figures had been altered by someone since he had the books in his possession; that he had been so pleased at getting new customers that he had accepted an invitation to drink and play at billiards, and had been suspended for two days, and when he returned he was given into custody.
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the JURY . Judgment Respited.
177. JOHN CALLAN (49) , Stealing a quantity of vegetables, the property of Harrod's Stores, Limited, his masters. Mr. HUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. DRAKE Defended. MR. DRAKE stated that the prisoner was under the influence of Charles Daly, who had been convicted, and who threatened to discharge him if he did not obey his orders as to the vegetables, and therefore he would
GUILTY, but the JURY believed him to be under Daly's influence.— Two Days' Imprisonment.
ALBERT WILLIAM ELLIOTT . I am assistant to Charles Elliott—on the night of September 30th I locked up securely, and at 3.30 somebody had attempted to get in by taking some tiles off the roof—nothing had been disturbed in the house.
JOHN CARTER (385 L). I was on duty on December 14th in the Old Kent Road, and saw someone come to the corner of St. Thomas's Road—I went there, but saw no one—I waited a few minutes, and heard a smash—I went on further, and heard someone whispering inside a gateway—I pushed the gate, but could not get it open as far as it usually goes—I pushed it harder, and felt something soft behind it—the prisoner came out—I said, "What are you doing?"—he said, "It is all right, my brother is out late to-night, I am looking after him?'—we struggled—a second man came and struck me a blow on the side of my head, and they both ran away—I followed the prisoner; a working-man caught him, and I said, "I shall take you in custody for being on enclosed premises"—he said, "You are mistaken, I suppose the job has been done, but I am looking for my young brother"—I searched him and found some matches and a key—he said that he lived at 40, Market Street, Old Kent Road; that is correct.
THOMAS CHARLES . I am a blindmaker, of 21, Fell Road, Peckham—on December 14th, about three o'clock, Carter spoke to me. I saw the prisoner running, and ran and caught him; he struggled a bit and used obscene language—I ran after him 200 or 300 yards.
CHARLES SMITH (Police Sergeant). I went to 320, Kent Road, on the morning of December 14th, and noticed the slates broken away—there is a cook's shop at the rear, and in front a passage with a gate—I found a rope inside the gateway—it was easy to get on the roof, as the drains were being repaired—three large tiles had been taken from the house and two others loosened—they could get in that way; there is no ceiling inside—a rope would be useful to get in—the gates are wooden doors—the prisoner denied all knowledge of the rope.
The prisoner received a good character.
He produced a written defence, stating that he was walking the streets all night to be at his employer's coffee-stall early in the morning.
GUILTY — Six Months' Hard Labour.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3RD, 1896.