CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
TENTH SESSION, HELD JULY 20TH, 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 DELIVERY FOR THE
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX AND THE PARTS OF THE COUNTIES OF ESSEX, KENT, AND SURREY, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,
Held on Monday, July 20th, 1896, and following days.
BEFORE the RIGHT HON. SIR WALTER WILKIN , Knt., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir JOHN COMPTON LAWRENCE . Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's High Court; Sir REGINALD HANSON , Bart., M.F., Alderman 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 , M.P., Sir JOHN VOCE MOORE, Knt., MARCUS SAMUEL , Esq., WALTER VAUGHAN MORGAN , Esq., JOHN CHARLES BELL , 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. TENTH 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, July 20th, 1896.
Before Mr. Recorder.
537. JANE ELIZABETH KNIPP PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully endeavouring to conceal the birth of her child. She received an excellent character from her master, and a lady undertook to receive her.—Discharged on her own Recognizances to come up for judgment if called upon.
538. FREDERICK JOURDAIN (34) , to feloniously uttering a forged request for the delivery of two baths and other goods; also to a conviction of felony at this Court in November, 1894.— Three Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
539. HENRY EDWARD CANELLE (21) , to stealing, whilst in the employ of the Post Office, a post-letter containing a postal order for 7s. 6d., the property of the Postmaster-General.— Nine Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
540. JOHN RAYMOND TUITE (22) , to stealing two letters, one containing two postal orders for 20s. and 10s., and the other an order for 1s.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
541. GEORGE WILSON (24) , to two indictments for burglary, one in the dwelling-house of Tom Moore, and stealing 9 lbs. of cheese, and one in the dwelling-house of Martha Solomon, with intent to steal.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
543. GEORGE GREENLAND (55) , to two indictments, one for forging and uttering a warrant requesting the delivery of a cheque-book, and one for forging and uttering an order for the payment of £40; also to a conviction of felony at this Court in January, 1886.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. TODD, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HARDING Prosecuted.
ALEXANDER DOUGLAS DUNN . I am an engineer, carrying on business at the Argyle Engineering Works, Spring Vale, Hammersmith—the prisoner was in my employment since August, 1894—I have from time to time missed articles from my premises during the last three or four months, including tools of various kinds, valves, a speed indicator, chisels, files, and drills—I spoke to the prisoner about them—he said they were about there somewhere—I have identified the tools in the possession of the police as mine—this engineers' directory is mine—I dismissed the prisoner summarily on May 30th.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I wrote you letters about twice a week—I have not got them—I do not recollect those letters being taken away, but I saw my property being taken from your house—I did not tell you to take the directory, I said you could use it in my private office—you had the drawings of a machine which is on my premises according to my orders.
GEORGE GLEINSTER (Sergeant T). On June 13th the prisoner was given into my custody—on the way to the station he said, "There is a directory at my second wife's house, 78, Overston Road, belonging to Mr. Dunn, I took it away in mistake"—I went to 78, Overston Road—I found the directory produced—in consequence of that I made further inquiries—the prisoner appeared before the Magistrate on the 15th, and was remanded to the 16th—when I went to his house, 94, Shepherd's Bush Road, where he was living with his first wife, I found a great quantity of tools; the greater portion are at the Police-station; I have brought a few of them—there are a large quantity of valves and other expensive tools—on the remand, on May 23rd, the prisoner sent for me—he said, "Cannot I have bail? I admit the greater portion of the things belong to Mr. Dunn "—when he was charged with the second offence, after saying several times, "That is mine," he said, "I will say nothing "—I found these articles afterwards in the house.
The Prisoner, in his defence, said he bought the things at pawnshops where they hang out for sale, and they were his; the board (produced) he made out of spare wood; the directory was given him to copy out names for his machine, the drawings for which he copied and returned; the valves he had to keep clean, and kept them in his rooms, giving a list to the manager to add the prices.
GUILTY .—The prosecutor stated the articles were worth £40 to £50.— Four Months' Hard Labour. The prisoner having previously
MR. HARDING Prosecuted, and the evidence was interpreted to the prisoner.
JAMES MOORE . (Detective D). On June 19th, in consequence of information as to this cheque, received from Yorkshire, I made inquiries and kept observation in Charlotte Street, Fitzroy Square—the prisoner was pointed out to me by Mr. Tetley, a chemist, of 44, Charlotte Street—
—I went to him and said, "I am a police officer; I shall take you into custody for stealing, on or about May 5th, an order sent by Mr. Lamb, of Knaresborough Hall, Knaresborough Yorkshire, to Margaret Brunet, of 95, Charlotte Street"; he said, "I know nothing about it"—I took him to Tottenham Court Road Police-station—he said, "I live at 95, Charlotte Street, one morning my landlady put a letter in my letter-box; I was going to give it up, but met a bad man, and we went together to make money of it"—I asked him if he knew the man's name, and where he lived—he said he did not—he said all this in English.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You did not tell me you had fits of madness.
MARGUERITE BRUNET (examined through an interpreter). I live at 15, Adamson Road, Hampstead—I am a lady's maid—in May last I lived at 95, Charlotte Street—I was expecting a letter from Mr. Lamb, of Knaresborough—I did not receive the letter nor a cheque—I did not authorize anyone to receive it—I knew the prisoner as living in the house.
EMILY TERRESON (examined through an interpreter). I am landlady of the house, 95, Charlotte Street—on May 4th Miss Brunet was living there—the prisoner lived there—letters came nearly every day—everyone takes his own letters from the board in the passage.
Cross-examined. I never gave Brunet's letters to you.
THOMAS TETLEY . I am a chemist of 44, Charlotte Street, Fitzroy Square—on May 4th the prisoner, with another man, came to the, shop—the other man showed me this cheque, and asked me if I would change it for his friend—he spoke English for his friend—I am English—I let him have 5s.—I have known the prisoner for years—he spoke English, but not very well—I said when the cheque was cleared at my bankers I would give them the balance—four or five days afterwards they came and asked for the balance, the other man first, but I refused to give it to him—then I gave it to the prisoner, who was with his friend—I paid the cheque into my bank—it was endorsed.
Cross-examined. I did not get half-a-crown for the service rendered.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I have nothing to say to you here, and have no other witness than the man who took me to change the cheque. He must be in London, but I do not know his address."
GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
IRELAND PLEADED GUILTY
MR. HODGSON Prosecuted.
WILLIAM TARGET . I am a groom, and live at Bushey—there is a cottage in the park in the occupation of Mr. John Nicholas, who is the superintendent of the Royal Mews—I have charge of the premises, and have the key—the cottage has been unoccupied since last October—I have gone there from time to time; the last day I was there was on June 18th or 20th; I then found it all right—I went again on the 26th, between nine and ten in the morning, and then found that the door had been broken open, and in the passage I found a number of feathers, and in the bedroom I found that seven pillows had been emptied of their
feathers—I also missed three looking-glasses; this (produced) is one of them; it had been taken out of the dressing-table—it is Mr. Nicholas' property—this broom-head has on it the Crown marks, V.B. and the Crown—that mark is on all the things which the servants have.
Cross-examined. They would be on all the things we use; the same thing applied to Windsor and all H.M.’s palaces—we are not allowed to, give them away; when disused we generally burn them.
FREDERICK WILLIAM MALLISON . I live at Bushey Lodge, Bushey Park—I know the cottage occupied by Mr. Nicholas sufficiently to identify the things in the house—on the evening of June 12th I went into the cottage—I went through all the rooms and missed things, and, also noticed damage—I recognise this looking-glass; it formed part of a dressing-table; I also identify this broom.
THOMAS MAGNER (Detective T). In consequence of information, I went to the prisoner's cottage at Surbiton on June 26th, which was about a mile and a quarter from this cottage—the prisoner was not in—I waited till he returned, and then said to him, "I am a police officer, and shall take you into custody for being concerned with another man in breaking and entering a church, and stealing things"—he said, "The looking-glass I put over the bar at the Old King's Head "; he afterwards said, "I bought it outside from a man; I took it to the public-house, and asked Mr. Waite if he knew the man; he said 'No'; I said I had received the looking-glass from him this morning; he asked me to let him have half-a-crown; a companion of Mr. Waites was present, and said, 'You had no right to lend him money on it'; he said, 'I lent him the money to buy it'"—the prisoner was taken before the Magistrate and remanded—on June 28th I went to his cottage again, and searched it, and found this broom concealed under the boards of the staircase—it was tied tightly round with string; there was no handle on it—I subsequently went to Mr. Target's cottage, and there found this handle, which fits the broom; it was in the cellar.
Cross-examined. I have made inquiries about the prisoner—I have known him for the last three years—I always considered him a very respectable, hardworking man.
Witnesses for the Defence.
JOHN SHARPE WAITE . I keep the Old King's Head at Hampton Wick—Porridge was a customer since last September—I always thought him a respectable man—on June 12 Ireland came, and I had some conversation with him about a looking-glass; I did not buy it about a quarter of an hour after Perridge came in—he said he had been offered a looking-glass, and wanted half-a-crown to buy it, and he asked me to lend him half-a-crown, and he would pay me when he saw his master—I said I had not a half-crown, and asked my potman if he had one—the prisoner then asked me to mind the glass for him till the evening, when he went home—he lives a mile or a mile and a half from me—a constable came about a quarter-past twelve that night—Perridge had not come for the glass; I suppose he was arrested by that time—I was not in bed when the policeman brought him at half-past twelve; I came down—I said I did not know him, that he was a stranger to me; it was dark; I could not see him; I could not recognise him in the dark; when he spoke I recognised him—Ireland was on the door-step when Perridge came; he was going out
as Perridge was coming in; they met on the doorway—Porridge, said to me, "Lend me half-a-crown; I want to buy this glass as a present to my mother;" that was a quarter of an hour afterwards—Ireland had told me that he bought it at a sale; I knew him as a customer—I did not know that he had been convicted of burglary—I knew that he and Porridge used to work together.
GEORGE ARROWSMITH . I am potman at the Old King's Head—on June 26th I remember a discussion about a half-crown and a looking-glass—Mr. Waite came and asked me to lend him half-a-crown, as he wanted to lend the same to Perridge to buy a looking-glass—I said I had not a half-crown, but I would go and get it—he said, "Never mind" he would take it out of the till and mark it on the slate which is kept there, and he did so—I saw it written down—I have known Perridge about ten months—I always found him honest and respectable—he bears that character amongst his neighbours—he has been working in the Home Park as a ballast heaver—I knew Ireland as a customer—I saw him that morning, before I saw Perridge; I did not speak to him—I did not see what he did—I was not present at the transaction.
By the COURT. I have known Ireland about eight months—I knew nothing about his character—I did not know he had been convicted and in prison—I did not know where he had been working—what was written on the slate was, "Whippy, 2s. 6d."—that is the name Perridge goes by—I saw that written there about twelve in the day—I did not see the looking-glass.
MAGNER (Re-called). It was about a quarter-past twelve at night when I took Perridge—I knocked at Mr. Waite's door—he said, "Who's there?"—I said, "Police"—he subsequently opened the door—the gas was alight, one burner—I had Perridge there, and pointed to him, and said, "Do you know this man?"—he said, "No "—he was close to him, looking fairly at him—there was plenty of light—Perridge never spoke a word—nothing was said to me about the slate—it was not shown to me—Perridge's mother lives near, not in the house where the broom was found.
PERRIDGE— GUILTY .
IRELAND PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Guildford on June 9th 1894, and other convictions were proved against him.— Three Years' Penal Servitude. Perridge received a good character he entered into his own recognizances to appear for judgment if called upon.
NEW COURT.—Monday, July 20th, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted.
CHARLES IMAGE . I am a cab-driver—the prisoner hired my cab at Uxbridge Road Station on Wednesday, May 27th, about one a.m., and I agreed to drive him to Church Street, Edgware Road, for 2s.—when we got there he said, "Cabman, have you got 2s.? I have nothing less than a 4s. piece," and handed me this coin (A 5s. piece)—after he had gone I found out that it was bad—I showed it to a constable, and took it to the
station, and gave information—I saw him again about a fortnight afterwards, and picked him out from a number of others.
EMILY WELCH . I live with my husband, at 16, Church Place, Paddington Green—on Whit-Tuesday I was with my husband at the Green Man, Edgware Road; there was some conversation between my husband and the prisoner, and they had drink together—we went to another public-house, and the prisoner showed my husband a 4s. piece, which he said was bad, and he meant to pass it off on a cabman—I did not handle it—my husband would not come with me; so I followed him to the Wheat Sheaf, and had more drink there, and went from Paddington Green to Lancaster Gate—this is the coin; I know it by this mark.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You said that it was bad.
KATE STONE . I am married, and am a sister of the last witness—I live at 4, Hartland Road, Isleworth—I was with them, and saw the prisoner with a coin; he said it was a bad 5s. piece, and he was going to pass it off on a cabman.
ALFRED HENRY MEARS . I live at Hatton Street, Edgware Road—on Whit-Tuesday afternoon I was at the Wheat Sheaf with the last witness; she is a relative of mine—we went to the Green Man, and there saw the prisoner—from there we went to the Poppy public-house, where the prisoner showed me a 5s. piece; he said it was bad, and he was going to pass it to a cabman.
Cross-examined. I did not say, "What do you think of this for a snider?"—that is the word you used; it means a bad coin.
GEORGE STONE (117D). I took the prisoner on June 19th, about 10.40 p.m., and said it was for uttering a counterfeit 5s. piece to a cabman—he said, "I am glad you arrested me; I passed the coin to a cabman on Whit-Tuesday night; I had the coin given me at the Welsh Harp, and passed it to a cabman; I admit I knew it was a bad one."
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate; "I am very sorry. I was the worse for drink, or I should not have done so."
GUILTY .— Discharged on Recognizance
LOUISA BRINKHAN . My father keeps the Bricklayers' Arms, Rivington Street, Shoreditch—on June 18th the prisoner called for some ale, and gave me a bad shilling; I took it to my father, who spoke to the prisoner, and sent for a policeman—the prisoner said to my father, "I had it given me in change for a two-shilling-bit at your place last night"—I saw my father give the coin to the prisoner; this is it.
ROBERT ELMS (174 G). I was called to the Bricklayers' Arms, and found the prisoner there; he was given into my custody—I said I should search him—he said, "You can't search me "—I began to search him, and he began to be very violent—I found 1s. in his waistcoat pocket, wrapped in tissue paper, and covered with brown paper—I took him to the station with the assistance of another constable—he said he had no fixed abode—in consequence of information, I went to 32, Kingston Place, where Mrs. Baylis, the landlady, showed me the prisoner's room, where I found seven
teaspoons, some blacklead, and chalk in a cupboard, and a small piece of metal.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . These two coins are from the same mould—this is plaster of Paris, this is whiting, and this lampblack—this piece of metal is what we term a get; it comes out of a mould, and is the same metal of which the coins are made.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I had the shilling given me on the previous night, and the other coin I found in the saw-dust outside the public-house back door."
GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction on May 29th, 1893, of unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin, and ten other convictions were proved against him.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
JOB CASEWELL . I am a chemist, of 12, Curzon Street, Mayfair—on June 20th, about 9.10 a.m., the prisoner came in and asked for something for the toothache—I gave her some tincture; she gave me this 5s. piece; I gave her 4s. 6d. change, and she left—I did not put the coin in the till; I thought it was bad, and followed her to Solomon's, the fruiterers, at the corner of Dover Street, and went, in and spoke to the assistant, and came out, but could not see the prisoner—I saw her ten days afterwards with several other women, and picked her out.
THOMAS GREGORY (Detective Sergetant C). I arrested the prisoner on June 30th at the Cambridge public-house, and said, "I am going to take you in custody for this counterfeit coin last week in Curzon Street "—she said, "Very well, I am glad you are going to take me; I shall have a fair chance"—she was placed with others, and was picked out—she said, "I think you have made a mistake this time.".
Cross-examined. You did not then say, "I do not know anything about it," but you did at the station.
HENRY TUCK . In April last I lived at the Old Crown and Cushion, Westminster Bridge Road—on April 27th, About 8.30 p.m., the prisoner came in for a glass of ale, and gave me this coin (A florin)—I looked at it, and she said, "Oh, give me that hack"—I found it was bad, and gave her in custody—she was discharged.
Cross-examined. You said you had taken it in the Strand.
The Prisoner, in a written defence, stated that if she was the woman whom the prosecutor said he followed to Solomon's shop, some of the assistants there would be able to identify her; that the Magistrate discharged her, but that the fact of her having been charged caused the police to suspect her, and arrest her for the 5s. piece, about which she knew nothing.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted.
EDMUND JONES (Midland Railway Constable). On July 7th I was at the carriage siding at Camden Town, and saw the prisoner in a brick-field, with two other lads, throwing stones at some girls, and then at an empty train on a siding, and about 5.7 I saw him deliberately throw a stone at a passing train—I jumped over a fence, and the other two ran away—he had no right on the wall; it is the company's property, and is 300 yards from the road—the stones were about this size (produced).
THOMAS BREELY (Police Sergeant, Midland Railway). On July 11th, at 5.30, Jones brought the prisoner to me; I asked him if he had thrown stones at the trains—he said, "Only two or three times "—I gave him to the police.
GUILTY .— Three Months' hard Labour.
552. RICHARD BURKE (61) PLEADED GUILTY to attempting to commit a burglary in the dwelling house of William Carpenter, having been convicted of felony on April 10th, 1893. Three other convictions were proved against him.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
553. HENRY JOHNSON † (23) to stealing a purse and £5 8s. from the person of Alice Barnett. Two convictions were proved against him.— Nine Months' Hard Labour , [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
554. EDWARD GRAHAM (35) to stealing a clock and nine yards of carpet, the property of John Johnson Runtz and another, having been convicted of felony on February 4th, 1895, in the name of Edward Jones. Four other convictions were proved against him.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, July 21st, 1896.
Before Mr. Recorder.
558. EDMUND GEORGE HIND (20) to feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of David Baldwin, and stealing a watch and chain.— Six Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. BIRCH Prosecuted, and MR. WARBURION Defended Knight.
the evening of Monday, July 6th, I went into a urinal in Morley Road—after a minute or so the two prisoners came in; Connelly stood on my right, Knight followed him in close behind—he turned and faced me, put his back to the door, and said, "You are not going out of here unless you give me something"—I said, "For what?"—he said, "Something for beer"—I made an attempt to get out, and he repeated, "You will not go out of here unless you give us something "—then Connelly turned round and said, "You are not going out unless you give us something for beer'—I had a good look at them; I thought they were very vicious men, and I put my hand in my pocket, and gave them 2d. to get out—there was only one entrance to the place—they were both strangers to me; I had seen them about before, and knew them by sight, but never spoke to them—after giving them the money Knight cleared away, and let me go out at once—I went straight to the Archway Tavern, and fetched a policeman, and gave them both into custody—they were then going down the street—I followed Knight to the station; I don't know what became of Connelly; I only, charged Knight, because he was the one that kept me back—I did not take notice which way Connelly went.
Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. This happened in broad daylight—it was in a road with houses on each side—a good many people were passing about—I was quite sober—I did not notice that Knight was the worse for drink—the urinal is about 200 or 300 yards from the Archway Tavern—as I returned, the prisoners were walking away—I was really afraid of Knight—I am thirty-five years of age, and am a pretty powerful man—I did not think that Knight was going to kill me if I did nut give him the 2d.—I had a good deal more money about me—they made no attempt to rifle my pockets—he seemed satisfied with the 2d.
Re-examined. I thought they would take all I had got.
HENRY RUSSELL . I am a carpenter, and live at 16, Redcross Street, Highgate—on the evening of July 6th, between seven and eight, I was in Varley Road, Highgate—I came out of the Brunswick public-house—two men came up to me—Connelly spoke to me first; he said, "Have you a match?"—I said, "No"—then Knight caught hold of me, and asked me for some money to buy beer—I said, "Get away from me, I don't want to have anything to do with you;" and I went into the public-house—I did not give him anything—the two were together.
HENRY WARNER (317 F). On the night of July 6th Knight was given into my custody by the prosecutor for demanding money by menaces—on the way to the station he said, "You are rather warm; this makes five of you "; there were five persons wishing to charge him with the same offence—he was perfectly sober, he may have had a glass—I took the two prisoners; on the way to the station Connelly made his escape; I could not take the two.
Cross-examined. Complaints were made that they bad been asking for money, not drink.
GUILTY .**— Twelve Months' Hard Labour eack.
MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted.
JAMES HANNAN . I am a tailor, of 13, Lascelles Place, Golden Square—on June 27th, about one, I was walking along Compton Street; I did not see anyone till the prisoner and a comrade of his came up from behind, and knocked me down on my back, and kicked me on the forehead—it hurt me very much; I cried out "Police," and "Murder"—one of them put his hand in my pocket, and took out my purse and 15s.—I can't swear which took my money—the police came up, and the prisoner was taken into custody—I held him till the policeman came up—he ran across the street; I ran after him, and caught him; the other got away—I had had a glass or two, but I knew perfectly well what happened—they took my hat, but I did not mention that till I got home.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I charged you with knocking me down and robbing me—I was dazed with your knocking me about—the doctor examined me—I mentioned about the purse when I came to—I can swear you are the man that assaulted me—I was only knocked down once; you were kneeling on my breast; I got hold of your coat, and did not lose my hold of you—the other man got away.
WILLIAM SAWYER (385 C). At one o'clock on June 28th I was in Greek Street, Soho—I heard cries from Compton Street—I went there, and saw the prosecutor on the ground, and the prisoner holding him—I saw the prisoner knock him down—the prisoner said, "All right, guv'nor, let me go "—the prosecutor said, "I charge that man, in company with another one, with knocking me down and kicking me in the forehead and chest"—the prisoner struggled with me most violently—after we had fallen twice he slipped his coat—I seized him by his braces, and blew my whistle for assistance—there was a crowd; it is a very rough neighbourhood—the prisoner called out, "Go for him!"—I managed to get him to the station, and the prosecutor there charged him with stealing his purse and 5s.—the prisoner said, "There was a woman in labour, and I ran to fetch a constable"—the prosecutor was somewhat the worse for drink—his face was plastered with blood; we could not see his face for the blood.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not know at first that the prosecutor had lost his purse, not till he had told the inspector about half an hour after—I told the inspector that I saw you knock the man down.
PERCY EDMUNDS , M.D. On Sunday morning, June 28th, I was called to Vine Street Police-station to attend to the prosecutor; he was bleeding very freely from a wound in the centre of the forehead; it went down to the bone; it looked as if caused by a kick of a boot—there was a little bruising about the body, and one or two superficial lacerations—he had lost at least a pint of blood—he had been very roughly handled.
Cross-examined. It might have been done by a fall; he was drunk and somewhat incapable, not quite; he could have found his way home—his breath smelt badly—he was partly dazed by drink and partly by the injury; he knew what he was doing.
Prisoner's Defence: I am innocent. There was no robbery. If there was it was before I saw him. He was very drunk. He said nothing about his purse till half an hour afterwards.
He was farther charged with having been convicted in September, 1893, in the name of Burke, to which he PLEADED GUILTY, and other convictions were proved against him.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour and Twenty Strokes with the Cat.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted, and MR. BURNIE Defended Ryan.
WILLIAM BUCK . I am a labourer—on the night of June 22nd I went in the Westminster Arms, Praed Street, Paddington, alone—I had some refreshment—Ryan asked me to drink; I refused—I went out after him—I was wearing a watch and chain in my vest-pocket—Fitzgerald punched me in the stomach—I had seen him before—Ryan stole my watch and chain—I ran after Ryan across Chappell Street—he knocked me down with a stick, and kicked me in the buttock—I complained to the police, who took me to Paddington Green Police-station, where I gave information—I then went to the hospital; I had my head dressed for a week—I have not seen my watch and chain since—I have worked for a ladder-maker three months, and I have been in the Royal Marines before that—the following day I saw Ryan at the Irongate Wharf—when he saw me he started running; I ran after him, and followed him into a urinal—Fitzgerald was with him—I shut the door and kept them in, and got the assistance of the police, who took them to the station; they were charged at the Police-court, and committed here.
Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. I saw no more men there—there was not a general fight while I was there—I did not see Condon there, nor at the Police-court—when I came from work I got the watch out of pawn—about a quarter-past seven I went for a walk, and came back to have a drink, because I live that way—I had only two drinks all the night—on coming out of the door the prisoner struck me—there was a point policeman in Praed Street—if there had been a fight he would have been there—I saw Ryan had a black eye—the next morning he said his hand-kerchief was covered with blood—he said he got it, fighting the night before—he said he had been fighting.
Cross-examined by Fitzgerald. I first saw you outside the Westminster Arms—there was no speaking at all—you hit me in the stomach coming out of the door—I had not been in your company.
Re-examined. There was no fight.
WILLIAM BURNHAM (131 F). I received information and a description of Ryan on the night of the 22nd from the prosecutor, who was cut about his face, which was covered with blood—the following morning I saw the prosecutor running, and then Ryan running, near the Westminster Arms—I walked over and spoke to the prosecutor—I went through the house, and into the w.c. belonging to it, where I saw the prisoners, and took them into custody—the prosecutor said, "I shall charge these men with stealing my watch and chain "—Ryan replied, "Governor, we could not do such a wicked thing"—I conveyed them to the station—they were charged with robbery with violence—Ryan said, "You see the state I am in; my handkerchief is all covered with blood "—it was covered with
blood—as I was leaving the station, the inspector said, "Don't forget the stick "—Ryan said, "No, I coshed him with that"
Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. When I came up the prosecutor spoke first—he said, "They are in here"—he was standing in front of the urinal—then I went in, and the prosecutor charged them.
Cross-examined by Fitzgerald. I took Ryan to the station—I did not hear you say it was through a fight and through spite.
WILLIAM BUCK (Re-called). I am married—since the committal I have asked my wife, who says the prisoner's statements made in Court about her are true—until I heard that statement made I did not know Fitzgerald had anything to do with my wife—I have never spoken to Fitzgerald in my life.
The Prisoners' statements before the Magistrate: Ryan says: "We had all been fighting together for a quarter of an hour. He fought me, and gave me a black eye, and a lump on the nose, and one of his friends made a running kick at me. I got up, and said, 'Oh, you cowards!' and struck him and his friend with my stick, and left them both on the ground. I ran the other side of the road. Fitzgerald was fighting another man and one of his friends at the same time. His motive in doing this is because I am a friend of this man, Fitzgerald; and his wife has had a child by Fitzgerald. It was him who struck me first. If it was not for my stick, I should have been murdered." Fitzgerald says: "I was in the Westminster Arms when the prosecutor and seven or eight others came out of the public-house, turned round to me, and said, 'Come on, Fitzy; I have got it in for you.' I said, 'All right,' and with that he made a running kick at me, and caught me on the leg. I said, 'See what he is doing, Ryan; he is kicking me.' Ryan asked him to fight fair. The prosecutor struck him. He pushed one of his pals on to me. I fought with him in the middle of the road in Praed Street;, and we had to run away on account of the mob he had with him. This is the third attempt he has attempted to set about me. He denies knowing me, but he has drunk in my company. The woman he is living with, or is married to, had a child by me. This is hatched up out of spite."
Evidence for Ryan.
WILLIAM RICHMOND . I am independent—I followed the sea, but came into £600, and was going into the public-house line—I live at 15, Church Place, Paddington—I was not examined before the Magistrate—I know the prisoners by sight—I saw the prosecutor and Ryan at this fight—Ryan was fighting the prosecutor near the middle of the road—the prosecutor knocked Ryan down, and while he was on the ground the prosecutor and another man kicked him—a stick lay close to Ryan—Ryan managed to get on his feet, picked up the stick, and got at the prosecutor—about a hundred people were there—there was another crowd fighting further down—I did not see the starting—Ryan went away—the police came and dispersed the crowd; I am sorry to say, rather late—I last saw Ryan going across the road—I saw the case in the Marylehone Times—I communicated with somebody—I am under subpœnaed to come here.
Cross-examined. I saw nothing of a watch and chain—the prosecutor was treating Ryan in a brutal way—I have not seen the prosecutor since—I have been drinking with him—I have not offered him £5 not to come
here and give evidence, nor any money—I have not advised him not to come—the prosecutor said he would help Ryan to get out of it—the prosecutor knows I was there—I think he saw me—he did not mention he was going to the Police-court—I never saw him till last week—I did not try to help him, there were too many people—there were better men than me, and I might get a hammering as well—since I was at sea I have been living on my money—I very seldom go in the Westminster Arms—I do not hang about—I was at sea about two years ago—I always pass as William Richmond—my ship was the Benbow Head, belonging to the Ulster Steam Navigation Company, Belfast—I have not my discharge with me: I have been in Germany since—I got some money from Germany, and I lost it—I was discharged as an A.B., very good—I went to Germany last summer—I got the £600 from my mother—I had £5 17s. 6d. and some money on the ship—I lived at 21, White Lodge Road, St. John's Wood, all last summer—I did nothing—I have only known Ryan since last winter; only by sight; I have spoken to him—he did not ask me to give evidence—Ryan sent me this letter—through his brother, I went to see him at Holloway Prison on account of this affair—before this I had spoken to him very seldom—I did not tell him that I and my old friend would get him out of it—my friend, Winter, is outside—he is an interpreter—I did not want to be served with a subpœnaed, but I did not know much about law, and thought I had to be served. (Letter read from Ryan to the witness, dated Holloway Prison, July 11th, 1896, stating: "Dear Mr. Richmond,—I must return you my thanks for your exceeding great kindness to me, and for the trouble you have been put through. You are doing it for one who you remember will be grateful to you for it. I feel confident, with the assistance of you and your friend, I will get out of this present trouble. I am glad that you wrote to me and gave me your friend's and your address, etc. Give my best wishes to your friend, and be kind enough to ask him to see me at Newgate on Monday morning;" and "N.B.—My brother will probably serve you and your friend with subpoenaed at your addresses.") I did not suggest that Ryan should send me a subpœnaed—I saw one friend with Buck—I took him to be a friend because he took his part—I have seen Ryan nearly every day, but not to speak to—last winter I was living at Stanley Street, Paddington—I changed my address four or five weeks ago—I was at Stanley Street about seven months—nothing was said about the robbery at Holloway, only about the fighting—it was the first time I had been there—I saw the account in the newspaper—I thought it was my duty to go to Holloway, because I had no doubt Ryan was not in fault, and the prosecutor did not say anything about the watch and chain—I did not speak to the prosecutor that night—there were more people there than me—I did not go to the Police-station—I saw the beginning, but I did not see the finish.
THOMAS WINTER . I am an interpreter—I live at 5, Homer Road, Marylebone—I have known Ryan about two years, perhaps a little more—I have seen Fitzgerald—I know the prosecutor by sight—on June 22nd, between nine and ten p.m., I came from the Edgware Road—I saw a
large crowd in Praed Street—then I saw the prosecutor and Ryan fighting; the prosecutor knocked Ryan down, and somebody kicked him—Ryan cried out, "You cowards!" and managed to gain his feet—he picked up a stick, and hit the prosecutor—he walked across the road towards Chapel Street, and the crowd dispersed—I walked down the Edgware Road with my friend—no charge was then made against Ryan, and no cry of "Stop thief!" or "I have been robbed!"—I first heard Ryan was sent for trial when a friend showed me the paper; he is a witness outside, I believe—his name is Richmond; I have known him for years—I went to see Ryan at Holloway, and sent him something to eat—he is not a relation—I have not done that to other prisoners, but I know Ryan—I think he is a betting agent—I read in the paper that he was committed for stealing the prosecutor's watch, for robbery with violence—I thought it was injustice.
Cross-examined. I am subpœnaed to come here—I would have come without, but I got one—Ryan did not tell me he would send a subpœnaed, but he wrote me a letter, and said, "I am going to subpœnaed you as a witness "—Richmond did not tell me he was going to be subpœnaed—I was pleased to have a subpœnaed, and said, "I am bound to go up now, and say what I had seen, and I do not think Ryan is a person who would have taken a watch and chain "—I did not see the beginning—if the prisoner had the watch and chain the crowd would not let him get away—Ryan hit the prosecutor with a stick—I do not think he knocked him down—the prosecutor reeled; I do not think he fell—Ryan gave him a heavy blow—I interpret German and Scandinavian—I am my own master—I meet foreigners coming into the country who are only too pleased to employ anyone to help them along—what I do I charge for—Richmond did bets for me—I do not know much about it—I have never been to a race meeting—Ryan did not ask me to give evidence—I have not seen him about this affair—I took him food, and said, "What are you here for? It's a funny affair "—I could not stop him speaking, but what I am saying I did not get from the prisoner.
Witness for Fitzgerald.
DANIEL CONDON . I am a painter and decorator—I live in Paddington as a rule, but I work over London occasionally—on the night of June 22nd I was in a public-house in Praed Street, having a glass of beer with my comrades, when I heard a great "shermozzle" a great row, in the street—we opened the door and looked out, and I saw the prosecutor and Ryan fighting on the other side of the road—there was a great crowd in two or three minutes—to the right, at the corner of Irongate Wharf, I saw Fitzgerald and another man fighting—I do not know Winter nor Richmond—I have known Fitzgerald's father and mother as hard-working people—I have known Fitzgerald from a baby—they fell to the ground, and the man appeared to be trying to strangle Fitzgerald, who was underneath—I and two more picked the men up and put them on their feet—the police came and dispersed the crowd—Fitzgerald said, "I have lost my hat"; I saw no more—I know Ryan's father and mother—I have known Ryan twenty-eight to thirty years—the constable, 131 D or F, asked me to come to the Police-court—I did not tell him I saw the prosecutor attacking Ryan or Fitzgerald—the constable asked for a man of the name of Condon—I said, "My name is Condon "—he said, "You come to the Police-court and state your evidence in front of the Magistrate"—I said I would go at
two o'clock—that is the constable (131 F)—I was to give my evidence against the prisoners.
Cross-examined. The fight went on five or six or seven minutes after I saw anything of it—a constable was stationed more than twenty yards off—the police are taken up with the buses—I work with Mr. Frere, of Spring Yard, and Mr. Rose—I left, on strike, nine or ten weeks ago—since have worked for Farr and Hill—I work occasionally when they have got a job in—I do not work outside the Westminster Arms—I generally work in Paddington parish seven or eight months in the year, and when a job comes in, one of my comrades knows he can find me at the public-house, outside or inside—I gave evidence before the Magistrate—I refused to sign it because I did not know the object of the point,"Are you going to sign if a bill comes in to you?"
Fitzgerald said he subpœnaed the prosecutor's wife to prove the prosecutor knew him. She did not appear. He then, in his defence, repeated in sub-stance his statement before the Magistrate.
GUILTY .—RYAN** then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Marylebone Police-court on November 11th, 1893.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour . FITZGERALD** PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in the name of John Jones at Marylebone Police-court on April 18th, 1893.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, July 21st, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. ARMSTRONG Prosecuted.
ALBERT NASH . I am the father of William Nash, and live with him at 193, Well Street, Hackney—he is thirteen years old—on the night of June 2nd I saw the house shut up; the door was not bolted, but latched.
ALEXANDER NASH . I am a brother of the last witness, and live with him—on July 2nd I went home at 12.5, but had not got the key; I climbed over the yard wall, and saw two men in the yard—Alfred Stevens, who works for us, was standing at the front door; he unlocked the back gate, and I ran round; he caught one man, and I the other, but I did not see the prisoner.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. We were playmates together—you have a good character, upright and straightforward.
ALFRED STEPHEN . I am a fish curer, of Homerton—Alexander Nash called me on this night; I ran to the gate, and told him to run to the front door, and they both struck him—I caught hold of the prisoner, and we struggled some time till he got away.
Cross-examined. You did struggle with me; I had seen you before that evening; you were very much the worse for drink.
WILLIAM NASH . I am a brother of the two last witnesses, and live at 2, Well Street—on the morning of July 3rd I went into the yard, and found these two birds on the ground, covered over—I saw them last in the shop—I also missed a small carriage clock.
Cross-examined. I have known you some time; you have always been a respectable lad; I am very much surprised that you are there.
Cross-examined. I have inquired into your character, and know nothing against you.
The Prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate, said that he met the other man in Well Street, who said that as he had no money he must sleep at Mr. Nash's, where he slept on another night, and asked him to hold his boots while he got over the gate to sleep there, and asked him to come into the yard while he got a sack to cover him, and then a boy called out "Burglars."
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BLACKWELL, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence. NOT GUILTY .
MR. KYD Prosecuted.
ANNIE SYLVESTER . I am single, and live at 7, Wells Court, Spitalfields—on July 3rd, about four o'clock, I was in Spectacle Alley, and saw the prisoner there, and said, "Will you be kind enough to give me the ring?"—she said that she had not got it, and challenged me to fight, and drew out a clasp knife; I saw it in her hand—she struck me on my face where the scar is, and on my side—she was taken into custody—I went to the hospital, and was not able to attend the first examination.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not strike you first, or catch hold of you by your hand.
SARAH HEFFRON . I live at 70, Dorset Street—I was going home, and saw them having a row over a ring, and they wanted to fight—I know the prisoner as Wright; a knife was in her hand, and I saw her use it—I was with Charlotte Stokes.
Cross-examined. She had hold of you by your hair.
CHARLOTTE STOKES . I live at Travers Street, Spitalfields—I was with the last witness at the corner of Spectacle Alley, and saw the prisoner and prosecutrix rowing—I saw her catch Cotter by her hair, and then she stabbed her—I saw the knife in her hand.
LEWIS ALBERT SMITH . I am house surgeon at the London Hospital—I attended Sylvester—there was a clean incised wound five-eighths of an inch long on her ribs, which might have penetrated to the abdomen; there was another wound on her jaw—if the wound in her side had been deeper, it would have been very serious—I kept her as an in-patient a fortnight and three days.
The Prisoner. I am very sorry I did it.
The Prisoner called
the prisoner first, and then I saw her with a knife in her hand, and saw her strike Sylvester with it.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
565. LEON GOODMAN (28) and SARAH GOODMAN (33) , Stealing a roll of ribbon and two remnants of ribbon, the property of Messrs. Nicholson and Sons, Limited; also thirteen remnants of ribbon, of Howard Williams and others; also a roll of black ribbon, of George Knock; also a roll of ribbon, of J. Spence and another; to which
LEON GOODMAN PLEADED GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour, and to pay the costs of the Prosecution.
NOT GUILTY .
GUILTY .— Discharged on his father's Recognizances.
WALTER HATCHER (646 Y). On July 4th, about 12.45 a.m., I was off duty, and going home through Peck water Street, and was followed by a man—I heard him say, "Jack, here is a watch and chain"—I was knocked down, one man knelt on me, and another said, "Have his b—watch and chain"—I was kicked, I got up, and was knocked down a third time—I shouted "Police," and Davis came to my assistance—I missed my watch and chain—I was so much dazed that I am not able to identify any of the men—I have been on the sick list ever since.
EDWARD DAVIS (367 Y). I heard cries of "Police," and met Hatcher, who complained of being assaulted and robbed—I went to the spot, and found the prisoner and about a dozen others—it is rather a rough neighbourhood—I did not arrest the prisoner.
ELIZABETH SIMMONDS . I am married, and live at 78, Peck water Street—on the morning of July 4th I heard a moaning noise; I looked out, and saw a man on the ground, and the prisoner on top of him—I saw him kick the man in the gutter; the man got up and staggered, and a young man said, "Jack has come back again"—I am sure it was the prisoner—I have known him from a boy—my room is en the second floor.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I know it was you, and your sister pulled you away, and said, "Jack, come home."
By the COURT. It might be that the sailor came up, and was pulling the man up, but I am sure I saw. him kick the man on the ground.
WALTER BEX (Detective Y). I arrested the prisoner on July 4th, at 4, Peck water Street; he was at home on leave from his ship—his sister was there—his brother, Jack, said, "I went there, and pulled the man off"—he said, at the station "I will have my say afterwards"—I searched him, but found no watch.
Marylebone Police-court, and the prisoner said, "Governor, I will tell you the truth; my brother, Jim, had come home, and said, 'Quick, open the door,' and I went and helped him, but I do not know anything about the watch and chain"—he also said, "I tried to save my brother, Jim; he came to the door, and said, 'Jim'"—I did not caution the prisoner; he made the statement voluntarily.
Witnesses for the Defence.
CHARLES ATKINS . I am a tube-maker, of 78, Peckwater Street—I heard a noise, and ran out, and saw the prisoner and the prosecutor on the ground together in Bartholomew Road, and saw the prisoner pull a man off the prosecutor—I told the constable he had got the wrong man, and the prosecutor said, "This is not the man, let him go."
W. HATCHER (Re-examined by the COURT). I do not remember seeing Atkins in Bartholomew Road, I was too much dazed, but I do believe he is one of the men, I am not sure—I took his name and address.
EVA BURGESS . The prisoner is my brother; he went out, and I followed him, and saw him pull the man off—I have another brother, Jim; he has disappeared—I did not see a man kicking the prosecutor when he was on the ground—the prisoner has been at sea three and a half years.
Cross-examined. It was in Bartholomew Road that I saw my brother pull a man off—I know Simmonds; she lives at the top of Bartholomew Road.
By the COURT. Jim is not a sailor—he does not go about in the uniform of Her Majesty's Service.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. SANDERS Prosecuted.
JOHN CHARLES PATTISON . I am a solicitor, of 20, Downey Avenue, Camden Road—on, June 18th I went to bed shortly after midnight—I just looked round the ground floor—it was all secure—next morning "I found that an entrance had been effected by the front kitchen window, and I missed a mackintosh, a coat, a gold pin, some links, a walking stick, and an opera-glass (produced)—they were safe the night before, and are worth £10—this hat is mine—another was left in place of it.
ALBERT HUTCHINGS (414 Y). On June 25th, about 4.30 a.m., I took the prisoner in custody, and took him to the station—he was dressed as he is now—he had this paper and pocket-book in his possession, and was wearing this hat—he was coming out of a garden in the next road to Mr. Pattison—I asked what he was doing—he said he went there to make water—I asked if he had any home—he said, "No"—I asked where he slept the previous night—he said, "What has that to do with you?"—I charged him with being a suspected person—it was after that that the property was identified—he was taken to Clerkenwell at ten o'clock—he was charged with burglary the following Thursday, and in the meantime the property was identified.
JOSEPH FINGALLY (Detective Sergeant). I found the prisoner with some of these things, and said that he would be charged with burglary—he said, "I had these things given me; they are mine"—I was called to Mr. Pattison's premises soon after the burglary, who said, "The things are mine."
GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony on March 12th, 1895; and two other convictions were proved against him.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
570. ERNEST BENNETT (21) to unlawfully obtaining money from Elizabeth Lambeth and Thomas William Vickers by false pretences.— Two Days' Imprisonment, the prisoner promising to go to sea. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, July 2nd, 1896.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrence.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
MARY ANN KIVELL . At, the beginning of June this year I took a coffee-shop at 8, Chapel Street, Marylebone; previous to that I had always lived at Bideford with my son—on Monday, June 22nd, the prisoner came to the house—I had never seen him before—he had some papers in his hands—he said he wanted to see me privately—I told him to come into the room behind the kitchen—he came—he said he had heard this was a bad house, and that some woman was seen to come there last Christmas—I said I had only been there a fortnight—he said, "You have been here a month "—he said his price was £50, but he would take £10 for putting down the house—he did not tell me what he was going to do; I thought it was to keep it quiet; that was what I gathered from what he said—I told him I had only been there a fortnight, and I had kept the house respectable, and I should apply to the railway company that I had taken the house from—he said he was going to the Police-station to take the law, and I should hear from him again—he asked if I had a husband—I said, "Yes"—he asked what he was—I said, "Afarmer"—he went away, and came back about ten or half-past—he rang the bell; I opened the door—he said, "Have you made up your mind what you are going to do?"—I said, "What do you mean? I am going to apply to the rail-way company," and I shut the door, and went straight home to my husband and son—in the meantime I received this letter: "18A, Mona Terrace. Dear Madam,—As you do not wish me to say anything about your shop, this is to say, I will say nothing for £5—£2 10s. down, the balance when the trial comes off "—when my son arrived, I handed the letter to him, and he saw the prisoner.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. When you saw me on the Saturday
you did not show me a photograph—you did not say that you had coma on most unpleasant business, that you had come about a divorce from your wife; you never brought up your wife's name—I did not suggest that I should receive money—I did not say that I would sooner pay you anything than you should say anything about the house—you did not ask me to produce the woman that showed your wife and a gentleman into the room.
Re-examined. When I took the house I gave the railway company references from the Mayor of Bideford and others.
RICHARD KIVELL . I live at Bideford—I am the son of the last witness—after receiving a communication from my mother, I came to London on Saturday, June 26th, I caused a little girl to write a letter to the prisoner, and he came to see me on Saturday afternoon—I showed him the letter to my mother, and asked him if he was the man who wrote it—he said, "Yes, I am the man"—he was carrying papers and a pocket-book; he began to flourish the papers about—I told him he was a rogue and a London sharper, and said, "Come outside; I am going to give you in charge "—he commenced to shuffle the papers about, and said, "I will show you who I am, and will give you in charge "—I gave him the length of my stick across his back—he did not say much—I had hold of him by the collar of his coat—he pretended to show fight for a while—he partly took off his coat, but he put it on again; I had given him enough before—he said the house was a bad house, and he would make it hot for me if I did not let him go—I held him till an officer came up, and then I gave him into custody—he heard me send for a policeman—he said, "I will make it hot for you, you cur!"
Cross-examined. You did not offer to send for a policeman—you did not say that you wrote the letter at my mother's instigation—you said nothing whatever about your wife.
THOMAS BROWN (152 E). On June 27th I was called to arrest the prisoner—the last witness had hold of him, and charged him with attempting to obtain £5 by fraudulent false pretences—the prisoner said it was a lot of rot; he would soon clear it up, and would make it hot for the prosecutor; that it was a bad house, and he wished to charge the son with assaulting him—I know the house; it was a bad house; it has been respectably conducted since the prosecutrix was in it.
JAMES HOLDER (Police Sergeant E). I was present when the prisoner was charged with attempting to obtain £5—after the charge was taken he said; "It is all false, the house is a dirty brothel, and the police know it"—I know the house; it was always used by women of ill-fame; it has been well-conducted since the prosecutrix has been in it—they appear to be doing a good coffee-house business—the prisoner was taken before the Magistrate, and remanded for a week on his own recognizance; he failed to surrender, and a warrant was issued—about an hour afterwards a telegram at the Police-court arrived from Chiswick that he was ill—I went to Chiswick the same night, and found him apparently well—he was in the street, in evening dress, smoking a pipe—he said he wanted to see a doctor, and wanted me to take him to several doctors—I said I could not do that—he said he had sent the telegram; this is it. (Read: "Doctor's certificate will follow. A. Beaumont shows no contempt of Court.") He did not show me any certificate.
The Prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate, and in his defence, alleged that he was tracing his wife, and making inquiries about her with reference to taking divorce proceedings and denied asking for money, or anything of the kind.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, July 22nd, 1896.
Before Mr. Recorder.
573. GEORGE NEWTON (16) PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully obtaining a tiger-skin by false pretences, and the said GEORGE NEWTON and ARTHUR ROBERT SIMPSON (23) to obtaining tiger-skins by false pretences; also to obtaining a ring and other articles. The Police stated that the prisoners had made eighty-six attempts since January to obtain property from the "Exchange and' Mart," fifteen of which had been successful. NEWTON received a good character.— Discharged on Recognizances . SIMPSON— Ten Months' Hard Labour , And
574. BENJAMIN PHILIP OXLADE (28) , to stealing a barrow and twenty hats, the property of Robert Alfred Hargrove. He received a good character.— Eight Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MESSRS. H. AVORY and BYRON Prosecuted, The evidence was interpreted to the prisoners.
ISAAC AARON JOSEPH . I am in partnership with Mr. Charles Virgo, as foreign bankers, at Leadenhall Buildings—we have correspondents in Valencia, J. F. Carles and Co.—on June 23rd we received the letter and envelope by post; it enclosed this bill of exchange for 30,000 francs. (This was on paper, stamped with the name of Carles, of Valencia.) It is accepted and endorsed, "J. B. Carles"—I know their signature; this is a very good imitation of it—they use a stamp like this, and the number would be approximately correct—the letter enclosed another, apparently written by Antonio Morales to his father; this is it—these letters are in Spanish; I did not translate them, but I have sufficient knowledge of Spanish to make myself acquainted with the contents—I cabled to Carles, and after that the prisoner Coll called that day—a person who styled himself an interpreter came into my office with him—these two documents "D." and "E," were sent in first as an introduction—I am under the impresssion that the envelope was open—I glanced at the letters, and went out to the outer office to Coll; there was a conversation through the interpreter, as I do not speak Spanish—I spoke to him as Don Antonio Morales, and he assented to that—I told him it was not convenient to carry the business through that day, and he had better come next morning—he seemed very much put out, and asked if it could not be settled later in the day—I said that he could come back at 3.30 if he liked, and it was possible we might do it; and if he would leave the bond with me, I would give him a receipt for it—he then handed me this French bond, numbered 11007, and I wrote this receipt for it—having seen, the reference in letter "C" from A. Morales to his father, and the reference to Lincoln, we telegraphed to Lincoln—
Coll then left, and a few minutes later my clerk made a communication to me—Coll returned shortly before four o'clock, and in consequence of what my clerk said, I returned the bond and got the receipt back, and a few minutes afterwards I got the bond back and handed back the receipt—I told him I was unable to carry out the affair that day, and asked him to call at eleven next morning—before he called I had received a reply to my telegram from Valencia, in consequence of which I communicated with the police on the morning of the 24th—I had a friend, Mr. Negroto, there that morning, who understands Spanish—Coll came about eleven o'clock, and Mr. Negroto translated what was said—I said, "Have you come for the money?"—Coll said, "Yea"—he was asked, "Are you Antonio Morales?"—he said, "No"—he was asked, "Where is Antoniq Morales?"—he said, "In Paris"—I understood him to say that he had been employed by Morales as a clerk to come to England—he said, "Is there any difficulty?"—I said, "The difficulty is that the letters you bring are false; this is a police officer, and I am going to give you in custody," and the policeman took him in charge—the letter is a fair imitation of the signature of Carles and Co.
JOSEPH HECTOR NEGROTO . I am a clerk, and am acquainted with Messrs. Vergo; I am thoroughly acquainted with the Spanish language—on June 24th I was in the office when Coll came in, and, at Mr. Joseph's suggestion, I asked him if he had come for the money—he said, "Yes"—I asked him if his name was Morales; he said, No, he had been commissioned by Morales to come to London, and collect his money for him; that he had a short time before arrived from Barcelona, where he met Morales, and told him he had business in London; would he like to accompany him? and he consented, and, when they arrived at Paris, Morales asked him to go to London, and deliver this bond, and he was to receive £1,190, and that Morales was not entitled to the money; he had cheated him, and induced him to come to London—he was then given in custody—I afterwards saw Alcina in custody in the street, and told him the charge was attempting to defraud Messrs. Joseph and Vergo—he said that the papers and money found on him were handed to him by Coll to take care of, but he knew nothing whatever about them; he also told me he met a man in Paris, and asked him to come to London with him.
EDWARDO FORNES . I have translated the documents in this case, handed to me by the solicitor for the prosecution, and the two documents "I" and "J," and the letters "O" and "P"—"O" is addressed to Rubier and Company, of Marseilles, and "P" is a letter by Morales to Don Antonio—they are both dated June 23rd—there are a number of Masonic certificates which I have translated, all except one; that is a sort of income-tax to the Government, which is never more than ten shillings a year—it is in the name of Don Antonio Morales Rubier; it is the practice in Spain to take the mother's name; he is described in that document as a bachelor usually residing in Barcelona. (This was found on Alsina.)
with me—I do not know either of the prisoners—I do not know Jose Morales, of Valencia, a landed proprietor—the note-paper of letter "A" is very similar to what we use in our business, and the signature is very similar to my brother's, but I am nearly sure it is not—the letter was not written by my firm; we have no clerk who writes a hand like that—I know nothing of the business referred to in this letter—I did not ask anybody to negotiate the French bond referred to in that letter—from the 9th to the 25th of this month my brother, whose signature this is like, was at their country house, about 100 kilometres from Valencia, and my other brother and I had the only signatures of the firm—the endorsement to this bill is not that of any of our firm, but it is similar to the other—letters "D" and "O" did not come from my firm; I have in my pocket several letters the same as that, in which another attempt was made to swindle the firm.
GILBERT LEIGH MARKS . I represent, in London, the firm of Magures et fils, of Roulaix, in France—this bill of exchange is a very good imitation of their signature, but I have no hesitation in saying it is a forgery.
ALBERT GREDIG . I am an interpreter, and am in the habit of attending at Cline's Hotel, Finsbury Square—on June 3rd, hearing that there were some foreigners upstairs, I went up and offered my services, and found the two prisoners occupying a room together—Coll spoke to me, and gave me a slip of paper, marked "Leadenhall Buildings, Messrs. Joseph and Vergo"—I went with the prisoners to Leadenhall Buildings; we got there at ten o'clock; I went up to the door of the office, and went down to wait, and Coll went in as soon as we arrived—we got there at a little after ten the first morning—we did not ring the bell; he opened the door and walked in—I went downstairs, and Coll came down and called me up, because he could not understand Mr. Joseph—I went up, and saw Mr. Joseph give a receipt—I did not see Coll hand over a bond; I saw him go downstairs—Alcina was still waiting at the bottom—Coll said that he could not read or write, and on the receipt was "100 francs," and he thought it was not for the full value, and gave it to Alcina to read, saying he thought it was worth more than that—I did not hear what Alcina said—I went up with Coll to get the bond back—I think Coll said something about cashing it somewhere else—I went into the office with him, and we got the bond back and gave back the receipts, and went downstairs—there were then a few words of conversation between the prisoners which I could not understand, and I went again with them at 3.30; Alcina stopped downstairs—I went with them next morning; Coll went into the office, and Alcina remained downstairs—Coll said he was going to Lincoln, and made out this list of trains (produced)—he said that he came from Barcelona, and met Alcina in Paris, and they came together.
Cross-examined by Coll. When you went upstairs with me you told me you did not know what to do, because you had only one day to stop in London.
FREDERICK HOME (City Police Inspector). On June 24th I went with another officer to Leadenhall Buildings—I remained outside, and Inspector Davidson went in—I took Alcina in custody in the passage—it was a very large building—I took him to the station, where he said, through the interpreter, "I met this man in Paris; he asked me to come to London
with him; he gave me the document and money; I don't know what his business is—I searched him, and found on Coll a receipt for the bonds—I found in his inside coat pocket a slip of paper with signatures, and a document headed "Instructions for Morales"—they were not sealed up in envelopes, they were open—I also found the letter marked "J," which begins, "Friend Pepin," and this envelope with a blue monogram, two Russian bonds, letters "C" and "P," one addressed to "Morales," the other a duplicate letter to the father from Morales, and a document marked "U," which is the receipt for income-tax paid by Morales, a card of the trains for Lincoln, the prices of French stocks and bonds, and a receipt for a subscription to a club in Barcelona in the name of Nevallo—I got some of these Masonic documents from a trunk at Cline's Hotel.
The Prisoners' statements before the Magistrate. Coll says: "With regard to the charge, I do not know anything. With regard to the presence of Alsina in London, it was entirely through me." Alsina says: "I would not have come to London but through Coll."
GUILTY .—MR. BYRON slated that the bonds were part of a robbery in Valencia, but, as they had been stopped, the numbers had been altered.— Six Years' Penal Servitude each.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, July 22nd, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. BODKIN and LEYCESTER Prosecuted, and MR. GRAIN Defended.
WILLIAM GEORGE BEETLESTONE . I am an officer in the London Bankruptcy Court—I produce file of proceedings in bankruptcy against the defendant—the prisoner's petition was filed on September 18th, 1894—a receiving order was mode the same day, and he was adjudicated a bankrupt on October 20th—the proofs admitted amounted to £32,645 1s. 6d.; the estimated assets to £4,593 19s. 10d.
Cross-examined. The defendant was examined on December 11th by Counsel on behalf of the trustee and the Official Receiver—that was the public examination—it was concluded—everything was signed by the defendant in accordance with the Act—he applied for his order of discharge on January 9th, 1896—it was refused—February 18th was fixed for hearing the application for discharge—it was heard on March 17th, and adjourned—I have the list of unsecured creditors—the Imperial Company proved for £441 13s. 6d.
LEONARD CHARLES CHERRY . I am clerk to the Official Receiver in Bankruptcy—I produce the Official Receiver's file—there was a dividend of 1s. in the £—the defendant answered the printed questions produced—each sheet is initialled by the defendant. (The material portions of the questions and answers were read—namely, Nos. 4, 5, 37, 39, and 40, which were to the effect (4) that the defendant carried on business at 10 and 12, Tooley Street as "James R. Weir "; that he established the business in June, 1889, at 32, Tooley Street, in a small office, bringing the goods to wharves, with about £230 capital, borrowing £1,750 and afterwards £3,000 from his father; the bills ran between them for mutual accommodation
the transactions were shown in the books, and he owed his father £4,000. In December, 1889, he moved to 2, Tooley Street, and his books would show a profit to the end of 1893. After two years he moved to his present address. As to bills between Penned, Dottridge and Howse (5) "Practically the three individuals named and I were supporting each other. We believed each other to be solvent, but, in fact, the suspension of one meant, and has meant, the suspension of all. I have always had to look to the proceeds of these discounted bills to meet my liabilities "As to Nos. 37 and 39, he attributed his insolvency to the rapid fall in prices in lard and other produce, and accommodation bills; that he kept proper books, and "The last time my books were balanced was the 1st of January, 1893, when a balance-sheet was made out showing, a surplus of £445 6s. 9d." And as to No. 40, "Although I never, after January, 1893, took out a balance-sheet, I knew from my losses in lard and other, produce in February, 1894, that my property was then and subsequently insufficient to meet my debts") That is correctly read.
Cross-examined. This is correct: "Discharge refused, or, in the alternative, if the debtor is not prosecuted for the offences under the Debtors' Act above referred to, or in the event of his acquittal under such prosecution, the discharge to be suspended for five years "—that is the note made by the Official Receiver as the result—the Deficiency Account was filed by the bankrupt and examined by the trustee or the Official Receiver.
JAMBS SAMUEL MARSDEN . I am one of the firm of Marsden and Sons, provision merchants, of Liverpool—my first dealings with the defendant were about June, 1894—on August 22nd I got an order through Mr. Lane, and sold him fifty kegs of North's lard, value £95 18s. 9d. on August 24th 200 pails of another lard, value £170 12s. 6d.; on August 29th fifty pails of North's lard, £26 5s.; and 204 pails of Morrell's, 200 pails of North's lard, value £212 2s.—that is £523—those goods were sold by me, on credit, on the usual terms, according to the custom of the trade," cash at a month, or before delivery, as required "—on September 5th I saw the defendant with Mr. Lane, the broker—he asked the price of lard, and saw samples—he bought 100 kegs of Hammond's lard at £215; 100 kegs of North's lard, £217 10s.; 140 pails of Kingham's lard, £78 15s.; value £501 5s.—that was sold on the same terms—the defendant very urgently requested these should be forwarded the same evening—I promised delivery of all that could be obtained that day—all but one lot were despatched by the Great Northern Railway to Farringdon—I had no knowledge of his financial position, except from inquiries in the market—we had had only one transaction for cash—the transaction appeared a usual one—had I known they were to be deposited for a cash advance, I should not have parted with them, unless for cash—I have beep in the trade over twenty years—the depositing of goods bought on credit for a cash advance is very unusual, and if it is known the man cannot get credit on the market—I am not aware of any such trade customer.
Cross-examined. We import some provisions—we are well known in
the trade—if goods are consigned, we are drawn upon at sight—we can arrange with the shippers for, say, 75 per cent., and the debt is remitted when the account sales are placed—our dealings are substantially for cash—that is our rule in the provision trade with consigned goods—I do not accept bills—I do not sell to customers upon bills—lard is a speculative article—it depends upon the weather and the market—there was not a fall in the market in August and September.
Re-examined. I have not been paid for any other than the first order, which was secured by payment into the bank before delivery—of the debt, £1,016, I have never received a penny—the first order was about £200.
By the JURY. The debtor was introduced to me by a broker, a Mr. Redman—that was the first time I saw Weir; the second was in the Police-court—the broker takes no responsibility for the debt; he receives his brokerage from the merchant for whom he sells.
JOHN HENRY GATESHILL . I am a provision merchant, of 42, Harrington Street, Liverpool—on August 27th I supplied the defendant with 270 pails of Morand's lard for £135, through Mr. Lane, a broker, on the usual terms, cash at a month, unless required before delivery—the goods were sent to London—I have only been paid 1s. in the £ through the Official Receiver—on December 3rd Mr. Lane bought for the defendant 300 pails of lard for £165, North's, I think, upon the same terms—I have only been paid the dividend—it was an ordinary transaction—if I had known 250 of those pails were to be deposited for a cash advance, I should not have parted with them—I have been in the trade since 1879—it is not customary to deposit goods obtained on credit.
Cross-examined. I never saw the defendant till I saw him at Southwark Police Court—we generally get a trade reference—dealing through a broker is usual.
JOHN HANMER BENNETT . I am a partner in the firm of Gardner, Bennett, and Co., of Liverpool, provision dealers—before September, 1894, I had dealings with the defendant—on September 3rd, through Mr. Lindford, a broker, I sold him twenty-four boxes of ham marked "North's G.A.," for £232 17s. 9d., on the usual Liverpool contract terms—they were despatched by the Great Northern Railway to the depot at Farringdon Street—if I had known the bulk of those goods were to be deposited with another man in the same way of trade for a cash advance, I would not have parted with them, because it would show financial weakness to ray mind.
GEORGE HENRY OLDRIDGE . I am a partner of Jones, Son, and Co., 9, Reinford Square, Liverpool—my firm dealt with Weir in 1893, but not again till September 3rd, 1894, when I sold him, through Mr. Lane, 350 pails of "Pineapple" lard (that is the brand) for £139 1s. 3d. on the usual Liverpool terms—that was sent by the Great Northern Railway to London—on September 4th I sold him 300 pails of same, through Mr. Lane, for £166 17s. 6d., on the same terms—they were despatched to London—I have not been paid, except that I have proved in bankruptcy, and received a dividend—we were informed the goods were to be sent to London, and sold in the ordinary way—if I had known they were to be deposited for a cash advance I would not have parted with them without cash—we heard a rumour on the Saturday, and tried to stop them, but were too
late—we could not trace them—in August and September there was a decided rise in the market till September 18th, of from 6d. to 1s. a cwt.—there might be a difference of 3d., but this memorandum is practically correct. (Showing the prices in August, first week, 38s.; second and third, 40s.; fourth, 39s.; first in September, 45s.; second, 48s.)
THOMAS LONSDALE . I am a member of the firm of J. and J. Lonsdale and Co., of Liverpool—our firm have had transactions with, the defendant before September 5th, 1894, when I saw him at Liverpool with Mr. Lindford, a broker—I know him—he bought 224 boxes of hams for £274 16s. 4d. on the usual terms of the Liverpool market—they were dispatched to London—they were never paid for—I should not have parted with those boxes on credit had I known that 100 were to be deposited against a cash advance.
Cross-examined. I have known the defendant and his father for some time—I had had transaction's with them—I have said, "We were satisfied to give him credit"—I was reported as one of the creditors, and we appointed a committee to look after our interests—personally, I do not charge him with fraud.
WILLIAM HENRY LANE . I am a broker in the provision trade, of Duchy Chambers, Liverpool—I acted as broker for Weir in August and September, 1894, and previously—I had transactions with Messrs. Marsden, Morrell, Gateshill, Davis, and Jones, Son and Co., on his behalf, in August and September, 1894, buying from those firms on the defendant's account, and on the usual Liverpool market terms, including, on August 24th, from Morrell, 150 pails of North's lard (a pail in about 28 lbs., and the present value about 10s.), of the value of about £75; on August 25th, 250 pails, £125; on August 30th, 250 pails, £125; making £325; on September 3rd, seven boxes of Morrell hams. £103 4s. 9d.; August 30th, invoiced September 5th, 250 pails Morrell's lard, £134 17s. 6d.—I saw Weir at Liverpool on September 5th—my previous transactions had been by letter and telegram—I went round with him to various places—I had no knowledge of his financial position—he gave me no reason why he wanted the goods—he did not say where they were to go—I produced the contract notes at the Police-courts.
Cross-examined. The transactions were on the same terms as usual—I had dealt with him four or five years—I have had large dealings with him, many thousands—his liabilities had been regularly met up to the time of his failure, as far as I know, or possibly I should not have dealt with him—it is customary for the merchants to make their own inquiries—I take no responsibility—I am a go-between, and get my commission.
ANDREW FERGUSON FRYER . I am book-keeper to J. W. Dotteridge, of 13, Duke Street, Tooley Street—he is a provision merchant and commission agent—the defendant, in August and September, 1894, deposited documents of title on goods for cash advances made to him from time to time by our firm—we took delivery, and sold to customers of our own, charging the defendant a commission of 5 per cent.—he paid the carriage—I think we advanced to him up to the full market value—if we made a loss we should get the balance off—we work several accounts together, and there is a division of the credit—the advance is made before the goods are disposed of—if there is a profit we put it to the defendant's credit, or remit to him, deducting freight, commission, and other expenses—on September
6th, 1894, the defendant deposited with us fifty kegs of Hammond's lard, seven boxes of Morrell's hams, four boxes of picnic hams—we advanced £100 against the lard and one lot of hams—I have the extract from the ledger—at that time the defendant owed us £1,300—we set the proceeds of the goods to his credit—we disposed of, by September 18th, goods which realised £97—I did not know the price invoiced to him—it was not our business to inquire—we realised for the goods deposited on September 6th £232—we placed that to the defendant's credit, less the £100 advanced—Mr. Berry, the trustee, got to know of that, and called it a fraudulent preference—we repaid that amount with costs to the estate—our profit was 3 per cent.—the four boxes of picnic hams (the shoulder part) realised £38.
Cross-examined. Our firm have been in business forty years or more—I have been with them seventeen years—the firm have had similar transactions with other persons—we are not the only persons doing the same thing in the provision trade—we did not inquire whether the goods had been paid for—we assume persons coming to us are trading in the ordinary way of business—the credit is not put on the contract note—when the amount is advanced we have a free hand to sell—that is the practice in London—it is a matter of speculation—prices go up and down about the end of July—there is nothing unusual in the transaction, but it would depend upon circumstances—we did our best according to the market price—we do not sell under—we go to the customer, and sell by sample, or he comes to our warehouse.
Re-examined. Our three per cent, is calculated on the amount we obtain for the goods—it is to our advantage to get the largest price we can—we have never been told by the defendant to sell at less than the market price—as soon as the goods are deposited with us, and we advance upon them, we have a lien upon the goods—if the person depositing is known to be insolvent, the transaction is not usual—there is a good deal of competition in the trade.
By the JURY. I think the £1,300 was running in bills.
JOHN TRINGROOVE . I am a clerk to Messrs. Tringroove and Co., provision merchants, Tooley Street—our firm had dealings with Weir—in 1894 we claimed £606, and were pressing him for payment of the balance—on August 24th we issued a writ; we got a judgment in default for £155 18s. 5d.—the day we issued the writ we got an order on the Great Northern Railway to deliver 100 casks of lard—we lodged the order, and got delivery of twenty on the 27th—we had not ordered lard from the defendant, but were taking goods in payment—we sold the eighty, and passed the order for delivery, about September 7th, to the purchaser—they realised £202 Os. 8d. net; we credited £181, which left £428 of the £600 due—our judgment, with costs, was £160 12s. 5d.
Cross-examined. I take it the goods were sent in consequence of the defendant being served with a writ—I think we began business in 1892—in 1893 we had transactions with the defendant to the amount of £4,000 and £5,000; in 1894 to more than £5,000—he owed us at one time £3,758—we looked upon him as an honourable merchant up to the failure—sometimes he paid in cash, at other times he gave acceptances, but the bulk of the lard he was unable to pay for; we retained possession and had to resell it—that was nearly the last transaction—he only
deposited three little lots qf cheese with us, and the lard—we sold goods to him, and bought goods of him, principally lard and butter—they were all "C.I.F." purchases—sometimes he would not take up a purchase, and we resold and charged him the difference.
WILLIAM HERBERT KALLAND . I am clerk to Mr. Thomas Boyd, of Wellington Chambers, London Bridge, provision merchant—we dealt with the defendant, especially in August and September, 1894—he deposited documents of title or goods for our advances—we sold them, and charged him 3 1/2 per cent, commission—on September 6th we received 140 pails of Kingham's lard, 250 pails of Morrells lard, 175 pails of North's lard, and fifteen boxes of "G. A. picnic" hams—we made an advance of £150 by cheque—we had then a lien on the goods for the amount advanced—we sold the goods to customers—they realised £617 7s. 3d.—the 250 pails of lard realised £140 12s. 6d. gross—from that we deducted £4 10s. commission, freight, and other expenses; for the 140 pails of Kingham's lard £78 15s. gross, for the fifteen boxes of hams £148 5s. 2d. gross; also on September 6th he deposited 100 pails of "pine-apple" lard—we advanced £340 on September 5th against the 450 pails of "Pineapple" lard, and 90 pails of North's—they realised £309 7s. 6d.—freight, commission, etc., would have to be deducted—in August and September, up to the failure, on different transactions we advanced £4,090, and realised £4,137—after deducting charges, etc., we held a balance in his favour of £47, which was handed to the trustee in bankruptcy.
Cross-examined. The transactions have been large; £5,000 or £6,000 a year, or more—we usually sold for cash; sometimes we gave two months' credit—his engagements were met—our firm is large, both in Liverpool and London—we have several houses—the head office is London—these advances on consignments are usual—we did not ask whether the goods were paid for—goods on credit are deposited for cash advances largely.
By the JURY. We believed the defendant was in a position to sell goods at a profit; we did not ask the question; it does not rest with us to inquire into these things; of course, you cannot expect a man to prove he has paid, or there would be no trade done—the defendant bought goods of us on credit, and for cash—I cannot give you the last credit.
ARTHUR JOPSON ROWSON . I am a provision merchant, of 35, Tooley Street—the defendant deposited goods and documents of title with me for cash advances—I sold the goods, and accounted to the defendant—on December 6th, 1894, I received 100 boxes of cheese; I believe, after a conversation with David Weir, his brother—I agreed on those goods and others to make an advance of £520 to the defendant—I believe it was by cheque—I then got an order for 100 boxes of fancy white cheese delivered to my warehouse from the defendant's warehouse—I realised, and there was a slight balance, which I accounted for to the trustee; I think about £60—I have been in the trade for thirty years—I do not suppose there is any custom to deposit goods obtained on credit for cash advanced—I could get the goods from wholesale houses on credit.
Cross-examined. At the time I did not attach any importance to the transaction—I asked for goods and the bill of lading for the money I was about to advance—I have made advances before on goods in a similar way—my usual business is to serve the wholesale trade—it is occasionally
done, but it is not in the usual course of business—I am not a shipper.
Cross-examined. I gave evidence at the Police-court for the prosecution; I was Cross-examined by the defendant's solicitor—my depositions were taken down—I have been thirteen years in business—I have done business with the defendant five years—I have sold the defendant goods, and he has consigned goods to me for sale—I have bought from him and sold to him on consignment—I have advanced him money on goods he has consigned to me—that is a common practice—in 1892 my transactions with him amounted to £13,912; in 1893, £20,952; in 1894, £20,000—I am not a creditor—all his transactions were duly carried out—I deducted my commission, and paid him the balance.
Re-examined. I did not inquire as to his financial position—I got 1s. per cwt. in the majority of cases I sold for him, and I took the American drafts up—they were principally American goods; Weir asked me if I was overstocked could I buy, and if he lost money he paid me.
Cross-examined. I am a creditor for £67.
WILLIAM CLANCEY . I am foreman to Messrs. Oakeley, Sons and Co., carmen, of Pudding Lane, City—on September 7th I got an order from Weir, junior, to remove goods from Farringdon Street—I booked the order to Weir—I sent a pair of four-horse vans for the goods—there were about seventy kegs of lard—some of the goods went to the defendant's warehouse, and some to Mr. Burgess's, at Tooley Street.
WILLIAM BAMFORD LANG . I am an accountant in the Commercial Bank of Scotland, at 62, Lombard Street—the defendant banked there—I have prepared from the books this statement of the defendant's over-drafts on his current account—it shows the overdrafts from January 2nd to September 15th, 1894—one is over £2,600—towards the end of August and September they were never below £850—we have no rule as to the amount of overdrafts given to a customer—the defendant discounted bills at the bank—we did not require security against bills of exchange—against the overdraft on the current account we advanced against bills of lading, which we held as security for the overdrafts—the bills of exchange were drawn by Weir on various merchants against those in Weir's and the acceptor's names—we inquired as to the acceptor, and were satisfied he was a reasonably trustworthy man, otherwise we would not have discounted the bill—we placed the discount to the defendant's current account—we discounted bills for the defendant, Pennal, and Howse—the bank proved for £9,206 caused by overdrafts and cash advanced—we wrote the defendant these letters of September 5th and 7th. (Pressing him to decrease his overdrafts and keep his account in order.) We had not been satisfied with his account for some time—in May, 1894, we thought the discounts were excessive, and the manager intimated that he would like the amounts to be reduced to a more moderate figure—the amount was reduced about £5,000.
Cross-examined. The account was opened the end of 1889—from that time to May, 1894, the bank had no reason to complain of the account—there would be an arrangement as to the limit of bills running—I could
not say the figure, but it would be £15,000 to £20,000—it was most likely a verbal arrangement—after May the account was not so regularly kept, and we were getting uneasy—the annual turnover was about £280,000 a year—Pennal's and Howse's bills were discounted, and placed to the defendant's debit—Howse failed.
Re-examined. I thought Pennal's and Weir, sen.'s, were ordinary trade bills—they comprised a large proportion of the turnover—Pennal and Howse did not bank with us.
ALFRED BERBSFOHD FULLER . I am clerk to Mr. Oscar Berry, the trustee—I have examined the books since the bankruptcy—I prepared the schedule of goods obtained, their destination, and what they realised, under Mr. Berry's instructions and supervision, from the defendant's books—I found that between May and September there were eighteen new accounts opened to the extent of £9,641.
Cross-examined. They are the ordinary books, and the entries are properly made and posted—I am an accountant—Rowson's transactions are not entered—that is the exception—all the moneys were paid into the bank or accounted for—his brother was his clerk, and was paid a salary—including that, the defendant drew about £400 a year on his personal account—his brother lived with him—the amount of purchases in 1889, from July to December, was £9,451 15s. 6d.; the annual average was £18,903 9s.—his total net purchases were £562,992—£5,082 18s. ld. of the deficiency was attributed to House, Pennal, and McAdam.
JOHN CAREY LOVELL . I am senior partner of Lovell and Christmas, provision merchants and importers—we have been over forty years in the trade—I have heard of goods obtained on credit being deposited for cash advanced in the trade, but it is contrary to the usual course of business—if we knew a man was doing business in that way, we should refuse to serve him—it would depend upon his credit to a great extent, but it is a kind of business that could not be done continuously at a profit.
Cross-examined. Our business is said to be large—we have to do with dock warrants and bills of lading, but not with depositing them as a temporary cover for overdrafts.
MR. GRAIN submitted there was no case to you to the JURY under Sections 11, 14, and 15 of the Debtors' Act, and referred to the case of Re Hodgson in L. R. 1, Chancery Division, p. 151, in support of his contention. MR. BODKIN called attention to Ex parte Marsden in 2, Cliancery Division, which he contended modified the case of Re Hodgson. The COURT held the question whether the transactions were in the ordinary course of trading was one for the JURY.
GUILTY.— Judgment Respited.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, July 23rd, 1896.
Before Mr. Justice Lauorence.
579. CHARLES JAMES DAINTRY (42) was indicted for that he, being entrusted by John William Chennels with certain valuable securities, did unlawfully convert the same to his own use and benefit, with intent, to defraud.
MESSRS. C. F. GILL and BODKIN Prosecuted.
JOHN WILLIAM CHENNELS . I am a licensed victualler at Hemel Hempstead—in 1891 I was coachman to Lord Leconsfield, of Petworth House—I knew the defendant as a solicitor at Petworth—he has acted for me as a solicitor—out of my wages and other means I saved sums of money from time to time, which I handed to the defendant—in April, 1890, I handed to him £150, another sum of £50 in October, 1890, another sum of £50 in April, 1891, and another £50 in September, 1891—by that time he had about £300 of mine in his hands—I had previously entrusted him with other moneys, for which I had a mortgage, and upon which I was receiving interest—I handed him the £300 for investment—he told me that he had a capital investment at Littlehampton, and the money was placed there—some time after that some deeds were brought to me by Mr. Pulling, one of the defendant's clerks; amongst them was this letter of March 2nd, 1892, enclosing the deeds of the Littlehampton property—next day, March 3rd, I took those deeds back to the defendant's office, and gave them to one of the head clerks, Mr. Granger—the day after I got this letter from the defendant, stating that the Littlehampton deeds were in his hands for safe custody—later on, in 1892, I saw the defendant, and spoke to him about my money and deeds—I asked him, if I wanted the money in three months' time, would he withdraw the investment, and hand it over—he said he would do so; I could have the money at the end of three months—I went to the office several times in the course of the year—I saw the clerks a great many times; I did not see the defendant himself more than once after I had applied for the money—I definitely requested him to get the money for me; to the best of my knowledge, that would be about September, 1892—I asked to have the money in three months' time; that would be about the end of the year; I did not get the money, the interest, or the deeds—I got this letter of January 4th, 1893, dated from Petworth, stating that he would bring the deeds the next time he came to Petworth—I believe he was then at Horsham—I then went to see Messrs. D. Rydone and Co., solicitors, of Petworth; I could not say whether it was the same day or the next; I consulted them, and gave them this authority on January 6th, 1893, but did not get the deeds, and they then commenced legal proceedings on my behalf; I have never received the deeds, or the £300—I gave the defendant no authority to deal with them in any way—these four receipts were given to me by the defendant on my handing him the four sams making the £300.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. My first transaction with you was as to a sum of £90, which I lent to a client of yours, Mr. Browitt—up to April, 1890, we had no other transaction—that had been settled—the moneys I handed to you were for investment—I saw you several times about it, and several times I saw Mr. Granger, your clerk—I went' to your office for the interest, and I received it up to 1892—sometimes I saw you, and sometimes Mr. Granger—I was to have 5 per cent, for the money from the time you received it—I never asked for the money till I found
you were going wrong—you sent Mr. Granger to me, from time to time, to ask if I had any more money to invest—you held the £300 to invest on the Littlehampton property, and £200 of Mr. Browitt's—I could not say when I first heard of the Littlehampton security, because I had given over all the papers to you from the time you forwarded me the deeds to look over; I handed them to you at your office, and I have never seen them since—I saw you first about the investment in the Littlehampton property; I don't remember whether Granger and I talked it over before I saw you—I have been in your office several times with Granger—I don't remember whether it was said that the property belonged to Mr. Blagden; you sent me the deeds by Pulling—it was a largish bundle; I looked them over; I did not count them; I thought they were safe in your hands when I returned them—they were papers; I don't know about parchments—I did not know much about deeds at that time, not so much as I do now—I certainly expected that a proper security would be drawn up, the same as in Browitt's case—everything was properly done until you took the deeds away, and stopped everything—I was not great friends with Granger, not towards the last—he never told me that Briggs was the clerk that did all my business—I did not ask Granger where the mortgage was, or when it would be ready—I remember coming to the office, and asking, and it was not ready—I don't know whether I saw you then or Granger—I asked for the deeds a great many times, but never got them; I did not ask you for them after March, 1892; I never had a chance, because you were never there; you were gone—I do not remember your sending me in any bill; I had no bill—I did not give you any direction in writing to hold these deeds; I simply asked you if you would take care of them for me, because I was travelling about the country; you paid me the interest up to 1892; until then I had made no sort of request for security—I never, to my knowledge, saw a deed passing the property from Mr. Blagden to you—I do not remember giving you my commission or percentage—I became very uneasy about the securities when I heard that you had gone abroad—I don't know that I spoke to Granger about it; I don't know what was said—I had been to the office several times—I did not go to Rydone and Co. at once; I waited a day or two, not long—Granger did not tell me there was something wrong to my knowledge—I did not hear from Petworth that there was a mistake about these deeds; Granger had not got them; he could not get at them, because you had the key of the safe; Granger told me so—I did not see Granger at all times, sometimes I saw him, and sometimes someone else—I was very angry with Granger after I found that everything had gone wrong—he did not offer me any deeds as a substitute for these; I never heard of them—I left everything in Rydone's hands—I am not aware that you asked Mr. Ashby not to sell the property—Granger never told me that the deeds had been sent to Mr. Ashby.
FRANK ABBOT BROMLEY BRIGGS ., I was clerk to a firm of solicitors—afterwards, down to 1892, I was ledger clerk to the defendant—I remember Mr. Chennel as one of his clients—this (produced) is the defendant's ledger; it shows Mr. Chennel's account, making altogether £300—on March 26th, 1892, I debited that account with £300 for charges; that is a correct account—I find an entry on that day of a half-year's interest on the Littlehampton mortgage, £7 Us. 2d.—that forms
part of a cheque for £12 3s. 9d. in respect of the half-year's interest due on Browitt's mortgage—this document, dated April 16th, 1891, is in the defendant's writing: "Attending Mr. Chennell, and he will let me have £50, which will goon the Littlehamtpon"—here is another entry—this shows the way in which the costs were kept in regard to such matters; a memorandum was kept on the file from which the coats would be virtually made out—here is a memorandum in the defendant's writing on March 3rd, 1892: "Attending Mr. Chennel, and he returned the Littlehampton deeds."
Cross-examined. If I had noticed anything wrong I should have noticed it—in all probability, I never looked at the deeds; I only attested the signature—I never called your attention to the fact that you had mortgaged this property twice over; I think I should have remembered if you had—you had a good business, and a large number of clients—I should say Granger would know what deeds had been deposited of Chennel's—I did accountant's work, and nothing else; I made out a balance-sheet from time to time—you never gave me instructions to falsify accounts—the books were openly kept—between March 3rd and May 26th you were married; I don't know the date, not even the year—everything in the ledger would be openly shown.
JAMES HENUY PULLING . In 1892 I was deed clerk to the defendant at Petworth—there was a strong room in which deeds and securities were kept—a securities book was kept; this is it—at page 166 I find an entry of a list of deeds relating to 27, Surrey Street, Littlehampton—among others, there is entered a deed of August 6th, 1883, one of December 17th, 1887, another of September 8th, 1888, and another of January 27th, 1891, the last being a conveyance by Blagden to the defendant of the property at 27, Surrey Street—I find here the four deeds entered in the securities book—there is a pencil-mark on the back in my writing: "Documents handed to Mr. Chennel, March 2nd, 1892 "; that is in Spooner's writing—that entry is struck through in pencil, and under it is, "Returned for safe custody"—there is also a third entry, "Sent to Messrs. Ashby, May 23rd, 1892 "; there is a x on that entry, showing that those ticked were sent to Messfs. Ashby—this paper is a list of some of the deeds entered in the securities book; that is in the defendant's writing.
Cross-examined. I have no recollection of taking a bundle of deeds to Mr. Chennel on March 2nd, 1892; there is no such entry—the strong room is a new room—I don't know why I made these entries in pencil—the instruction on the security-sheet is when deeds are handed out—there should be a pencil entry for the time being, to be rubbed out when they are returned—they should be sorted when returned—we sort three times a week; at busy times that cannot be done at once—Mr. Granger had a key of the strong room—I have no recollection of telling Spooner to make these entries; probably he made them from the draft sheet—Mr. Chennel saw Granger sometimes when he called—Granger lived at the office—I have no recollection of your seeing Chennel personally after March 2nd; I think, as a rule, he saw Granger—f think the Littlehampton property was in his department, probably in Briggs at that time; I could not say, because they were altered—there were a good many clerks in the office, and a good many clients; it would be very possible for mistakes sometimes to occur—you were away from the office a good deal latterly.
JOHN ASHBY . I am a member of the firm of Thomas Ashby and Co., bankers, at Staines—the prisoner banked with us for many years—on and off, for the last fifteen or sixteen years, he deposited with us the title-deeds of properties—he had two accounts; one an ordinary account, and another described as a clients' account—that was only entered in our books as a "C" account; that was for his own convenience—in our pass-book I see it is called "Clients' account"; the other was a drawing account—we always understood that the securities he deposited were his own property—in 1887 I asked him definitely on the subject, and he satisfied us that he was dealing with his own property—in February, 1892, I received from him this letter, dated 5th: "Pet-worth. Dear Sir,—When I saw you the other day you said I was to think over how best to keep the clients' property separate from my own. It seems to me to be impracticable. I wish to take the Littlehampton deeds and substitute others, on the same arrangement as before. Can you do this?"—he had at that time deposited with us the deeds of the Littlthampton property, and he had deposited other deeds to enable him to have an overdraft—on February 21st I received from him these letters, of February 20th, February 25th, and February 27th, and one May 19th—we wrote to him this letter. (Read: "Unless you can arrange to conduct your business with us in a way satisfactory, different from what you are doing, we must close the account; unless provided for, your cheque will be returned; distinctly understand we cannot have this constant and daily trouble with your account"). On May 19th I received from him this letter, stating that he proposed to mortgage the Littlehampton property, which he valued at from £300 to £400—I replied to that on the 20th, enclosing a list of the deeds; and on the 23rd I wrote, telling him the amount due from him must be sent, as his account could not be overdrawn—that represents the condition of things on May 23rd—at that time the clients' account was overdrawn £333, and the current account £1,152—on May 26th I got an equitable charge upon them, which was forwarded to me; we took a separate charge upon each—on January 5th, 1893, I received from him this letter, asking for the return of the Litttehampton deeds at once, as he could do something with them—we did not part with them—we subsequently got a mortgage executed by him—this is it—we subsequently realised our security among the property sold—we sold the Littlehampton property—those deeds were handed to the purchaser—this is the document sent in the letter of May 23rd, the assignment from Knight to Leggatt, the conveyance from Leggatt to Daintry, and the conveyance from Blagden to Daintry of Jan. 22nd, 1891."
Cross-examined. These are the documents sent to me on the first and second occasion—I think there were no others relating to this particular property—I have no recollection of our first transaction with you—you banked with us for about eighteen years—large sums of money passed through your hands, £200,000, perhaps more—during that time I had no reason to complain of your transactions, except perhaps a little irregularity at the last; you overdrew too much—that was especially after an illness that you had—we always found your transactions straightforward as far as we were concerned—the schedule of deeds was made upon our first transaction—this is a copy of the charges supplied by our
bank to you, dated January 28th, 1891—we had an equitable charge—the words, "Subject to other existing mortgages," were struck out—in the form itself these words remain—in 1891 and 1892 you were in a bad state of health to all appearance—on the second or third month in 1892 I went to see you at Staines—on May 19th I wrote you, complaining of your overdrawing, and received your reply as to the Littleharnpton and other securities lodged with us—the deeds of the Littlehampton property were at one time held by you—you sent deeds by registered post from Petworth, with the charges—you wrote in January, 1893, asking for the deeds of the Littlehampton property—you did not receive a farthing after you deposited the deeds a second time, beyond the demand when you deposited—them they were deposited for the advance we made—unless some deeds had been deposited there would have been no advance—some deeds were sent afterwards, but not other deeds which we relied upon—you told me you were very much worried, and very ill—I do not recollect your stating you were going to receive £2,000 from Archdeacon Sinclair—some property was to be mortgaged by you in a building society—in January you wrote for deeds, stating there had been a mistake in sending them—they were not mortgaged—I knew very little about your bankruptcy; it was in the hands of our solicitor—I know we had an equitable charge upon your property; it did not contain power of sale, and we wanted to realise the property, and our solicitors obtained a legal mortgage, with power of sale on all the property on which we had equitable charges—I do not know what instructions were given, but no doubt if there had been any chance of your paying the money we should not have pressed the matter—the mortgage was in 1893—the sale must have been nearly twelvemonths afterwards—we had no fresh powers from you after your bankruptcy—our object was to get power of sale—you were out of the country—I believe you went to avoid going to Holloway on civil process—during all the years you banked with us this is the first trouble we have had—I have no recollection of letters from Chennels, or of seeing other deeds than those that have been shown me.
Re-examined. Up to 1887 the defendant was a man of apparently small means—he had not much capital to carry his business on.
JOHN GUSTAVE SLADE . I am Bankruptcy Clerk and Registrar of the County Court at Brighton—I produce the file in Daintry bankruptcy proceedings—the petition was tiled April 17th, 1893—the accounts of bankruptcy were suspension of payment, and going out of the country to defeat his creditors—in list "B" of creditors fully secured, I find an entry, "J. W. Chennels, Berkhampstead, Coachman; amount of debt, £250; consideration, money lent; particulars of security, mortgage of 27, Surrey Street, and cottage at Littlehampton "
Cross-examined. There is nothing special in the form in which you submitted your statement of affairs—you were then in contempt of Court—it would probably be difficult to make out the statement without the clerk—I believe you said you would do the best you could.
JOHN PITFIELD . I am one of the firm of Rydone and Pitfield, solicitors, Petworth—Chennels consulted us on January 6th, 1893 with reference to his matters with Daintry—he handed us all letters, including the prisoner's, of March 2nd and 3rd, stating the "Littlehampton deeds
are placed in my custody "—my clerk prepared the document demanding that Daintry should hand over the deeds relating to the £300 referred to in the letter of March 3rd—there was no answer—another letter was sent by my firm on January 6th, enclosing authority, signed by Chennels, and stating we should attend at twelve o'clock to receive the deeds, and, failing that, should take proceedings without further notice—no notice was taken of that—subsequently we commenced proceedings to compel Daintry to hand over the deeds—an order was made on March 17th upon the summons—there was some difficulty in getting service effected—we never got those deeds—we did get deeds with regard to the Browitt mortgage, through the Official Receiver.
Cross-examined. The Official Receiver did not tell me what he had; I went through them at Brighton—I saw the large bundle—there was nothing to show me they were Chennels' security—you were exceedingly pressed in December, 1891, and January, 1892—on December 12th I was pressing you on behalf of Holt, and wrote: "If we take no proceedings for the completion of the payment off of the Milton mortgage, will you undertake to return the deeds for £900 for Holt's use?" and you replied that we must have overlooked the fact they did not belong to you—you were in direst need, your agency for Chennels had been determined, and he had consulted us—your clerk pretended he knew nothing about the deeds—I considered he could have told me more than he did—I communicated with Ashby's to know whether they had the deeds; I then found they had sold the property—I saw the legal mortgage subsequently—I can form an opinion after this trial whether anything more can be done; it was not till long afterwards I ascertained what had been done—the act of bankruptcy was on December 24th, 1892; that was the date of the notice to creditors—there were two receiving orders—you told me, in reply to my letter of December 12th, you could not approach Milton's money, but there would be a large sum when Milton's mortgage would be paid off.
HARRY READ . I had the conducting of the extradition proceedings—I brought the defendant from Venice on May 11th to England under this warrant—I took him to Pet worth, where he was charged before the 'Magistrate.
Portions of the defendant's statement were read, to the effect that great blunders had been made by him with regard to the mortgages. In defence, the prisoner contended there was no case against him; he had an inalienable right to the deeds, and to deposit them for the equity of redemption, but the whole thing was a mistake and accident, brought about by pressure and ill-health, and worry; no facts were suppressed, and his books were Properly kept, and from them the evidence against him was obtained. He detailed his privation? consequent on he fall, and hoped for an acquittal, as he thought he had suffered sufficiently for his carelessness.
GUILTY .— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, July 23rd, 1896.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. PURCELL, for RAFFE, stated that he would
PLEAD GUILTY to the 13th Count, for obtaining credit by fraud and incurring a debt and liability, upon which the JURY found him
GUILTY.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. LYNCH, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence against
TURNER.— NOT GUILTY .
MR. ROACH Prosecuted.
EMMA HUMPHREYS . I am the wife of Walter Benjamin Humphreys, of 1, Parks Lane—for the last month the prisoner and his wife lived in my house, on the first floor—on Monday morning I was downstairs, and heard a little cry; I called to Mr. Folley; I cannot tell which of them, came out first—Mrs. Folley was in a faint condition, and asked for a drink of water; I saw blood running down from her eye—she said that Folley did it, and asked me to send for a policeman—that was loud enough for him to hear; she was very excited; he was drunk—he said,.
"Let the b—die; I will swing for her."
The Prisoner. I deny that I Used such a word. Witness. You did.
ALBERT BATLEY (241 H), On June 22nd, at 7.30 p.m., I went to 1, Parks Lane, Bethnal Green, and saw the prosecutrix; she was bleeding, from her face, arms and body—she made a statement, to me and I went to a public-house and arrested the prisoner; he said, "I suppose I can get out of it?"—I said, "I don't know "—on the way to the station he said, "She tried to commit suicide two or three times "—he was charged at the station with cutting and wounding—he said, "Be careful what you say; my wife was cutting bread-and-butter with that knife "—he also said, "Who see that?"—there was blood on the knife; this is it.
ALICE FOLLBY . I am the prisoner's wife—on this Monday morning he called me names; he was drunk, and I threw something at him—the knife lay on the table, and I rushed at him with it, and I suppose I got hurt in the struggle.
By the COURT. I mean to tell the Jury that I believe I hurt myself with the knife—I recognise the knife—I do not remember saying a word to the Magistrate about my having that knife in my hand—I do not remember whether my deposition was read over to me, or whether I affixed my mark—I did not say as I came down the stairs that Folley had done it—I did not say to Mrs. Humphreys that my husband had done it—I had a scuffle with my husband—he did not get the knife in his hand—I did not ask Mrs. Humphreys to fetch the police; I never charged my husband—T did not make a statement to the prisoner when he came—I saw a policeman that night, but said nothing to him.
ERXBST TUCKER . I am house-surgeon at tike London Hospital—on June 22nd, about eight o'clock, Mrs. Folley was brought in, suffering' from nine recently inflicted wounds, one on her shoulder an inch deep, an incised wound; one on one wrist, three-quarters of an inch long; another on her left loin, a small punctured wound on her back, a small scratch below her left elbow, another scratch on her collar-bone, and a wound on the angle of her left eye—the first and fifth were serious wounds, and were likely
to be caused by this knife—they could be self-inflicted, but not those on, her back—the wounds could not have been caused in a struggle to get the knife—she remained till the 7th, and then went away without leave—she said, "My husband done it"; she volunteered that.
Prisoner's Defence: I am innocent. I admit throwing the knife. I was intoxicated. She threw the knife at me, and I threw it back. We have been married twenty-five years, and lived comfortably.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding, under provocation. — Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. HEDDON Prosecuted, and MR. ATTKNBOROUGH Defended Stafford.
FITZORRALD ARTHUR . I am an advertising agent, carrying on business as Arbuthnot and Co., of 110, Strand,—about March 20th the prisoner, Stafford, called on me—he had called before that—he represented himself as travelling for a guide, and asked if I would give him an advertisement for a book, and asked if I would accept any orders he gave me—I said, "Yes"—about March 25th he brought me an order, purporting to come from Mr. Abrahams—I made inquiries, and found he was all right—he called again on March 28th, and I paid him £3 18s.—on the following, week he called again with another order in a letter form with the advertiser's private address on it, and the business address pat on—he thought my price rather high, as it was a class miter. (This was an order from G. Hazledon to insert an advertisement for 6s. 6d., which was receipted; also another from G. Hazledon to insert another advertisement in the "Army and Horse Guards' Gazette "for fifty-six weeks.) He called again on April 17th, and I paid him 15 per cent, on that—I sent the account on March 31st; two or three months elapsed, and I received no money, and we wrote and said that the collector would call; he called, and they repudiated it—I met Stafford on June 15th, and told him his order was not correct; he was rather impudent to me, and I said, "Come to my office "—he said, "I know the order is a forgery, but I was not aware of it at the time"—he said he had found out since that a man named Reeves had written it, and he gave Reeves half the commission—I took Stafford to Bow Street before Mr. Vaughan, and got a warrant, and he was brought up on the Monday—on the following Monday Reeves called at my office, and said he had heard that I dared to accuse him of committing forgery, and asked to see the order; I asked him to come to Bow Street—he said, "I have not time"—I asked him to give me a specimen of his writing, and if I had falsely accused him I would apologise, and he wrote this—I then said, "I have not the shadow of a doubt you wrote it, and you are going to Bow Street with me"—he went with me; I applied for a warrant, and the case was gone into.
Cross-examined by MR. ATTENBOROUOH. He went willingly; I did not wait for a detective—it is usual for men who collect advertisements to divide the commission—I did not know Reeves before—Stafford had been to me before with orders, and they were genuine, with one exception—I have found out since that he was canvassing for advertisements for the "Guide to Olympia," and I believe for other things—the first order was
on March 30th; he did not draw his commission till April 2nd; I pay once a week—there is nothing suspicious on the face of the orders—a "block" is mentioned in both advertisements; I had got the block—he said that this advertisement was appearing in the Amateur Wheeler; I know that it came from Resves—I told him I had discovered that it was not a genuine advertisement; he said that he knew it was a false order, but he was not aware of it at the time, and that he got it from Reeves, and gave him the half commission—I found out that I was not the only victim; I had inquiries made, and found that Reeves had something to do with it—it was not Stafford who told me of Reoves—I was inclined to think it possible that Stafford might be deceived as I was, but I am not now, because I hold another order on an identical form from another man, which I have reason to believe is forged.
Cross-examined by Reeves. I sent or wrote about three times for the first account, and received no answer—you objected to going to Bow Street, and I told you I would take you there by the scruff of your neck.
Re-examined. I met Reeves in the street and said, "We won't have any altercation here; come into my office "—he said at first that they were genuine orders—I said, "I am informed that they are forgeries, and I know that you know "—he said, "Yes, I know now that they are forgeries "—he told me he got them from Reeves—I knew nothing about Mr. Hazledon at that time—if I had known it was a forgery I would not have paid him.
GBORGE KERRISON HAZLEDON . I trade as Wilson and Hazioden for my father, at 86, Edgware Road—I have seen Reeves—he came to my consulting room about March 24th or 25th, with Mr. Clark, whom I should know again, but I do not see him in Court—there were writing materials and paper like this, with my father's address—there was no advertisement drawn on forms like this—this is signed, "Wilson and Hazledon "; it is not my writing, nor is this—I took a gentleman to show him the lavatory.
Cross-examined by MR. ATTENBOROUGH. I do not know Stafford—I knew Reeves; he inserted some advertisements in the Amateur Wlieeler by my orders.
Cross-examined by Reeves. I am the sole proprietor—my father's permission had not to be given for the advertisements—he was not interviewed for the purpose—I saw the advertisement, but did not know anything about it till I was summoned to Bow Street—I received a registered letter from Mr. Arthur—I did not give you orders except when I gave my signature—I swear I never gave you authority to sign my name—I have not repudiated the order for the Amateur Wheeler.
WILLIAM WILLIAMSON . (Police Sergeant E). I arrested Stafford on June 15th at 2.30 p.m.—I found him detained at the prosecutor's office, and three of us went to Bow Street, and applied for a warrant—he said, "Who is going to prove we gave the order? The order was not given?"—I said, "Yes "—the charge was read over to him; he made no reply.
Reeves in his defence, stated that he had authority to issue the two orders, and that he went about and got orders for advertisements, and the block, and
that each time the account went in no repudiation of the order came back; he produced the advertisement, to show, by the date, that it appeared after the order, but one of the proprietors went and withdrew the order; that Dr. Hazledont advertisement appeared week after week, and he had never paid for it, but immediately the account was sent in he repudiated it; that he had permission to use his authority, and handed him the block.
STAFFORD— NOT GUILTY . REEVES— GUILTY .
He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Clerkenwell on September 2nd, 1895. Two other convictions were proved against him.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, July 23rd, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
JOHN CHANDLEB . On July 7th I was on duty at Leyton, and met the prisoner, carrying a sack; I asked what it contained—he said, "Only a few old clothes "—I said I wished to see the contents—he put the sack on the ground—I examined it, and found it contained a silk surplice, a linen surplice, a silk chalice covering, an altar cloth, and other things, which were given up for the use of the church—that same morning I went to the prisoner's house he said he had bought the things of a man for 15s.—the clerk came and identified the articles; I went to the church, and found that a window had been broken, and in that way the entry had been effected—the churchwarden afterwards identified the articles as belonging to the church.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not see a man leave in the direction where I found you.
ALEXANDER DIX . I live at Walthamstow. and am clerk at St. Saviour's Church—about, a quarter to eight in the morning I was called to the station, and there saw the prisoner, and identified these articles as belonging to the church.
Prisoner's Defence,: A man accosted me, and asked me to buy some articles cheap—he said that some of the articles belonged to the Rev. Mr. Moffat, a clergyman, who had been dismissed; I offered him 13s. for them—when I was charged I told the inspector this—I am innocent of the charge of sacrilege—the man I bought the things of gave me two addresses—I have communicated with those addresses, but got no reply.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WALLACE Prosecuted.
PATRICK SCULLY . I live at Haslemere Terrace, Acton—on June 24th. I went to No. 8, Bangor Street, with a woman for a purpose—I was sober—while there I took off my coat—I lay on the bed outside, and fell asleep—I was asleep about half an hour—I was awakened by the prisoner feeling in my pockets—he took my tobacco-box and about nine shillings in money—I don't know him—I had seen him once before in company with the woman—I struggled with him, and he stabbed me with a large knife over the eye—he then ran downstairs, and I followed—he rushed at me and knocked me down, and kicked me when I got up; he knocked my head against the iron railings—I then became insensible—I identify this tobacco-box.
By the Prisoner. I was on the bed when you came in—it was in the room of the prostitute—I did not say that you took a belt from me—I did not challenge you to fight.
EDWARD PITTA WAY (Police Constable 21 X R). On June 24th I was called to Bangor Street—I saw a crowd and a woman, named Thompson, on the ground insensible; she would not charge the prisoner—I also saw prosecutor insensible—he afterwards complained of the prisoner—I found prisoner down an area—I took him to the station—I found on him this tobacco-box—he was not drunk, neither was prosecutor—prisoner made no answer to the charge.
ROBERT ALEXANDER JACKSON . I am a registered medical practitioner—I examined the prosecutor—he had a cut over the right eye, and several bruises and abrasions on the face—the marks were quite consistent with being caused by kicks, except the cut over the eye.
HANNAH BURKE . I live at 11, Bangor Street—I saw the prosecutor run out of No. 8, covered with blood; prisoner followed him, and knocked him down two or three times—prisoner also knocked his wife down—he then went back to prosecutor, and knocked his head against the railings.
By the Prisoner. I did not hear prosecutor challenge you to fight.
Prisoner, in a written statement, said "I found prosecutor in bed with the young woman I was living with, and, being excited, pulled prosecutor off the bed. In so doing he fell against the corner of the table. He challenged me to fight. It was the next morning he charged me with robbing him. The tobacco-box was given me by the woman. Prosecutor lived with the woman before I did. He was drunk"
EDWARD PITTAVVAY (Re-called). I found no money on the prisoner—I examined the room, but found no money—there was a quantity of blood by the side of the bed—the tobacco-box was found on prisoner when searched—Scully said, "That box is mine "—he did not see the box opened, but—said there was a nail in it—there was a nail in it.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. ROOTH Prosecuted, and MR. GUY STEPHENSON Defended. He PLEADED GUILTY to the common assault; no evidence was offered on the charge of felony.— Judgment respited.
MR. ROOTH Prosecuted, and MESSRS. DRAKE and HARRISON Defended.
JOHN READ . I am a detective of the C Division—I was in company with Cunningham, a police officer, on July 4th, at ten p.m., in Sherwood. Street, near Piccadilly Circus—I saw the two prisoners there, loitering up and down—they were walking together for about twenty minutes—Thomas looked round, and saw us, and immediately loft Markham—I followed Markham into Golden Square—Markham was carrying a parcel—I told him we were police officers, and asked what were the contents of the parcel—he said, "It is mine, have a look for yourself"—I opened the parcel—it contained a dark lantern, two wooden wedges, and a sack—I took him into custody—at Vine street I asked him had he anything else about him—from his inside pocket he produced a jemmy—a box of matches and a key were found on him—I returned to try and find Thomas, but failed—the following day I went with Cunningham into Broad Street, Golden Square, and Saw Thomas.
MR. HARRISON, on behalf of Thomas, objected that anything which happened the following day was not evidence un the present charge. The COMMON SERJEANT held that objection to be good, and said unless Thomas could he shown to have known the contents of the parcel the previous night the charge must fail.
No further evidence was offered against Thomas. Markham then said he would PLEAD GUILT?.
THOMAS— NOT GUILTY . MARKHAM— GUILTY . Several previous convictions were proved against him.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. MORESBY Prosecuted.
ANDREA SOLA (Interpreted). I am a shopman—I remember being in Flower and Dean Street on the evening of July 8th, about eleven o'clock—three men assaulted me and took away my money—two of them struck me—they knocked me down—I recognise the prisoner as one of the men who struck me—he struck me once, and another man struck me another time—I cannot tell where the prisoner hit me—before I was on the ground ray money was taken—the money was in the back pocket—they stole 10s. or 11s.; I felt the money being taken—two men ran away, the prisoner stopped and was caught by the policeman—I am certain that the prisoner struck me once—I certainly had had something to drink, but I was in. my sound senses.
into Flowerand Dean Street—I saw prisoner walk away from the prosecutor at a fast pace; I caught him—prosecutor came up and said, "That is one of the men that assaulted and robbed me"—prisoner said, "I don't know anything about it"—I took him to the station, and when charged he said, "I am not guilty"—prosecutor had been drinking, but although excited could give an intelligible account of what occurred—he was bleeding from the mouth.
By the Prisoner: When I first saw you you were walking away from prosecutor and from me; you did not run—when I searched you at the station you had only a penny on you.
Prisoner's Defence: "I was making my way round to Russell Street to borrow a few shillings from a man I was in the habit of borrowing money from, when the constable came up behind me and charged me with assaulting the prosecutor."
GUILTY of assault with intent to rob. Several previous convictions were proved against him.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
He PLEADED GUILTY to a common assault, and was acquitted on the charge of felony.— Judgment Respited.
MESSRS. C. F. GILL, BODKIN and GUY STEPHENSON Prosecuted, and
MR. B. O'CONNOR Defended.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT. Friday, July 24th, 1896.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrence.
MESSRS. BODKIN and EDWARD CLARKE Prosecuted, and LORD COLERIDGE, with MESSRS. TRAVERS HUMPHREY, and CHALMERS Defended. The JURY, being unable to agree, were discharged without returning any verdict, and the case was postponed to the next Session.
NEW COURT.—Friday, July 24th, 1896.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrence.
MR. BURNIE Prosecuted.
SARAH ANN TOPPER . I am the prisoner's wife, and lived with him at 14, Cable Street, Tidal Basin, West Ham—he is a boiler-maker—on the evening of July 3rd I was indoors—he came home some time before seven—he said, "Can I come in and have a wash?" I said, "Certainly; you are not going to meddle with me?"—he came in and went into the back-yard—I went and got a can to get him some water—he came again into the kitchen and said, "I hardly know what to do with you. Are you my friend, or my enemy?" I said, "Your friend, of course"—he repeated the remark about twice—he was standing by the kitchen door—his hand was in his right-hand pocket—I was near him, with the can in my left hand—my little boy called out, "Hullo, mother, run"—nothing happened to me; only, as the prisoner fired, I held up the can—I did not see the pistol; I saw the reflection in the kitchen door; the powder scratched my hand—he was about two or three feet from me; I ran out into the street, and he ran after me, and fired at me again—I heard the report; I was struck on the hip on the right-hand side—after that there was another report—I ran into the house of Mr. Goad, a neighbour—I afterwards saw the prisoner at the station, and charged him—I could not say whether he was sober or not on this night—he drank sometimes—he has been very strange, very delirious, very much wandering about for nearly twelve months.
THOMAS ALLINGHAM . I am eleven years old, and am a schoolboy; I live with my parents at 41, Catherine Street—in the evening of July 3rd I was in the street—I saw the prisoner there—I saw him shoot his wife twise; after that he dropped the revolver, I picked it up, and gave it to a man who was there—it was a revolver like this.
FREDERICK GOAD . I am a labourer, and live at 34, Catherine Street, Tidal Basin—on July 3rd, between seven and half-past, I was indoors, and heard two reports of fire-arms—I ran into the street, and saw the prisoner running towards the top of the street—I ran after him; he had nothing in his hand then—I searched him, and found in his right-hand coat-pocket thirty-two ball cartridges—the revolver was handed to me in the street by a boy about the size of the last witness—I took it to the station, and handed it to Sergeant Heavy—I detained the prisoner till a constable came up.
GEORGE WREN (292 K"). About seven in the evening on July 3rd I was sent for from the station—I went to Catherine Street, and found the prisoner detained—I took him into custody for shooting his wife—he said, "A ll right, policeman. Kill me at once; my life is not worth much now "—I took him to the station, and he was charged—he said, "All right, sir. I can't help it"—he was sober, but excited; he was not violent.
JOHN HEAVY (Police Sergeant K). About a quarter to eight on July 3rd Goad came to the station and handed me this six-chambered revolver; it was quite hot—it contained three ball cartridges and three expended cartridges—J produce them; they are similar to those which Goad found on the prisoner.
father deals in fire-arms—on July 3rd, about five, I sold this revolver to a man like the prisoner, also fifty cartridges; these are some of them.
ROBERT DALY . I am a surgeon and a licentiate of the Apothecary's Company—on July 3rd, about 8.5., I examined Mrs. Topper—I found her dress perforated by a hole about three inches above the right hip—she complained of pain there—I afterwards made several examinations at her house; I found a wound about three inches above the right hip arid five inches above the spine—it was simply grazed; it corresponded with the hole in her bodice—the two skins were divided—there was a circular contusion, which would be covered by a half-crown; it was blue in the middle, and red on the outside—that would be consistent with a glancing shot; the second finger of her right hand was stained with marks of powder.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "The night before last my wife got hold of me by the throat and nearly strangled me; that was what excited me, and caused me to do what I did."
SARAH ANN TOPPER (Re-called). My husband and I were always living together—it was an unusual thing for him to come home and ask to have a wash; he generally came in—he had a blow on his head which affected him.
GUILTY of unlawful wounding .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted.
GEORGE BOOTH . I live at 140, Ashfield Road, Leytonstone—I am ten years of age; I am a schoolboy—the deceased was my brother—on Tuesday, May 26th, about four in the afternoon, I was on Wanstead Flats with my brother, looking at the people throwing balls at cocoanuts—I saw the prisoner there; he was picking up the balls—a man was picking up the cocoanuts; one broke, and he told my brother that he could have the bit—my brother picked it up, and the prisoner came and kicked him, and took the piece away from him—he gave him a running kick in the abdomen, between his legs—I was about two yards from him—he went and laid down on the ground and cried—he seemed to be in great pain, and laid there for half-an-hour—on June 15th I went to Leyton Station, where I saw about five boys, and I picked out the prisoner as the boy that kicked my brother.
EMILY BOOTH . I live at 140, Ashfield Road—on Tuesday, May 27th, my boy, the deceased, came home very ill, and complained of being kicked; he was ill alt night—on the following Tuesday, June 5th, I took him to the hospital, and he eventually died—on May 21st he had had a light with another boy, but he did not complain of that; he was in good health then—he went out with the little boy—he was twelve years and a—half old.
JAMES JONES . I am a labourer, employed by the Great Eastern Railway, at Stratford—on Tuesday, May 26th, between three and four, I was on Wanstead Flats where I saw some people playing for cocoanuts—a nut was broken—I saw a little boy with a piece of cocoanut in his hand—I saw three young fellows there, one of them threw the cocoanut down, and I saw the prisoner run and give the boy a running kick—I
went and picked him up; he was in great pain—I straightened his legs, and said to the prisoner, "Do you know you have killed this boy?"—he said, "No"—I said, "You have, and I will make you pay for it"—he said, "Yes, you will do something"—I saw the witness Booth there with his brother.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I caught hold of your collar and shook you, and my hand caught the back of your ear—I know Wanstead Flats; I had never seen you before.
ROBERT JOHN HILLYER . I am a qualified medical practitioner and late house surgeon at West Ham Hospital—the deceased boy was an out patient there since May 26th—he was examined when he came in, on June 2nd—I saw him on the 5th; he was suffering from peritonitis—he died on the 6th—I made a post-mortem examination—I found all the evidence of general peritonitis and a decomposing blood spot on the peritoneum on the right side—there wore no external marks of injury—that was an injury likely to arise from a kick—the clot of blood shown that there must have been violence.
GEORGE BLEVVY . I live at 1, Carlisle Road, Leyton, and am a flower hawker—I know the prisoner; he was working for me on May 26th, on Wanstead Flats, picking up the balls which had been thrown at the cocoanuts—no other boy with one eye was working there that afternoon—he works for me constantly at holiday times in that way—I heard nothing about this assault.
JAMES MURCH . I am a keeper at Epping Forest—on Tuesday, May 26th, I was on Wanstead Flats, where the cocoanut-shying was going on; I marked out all the places, telling each man where he could stand—I saw the last witness there; I can't say that I saw the prisoner; I don't know him by sight; I have not seen him before; I never heard of any other one-eyed boy working there.
GEORGE FOX (Detective). I arrested the prisoner on June 4th—I told him he was charged with causing the death of George Booth, on May 26th, at Wanstead Flats—he said he knew nothing of it—he afterwards said he remembered pushing a boy because he was afraid that he would be hit by a ball—I took him to the station; he was placed with a number of other lads about the same build—Robert Booth was sent for and he at once identified the prisoner, so did Mr. Jones—the prisoner said, "I never saw you there; I never kicked your brother;' I remember pushing a boy because I was afraid of his being hit by a ball"—I have made inquiries about the prisoner; he was a casual boy working for the man at the cocoanut show—I have not discovered any other one-eyed boy.
Prisoner's Defence: I did not know the boy—there are plenty more" boys with one eye besides me.
GUILTY .— Four Months' Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted.
boot-fitting—I was in the kitchen with Sarah Carter, and ray husband came home about two o'clock using obscene language—I asked him to leave, or I should go out—he said that if I went out he would throw the bottle over me, and blind me—about three weeks previously a bottle of nitric acid had been purchased to clean ivory, and it was on the dresser in the kitchen—we went into the scullery; I was going out through it; he threw it at me, and it caught me in the face and on my hand, which I put up to protect my face—the effect was blisters, the skin came off, and it burnt me—I put some oil on my face and went out for two hours, and came home—the prisoner was still at home—he said he would murder me—he was much the worse for drink—Mrs. Carter and I walked about the streets till eleven o'clock—on July 16th I went to Dr. Moyle.
By the COURT. The prisoner has been addicted to drinking at times since he has been out of employment—I have been married to him nine years—we have no family.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You went to the City and returned about 5 p.m.—Mrs. Carter and I had waited dinner for you—I did not say, "If you want any dinner, get it yourself "—you did not say, "Don't go out; come and do some gardening, and let it blow over "—the Magistrate commented next morning on my not having seen a doctor—I have since seen two, as I was ill.
Re-examined. After he threw the acid I saw him next at 11 p.m., and he went away and came back on the Tuesday night—I applied for the summons on the Monday.
SARAH CARTER . I work for the last witness—the prisoner came in, using filthy language—he said, "If you go out I shall blind you "—the nitric acid was on the dresser—she was going out—he threw the acid like this, and it went on her face and hands—before he took the bottle into his hand it was corked—she put some oil on her face and went out—when we came back he would not let us in, and used filthy language, and said he would murder her—there is no ivory in the house, only the keys of the piano.
JOHN MOIR . I live at Harcourt Road, Leyton—on July 6th Mrs. Cornwell came to my house—I saw traces of sears on her face, and marks of acid on her hands, and her jacket was burnt—that is consistent with a weak solution of nitric acid—she was very depressed and nervous—the injuries had been caused six or seven days before.
Cross-examined. The bottle must either have been thrown, or it tumbled—if she had been catching it the stains would have been inside her hands, but they were outside, as she was defending her face—her face was not damaged in any way.
Re-examined. The application of oil would prevent it going deeper.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate: "In the scrimmage it was caused—I have no witnesses."
Prisoner's Defence. My wife and I had a few words, and I asked her to overlook it, and come into the garden, and not go out, but she would go out, I have no recollection of throwing the acid over her, and I believe I did not do it, no man ever had more affection for his wife than I have for mine.
GUILTY on the Third Count.—Recommended to Mercy by the JURY .— Nine Months without Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Recorder.
NORTON PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted; MR. GILL Defended.
GEORGE SMITH . I am a labourer, of 26, Bradley Street, Bow—I was acting as tally clerk at the Docks—I delivered five cases of three-star and one-star brandy and one case of three-star and four of one-star—they were part of what I carried out to the barge Scotland, and were, I believe, consigned to a ship lying in the dock.
JAMES ELLIOTT . I am in the employ of the Union Lighterage Company—on June 18th I was in charge of the ship Ina Moore, for Melbourne—I have seen five cases of brandy in the hands of the police; they were part of the cargo—I left them in Fitch's custody.
ALFRED GEORGE EDDY . I am a lighterman, of 4, Ralph Street, Stepney, in the service of the Union Lighterage Company—I received instructtions from Fitch, and went on board the barge—it was my duty to transfer the cargo from the barge to the ship, and I transferred 250 cases of brandy; the Custom House officer locked the lighter, and I put the tarpaulin on, and the oars, too—on comparing my delivery note with the cargo, I found ten cases short, which I reported to my employers.
FREDERICK KITCHEN (Dock Officer). On June 29th I received information and went to Saunders' house with other officers and one of the Thames police—we got there about seven p.m.—Saunders holds the licence—Mr. Hawkins asked him if lie had any contraband goods on the premises—he said, "No, not that I am aware of'—Hawkins said that he must search the house—Saunders then said, "I bought five cases of brandy last Sunday week from two men; it was in the evening "—he then took us to the spirit room, on the first floor, where my attention was called to five cases of brandy under a settee—"Billiard-room" was painted up, but there was no billiard-table there—brandy was in the cases; they were marked "H. M. and Co., Melbourne Wharf"—I said, "I have reason to believe these formed part of ten stolen from the dock on the day you say you bought them "—he said, "If I had known that, I would have had nothing to do with them"—I asked if he knew the man he bought them of—he said, "Charley Newton, a dealer, had introduced another man at my office, who was about leaving his house, and wanted some ready cash, he asked me £6; I paid it; the canes were brought in; my barman) I think, knew the second man "—he was charged at the station with harbouring contraband goods—I arrested Newton on July 3rd—another man was charged, who was discharged by the Magistrate.
Cross-examined by MR. GILL, On the first occasion I had Hawkins and Hill with me—he gave me every facility after he was told his house would be searched—the cases of brandy were where any one in the room could see them—he said he bought the brandy, of a man who was introduced
to him by Newton, who I knew, so that at once I was put in train—he said he was a lame man, but his barman could tell me, and that he was leaving a public-house which he had kept at Poplar—I said, "My information is that you bought ten cases for £6"; he said, "No; I bought five for £6"—I made no note, and depend entirely on my memory—he said, "He asked me £6 for them"—he was charged with harbouring the goods; that involves heavy penalties—I had the name of Newton before I went there—I arrested Newton in Craig's presence, and made a similar statement to him; he admitted that it was so; that was before the third man was arrested.
Re-examined. The name of Norton was mentioned before I went to the Liliput Arms—I have known Newton twenty years.
JOHN ALFRED HORTON . I live at 7, Selbourne Road, Forest Gate, and I am chief preventive officer of Customs—I went with Kitchen to the Liliput Arms and saw the prisoner—T told him I was an officer of Customs, and had reason to believe he had contraband goods on his premises—he said he had nothing that he knew of—I said I should search the house—he then said that he bought five cases of brandy some time previously—T asked him if he had an Excise permit—he said he had none—I asked if he had entered the spirits in his stock book—he said, "No"—I called for his stock-book, examined it, and found no entry relating to this—I asked where the cases of spirits were—he said, "Upstairs "—I followed him to a room on the same floor with the spirit room, with a room between them, where the spirits were under a settee—I said I should charge him with harbouring the goods with the intention of defrauding the Customs—he said he bought them of a publican named McGilp, who stated he had given up his public-house and was rather hard-up, and he gave him £6 for it out of charity—the value of it, plus duty, is £10 16s. 8d.—the duty is £5.
Cross-examined. I am not aware that three or four of us were asking questions at the same time—Kitchen was present the whole time—I did not specially inquire into it; I went on searching the house—I went into the spirit room; there were, perhaps, the contents of four or five cases there—there were spirits in cask in the cellar, but not in the room; about £300 worth—the spirits were not all in the spirit room—he pointed, me out these five cases of brandy—it is not a public room; I saw a young lady undergoing a French lesson there—I heard the name McGilp—there was no necessity to give a false name—he did not describe both men to me—the description went no further than the name—it was not said that he was lame and stout, and wore spectacles—he said he was introduced by Norton, having a house.
Re-examined. I say that Saunders gave no description till the man came up—there were two chairs and a table there, and a young lady was writing out an exercise—I said before the Magistrate that the man's name was McGilp—I made a note of it at the time.
Cross-examined. This room was used as a club-room—there are forms round it, and boxes belonging to the club under the settee—it is a room to which anybody has access—I have seen Norton come there for seven or eight years—he introduced a man to me as a publican in my master's
absence—one of the men asked whether my master was in, and they afterwards saw him—spirits, wine, and beer were kept in the cellar, and there is a spirit-room upstairs which was full—when they asked for my master they got into the coffee-room; the door was open—my master has not bought anything of Norton during the eight years.
Re-examined. Norton is a dealer I have heard, but I have not known him sell anything—the room upstairs is not a billiard-room, but a room for the slate-club, and Miss Saunders has made up her school lessons there—you could not go into the bar and go up there—I did not see the brandy come—I went at six a.m.—we always had our stuff in in the day-time.
By MR. GEOGHEGAN. Saunders and I had a conversation about the stranger—I know Pedlar Palmer; he is a boxer, and does a little betting—I never saw the man before who came on the 21st, nor did I hear any description of him; I was told afterwards that he took money for Pedlar Palmer.
By MR. GILL. When Norton first described this man to me, I understood he was a publican, but afterwards I was told he was a receiver for Palmer—on the day the Excise officers came my master asked if I knew him, and I said, "Yes; he take? money for Pedlar Palmer."
Saunders' statement before the Magistrate: "I am absolutely innocent. I did not know it was stolen."
SAUNDERS received an excellent character.
NOT GUILTY .
Sentence on NORTON.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
Before Mr. Recorder.
599. HENRY PALMER (45) PLEADED GUILTY to a burglary in the dwelling-house of Albert Bennett, and stealing a box and two bowls; and to a conviction at Winchester in January, 1894, and other convictions were proved against him.— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
JOHN SULLIVAN . I am a schoolboy—on a Wednesday morning in June I was going to school and saw the prisoner—he told me to get change for this shilling, and get half an ounce of tobacco—this is it, but it was not broken like this then—I went to Mrs. Hubbard's shop—she refused to take it, and I took it back to the prisoner, gave it to him, and told him—he gave me another coin, and told me to go into the Winchester
Arms and change it into copper—I was taken to the station, and gave the police a description of the person who had given me the money, and two hours afterwards I picked the prisoner out—I am sure he is the man.
JOHN ROBERT WILSON . I keep the Winchester Arms—on the morning of June 24th this boy brought me this coin—I found it was bad, and had a conversation with him—he gave me a description of somebody—I gave him in custody.
THOMAS DYBALL (Detective M). On the morning of June 24th I saw this boy—he gave me a description, and I went into Chapel Street and saw the prisoner; I followed him and lost sight of him—I saw him again, and followed him—I was sure he was the man, because the boy's description was so accurate—I said, "lam going to take you into custody for giving a bad shilling to a boy this morning "—he said, "I have not been in Chapel Street"—I said, "I saw you there"—he said, "Oh, yes"—he was put with seven others, and the boy picked him out.
Cross-examined. He began at one end of the line, and you were at the other, and when he got to you he said, "That is the man."
Prisoner's Defence. I never saw the child in my life.
NOT GUILTY .
RUFFELL PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. DRAKE Prosecuted, and MR. LAWLESS Defended.
LAURA THOMPSON . I am barmaid at the Bell, High Street, Wandsworth—on June 23rd a boy named Pearson brought me this note, "Dear Miss: Will you supply me with half a gallon of bitter?"—a can was produced—another boy, named Hepburn, came and gave me these documents, all signed in the name of Mr. Brogden—I supplied half a gallon—I refused to supply him with more—the value of all was 11s. 9d.
Cross-examined'. Brogden is a respectable man—one letter is signed "Brogen" and another "Bogden"—I had never supplied on written orders before—I did not think it extraordinary.
Re-examined. Mr. Brogden had been in the habit of sending his men there to be supplied, and he would come afterwards and pay for it.
WILLIAM PEARSON . I live at Armory, Wandsworth, and know Lambird—I saw him on Wandsworth Plain—he gave me a jug and said, "Will you fetch me some beer?"—I said, "Yes"—there were two or three men there—he gave me a can and this note from his coat pocket—he took a piece of paper out of his pocket with the order wrote on it—Ruffell is the other man—I brought the beer back and gave it to Whiffen; that is Lambird—I got ld. and went away—while the other man was writing the note Whitfen was not far off.
Cross-examined. He never told me his name was Whiffen—I know Whiffen his step-father—I know both prisoners—Ruffell took a leaf out of his pocket-book and wrote something on it—Whiffen appeared to be under the influence of drink—Mrs. Collingmore was not there—this was in broad daylight.
Cross-examined. Whiffen gave me sixpence to change—they all had some of the beer—about half-a-dozen men were there.
EMANUEL HATBURN . I am fourteen years old, and live at Armory Road, Wandsworth—on June 4th I was on Wandsworth Plain, and saw about nine men—I know both prisoners—Lambird said, "Do you want to earn a penny?"—I said, "Yes"—he handed me this can, and a note which Ruflfell wrote and gave him—I got the beer, and they drank it—Lambird gave me a penny.
Cross-examined. I know some of the other men, and they saw Ruffel write on the paper and helped to drink the beer—Lambird gave Ruffel the book, and Ruffel wrote the order.
Cross-examined. I was about the length of this Court from them—there were ten or twelve men there—I heard Lambird say, "The job is finished"—people were passing at the time.
THOMAS BOYDEN . I am an engineer, of 25, Tufley Road, Wandsworth—I did not write these documents, or authorise anybody to do so, or to get beer at this public-house—I know Lambird—I sometimes send for beer when I have a hard job on—I do not know whether Lambird knew that—I have known him from a boy, and a good boy too.
LAMBIRD received a good character.— GUILTY of uttering .— Four Months' Hard Labour . RUFFELL— Six Months Hard Labour.
MR. MARTIN Prosecuted.
FREDERICK CHARLES MAXWELL , I am office-keeper of Wandsworth County Court—I produce the file in George Ewens' bankruptcy—he was adjudicated bankrupt in December, 1889, and has not received his discharge.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. It is Mr. Pearce's business; I do not Know that he said that they were trying to make a case against you.
WILLIAM BAILEY . I am a lath-render, of Mayall Street, South Lambeth—between August 6th and September 6th I did some lathing for the prisoner, who is a builder—the work came to £18, and he paid me £5 on account—he came to my premises a few days before October 8th, and inspected some chinariey-pieces which I had to sell—the price was £45 19s., which was afterwards reduced to £40, it being damaged—he went away, and I saw him a few days afterwards at Fatherfield Road, where he was building some houses—he said he would take the goods at £45 19s., and
send a man for them—I said, "All right"—an account was made out for £50 odd, as there was a balance due—we settled for the chimney-piece at £40, and there was £13 on the old debt—we both signed the account as being correct—this is it—he gave me an acceptance for £35 17s. 6d., which he sent a week before, not endorsed; he came afterwards, and accepted it—this was a bill, which I had by me; it has the endorsement of a man named Burr—I took the writ out, and the account, and got judgment—I did not know that he was an undischarged bankrupt.
Cross-examined. I asked your foreman whether you were a good man, and he said that you were—I received £5 on account—the marble chimney-piece was starred in one place, and the stone in another—you did not say you could not take the chimney-piece because you were very short of money—you said that your houses were practically sold, and you would be in funds, and would give me a cheque—I took the particulars of this bill; you did not give them to me—after I received it inquiries were made; I took it on your saying that you had done work for him, and that he was a thoroughly good man and had two billiard tables, and led me to believe he was a millionaire—I know Mr. Cook through meeting him at your place, but had no conversation with him about your being an undischarged bankrupt till after I bad filed a petition against you.
By the COURT. I would not have let him have the goods if I had known he was an undischarged bankrupt; I went straight from Cook to my solicitor.
Re-examined. I know the prisoner's writing; this is his signature on both these papers; they are two memoranda ordering 500 slabs.
CHARLES MOULD . I am the secretary of the Veronese Fibrous Plaister Limited, Church Street, Fulham—a man came, who gave the name of George Ewing—I got this order on June 25th: "Please supply 500 slabs, also galvanized nails for fixing the same.—G. Ewing," and on the same day this telegram—I sued upon it; I did not know he was an undischarged bankrupt till I was at the Police-court.
Cross-examined. I asked his name; he said, "George Ewing"—we asked for trade references, and wrote to two; one was George Cook, of Streatham, and the other J. Harrison—I had a letter from you about the payment of your account, dated February 28th, this is it (Produced).
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he offered the prosecutor a bill of a customer, and said that he was not a very strong man, but the prosecutor said, "If it is all right I will take it "; that he had sold some houses, and received £40 deposit, and expected the rest to be paid in a week; and if it had been paid the case would never hove come into Court, and that he had lived in the same parish fifteen years, and everybody knew him.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. ABINGER Prosecuted
GEORGE HAROLD (395 L). On the night of June 24th I was on duty in Walworth Road, and saw the prisoners standing at a door—I said, "What are you doing here?" and they walked away—I saw them again in Larkin Street, and saw Lyons come from the door of No. 1—Staines gave
a whistle—I said to Lyons, "What are you doing?"—he said, "Having a look round "—I took him down to Staines, and then to the station—he said, "I have not been in Lark in Street."
Cross-examined by Staines. When I asked what he was doing you were in the Walworth Road; you were both together at first, but you ran away afterwards.
Cross-examined by Lyons. I saw you come out of the gateway of 1, Larkin Street—you turned to the left and then to the left again; I ran sixty yards before I caught you.
ARTHUR PAINTER (48 L.) In the early morning of June 24th I was on duty in Walworth Road, and saw Staines running hard from Larkin Street towards Camberwell Gate—I stopped him—he said, "I cannot stop, governor"; I said, "There is something wrong," and detained him till a constable brought up Lyons; they denied knowing each other—I found this knife on him.
Cross-examined by Staines. When I caught you, you were about sixty yards away—till the constable came up with Lyons.
Cross-examined by Lyons. The constable had you in custody—it was about 2.30 a.m. on the 24th.
WILLIAM LEONARD (Police-Sergeant L.) About 9.45 on the morning of the 24th I examined the door of I, Larkin Street, and found the lock had been commenced to be cut away; had the bolt been lower it could have been shot back.
Cross-examined by Staines. The door is two inches thick.
The Prisoners' statements before the Magistrate. Staines says: "I was not there." Lyons says: "We were walking along the street; we had nowhere to go; we had no lodging. I am wholly innocent."
Staines' Defence. I know no more about it than this table.
Lyons' Defence. Having no lodging, and nowhere to go, we were simply walking along the street. The policeman said, "Where are you two going, have you got anything about you?" We submitted to be searched, and he took us to the station. We were simply destitute.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour each.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. SYMMONS Prosecuted, and LORD COLERIDGE, Q.C., and MR. ELLIOTT
appeared for Phelps.
GUILTY .—HAWKINS— Five Years' Penal Servitude . PHELPS— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
ADJOURNED TO TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8TH, 1896.