CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
TENTH SESSION, HELD JULY 25TH, 1898.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND BY
Short-hand Writers to the Court,
ROLLS CHAMBERS, No. 89, CHANCERY LANE.
THE POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE
REVISED AND EDITED BY
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 25th, 1898, and following days,
BEFORE THE RIGHT HON. HORATIO DAVID DAVIES, M.P., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; The Hon. Sir JOHN COMPTON LAWRANCE , one of the Justices of the High Court; Sir DAVID EVANS , K.C M.G,; JOHN WHITAKER ELLIS , Bart; Sir REGINALD HANSON , Bart., M.P., SIR WALTER WILKIN , Bart., Aldermen of the said City; Sir CHARLES HALL , K.C.M.G., Q.C., M.P., Recorder of the said City; Sir JOSEPH COCKFIELD DIMSDALE , Knt., MARCUS SAMUEL , Esq., HENRY GEO. SMALLMAN , Esq., WILLIAM PURDIE TRELOAR , Esq., SAMUEL GREEN , Esq., and THOMAS VESEY STRONG , Esq., other Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON , Q.C., Knt., Common Serjeant of the said City; and ROBERT MALCOLM KERR , Esq., Judge of the Sheriff's Court; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Tenniner and General Gaol Delivery, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
DAVIES, 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 25th, 1898.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MESSRS. BODKIN and E. P. CLARKE Prosecuted.
EDWARD PITT . I am managing foreman to Messrs. Batey and Co. The prisoner is one of our travellers—he goes out with a van—he starts every morning with a van full of stock, which it is his duty to take to our customers, and to receive payment, and to hand the cashier the money which he has taken for the bottles sold—on Friday, May 27th, he took out goods to the value of £35 1s. 6d.—he is on round No. 69, which includes Earlsfield and Wandsworth. He brought back goods to the value of £7 0s. 1d.—if goods are sold from the van on credit, the customers give to him in return a voucher signed by them—he gave us no vouchers or money—I saw him in the paying-office, and thought he was in a semi-state of drunkenness—afterwards I thought he was shamming—he had to account for goods to the amount of £28 1s. 5d.—I did not see him taken off the van—I felt his clothes and found no money, but 2s. or. 3s. dropped on the floor when he was being carried in—I saw the strap of his satchel round his neck—it was cut (produced)—I went to the police-station and made a communication to the inspector, and when I came back I had him locked in the paying-room office, and gave some instructions to the yardman, and went to his district to try and get some information—I did not return to the yard that night—I saw him next morning about seven o'clock, and asked him about the money—he said, "What money?"—I said, "The money you took yester-day"—he said, "I have not got any"—I said, "You have taken about £28, have you taken any vouchers?"—he said "No"—I said, "So you have actually taken it in hard cash?"—he said, "Yes, that is it"—I asked him how he lost the money, and he said a man asked him to have a dink, which he did, after which he could remember nothing—that was the only explanation he gave—I gave him into custody—no other van man goes that round.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You did not say you had been robbed—I could not give you an extraordinary good character—I have never doubted your ways before.
Cross-examined. I have never doubted your honesty—I should give you a good character.
Cross-examined. As far as I know you were quite honest.
Cross-examined. I have always found you just to me—about three weeks before this happened you asked me to lend you £3 or £4—I could not lend it—I had not got it—you did not say you were in arrears with the firm.
JAMES DANIEL SNOOK . I live at 22, Linton Grove, Fulham—I am night watchman at Batey & Co.'s—the prisoner was lying at the back of the van when it came home, apparently asleep—he was put in the paying office—I watched him—when Mr. Pitt went away the prisoner got up and looked at some papers to see what they were—he came to the door and asked me what he was there for—Smith, the other watchman, said, "You ought to know"—the prisoner asked me if he was going to remain there—I said he would have 'to remain there till Mr. Pitt returned—he walked about the room—when the van returned with Mr. Pitt I let it in and then looked into the paying office—the prisoner was lying down—I do not know whether he was asleep, but he was talking to me a minute before—the door was locked—Mr. Pitt had the key—the prisoner asked me to go and see Mr. Pitt—I went away and came back shortly and the prisoner was gone—the door was broken open—when the prisoner spoke he spoke in a rational way.
Cross-examined. I think you were brought back a little after ten—Mr. Pitt went away about 10.45—he did not come back—the van did about 12.25—I have been in the employ of the firm since May 22nd—I came as foreman, but there was no vacancy, and I went as watchman.
the COURT. He knew I was watching him—I was outside—He could hear my footsteps—I was looking through the keyhole—he would not know that.
JOHN HALEY . I am a van guard in the employ of Messrs. Batey—I was guard to the prisoner on May 21st—we went to several customers—there was another van with us—we stopped about 2.30 to have dinner at the Sailor Prince-we had had one drink before that, and after dinner we went on with our round—we called on Mr. Street, after which the prisoner showed me some money in his hand—he had had about five glasses of beer altogether—I was with him all day—when we went to the Sailor Prince he looked a bit drunk—I did not notice anything unsteady in his walk—when we had been in the public-house some time he said he was going away for a moment—he went out for about ten
minutes—Earlsfield Station is about half a minute's walk—I did not see which way he went—I was sober—I had only four ale, his was bitter—I went out to the cart, and stayed about five minutes, and returned and found the prisoner in the tap-room with a glass of spirits beside him—he was leaning his head on his arms—there were four men in the bar—we eventually got him out—he walked out—he did net drive, I drove—it is against the rules for us to drive the van—I invited him to drive into the yard—he stayed behind on the tailboard of the van—I drove in, and saw Mr. Pitt—the prisoner did not complain to me of being robbed on that day—I did not notice whether he had his pouch on—I did not see anybody speak to him.
Cross-examined. I remember we had half a-gallon of beer about seven o'clock in two jugs—J and the other van-boy drunk most of it—I do not know whether you had any of it—since this has happened the firm has given me a superior position—Korney, the other boy, asked you if you were able to drive home—you seemed to be helpless.
FRANK CORNEY . I am a van guard to Messrs. Batey—I was driving the van which went round with the prisoner's van—we went to the Sailor Prince—the prisoner was not intoxicated when we went in, but when we came out he was not sober—I drove him home—he made no complaint of having been robbed—we called at a good many places that day—I do not know how much money he had taken.
JOSEPH THOMAS GOODMAN . I am the son of the landlord of the Sailor Prince—I served the prisoner with' twopenny worth of gin cold, which is I about one-third of a quartern—he was sober then—he was standing in front of the bar—he bought the gin himself—we talked of the Oaks.
DOUGLAS FRANKLIN . I am a labourer, of 49. Bendow Alley—there were three other men in the tap-room of the Sailor Prince—we were playing there, and the two boys came in and took the prisoner away—He walked straight—we did not interfere with him.
Cross-examined. We were all sitting at the same table.
THOMAS CHARLES WILLIAMS . I live at 25, Windhithe Road, W.—I was in the Sailor Prince on this day—I did not see anybody interfere with him—we were playing at the same table where the prisoner was sitting.
ALICE WEBB . I live at 3, Station Terrace, Earlsfield—on May 27th, about 8 o'clock, I was at my shop, close to Earlsfield Station—I saw the prisoner walking in the direction of the station—he appeared to be sober.
ALICE MARIAN WILLIAMS . I live at 20, Hazelrnere Terrace, Acton Green—on May 27th I met the prisoner by appointment at Earlsfield Station about 8.30 p.m.—he had been living with me—he asked me for my purse—he told me before that he would give me something—he did not say what—I gave it to him—he put about £24 into it—he got the money from his satchel—I went home then—he got home about three
o'clock in the morning—he said he had been locked up in the office all nighty and that he had got out with a nail—next morning he asked about the money—I told him where it was, and he took what he wanted and went away—he has now spent all the money.
Cross-examined. The money was in gold.
HENRY GRAHL (Detective, T Division.) I went to Messrs, Batey's yard on May 21st, and there arrested the prisoner, and charged him with embezzlement on the 28th—he said, "All right, I will go with you"—we went to the station—about half an hour after he sent for me, and said, "I don't quite understand the charge"—I said, "What do you mean?"—he said, "The £4 do you speak of?"—I said, "That is one of the items set forth in the charge."
In his defence, the prisoner said he was in debt to the firm owing to the bad season. The debts were recognised by the firm. He gave £24 of the money to the young woman, and had £4 1s. 5d. left. The drink got the better of him, and lie told the boy to drive home. He woke up in the office, and found his papers all over the office. He spoke to the watchman, and after wards opened the door with a nail. He paid the money next day to the customers. The travellers incur a lot of expense, and in the winter do was pay their expenses. There is a system in the firm that when a man gets into debt to make a loan of it, and give them I O U's. He did not know how he lost the £4. He had lost his eye in the service of the firm, and near got anything for it.
MR. PITT (Re-examined.) The prisoner has never told me that he took the money out of his pouch—I have not said I would take him back into my employ—he said he lost his eye through a bottle exploding, but we could not get any information—our travellers are not allowed to get money in this way.
Cross-examined. If a man is behind with his payments he is not allowed to go out next morning, you did not sign I O U's.
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. ROBINSON Prosecuted.
HARRY JAMES TYLER . On June 21st, at 12.55, I was in the Kingwood Road, Fulham—it was rather a dark night, but fine—I saw the prisoner—I passed him by four steps, when he got his arms round me and knocked me down—I lost a watch and 15s.—there was another man; I could not recognise him—they ran away and separated—I chased the prisoner, and got almost on top of him—he turned and knocked me down again, and knocked my tooth out and blacked my eye—I lost sight of him—I next saw him the following night at the police-station among five or six other men—I picked him out—I have not the least doubt he is the man.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You were not under a lamp when I first saw you—there are no lamps there—there are no walls—it was near a field—there is no wire fence round—I did not hear, you say any thing—you were alone when I passed you—you came up behind and threw me
down, and snatched my watch and chain and purse—I cannot swear who took my purse, but I should think you did it—the chain was broken, you did not take it—I showed it at the station—I did not struggle, I had no chance—I did not shout—I did not carry a stick—you ran in the direction of the Board Schools—I followed you about twenty or thirty yards—I was close to you when you turned round and struck me—there was a woman, but no man with her—the man helped you to rob me—I did not see the woman before I was robbed—she was about twenty-six yards off—the man was with her then—she is the woman who gave evidence at the Police-court—she was not with the man when I was knocked down—she did not take any part in the robbery—she said she knew you—she gave your description and your name, "Sleepy Hurley"—I told the inspector what was the matter—I gave your description—we did not meet a policeman on the way to the station—the woman was kept at the station—I have not seen her since except at the Police-court—the police did not give me your description as I went to the station—they did not tell me to look and see if there was anybody I knew—the inspector said, "Be sure"—I saw your black eye.
HENRY GRAHL . (Detective-Serjeant, T Division,) I arrested the prisoner on June 21st at 10.30 p.m.—I told him he answered the description of a man who had assaulted and robbed a man in King wood Road that same morning with another man—he said, "All right, guv'nor, I will go with you—we went to the station—the prosecutor identified him from among other men—he made no reply to the charge.
Cross-examined. When at the station I did not go out to the prose-cutor—I had told him to attend before—I was present when you were identified—there were six other men—the inspector said to you, "Place yourself where you like; there is a man going to pick you out"—the prosecutor was outside—I do not know where you placed yourself—I did not go out—I did not say to you, I have been waiting for you a long time—I took your sling, but not your belt—when I took it you did not ask why, and I did not say, "Mind your own business"—I did not tell you to show us your arm—I did not tell the deputy of the house to say it was between twelve and one when you came in—I have talked to the woman, I know her—she has been hounded since you have been in custody—she was living with her husband on this night—she has left him now; I don't know why.
HANNA SWAIN . On June 21st I was living at 36, Deptford Street—I saw the prisoner in the Fulham Road about one o'clock with another roan—he knocked the prosecutor down—the prisoner said, "Knock him down; have you got it, Sleepy?"—the other man knelt on him—I saw the prosecutor, and I saw the prisoner knock him down—he snatched his watch and ran—the prosecutor asked me where they went—I have been threatened.
Cross-examined. When I first saw you you were crossing towards the prosecutor—you were not under a wall—there is a field there—there are some houses—I know it was you, I saw you—it was moonlight—there are lights at the top and bottom of the road—I was going to my daughter's—I had been to Barnes and Putney—I left about 12.30—I
missed the way and asked a constabie—there was no one with me—I told the prosecutor I could identify you—I gave your description at the station—you had a white muffler on—they kept me at the station to see if I had given the right address—I don't know what time they let me go—I went straight home then—I identified you at the station—the constable said they had got "Sleepy" at the station—if I saw the other man I should know him—I gave his description—he was taller than you—I have not left my husband through misconduct—I was not turned out of my house the day this occurred—I recognised you by your waistcoat and by your face.
Witnesses for the Defence.
JAMES FOUNTAIN .—I am a labourer and live at Wandsworth—on June 20th at 12.30 I was in Daws Road and saw the prisoner drunk—I asked him to come home with me, and I took him home and handed him over to the landlord.
Cross-examined. This was on June 20th at 12.30—he was thrown out of a public-house in Daws Road—I don't know where the Kingwood Road is—I left him at Hammersmith—I know it was the 20th, because it was in the papers—I did not know till afterwards that he had been arrested—I did not go to the Police-court.
JIMMY HARMETBY . I am potman at the Wilton Arms, in Daws Road, Fulham—on June 20th I was shutting up the house at 12.30, and I saw the prisoner outside very drunk, and I advised him to go away, and as I was going home I met the prisoner and James Fountain—that was about 12.45—I saw you pass where I live.
Cross-examined. This was on Monday—I cannot remember what happened on the 17th or 18th—where I saw them is fifteen minutes' walk from where the robbery took place.
JAMES FOUNTAIN (Re-examined.) I am not working for anybody now—I last did some work about a month ago—I don't know the man's name—I have done some permanent work this year—I don't know how many months ago.
The Prisoner, in his defence, said that he went home with Fountain abort 12.55, and he went to bed, and the next evening he was outside the Wilton Arms, and the policeman came up and said he was wanted job stealing a watch. He knew his description had been given to the prosecutor, and he changed his place in the line of men when he was identified, end the prosecutor could not at first recognise him.
GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony on Novenber 5th, 1888. There were numerous other convictions proved against him, two of five years each— Five Years' Penal Servitude, and Twenty Strokes with the Cat.
473. MICHAEL SHANNON (36), PLEADED GUILTY to a burglary in the counting-house of Edward Arthur Penn, and stealing a jacket and other articles; also to being by night armed with instruments of burglary. Several previous convictions were proved against him.— Three Years Penal Servitude. —
474. GEORGE BROWN (28) , to stealing two hams of Frederick Luck, and to a previous conviction of felony Thirteen other convictions were proved against him. Three Years' Penal Servitude. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
475. FREDERICK JOHN CHILDERHOUSE (29) , to embezzling and stealing an order for £30, and other sums; also to forging and uttering endorsements to three cheques with intent to defraud.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
476. FREDERICK WILLIAM SMITH (21) , to stealing, whilst employed in the Post Office, a letter containing a half-sovereign, a shilling, and stamps.— Eight Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
NEW COURT.—Monday, July 25th, 1898.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
478. GUSTAV HAYMAN (57) , to unlawfully obtaining from Oswald Barton two scarves and other articles; also scarves, and other articles, from Wheeler and Co., with intent to defraud. Nine Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
479. WILLIAM MURPHY (28) , Feloniously wounding Ingvar Lofas, on the high seas, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm. The Prisoner stated that he was guilty of unlawfully wounding, and the JURY found that verdict. One Month's Imprisonment.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
CHARLES SMITH . I am subpostmaster at Netting Hill—on February 19th I served the prisoner with a 10s. postal-order—he snatched it from my hand, tendered a crown-piece, and left the office—I broke a piece out of it, and called him back, and said that it was bad—he said that he was very sorry—I sent for a policeman.
GEORGE FARLEY (300 X.) I was called and took the prisoner—he said that he got the crown in the Edgware Road—he was charged at the station, and made no answer—he was remanded for a week—no complaints were made, and the charge was withdrawn—I received this coin,. with a piece out of it, from Mr. Smith.
ADA LOUISA SAYER . I am assistant-postmistress at 148, Mile End Road—on March 31st I sold the prisoner a postal order for 7s. 6d.—he gave me a crown piece—I told him it was bad—he said "Is it?"—I asked him his name and address—he said "Tredgar, 19, Hoxton Street North"—I allowed him to leave, and sent the coin to the postal authorities—this is it—I was sent for in June to Worship Street Police-court, and picked out the prisoner from a number of men.
HAROLD WYNNE . I am a clerk in the Eastern District Post Office, Whitechapel Road—on April 1st I received a registered letter containing., a report and a counterfeit crown from Mr. Sayer—it eventually went to Mr. Gilby—this is it.
SUSANNAH MARY BAKER . I keep a dairy—on June 15th the prisoner came in for five eggs, price 3d., and gave me a bad five-shilling piece—I sent for a policeman, and he was given in custody—I received another bad five shilling piece that day—I do not know from whom—I was serving there all day—these are the crowns (produced.)
Hoxton Road, and the last witness gave the prisoner into my custody for giving her this coin—he said that it was given to him in change.
Prisoner's defence: The money was given to me; I did not know it was bad.
GUILTY .—Seven previous convictions were proved against him.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted.
ETHEL MARY BELL . I am assistant at a hairdresser's. 247, Regent Street, kept by Madame Lys—on April 25th, about 6.30, the prisoner purchased a fringe net, price 1s.—she gave me a crown piece, and I gave her 4s. change—she was there about ten minutes, and I had a good opportunity of observing her—she wore a black skirt and hat, and feathers—I afterwards found the coin was bad, and handed it to the police the same evening—this is it—she came again last Monday, differently dressed, and asked for the same article as before, and gave me this double florin (produced)—I recognised her by her face immediately she came in, and before she asked for the net, and communicated with a porter, and kept him there while I was serving her—I handed the coin to him and sent for the police, and my employer charged her—I sent for the police in consequence of her having passed the crown piece.
JAMES SMITH (361 d.) On July 18th, about 3.15, I was called to this shop and found the prisoner sitting on a chair—she spoke first, and said, "I did not know the money was bad; I feel so bad I think I shall faint"—the porter handed me this crown piece—I took her to the station—she was charged with the two utterings, and said that she went home with a gentleman who gave her the 4s. piece and 2 half-crowns, and that she was never in the shop before in her life.
The Prisoner, in her statement before the Magistrate and in her defence, stated that she teas not in the shop in April, and that she received the he piece from a gentleman.
GUILTY of the second uttering — Three Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, July 26th, 1898.
Before Mr. Recorder.
482. THOMAS EVANS (23), THOMAS BRIGGS (22), HENRY WALLACE (23), HENRY WHEELER (28), and EMILY MACMILLAN (19), were indicted for a burglary in the dwelling-house of Clement Valentine Parsons, and stealing tools, value £8.
EVANS PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. BURTON Prosecuted.
quantity of property to the value of about £8—amongst other things the articles now produced some knives, two pistols, and other things.
ANNIE JAMES . I am housekeeper to Mr. Parsons and reside on the premises—I was aroused in the morning and found the place in great confusion—the cellar window was wide open, also the outer door—it had been forced open.
EDWARD BENNETT (Detective-Serjeant, F.) About nine in the morning I went to Mr. Parsons' house—I found a burglary had taken place—I made inquiry, and at 2.30 in the afternoon I was in company with Detective Anthony—I saw Macmillan—she was wearing this creamsilk handkerchief—it answered the description of some of the missing property—we followed her r to Hyde Park, where she met the prisoners—we surrounded them and took them into custody for a burglary at Warwick Road—Wallace had on these thin shoes—Evans had on this pair of drawers or pyjamas—Briggs had this white linen handkerchief in his hand, with the name of C. Parsons on it, and these five cycle tools, and one oil can—Wheeler had on him these two handkerchiefs, a cream silk one and a white one, with the initial "E" on it—Macmillan had two handkerchiefs, one she was wearing—at the station Evans said, "Here, gov'nor, I want to get them out of this. I done the job. These are his drawers, and this in his pipe; I gave Briggs the tools"—Macmillan said, "I met them at half-past five this morning. I saw these knives, two pistols, and some books, and a bottle of champagne; I helped them to drink it, and asked them to give me the handkerchiefs"—Briggs had this cycle tool in his pocket—I saw the detective find them, and he produced them at the station.
CHARLES ENTICKNAP (Detective, F.) I was with Barnett—we saw Macmillan in the Edgware Road, and followed her into Hyde Park, where she joined the other prisoners, who were sitting on the grass—she sat down—they were wearing some of these things—we got assistance and surrounded them—I seized Wallis, and a uniform constable Collared the female, and another constable collared Wheeler, and they were taken to the station—I searched Wheeler—he was wearing this handkerchief round his neck, and this other he had in his hand—he said, "I bought that at the Salvation Army"—they were all charged with burglary—they made no answer to the charge—a pair of boots were left behind at the house—next morning Wallis said, "You may as well let me have those boots to keep my feet warm"—he put them on and they fitted him—he was wearing these thin shoes—at the station Macmillan said, "I met these men in the park at half-past five, and they had some knives and boots"—the others did not hear what she said.
Wallace: Was not a pair of socks left behind?—Witness: Yes, and you. have them on now. (The Prosecutor did not identify them.)
The statements made by the Prisoners before the Magistrate.—WALLACE; "I had nothing to do with it, only buying some of the stuff of a strange
man."WHEELER: "I know nothing about it; I bought the handkerchiefs at the Salvation Army Shelter." MACMILLAN: "I bought the two handkerchiefs."BRIGGS said nothing.
GUILTY .—Evans also pleaded guilty to a previous conviction at this Court in July, 1895; and Wallace to a conviction at Clerkenwell in 1897. Other convictions were proved against Evans and Wallace.
EVANS: Four Years' Penal Servitude. WALLACE: Three Years' Penal Servitude. BRIGGS: Nine Months' Hard Labour. WHEELER: Six Months'. MACMILLAN: Three Months'.
484. EDWARD ALEXANDER BREMNER (35) , to feloniously forging and uttering an endorsement to a cheque, with intent to defraud the Motor Manufacturing Company— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
487. WILLIAM HENRY HUDSON (35), WILLIAM CHAPMAN (47), CHARLES WARREN (46), ADA ROSE BURRELL (25), JANE WATKINS (44), GEORGE CHARLES HARRIES (38) and CHARLES MAYNE (54) , to unlawfully conspiring by false pretences to defraud George Augustus Chapronier and others of various sums of money
CHAPMAN PLEADED GUILTY to previous convictions.
HUDSON— Judgment respited.
CHAPMAN— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
BURRELL— Fifteen Months.
WARREN— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
HARRIES— Eighteen Months —MAYNE Three Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. GRAIN Prosecuted.
GEORGE DEAN (634 K.) On June 30th, about 6.40, I was in Arnold Road, Bow, on duty and saw the prisoner—he was at the corner of Cricket Street and Arnold Road, running level with the railway—a stone could easily be thrown on to the railway—there were other lads there—the prisoner stooped down and picked up a flint stone, and said "Here is a train" and threw the stone at the train—the road was under repair at the time—I distinctly saw the stone thrown at the train.
Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I am very sorry I done it.
Witnesses for the Defence.
WILLIAM EDGNER . I do not do any work—I live at 40, Cricket Street, with my parents—I was playing about with a button, and the prisoner threw it over the railway, because it was no good—I did not throw anything—I am quite sure of it—I did not hear him say, "Here comes a—engine"—I was by his side—I don't know who found the button—I don't know where he got it from—he gave it to me, and I gave it back to him.
14th—I was out when this happened—ho goes about with an organ man—he is out of school now—I bad trouble with him about his going to school, but he has been all right since he has been to work.
Prisoner's defence: "I am very sorry I did it."
GUILTY .— Six Strokes with a Birchrod.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, July 26th, 1898,
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
489. JOHN LEAMORE (27) and JAMES DONOVAN (25) PLEADED GUILTY to robbery on William Tillett, and stealing a watch and chain, a purse, and £2 5s., his property, Leamore having been convicted on August 4th, 1896, and Donovan on the same date.
LEAMORE— Three Years' Penal Servitude. —DONOVAN— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
491. THOMAS HARDING (34) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of Benjamin Saunders, and stealing an electric battery and other articles, and 9s. 2d. in money— Nine Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
GUILTY, and the JURY found that verdict. Six other convictions were proved against him.
Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. H. AVORY Prosecuted.
GEORGE JAMES COOPER . I am of no occupation—on January 21st Mr. Metcalf was acting as my solicitor—I required a clerk, and the prisoner called on me to get my signature to this mortgage deed (produced)—I signed it—he asked me for the stamp fees, and gave me the items—they came to, £3 14s. 6d., which I paid him, and he said that he would bring the deed back on the following Thursday, but I have never seen him since—I received these letters and telegrams from him. "February 10th, 1898. Dear Sir,—Your letter to hand. I have been ill. Everything is all right. I will call and see you on Monday morning. S. F. BILTON"—then a telegram of February 16th, "Will call at eight tonight. BILTON," and another of February 17th, "Don't call, letter follows, BILTON." (Two other letters and two telegrams from the prisoner to the witness were read, promising to call on different dates.) I gave "Mr. Metcalf instructions to prepare a goodwill, and on January 18th the prisoner called on me with the deed, and asked me for £3 10s. for preparing it, and £1 1s. for Mr. Metcalf's charges, and I paid him £1 4s. 10d.—he said that as I had not an account with Mr. Metcalf it would be better for me to pay it.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I had employed Mr. Metcalf to
purchase two houses in Gloucester Place, and agreed to pay him £6 10s. for his charges, and I sent him a cheque to settle the costs of the mortgage—that was inclusive, and I was to pay all that was out of pocket—there was some delay as to title, and I asked you, as a personal favour to devote your time to it, so that it could be completed the next day—as to the £3 4s. 6d, I called at the office after the purchase and asked for Mr. Metcalf, and when I asked for you I was told that you were discharged. (The RECORDER informed the prisoner that all these matters had nothing to do with the charge.)
Re-examined. The £6 10s. did not include the payment of January 18th, but it included everything else—it did not include the out-of-pocket expenses, I remained liable to Mr. Metcalf to pay them—when the prisoner called on me on these two occasions I believed he was authorised to receive those sums on Mr. Metcalfs behalf.
HARRY SAMUEL KENDAL . I am a schoolmaster, of Pinsbury Park—Mr. Metcalf has acted as my solicitor for some years, and I have known the prisoner as his clerk since the end of last year—on the Saturday before Easter he came to my private house and said that he was very much worried as a case connected with an omnibus company was down that day, and as Mr. Metcalf was out of town, could I oblige him with £2.—I asked him why he did not go to more local people, or to Mr. Metcalfs banker—he said that he should get into awful trouble—I gave him £2 till the Tuesday evening, as he said that Mr. Metcalf would be back on the Monday—he never returned it—when I saw him he only came into the office when I was there having a will prepared.
Cross-examined. I expressed great satisfaction at the Eldon, in Eldon Street at the way you had conducted the matter, and said that I should be happy to see you—I feel sure that it was Saturday, April 9th, when you called on me—Monday was Bank Holiday—I told you that I wanted it back on the Thursday for a specific purpose, and that was to pay taxes—nobody was present when you made those representations—Mrs. Kendal is here—(The RECORDER cautioned the prisoner that he was wasting time, and injuring his own case.)—I did not mention this to Mr. Metealf, be cause I took a lady over eighty years of age there to make her will, and to pay for it—I did not pay for it—when my case came on Mr. Metcalf asked me for the Counsel's fees—I told him I had already paid them—that was some time in June, and I then told him the circumstances under which the £2 was borrowed.
Re-examined. I believed when I parted with the £2 that the prisoner wanted it to pay some fees with respect to the Omnibus Company.
BERTHA TIGHE . I am a lodging-house keeper, of 13, Canonbury Square—Mr. Metcalf has acted as my solicitor for some time past, and for my late husband—I knew the prisoner as Mr. Metcalfs clerk—he called on Saturday, May 31st, and produced a letter, which he said was from Mr. Metcalf, but he did not read it; he put it back in his pocket—he said that Mr. Metcalf had gone away and had not paid him his wages—I gave him some bread and cheese—he asked me for 15s., and I lent him 10s.; he never returned it.
Cross-examined. I did not leave a message with Mr. Toole, requesting
you to call at my house; I never did any business with you, only with Mr. Metcalf.
DANIEL METCALF . I am a solicitor, of 18, Eldon Street, Finsbury Square—the prisoner came into my employment as clerk at the end of last year—Mr. Cooper, Mr. Kendal, and Mrs. Tighe are clients of mine—I had, on Mr. Cooper's instructions, prepared an assignment of the goods will of a business, and entrusted the prisoner to get it executed on January 14th—he had no authority to demand payment of £1 4s. 10d. from Mr. Cooper, nor did he pay me a penny of it—on January 31st I had prepared a mortgage for Mr. Cooper, and entrusted the prisoner with it to get it executed, but he had no authority to demand £3 14s. 6d. for it, nor did he pay me a penny—he told me on February 3rd that he had got the deed executed, and it wanted stamping and registering, and I gave him 12s. 6d. for the stamps and 7s. 6d. for registering the deed—he had then got the deed with him—I left it in his possession to get it stamped and registered, after which he ought to have delivered it to Mr. Cooper—this is it—it has never been stamped or registered, and there will be a penalty of £10 to pay unless I can get it remitted, but they only remit £5, so I shall have to pay £5 in any event—a day or two afterwards I asked him if Mr. Cooper had got the deed—he said, "Yes" and that everything had been completed—I had in the office an accident case against the General Omnibus Company, and paid the prisoner £2 on March 29th to set down an appeal in the High Court—he did not do so, and I shall have to get special leave to appeal—I did not know that he had got £2 from Mr. Kendal in that matter—I went to my Counsel, and he said that there was money owing—in consequence of matters which came to my knowledge I dismissed the prisoner on Saturday, May 21st, about two o'clock, and I had not sufficient change, and my clerk, Mr. Thwaites, paid him 25s., his week's wages—it was not till long afterwards that I heard of his going to Mrs. Tighe and borrowing money, and not only to her, but to others.
Cross-examined. On Wednesday, May 18th, I said to you, "Did you set that plea down of the General Omnibus Company?" and you said, "Certainly"—I said, "It is very strange; I have been to Mr. Tritters, and both he and his clerk say that they have searched the list, and it is not set down"—I made an appointment to meet you next day and go to the Associates Office—I was at the office on the Saturday before Easter and paid you your wages, 25s.—I was not away on the Friday, Saturday,. Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday in Easter week—I was not at Hastings, and did not send a telegram for £2 to be sent to me, because I was not coming to town—I got back from the Law Courts about 1.30., and saw Mr. Thwaites in the office, and went with him to the bank, and then gave him two half-sovereigns and two half-crowns to pay you—I did not receive from you £1 4s. on the day after the completion of the deed—you did not tell me that you had got Mr. Cooper to pay you and extra guinea for extra work, as you had had to engross the assignment—I looked at my diary at the Police-court, and found that I had given you, 12s. 6d. for stamps and 7s. 6d. for registration—here is the entry—that entry was made the same day—you had no authority to receive money
from Mr. Cooper. (As the prisoner persisted in asking irrelevant question and abusing Mr. Metcalf, the RECORDER told the witness to stand down)
Re-examined. If the prisoner received money from Mr. Cooper it was his duty to make an entry, and there is no such entry.
STEPHEN THWAITES . I am a clerk to Mr. Metcalf—on May 21st he gave me two half-sovereigns and two half-crowns for the prisoner, which I paid to him about 2.15, and he said, "I am very much obliged to you I did not expect, it, I am not coming any more, we will have a parting glass," which we had—it was not paid for out of the 25s.; I paid.
Cross-examined. I have been with Mr. Metcalf since this Court adjourned—the bank is in Coleman Street; I did not go in—I did not tall you that Mr. Metcalf was very much annoyed about this matter of the Omnibus Company, and that he could not allow the £2, but that he sent you 15s. of your wages, and kept the rest, nor did I say, "Here is 7s. 6d., and here is a piece of paper, you are to go round and get 7s. 6d. from Mr. Green"—Mr. Green is a greengrocer and bookmaker round the corner. (The prisoner persisting in asking irrelevant questions, the witness was ordered to stand down.)
JOHN DAVIS (City Detective Inspector.) I arrested the prisoner on June 17th, on a warrant, for stealing £2 of his master—he said, "I had the £2 for the purpose of settling an action; I was very much troubled by the illness of my wife, and my mind was divided between two matters: whether I paid the £2 for the stamp or not, as there was no record kept, I cannot say."
WILLIAM FITZGERALD (City Detective.) I searched the prisoner's residence, 9, Oakley Street, and found several documents—this is one (The mortgage deed for £600); also a sealed letter, which had never been opened.
Cross-examined. It was under the papers, but the drawer was not locked.
The Prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate, and in his defence, said that he borrowed the £2 of Mr. Kendal, and was sorry he had not paid him back; that he lost two notices of motion and the stamps with them, and was under the impression that lie had set the motion down in the omnibus Case; that Mrs. Tighelent him the 10s. without his making any statement about not having received his wages; and at that time he had not been discharged.—
GUILTY of obtaining the £3 14s. 6d. and £2. MR. AVORY stated that he obtained Mr. Metcalf's situation by a false character, and had been in the employ of four other solicitors, one of whom he had robbed of a £100 note. Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
EDWARD NEWMAN . I am a pilot of 148, Brady Street Buildings—on July 14th, in the middle of the day, I was in Brady Street—I felt a kick on my ankle and fell—I heard a woman say, "My God! he has got it"—I was kicked and robbed, but cannot identify the man—I lost my watch, seal and key.
to two, I was in Bath Street, and saw a man running after another man and calling "Stop thief"—I ran behind the man who was being run after and kept him in sight, and when he got into Mile End Road he stopped, and I told a policeman who went up and spoke to him—he ran away again—I saw the prisoner at the station last Friday in the box, and recognised him.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. The other man was not in front of you, you were in front, and a lot of people behind you.
Re-examined. I ran faster and was the only one left pursuing him.
GEORGE BELL (306H). Oh July 14th, about a quarter to two p.m., I was in Sidney Street—Miller spoke to me, and I followed the person he pointed to; it was the prisoner—I put my hand on him, and he ran away—another constable caught him, but I never lost sight of him—he was taken to the station, and Newman came just after four o'clock.
EDWARD DAVIS (223 G). On July 14th I was in Cambridge Road, Mile End, and about 1.45 I heard a policeman's whistle, and saw the prisoner running—I stopped him, and the lad said that he had stolen a watch—I said, "You hear what he says"—he made no reply—he was taken to the station, and charged with stealing a watch, a seal and a key—he said, "How can I have stolen them when he does not know me"—he refused his address.
Prisoner's defence. I was running, and this boy Miller followed me and gave me in charge. I was placed with seven more men, and the prosecutor picked another chap out, and then he had another look at me.
NOT GUILTY .
JOHANNA LEAVY . I live at 40, Stepney Causeway—on July 3rd, about 3.30, the prisoner came to my street door and walked up and down, and challenged me to fight, and struck me, and I hit her back—she took a knife from under her apron—I put my arm up, and it went into it—I had to go to the hospital.
ELLEN MYERS . I live at 6, Perriwinkle Street—on the afternoon of July 3rd I was standing with Leavy at her door, and the prisoner took out a knife and struck her on her arm—I took the knife away; this is it (produced.)
Cross-examined. The knife was under your apron.
The Prisoner, in her defence, stated that her daughter called her from the top of the court, and she ran to the Prosecutrix't door with a knife in her hand; that the Prosecutrix struck her, and she showed the Jury a mark on her head, but could not say whether she struck anybody or not.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding under great provocation. — Six Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT—Wednesday, July 27th, 1898.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrence.
The GRAND JURY having thrown out the bill, MR. HORACE AVORY offered no evidence upon, the Inquisition.
NOT GUILTY ,
(For other Cases tried this day see Essex and Surrey Cases.)
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, July 27th, 1898.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. GRAIN and MR. ROWSELL Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.
ERNEST S. MARMDORF . I am a Prussian subject, and have been a lieutenant in the Prussian Army—I am now in the Reserve—my father died this year; he had property in Prussia—I was dependent upon his allowance up to 1896—I knew Herz in Berlin—I was staying here in 1896 at the Hotel Berkeley, and had some dispute with my father about my expenses—I was dining at the Berkeley in July, and Herz came in—I gave him three rings to pawn for me, and he came back with £130, and said that it was the money he got for me, and gave me a receipt similar to this. (A contract note for £130, dated July 29, for a diamond, a pearl, and an emerald ring. Signed, st. Herz, 55, Bernard Street., Eumll Square.)—I was staying with a lady there, and gave the ticket to her—some time afterwards I wanted more money, and handed Herz more jewellery, a cigarette-case, a pin-box, a long chain, a scarf and other articles, and asked him to pawn them with the same pawnbroker—I wanted them put on the same receipt, but could not find it—he went away with them, and came back and said that it was too late to pawn them with a pawnbroker, and he had left the jewellery with a friend of his, and brought me £30 or £40—soon after that I left for the Continent, taking with me Webb as valet, who sometimes acted as my secretary—in September, 1896, I was in Paris, and instructed Webb to write to his brother-in-law about the jewellery, and I also wrote to Herz, as Webb told me that flerz wanted a letter from me—my letter was that he should hand over to Stevens the receipt for the jewellery which he hid pawned for £170—I received no answer from Herz—I was then ordered to Italy by a doctor—I was in communication with my solicitor in reference to the matter in 1897, and was asked to come over to give evidence, but was forbidden to travel—I came afterwards—I always paid Herz for his services—I have never received the jewellery back.
Cross-examined. I gave the contract note to my friend, and she mislaid it—I wrote that Stevens would pay Herz, and he would hand over the jewellery and the receipt—there were only two pawnings.
JAMES STEVENS . I am housekeeper at 12, Buckingham Street Strand, which is let out in flats:—I am a brother-in-law of Webb, Mr. Marmdorf's valet—I keep an account at the Capital and Counties Bank—about September I received a letter from Webb from Paris in reference to the
jewellery and Herz—I went to find Herz, but he was out; I found him at the Cafe Monico, and old him I had received instructions from Mr. Marmdorf—he said that there were no pawn-tickets or receipts, he had pawned them with a friend, and if I would give him the money he would bring them, and that £170 was required—that was about the last day of September—I made an appointment to meet him next day at Frascati's, and took with me this crossed cheque for £160 in favour of Herz—I asked him for a receipt, and gave him £10, making £170—we went to the Post Office, and I saw him write this receipt: "Received from Mr. Stevens £170 to take the things out for Mr. Marmdorf: R. Herz, 55, Bernard Street"—he said that his German bankers would not cash the cheque, and I accompanied him to the bank, initialled the cheque, received the money, and paid him in notes and gold—he said that he was going to his club friend, and would bring back the jewellery—he did not name his friend then, but he afterwards said Fred Arnold—he brought back some jewellery, but not the three rings—he said that Mr. Arnold was out of town, and on the Monday he would accompany Mrs. Arnold to get them out of the Chancery Lane Safe, where they were locked up—I wrote to him and received this reply from him—(Dated October 27th. Stating that he had written to Mr. Arnold, who would positively hand over the jewellery on October 2nd. Signed "R. Herz")—I wrote to him constantly, and afterwards received this other letter—it is only dated "Sunday." "Dear Sir,—I am sorry to say I have not received the goods. I saw Arno'd yester day, and told him I must have the goods. I have to go to Nottingham, and when I come back I will get the goods"—(Another letter stated: "I have seen Mr. Arnold, and have given him to the end of the week. I have written to Mr. Marmdorf")—I consulted a solicitor and instituted proceedings at Marlborough Street, but as Mr. Marrnforfs attendance could not be obtained it was postponed—I have never received a penny—I went to Davidson, a pawnbroker in Cheapside,. and paid £130 for the rings, which were lotted for sale—I had no difficulty in getting them—after "the first proceedings I saw Herz, who said he would pay me £5 a month, but he has paid nothing.
Cross-examined. When I went to the pawnbroker I' showed him a letter written by the lady who had been stopping with Mr. Marmdorf at the Berkeley Hotel—I got this letter from Mr. Marmdorf—the prisoner told me that his friend Arnold was ill, and his wife could not get the jewellery—Mr. Marmdorf wrote to me and said that I was to receive the tickets without parting with any money—from March to May, 1897, the prisoner was prosecuted at Marlborough Street Police-court—no proceedings were taken after that till this year—I have been to the Chancery Lane safe people—Hertz told me that Arnold was away on the Continent; he did not tell me that he owed Arnold money, and, therefore, he stuck to the money and would not give up the jewellery.
ARTHUR BURLSTON , I am assistant to Mr. Davidson, a pawnbroker, of 59, Cheapside—these three rings were pawned with me on July 29th, 1896—this is the counterfoil of the contract note, signed "Robert Hertz"—he has never come to redeem them.
Cross-examined. I gave a contract note and kept a duplicate note—before I delivered up a pledge I required the production of the contract
note or a statutory declaration that it was lost—if I gave it up without one of those two safeguards I f-hould be liable to an action—there are six assistants in the shop.
By the COURT. If a man who had pawned goods came to me I should require him to make an affidavit that the ticket was lost—I have had that done—he would have to bring a witness to identify him.
ARTHUR ERNEST BURTON . I am a solicitor—Mr. Stevens consulted me, and on December 14th I saw the prisoner, and asked him why the jewellery was not returned—he said that Arnold had it, that he owed Arnold about, £300, and that he had paid him £220 on October 2nd, £35 on October 10th, £45 on November 4th, and £25 on November 29th, and he gave me Arnold's address, 2, Little Dean Street, Soho—on December 16th I saw him again, and he told me that the three rings were pledged with Mr. Davidson—I told Stevens that.
Cross-examined. He said that he had pawned them with Arnold, and as he owed Arnold money he could not get them back, and that Arnold was broad.
Cross-examined. I have seen Hertz frequently—he said that he owed Arnold money, and that Arnold was at different places abroad.
Cross-examined. The pearl ring is a gentleman's ring, it fits my finger.
Cross-examined. I know this public-house—a club was held there—it was not raided, but there was a summons, after which it disappeared.
GUILTY .— Judgment respited.
MR. MUIR and MR. CLARK Prosecuted, and MR. WARBURTON Defended. After the commencement of the case the prisoner stated that he was
GUILTY , upon which the JURY found that verdict.— Eighteen Months Hard Labour.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, July 27th, 1898.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. LEYCESTER Prosecuted, and MR. LAWLESS Defended Fisher.
GEORGE WEST MUNRO . I am managing clerk to Spencer, Turner and Boldero, drapers' warehousemen, of Lisson Grove—in consequence of information I watched Curtice and Son's van—they are our carriers for country parcels going by the three Southern railways—our town parcels
are delivered by our own men—I saw Fisher driving—Russell and Moore were on the front, and the van boy Thompson on the van—I followed in a Hansom—the van went down Lisson Grove, Marylebone Road to Portland Road Station, where they watered the horse—they then went down Tottenham Court Road, and at the British Museum again stopped for ten or fifteen minutes—they pulled down the tarpaulin cover from the front of the van—I was a little way behind, and could see through the back—they then went on to the Fetter Lane end of Breams Buildings, Chancery Lane, and stopped a considerable time—I got out of the Hansom—I saw Fisher, Kussell and Moore sitting talking together on the front of the van—Moore and Russell left the van—this parcel of silks was under Moore's arm—it had been made up for a lady who had bought the goods in the retail department—the house is both wholesale and retail—we have no other retail place in London—I followed Moore and Russell to Fleet Street, and down a narrow turning on to the Thames Embankment to the corner of Blackfriars Bridge, where I spoke to a policeman, who took them into custody and took the parcel from Mooie, put it under his own aim, and a second policeman took hold of Russell—they were taken to Bridewell Police Station—I charged them—I examined the parcel—the paper covering most have been turned in the van, for it had the address inside: "Mrs. Honey wood, care of Mr. Adcock, H. Hoare & Co, 11, Billiter Square, E. C."—the parcel ought not to have been on Curtice's van, but was to be delivered by our own van—from inquiries at West Sraithfield I went to Blackfriars Bridge Station, and found Fisher and Thompson—I said, "You are Curtice & Son?"—Fisher said, "Yes, sir"—I said, "You have been to Spencer, Turner and Boldero's to-day for a load?"—Fisher said, "Yes, these are some of the goods on my van now"—I had asked a policeman to go with me—I said, "L shall have to take you to the Police-station"—the policeman arrested Fisher end thompson.
Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. I do not remember seeing this outer paper wrapper—I understand Russell has been formerly employed by Curtice's—I believe he had come to our place for parcels—a good many vans load at (he dock, and our warehouse sometimes—Fisher was unloading at Blackfriars.
ARTHUR WILLIAM THEOBALD . I am a packer in the prosecutors' service—I tied up this parcel and put it in its proper place for dispatch—I have the slip which came down with it—the address was not then on it.
Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. I remember the parcel by my signature being on the slip—the address is not on a parcel when I make it up—I know from the slip what to put in the parcel.
WILLIAM CANFIELD . I am under-foreman loader—on the evening of June 15th I saw this parcel on the bank where the vans are loaded—I saw Thompson take it and put it in the van—it was directed—I did not read the address—I saw the white label—I had a suspicion and watched—I had no instructions to watch the prisoners—I told Mr. Munro what I had seen—I did not know it was a town parcel till it came back—I accused the boy of putting the parcel in wrong—I said, "You have got a parcel that does not belong to you"—the parcel was against the door of
the packing-room, with others—from the place the by took it I concluded it was a town parcel—the boy said, "No; it belongs to our lot."
Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. There were a lot of vans and a lot of parcels—I was watching at the other end; I had been directed to watch—not any particular vans—I am supposed to look after the parcels.
FREDERICK WADE (City Detective.) On June 15th I was outside the prosecutors' premises—I saw Moore and Russell there—Curtice's van was driven up by Fisher—Thompson was the van boy—Moore and Russell had been standing opposite about half an hour—a short distance down they jumped on the van—they went inside the passage and spoke together, and then Moore and Russell went into a coffee-house till the van came out again—they followed a short distance, then jumped on the van—I followed with another officer in a cart, the horse being driven by the other officer down the Tottenham Court Road—after about ten minutes, through the traffic, I lost sight of them—I had watched them on the previous Friday, when I saw Moore, the carman, the van boy, another man called Piggy, and another named Taylor—they went to Smithfield in the van—we lost sight of them—I watched again on Tuesday, June 14th—I saw the five men, but not Russell—I saw them several times riding on the van.
Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. I have made inquiries—Fisher was I believe, employed by Dartnell and Co. and by Saunders and Co.—he is twenty-one, and has a wife and child—he has been about two months employed by Curtice and Co.—I believe Russell has been a carman of Curtice's.
Cross-examined by Russell. I saw the van come into the yard—you had been a good half-hour before that in the street opposite—I only saw that one of Curtice's vans that day—I believe there was another.
ALFRED OSBORNE . I am manager of the London branch of Curtice and Sons, Limited—we collect parcels for the country from Spencer, Turner, and Boldero's—Fisher was a driver—he had been in our service about six weeks—Thompson was the van boy—the parcels were brought to our offices at West Smithfield, and from there sent to the different railway stations—Russell and Moore were not in our service on June 15th, and had no business to be riding in our vans—Russell had left our service about six weeks before this happened—Fisher took his place.
FREDERICK ARTHUR MEADS (214 City. I arrested Moore and Russell near Blackfriars Bridge—Mr. Munro first spoke to me—I asked them what they were going to do with the parcel—Moore, who was carrying it, said, "I am going to take it home"—I told them Mr. Munro would charge them with stealing the parcel from Lisson Grove—I handed Russell over to another constable—we took them to Bridewell Police-station, where they were charged—I went with Mr. Munro to the London, Chatham and Dover Railway Station—I told the other two men they were wanted in connection with stealing a parcel from Lisson Grove—they made no reply to the charge at Bridewell Police-station.
Thompson, in his defence, said he did not remember putting the parcel on the van when he teas helping putting the goods on. Russell said that he was asked to ride in the ran, when Fisher said he had a parcel which had
fallen among his lot, and he was afraid to take it back, as Jie might get the "sock" MOORE said that Fisher told him he did not want to take the parcel back, as he might get the "sack"; so he walked about with it till they were taken into custody.
GUILTY .— THOMPSON (who was recommended to mercy on account of his youth) , and FISHER (who had borne a good character), Nine Months' Hard Labour each. MOORE** Three Years' Penal Servitude. RUSSELL, Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted.
During the progress of the case the prisoner stated that he was GUILTY , upon which the JURY found him.
GUILTY.—He received a good character.— Judgment Respited.
MR. McCALMONT HILL Prosecuted and MR. BURNIR Defended.
FREDERICK WADE (City Defective.) On the afternoon of June 3rd I went to 75, St. Peter Street, Islington, a wardrobe shop—I said to Mrs. Linfield, who kept it, "I believe you have some sealskin jackets for sale?"—she said, "Yes"—she tool me to the first floor bedroom and showed me a box containing six sealskin jackets—after a conversation with her I arrested her, and brought her and the box to the station—in the cab she pointed out the man Palmer—I stopped the cab and brought him on to the station—I told him he would be charged with being concerned in breaking into a sealskin warehouse in Long Lane, Smithfield—he said he had bought the goods of some one, he declined to say who—I left the two prisoners at the station and went in a cab to St. Peter Street, leaving instructions to detain anyone who came—when I went back I saw Alice Palmer—I told her her husband was in custody—she was surprised—I told her she would be arrested for being concerned in it—she said she knew nothing at all about it—entrance had been effected by the padlock being broken off—we have the tools here—the front door stood open for the convenience of other people.
Cross-examined. About £700 worth of sealskins had been stolen from 2 and 3, Long Lane—those found are worth £48—Palmer did say, "They must have had a ship to take the goods away"—there are six skins found—this is one—there were seven of that description—the best one is missing.
WOOLF MILLER . I am a furrier, of 1 and 2, Long Lane, City—I was the victim of a robbery from my place of business between 13th and 15th May of 100 sealskins, value of about £700—they were safe on the Friday—on 15th we found the padlock had been forced, the beading torn
away, and the door closed simply on the spring lock—this is one of them.
Cross-examined. All the six produced are mine—I identify them by the quality, the make, and the lining—they are not all the same lining—two we manufactured from beginning to end, one was lined liy others and three were purchased—we sell wholesale, not one jacket.
FLORENCE GILBERT . I am the wife of Charles Gilbert, of 17, William Street, St. Peter's, Islington—on May 24th I was sorting downstairs at 75, St. Peter's Street, my sister's wardrobe shop, when the prisoner Mrs. Palmer, whom I had not seen more than two or three times, came with this hox in a cab—she asked me to help her downstairs with it as my sister had said she would mind it—she said it contained under clothing—I took in the box at her request.
Cross-examined. When Mrs. Linfield returned I asked her, and she said she would mind it—the box was locked.
MARY ANN LINFIELD . I am the wife of William Linfield, of 75, St. Peter's Street, Islington—I keep a wardrobe shop—the prisoner, Alice Palmer, asked me on May 14th if I would mind a tin box—when I returned about noon on 15th I found this box—I saw Mr. Palmer on May 14th, and after that, on June 1st, when he knocked at the door and asked if his Missis had been there—I told him no, and said, "She has left a box"—he said, "Yes, she is coming for it to-day"—both prisoners came on the Thursday evening, and the box was opened—Mr. Palmer asked Mrs. Palmer for the key—he offered one jacket for sale—the next day a detective-Serjeant came and took the box, and me with him—we saw the male prisoner on the way.
Cross-examined. I bad not seen Palmer till May 14th—Mrs. Palmer had made up little seal hats and fur trimmings and sold them to me—the prisoners said they were going away when they asked me to mind the box for them—Palmer asked me to ask a lady who was buying ribbons to buy the cape, which he offered for £7.
HARRIET GETTENS . I live at 7, East Street, Haggerstone—George and Alice Palmer lodged with me as man and wife—I first saw a trunk like this produced on May 23rd or 24th, the Monday or Tuesday before the Derby Day—Mrs. Palmer asked me if I would take it in, as she was going away for a few days—a little boy brought it—I stood it in the passage until she came, when she took it upstairs, where it remained till the next morning—she took it away in a cab—she was with me five weeks—she said her husband kept a workshop.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. CONDY Prosecuted, and MR. STEWART Defended.
CATHERINE ELLIS . I am the wife of Henry Ellis, a labourer, of 8, Wade's Place, Mile End Road—I am the prisoner's sister—about 8.30 one evening the prisoner knocked at my door—I opened it, and said, "Come in, Janey"—she said, "Come out"—I said, "I can't, I have no boots on"—she said, "Well, put your boots on"—I put them on, and came out—just as I got to the undertaker's she "digged" me in the face with a shoemaker's knife—I was sober—I had had no quarrel with her—
we had had a few words on the Monday night previously—I had not seen her since—I saw this knife in her hand—I said, "Oh, Janey, what are you stabbing me for!"—my brother works with the knife—she lives with him—I was cut under the eye across my face-—I am well now.
Cross-examined. I don't know what the quarrel was on the Monday—I had no row with her, and she can speak the truth if she likes, only a few words about a man she was living with, and my husband got seven years for shooting at me—he is a notorious character, and she has always thrown it up in my face—I did not quarrel, but I could not live with my husband because of his brutality—it was only jangle—she was working her way to Australia, where the man is she lived with, and I went with Janey to have a drink in the Welcome, and she started on me for nothing—she said, "You give your husband seven years; I am going to murder you"—I am now a quiet, gentle woman; it is not what I have been—I have been at the Thames Police-court—I had six months' hard labour when I was seventeen years of age—I am now thirty-two—I was married it fifteen to Henry Ellis—I live by making little boys' knicker suite at 8, Wade's Place—it is a respectable house—I had not any knife in my hand—I deny that I had a penknife—I did not attack you on this July 1st—you did not catch hold of my wrist—I did not threaten you—I never used a knife—I was not stabbed by a knife in my hand—it was only five or six houses down the street, and there is a chemist's shop at the corner—you asked me to come to the top of the street—you waited for me—there was no conversation—you rushed at me directly—my niece said, "Aunt Jane, don't dig Aunt Kate any more."
ALFRED WOOD (312 H) I went to Wade's Place on July 1st—I saw the prosecutrix—she was bleeding much from a cut under her left eye and on' her face and hand—I afterwards arrested the prisoner in the Welcome Inn—I charged her with-stabbing her sister—she said, "All right, I was coming to the station if you had not come to me: I had a few words with my sister; she had a knife in her hand, and said 'I will rip your f—g guts out;' I caught hold of the knife to try and take it away from her"—I went to 81, Earl Street with the prosecutrix, and up in a room she pointed to this knife and said "That's the knife that's done it."
Cross-examined. I know the people in this neighbourhood—Jane is respectable—it is the brother who keeps the brothel—the prosecutrix is a well-known violent character in the East End—she has been charged a number of times with drunken assaults—I have a list of her convictions.
CATHERINE ELLIS (Re-examined.) I never had twenty-one days—my convictions are no reason for my being murdered—I have been illtreated by my family—I had a month in 1891, and was fined 2s. 6d. or three days for being drunk—not six weeks in 1891 and another 5s. fine, nor in 1892 another month—I have been told I was drunk, but I did not know what I was doing—I never had three months—I have done two months and five days, that is all I have ever done—in 1898 I was fined not 5s. but half-a-crown or three days—I do not remember if the half-a-crown was in 1897—I remember 5s. in 1898—I was quite sober on July 1st, and never went out till my sister knocked at my door.
three months, not imprisoned—the other convictions in the list are right—I was present—I saw her on the night of the assault, but not previous to being called—she appeared to be sober, but smelt of drink—the prisoner was sober.
JAMES RICE . I am nine years old—I lived at 8, Wade's Place on July 1st, where Mrs. Ellis lodged—I was indoors when Mrs. Wells said, "Mrs. Ellis, come out, I want you"—Mrs. Ellis said, "I have no boots on"—she said, "Put your boots on," and when Mrs. Ellis had got to the top of the street she stepped out from where she had been hiding in the shoemaker's and stabbed her—Mrs. Ellis had no knife in her hand—both are my aunts—Mrs. Ellis is not my aunt.
Cross-examined. I have not been talking this matter over—a man wrote my evidence down for me—he talked with me at the house—he told me what to say—I told the Magistrate—I live with my father and mother—my father is a labourer—we lodge upstairs in the back, on the same floor.
CHARLES FRANCIS LESAGE . I am acting divisional surgeon of the H Division—about nine p.m. on June 30th I saw the prosecutrix at the Police-station—she had an incised wound an inch in length just below the left eye, a slight cut at right angles to the extremities, a cutaneous wound on the lower lip, and between the thumb and forefinger of the left band a slight lacerated wound—that might have been caused by holding up the hand to avoid the blow—the wounds were not dangerous in themselves, but owing to their position they might have been—this knife might have caused the wounds—I did not see any marks of blood on the knife—the blood would not necessarily flow the moment the wound was inflicted—it does not necessarily ad here to the weapon—the prosecutrix smelt strongly of drink.
Cross-examined. I should say the wound near the eye. was caused by a blow downwards—there was an interval between the wounds in the face—it is possible for the same blow to have caused them—the wound on the hand was more probably caused by someone else, and in her trying to avoid the knife in the struggle.
Evidence for the Defence.
JANE MASKIE . I am going on for fourteen years old—I am the niece of the prisoner and the prosecutrix—on the Thursday night I saw my aunts at, the top of the street; I was close to them—my mother wanted me, and when I got back they were struggling with a knife—a penknife was in Mrs. Ellis's hand—my father is the Brother of these women—the prisoner lives there with us—I know James Rice—I did not see him near; if he had been there I should have seen him—they were about six yards from where Mrs. Ellis lived—I saw Mrs. Ellis with the knife, and she went and stuck it in Mrs. Wells's fact—she said she would have her life—she also threatened Mrs. Wells on the Monday—the threatened me in the court, at Arbour Square, that she would have my life if I went up against her; she threatened me as I went by her.
Cross-examined. I am fond of both my aunts—I told the Magistrate about threatening my life—I talked this over with my aunt—I went home
with her—I do not know the knife on the table—my father is a shoemaker—this is a shoemaker's knife—I have not seen my father use it—the constable took it off the table—I live with Aunt Jane.
Re-examined. Jane is kind to me—she is married—she lives with my mother—she has been in prison since—she did not suggest what I should say.
ELIZABETH BALL . I am a sister of the prosecutrix and the prisoner—I heard the prosecutrix say to Jane Maskie, "If you come up to swear ray life away at the Sessions I will have your life, and I will bring a lot of little boys and girls to pay you"—the prisoner once lived with another sister, Mrs. Wright—she is a quiet, respectable woman.
ANNA WRIGHT . I am another sister—for some time the prisoner lived with me—I found her an amiable, affectionate woman—my husband is a fruiterer and greengrocer—we do not associate with Mrs. Ellis, because of her bad character.
NOT GUILTY .
FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, July 27th, 1898.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
GUILTY .— Two Years' Hard Labour.
MR. BOND Prosecuted, and MR. SYMMONS Defended.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. BRUCE Prosecuted.
WILLIAM REEVES . I am a hairdresser, of 61, Cable Street—about midnight on June 29th I was in Commercial Street with a friend when I saw the prisoner and two others pinning a man against the wall—they robbed him and threw him to the ground with a tremendous crash—I told a policeman.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I saw two others with you—they ran away.
Cross-examined. I did not see you with the prosecutor.
followed them and caught the prisoner as he turned into George Yard—when I arrested him he said, "I don't know anything about the man. I didn't interfere with him"—I took him back to Commercial Street, and found the man lying unconscious in the road—two other officers took the prosecutor to the station, and I took the prisoner—the prosecutor who was drunk, did not identify the prisoner at first; he did in the evening, when sober—he said he was the man who knocked him down and held him by the throat, took the money from him and kicked him.
Cross-examined. He said at first that he did not recognise you, and did not want to press the charge against the wrong man.
Prisoner's defence. I was forty or fifty yards away when the constable stopped me—the prosecutor said he did not recognise me, and said so again at the Police-court.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. WOODCOCK Prosecuted, and MR. SYMMONS Defended Jobson.
JOHN WRIGHT . I am a labourer, of 5, Chapel Place, Chapel Street, Clerkenwell—I was in Pentonville Road on June 14th, at about 1 a.m., when the prisoners came up and said, "What have you come up for, a row?"—I said, "No; I have been a friend to you long enough"—I turned round, and received a push and a kick from Skeggs—I turned to go across to the coffee-stall and punched him back, and then Jobson gave me a stab in the neck, and after that I got a stab in the back by a man not in custody, known as "Murk"—I went a few yards, and fell onconscious in Pentonville Road—I was taken to the hospital, and attended to there for three weeks.
Cross-examined by MR. SYMMONS. We had no quarrel before, nor had I done anything to annoy him—Jobson stabbed me in the neck from behind—I turned round and saw the knife in his hand—Murk gave me the worst stab—I am recovering, but feel the effects of it—Skeggs was the aggressor, but he never used a knife, he hit me and I hit him back—he kicked me on my leg and punched me on my back—I kicked him slightly—he did not fall—I am in the building line—I was last at work about four months ago—I earn a little money pulling costermongers' barrows—I don't ask them to stand me drink—I don't go round with my friends "knocking them out" when they don't stand drink—I know Cooper, but he is no friend of mine—I refuse to answer whether he is a rough—what business I have done with him I have had to pay for—I refuse to answer anything about Cooper's case—I could not give evidence in Cooper's case—if I have been in trouble I have had to suffer for it—I have been convicted of assault, I don't know how many times—I got six months about eighteen months ago—that was not exactly the last, there was one this year, two months for assault.
Cross-examined by Skeggs. I said nothing till you spoke to me—I did not tell the Magistrate that I did not know who punched me—you did not fall down and I did not kick you on the nose.
Re-examined. I did not start the row—there were four or fire together—one was Brown, who has got eighteen months for perjury, and another, Arthur Smith, was convicted at the North London Sessions.
WALTER SELBY (Detective G). I arrested Skeggs on June 15th with a constable at a house in Clerkenwell—he was in bed with Jobson—I told him he would be charged with being concerned with others in stabbing Wright the morning previous, in Pentonville Road—he replied, "All right"—on the way to the station he said, "I have had enough of Jack Wright; he constantly comes round to us boys and demands money from us. Last night, because I would not buy him some coffee at a stall, he kicked me in the privates. We had a fight, and he kicked me in the face when I was down."
Cross-examined by Skeggs. You had a slight abrasion on the right side of your 'nose.
By the COURT. The prosecutor does very little work, and has been charged on various occasions.
Skeggs, in his defence, said that the prosecutor was the aggressor.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BORTIN Prosecuted.
WILLIAM HUTCHINS . I live at 26, Liverpool Street, King's Cross—on Jane 25th, about 12.45 a.m., I was passing along Warren Street, counting some money in my hand, and I saw the prisoners and two other men—Lake struck me on my mouth, knocking some of the money out of my hand—I picked it up, and went to Tottenham Court Road, and gave information to an inspector, showing him my face, which was bleeding, and my hand was scratched—we went down Euston Road and met Constable 420, and asked him if he had seen Lake—Lake was afterwards arrested, and I was sent for to identify him, which I did, amongst eight others—I did not see Lake pick up any of the money—I had known him four or five years—Gray struck at me, but missed me—he picked up some of the money.
Cross-examined by Gray. I did not swear at the Police-court that you struck me—you did not deny being there when I picked you out.
GEORGE BROWN (420 D). I was on fixed point duty when the prosecutor came up with the Inspector, and asked me if I had seen Billy Lake—I said, "No; what's the matter?"—the inspector said, "It really amounts, I think, to highway robbery with violence; this man has been assaulted and robbed in Warren Street by Lake"—the prosecutor then went away with the inspector, and I said that I was going down Warren Street to see if I could find him—I went down Euston Road to a public-house and saw Luke coming out, and arrested him—I took him to the station—on the way he said "I don't know anything about his money, I told him it was an old grudge I owed him some years ago"—on June 28th, about 1.30 a.m., I was off" duty in Euston Road, and I saw Gray outside the Goat and Compass public-house—I told him I should take him into custody on suspicion of being concerned with Lake in robbing the prosecutor and assaulting him in Warren Street—he said "I was with Lake a short time previous to this affair; I was not there at the time"—on the way to the station he said, "I might as well tell you I was in company with Lake
and the others, but I took no part in the assault or robbery"—I took him to the station—he was placed with several others and recognised by the prosecutor—they were labouring men about his own stamp, and as near the same height as possible—he was asked if he was satisfied, and he said, "Oh yes, I am satisfied you and Lake will do for me," or words to that effect.
Cross-examined by Lake. You did not say going to the station, that it was a fight.
The Prisoner's statements before the Magistrate. Lake says: "This man Gray was not there. I was having a row with the prosecutor, but I never had any of his money. I know nothing about the 1s. 6d. I am innocent." Gray says: "I was not there. That is all I can say."
Gray handed in a written defence denying his presence at or knowledge of the affair.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Thursday, July 28th, 1898.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. PUBCELL Prosecuted.
ALERED DEARES . I am a salesman, of 67, Tollington Road, Holloway—on the afternoon of July 20th I was in Middleton Road, going home—some men came on me from the back and I felt myself pinned—I had a tremendous blow on my back—I had a watch in my pocket—I kept my hand on it, and the prisoner Woods came and rifled my pockets—he took my keys out of my pocket and turned them inside out, and gave me a tremendous blow on my jaw, and they all ran off—I was dazed and my head was bleeding—a cart was passing, and I said, "There they go"—my head was dressed by the divisional surgeon—I have not been able to go to business yet, and I feel the effects still—I afterwards saw the prisoners when they were charged.
JOHN EDWARD SPARKS . I am a carman in the employ of Dickens and Jones—on July 20th I was driving a cart with a man named Key at 2 p.m.—I saw Mr. Deares turn down Middleton Road and make water and King pinned him behind, Woods rifled his pockets, and Kendrick struck him behind with a chisel eight or nine inches long, which he took from his jacket, and the blood spurted out—they saw that I saw them, and ran into Camden Road—I followed in my cart, dismounted, and chased them into Middleton Road and down a court, where I lost sight of them—I spoke to a young man on a bicycle, and afterwards to a police-man—I went to the station next morning and picked out the prisoners from twelve others—another man was with them when they did this—I have since been threatened for my life.
FREDERICK WILLIAM KEY . I am a porter—I was with Sparks in a cart on this afternoon, and saw four men assault the prosecutor, and run away—King and Woods are two of them—Sparks chased them in the cart
and got out, and I took Mr. Peares into the cart—I saw a number of men next morning at the Police-court and picked out King and Wood.
JAMES WOODWARD . I am a clerk—I was riding a bicycle in Hungerford Road, and saw four men run up the road—I followed them and lost sight of them—I picked them out at the Police-station the same evening from a number of others—I have been threatened in the Market about giving evidence, but have not seen anyone here to-day who threatened me.
THOMAS POWELL (Detective Y). On July 20th, about 2.40 p.m, Deares complained to me, and I received a description—I kept observation, and about 4.10 I saw King and Woods, and took King—he said, "You have made a mistake, it is all up, Mr. Powell; I have only been out a week. Who said this?"—I said that several witnesses said that he had a turnedup nose—he said, "I thought my nose would do it; how much do you say he lost?"—I said, "About £1"—he said, "That is a lie; he only had 10s."—I made this note at the time—they were charged, and neither of them made any reply—I had seen the prisoners that day, about 12.30., within half a mile of where the robbery took place, and Kendrick was. about twenty yards away, coming down North Road.
HERBERT MEAD (650 Y.) I was with Powell on July 20th and took Woods and told him it was for highway robbery with violence, with two others—he said, "All right, sir; I have not been in this way long"—I saw four of them together a few minutes before the robbery.
JOHN BERRY (471 Y). On July 20th, about 6.45 p.m., I saw Kendrick in Randall's Road, and told him I should arrest him for being concerned, with others, in a highway robbery—he struck me two blows on my face and leftear, and kicked me on my right ankle—assistance came, and he said, "Let me go, I will walk quietly; I know what it is for"—I am still on the sick list.
Cross-examined by Kendrick. I did not handle you violently before you struck me—people came round to rescue you—it is a very rough neighbourhood.
The Prisoners' statements before the Magistrate. King says: "I never struck the prosecutor; we found him lying down bleeding, with the money out of his pocket. I saw him go down to make water; he was very drunk, and fell down." Woods says: "I deny that I went to the prosecutor's pocket." Kendrick says: "The three of us were coming from Camden Road. The prosecutor could hardly stand; he went down to make water; he was bleeding furiously; there was 10s. lying beside him, four half croons. I picked the money up. I never struck the man at all."
King and Kendrick produced 'written defences repeating the same statements in almost identical words to each other.
Wood's defence: I deny it; I was four feet away, and saw the prosecutor lying there.
---- I am the gaoler here—the prisoners exercise together at Holloway, and meet together—the schoolmaster would assist them in making these statements if they could not write, but no one would assist them in the composition.
by a fall backwards—there must have been one very severe blow or two—he is likely to suffer for some time—if will take some months to say whether he will suffer permanently.
GUILTY .—They then PLEADED GUILTY to previous convictions, King and Kendrick at Gravesend on August 13th, 1897, and Woods at Edmonton on February 14th, 1895. Three other convictions were proved against King, two against Kendrick, and one against Wood.
KING— Three Years' Penal Servitude. WOODS— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour and Twenty Strokes with the Cat. KENDRICK— Three Years' Penal Servitude and Twenty Strokes with the Cat.
The COURT ordered a reward of £1 to Sparks.
512. GEORGE WILLIAM FROST (29) , to unlawfully appropriating to his own use a cheque for £100, which he had received as a broker, with directions in writing.— Three Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
513. WILLIAM PAULET REES (55) , to forging and uttering the acceptances to bills for £247 10s. 6d., £230 10s. and £218 4s., with intent to defraud; also, to feloniously marrying Nellie Thompson, his wife being alive— Eight Years' Penal Servitude on the forgery indictment, and Nine Months on the bigamy, to run concurrently. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. SIMMONDS Prosecuted.
AUGUSTUS CHARLES BISHOP I am a labourer, of 8, Hale Street, East India Road—on June 8th, about 8.30, I had a fight with Johuny Benmore—I hit him, and he fell against the wall, and the prisoner ran up and stabbed me with this knite (produced)—I knew her before; she is acquainted with the man I was lighting with—my young woman was there, too.
By the COURT. A young man said that he wanted to fight, and I went out and said, "Do you want to fight me?"—he said, "No," but we fought—what caused that was I was in the prisoner's house one morning, about 8.30, and saw him speaking to my young woman—I said, "You shan't-work there any more."
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I ran after you—I did not get you against the wall—I opened the street-door and you ran upstairs—I ran after you, and said, "Edith, give me the belt you have round your waist—there were three buckles on it.
REGINALD CLARK , M. R. C. S. On June 30th Bishop was brought to the Poplar Hospital, and I found an incised wound on his right shoulder half an inch long—he had lost a good deal of blood—I stitched it up—he has recovered.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. She received a good characters and her master arranged to take her back into his employment.— Discharged on her own recognisances.
GUILTY .— Eight Months' Hard Labour each.
MR. SELLS Prosecuted.
ELLEN BUCHAN . I am married, and live at 47, Barr Street—the prisoner was my lodger—on July 18th, about 11.15, I was in the front kitchen—he called me up three times and gave me some papers to read—I looked at them and then he came to his marriage lines, and said, "What year was I married?"—I said, "1870"—he said, "How long have I been married?"—I said, "twenty-eight years"-—he said, "Take that, that makes twenty-nine," and cut me on my head with a chopper—I got to the door, and he struck me on my shoulder—an old lady came to protect me and I ran to the inn—I had had no quarrel with him—his wife had paid the rent—I saw Dr. Grant.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You were under notice to go because your language was so disgusting that we could not bear to hear it—you were always intoxicated, and came in and out twenty times a day—you asked for your rent book and your wife had got it.
CHARLES GRAHAM GRANT , M. R. C. S. I live in the Commercial Road—on July 18th I saw Ellen Buchan—she had a deep triangular wound over the left orbit and two wounds on her skull, all going down to the bone—this chopper would be likely to do it—they were very serious wounds, but not in any vital spot, unless there had been puncturing of the bone.
CHARLES MURPHY (508 K). I went to 47, Barr Street from what I was told and charged the prisoner with cutting and wounding Ellen Buchan with intent to do grievous bodily harm—he said, "I own I did it with the chopper, I hope she is dead."
Prisoner's defence: I was trying to find my wife and could not get a place to go to because they would not give me the rent-book. I had not had it for fifteen months. This woman is not married.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. H. AVORY Prosecuted, and MR. THOMPSON Defended.
JOHN MAGUIRE (Police Serjeant). On June 20th I went to 16, Dean Street, Soho, with another officer, to execute an extradition warrant on a woman who had been convicted of uttering counterfeit coin and had
escaped—I found her there, and the prisoner protested against our entering, and said that the rooms were rented by him—the conversation was in French—we took the prisoner to the front room, and as we passed the ante-room he said "That is my bedroom"—I went in and turned over the clothes, and at the foot of the bed I found this bundle of papers between the two mattresses—he said, "Those papers are mine"—I turned them over, and found these two copper-plates—he said, "You must have put them there"—I took them to the other room, and showed them to the inspector—the woman said, "I am not going to be mixed up in this business; this is your affair"—he became very agitated—the window was partially open, and he made a rush for it and tried to throw himself out, but we prevented him, and took him to the station—I then returned, and found a bundle of papers in a chest of drawers in the front room; these are impressions of the two plates (produced)—two pieces of paper have the water-mark and two others have a printed impression—we also found a bundle of papers, written in French, containing most minute instructions in photography and for printing, which even I can follow, though I know nothing about it—I also found some batteries and a bottle of nitric acid; I took them to the station and said, "Auffret, we have found these things in your place"—he said, "The battery was given to me by Angelito before he went to Spain"—I had seen Angelilo at the prisoner's place prior to his arrest—the prisoner described himself as a compositor.
Cross-examined. I know from the landlord that the prisoner's wife was living there a few days before—he did not make use of the name of Posini, the man below, when he went to the window, to get him up as a witness—the window is twenty-two or twenty-three feet from the ground, and it would very likely have killed him.
MARY ANN FISHER . I am the wife of Henry Fisher, of 16, Dean Street, Soho—we let apartment—on May 3rd the prisoner's wife took rooms of me, and the prisoner came shortly afterwards and lived with her, and paid the rent, and on June 14th he took a third room—another woman came afterwards who was arrested by the police.
Cross-examined. The woman who was arrested was there a fortnight—I had not seen the prisoner's wife since the Saturday before his arrest.
WILLIAM GRAY HAY . I am in charge of the engrossing and lithographing Department of Skipper and East, Great Tower Street—they engrave notes for the National Bank of the South African Republic—these two copper-plates are available for producing a water mark similar to that of the £10 notes of the South African Republic, but it would be an imperfect resemblance—the process on these two sheets of paper is one by which a bank-note can be photographed on a plate, and that plate afterwards used for engraving—two of these impressions appear to have been made from the plate—this paper could be reduced to the thinness of banknote paper by what we call calendering.
Cross-examined. That is a process to make the water-mark, and it represents it very nearly, but it is not as it would be done by a professional engraver—the water-mark is larger than that on the original note, but you must make an allowance for shrinkage, because it is printed wet—this is on glazed paper and very hard—it is evidently intended for printing from copper plates—I should call it a fairly good printing paper
—it is not a bank-note paper—the whole of this work is more like that of an amateur than of a skilled engraver,—the photographic process on these papers are to be found printed in Mr. Herbert's book, and refer to any kind of reproduction.
Re-examined. This is a genuine £10 note of the bank (produced)—there is a very slight difference in the size of the impression.
WILLIAM PERRY . I am employed in the National Bank of the South African Republic, 73, Cornhill—Skipper and East are the printers of our notes—this is a complete specimen of the £10 note which we issue—it contains a water-mark similar to this on the copper-plate produced—they are signed manually.
Cross-examined. The Dutch word for "Limited" does not appear on this (The toater-mark).
Re-examined. It is not on the genuine note—every word on the genuine note appears on the copperplate.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, July 28th, 1898.
(For Cases tried this day see Essex Cases.)
FOURTH COURT.—Thursday, July 28th, 1898.
Before Robert Malcolm Kern, Esq.
MR. BURTON Prosecuted.
WILLIAM HUTCHINS . I am a labourer, of 26, Liverpool Street, King's Cross—I was in Warren Street on June 25th about four o'clock—I saw the prisoners with two other men—Lake struck me a blow on my mouth and knocked some money out of my hand—I stooped to pick it up, when Gray attempted to strike me, but missed me—I gave information to a constable, and Lake was arrested—Gray was arrested on the following Tuesday, and I identified him from several other men—I have known Lake four or five years—I am certain Gray was with him—the blow Lake gave me cut my mouth open—it was bleeding when I went to the constable.
GEORGE BROWN (420 D). I saw Hutchins on June 25tb, with an inspector and another constable—he spoke to me, and in consequence I arrested Lake about five o'clock in the Euston Road—the prosecutor was bleeding slightly from his mouth—when I charged Lake he said, "I do not know anything about the robbery, I dealt him out one for an old grudge I owed him some years ago"—I arrested Gray the following Tuesday, the 28th—I told him I should take him for being concerned with Lake in assaulting the prosecutor and stealing some money—I took
him to the station, placed him among seven or eight other men, and Hutchins identified him.
Cross-examined by Gray. Hutchins did not walk past you once, or ask you to show him your left arm.
Lake, in his defence, said that he only defended himself, as the prosecutor struck at him, and he struck at the prosecutor, and that Gray was not there at all.
Gray, in his defence, said he was not there, but had left Lake about twenty minutes before.
LAKE— GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour. GRAY— NOT GUILTY ,
MR. TUDOR Prosecuted.
GEORGE BRADFORD . I live at 2, Caledonian Crescent—on June 20th my attention was called to something going on in the yard—I went out; the prisoner and his wife were there alone—I did not hear what was said, but he hit her with an axe—I rushed up; he said, "Leave me alone; I will give myself up,"
DAVID RICHARDS (208 G). About 5.30 on June 20th I was called to 2, Caledonian Crescent, and saw Mrs. Hume lying on the floor, bleeding from a wound in her head, and the prisoner stood in the room—she said that he had assaulted her—he said, "Yes; I did it with this chopper" (produced)—she was taken to the hospital.
ELIZABETH HUME , I am the prisoner's wife, and live at 34, Wharfdale Road—we have been married two years—I lived with him up to June 12th—on June 20th he called on me in the morning with his brother; he then left—I saw him again that morning—I went out and spoke to him in the front garden—he was talking to me very nicely, and I arranged to meet him on Monday night—he got angry—I turned my head, and he hit me with a chopper—I ran down into the kitchen, and fell down—I was taken to the hospital, where I remained for a fortnight—he was not drunk.
Cross-examined. I went into your brother's living room because I had nowhere else to go.
FREDERICK HENRY AUFREY . I am house surgeon at the Royal Free Hospital—Mrs. Hume was brought there—there was a scalp wound on the back of her head about three and a-half inches long—it was bleeding, and on lifting the flap of skin this piece of bone (produced) was attached to it, which we had to remove—she was perfectly conscious—she also had a bruise on her left arm—she remained in the hospital a fortnight.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MR. HENDERSON Prosecuted.
WINIFRED FITZGERALD . I live at 44, Well Street, Poplar, and am cashier to Mr. Beaumont, a bootmaker, of High Street, Poplar. About 10 a.m. on July 16th I was in the East India Dock Road, coining from the Limehouse Bank—I had a leather bag containing 10s. worth of
copper belonging to Mr. Beaumont—I received a blow from behind and fell down—I saw the prisoner, and ran after him, screaming "Stop him; he has got my money"—a man stopped him and the prisoner threw the bag at him, and got away—there were two other men who I could not recognise—I next saw him in the West India Dock Police-station and identified him from fifteen others without difficulty.
ROBERT BLUNT . I am a mining engineer and mine owner, from Australia, now living at Oriental Street, Poplar—on July 16th, about 10.10, I was standing talking to Mr. French, and we heard a shout of stop him; he has got my money"—there was a van in the street, and we did not see anybody till the prisoner came from behind it—he was running, with a black bag in his hand—MR. French tried to stop him, but he dodged him and threw the bag away—I picked it up and Mr. French followed the prisoner—I saw the prisoner next in the police-station, where I identified him—I noticed his peculiar face and high cheek bones, and big nose—I have no doubt he is the man who was running away.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. There were thirteen other men, not fifteen. Prisoner's defence. I am innocent. I was not there.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
MR. SELLS Prosecuted, and MR. RANDOLPH Defended Walsh.
RAYMOND BAKER . I am a butler—until July 18th I was employed at 31, Hans Road—on July 15th, about 3.30, I went into a public-house in Brompton Road—I met a man named Williams, and had a drink with him; the prisoner Farley and Walsh followed me in—Farley asked us to treat them; my friend did so—Williams went out, and Farley asked me to lend him 1s.: he said that he was a man of the world—I. said, "I never lend and never borrow"—he gave me a blow on my stomach, and threw a mackintosh over my face, and then threw it to Walsh—I still feel the effects of the blow—I followed Farley as soon as I could, but Mann and Walker were round me at the time—they tried to stop me from running and placed their feet between my legs and tried to trip me—I went about a quarter mile, and saw them in custody—I missed £4 and a diamond pin worth about £5—the police sent for me to the station, and I identified the prisoners, easily.
Cross-examined by Farley. I did not have a drink with Williams before we went to the Red Lion, we only had one drink—when I called a police-man you started running—I had about £4 16s., in silver mostly.
Cross-examined by Mann. You wore all round me, and you were running together.
Cross-examined by Walker. You were at the corner of the public-house when you tried to trip me up—I had been in the Crown and Sceptre, but
not with anybody—you were in the Red Lion, but not with me—I did not give you in charge because I went after the other men—I did not see you again till you were at the station.
Cross-examined by MR. RANDOLPH. Walsh caught the mackintosh—it was thrown by Farley, who struck me. I identified Walsh as being one of the men.
CHARLES WILLIAMS . I am a butcher, of Hooper's Court, Knightsbridge—I know the prosecutor, and on this day we went into a public-house—I saw Walker, Mann and Farley in the Red Lion, and afterwards saw Walsh and Farley in the Crown and Sceptre—Farley spoke to me—I had been drinking very much, and at the Red Lion I was under the influence of drink.
Cross-examined by Farley. Before the robbery I was in the Crown and Sceptre—I do not know if the prosecutor was there—I came over from there with him—I think we had several drinks at the Red Lion—you asked me to buy a mackintosh—I said I did not want one—I went out first—I did not hear you ask the prosecutor to lend you 1s.—I did not see any robbery done or any assault.
Cross-examined by Mann. I saw you near the Red Lion about an hour previous.
Cross-examined by Walker. I did not see you rob the prosecutor or assault him.
Cross-examined by MR. RANDOLPH. I cannot swear I saw Walsh in the Crown and Sceptre; I saw him somewhere—Farley offered me a mackintosh in the Red Lion.
WALTER WARNER (288 B) On July 15th I was in Hans Road, and about 4.25 saw Farley and Mann running from the direction of the Red Lion—I gave chase, and overtook them in Hans Crescent, after running about 500 yards—just before I overtook them Farley signed to Mann to separate and escape—Farley asked me what I stopped him for—I said I thought there was something wrong, but that if there was not he could go away after he had been back to the Brompton Road—he said he was a respectable man, but did not say why he was running—we went back and met the prosecutor, who shouted, "Hold him! hold him! He has hit me in the stomach and taken a sovereign from my pocket"—another constable came up—Farley did not say anything to the prosecutor—he said to the other constable, "I am the bloke"—I took him to the station.
WILLIAM AYRES (220 b). On July 15th I was in Montpelier Street—my attention was called to Farley, Mann, and Walker, about 3.30—they met outside the Crown and Sceptre, after which they parted—Farley crossed the road to the Red Lion—Walker walked along the Brompton Road, and Mann remained outside the public-house—they met again about four o'clock, and after a short conversation they all entered the Red Lion public-house and remained there about ten minutes, and came out and followed each other along the Brompton Road—the prosecutor held up his hand—I saw him in the Brompton Road about twentyfive yards from the Red Lion—I do not know why he held his hand up; I thought there was something—I commenced to run, and the three prisoners ran, too—I lost sight of Mann and Walker, but the other constable caught Farley—I know Mann and Walker well.
Cross-examined by Farley. I did not notice that you had anything with you when you were crossing the Brompton Road—I did not see any robbery or assault.
Cross-examined by Mann. I did not see Farley and Walsh cross the road by themselves—I do not see you every day.
Cross-examined by Walker. I did not see you rob the prosecutor or assault him—I saw you in the Red Lion.
ALBERT COTTON (453 B). On July 15th, from information received, I want to look for Mann and met him in the Brompton Road. I said to him, "Jack, I am going to take you into custody"—he said, "What for?"—I said, "For being concerned with another man, who is in custody, for stealing a sovereign"—he said, "I was only running after the other man"—that was Farley—the prosecutor identified him—the charge was read to them, and Farley turned round to Mann and called him a b—copper's nark.
Cross-examined by Mann. I did not hear Farley say that you had nothing to do with it.
Cross-examined by Farley. I was there when you were put into the dock, charged with stealing a diamond pin—I did not hear you call, Mann a copper's nark—you said, pointing to Mann, "He knows nothing about it," but I was not there all the time.
Cross-examined by Mann. I heard Farley say that you had nothing to do with it.
JOHN MAGUIRE (Detective, B). I saw Farley and Mann at the station—I received the description of three other men who were concerned in the robbery—I went to look for them—I saw Walker in the Fulham Road about 10.15 the same evening—I said, "Your name is Walker?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "I am going to take you into custody for being under suspicion of assaulting a man, and stealing a sovereign and a scarf pin"—he made no reply—I said, "Do you hear what I say"—he said, "Yes"—I took him to the station, and he was identified by the prosecutor.
Cross-examined by Mann. I never witnessed anything of the affair.
MICHAEL MORGAN (Detective, B), I received Walsh's description, and saw him in the Brompton Road—I said, "I am a police-officer, and shall arrest you on suspicion of being concerned with other men in custody of robbing a man of a sovereign and a pin, and using violence at the same time"—he said, "I know nothing at all about it; I know I was in the public-house that afternoon, and had a glass of beer. I sell mackintoshes to coachmen and such like: what business I do is legitimate"—I took him to the station, and he was picked out from seven other men by the prosecutor—he said to the prosecutor, "I will make you pay for this."
Cross-examined by MR. RANDOLPH. I have made inquiries about him, and he lives with his mother, and is a general dealer—he sells mackintoshes—I know there is a second-hand dealer in the Brompton Road named Myres—I do not know if he deals there—nothing is known against him.
Re-examined. He does not deal in mackintoshes only.
Farley, in his defence, said that he was selling mackintoshes in the bar of the public-house, and the prosecutor asked him to have a drink, and he asked
the prosecutor to lend him 1s., who made a nasty remark, and provoked the prisoner to that he shoved the prosecutor in the chest once, but he never said he had been robbed, and that he did not attempt to run away. Mann, in his defence, said that he was standing outside the public-house, when Farley came up with the prosecutor, who said he would give him in charge for striking him, that the two men ran down the street, and then returned to the Brompton Road, and that he had only 7d. in his possession. Walker, in his defence, said that Williams said that he (Walker) was in the Crown and Sceptre, and the prosecutor said he was not, and that nothing was found on him relating to the charge.
WALSH received a good character— NOT GUILTY . MANN, FARLEY, and
WALKER— GUILTY .
MANN then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony on February 4th, 1895, and seven other convictions were proved against him.
WALKER PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony on March 20th, 1897, >and four other convictions were proved against him— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour each.
520. GEORGE HENRY LANE (20) and EDWARD JAMES ELFORD CAREY , Obtaining by false pretences from Duncan Durward and others four pairs of bicycle tyres and other articles with intent to defraud. Other Counts—for obtaining credit by false pretences and conspiracies
LANE— PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. C. F. GILL, MR. AVORY, and MR. GUY STEPUENSON Prosecuted, and MR. WARBURTON Defended Carey.
DUNCAN DUBWARD . I am cashier to the Single Tube Type Company, of 7, Snow Hill, London—on April 9th I received this letter with a printed heading of 20, Market place, Kingston, and Works at St. James' Road, for a sample pair of tyres, and signed for the Crown Cycle Company "pp., H. O."—I sent a reply and a sample—I received another letter on 13th, headed in the same way, to which I replied, and on 15th I received an order to deliver to bearer three pairs of tyres, and stating that they would want fifty pairs—I received the letter of 19th ordering fifty pairs—we delivered six pairs to a man who signed our book in the name of Dawson—the value was £1 12s. £4 12s. was the amount of the next consignment, and £9 12s. a third, the total being £15 16s., including pumps—we have never been paid—three of these are our pumps that we supplied.
Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. The letters are not in the same writing—they all came from Kingston—the Crown Cycle Company is a swindle—I have not heard that Lane has PLEADED GUILTY to the swindle.
LOUISA COTTERILL . I am clerk to the New Cooper Cycle Fitting Company, Birmingham—I received the two letters produced from the Crown Cycle Company, ordering goods, and sent bicycle fittings to their address to the value of £5 16s. 3d.—I received another order, but did not act upon it—I supplied the goods on the faith of the letters, and believing the firm was all right—we have never been paid.
FBEDERICK SEDGWICK . I am working manager to the Dragon Leather Company, of Birmingham—I received these two letters in April last headed the Crown Cycle Company ordering sample saddles, in consequence of which I sent a sample—I got other letters asking for consignments o
goods—I sent two consignments of seventy-two saddles to the Crown Cycle Company, of Kingston, some tool-bags. and another consignment of fortyeight saddles and some more tool-bags—the total is £29 16s. 3d.—we have never been paid—I believed there was a genuine business and works at Kingston—I have seen at the Empire School of Cycling, Tavistock Road, Nos. 28, 30, 32, 35, 48, 51 of the saddles supplied to the Crown Cycle Company at Kingston, and some bags—this No. 51 is one of them—I have supplied some other saddles to the Cycling School.
FRANCIS WILLIAM ROSSER . I am a cycle manufacturer, of Birmingham—I was manager to the Cycle and Brake Company, of Henrietta Street, Birmingham—inconsequence of receiving this letter with the printed heading I supplied a dozen brake sets to the Crown Cycle Company, at Kingston—I received other orders in these letters and forwarded three dozen—the value of the first consignment was £3 4s., and the other two £5 12s. 6d.—I have never been paid—I have applied for the money—I believed from the letters the company was genuine—I have not seen any of the goods since.
ALBERT WILLIAM BREACH . I am parcels porter at the Kingston station of the London and South-Western Railway—I received this letter of April 13th, headed "The Crown Cycle Company," and signed G. H. L.," asking us to keep goods at the station, as there was no name up, and the place would not be open till the next week—I produce my books, which show goods received on April 14th consigned to the Crown Cycle Company, which the same day were handed to a person who signed for them as "W. Dawson"—I know him now as Walter Lane—on April 26th and on May 12th, andconstantly afterwards similar goods were received from Birmingham, and signed for in the same way and taken away—they were addressed to the Crown Cycle Company.
Cross-examined. I also saw the prisoner Lane at the railway station to inquire—he did not take parcels away—I never saw Carey at the Kingston Railway Station.
CHARLES ALFRED BALCOMBE . I am goods warehouseman at Kingston for the London and South-Western Railway—I produce my books—on April 27th goods were received from Wolverhampton consigned to the Crown Cycle Company, and signed for a person as Dawson, whom I have seen outside; also, on May 5th, two casks of saddles from Wolver-hampton; on May 16th two more casks of bicycle saddles; and on the 20th and 27th cases of bicycle fittings; hardware—they are signed for by Dawson.
Cross-examined. On May 27th T. Cooper signed.
FRANK PARKER . I am manager to Mr. Barnes, butcher, of 20, Market Place, Kingston—I let the defendant Lane, as Wilson, two rooms on first floor for an office in the cycle business—there was no business except receiving letters—there were three chairs, a table, and a piece of carpet there—in a few months I had had enough of them.
Cross-examined. Dawson came for letters—I never saw Carey.
HENRY HARWOOD . I am a canvasser—I was out of work early this year; the prisoner Lane employed me to write letters signed for the Crown Cycle Company "pp., H. O."—I went to the Kingston Railway Station with him at times—on one occasion he brought away two barrels of goods
to his house—I went with him to the Empire Cycle School, at Tavistock Place—I took a dozen cycle saddles from Kingston to his house, The Grove, Hammersmith; also two barrels of goods and afterwards a dozen bicycle saddles from The Grove to the Cycle School—I never saw Carey in the school; I saw him talking to the two Lanes outside—I saw Carey in the Old Kent Road once—I drove up in the trap with Lane, who left me to get home as best I could, and Carey drove back with Lane—they appeared friendly.
Cross-examined. Lane told me he was in Carey's employment a year and a half ago—I knew Carey had been in the bicycle trade for years—he keeps the school for teaching cycling—I considered the business legitimate, or I would not have gone into it.
WALTER STANLEY LANE . I live at 60, The Grove, Hammersmith, with my brother, the defendant—in April my brother asked me to go to Kingston Railway Station for goods—I signed for goods, "T. Dawson"; they were from the Single Tube Tyre Company—we took them to Carey, of the Empire Cycle School—he said, "These are not much class; only worth 3s. or 4s."—I subsequently went to Kingston Station, and got other goods—the signature, "T. Dawson" is mine—on April 15th I took away some tyres to Carey's—I was handed a note from the Empire Cycle School—the Tyre Company has it—I took five other pairs of tyres to Carey's—Carey said "It's a b—y fine room; you ought to get a van and go and fetch fifty pairs"—Carey supplied me with the money to pay the carriage for the goods and my fare from London—On April 26, and 27th I fetched more goods, also May 16th and 27th, including some cycle saddles loose from the Dragon Leather Company—sometimes Harwood went with me—I can only recognise one letter in my brother's writing.
Cross-examined. Most of the letters are in Harwood's writing—my brother paid me—I have received money from Carey—I am not more then sixteen years old—I left school about a year and a half ago—I was employed at the Civil Service Stores, Queen Victoria Street, between six and eight months—I left because I did not get enough wages—I gave notice—I was not dismissed—Carey told me to use the name Dawson—I will not swear my brother did not—I used to put T. Dawson or W. Dawson—I knew it was a fraud when I was told not to sign my own name—I never heard my brother was Wilson or Cooper—I heard of J. B. Wilson at Kingston, but did not know it was his name—Detective Felton first sent for me—I was subpœnaed—my brother had been arrested—I know nothing of my brother's statement about Carey—I made a statement at the Police-court.
Re-examined. My brother told me it would not do to use my own name—I was told when I first went to Kingston not to sign my own name.
GEORGE HENRY LANE (the prisoner). I first knew Carey by going to work for him three and a-half years ago—before that I was employed at the Civil Service Stores—I went to Carey at 81, Euston Road, a cycle school—Mr. Carey had an action with his partner—the school was dissolved and an Official Receiver was put in—then I started business for myself at Hammersmith—that did not get on—Carey wrote me, and I went to see him at 154, Camberweli Road—he said he was going to open an office,
and he wanted me as an instructor—he asked me to come in a fortnight's time—he wrote again, and I went and saw him—then a school was opened—I gave him notice—I saw him again about the end of the year—I remember taking the premises at 20, Market Place, Kingston—I was sent by Carey to find rooms for a cycle business at Richmond or Kingston or somewhere round there for an office, and after two days I found that place—he gave me addresses to write to from a cycling-book—he suggested the name the Crown Cycle Company, and the printed-headed paper produced—there were no works, but the landlord took me over a stable, which he said he would let for 4s. a week—I could not take it and arranged to meet another gentleman in a fortnight—no manufacturing was done at Kingston—I wrote about five letters—Harwood wrote some—Carey told me to get somebody to write them, and as Harwood had nothing to do and I knew him, I asked him—Carey said I was to bring the goods to him, which I did, as they came—he used to give me 2s. or half-a-crown in the day at odd times, and 5s. or 10s. on the Saturday—I took a lot to the New Kent Road, and Carey took some—I never had any of the goods—I have never had anything else against me.
Cross-examined. I have left school four years—I was a few months at the Stores, first in the coffee and then in the grocery department—first at 10s. a week—I left, to get more wages, of my own accord about three and a half to four years ago—I did not tell Carey I was doing well on my own account—Carey instructed me to use the names of Wilson and Cooper—I did not know it was to defraud—he took the place in the name of Wilson, and sent me down in 'that name—he told me he had had some printing done, and it was sent to him—I carried on business at The Grove as Lane—it was not fraudulent—it lasted a month—not as J. B. Wilson at all—I did not open a place as the Thames Hardware Company—not at St. Andrew's Hill—I have heard too much of it—I did not know the Crown Cycle Company was a swindle—I wrote many letters before my suspicion was aroused—I may have sent my brother once to Kingston, because I may have seen Carey in the evening and he may have said, "Send your brother to-morrow morning to Kingston"—I began to know it was a fraud when I was arrested—I knew Carey had not paid for a lot of things—I did not know I was going to give evidence—I thought I was coming to be tried—the police did not speak to me about it—I did not say to-day outside the Court that I did not mind doing two years if I got Carey twelve months—I know he has put me here.
Re-examined. The signature, "W. Wilson," to this letter is Carey's writing—this is a printed form of the Thames Hardware Company—I was up there every day—I know goods came there—I only know of £5 being paid there—Carey was the head of the business—this letter is his" writing.
GEORGE FELTON (Detective, City). I arrested Lane—he said that Carey was at the bottom of it—he eventually made a written statement—on June 22nd I arrested Carey in Tavistock Place, about fifty to seventy yards from the cycle school—I told him I held a warrant for his wrest, and read it to him—he said, "I have never had anything from Kingston; I have never been there in my life; Lane wanted to get me
down there—I would not go"—I said, "You had tyres from the Single Tube Tyre Company"—he said "Yes, I think two, one was taken off in my presence, and the other to the shop in the New Kent Road, and there sold; I ordered them in the ordinary way, and wish to pay for them"—I went to the New Kent Road, and found a shop in the name of Carey and Sons—I found 113 leather saddles—four are produced, they have been identified by the Dragon Leather Company—also 36 leather pitches, some white metal brakes, 4 box pitches, 33 gear cases, 3 rubber tyres some tins of oil, and a dozen axles—at the New Kent Road I found three tyres which have been identified by a gentleman from the Single Tube Tyre Company—at Carey's office I found unpaid bills and bicycle transfers of various makers—these are some of them—they are the names of makers which are stuck on machines.
Cross-examined. The Empire Cycle School is a disused chapel—from inquiries, I believe £4 a week was paid for the premises—I saw in a rent-book the receipt as from him and another person—two instructors were there.
GUILTY .—He was stated to have been suspected as a receiver of stolen bicycles for some years.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. LANE— Six Months' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, July 28th, 1898.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrance.
521. In the case of JOHN TRODD (41) , Feloniously shooting at Herman Mieksh Emmerch and Argo Valley , before plea, the JURY were sworn to try whether he was of sound mind, and upon the evidence of DR. JAMES SCOTT , surgeon of H. M. Prison, Holloway, and DR. WILLIAM HENRY SAVAGE , the JURY found him to be insane and unfit to take his trial, when upon he was ordered to be detained until Her Majesty's pleasure be known.
MESSRS. C. W. MATHEWS and BODKIN Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN
Defended, at the request of the COURT.
EMMA WHITE . I am the wife of Thomas White, and live on the second floor at 6, Carlisle Street, Lisson Grove—the prisoner lived there on the ground floor, and took in washing—she had a little shop there—I knew the deceased as a neighbour; she was engaged by the prisoner to do washing, and she had washed for the prisoner up to about mid-day on June 9th, when the prisoner discharged her—on that afternoon, about 2.30., I was in the Cornish Arms with the deceased—the prisoner came in, and said to me, "I can fight you"—I did not speak to her; I was too frightened—she took no notice of the deceased—the barman came into the compartment and put her out of the public-house—she went to the next compartment, and was talking: I could not tell you her words; I was too frightened to listen—I think she addressed her words to me; she took no notice of the deceased—the barman and the manager of the house came to that bar and put her out
and locked the door—I do not think I remained in the Cornish Arms for more than throe minutes—I parted with the deceased outside—about 5.30 that afternoon I was standing at my street door, when the prisoner threw tea leaves and greasy water over my hair and back, and then two lots of blue water in which things had been starched—I got off the doorstep on to the pavement crying—I was wet through—I went round the corner and met two policemen, and they came into the house—the prisoner opened her door and hit me in the face—I then went upstairs to my second floor; it was from 5.30 to 6 o'clock—between 7.30 and 8 that evening I was looking out of my open window on the second floor when I saw the deceased outside—she called "Broker"—I threw out the street-door key to her; she picked it up—I waited for her to come upstairs; she did not come—my husband came upstairs and told me something—I did not go downstairs.
Cross-examined. I was always too kind to the prisoner—I was almost too frightened to look at or speak to her—she had no reason to feel angry with me—we had never quarrelled before—the Cornish Arms is a few houses off my house in the same street—I went in with the deceased about 2 30—I don't think we were there a quarter of an hour before the prisoner came in—when she was turned out the second time she left me and the deceased in the bar—she went straight home—it must have been before three when I got home—I could not tell you precisely the time—the deceased and I had each had two half-pints of ale—the prisoner said nothing to the deceased—they seemed to be the best of friends, so far as I could see—for some unknown reason the prisoner squared up to me—I could not say if she was drunk—I cannot say why she squared up at, or threw tea leaves and blue water over me, or hit me on the cheek—I do not know her husband—he lived in the house at the time, and had done so for seven months—I did not see him twice in the house, I think—I know the Brokers—they lived in the floor but one over the prisoner's shop—I could hear people talking loudly in the passage from my rooms—I did not hear anything that evening—I did not see the deceased lying in the passage—I don't think she was rather a heavy woman; she was a small woman—when the deceased came in the evening, and I threw the key to her, she was not the worse for drink—I should not think she was, I had not seen her since 2.30—if one of the witnesses says she was I could not contradict her, because I could not say—I have been inside the prisoner's rooms—I was not in her wash-house on the morning of June 9th—I did not hear her say before the coroner that on that morning I went into the wash-bouse, and created a disturbance.
ELLEN BROKER . I live at 6, Carlisle Street, and am fourteen years old—on the evening of June 9th, I was at home—at 8.40 I saw the deceased going into our house—she did not live there—I was going in beside her—my" mother is Mrs. White—she married again—she threw the street-door key from the window, as the street-door was shut—the deceased took the key and let herself in—at the door into the prisoner's room on the ground floor the deceased stopped, and said something to me in her ordinary tone of voice—the prisoner was in her room—I had seen her at the shop-door a few minutes before—her door was shut—the deceased spoke loud enough for anyone in the room to hear—(MR. GEOGHEGAN objected to the words spoken
by the deceased being given in evidence, as the Prisoner was somewhat deaf, and might not have heard them)—after the deceased had spoken the prisoner came from the shop-door into the passage and struck the deceased on the right temple—she had this polishing-iron in her hand—she only struck her once—the deceased fell sideways on the stairs—the prisoner went into her own room and shut the door—I ran into the street, and when I came back I found the deceased with her head on the stairs—when I went into the street I called for my father, who was in the yard washing—he came—I stood at the street-door—after a little while the constable came, and my father spoke to him—after my father had come I went back into the passage, and saw the prisoner come out of the shop-door and look it the deceased, and go back and shut her door—she did not speak—the deceased was taken away—I saw the prisoner taken into custody that evening by the policeman.
Cross-examined. When I went to speak to the policeman Teet I had only spoken one word when my father came and told him—I never saw the prisoner strike the deceased with a stick—I came home at 7.30 that evening—my mother was in then—I had been upstairs and seen my mother before the prisoner struck the deceased, and my mother had told me that the prisoner had been fighting with her—my mother did not seem angry—her dress and hair were quite wet; she said the prisoner had thrown a lot of water over her—she did not say she expected the deceased to call—my mother and the prisoner have always been good friends—I asked mother why the water and cinders were in the passage, and she told me—there were cinders and blue water there—she said she and the prisoner were standing at the street door and the prisoner threw the slops over her—she said she did not know how the cinders came there—I asked her why it took place; she said she went down early in the morning at ten o'clock, and looked at the prisoner's window, and the prisoner saw she was there, and mother said, "One fool looks at another," and the prisoner came out and struck her—I saw the prisoner strike the deceased with an iron upon the forehead.
By the COURT. When I came in with the deceased and the prisoner came out into the passage there was no one else there at the time; only father was in the yard, washing.
THOMAS WHITE . I am a labourer, living at 6, Carlisle Street on the second floor—on Thursday evening, June 9th, I was in the yard washing—my step-daughter, the little girl Broker, called to me—I went into the passage, and saw Mrs. Murphy lying on the floor, face downwards, with her feet to the stairs, and her head towards the street-door—I tried to move her, but could not—I went to the street-door, and asked whether there was a constable there—I called Clancy, who was in the road—afterwards a constable came—I stayed in the passage till Clancy and the constable came—Mr. Murphy came back with Clancy, about five minutes after I had seen the deceased lying on the floor—I had not seen Murphy on that evening before—I have known him for years—I had not heard his voice that evening before he came with Clancy into the passage—I did not see the prisoner till the constable fetched her out—Mrs. Murphy was taken to the hospital.
Cross-examined. It is not true that was in the passage and shouted
out to the deceased's husband to stop kicking her—the deceased was too heavy for me to lift—I did not see any blood on her face—the prisoner's shop is on the left of the passage as you come in from the street—there is a separate entrance into her shop from the street—as you go up the passage you pass her private door, which is about three of four feet from the staircase—I don't know whether the deceased raised or tried to raise herself between my daughter seeing her and my seeing her.
PETER CLANCY .—I am a labourer, living at 1, Suffolk Place, Marylebone—on the night of June 9th I heard Mr. White calling out for my assistance—I went to 6, Carlisle Street, and into the passage with White—I saw deceased lying on her face and bauds, flat on the floor, face downwards—White and I eased her up on to the bottom of the staircase—I said to White, "Wait till I go and see if I can find Mr. Murphy"—I went outside, and Murphy was coming put of the barber's shop just across the road—I spoke to him and brought him over into 6, Carlisle Street.
MICHAEL MURPHY . I live at 6, Manning Place, Marylebone, and am a labourer—the deceased was my wife—on June 9th I last saw my wife alive at 6 p.m. at the front of No. 6, Manning Place, where we lived—I went upstairs to get my tea, as I had just come from work—she stood at the door—after having my tea I went into the yard and then had a wash and came back into the yard again, and after that I stopped there till about 8.5, and then I went to the barber's shop to get shaved—as I was coming out of the barber's shop I met Clancy—he spoke to me, and in consequence I went to 6, Carlisle Street with Clancy—in the passage I found my wife unconscious, lying with her head towards the streetdoor—a policeman came shortly afterwards, and my wife was taken to the hospital—I had not assaulted, kicked, or done anything to my wife in the way of violence on that afternoon or evening—the first time I went to 6, Carlisle Street I found her lying in the passage.
Cross-examined. I had not seen my wife at 6, Carlisle Street before that evening—the prisoner did not open her door and see me and my wife standing together—I did not see the prisoner on that night before I saw her in custody—when the constable shoved her door open and went into her room I saw her inside the door—when I said before the Magistrate I was standing in front of my wife when the prisoner opened the door the second time," that was when I picked up the deceased with Clancy, and my back was turned to the door and I could not see the prisoner.
WILLIAM TEET (116 D). About twenty or fifteen minutes to 9 p.m. on June 9th I was in Carlisle Street on duty when White called me to 6, Carlisle Street—I went in, and in the passage found Murphy, Clancy, White, Nellie Broker, and, lying with the back of her head on the first stair and her body stretched out on the passage floor, Mrs. Murphy—I raised her up; she was unconscious—I went to the door in the passage, knocked at it, and saw the prisoner inside—I told her I should take her into custody for assaulting this woman, Murphy—she slammed the door in my face—I knocked again—she then opened the door again, and said, "I do not know the woman"—another constable was fetched, and the prisoner was given into his custody—with assistance I took the
deceased to St. Mary's Hospital—earlier that evening, about 8 I was called to the same house, No. 6—in the passage I then saw the prisoner in the act of striking Mrs. White—I got between them, and told the prisoner to go to her shop and Mrs. White to go upstairs to her rooms, which they did.
GEORGE COLL (117 D). On the night of June 9th I was in Carlisle Street—I saw the deceased lying on the staircase at No. 6—the last witness asked me to take charge of the prisoner—I knocked at the door of the shop in the passage, calling "open the door"—it was not opened—I pushed it open—immediately behind the door I saw the prisoner—she spoke first, saying, "Oh, sir, I did not do it; I have not seen her since five o'clock. When I paid her her money I heard her and her husband having a row in the passage, and I heard him kick her. She has been drinking with the woman upstairs all day"—I had made no accusation against her when she made that statement—I took her to the Police-station—afterwards I returned to the room, and behind the same door where I had found the prisoner I found this polishing-iron—I handed it to Inspector Allison in the same condition in which I found it—when I found the prisoner in the room on the ground floor I saw no one else there—I searched both rooms—I saw nothing of the prisoner's husband in the room at the time.
Cross-examined. Teet practically gave her into my custody—he did not tell me what she was charged with—he said "Take charge of the woman in that room"—he was in the passage.
ROBERT ALLISON (Inspector D). At ten o'clock at night on June 9th I saw the prisoner at Molyneux Street Station—I told her she would be charged with the wilful murder of Julia Murphy, and that anything she might say would be taken down in writing and might be used in evidence against her—she then made this statement, which I took down in writing, and read to her and which she signed: "I never see the woman, Mrs. Murphy, until they knocked at the door, when Mr. Dickinson and myself opened the door, and I see the woman lying, and I said, 'There is a woman lying there drunk,' and I thought so. We came in, shut the door, and locked it again. I got nothing to say regarding the woman's death. I did not strike her, and did not cause that woman's death, Dorothy Dickinson"—I received this polishing iron from Cull, and handed it to Dr. James.
CORAM JAMES . I am a registered medical practitioner at 16, Thayer Street, Maylebone—I received this polishing-iron from Allison, and I made a microscopical examination of it—I found some stains on it which contained some mammalian blood corpuscles.
Cross-examined. The question of whether it is mammalian blood is determined by the shape and size of the corpuscles.
ALFRED SLY (Inspector D). I took the charge against the prisoner when she was brought by Cull and charged with the wilful murder of Julia Murphy, at 6, Carlisle Street—when that charge was read to her she said, "Never! never! I never saw the woman until the officer came into my room and laid hold of me, and I wanted to know what he laid hold of me for."
—I was at the inquest held on the body of Julia Murphy on June 13th and 21st—the prisoner was present on both those days—she was not represented by solicitor or counsel—all the witnesses were examined in her presence—she asked them questions from time to time—she was asked by the coroner if she wished to give evidence, and she replied in the affirmative—she was cautioned that what she said would be taken down and used for or against her at another Court—she elected to be sworn; she was sworn, and gave her evidence, which I took down in writing—it was afterwards read over to her by me, and she signed it. (This deposition VMS read as follows:—"I am the wife of John Dickinson, a coach painter, and I live at 6, Carlisle Street, Marylebone. I am a laundress, and employ people to work for me. Mrs. Murphy was employed by me to wash and iron. On Thursday, June 9th, she came in at nine o'clock in the morning to work. Everything went well until the woman White came downstairs and kicked up a bother, and would not keep out of the washhouse. I told Mrs. White to go out of the washhouse, and she would not do so. She made a terrible noise and bother, and called me foul names. I told Mrs. Murphy to go, and I would pay her her money. It was then twelve o'clock. She did not attempt to go. I said, 'Mrs. White does not like your being here.' Murphy said, 'Very well,' and went and got her shawl. I paid Murphy, and told her to come in the morning. In the afternoon, about three o'clock, I went to get half a pint of ale, and on going to the Cornish Arms public-house I saw Mrs. White and Mrs. Murphy there. I then went home. They afterwards came to the house and caused a crowd to collect. This was at five o'clock. Mrs. White and Mrs. Murphy came into the passage. I went into my room and locked the door. About eight or a little after my husband came in. He said to me, 'What's the matter?' I said, 'I do not know.' He had not been in more than ten minutes, when there was such a kicking and screaming in the passage violently. Mr. Dickinson began to cry, and I told him not to make me worse with them than I was. I was ironing in my room, and I had to stop my work. Then out came, the man White swearing and holloaing in the back yard, and washing his hands. I opened the window of my room, and asked bin what was the matter, and he said, 'Look at Mrs. Murphy, look at her now. She was not like that a little while ago.' I shut the window, and then there came a knocking at the door. Mr. Dickinson said, 'Don't open it.' I said, 'Open it and see what's the matter; there's something wrong here.' Mr. Dickinson opened the door, and I looked past him, and I saw Mr. Murphy standing leaning on the banisters, and his wife Julia Murphy was lying on the floor with her head on the bottom step. I said to my husband, 'There's a woman there drunk,' and he pushed me in and locked the door. I opened the door again and looked. Still Mrs. Murphy was lying on the ground, and still Mr. Murphy was standing, and I then walked down the passage and opened the street-door, and I called a policeman, and he came in. I then went into my room, and locked it again. A knocking came at my door. I did not at first open it, thinking it was the people outside. When I opened it a policeman was there, and he took hold of me, and said, 'I am going to take you into custody for causing this woman's death.' Then I
heard some one in the passage say, 'Get a cab.' I was afterwards taken to the Police-station. That is the truth, or may I never enter the Kingdom of Heaven.—DOROTHY DICKINSON."
JOSEPH OLIVER SKEFFINGTON . I am house surgeon at St. Mary's Hospital—on June 9th, about 9.5 p.m., deceased was brought to the hospital—she was dead—on June 11th I made a post-mortem examination under the Coroner's order—the superficial injuries I found were an abrasion at the right angle of the mouth, an abrasion over the bridge of the nose, an abrasion below and outside the right eye, an abrasion on the forehead, and a contused and lacerated wound at the outer angle of the right eyebrow; on the temple a small contusion—the skin was broken—this polishing iron might have occasioned that contusion; it is consistent with its having been occasioned by it—I should say it was a fairly severe blow; it would require some force—the contusion was the gravest of the external injuries—the others were more or less superficial and are consistent with having been caused by a fall—I opened the skull—there was no fracture of the skull and no injury to the brain, it was normal—continuing my examination I found that the spine in the neck had been broken in two places, one about an inch above the other—the piece of the spine broken out was wedge shape, the base of the wedge being forward—I think death was due either to such a severe concussion of the spine in that region or to the temporary pressure on the spinal cord leading to arrest of breathing—I think the injury to the spine caused the death—the injury over the right eyebrow would have occasioned the fracture of the spine in that woman, and so the death—her spine was quite peculiar, the bones of it being welded together as the result of spinal disease—in places the bones of the spine had become absorbed, producing a thin, rigid, and brittle spine, and the forcing of the head backwards, by means of violence in front, towards the spine would have caused the peculiar fracture of that spine as I saw it—I should say the force of the blow came from the front—having regard to the peculiarity of the spine one blow would have been sufficient to cause death—in my opinion if this had been a normal spine death would not have ensued on such a blow—the rigid and diseased condition of the spine was a contributing cause to her death.
Cross-examined. Anchylosis is the medical phrase for such a condition of the spine—I would hardly say that very slight violence indeed would cause the fracture of a spine in such a condition—I believe a case is recorded of a lunatic throwing back his head to avoid food being given him, and fracturing such a spine—it would not require much force to cause such a fracture, having regard to this woman's spine—the deceased weighed about ten or eleven stone—I can only say the skin over the eyebrow was parted—it is possible that if she fell on the edge of one of the stairs the injury would be caused—the superficial injuries on the face were all on the right side except the one over the bridge of the nose, which was central—they were all on the same side as the wound on the forehead—in my opinion those abrasions at the side of the face were the result of a fall, not the result of direct violence in any way—it is possible that fracture of the vertebrae of the spine would not cause immediate death, but that the person might have
got up, or moved and fallen—I don't think the bruises on the back of the head had anything to do with the cause of death—I could not say whether that might not cause one of the fractures—it is fair to say that with the spine in that condition, with marks of violence about the face and head it is impossible to say whether direct or indirect violence caused the death.
Re-examined. All the superficial injuries were consistent with having been caused by a fall, including the injury on the back of the head—they were all on the right side—I think it is very improbable after such an injury as the fracture of the spine that the woman could have got up and fallen a second time.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. I never struck the woman, may I never meet my God in heaven; from five o'clock or half-past till the door was opened, and she was lying on the floor, somewhere between eight and nine, I never saw her.
GUILTY of manslaughter. —The prisoner had been several times convicted of being drunk and disorderly, and of assaults.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
MESSRS. CHARLES MATHEWS and BODKIN Prosecuted, and MESSRS. GEOGHEGAN and HUGHES Defended.
AMY BROWNE . I was living as a barmaid at the Railway Tavern, Three Colt Street, Limehouse, with my aunt, the late Mrs. Truett—her husband's name was George Truett—he was in bad health, and on May 28th and for a little time before that he was living at Elstone, near Bedford, and my aunt, Augusta Caroline Tniett, was left in charge of the public-house—I assisted her in the business—the prisoner is George Truett's brother—about a fortnight or ten days before May 23rd I saw the prisoner at the public-house—he asked to see my aunt, but he did not see her at that time—he called twice that day, but saw her the second time—I heard no conversation between them—I did not see the prisoner between then and May 23rd—this telegram was delivered on May 14th at the public-house—a prepaid form of reply accompanied it; no reply was sent—on the afternoon of May 23rd I was in the house—it was my aunt's custom in the afternoon to take a rest; she left the bar about two—at the back of the bar there is a bar-parlour, with a couch—the door at the back of the bar-parlour opens into the kitchen—it is possible to get into the kitchen from the street—in the counter there is the usual counter-flap—by lifting that up a person can go from the public-house side into the bar, and then into the bar-parlour—on that afternoon my aunt went and laid down on the couch; I was left looking after the business—about three o'clock the prisoner came into one of the compartments, and I served him with some ale—he asked if Mrs. Truett was at home—I said "No, she is not"—I thought he was referring to his own wife—he then walked round to the kitchen door—I went into the bar-parlour—my aunt was asleep; I woke her—I had some conversation with her, and then locked the door communicating
between the kitchen and the bar-parlour—after that I went back to the bar—I saw the prisoner had gone into the street—while I was standing behind the counter I heard somebody trying to open the door between the kitchen and the bar-parlour which I had just locked—after that the prisoner came into the bar again—he went to the flap passed through it into the bar-parlour—I did not notice whether he had anything in his hand—as he went he said, "I will go where they are"—I did not stop him in any way—he went into the bar-parlour and I followed—my aunt was on the couch, sitting up—the prisoner went up to her—I did not hear her say anything to him, or he to her—she had no chance to say anything—the prisoner went towards her with a knife—I did not see him do anything—I ran out—I did not see his hand move—I did not see how close he went to my aunt—I saw him going, and ran out—I was in the par-parlour when I first saw the knife—he was right inside the barparlour—I did not see where he got the knife from—I ran out to call a constable—when I got back I found the constable in the house.
Cross-examined. When he went through the door leading into the bar-parlour I was close to him.
EDWARD NUGENT . I am 'a stevedore, living at 6, Chivers Court, Nightingale Lane—on May 23rd I was in the bar of the Railway Tavern, in the west wing of the house—the prisoner walked right through, lifted up the flap and walked into the bar-parlour—as he was going he said, "I will be where they are"—Amy Browne was serving at the other end of the bar—she looked in at the door of the bar-parlour and said, "Oh, he has stabbed her," and ran out—when we heard the cry we jumped over the bar, and caught the prisoner coming out of the bar-parlour—he had nothing in his hand—I got him and got his hands behind him—he said, "Let me go and let me have some fresh air"—I said, "No, you will have plenty of fresh air when the police come"—he said, "Revenge is sweet; I do not care if I hang as long as she dies"—I held him and sent the other man for a policeman, who came a little while afterwards—while I was holding the prisoner deceased came out of the bar-parlour, as soon as the police came in—she brought a large butcher's knife with her.
THOMAS JOLLY (201 K). A little after three on May 23rd I was called to the Railway Tavern, Three Colt Street, where I saw the deceased and the prisoner, who was being held by the last witness—she charged the prisoner with stabbing her with a knife—the prisoner said, "I meant to do it; I do not mind if I swing so long as they die"—I saw this knife (produced) in the house—I took charge of it—I took the prisoner to the station—the woman also went there, and was attended by the police-surgeon—the deceased gave me the knife—the prisoner said at the station, "I picked it up in the street."
JOHN BRENNAN (Serjeant, 40 K). I was in charge of the policestation at West India Dock Road on May 23rd when the prisoner was brought there by Jolly—he was charged with feloniously wounding Augusta Caroline Truett, and attempting to murder her—in answer to that charge he said, "I am very tired of my life. She took my money and property from me. My life is a perfect misery; I may as well be dead as live"—the deceased woman also came to the station, and in the prisoner's hearing made this statement, which was written down, and afterwards read to the
prisoner—he made no reply to it: "At about three p.m. on the 23rd inst. I was in the back parlour of my house Three Colt Street, lying on the sofa asleep, when Charles Truett, who is my brother-in-law, came into the room, and I felt something go through my stays, and felt a pain in my side—I saw a large knife in Truett's hand—he threw it on the table, saying trevenge is sweet' and ran out; I ran after him and called, 'Stop him; he has stabbed me.' The policeman then came and took him into custody."
Cross-examined. I thought his manner seemed very strange—he seemed not to realise the gravity of the charge made against him.
GABRIEL JOHN WREN . I live at 10, Marlborough Road, Romford—since April 4th this year and up till May 23rd I shared a bedroom with the prisoner at 10, Marlborough Road—at that time he was separated and living apart from his wife, who lived at Edmonton—in my hearing he was continually talking about his own affairs and about the deceased—I heard him say that on the night of his father's death he saw his sister-in-law (which one I cannot say) coming downstairs with £600 in her arms, assisted on one side by the other sister-in-law, and accompanied by a charwoman on the other—they called his attention to a noise which was occurring upstairs—that when he went upstairs she said, "Uncle, you will give me father's money, won't you?"—he said, "My dear, I have not got your father's money"—she said, "No, auntie has taken it downstairs in a bag"—when he came downstairs he saw the aunt sitting at the top of the cellar stairs—the husband was supposed to have gone into the cellar to get a drop of brandy—she was supposed to have fallen—she had then no money in her arms, the money was gone—he said they had had his money—he mentioned no particular names—on one occasion he said he did not want to die, but if he did take something on his shoulders they would be sorry—he said that Mr. Paul and his sister-in-iaw were keeping his wife away from him—Mr. Paul, had something to do with the brewery, I believe, and with the transfer of the house—on one occasion he said that he met his sister-in-law and asked her what business had she to go into Bedford about his father's property, and her answer was, "What business is it of yours?"—the prisoner was not living with me on the date of this occurrence—he left on April 28th—I last saw him Before this crime on Sunday, May 22nd—after April 28th I lost sight of him for several days—I saw him several times between April 28th and May 22nd—he used to go backwards and forwards to me, though he had left my place and gone to apartments opposite—I saw him on the Sunday in the Marlborough Road—he was stall living, after he left me, in the Marlborough Road—I used to see him nearly every day—he made a companion of me—his mind was greatly upset—he never seemed to get any peace night, or day—I myself had little rest of a night because the prisoner was so restless while he was staying with me, and as soon as his eyes were open he was talking about his father's property—he had those things on the brain and was always talking about them—I formed an opinion with regard to his mind and many others did also.
Cross-examined. He complained of great pain in his head and back—he said his wife and others had been tampering with his food and had
been administering something to him—they had been giving him a dose, like his poor father had had—he said people used to follow him about—if any strange persons appeared in the neighbourhood and took any notice of him he wanted to know who they were, and said they were hunting him down—if I spoke to my daughter or my daughter to me his eyes were on us both—he was very suspicious in every way—he told me he was present when his father died, and that he never wished to see anyone like his poor father, because his eyes darted out of his head about two inches—he said his father died very hard—he died in a fit—I formed an opinion as to whether he was right or wrong in his mind—I saw him four or five times in a day.
Re-examined. He was a labourer by trade, and worked at excavating—he was not an employe' at the time—he was last employed on ground he purchased from me—he assisted in digging the post holes and doing the concrete, and so on, when he lodged with me in April; he did his work well; I said what a good working man he was—I have had charge of a few men in my time, and I can always tell men who work well—he was a hard-working man: the work he did was purely manual.
CHARLES BURCHELL . I am a solicitor, of 85, Gracechurch Street—I was one of the executors of the will of Robert Truett, the prisoner's father; he died early in this year, and his estate then had to be realised and divided equally between his three sons, Charles, James, and George; after the will had gone to probate the estate was equally divided between them, and each was paid his fair share—there was a proper deed of release, a proper set of accounts got out, and each of the residuary legatees signed the accounts, and each executed the deed of release and were satisfied with respect to the executors—accounts vouching that were found on the prisoner—these are the receipts, showing that each has been paid—I cannot see any reason he had to complain of an unequal division of his father's property—he never complained of the executors—there was always something peculiar about him, a sort of dissatisfaction with everybody and everything—I don't believe he thought the executors were doing him justice, but he never told me so—I always looked upon him as an intagonistic client; I never looked upon him as sympathetic; if be could have found fault with me he would have done so, I think.
Cross-examined. His share in the estate came to £712 9s,—his father had kept a beer-house—the prisoner had the same sum as the others—he was not in want—from the inquiries I have made I have satisfied myself that his story about £600 being taken away and hidden in the cellar is a myth—I should say it is impossible from the class of business the father did that £600 should bestowed away—since I have been the only executor I have had letters from four or five solicitors asking for statements of the accounts on his behalf—that was after I settled the accounts and paid. the cheques.
JAMES JOHN MACANDREW . I practise as a medical man—I went to the West India Road Police-station on May 23rd—I saw the deceased—she was suffering from a incised wound below the left breast, and from shock—I dressed the wound, and sent her to the London Hospital—it was slight shock—it was increased—she vomited blood, showing internal haemorrhage.
—on May 23rd the deceased was admitted suffering from a wound in the abdomen about one and a quarter inch long and five or six inches deep—it was such a wound as might have been caused by this knife—she remained in the hospital till June 17th, when she died about six p.m., the cause of death being peritonitis induced by the wound—to inflict that wound considerable force would be employed—I made a post-mortem, and ascertained that the cause of death was the wound, followed by peritonitis.
JAMES TRUETT (not examined in chief). Cross-examined. I am the prisoner's younger brother—I am a beer retailer—I was examined before the Coroner—on Saturday, May 21st, the prisoner called on me—he seemed very strange in his manner—he said his wife and children had left home—they had parted—he asked me if I had seen his wife—I said no—I said, "Don't you come and bother me again"—because he was so rambling I could not get anything out of him—he went from one thing to another—he said a bag of money was missing somewhere, and he wanted to find out where it was—he said he saw the bag brought downstairs, and he believed the deceased woman had got it, and he went on rambling about something I could not make head nor tail of, and I told him to come and see me no more—I said if he went to where the deceased lived or said anything at all I should have to send for a policeman to drive him away—he complained on May 21st that people had been tampering with his food—that something had tasted very nasty—he said people followed him about—I said before the Coroner he was not accountable for his actions—he was drayman for a firm of brewers some years ago—he told me his wife had left him because she could not stand it any longer—she was frightened of him.
Re-examined. The prisoner has got his living by hard work, when he was at work—he was an excavator, navvy, anything he could get hold of—has been employed all over London—I could not say anything about whether it has been suggested that he should be locked up or taken care of to prevent him doing mischief to anybody—I seldom saw him before the last month or two; sometimes I would not see him for six months—twelve months ago I formed the opinion he was not accountable for his actions—I did not think it was necessary to take steps to have—him looked after; I did not think there was my danger in his being at large—I should take him to be mad—he would talk about one thing for five minutes and something else the next five minutes; I was glad to get away from him—I first noticed his odd manner about two years ago—our father died on May 23rd last year, and the prisoner has been wrong ever since.
AMY BROWNE (Re-examined by MR. GKOGHEGAH). A number of dockers and labourers used to come to the house for lunch—they brought their bread and cheese; we served them with plates, knives, and forks—my uncle, aunt, and myself had our meals in the oar parlour.
Witness for the Defence.
GEORGE ADAMS . I live at 2, Laurel Villas, Felixstowe Road, Lower Edmonton—I am the prisoner's son-in-law—on May 23rd, 1897, when the prisoner's father died, the prisoner was living with us; he came and told us on the following day of the death, and said his father died hard, and tad a very rough time of it—the same night I went and sat up
in the bedroom with him till he went to sleep because he was so upset—I do not know that he mentioned that he saw anything in the corner of the room—I remember he said he could see his father in the corner of the room—he was in a very nervous state, and I tried to cheer him up—I had to keep his hand in mine till he fell asleep—for a week he continued to talk about it, and it seemed to affect him a lot—he said his father had left £600 in the safe for him, and that the deceased and a Mrs. Roberts had carried it downstairs—he was every day saying we were poisoning him, and that there was stuff being pat in his food—sometimes when I came home from work and did not feel as though I wanted any supper the prisoner would not have any supper, so just to satisfy him I used to eat something, to show there was nothing the matter with it—he said there was someone in London sending down people to get him out of the way—he was not drinking when he said those things, so far as I know—his wife said I should have to bring in a doctor to him—he said, "You bring in a doctor here, and I will throw him out, and you after him"—he was continually taking linseed oil and Epsom salts to make him vomit—he used to go into the garden and try to be sick after his meals and before, because he said we were all administering something to him.
Cross-examined. This vomiting was a week or two after his father's death—everything I have been speaking of dates from his father's death—he had been rather strange before, but that was when he had been drinking—he drank very heavily at one time, on and of: sometimes he would keep himself right, and then he would go on again, perhaps for a week or a fortnight—I 'believe he gave it up—I could tell whether he had been in drink by the expression of his face, and he kept indoors of late—the latter part of his time with us he did not drink—I had him under my observation when I was at home, and my wife said he had not been out all day—before his father's death be gave up drink; I don't think he has broken out since: only once, in April this year, I fancy—he only came home drunk once; I spoke to him about it afterwards—it was only one day; next morning he said he was very sorry—I did not see him the worse for drink after that—I was not living with him in April—he left us on April 4th, I think, and did not come back any more—I do not know if he was drinking to excess in May just before he committed this offence—I did not see him—he had been away then—I had not seen him after April.
Re-examined. I am a teetotaller—from the time of his father's death I think he was only under the influence of drink on one day—when he was sober he made the statements about persons following him, and about his food, and so on.
GUILTY of the act, but insane at the time of its commission so as not to be responsible. — To be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure.
FOURTH COURT.—Friday, July 29th, 1898.
MR. BUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. HUGHES Defended.
GUILTY of an indecent assault. — Two Years' Hard Labour.
OLD COURT.—Friday and Saturday, July 29th and 30th, 1898.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrance,
525. VICTOR HONOUR (40), ALFRED JOHN MONSON (36), and ROBERT IVES METCALFE (36) , Unlawfully obtaining from the Norwich Union Life Insurance Society a policy of insurance for £1,000 on the life of Percival Edward Norgate, and an order for the payment of £6 10s. by false pretences with intent to defraud. Other counts, For conspiracy.
MR. C. W. MATHEWS and MR. H. AVORY Prosecuted; MR. MARSHALL HALL, Q.C., MR. BODKIN and MR. RANDOLPH Defended Honour; MR. RAWLINSON, Q.C., MR. HUTTON, and MR. CLAUDB GORDON Defended Monton; and MR. H. C. RICHARDS, Q.C., and MR. COYLEB Defended Metcalfe.
PERCIVAL EDWARD NORGATE . I have no occupation; I am twentyeight years old—my father is the Rector of Holywell, near St. Ives, in Huntingdonshire—I came to London some years ago, and was articled to a solicitor, living upon an allowance from my father—in 1893 I made Honour's acquaintance—he was then carrying on business as a moneylender at 26, Moorgate Street, in the name of William Dent, and also at Canonbury Villas, in the name of William Shakespeare—I borrowed small sums from him, giving him as security my bills or promissory notes—about July, 1894, he alleged about £40 was due from me—I then required a further small advance, and on my applying for it he suggested I should sign a bill in my mother's name—I objected to it at first—he told me it would never be shown to any one; it would never be known—upon that I signed in Honour's presence my mother's name, R. Norgate, on two bills of exchange for £25 each, I think, or £30 each, I cannot remember—I got for them some of my old overdue promissory notes back, and some small sums of money—between that date and the end of 1894 I had other transactions with him of a similar nature, obtaining a small sum of money and giving him a bill signed in the name of my mother or father—they were all signed in his presence in 1894—about Christmas, 1894, he was threatening some proceedings against me on those bills, and it being pressed, I telegraphed this message addressed to Milton 131, Jermyn Street, "Writing you to-night; do nothing until you have had letter"—I followed that by this letter dated December 27th, written from Holywell Rectory—-(Stating that he would catt on Monday, as he wished to arrange about the last documents and redeem them, and a cheque and pawn-tickets; that he had wired that afternoon, an he was particularly anxious that his mother should not know about the form the bills were in, and hoped that Milton would not write to her)—on January 7th, 1895, Honour commenced an action in the Mayor's Court, London, against my father and myself on one of the bills for £20—my father spoke to me about the matter—my mother came to London, and we went to Honours office in Moorgate Street—in my presence my mother paid Honour £20—subsequently she paid him a further sum of £60 at Canonbury Villas (where he lived) to settle this action, and all claims that he had at that time—his clerk handed her the bills I had signed in her and my father's names—my mother told him at Moorgate Street that she had not signed
those bills, and that she would not be a party to any bills, and told him that if he lent me any more money she would not pay it again—notwith-standing that, during 1895 I borrowed further sums from Honour, and as security for those I gave bills, some of them signed in my father's name—the same sort of bills—they were also signed in Honour's presence—in January, 1896, I went through the bills with him, and he agreed to take a promissory note for £120, repayable £4 a month, in settlement of the bills he then had—I wrote out on a piece of paper at his dictation a form of promissory note, which I was to bring him with my mother's signature, and I took it away for the purpose, as I suggested, of getting my mother's signature—it was made payable to either Josephine Urbanowski or Josephine Urbanowski and Co.—I brought it back to Honour with the signature R. Norgate—I had mentioned to him in December, 1894, that I had a reversionary interest contingent on my surviving my father and mother—I paid the February and March instalments of £4; when the third month's became due I was unable to pay it—Honour then suggested I should ensure my life for £200, and he would take the policy, and pay the premiums, in substitution of the promissory note—I told him I could not pass the doctor for an insurance—I was suffering from disease at that time—he told me I could be insured for £200 without medical examination—he gave me some pamphlets on life insurance without medical examination; of the Caledonian office, I think—I was introduced to Monson at Honour's office in the name of Wyvill—I first met him at Honour's about that time—I had several interviews with Honour about the policy—he told me in Monson's presence that Wyvill was a partner in Lumley and Co., insurance agents in Shaftesbury Avenue, when he introduced us—soon after Honour introduced me to Metcalfe at Honour's Jermyn Street office—he told me Metcalfe was trading as Lumley and Co., of Shaftesbury Avenue, and he would arrange the policy—either that day or soon after, at Honour's office, I think, Metcalfe produced a form of proposal—I do not remember on what office it was—I fancy Metcalfe filled up the form from particulars I gave him, and I signed it—it was a proposal for £200—that was about the beginning of April, 1896, before April 9th—Metcalfe took the form away, and I have not seen it since—that was the only form of proposal I ever signed or saw—about that time I wrote out this draft assignment of a policy for £200—Monson had a book on life insurances, with forms in it, I think, and he handed it to Honour in my presence, and Honour handed it to me, and pointed out this particular form, and told me to draft an assignment of a policy from it, and I wrote out this draft—the date was left for some blank day in April, 1896—I saw Metcalfe soon afterwards in the neighbourhood of Honour's office—he told me he had arranged the policy, and that he should want me to endorse the cheque for the premium which. Honour was going to give him, and to assign the policy to Honour when they got it—a day or two afterwards I met Metcalfe again at Daish's restaurant, in the Haymarket; he produced this cheque for £27 on the Capital and Counties Bank, signed by Urbanowski and Co.—I endorsed it—I said it was a large premium for an insurance for £200—he said it was owing to my not having been medically examined they charged a bigger price, and that he was getting a commission out of it and
he would share it with me and Monson—later that day I met Metcalfe and Monson at the Victoria Hotel, Panton Street, and we had lunch together—Monson paid for it—he had some gold in his hand at the time; I could not say the amount—he gave me £3 and Metcalfe £3 from the £10 commission—Metcalfe told me to go to Honour's office, and later that afternoon I went there by myself for the purpose of assigning the policy—I saw Honour and his clerk, Winters—some blank forms of assignment were produced; I had to sign one, and I signed this. with my ordinary signature; it was then in blank—the £1,000 was not in it then—when I had signed it Honour told me the signature would not do, and he gave me this, a slip of paper, with my name, Percival Edward Norgate, written on it in someone else's writing; I did not know whose writing it was—Honour told me I must sign an assignment in that writing—I then signed some more blank forms of assignments; this is one—I made an attempt to imitate this writing—Honour said it was no good; it was too much like my own signature, and he suggested that I should practise the writing on the piece of paper, and for that purpose I took it away—I never after that date ever signed any other form of assign-ment; Honour asked me several times to do it, but I never did—I do not remember whether Winters attested my signature or not—I kept the piece, of paper until July or August this year, when I handed it to Mr. Sydney, a solicitor, of New Inn Chambers, Wych Street, who was acting for me at the time—on the day I signed the assignment form Monson gave me this, form of private friend's report, and told me to get James Winters, Honour's clerk, to fill it up as a reference for me; and Winters in my presence filled it up and handed it to me—I kept it—I was to have given it hack to Monson, but I did not see him—I afterwards handed it to Mr. Sydney, with the slip of paper—I don't think Winters asked me any thing; when filling up the report—as to the question and answer, "Are his habits in every respect strictly regular and temperate, and have they always been? A. Yes, as far as I know "; that was not a fact; Winters knew differently—some time after I saw Monson, and said that Winters had filled up the private friend's report, I had not got it in my pocket, should I send it to him—he said it did not matter, that they had sent in another—subsequently, in November, at the office of the Norwich. Union Assurance Company, I saw these two private friend's reports—one is signed "Fred. Perceval, Sherwood's Hotel, Adam Street, Adelphi," and the other "James Winters, Moorgate Street"—the signature, "James Winters" is not in Winters's writing, which I know—I believe, it to be in Monson's writing—I have seen him write—I do not know anyone named Fred. Perceval—the signature on this proposal form, which was sent to the insurance office, "Percival Edward Norgate," was not signed by me—it is the same writing as that on the slip of paper handed to me by Honour—I never authorised anyone to fill in a proposal form. like this for £1,000—I don't know anything about it—I did not, on April 23rd, 1896, go before Dr. Hastings Stewart, or any other doctor, for the purpose of being examined—I did not sign this paper, which purports to be a doctor's medical report on Percival Edward Norgate—the signature is in the same writing as that on the slip of paper—in July, 1896, I had not paid any further instalments off the promissory
note, in pursuance of the arrangement that the policy was to be substituted as I understood—in July I learned that a writ had been issued against my mother in respect of the promissory note—I went and saw Honour and told him he had not kept his promise—he told me if I would give him a letter saying I had passed the doctor in the insurance matter, he would give a letter to his solicitor not to serve the writ—I was told by Mr. Faulkner, a solicitor, that the writ had gone to St. Ives to a solicitor to be served—I thereupon wrote this letter, dated April 14th, at Honour's office, at his suggestion—I do not know if it was his language—the Madame to whom it is addressed is Madame Urbanowski—the address, 35, Keppel Street, Russel Square, is where I had lived in January and February, 1896—not after March—I was not living there in July when I wrote this letter, dated April 14th, 1896—April 14th was supposed to be the date of the supposed examination by the doctor—it was a wrong date—my birthday is April 9th, and Honour thought I saw the doctor shortly after my birthday—(The letter was to the effect that he should be able soon to deposit with her the life policy by way of equitable mortgage for the money he owed on Herbert's bills and other accounts; that he had that day attended with Mr. Metcalfe and passed the doctor; and that the policy would be for £1,000 on the Norwich Union Lift Office.)—I handed that letter to Honour, and he gave me in exchange a letter of authority to his solicitor not to serve the writ that had been sent down to St. Ives—I took that letter to Mr. Faulkner—the writ was not served then; but about the end of October, 1896, I heard that the same writ bad been served on my mother at St. Ives—I saw Mr. Sydney about it in July, and made a statement about the insurance when it was first issued, and I saw him again when I heard it had been served—at the end of October or the beginning of November I went with him to the Norwich Union Office, in Fleet Street, and I then saw this proposal form and these private friends' reports—by arrangement I met Dr. Hastings Stewart at the office the same day—Sydney defended the action against my mother under Order 14; there was application for judgment under Order 14, and she put in an affidavit in answer, and leave to defend was given unconditionally, I believe—in March or April, 1897, the action came on for trial, and judgment was allowed to go by default—in February, 1898, my father and mother settled Honour's claim against them by paying £150 in cash and giving a promissory note for £60, making £210 in all for the bill for £120; interest and costs—I heard no more of the matter till March this year, when Inspector Arrow saw me—I made a statement to him.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. I am twenty-eight years old—I came to London about ten years ago—my father is a country clergyman with fair, but not large, means—I was articled to a firstclass firm of solicitors—I served the full term of my articles, and passed all the examinations, and became fully qualified to take out my certificate as a solicitor—I knew Honour three or four months before my articles expired; I think it was before or about the time I passed my final examination—Mr. Myers, a solicitor, introduced me and a friend of mine to Honour—at that time I was in receipt of some allowance from my people—before I went to Honour I might have owed my landlord and tailor something, but I owed no bills—I was not hopelessly in debt—I had not
been gambling or horse-racing—I did not tell Honour I had got into trouble gambling—I went to him first as a surety for a friend, Mr. Oddy—I did not introduce him to Honour—Mr. Myers introduced him and introduced me as his surety—I could not tell if Myers was borrowing from Honour—I had not borrowed money from any money-lender before I went to Honour—I believe I wont surety for Oddy on a small bill about that time, just before or after—I went surety for Oddy on one or two bills which were paid, and after that in November, 1893, I first borrowed money on my own account from Honour—£10 was the first sum, I think—I paid him some, and then had others, and ultimately he said 'I owed him about £40—after I was out of my articles I was living on my father, who still gave me an allowance—I was not getting money from him for speculations at that time—the matter of Roberto was later—I got £2,500 from my father to invest in a business at Kilburn—I don't know that all of that was lost—I got nothing of that for myself—I was appointed secretary of the company, and had some ordinary shares given to me—the company is being wound up—to my knowledge my father has had nothing back—it was Honour's suggestion that I should draw forged bills in my mother's name—I had never forged bills before—I remonstrated with him when he first suggested it—he suggested it several times—when I first forged my mother's name to a bill I got back some over-due promissory notes and £10 in cash—I understood the forged bill was not to be presented—at that time I was in receipt of £150 to £200 a year from ray father—the temptation came from Honour—it was not my own suggestion—I was not trying to swindle Honour—I did try to deceive him as to the £120 bill—that was in 1896, I think—on the settlement by my mother in January, 1895, she told Honour she would not settle any further bills, and that they were not genuine—she had never given bills, and would not give bills—in spite of that I took Honour a bill for £120 purporting to be signed by her, and tried to pass it off on him as a genuine bill because she told him the others were not genuine—I did it with the intention of deceiving Honour—I made a declaration about it—I got back certain forgeries in exchange for that bill—some of the promissory notes were in my own name, but all bearing my father's or mother's name were forged—I signed all but the £120 bill in Honour's presence and at his instigation—he refused to lend me money unless he had that kind of security—he always held some bills, and I gave him others in place of them to keep it from coming to my parents' knowledge—other forged bills were given by Atkins and Herbert to Honour—I endorsed some of those over to Honour, but they were there at the time—I don't know if they were forged in Honour's presence—some of the Atkins and Herbert bills were taken to him, and some were done in his office—Honour had a tailor's shop with an office at the back—we might have written some in the office—I have not had £300 or £400 from Honour altogether myself—I don't know bow much Atkins and Herbert had—this letter of October 23rd I wrote to Honour—(This stated that as to the charges on Herbert's reversion Atkins had negotiated one with Mr. Cridland, and the others were carried through with Messrs. Thomas; that he VMS sorry he had endorsed the bills, or had anything to do with them, and lie hoped Mr. Honour should not proceed against him, and
would use his influence with Messrs. Urbanowski not to proceed an Honour was aware he (the writer) would not willingly have had anything to do to do with a bill if he had thought it was forged)—I knew nothing about Herbert's bill, and had nothing to do with it—I wrote that letter in Honour's office at his suggestion—the ideas were Honour's—the phraseology was mine—Honour is a foreigner—I don't think in 1893 he knew what a reversion meant—he speaks English, fluently and well now—I have seen him write, and could read what he wrote—I kept from my father and mother the fact that I had forged these bills—it was to keep it from them that I kept on postponing the evil day—I think it was in January, 1895, I first told my father and mother I had forged these bills at 'Honour's instigation, when he issued the Mayor's Court summons—I don't think I told them then that unless the bills were paid I should be prosecuted for forgery—I told them Honour knew they were forged bills when he took them—they came and took up the bills, and settled with Honour—I daresay I gave my mother a solemn assurance that I would not borrow any more money from anybody; I can-not remember, but probably I promised her—a month or two after I began to borrow money from Honour again—Honour was threatening to sue on my bills, and I palmed off this bill on him in order to postpone my parents knowing that I had again forged—Honour had the same class of bills; although he had got the money arid I had given the promise, I began again to forge my mother's name—I did not have them all back at the settlement—my mother got a settlement in full discharge—I had more money from Honour, and he always insisted on this form of bill—he did not take them in his own name then, but in the name of Urbanowski—then I tried to palm off on Honour the £120 bill as genuine in order to take up the bills which were overdue—I told Honour in 1893 or 1894 my father had a policy on my life; he paid the premiums, and that it was alive then—I might have told Honour that to try and get him to lend me more money; he wanted the policy if he could get it—in 1896 Honour claimed that I owed him £100 or £120, but part was for interest—I went about introducing people to Honour, and took commission from him; I was what they call a runner—I first introduced Mr. Garrett; I don't know anything about it, or if it was a dead loss to Honour—I know nothing about Shepherd's dealings with him; Shepherd was not a friend of mine—I never heard the name of Minn—before any question arose as to my insuring my life in the Norwich Union my instalments on the £120 bill were overdue, and Honour was threatening to issue a writ on the bill which I had palmed off on Honour as a genuibe bill of my mother; it was the only one he was supposed to have—he was pressing me; I do not know if he issued a writ—I recognise that you suggest the whole of the idea of this fraud of insuring my life was mine, and not Honour's—I told him my health was bad, and I could not pass a medical examination, and he told me I could insure in the same insurance company for £200 without being examined—I wrote this assignment (exhibit 27) at some period in the negotiations, copying it from a book—I knew a policy for £200 was olearly contemplated,—I did not suggest that the margin of security was too large, and the bill was only for £120—I know that when you assign a policy of insurance the assignee can only have a title to the amount of his
mortgage; he becomes trustee for the beneficial owner for the rest—I have been told since that £200 is the limit you can insure without passing a medical examination—I did not know it at the tune—on June 5th, 1895, I took a charge from Thomas Lloyd Herbert on his reversionary interest to secure £860—I assigned that to Urbanowski—it was all arranged before the charge was given—I did it for Honour's convenience—I always understood the policy was to be for £200—until I was asked to endorse the cheque for the premium, and to assign the policy I did not know the amount had been altered—I did not know what the exact amount of the policy was when I endorsed the cheque—I said the premium was too large for a £200 insurance—Mctcalfe said it was in consequence of my not having been medically examined—I said I did not believe it—I knew they had altered the amount then—£27 is a ridiculous amount of premium on £200—I did not suggest myself it should be altered—it was not my idea—I first knew someone had personated me before the doctor when Honour asked me to sign my name in someone else's writing—I did not tell him someone had personated me, that I had not been before the doctor—I thought he must know, giving me the man's signature—I did not know it was a policy for £1,000, it might have been for £200, or £300, or £400—I knew nothing of the original proposal being for £2,000 till it was shown me at the company's office—this receipt to Urbanowski for the premium on a policy of £1,000, signed by me, was given when I signed the assignments—at that time no one told Honour in my presence that I had been personated before the doctor—I never saw the policy at that time—I don't know who handed it to Honour; I did not—I did not hand it to him on April 30th, when I accepted the bill for £45 and signed the receipt—Honour did not, finding that I had obtained a policy for £1,000, tell me I ought to hold him harmless for his loss over the Herbert business in respect of the assignment—when I signed the assignment the figures were blank—I suppose the £860 refers to Herbert's indebtedness—when he asked me to copy my signature in someone else's writing, I presumed Honour knew about the personation—he asked me to sign an assignment of the policy and I signed it, and then he gave me the slip of paper as a specimen of the writing of the man who had signed it—I did not try hard and make a good imitation of it—some of the letters are slightly different to my ordinary writing—I tried to a certain extent—I had this piece of paper before me when I wrote this signature—I knew then a fraud on the insurance company was intended—I was not anxious to carry it out—Honour told me to take it home and practise it—I could not have imitated it then and there—I ought to have copied it better than I did, but I did not intend to try then—my mother swore an affidavit in the action brought under Order 14 at Cambridge, life ore a Commissioner for Oaths—I cannot tell the name of the solicitor—it is on the affidavit—my mother and my father met me, and she went with me while my father waited for us and met us coming out of the office—I believe she made an affidavit of documents in the same action—I do not know what Honour got out of the insurance policy—I do not suggest that he got a share of the commission on the premium—I told Mr. Sydney about August; I believe he went to the insurance company in September, and I went to the company in
October, or the first days of November, 1896—I wrote all this letter of April 14th in July—I don't think the postscript was written at a different time to the body—it was never suggested that I should go and see a doctor—Honour knew I would not—I did not tell him I was going to the doctor, and would give him a letter next day to say I had been—after telling Mr. Sydney I had been personated I did not go away—I told the company all I knew about it—I made an affidavit of documents in the Chancery action; that was this year, I think—I think my solicitor advised me that it was not necessary for me to file any affidavit—the company were in possession of all the knowledge I had of the matter, and I made no affidavit—I did not keep out of the way in 1897—I wrote this letter to Mr. Bentley after the Norwich Union had declined the premium at the end of June or beginning of July, 1897—(Stating that he could not turn up that day, as his doctor had given him some medicine to take for a day or two; after which he hoped to pass; that he would see Bentley on Tuesday, which he believed was the next day he had said Metcalfe would be up).—"hope to pass "means to pass the doctor—Bentley is a friend of Honour's; I knew him through Honour—he knew the Norwich Union had declined this policy—I told him by some mistake the company had sent me notice to pay the second premium; that was before they had declined it from Honour, I believe—that would be a year after the first premium was paid—I wrote to Bentley telling him I had had this notice—I went to meet him, and he told me Messrs. Newton and Co., on behalf of Mr. Honour, had tendered the premium, and that the company had refused it, and therefore he would not be able to keep the policy, and he suggested I should try and obtain another' policy in the Star office, because they were supposed not to be so strict, in place of the one the company would not let Honour have—that was after I had been to the Norwich Union and told them it was a fraud; at that time we were negotiating with Honour for a settlement; he asked for £1,200 to settle his claims against me, my mother and father, not Herbert's matter; I was not to be released from that—I told Honour that £1,200 was perfectly ridiculous; my parents were not in a position to pay that sum—I had not been a party to the fraud on the insurance company—I knew of the fraud in 1896, and I told the company about it—after that I still wanted to settle Honour's claim against us—I did not after that propose to get another policy carried through; it was proposed by Bentley—I won't say I have never done anything wrong on my own initiative—this letter had nothing to do with the Norwich Uuion—it was the Star office I understood from Mr. Bentley—I intended to go to the doctor in this case; I knew I could not pass; I thought it would have satisfied him if I could not—I was in London when the Chancery proceedings were instituted—Honour knew my address—I did not put myself in communication with the police—they went to the Norwich Union in consequence of a statement made by Mr. Monson, and then the Norwich Union solicitors wrote to Mr. Scudamore, acting for me, and told him Mr. Arrow had been to them and said he wished to see Norgate's statement to them, and they did not wish to show it without Mr. Scudamore'a consent or knowledge—acting on Mr. Scudamore's advice, I went with his managing clerk to Arrow on March 30th, 1898,.
and made the statement over again that I had made to the company two years ago—in my statement I said that the £120 bill was forged—Arrow said, "Will you let me have your address? If I want to see you I will communicate with you"—I changed my lodgings—I went to Vine Street to see Arrow and was arrested—I was represented by a solicitor at first; I wanted to get bail—I deny that I was in any way implicated in this fraud—I was a party to it after I knew of it—I should have disclosed it at once—I went shortly afterwards to Mr. Sydney and explained it—I was not in custody for a week—I was not invited by Arrow to give evidence—I was discharged—I always said I was ready to give evidence in this matter; I have said so from the start to the finish—I know that you suggest that the fraud was mine, conceived and carried out by me with the legal knowledge I had acquired as a solicitor; I deny it in toto—I do not say Honour suggested I should get a policy for £1,000; he did that himself—I knew it afterwards—I sent this telegram of January 11th, 1896, to myself: "Your father wires me to go home. Come yourself tonight. Arrange matter next week.—Mother" for the purpose of deceiving Honour with regard to the £120 bill—I do not suggest that Honour had anything to do with the £120 bill—I have always said it was a forgery of my own for the purpose of deceiving him, if possible—Exhibit No. 32, dated February and, 1896, which is a statement signed "R. Norgate," to the effect that she was possessed of separate estate, and gave her promissory note in exchange for her husband's bill, was all part of the £120 bill—I traced my mother's signature there from an envelope Honour had—we took elaborate precautions to try and ensure the £120 bill being right—I wrote Exhibit 33: "Sir, I authorise my son, P. E. Norgate, to receive my husband's bills in exchange for my promissory note for £120, which I have given him to hand you. Yours truly, B. NORGATE"—I gave Honour, as a specimen of my mother's writing (he asked for it beforehand) this letter addressed to myself at the time I was trying to mislead him as to this £120—he wanted it to compare the writing—the letter was written by my mother—I made this affidavit, in which I say the writing on other documents was my mother's, at Honour's sugges-tion—he requested me to swear it—there is not a word of truth in the affidavit—he said he should want me to make the declaration—I was in Honour's hands; he held the forgeries over me; if I did not do what he wanted he would have sued my father and mother on the forged bills—I was not afraid of his prosecuting me; I wanted to keep it from my parents, and not let them know that fresh forgeries had been committed—there were fresh forgeries in Honour's possession in 1895.
Cross-examined by MR. EAWLINSON. When Monson was introduced to me as Wyvill I knew he was Monson, and thought he was living under his mother's name for the time being—I don't know if Mr. Muldowny was there; I have met them together constantly—Muldowny is a friend of Honour and Monson and mine; I think lie is a runner—it might have been on April 21st that I was first introduced to Monson; I cannot fix the date—he knew nothing about me then—a form was filled up by Winters in my presence—I don't know whether this other one is filled up by Monson; the two forms are filled up alike, except that one says, "Yes," and the other says, "As far as I know"—I meant to give to Monson the one Winters signed; I understood he was going to send it in
—I cannot tell whether in the interval Monson received instructions from Winters to fill up another document—I may have filled in myself the propoeal form for £200; I have not seen it since Metcalfe had it—I don't think I filled up the names of two friends; I don't believe I filled up much more than my age and the ages of my brothers, sisters, and parents; just the formal part—Monson told me to get a private friend's report filled up by Winters, and I did so—I never heard of the name of Perceval till I went to the company; I did not fill in that name and the address "Sherwood's Hotel"—I do not know a Mr. Perceval; I have never seen him, to my knowledge; he has never been pointed out to me—I saw Winters at the Police-court; he did not give evidence there—I subse-quently saw Monson, and told him Honour had given me the slip of paper—I do not know who had anything to do with the personation and who had not—I did not see the amount of money that was divided at the hotel afterwards—I understood the amount of the commission was £10—I have since seen the cheque for £6 10s.—I don't know what money Monson had out of it; he had some, in his hand—Mr. Sydney told me that at some time in 1896, about September or October, Monson went to him—about September Mr. Sydney would have known of the personation—Monson knew Mr. Sydney was acting for me—in 1897 I was anxious that the whole matter should be settled—I did not know any of the Hobsons—I knew one by sight—I may have seen them, but not that I am aware of—Honour, Bentley and I talked it over together, and we were all trying to settle it, I think, and it resulted in the settlement in 1898, partly through Bentley, I suppose—Monson saw Mr. Scudamore, my mother's solicitor, about it—I don't know on whose behalf he saw him—that was two or three days before the visit to St. Ives—he was then trying to settle matters—I went to the company and saw the manager in December, and they knew all about the personation then, because I told them; every one knew it—the company brought their action in July, 1897—it was believed that a young Hobson had done the personation.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHAKDS. For a little time after I qualified as a solicitor I had a clerkship, and I have had money from my people, and I have sometimes introduced people to Honour—I have never earned my own livelihood from the time I qualified as a solicitor—I have not taught Honour all he knows of English—in 1893 he did not know what a reversion was—I cannot say if he knew what a statutory declaration was—J don't think I have discussed English law with him, but I may haw talked about business we had-in 1893 I told him I had a reversion, but I did not explain it—he has constantly had solicitors acting for him—I have not acted as his legal adviser and drawn money from him for it—I have had commissions from him for introducing people—I only had one insurance transaction with him—Monson produced the book on insurance—I did not produce it to him—I am quite certain it was Monson's propenty—I saw him give it to Honour at Honour's office at Jermyn Street—it was opened at a particular page, and I was told to draw an assignment from the form on that page—I cannot remember ever having left loagings without paying—at Putney I sold my home to pay my rend—I had a house there and my own furniture, which I sold for £26—I did not want a precedent for drawing the affidavit which my mother signed—I first met Metcalfe at Honour's office about April, 1896, I think—he was introduced to me as a partner of Luniley and Co., of Shaftesbury
Avenue—Honour told me they were insurance agents—I did not discuss the policy with Honour and Metcalfe—I had talked it all over with Honour previously—Metcalfe had several forms of application with him; I could not say on what companies—Honour said they had arranged with Metcalfe to arrange the policy—Honour knew my life would not be accepted because of drink—I have lived a life of steady dissipation for years—I am not living it now—I do not say I have reformed, but I have got more sensible—I have got older and do not drink so much, nor sit, up so late at night—I believe Metcalfe filled up the form—I gave him my age and my people's ages—I cannot remember whether he or I wrote it—Daish's is a sort of public-house—I met Metcalfe in the Haymarket accidentally in the morning, about the end of April—I was lodging in High Street, Bloomsbury, at the time—I was going to Honour's, and Metcalfe said, "Meet me at Daish's," and I met him here at 11.30 or 12 in the morning—I cannot remember what we had to drink—I endorsed the cheque—the appointment was made for luncheon at 1.30 or 2—Metcalfe was living at the Victoria, where we lunched, or some-where close by—I think Metcalfe and Honour were there when I got there—I could not tell you at what period of the meal the division of the money took place—I did not see the cheque then—Monson had gold in his hand—I think he gave us the money towards the end of the meal, when he paid for the lunch—I do not know how much it was—Metcalfe had some gold—I don't know how much.
Re-examined. My first introduction to Honour was when I became surety fur Oddy, to whose brother I was articled—it was a year or more after that that it was proposed I should sign my mother's name—about two years after I knew Honour I began to endorse forged bills drawn in the names of Herbert and Akins—that was about the time that the bills forged in my father's name were being brought into existence—these letters of October 21st, 22nd, and 23rd were all written on one day, after Atkins and Herbert had gone abroad—this (produced) is the draft of those three letters—the draft and the letters were written in Honour's office by me—the letters were left with Honour—I took away the draft and kept it, and I gave it to the Treasury—I believe Honour had sued Atkins's and Herbert's parents upon the forged bills—Honour or some-one told in the actions were dismissed—these letters were written, I think, because Honour wanted to put himself forward as the innocent holder of the bills, and that he did not know they were forgeries—the wording of the letters was mine; the ideas are Honour's—he said he sued as Urbanowsky, so that they could not recover costs from her; she was his servant, and had no money—I have seen her going in and out with a basket; I understood she was his housekeeper, or cook, or something—these four bills dated between January 29th and May. 29th, 1895, signed "Accepted, Edward Norgate, drawn by Peroival Norgate," were written all atone time and tilled in with the drawer's and acceptor's name in Honour's presence—there is no attempt to imitate or disguise any of the writing it is all my ordinary writing—anybody looking at the document could see that the acceptor's and drawer's names were in the same writing—it was for the purpose of withdrawing these bills that Honour had, that the promissory note for £120 was given—I traced my mother's signature to that £120 bill, and tried to deceive
Honour—Honour first suggested that he would settle all claims against me in reference to my father's and mother's forged bills that he had for £1,200; I told him it was ridiculous; they were not in a position to pay anything like a quarter of that sum—we had a lot of interviews about it, and ultimately he came down to about £300—afterwards I went to him with my mother; we offered him £175, and ultimately he agreed to take £210—that had relation to the bill for £120—the private friend's report filled up by Winters is dated April 28th; the one filled up by Monson is dated April 23rd—I do not know in whose writing the answers are in the actual proposal; no part of them was written by me; I never saw it till I saw it at the company's office—I understood that the insurance company refused the second premium which became due in April, 1897—after that Mr. Bentley intervened—I knew him through Honour; I think he knows the other defendants—I wrote the letter to Bentley when Honour was asking for the £1,200, in order to try and get the amount reduced—I said, "I am quite sure I cannot pass, but I will go and try if you like if that will satisfy you "; he said if he could get a policy he would take less than £1,200—I had every intention of presenting myself to a doctor—I understood I was to go to the Star Life Office then, because I understood their doctor was not so strict as the Norwich Union doctor—the Norwich Union soon afterwards brought their Chancery action, and I did not hear anything more about the Star.
EACHAEL NORGATE . I am the wife of Edward Norgate, and mother of the last witness—I first heard about the beginning of 1895 that my son had had money-lending transactions with Dent; that was the only name I knew at the time—at that time we were served with a summons in an action in the Mayor's Court, London—having spoken with my son, I came with him to London, and went to an office in Moorgate Street, where we saw Honour, who passed in the name of Dent—he said he had got as security for the money he had lent my son, a bill signed in my name—I said I would pay him some money, but I could never pay him any more money after; it was on the understanding that he never lent my son any more money—I said I never had signed a bill, and never would sign one—I paid him £20 down, and made a promise to pay him and ther £60 in three weeks, I think—he gave me a memorandum of the terms, which I sent to the Treasury—about three weeks after I went to Canonbury Villas with my son, and paid the other £60—I then got from him some bills of exchange which had been signed in my name—this is the undertaking he gave me—(This was an undertaking not to proceed further with the summons, or sign judgment, in considerations of MRS. NOBGATB paying £20, and a further turn of £60 within they weeks, and MR. SYDNEY'S costs in settlement of all claims.)—Mr. Sydney was acting as Honour's solicitor—Honour handed me back either two or three bills—I destroyed them—about the end of October, 1896, I was served with a writ for £120 in an action brought by Urbanowsky—I consulted with my husband, and put the matter in the hands of Mr. Scudamore, a solicitor—soon after that I made an affidavit—they were then applying for judgment—I did not see the promissory note they were suing on before I made my affidavit—judgment went by default, and in February this year I went with Mr. Edwards, Mr. Scudamore's clerk, to Honour's office in Jermyn Street—
he produced to me the promissory note for £120 he was sueing on—I saw it was signed "R. Norgate"—he said he must have £300 or £400 to settle it—ultimately I agreed to pay him £150 down and gave him a promissory note to pay another £60—this is the promissory note I gave him—I and my husband signed it—we also signed this document—(This stated that in consideration of his accepting their terms as per receipt of even date and handing over promissory note for £120 dated February 3rd, 1896, signed by R. NOROATE, and one for £20 dated August 6th, 1895, signed by EDWARD NORGATE and releasing them from all bills bearing their names, she handed him a joint promissory note for £60 payable six months afterdate)—Honour then gave us back the £120 promissory note, and I tore it up—I told Honour he had promised not to lend my son any more money—I do not know that he gave any explanation of breaking his promise—I was present on July 30th, 1897, when Monson called on my husband at the rectory—he said he was Mr. Hobson, and he had come about the insurance business, where his brother had been substituted for my son—he suggested that we should pay him money, and that he would settle with Honour my son's other debts—I think he asked for £400—I am not certain—he said he would contribute £50—he said his mother was a widow, and they wished to keep it from her.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. My son has been a great anxiety to us—I did not see Honour between the time I saw him as Dent and this year—after the £120 bill had been put forward my son did not tell me he forged that bill with intent to deceive Honour—I was told they were signed in Honour's presence—I made an affidavit, I think at Cam-bridge—I do not remember the Commissioner's name; I think the solicitor prepared it.
Cross-examined by MR. RAWLINSON. I was not there when Monson arrived on July 30th or 31st—my husband came immediately to fetch me, saying, "Some young man has come about Percy's business"—I don't know whether Monson gave his name to the servant—he saw my husband before he saw me—he had no conversation with him, I think, till my husband fetched me, because he came for me immediately—I think I knew at the time that Stanley Hobson had personated my son—I am not sure whether Monson was the first to tell us of it—I must have known of the personation before July 31st—about the time my son told the insurance office about the personation someone told me about it, and I learnt it was young Hobson who personated my son—the next day Monson or Hobson wrote to me, saying £190 was due, and taxed costs—he said at the interview £120 was due—I knew the person I had seen wrote this letter, because my son came down "later the same day—I did not discuss the forged bill for £120 with Monson, only the question of the insurance—he said he came to arrange matters on behalf of Honour; he would settle the matter with Honour—I knew Monson as Monson and Hobson—I knew of no other Hobson—I and my husband had no solicitor acting for us at that time—I believe Mr. Sydney sent the affidavit down to us—Monson suggested we should go to Messrs. Elgood and Moyle, a firm of solicitors in Lincoln a Inn Fields—I received a letter from them.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. Honour promised not to advance more money, and not to deal with my son again—I found I could not
rely on my son's word altogether, last Christmas I thought his memory had become affected by the dissipated life he had led.
Re-examined. After our interview with Monson on July 30th my son came home the same night—I described to him the man who had called, and my son gave me certain information about him, and from that I came to the conclusion that it was Monson who had called.
EDWARD NOROATB . I am the Rector of Holywell, near St. Ives, and the father of Percival Norgate—on July 30th, 1897, Monson called to see me, as he said, about some difficulty that my son and his brother had got into about some insurance policy, something about substituting a life, I understood it, "to best the old Jew"; he referred to Honour—he gave the name of Hobson when he was introduced—he proposed that he should assist in getting them out of the difficulty; and, in addition, he said that my son owed Honour money, and that he would settle the whole concern in one; he sat down and wrote a list of what he considered Honour had a claim on him for; it amounted to about £400; he said his younger brother, as he had got into this difficulty with my son, would pay part of it—he proposed to find £50—I asked him where he lived, and whether he belonged to a London club, and a few questions of that sort—he said he did not belong to any club—he gave me his address as 44, Mortimer Street, Regent Street—I don't think he said anything as to what had become of his younger brother; he said he was going to settle the matter; I understood his younger brother was in London—he paid the matter must be settled through Messrs. Elgood and Moyle, who were acting for him—on the evening of that day I received this telegram: "Have seen Elgood and arranged meeting for Tuesday. I am sure he will arrange on easy terms. I am remaining in town.—HOBSON"—next day I received this letter, signed, "J. Monson," from 44, Mortimer Street—(This stated that he had had several interviews with Honour on behalf of PERCIVAL NORGATE, and had been asked to act as mediator in bringing about a settlement of the dispute with Honour; that he had discussed the matter with Hobson, and at his suggestion was writing to on plain the position of affairs; that last night he had seen Honour, who refused to listen to any terms of settlement, but said he had made up his mind to give MESSRS. NEWTON instructions to apply for a warrant against PERCIVAL NORGATE for forgery, and pointed out that it was only necessary to produce MRS. NORGATE'S affidavit to enable him to get a warrant, and that if MRS. NORGATE admitted the signature to be hers she would be prosecuted for perjury; that he had attended that morning with Hobsonat MR. ELGOOD'S office, and was sure that MR. ELGOOD'S influence with MR. NEWTON would bring about a settlement, and extricate him from these troubles; that it would be advisable to let MR. ELGOOD effect a settlement of the whole business in one transaction, and he would undertake that it would be brought about on Tuesday if the matter Were placed with ELGOOD; and that Honour said £190 was due to him inclusive of the taxed costs, under the alleged forged bill.)—I am sure £400 was the amount he had mentioned at the interview, and that was to include the insurance matter and the promissory note—except that my son recognised the description I gave of my visitor I had no idea that the Hobson who called on me and Monson were the same person—in consequence of the information he gave me I declined to have any negotiation with Elgood or anybody—on August
3rd we received this telegram signed "Hobson, 44, Mortimer Street," addressed to Mrs. Norgate: "Just seen Newton and Co.; most imperative I see you to-morrow; will arrange further payment towarls settlement, but only on condition that you settle through Elgood's"—in February this year I came to London with Mrs. Norgate when she settled the matter with Honour, and I signed the promissory note for £60 in addition to the £150.
Cross-examined by MR. RAWXIXSON. I dont' know that Monson's visit did no harm; it is not always easy to find out what harm is done by a visit of a man of that class—if I had settled for the £190 suggested in the letter I should have been £20 to the good—I received a letter from Elgood and Movie offering a contribution of £50 on behalf of Hobson towards a settlement, I believe—Hobson did not subscribe to the settlement of February—I do not remember Messrs. Elgood and Moyle ever sending to me direct any small sum towards a school feast, or anything of the sort—I knew at that time there was a forged bill of my son's and that my wife had sworn it was a forgery—I knew that Honour was constantly pressing for money—I knew nothing about the insurance business—it was desirable to settle the forged bill matter—my son had been to Mr. Scudamore before; I went to him afterwards at my son's suggestion, I believe.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. My son has given us a great deal of trouble—latterly I have not been able to rely on his word; I have noticed that his memory has been going lately—I have known for years that he has led a dissipated life; very probably that would affect the memory of the strongest man.
GEORGE HENRY EMMETT . I am London manager of the Norwich Union Life Insurance Office at 50, "Fleet Street—on September 22nd, 1896, Mi. Sydney, a solicitor, came to the office, and made a communication to me, in consequence of which I went to his office the following day and compared the genuine signatures of Fercival Edward Norgate with the signatures of this proposal form and doctor's report, and I found they did not agree at all—two or three days afterwards Mr. Sydney also produced the slip with the name "Percival Edward Norgate" written on it—I compared it with the signature on the doctor's report and proposal form, and found they were in the same writing—I then made an appointment for Norgate to meet Dr. Hastings Stewart at my office on November 2nd, 1896.
Cross-examined by MR. RANDOLPH. At the beginning of November, 1896 we knew or thought that Norgate had been impersonated—the doctor who had examined Hobson saw Norgate in my room, and said, "I have not examined this man at all"; I do not know who did the impersonation; I instructed my branch manager not to take the premium which was payable in the following April—did not lay the case before the Public Prosecutor during the winter of 1896; nor did my office, to my knowledge—I spoke to Mr. Frayling, of the Treasury, on my own personal responsibility, in an ordinary conversation, but nothing was done officially—I happened to know him, and spoke to him one day walking home from the train—I think that was nearer July, 1897, after we had refused the premium—I had not mentioned it before I refused to accept the premium—my company, so far as I know, mentioned the
matter to no one, and I only mentioned it to Mr. Frayling because he was a personal friend of mine just before I went to the West Indies for my health—we had taken steps to have the policy quashed in the Chancery Court—the first I knew of a writ being issued was when I saw it in a newspaper in Barbados, about October, 1897; I was away for seven months, from May till December, 1897—I had been to the Highlands, and came back and spoke to Mr. Frayling, about July, before I went to the Barbados.
Cross-examined by MR. EICHARDS, I have been in the Norwich Union Office about fourteen years—I was not manager originally—at one time I was inspector of agents for the Life Association of Scotland, soon after I was admitted as a solicitor—I went to the Norwich Union about 1884, and became London manager about 1888, I think—I believe Metcalfe filled the post for the Life Association of Scotland, which I gave up—it is a very hard post—competition for policies is very keen; every effort is made to stimulate agents to get new policies—the commission is very generally 1 per cent, on the sum assured, and 2 1/2 per cent, on renewals—friends' reports are sent out as a rule when a proposal first comes to the office—in some cases, where there is hurry, they are given to the agent, who takes them to the friends, and gets them filled up—Dr. Stewart was not known to me personally—he had examined a case for us before, I believe—the office would accept his report—Metcalfe had not been working as agent for our office to my knowledge—so far as I know, this was the first policy he introduced; in fact, I did not know he had introduced it—I had not heard of this case till Mr. Sydney told me about it; you cannot follow every case in five branches.
Re-examined. I did not mention this matter to Mr. Frayling in any sense officially, or ask him to report it to the Director of Public Prosecutions—it is a mere accident that he lives in my neighbourhood—I mentioned it in the train.
ARTHUR HASTINGS LANFRAR STEWART , M. R. C. S. I now practise at Albany Courtyard, Piccadilly—on April 23rd, 1896, Metcalfe called to arrange for the examination of an applicant for insurance in the Norwich Union Office, and gave the name of Norgate as that of the applicant—I made an appointment for the same day, and the same day a person calling himself Percival Edward Norgate came to be examined—I think he came alone, I am not certain—I put to him the questions, and took down his answers on this form, and he filled it up in my presence, Percival Edward Norgate—I then medically examined the person—he appeared to be sound—I made this report to the insurance office, reporting that he was a healthy person, and insurable at the ordinary rates—that person was not the witness, Percival Norgate; it was some one quite different—I did not hear any more of the matter till an appointment was made for me to meet some one at Mr. Enmett's office, a few days before November 3rd—on November 3rd I saw Norgate at the office, and saw he was not the same person.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. I have known Metcalfe since 1892—he was introduced to me by a gentleman whom I believe to be the manager of the Law Courts Branch of the New York Life Society—Metcalfe has brought me several cases to examine for the Norwich Union, and other offices—I have not a note of having examined Mr. Roland
Bateman—I have examined from twelve to twenty gentlemen on his introduction I should say.
Re-examined. I only knew him in one name, Metcalfe—I did not know him as Lumley and Co.
BRUCE MORRISON . I am manager of the Westminster Branch of the Norwich Union Life Insurance Office—I first knew Metoalfe in connection with our office on March 30th or 31st, 1896, when he called with a view to do business as an agent—I gave him the agency, terms—he said he was a representative of Messrs. Lumley and Co., insurance agents, of Shaftesbury Avenue, and he gave his name as Metcalfe—on April 1st I wrote to Lumley and Co., giving the agency terms—he asked if he could be allowed to get the private friends' reports filled up, as he had been in the habit of doing—I gave instructions in the office to let him have some—those reports are sometimes sent from the office to the private friends, or sometimes given to our own representatives—usually they are sent direct from the office to the private friends.
Cross-examined by MR. EICHARDS. He said he had been an insurance agent for some years; that he had done business with Mr. Oates, who had been manager of a company in the City, and that also he had been manager of the Scottish Imperial—I made no entry of his visit in any hook; I never do so—I did not apply for his references—it was not necessary to an inquiry about a cash agent—I have a copy of the letter I sent him with our terms afterwards—it would not prevent him acting for any other office—we received a proposal from Mr. Roland Bateman; it was not completed—there was another proposal in the name of Norgate, and there might have been others—I cannot say if all those proposals were seen by Dr Stewart.
Cross-examined by MR. RAWLINSOW. I cannot say if I heard about the impersonation in November, 1896—I know nothing about it.
Re-examined. The only two cases I remember as being brought by Metcalfe were Bateman's and Norgate's—Bateman's was wanted in a great hurry and was pressed for, but it was not completed—it was within, a day or two of my interview with the prisoner.
HUGH ST. JOHN CLARK . I am managing clerk to Mr. Morrison, manager of the Westminster Branch of the Norwich Union life Office—I saw Metcalfe at my office in April, 1896—about April 24th I received from him this proposal to ensure the life of Percival Edward Norgate for £2,000, which was altered to £1,000—the name of Lumley and Co, appears at the head of the front page as the name of the agent introducing the proposal—it was signed Percival Edward Norgate—by Mr. Morrison's instructions I authorised a clerk to hand some private friends' reports to Metcalfe, and two of them were brought to the office filled in as they now appear in the names of Winters and Percival, by Metcalfe I believe—on: April 20th I saw Metcalfe at the office—he said a lady had an interest in the policy which was being taken out on Norgate's life, and asked me to write a letter to the lady, whose name he gave as Madame Urbanowsky, saying that if the policy were taken out on a certain table it would be world-wide and indisputable—in consequence I wrote this letter of April 27th, and handed it to Metcalfe—(This letter stated that if a policy was taken out under their guaranteed bonus table at a premium of £30 10s. for £1,000, it would bean incontestable world-wide insurance.)—on the next day,
April 28th, Metcalfe came to the office and paid the premium on this world-wide policy—the premium was £30 10s.—he paid it with this cheque for £27—he was entitled to ten per cent, commission as agent—I gave him credit for £3 10s., the deficiency on the cheque, and handed him a cheque for £6 10s. payable to and endorsed by K. J. Metcalfe or order—a policy was then made out and executed by my office for £1,000 on the life of Percival Edward Norgate—afterwards there was an application for an order to lodge the policy in court, and Honour lodged it—this is it—I believe it was given to Metcalfe when it was executed—in paying the commission and giving instructions for the issued policy, I believed it was a genuine proposal form of Percival Edward Norgate, and that the private friends' reports were genuine, and that Percival Edward Norgate had been examined by the doctor—I only saw Monson once at our office, in the beginning of 1897, when be brought a letter from Messrs. Lumley and Co., in Metcalfe's writing, dated January 26th, and waited for an answer—(This stated that he could introduce a case of £3,000 upon the life of a gentleman, aged fifty-five, but that he must ask for a commission of £2 per £100 assured, as he had to pay away 30s. per £100, and could get £'2 in the City; that a proposal form should be given to the bearer, who would see it was filled in and the proposer examined, and also two private friends' reports; that he had told the gentleman to be examined at DR. STEWART'S, as the most convenient place.)—I should say the whole of the filling-up on the proposal form signed Percival Edward Norgate, is in Metcalle's writing—in answer to the letter of January 26th, 1897, only a proposal form was handed to Monson; I did not comply with the request to hand out the private friends' reports—I told Monson we should require to see the proposer; that was in consequence of what has come to light about Norgate.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. No policy is indisputable if it is obtained by fraud; fraud would void any policy; the whole of the transactions took place through Metcalfe.
Cross-examined by MR. RAWLINSON. I believe when Monson called in January our company knew previously all about the fraud on Norgate's policy in consequence of Norgate having called—January was the tirst time Monson had come into our office—I knew him by name and by sight—I handed him a proposal form to fill up for our office—I may have handed him five or six on that day—after that date he did no business with us—referring to those forms, I never saw them again—I never saw Monson with regard to any particular case after that, or understood that he introduced cases since that one—the name of Powis came before me—not from Monson—I do not know when it came in—I cannot say whether it was on one of the forms I handed to Monson, and I cannot swear if it came from Monson—it was not carried through.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. Mr. Bruce Morrison is above me in the office—he is in an inner office, and I am at the counter to answer people that come in—I first knew Motcalfe in the early part of 1896—at that fine he had the agency for our office in the name of Lumley and Co.—I did not know that he had filled the position of inspector to the Life Association of Scotland—I had never visited him at Shaftesbury Avenue—he frequently called at our office after he was appointed agent—we do not give an agent stationery except in special cases where it is
applied for—every proposal that comes into the office is entered in a book—I have not got the book here—I see it every day—I cannot say when I last referred to the entry to insure Norgate's life—I looked at it prior to the Police-court inquiry—if a proposal came by post there would be an entry to that effect—if it is handed in by a proposer or an agent it is not entered—I based my evidence that it was received from Metcalfe on my memory—we get two or three proposals a week at the most—I swear, to the best of my belief, that Metcalfe brought it—I should say that "27th December, £30," is in the writing of the head office, where we should send it, and where it would be kept—I do not suggest that they are in Metcalfe's writing, but the greater part of the proposal is—the words, "Sherwood's Hotel," are in the writing of one of our clerks—I believe the names were put in when the proposal came in, but the addresses were not, and they were filled in by our staff—when Metcalfe came he only told me the policy was for £1,000, not for £2,000—it is not customary in most firms to have the name of the agent on the policy—I have been in other offices—I obtained this cheque from Mr. Bruce Morrison, by whom it is signed, on the same day that the premium was paid—it was given the day it was made out—I believe when the premium was paid the commission cheque was given at the same time in exchange—I believe I was first informed about Norgate's statement that he had not been medically examined in the autumn of 1896, and I then knew that a trick had been played on the company—I did not communicate with Metcalfe—I do not think I saw him in the course of the autumn—when this letter was brought me by Monson I communicated with Mr. Bruce Morrison—the letter Monson brought was sent to the head office—we do not take receipts when policies are handed out—they would only be given to recognised agents.
Re-examined. All the proposals come through my hands at the West-minster office—this particular one was brought to my notice in the autumn of 1896, after Norgate and his solicitor had been there, so that my memory was refreshed by the incident—we declined the proposal in the name of Powis—I believe it was accepted first of all and afterwards declined—we issued no policy—I believe the name was H. P. Powis—the proposal in the name of Roland Bateman did not go on—the premium was never paid—I never saw Bateman—I believe I saw Powis—I do not know whether application for the premium was made to Madame Urbanowsky—a renewal notice was sent to her by the head-office at Norwich by the clerk.
HENRY JOHN KERFE . I am junior clerk in the Westminster office of the Norwich Union—I handed this private friend's form to Mr. Metcalfe about the last week in April, 1896—I filled in some of the entries—the name of "Porcival Edward Norgate" in each of them is in my hand-writing, and so also is the name "James Winters"—Metcalfe gave me the name—the name "F. Perceval" in the second form is not in my writing—I do not know in whose writing it is—Metcalfe took the forms away.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. I have had five and a-half years' experience, all at the Norwich Union—I have given these private friends' forms to agents in one or two special cases before—I remember this because it was rather out of the ordinary—I have given them to an agent at
Harlesden, and to a firm of agents in the City—those are all I can remember at the moment—I do not know if these came back by post or how—it is only customary to send a stamped envelope with them when we send them by post.
H. N. DAVIS. I am a member of the firm of Hartcupp, Davis and Cobbold, of Fitzallan House, Arundel Street, Strand, solicitors—we are London agents for the solicitors at Norwich to the Norwich Union office—on July 14th, 1897, I issued a writ on behalf of the Norwich Union Socibty against Victor Honour, Josephine Urbanowsky, and Percival Edward Norgate, claiming delivery up and cancelment of this policy on the ground of fraud—on the same day notice of motion was served asking that the policy should be brought into court—on July 30th that motion came on for hearing—the policy was brought into court on behalf of Honour—affidavits were filed; among them one by Honour—I produce a copy, which his solicitors sent me—(The affidavit was read, it contained the statements that although the money advanced belonged to URBANOWSKY she was not conversant with the details, the management of the matter being left to him; that prior to April 29th, 1896, NORGATE owed her sums afterwards agreed in the aggregate at £860, and that being pressed for payment, and wanting a further advance, NORGATE said he would insure his life for £1,000, and that he (Honour) arranged to make a further advance of £45 to enable NORGATE to pay the premium and have a small sum over; that, continuing to press NORGATE to settle the matter, URBANOWSKY received from NORGATE the letter of April 14th, 1896; that on or about April 29th he (Honour) paid NORGATE £30 10s. on account of the £45 for the specific purpose of paying the premium on the policy, and when completed it was handed to him, for URBANOWSKY, to hold as security, he then paying over the balance of the £45; that subsequently NOBOATE signed an assignment of the policy to URBANOWSKY; that neither he (Honour) nor URBANOWSKY had the slightest knowledge or suspicion that the policy was obtained in any other than the usual and proper manner, or that there was any fraud on the part of anyone in connection with the transaction; and that afterwards MR. SCUDAMORE, a solicitor, called and stated he had heard the policy had been obtained by fraud, and that NORGATE and his solicitor intended to ask him to take a small sum in settlement to prevent trouble, which he refused to do).
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. This matter first came into my hands with a view of questioning the validity of this policy shortly before proceedings were taken—Honour was made a party because we understood he was mixed up in it; and that Urbanowsky was only a nominee and a fictitious person altogether—for all intents and purposes I take Urbanowsky to be the same as Honour—in order to set aside a policy in the hands of Honour you have to allege, fraud against Honour—the seventh paragraph of the statement of claim alleges as fraud against Honour and Urbanowsky that, with a view to defrauding the plaintiff company, the defendants conceived the idea of procuring an insurance on the life of Norgate, whose life they knew to be uninsurable—in the course of the motion Dr. Stewart, Mr. Coe, Mr. Hartcupp, and Mr. St. John Clerk made affidavits—Coe was a photographer at Norwich and photographed the assignment—the affidavits were principally to explain
the absence of Mr. Emmett through illness—there is no allegation in the affidavits that Honour was party to the fraud, and there is no reason why there should be; we did not deal with the matter; it was only to get the policy in court, and to explain the absence of certain persons who would otherwise have made affidavits—I think Honour has frequently denied that he was any party to the fraud in the letters—his solicitor wrote the letters which are exhibited, and others; there are a great number of letters—very possibly, at an early stage of the proceedings Honour said he had been defrauded by Norgate, and would give us any assistance he could—I think everybody was offering help to us to prosecute the others—I never saw Monson or Metcalfe—I understood Monson had communicated with the police.
Cross-examined by MR. RAWLINSON. The writ was issued on July 14th, 1897—I have heard that our office knew about this fraud in October or November, 1896—I knew nothing of it till just previous to proceedings being commenced; they would consult the Norwich solicitors—I am only the London agent—it is quite wrong to say I said at the Police-court, "Careful inquiries had been made for six months"—no doubt the deposition was read to me, and I signed it, but I did not swear that, so far as I remember—I think careful inquiries had been made, but I did not make them, and I did not say I made them, or knew anything about it.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. I had no communication with Metcalfe, I think.
Re-examined. The only object of the society in the Chancery proceedings was to get the policy in a place of safety, and that it should not be assigned to someone out of whose hands we should have more difficulty in getting it.
ALFRED EDWARD EDWARDS . I was managing clerk to Mr. Scudamore, solicitor, of 79, Gresham Street—in February, 1898, I went with Mrs. Norgate and her son to Honour's office at 139, Jerrayn Street—the Rev. Mr. Norgate went, too, but he waited outside—Mrs. Norgate remained in the front room while Percival Norgate and I interviewed Honour in the back room—I discussed with Honour the question of the settlement of the £120 promissory note—Honour at first asked £300 or £400—there was considerable discussion, and after Mrs. Norgate came into the room he consented to take £150 in cash and a joint and several promissory note for £60, signed by Mr. and Mrs. Norgate—certain documents were then drawn up, which Mr. and Mrs. Norgate signed; the release I had drafted and had copied before I left my office, and the other was dictated to me by Honour—he wished to have introduced a release of all liability as affecting himself with regard to the £1,000 policy in the Norwich Union Office, and that I objected to, and I told Mrs. Norgate not to agree, and she accepted that advice and did not agree—I then produced this form of release, which I had already prepared, which Honour signed in my presence and I attested his signature—I asked Honour to let Urbanowsky sign in my presence, but he said it was impossible, and if we left the document he would forward it on—it was left with him and was afterwards forwarded on with this signature—I never saw Urbanowsky—I was managing clerk for some years to Mr. F. C. Sydney, of New Inn Chambers—he was Mr. Honour' solicitor in 1895—I was in his employment for three years or more up to the early part of 1896.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. My principal was acting for the Norgates—all I was concerned for was to obtain a release of bills in any of the names Honour had—I did not know Urbanowsky or Honour had a claim against Norgate on the assignment of a charge of Herbert for £860—I had not seen it—£210 was paid to release Norgate, and Mrs. Norgate from all claims, charges, I O U's, promissory notes and any documents of that sort—the object of the release was to make a clean sweep of it, so that after the £210 was paid Honour would have no claim against any of the three Norgates—Honour asked in return for something to be inserted in the release to release him from any share in the £1,000 policy—I knew then that the Norwich Union had brought their action, and that the policy had been challenged; at that time (July, 1897) they had got as far as a statement of defence and reply.
C. J. R. SCUDAMORE. I am a solicitor, of 79, Gresham Street, in the City—in June, 1897, young Norgate consulted me with referenced to his affairs, and particularly with regard to the Norwich Union Insurance matter—the writ in the Chancery action came into my hands—it was issued on July He, 1897—I succeeded Mr. Sydney in respect of a judgement ment that was obtained against Mrs. Norgate by Urbanowsky and Co.—I took over the papers in July of 1897—I was acting for Mr. and Mrs. Norgate—Mr. Norgate forwarded to in the two telegrams and the letter, and on behalf of Mr. Norgate I answered the letter by this letter to Monson of August 4th, 1897.—(This stated that REV. E. NORGATE had handed them Monson's letter of July 31st, and instructed them to dedint Monson's voluntary offer to act as mediator, as their client was in no way desirous of having anything to do with him; that the many threats contained in Monson's letter were thrown away; and that they must requed him to desist from uniting to, or in any way further annoying there client.)—I received this letter of August 5th in reply from Monson—(This stated that it was at the special request of P. E. NORGATE that he had endeavoured to effect a settlement with Honour, particularly in relation to the alleged forged bill; and that MR. SCUDAMORE had asked him to ascertain from Honour if he would accept £150 and surrender all documents held by him; at that time MR. SCUDAMORE was not instructed by REV. E. NORGATB, and it-might now be adverse to his interests to bring about a settlement if hit client wished to spend a few hundreds in law costs before settling with Honour)—I find the words of that reply drafted in pencil on the back of the letter I wrote.
Cross-examined by MR. RAWLINSON. I formerly worked with Mr. Sydney, and then set up on my own account—when I wrote the letter to Monson I was acting for young Mr. Norgate, and I may have been uhortly before—a short time before I had an interview with Monson and young Norgate at my office; that would be about July 26th or 28th—Monson came to see if he could settle the whole matter—I think he made statements about Mr. Hobson—I do not know from whom he came, but Hobson's name was mentioned—he said Mr. Statham Hobson was willing to assist in finding funds for a settlement, and that the Hobson family were anxious that the affair should be settled, having regard to the part the younger Mr. Hobeon had taken in it—I was anxious, on behalf of my client, that the matter in connection with Honour should be settled as well—I took a very active part, and eventually settled them
for him—it is correct what I said in my letter of the 5th that I asked him to ascertain from Honour whether lie would accept £150 in settlemeat, and he said he would bee what he could do—Norgate'e parents instructed me in the Chancery action—after Monson had been to St. Ives, I wrote a letter, by instruction, that I was not to have any more negotiations with Monson, and the negotiations were broken off, and I hear that that letter was forwarded by Monson to Honour, and was found afterwards by the police in Honour's possession—that was the end of the negotiations between myself, Monson, and Honour—up to that point Monaon's position was that of mediator between me, Honour, and Hobson—that letter forwarded on to Honour put an end to that relation—I never met Mr. Bentley.
Re-examined. A considerably larger sum was mentioned by Monson at that interview as that for which Honour would settle, I believe—I think it was £300—I have no very clear remembrance—I asked if £150 would probably be accepted—I never had a reply—Monson said,. "I will see what can be done," or something to that effect.
CLEMENT HOBSON . I live with my mother—I have a brother named Stanley Hobson, who is now twenty-four years old—about three years, ago he was in an office at 184, Shaftesbury Avonue carrying on an insurance business there in the name of Hobson and Ives originally—I. know Metcalfe, and I know that one of his Christian names is Ives—he was carrying on business with my brother there—I have seen Monson once there in the office—I called occasionally—my brother was attending to that office up to about January or February, 1896, I think—to the best of my belief this proposal form and medical report are signed "Percival Edward Norgate "in my brother's (Stanley Hobson's) writing—this slip of paper is in his writing—my brother went abroad in October or November last year—these letters (exhibits 57, 58, and 59) found at Monson's are all in my brother's writing, addressed to Monson.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. I presume, from exhibit 57, that my brother was very hard up—so far as I know, he and Monson were great friends—my brother was going up for a shorthand exaimnation.
Cross-examined by MR. BAWLINSON. I have a brother, Statham Habson, on the Stock Exchange—he is on half-commiesion terms with a stock-broker—he is a younger brother than the one I refer to—there are seven of us—I first knew about this impersonation about November, I think—I have since heard that my brother, in July or August, 189.7,; was consulting Elgood and Moyle, in Lincoln's Inn Fields—I never heard of them before—my brother was willing to contribute, through them if necessary, £40 towards the settlement of these affairs—he has told me so since—Monsou's brother was articled to my father, who was a surveyor, occupying a high position in London—since August, 1897, my brother Statham has been seeing Monson from time to time until his arrest, and I should take it Monson would be anxious to do anything he could for my brother Statham—I have seen a good deal of Monson since July or August, 1897, and have had dealings with business with which he was connected—did not know him intimately until last October or November-since that time I have come across him in insurance business in the City—since September or October, so far as I know, he has been
earning his living honestly—business has passed through my hands which must have passed through his—he told me last October he had been to St. I yes to see Norgate's father.
Cross-examined by MR. KICHABDS. I had met Metcalfe before going to the office, and before he was engaged with my brother in business—I be live my brother introduced him—this property in Shaftesbury Avenue belonged to my father, who was interested in the development of the estate—my brother originally opened the office with an agency for the Ocean Company—my family have been connected for two or three generations with insurance—my grandfather was manager of one of the best known offices—my brother started on the property in which my father or mother had an interest—my father has been dead two or three years—Metcalfe visited at our house at Russell Square—I have not met Mrs. Metcalfe—my brother went away in November—he never mentioned why he must leave—he was 21 when he went away—he was in partnership with Metcalfe when he was 21—he was working with Metcalfe, whether in partner-ship or not I cannot say—he was 21 in October, 1895, before he opened the place in Shaftesbury Avenue—Metcalfe was there in 1895.
Re-examined. This letter, exhibit 58, is in my brother Stanley's writing—it is signed "Stanley Statham Hobson"—that was not his name—my father's name was Statham—one of my brothers is christened Statham—we are a very large family, and the Statham distinguishes one branch from another—(Exhibit No. 58, which was read, spoke of Metcalfe's good cliaracter and capabilities. MR. AVOBY also read a letter of June 8th, 1897)—my brother was in the Star Life Office at one time—Monson told me he had been to was Norgate's father, and he said some-thing about going in the name of Hobson: that he had used the name of Hobson—I do not know that he said he was the eldest brother.
By MR. RAWLINSON. Exhibit 58 is dated June 8th, 1897, and is from my brother Stanley, who did the personation—I do not know that Norgate has sworn that in June, 1897, his life was being put before the Star by himself in connection with Bentley—I did not ask anything about it.
By MR. RICHABDS. St. Cuthbert's, Pinner, is my mother's residence—she was living at home in October, 1896—my brother was in the Law Accident Society, and Metcalfe was employed there with him—that was about a year previous—I have been in the Star Office—I am not now.
By the COUBT. I first heard from Monson about October or November about my brother and this personation matter—he did not tell me that was the reason my brother had gone abroad.
EBENEZER ARTHUR CLARKE . I am a commissionaire—for some time past I have been housekeeper at 148 Shaftesbury Avenue—about Easter of 1895 the first-floor office was taken by two young men whom I knew as Hobson and Williams, and they started business together in those names—about two months after that I saw Metcalfe there—he remained there till the end—about five months after he came the name was changed to Hobson and Ives, and Williams was crossed out—he went away—Monson used to come backwards and forwards to the office about five months after they started—I knew him first by the name of Monson—he was pointed out to me in that name—afterwards I knew him as "Wyvill—letters were addressed to him there in both names—about two
months before the tenancy was terminated I heard and saw the name of Lumley and Co.—they were there altogether twelve or fifteen months, from Easter, 1895—nobody has carried on business there since then—I think they left the office about February or March, 1896—the name of Lumley and Co. had been put up two months when they left—I did not know they were going away—I do not know who Lumley and Co. were, but Metcalfe was there the whole of the time—Honour came five or six days after the name of Lumley was up—he passed me in the passage, went upstairs, and went into the office—Monson came about five months after the others, and continued to come backwards and forewords up to the time the office was closed—after the office was closed I saw Monson—he came after a bag that was left behind in the office—having received a letter from the landlord to give it to him, I handed it over to him when he came, and lie gave me this receipt signed in the name of Wyvill for the bag and clothes he took away—I also gave him a cheque-book with the name "Monson" inside.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. About 1896 was the last time I saw anybody there—it was two years before my recollection was brought back—I did not know Honour's name when I saw him there—I never spoke to him nor heard him speak—Mr. Arrow did net ask me nor did I tell him that I had seen Honour there—I first made up my mind that I had seen Honour at this office when I was at Bow Street—seeing him in the dock with the others, I made up my mind that I had seen him come to the office—I saw him there several times at a distance—I was away nearly all day long—I have three or four sets of offices to look after—I am not very near-sighted; I wear strong glasses—I can see you without my glasses, but I do not say I could recognise you—I am quite positive I saw Honour there—I was not asked at Bow Street whether I had seen him there.
Cross-examined by MR. RAWLINSON. I did not swear at the Police-court that I only saw Monson two or three times—the depositions were read to me and I signed them—I saw Monson two or three times a month.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. During the day time I was at No. 166, Shaftesbury Avenue, as a rule—I have two houses to look after; No. 148 was the place I lived at—I had nothing to do with the office of Hobson and Ives; my wife looked after the flats and offices there—Mr. Hobson was the landlord in 1895; he was the father of Stanley Hobson—he died, and Mrs. Hobson was his executrix—No. 166 were residential flats—I saw Mr. Hobson who was giving evidence to-day once or twice along with his brother at the office.
Re-examined. I had my glasses on when I saw Honour come to the office—I have seen Monson come into the office two or three times a month during the whole time I have spoken of, from five months after the others came.
EDWIN JOHN MARKS . I keep a lodging-house at 36, College Street, Westminster—Monson lodged with me in November and December, 1896, in the name of Wyvill—he left in December, 1896, leaving a number of papers behind him, which I handed over to the police quite recently, in the course of this year.
of Perceval stayed there for three or four days—Monson stayed therein October, 1896, and a young gentleman; Mr. Perriera, who was represented to me as his cousin, and a young gentleman named Bateman used to visit him there.
CHARLES ARROW (Detective Inspector, C). On Friday, June 24th, I received from Bow Street Police-court warrants for the arrest of the three prisoners—Norgate's name was mentioned in one of the warrants—on the same day I received a telegram from Norgate, followed by a letter the next morning—those communications were irrespective of any warrant obtained against Norgate on June 24th—they advised me as to his whereabouts—the telegram said he was writing to me, and the letter said he would see me that day—on the next day, the 25th, he met me at Vine Street Police-station voluntarily—I then arrested him, and read him the warrant—he said nothing in reply to the warrant; but later on he made a statement to me—prior to the issue of the warrant I had been in communication with him, and had taken a statement from him—an extract from it was attached to the information—on June 25th, about 5.30, Monson was brought to the Vine Street Station by Sergeant Cunningham—Le had with him a portmanteau and hand-bag—he said, "I was just off for the north"—I read the warrant that contained his name, to him—he said, "No bail, I suppose? Honour, too!"—I said "Yes"—I had read the name of Honour in the warrant—I then went to 9, Aruudel Street, Haymarket, where a room was pointed out to me as Monson's—with the keys I had taken from Monson at the station I opened a drawer in the room, and took from it papers, and from the room some books and papers—this is one of the books—they have been kept by me since—on that same Saturday evening I went to 131, Jermyn Street, where I found Honour in an office lie occupied on the first floor—I read to him two warrants in which his name was—he said "Who granted the warrants?"—I said "Mr. Lushington"—he said "Who is the prosecutor?"—I said "The Public Prosecutor"—he asked if he might send for Mr. Newton, his solicitor—I said yes—I took him to Vine Street, where he was searched—on him a key was found—I said "Where are the keys of your safe?"—he said "I don't know, perhaps the wife has them"—afterwards he said, "I think they are in the cupboard, of which this is the key"—I went back to Jermyn Street, and the key of the safe was produced to me by Mrs. Honour—opening the safe, I took possession of a quantity of papers and books, some from the safe and some from the cupboard, the key of which I found on Honour—I took those back to the station—when Metcalfe was brought in, about eleven, he said his name was Albert Ives Metcalfe—I asked him if in 1896 he was trading at 146, Shaftesbury Avenue, as Lumley and Co.—he said yes—I read the warrant to him—after that the charge was read over by the uniform inspector on duty to all of them—Monson said "I see"—Honour said, on being asked for his occupation, "I was a money-lender; since couple of months I have given it up; I am buying property now and buildings; I am dealing with house property"—he said his age was forty—on the charge being read over to him, he said to one charge, "This is a lie," and to the other charge, "That is an absolute lie—all lies"—among the papers I took possession of at Honour's office were
the exhibits Nos. 1 and 2 (The letter and telegram sent by Norgate to Milton asking him not to do anything with the bills), and 3, 4, and 5 (Three letters written on the same day, though bearing different dates, having relation to Herbert's and Atkins' matters), 9 (The printed form of alignment with Norgate's signature appended, in which there was said to be a slight attempt at imitation), 17 and 18 (The documents of February 16th, 1898, given by Norgate's parents when the settlement was effected), 19 (an acknowledgment under Norgate's hand of £120 due on a bill), 39 (The writ in the Mayor's Court action in 1895 against Norgate's parents at the suit of Honour), 40 (Referring to the same action), 52 (The letter written by Mr. Scudamore to Monson, on the back of which was the draft of the reply sent by Monson)—exhibits 8 (The signature written by Stanley Hobson on a piece of paper, and given to Norgate to copy) and 11 (The private friend's report signed by James Winters) I obtained from Mr. Scudamore—at Honour's office I found a number of cards and letter papers in the names of Victor Honour, Milton, Urbanowski, W. Dent, 26, Moorgate Street; and Mr. Shakespeare, Canonbury Villas, and some blank she it of foolscap paper signed at the bottom "Josephine Urbanowsky"—I have known Honour by sight for about two years past—Urbanowsky was a woman I believed to be his servant all along at Jenny Street—I have seen her going in and out as if marketing, and dressed as a servant would be dressed—it was not from her, but from Mrs. Honour that I got the key of the safe—I saw Urbanowsky when I arrested Honour and asked her her name, and she told me she was Josephine Urbanowsky; thatt was not in Honour's presence—I have known Monson about two years by sight, and about one year to speak to—I have seen him enter and leave Honour's office, at 131, Jermyn Street—on October 26th, 1897, he came to me at Vine Street Station and made a statement—at 9, Arundel Street, the address Monson gave, I found exhibits 57, 58, 59, 60 (Letters from Stanley Hobson addressed to Monson), and a great number of other documents—I have seen Monson write and can identify his writing—I believe exhibit 12 (The private friend's report signed James Winters) to be in Monson's writing, and I am positive the signature James Winters is—I found among Honour's papers a number connected with the proposed insurance of Powis, including this proposal and this letter addressed to H. H. Powis from the Norwich Union, and signed Bruce Morrison.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. I saw Winters yesterday, he was stopped by a constable as he was drank, and I am not sure he is not in custody now—he was at Bow Street, but was not called as a witness—Monson came and gave me information, and so not did Norgate—there was a large mass of papers and documents at Honour's place.
Cross-examined, by MR. RAWLINSON. Winters was subpœnaed by me at the Police-court and here, too—he would be too drunk to call—he was reeling drunk yesterday and not fit to be a witness; I have not seen him since; he is habitually drunk—I also subpœnaed Mr. Elgood and Mr. Sydney—they are sober—they were not called—I had not heard of this personation business before July, 1897; I knew nothing about the writ being issued by the Norwich Union—the matter had not been reported in my division—I might have read it in the paper, I took no
notice of it as it was a civil matter—no steps were taken by the police—I knew Monson well by sight before I had an interview with him in October—I had more than one interview with him about October and November—I knew of the alleged personation in September or October, and I saw him on October 20th and subsequent dates in reference to this and other business—I took him once into Hatchett's and treated him to a glass of ale; that is the only time I remember having refreshment with him—that was before he made a statement to me—there was conversation about his making a statement to me—I had met him at a solicitor's office before that—I did not think he was absconding from the charge—after charging Monson I went to his lodgings at Arundel Street and searched them; I had no warrant—I think I had a right to doit; it is a practice I have carried out for a long time past—at the Police-court a suggestion was made that Winter was drunk and was not fit to be called, and he stood up and made an exclamation of some sort; I could not hear what it was.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. I consider I have the right to search the rooms of persons who are in custody, without a search-warrant—I have not got the opinion of the law officers of the Grown nor of Mr. Wontner—it is the custom of myself and my brother officers—I saw Metcalfe several times on the Sunday after his arrest in the cells, and talked to him—he talked about his wife and family, and I allowed him to write a letter to his wife and sent it for him, and he talked about being allowed to have refreshments in the cell—I did not suggest to him that if he made a statement I would put it before the Treasury—there was no conversation about a statement—there was no suggestion that he should assist me, as Norgate was doing—I did not tell him that the Treasury did not want to hit him, but they did want to hit the other two, not a word about it.
AGILIO MEZZARA . I had a restaurant at 13, Panton Street, Haymarket—late in April, 1896, Metcalfe, with Monson, brought me this cheque, and asked me to cash it—Metcalfe's endorsement was already on it; I cashed it—I cannot remember to whom I gave the money; they were together at the time—they had some luncheon, and whether I gave them the cash before the luncheon or whether I took for the luncheon out of the cheque, and gave them the difference I do not remember—that was the first time I had seen Metcalfe—Monson introduced him to me—I had known Monson a few days before as he was lodging in the house—I don't remember if anyone else was with them at the luncheon—I have seen Honour at my restaurant on one occasion; none of the other defendants were there at the time—I have been to Honour's office in Jermyn Street with Monson—Monson took me there—Norgate has been once or twice to my restaurant with Monson.
Cross-examined by MR. RANDOLPH. I went to Honour's office just before I gave up my restaurant—I went bankrupt and Monson took me to Honour to try and borrow some money—I did not get it—I went to Honour's office because Monson owed me money and I wanted to get it—I went once by myself, and once with Monson.
Cross-examined by MR. RAWLINSON. I cashed the cheque when the luncheon was going on, and deducted the price of the luncheon and handed over the difference.
Cross-examined by MR. RICHARDS. I cannot say if Norgate was at the luncheon.
GUILTY .— The JURY strongly recommended Metcalfe to mercy. MR. MATHEWS stated that Monson had acted in a similar way in other cases, and that part of Honour's business had been to get young men into his hands and induce them to commit forgery, which could be used as meant of extorting money from their parents,
HONOUR and MONSON— Five Years' Penal Servitude each. METCALFE— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
The COURT commended the conduct of Inspector Arrow.
OLD COURT.—Monday, 1st August, 1898, and 5 following days.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrance.
526. LOUIS SIMONS LUPTON, JAMES MONTAGUE COWARD, JOHN HUNTER STEPHENSON, WALTER RICHARD BURGOYNE WATTS , and WILLIAM FRANK BURGOYNE WATTS for unlawfully conspiring together by false pretences to obtain from such of Her Majesty's subjects as should thereafter be induced to buy shares in the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited, divers of their moneys, Eight other Counts charged Coward and Stephenson with making and publishing a statement in the City Times which was, to their knowledge, false in material particulars with intent to defraud the shareholders of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited, of which they were directors, and Lupton and W. R. B. Watts, and W. F. B. Watts with aiding and abetting them; The tenth Count charged the obtaining by false pretences from Victor Herbert Tymms an order for the payment of £37 3s., with intent to defraud; The eleventh Count charged the prisoners with conspiring together to commit that offence, and on sixteen other Counts they were charged with fraud and conspiracy.
THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL, MR. SUTTON, MR. C. F. GILL, and MR. H. AVOBY prosecuted; SIR EDWARD CLARKE, MR. C. W. MATHBWS, and MR. BODKIN defended Lupton; MR. MARSHALL HALL, Q.C., and MR. HIGGINS defended Coward; MR. ROBSON, Q.C., and MR. C. F. LOWENTHAL defended Stephenson; MR. RUFUS ISAACS, Q.C., MR. GEORGE ELLIOTT, and MR. GORDON DAVIES, defended Walter R. B. Watts; and MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS and MR. E. BOYD defended William F. B. Watts.
GEORGE WILLOUGHBY CORNELIUS . I am in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies—I produce from Somerset House the file of a company called James V. Turner Lupton and Company, Limited—the company was registered on November 3rd, 1892, by F. W. Crick—the memorandum and articles of association are on the file—one of the objects of this new company is to promote companies—the signatures of the signatories to the memorandum and articles of association are witnessed by James Arthur Comper—the registered offices of the company are at 5, Copthall Buildings—the business of the company in addition to the promotion of companies is the business of stock and share dealers—Louis Sirnous Lupton is the vendor to the company—he purports to sell the goodwill of his
bus ness in 100 shares of £10 each—there is a provision that the company is to indemnify the vendor against all actions in connection with the business; and also a provision that the books of the company are to revert to the vendor when the company have no further use for them, the purchase was to be completed on November 14th, 1892—that agreement was executed by Louis S. Lupton and Mr. Woollaston and Mr. Neale, described as directors of the company—I find on the file a special resolution dated May 18th, 1896, confirmed on June 15th, 1896, for the voluntary winding up of the company—Ernest Edward Mackenzie, the first liquidator, resigned, and the liquidators were then Comper and Ward—the resolution for the winding-up is signed "Louis S. Lupton, chairman"—the first meeting of the winding-up is registered on December 31st, 1896—I also produce the file of the company called the "City Times Publishing Company, Limited," registered on December 3rd, 1894, by W. R. Burgoyne Waters—the object of the company is to take over the paper called the City Times—the signatures of the signatories to the memorandum and articles of association are witnessed by W. R. Burgoyne Watts—the first registered office of the company is 5, Copthall Buildings—I find on the file three returns of shareholders, one on April 15th, 1895, another on December 31st, 1896, and another on December 31st, 1897—the three returns are identical—the nominal capital of the company is £2,000, the paid-up capital £7—the notice of the address of the company is signed Burgoyne Watts and Company, as solicitors for the company—I also produce from Somerset House the file of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited, registered on August 24th, 1895—the registered address of the company is 3, Newman's Court, Cornhill, registered by J. H. Stephenson, director—that appears to have been lodged by A. H. Brotheridge, of 5, Copthall Buildings—the memorandum and articles of association on that file are dated August, 21st, 1895—the names of the printers of it are Messrs. Ford and Turner—I find on the file an agreement of September 5th, 1895, purported to have been made between William George Strickland and the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited—it purports to convey certain mining claims, plant, machinery, and effects in the Lydenburg district of the Transvaal—the property is described in the schedule as at Surkersboschkop, B., No. 304 district, Carolina Ward, Komati, adjoining the Lionsdale estate property on the south-east boundary, about 600 morgen or 1,200 acres—the agreement is executed by two directors, J. H. Stephenson and J. Coward—the consideration shown in the agreement is 100,000 fully paid shares of £1 each, No. 8 to 100,007—it is provided that the agreement. is to be filed at Somerset House before the issue or allotment of any of the shares; the agreement bears the signature of the secretary of the company, Berlrand G. Nash, and of the vendor, W. G. Strickland—I find on the file a summary of capital and shares made up to October 29th, 1895—the total number of shares issued is 100,007; on that date the number of shareholders was about 190—I find on the file an extraordinary general meeting of the company was held at the Great Eastern Hotel, Liverpool Street, on May 8th, 1897, at which a resolution was passed to wind up the company, and an order of the Court to wind up the company, dated May 19th, registered on May 25th—this "Witness to the sealing of the Lydeuburg Consolidated Mines, Limited, and the
signature of "William George Strickland, Bertrand G. Nash, secretary," is in a different handwriting to the body of the agreement.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. "Bertrand G. Nash" is not in the same writing as the word "secretary."
Cross-examined by MR. LOWENHAL. The address was registered by Mr. Brotheridge; it was not registered by Stephenson, but it was signed by him as a director of the company.
BERTRAND GEORGE NASH . My brother was office-boy to the defendant Stephenson, at No. 3, Newman's Court—when I left school, in August, 1895, I went to that office as an office-boy—I got five shillings a week—I am 16 1/2 now—I was 13 1/2 then—soon after I went there I saw the name of the Lydendburg Consolidated Mines on the other side of the passage—Stephenson sometimes went into that office—I have only seen Coward once or twice in Newman's Court, but I know him by sight—I saw him in Mr. Stephenson'B office—I know Lupton's office at 5, Copthall Buildings—I went there about a month after I became office-boy to Mr. Stephenson—I went there because they were doing some overtime; they wanted me to help them—I went to do writing—I went there at four o'clock in the afternoon, and they told me to come back at nine o'clock at night, which I did—they said if I would just write my name they would say I had called; and that I was not old enough to stop; and so I went home—I wrote my name on a plain piece of paper as I thought—I do not know who told me to write my name on this plain piece of paper; one of the gentlemen who was in the office—I did not see the whole of the paper—the part I wrote on was plain—other papers were strewn about on the desk; they were lying all about the paper—I signed my name, "Bertrand G. Nash;" nothing else—the signature on this agreement, "Bertrand G. Nash," is my writing—all this other writing was not here when I wrote my name on that day, but I recognise that as my writing—the word "secretary" was not there when I wrote it—the seal on that document of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines was not there when I wrote my name—I did not see that seal put—that is the document I signed at that time—I did not know I signed a document—that that was the only one I signed at that time—this is a duplicate to that agreement, that signature, "Bertrand G. Nash" is my writing, but I do not recollect signing it—it was not done at the same time—I do not know when it was—I did not sign at any other time my name to some document—I cannot tell how my name comes there—I did not know that I was secretary of this company—someone drew their finger cross and told me to write my name there—that was at nine o'clock at night—I got 6d. for it—I did not see who gave me the 6d., it was put on desk in front of me.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I was sent to the office by Mr. Stephenson—my hours were not very late at night—I left about half—past four—I heard there were people doing overwork at another office, and I wanted to do some overwork, that was why I called there—Mr. Lupton was not there when I went at nine o'clock—I went to Mr. Lupton's office—I was to do the overwork there—there were the people doing overwork there, and a lot of paper, about on the table—they told me if I wrote my name they
would tell somebody I had called—then they said I was not old enough—I got 6d. for my tea—they did not say anything about my not being able to write well enough—I am sure I only wrote my name once, and that time on a blank piece of paper—I was never asked to sign any-thing else—next morning I went back and told Mr. Stephenson that I was not old enough to do overwork—I did nothing and got 6d, for doing nothing.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBSON. I don't remember how many persons were in the room when I signed the paper—there were about seven persons present—Mr. Stephenson was not one of the number—there was a lot of papers strewn about on the desk, and some of them were over the agreement—I could not tell what the document was because the papers were covering it—all I could see was the place where I could put my name—that was pointed out to me by a finger—I am sure that is correct—I went there on the chance of getting some work, which I did not get—Mr. Stephenson said nothing to me about signing my name or anything of the kind.
Re-examined. Mr. Stephenson sent me to Lupton's office—he told me about the overtime, and where it was—I told him next day I went round there, and they told me to go back at 9 o'clock, and when I got there they said I was not old enough, and they gave me 6d., and he laughed—I told him I had signed my name to say that I had called—I did not get anything besides this 6d.—I live at Highbury, I went home—I did not wait about—I got my tea and 6d. for this—the endorsement on this letter of September 12th is in my writing—it is "Jas. V. Turner, Lupton and Co., 5, Copthall Buildings, London, September 17th, 1895"—Mr. Stephenson told me to put it there—it is addressed from 5, Copthall Buildings, September, 12th, 1895, to H. Stephenson, Esq.—(Read): "Dear Sir,—We have sent Mr. Marshall up to your office; he will be able to do any certifying, etc., that is required.—Yours faithfully, JAS. V. TURNER, LUPTON and Co., Limited."
By MR. ROBSON. It was my business as clerk to Mr. Stephenson to endorse letters as I have endorsed that—I endorsed that in the ordinary course of business without any special directions at all.
ALFRED ERNEST MARSHALL . My address is 46, Gray's Inn Road—I know the defendant Lupton; I got employment as a clerk in September, 1895, at a company he was connected with called the African Gold Concessions and Development Company, Limited—on September 12th I was asked to go from the African Gold Concessions to 3, Newman's Court, Cornhill, by Mr. Lupton to act ns clerk to the Lydenburg Consolidated—when I got to Newman's Court I found on the door the name of the company, and in the office of the company some of Lupton's clerks: Frederick William Crick, William Neales, and William James Thomas; they were people I had known before at Lupton's—I took charge of the office—I found there a complete set of books; suitable books for a company, nicely bound and gold-lettered—they were all clean when I went there; there were no entries in any of them; and amont them was a minute-book, bound and lettered like the others—the duties I did when I first went to the office were receiving and giving receipts for transfers—I attended
the meetings of directors; I am not certain as to the date of the first meeting of directors I attended; it was about a month after I went there—I attended about three meetings—I continued in the service of the company up to December 4th, 1895—I made some entries in the minute-book while I was there—I got the material from one of Lupton's clerks; it was given to me on sheets of foolscap—it had been recently copied; I believe he was copying it from some other material, the ink was wet when I got it—I made entries into the minute-book from these memo-rand a so received; they did not relate to meetings at which I had been present—I was not able to enter the dates of them—I entered up these meetings about the middle of October; they were all entered up at the same time—I remember there was a meeting on September 4th, and some question being raised as to the dates of the meetings—all the directors were present; that was Colonel Lambart, Major Prust, Mr. Coward, and Mr. Stephenson—they wanted to know why the minutes were entered up without dates; I said the meetings had not been held; someone said the meetings had been held, and the result was there was some unpleasantness—I tendered my resignation; at that time I was secretary—at the time I resigned I had got the memoranda from which I had entered up the minutes; they were in the minute-book as well—I gave them to Mr. Thompson, my successor; he was secretary after me—he paid me what was due to me; and gave me a £5 note in addition—I signed some paper when I handed him these foolscap writings—in going away I left behind me not only the memoranda from which I had entered up the minutes, but also the minute-book in which I had made the entries and every other book—during the time I was there there was no allotment of shares; I was given to understand an allotment had been made, from one of Lupton's clerks, I forget which—there appears in the books an allotment of 100,000 shares, split up into five lots of 20,000 each; that was in the books when I was there, 20,000 to James Pope; I believe he was James Arthur Comper; I think he was the same man—William Thomas Wallace was an allottee of another 20,000; he was Walter James Wall, one of the clerks at Lupton's—Comper was clerk to Lupton—George White was another allottee of 20,000 shares—I do not know him—I do not know Cecil Stanley—Harry Valentine is the last, he was myself—that distinguished name is a family name—when I came there transfers came in, and receipts were given for the transfers—certificates for shares were issued—the share ledger was kept there by me—I find that by September 30th 7,569 shares had been sold for £14,780—after September 30th, and up to the date of my leaving, certificates for further shares were issued referring to sales of about £6,000—up to the time I left, during the whole time I was acting there, when the transfers of shares were received and certificates issued, James Pope was in all cases the vendor—this bundle of transfers (produced) marked No. 11, are the transfers that I received during the time I was secretary—the transfers came in from September 13th down to December 7th—the transfers in this bundle. No. 1 to No. 168, were passed by the directors on October 7th, 1895—October 17th was the first meeting of directors that I was present at—this minute-book was not at the office of the company during the time that I was there—this is not the minute-book I left behind me, and therefore it is not the minute-book that I had
entered up—the entries go over the time I was there—looking at that minute-book, I see that at a meeting on August 29th, 1895, it is represented that I was appointed secretary on that date—I may have been appointed, though I was not actually acting as secretary—I know nothing of it—I know nothing of the signatories at the first meeting that was held on August 22nd—I did not come in contact with them in any way—at the meeting which is said to have been held on September 2nd, 1895, it appears there that the secretary was instructed to write to the vendor requesting immediate transfer of the property of the company, but I had nothing to do with the company at that date—I was not present, and, not being instructed, I did not, of course, write to the vendors—on September 12th I went there, and the first meeting I attended was October 17th 1895—on September 2nd I had no communication of any sort or kind with the company—on September 2nd it says here, "The secretary reported that the offices of the company had been duly registered," that is not true—the next meeting at which I am represented as being present is September 5th—it is there resolved, "That the secretary be instructed to call a statutory meeting to be held at the Cannon Street Hotel on October 15th next, at 2 p.m., and that lie be and is hereby authorised to engage a room at the place specified for that purpose, and to give due notice to all shareholders of the same"—I was not present at that meeting—no such instructions were given to me on that date—I did not engage any room at the Cannon Street Hotel—I did not give any notice to the shareholders of the meeting—this minute-book, so far as I know, was not in existence at the time I left—I said that the first meeting of directors I was present at was the one on October 17th; I am afraid I was wrong there—I have no recollection of dates; this book is the only thing that will assist me as to the dates—I see no meeting was held on October 4th—I received three weeks' salary from Lupton, that was all after September 12th—after three weeks I used to pay myself out of moneys coming from the registration fees—I do not recollect any meeting on October 10th at which I was present; there may have been a meeting; I was present at three or four meetings; it is a long time back to recollect—there was no meeting that I was present at in October at which there was a representative of the vendor of the company—I believe there was a meeting at which I was present when the subject of the appointment of the manager of the mine was discussed, but I have no recollection of it; the subject was mentioned at one meeting as to appointing a manager—I never saw the manager—only the four directors and myself were present—I wrote a report in the minute-book of the meeting at which I was present—I remember being spoken to with regard to a meeting that was to take place at the Cannon Street Hotel by Mr. Coward's office-boy about eleven o'clock; I do not know the date; it might have been October 15th—that was the first that I heard of the meeting being held, and in consequence of what the boy said I sent off telegrams to the directors in the terms of this one (produced)—(read) addressed to Colonel the Honourable O. G. Lambart, 11, Cliff, Southend, "Kindly attend meeting of Lupton's at 12 o'clock"—that agrees with my recollection at the time I got the message—it is rather short notice for the gentleman to come, possibly so; I believel was in fault myself;
I went early the day before—I did not know Mr. Coward in any capacity except as a director of the company; I have seen him at 5, Copthall Buildings, the office of the City Times—the boy came up the same afternoon as I went—I had not taken in any letters at Cannon Street—I went to Cannon Street—before I went there I put a printed notice on the door to the effect that a meeting was being held—I got that from the secretary—when I got to the meeting Lupton's clerks were there—there was Warner Green, and Walter James Wall, Mackenzie and William Neales, and a person of the name of Shakley—I have seen Mr. Neales at the office at 5, Copthall Buildings—he became a director after that date of the African Consession—they were all the audience, or the shareholders—the clerks, Major Prust, Mr. Stephenson, Mr. Coward, and myself represented the company—everything was done in a regular way—I read the notice convening the meeting—I had first seen that notice that morning—I had not seen any committee of the shareholders—having read the notice convening the meeting, Major Prust read a report with regard to the property—I do not know what, but something was said as to Colonel Lainbart's absence by Major Prust—I believe what he read from was brought from Mr. Coward—he read the report of the company's property, by the manager of the mines—he said he was sorry to see so few shareholders present, but through the Press they might see their money was in a good concern; that was all—nothing happened after that—there was a vote of thanks to the chairman—I do not know who proposed that—the report of the manager was taken away by one of the directors—I never saw it again—I did not take any steps to publish it through the Press—I did not make any report with regard to that to the news-papers—I do not know if there were any reporters present—I have no recollection of them, but there might have been—I believe one of the clerks got some information from Major Prust, but I do not quite recollect what it was—he suggested what it was—I remember that Major Prust answered that, but I believe he was in total ignorance of what the people were—they might have been shareholders for all he knew—I entered a record of that meeting of October 15th in the minute-book—only the directors were present—the board meetings were supposed to be fortnightly—there were three or four meetings I attended which the directors attended; I did not see anybody attending as a solicitor—at the meetings I attended neither of the directors was there—the meetings were not, in fact, held every fort-night—they could not have been; I suppose I should have called them—I managed the company, and if I called a meeting they would have attended—I called a meeting when it suited me—while I was there I wrote some letters, which were copied in the letter-book—I have no recollection what the business of the company was from September 12th to December 4th—I have no recollection what letters there were—I attended the meetings and gave receipts for transfers as they came in—I put the transfers before the directors and the certificates were issued—that was the business I did—during the time I was there I never saw the Strickland agreement of September 5th, but I may have known of it on that date from one of Lupton's clerks—I did not know Strickland; I did not know who Bertrand G. Nash was at that date—I never saw the greement until long afterwards—I had no property of the company
except the books—I kept the seal of the company; it was produced at the board meetings—after I had left the company I saw the minutebook; that was on some occasion when I visited the offices of the company—I saw a clerk there named Lewis; the first seventeen meetings in the minute-hook (produced) are in the handwriting of Lewis—I knew a clerk named Abbott in the African Concession; the entries from eighteen to twenty-five are in his handwriting—I know the handwriting of the defendant Stephenson; the minutes of the meetings 32, 33 and 34 are in his handwriting—I know the handwriting of another clerk, named Connelley, who was in the African Gold Concession; the minutes of the meetings 36, 37, 38 and 39 are his writing; 26 to 31 are in Thompson's writing—while I was there I made a return of the shareholders in the Lydenburg on October 29th, 1895; that is a correct return of the shareholders as they appear as the shareholders of the company—the signature in the Strickland agreement of September 5th was the signature in the writing of the defendant Stephenson; the same applies to the duplicate of the agreement—I should not like to say I knew Mr. Coward's hand-writing—during the time I was there between September and December I saw one or two advertisements in the newspapers with reference to the Lydenburg companies; they were not inserted by me—as secretary, I did not insert any matters in the Frees; I did not insert a report of the statutory meeting of October 15th—when I sent out notices for a meeting there was always one held; in fact, a meeting was held on December 4th, where I had a interview—I do not think I made an entry—I was not invited to resign in consequence of severe indisposition—there was a meeting again on December 5th; I was not present at the meeting, but I was on the premises—when I say there was a meeting I have no authority to say there was a meeting, but the directors were there at a meeting, but I do not know whether that was a meeting or not; I had resigned then—I was called secretary pro tern.; I wished it.
Tuesday, August 2nd.
ALFRED ERNEST MARSHALL (Further examined by MR. GILL.) This transfer receipt book (produced) is the book I started to keep when I went to the office—it commenced on September 12th or 13th—the memoranda given to me to enter up the minute-book I showed to Coward—he approved of them—with regard to the signatures of the first meeting of the company purporting to be hold on August 22nd, 1895, before the directors were appointed, in the minute-book I left at the office there were no signatures to the first meeting—I see the names of the signatories to the memoranda and articles of association—I took the minute-book to two of the signatories with a view to getting their signatures—I did not get their signatures—when I left in December the first meeting was not signed.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. During the time I was there there were two, three, or four meetings of directors—I cannot remember whether there were two, three, or four—I have not the slightest recollection; there may have been more than four, at which I was present—I hare no idea as to the dates upon which they took place—I have no memoranda of any sort or kind to aid my recollection—I have mentioned one subject difscussed, about the appointment of a manager—I cannot tell what date that was—the name of Hamilton, I believe, was mentioned
as a manager—I have no recollection of hearing mention of what Mr. Hamilton was—his name was mentioned in connection with the appointment of an engineer—however many of the meetings of directors there were Mr. Lupton was never present at any one of them—I could not recollect the date of the meeting at Cannon Street, apart from suggestion—with regard to the meeting on October 15th, somebody had come the day before with the message which would have enabled me to send out the letters reminding the directors of the meeting by the previous night's post—I say candidly I was not giving the company the attention I should have done at that time; it is probable I may have had instructions to call the meeting some weeks back—I had not done so—the message did not go out until the day of the meeting—as far as Colonel Lambart was concorned that was too late—Mr. Lupton was not at that meeting—so far as I know Mr. Lupton had nothing to do with the speech which was made by Major Prust—I had heard of the agreement called the Strickland agreement some time before September 12th; some time before I went there—I had not heard anything of the negotiations about that agreement—the early part of the minute-book that was produced to me was in Mr. Lewis' writing, not the memoranda of the early meetings of the directors; they were in Mr. Mackenzie's writing—as to the material from which Mr. Mackenzie made those I did not see in whose writing those were—I said in my examination "I attended the meetings of the Lydenburg directors and I kept the minute-book. I wrote it up from the agenda. I prepared the agenda on foolscap paper"—I prepared the agenda paper—I wrote it on foolscap, and having at the meeting noted down what was done on the agenda paper would write out the minutes from that—that would be the ordinary and proper course—I put the foolscap a on which I prepared the agenda with the papers I received paper Mr. Mackenzie, handed them all on to Thompson—I do not remember the time I had the first conversation with the directors upon the subject of the minutes—we have had one or two words with the directors—I had entered up in a book what purported to be the minutes of the earlier company—at each meeting of the directors the chairman ought to sign the minutes of the previous meeting—I noticed that in the book that was before me the minutes were signed by Major Prust and Colonel Lambart—in other books than that there were entries of the earlier meetings of this company which had been signed by Colonel Lambart only—minutes of meetings which had been held before I went there on September 12th appeared in their regular order, signed by Colonel Lambart—I have spoken of the transfers of shares coming in as early as September 13th—no share certificate was delivered out from the office till October 18th—the directors had done nothing with them they had been signed at the board meeting, but their certificates had not been handed to the public at all; the public never received their certificates till after October 17th; they were never delivered out—I do not know that I quite understood what was the object of putting large batches of shares in different names—the object would be, when transfers of those shares were made that it should not appear that they were all coming from the same person; that would be the idea, I suppose—that suggests itself to me as the natural reason—whether the shares were worth much or little it would be desirable that it should not be
known that one person was selling all the shares—those mentioned, Pope, Wall and so on, were clerks; I do not know that they represented those individuals; I have only seen some of their writing—I went in another name, Valentine—I have no recollection of signing that name—if those shares, held by me in that name, had to be transferred, I would of course, have signed that name—it did not occur to me that there was anything dishonest or improper in that—it would not affect the value of the shares whether they were split up into twenty lots.
Cross-examined by MR. LOWENTHAL. I resigned my post as secretary—I did not give any reason for resigning—I know nothing of the meetings in August and September, not before September 12th—the meetings in August and September were supposed to have taken place in August and September—the minutes are entered up from Mackenzie's draft—those meetings which I said had not taken place were meetings which were supposed to have taken place in August and September—I said before the Magistrate on April 18th, "I entered into it the minutes of meetings which were stated to have taken place in August and September"—I believed them to have been held in August and September—that was what I entered in the minute-book from Mackenzie's draft—I had not resigned because those meetings had not taken place—it was some of the others of a later date; I am only going by this minute-book which I produce here—I entered, from September 12th, all the minutes which had taken place—I said that not all the meetings which had not taken place were meetings notes of which Mackenzie gave me—I gave 110 reason for my resignation at all—the reason why I really resigned was that I was asked to enter in the minute-look the minutes from the draft Mackenzie gave me, and I said that those meetings had not taken place—I say that the meetings I say did not take place were meetings, notes of which Mackenzie gave me—they were before I was secretary—the directors asserted that those meetings had taken place—I do not admit that I was dismissed by the directors for improperly keeping the minute-book and for drinking—I have already mentioned that I was not giving the company the attention I should have done—I admit that the directors had cause for complaint against me.
Cross-examined by MR. EUFUS ISAACS. During the whole time I was secretary of the company I attended at the office fairly regularly—during the whole of that time I never saw the defendant Walter B. B. Watts.
Cross-examined by MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS. The notes I received from Mackenzie, from which I entered up the old minute book, which Colonel Lambart signed, were not dated—when I left the situation altogether that oil minute-book was entirely made up, with the exception of the dates; the dates were absent—that would be the dates of the meetings up to October 17th; the dates are in of the meetings I attended—I never attended a meeting till October 17th—I dated the minutes I attended my-self; most decidedly so—that would be after October 17th and up to December 4th, and none of those meetings were attended by Williams Watts.
Re-examined I heard of the Strickland agreement some time before September 12th; that was some time before I went to the office of the Lydenburg Company, while I was in the employment of the
African Gold Concessions—when I came to the office of the Lydenburg I never saw that agreement—I went on September 12th; the first meeting I attended was the meeting of October 17th—looking at this minute-book, I see entered a minute of a meeting of October 4th, at which I am represented as being present; I also see entered there a minute of October 10th at which I am represented as being present—under that minute of October 10th I see a statement that the board were informed by the repre sentative of the vendor of the completion of the transfer of the property—I am sorry I am wrong as to dates; I say this only from the book—October 104 was the first meeting I was ever present at—the statutory meeting was held on the 15th, and I was present at that—altogether, I seem to have been present at three meetings and the statutory meeting—I say I attended three or four meetings; it may have been five; I have so distinct recollection; it is so long back—the minute-book I had written up from memoranda supplied to me was not placed before the directors on October 17th, nor on any date—the minute-book, with the minutes I had entered, was signed by the directors at the meeting in October; all the previous minutes were signed at the same time—the transfers came in as from September 13th—the certificates for shares were first issued to the public in October; they were dated on September 13th, at from the time the transfers came in.
By MR. MATHEWS. The signing of the minutes by the directors occurred in the month of October, not in December; they signed so many minutes as were then in existence.
WILLIAM HERBERT THOMPSON . I was employed as secretary of the Lydenburg Consolidated Company in December, 1895; before that I had been employed at a company called the African Gold Concessions—I went to the Lydenburg about December 11th; Mr. Lupton told me to go there—I was employed at the African Gold Concessions as secretary and also with a seat on the Board of Directors—at the Lydenburg Company I became the secretary; upon going there I saw Marshall, the last witness—I settled with him, on the instructions of Mr. Lupton—I paid the money due to him for salary and also gave him a sum of £5—when he was going away he handed me any written memoranda that he had—when I took up my work with the company I had no knowledge what ever of what had taken place before I went to the office; I knew nothing at that time with regard to the property of the company—I found a set of books there, the ordinary books of a company—I did not personally take up the work in connection with the receiving of transfers, giving receipts, and so on; I had a clerk to do it under me, named Lewis; he was the first clerk—as the directors, I saw Colonel Lambart, the Chairman, Major Prust, Mr. Stephenson, and J. M. Coward—an arrangement was made as to my salary with the directors—I saw Mr. Willie Watt, as representing the solicitors—he used to attend at the office as the solicitor to the company—as to whom was present at the first meeting of the directors, I could only answer by seeing the minute-book; I do not remember it—I do not remember ever seeing that minute-book—I have a very indistinct recollection about that circumstance, but I fancy I was told it was at the solicitor's—I did not bring a minute-book with me, but after-wards I brought a blank book that was turned into a minute-book—I brought the book on my own initiative, the actual book, but I was in
structed or told there would have to be a new minute book written up—I think it was principally the gentleman who attended as solicitor, Mr. William Watts, who told me that—that was the only one I ever came into contact with at the Lydenbure—I think the minute-book had been taken away before I came; I do not remember seeing it—I cannot remember if I asked for it, but it is very possible that in asking for the different books I should have asked where is the minute-book; at that time I was very busy—I cannot remember if I asked Marshall for the minute book—it was a blank book, and under the instructions I received from the gentleman who was acting as solicitor, Mr. Willie Watts, who supplied certain memoranda and an old minute-book for it to be written up from, I told the clerk Lewis to write it up—I was supplied with the old minute-book after I came there; whether it was brought to me after I went there I cannot remember—I cannot remember the appearance of it; I was in doubt all along about that one; I cannot remember whether it had a green rover or not—Mr. W. Watts Landed it to me—I instructed the clerk Lewis to write it up in accordance with these memoranda—this is the minute-book—the gentleman who represented the solicitors, Willie Watts, instructed me to where it up—this is the book that was written up—Willie Watts took away the old book—I think he took away the memoranda as well, but they were not so much in my possession as in the possession of the clerk Lewis—the first entry in that minute-book purports to refer to a meeting held on August 22nd—I never saw the signatures—so far as I know they were obtained by William Watts; he took away the book for that purpose—he brought it back signed as it is now—it is signed by four out of the seven signatories—there is an extraordinary general meeting signed "Buckland "; that was obtained in the same way—the next meeting is signed "O. G. Lambart, Chairman"—that was signed after all these previous meetings had been written up—the first meeting at which I appear to have been present was the meeting of the 11th December—it would be very shortly after that that all the back minutes would have been signed up—they were signed as they appear to be signed there now, by Lambart, Stephenson, and Prust—the book was passed round at a board meeting some short time after I became secretary and was signed up—I never saw the Strickland agreement—William Watts was present at the meeting of December 11th—I see there the entry in the minutes: "The secretary was instructed to ascertain from the solicitors as to the due registration in South Africa of the property of the company from the vendors; also to write to Mr. Hamilton, the manager at the mine, respecting the same "; that is down here—I do not remember writing to the solicitors—I do not remember whether I did or not—I wrote to Mr. Hamilton—this was a copy of a letter of 11th December, 1895—(read) "Mr. Hamilton, manager, Surkersboschkop. Dear Sir,—At a board meeting held here to-day I was instructed by my directors to write and ask you to, at once, inform them as to whether the property of the company has been duly registered in their names in South Africa. Please reply immediately. Yours truly, W. H. THOMPSON, Secretary"—that was the only Address that I had got of the mine at that time—the address is Mr. Hamilton—I had a lot of trouble to find out where to send the envelope,
but eventually I think it was addressed to John J. Hamilton, Esq., Transvaal, or something like that—it reached Mr. Hamilton, and I received this answer from Mr. Hamilton some months afterwards: "Lionsdale, 4th February, 1896. W. H. Thompson, Esq., Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited. Dear Sir,—Your favour of the 12th, December has only just reached me, in consequence of the address being Surkersboschkop B, which is not a postal address. It has been wander-ing all over the Transvaal. My address is Lionsdale Estates, Carolina, S. A. R. From the address of your letter Surkersboechkop B, I presume it is in connection with the property, which has, I believe, been disposed of by our board, and I have forwarded your letter to our Johannesburg agents, the British and Transvaal Financial, requesting them to give you the information you wish—Yours truly (signed), JOHN J. HAMILTON"—that was the only communication I ever had with Mr. Hamilton during the time that I was acting as secretary; the only communication or letter—I never found at the office of the company any report from a mining manager or mining engineer—what purported to be a report, read at the statutory meeting of October 15th, never came into my possession—from the time that I became secretary, transfers came in from time to time—the next meeting that I was present at was December 17th—William Watts was present at that meeting—the transfers were placed before the directors, and certificates for shares were sealed and issued—I reported the fact that I had written to the company's solicitor and also to Mr. Hamilton—the next meeting of the company was on January 8th—William Watts was present at that meeting, and transfers were produced to the directors and the certificates sealed and signed—I see the secretary reported on the disturbed state of South Africa, and the solicitors did not think it advisable at present to send the money out there for the due registration of the company's property, bat same would be done immediately it was safe so to do—that was a statement made by Mr. William Watts—I also reported at that meeting that a month's fees of directors had become due from the 4th inst., and I was instructed to pay the same—the money to pay the directors was to come out of the bank, if there was a banking account at that time; I forget whether there was a banking account at that time—I should have to apply to Lupton for the money—on January 22nd another meeting was held—I reported that I had been unable to open the banking account owing to financial arrangements not being completed; financial arrange-ments with Mr. Lupton—there was another meeting on January 27th; I think this financial arrangement refers to the half-a-crown agreement, but I will not be certain—a sum of half-a-crown was to be paid to the company in respect of every share that Mr. Lupton sold; there was some Agreement to that effect, and I think that refers to it—that arrangement was not completed; I am speaking from memory, but I think that is what it refers to—for every complete share 2s. 6d. was to be paid by Lupton, as he sold his block of shares—I have not got transfer 241 here—that is a transfer of 500 shares from James Pope to Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts—to the best of my knowledge Pope was a clerk in Mr. Lupton's office—in a great many of the transfers of shares which were placed before the Directors and passed, James Pope appeared as the vendor—there was a
meeting of the company on January 27th in which the position of the company was discussed, and the fact mentioned that the company's property had not been yet duly registered in Africa—at that meeting William Burgoyne Watts was present—there was another meeting on January 29th at which Watts was also present—at that meeting I reported that I had sold 100 shares of the company to Mr. Lupton—having sold the shares to Mr. Lupton I opened a banking account at the London and South-Western Bank, and cheques were paid to the directors Lambart, Prust, Coward, and Stephenson, and also a cheque for myself, and a cheque for office expenses—there was another meeting of the company on February 8th—the banking account was, to begin with, £100—on February 5th I reported that the balance at the bank was £36 19s. 7d.—the directors' fees and the secretary's salary would came the account to be overdrawn—I was instructed to obtain a small loan not exceeding £15, so as to enable the cheques drawn that day to be honoured—I am not quite sure where I got the loan, but I think I lent it myself—sufficient money was paid in to enable the cheques to be cleared—I see it was £12 I paid in to make up the deficiency—that was sufficient to meet the cheques drawn at that meeting—the balance was a few shillings—that was all that there was in the bank at that time—at that meeting I reported that the promoters of the company had made an offer of half-a-crown a share, in order to provide working capital for the company—that is what was called the half-crown agreement; it was the agreement I was referring to—that offer was accepted—there was a stipulation that some of the money was to be paid at once; £400 or £500, I think—at that meeting I was granted leave of absence not exceeding four months from the 15th inst., upon my providing an assistant-secretary—at that time I was going to Cape Colony for the African Gold Concession—at the same time I was to look for this property—I was present at a meeting on February 10th, when I produced the company's cash-book and the office cash-book for the inspection of the board—I was present at the meeting of February 12th—William Watts was present at both of those meetings on February 10th and 12th—the half-crown agreement was discussed at the meetings of February 10th and 12th—a resolution was passed that the £12 due to the secretary be drawn out of the first funds coming to the company—I was also present at the meeting of February 14th—this minute occurs on February 12th: "On the discussion of the affairs of the company the solicitor reported that the draft agreement for the payment of 2s. 6d. per share, for providing working capital, had been approved, but upon the engrossment being produced Messrs. J. V. Turner Lupton and Co, Limited, had objected, and struck out clause 3, and after some discussion the solicitor advised the board not to accept it in its present condition, more especially as one of the signatories of the document was not a director of the said firm of J. V. Turner Lupton and Co., Limited, and the solicitor further advised that taking into account the present critics that of the company, counsel's opinion should be taken on the general position of the company"—I do not recall that at all—I have no recollection; I have some recollection of the circumstance of the draft agree-ment not being approved of—I have no recollection of what the critical
position of the company was, or of counsel's opinion being taken; I have no recollection about counsel's opinion, but I have a distinct recollection of the position of the company not being registered as being a critical position—I mean not registered in South Africa—at that meeting of February 14th William Watts was again present—on that occasion the half-crown Agreement which was produced and signed by Lupton and Co. agreeing to pay half-a-crown per share on 76,862 shares standing in the name of his nominees, was read with a provision that if the half-crown per share was insufficient to provide the necessary expenses of the company that Turner Lupton and Co. were to provide sufficient for working expenses—that agreement was ordered to be signed and sealed—it was also resolved "chat Mr. W. H. Thompson be instructed to register the company's property in the Transvaal, also to look into the matter of the new property offered, and to employ experts to report thereon, and it was agreed that all Mr. Thompson's travelling! hotel, and other reason-able expenses were to be paid by the company "; the new property offered to the company was some property at a place called Pilgrim's Rest; offered by a man named Gomm—no step was taken with regard to that—at that meeting there were transfers—the letters from Mr. Gomm were given to me to take with me for the particulars of the property, but nothing further was done with that—I went as far as Johannesburg and Pretoria—I did not get to Pilgrim's Rest; they sent me no money—I left England shortly after that, on the 15th, I think, the following day, Saturday—I left a clerk named Abbott to act as secretary in my absence—I got back to England, I think, in the early part of June, 1896—while I was out there I did not get to Surkersboschkop, because, I had no travelling expenses—I fancy I located the position properly when I was up at the Government offices; I have not visited it—I never met anyone who had been on the property there—I supposed the property to be in the Barberton district—that is just outside the Lydenburg district; they adjoin one another; the celebrated "Sheba" mine is in the Barberton district—while I was there in March I think I wrote home to the board of directors; anyhow there is my copy letter-book—this (produced) is a copy of the letter of March 9th, 1896, from Cape Town—it is to the directors of the Lupton Company—when I returned home I gave them an account of what I had done while out there with regard to the matters that I had reported to them in the letters—that is one of the letters I sent to them while I was away—(The witness read the letter)—that is a copy of the communication I received in answer to my request for reports—I never got any reports—that may be the answer I received from the directors to the letter that has been read; I do not remember seeing this before, but the Post Office arrangements at Johannesburg are not good; it purports to be an answer; it would be the right answer to my letter;—I took steps to carry out what I suggested in my letter, employing a raining expert, who could test the property in my presence; I made arrangements when I was in Johannesburg—when I say I made arrangements, I got as far as arranging how much he would charge to come with me—it never get beyond that, I had no money—accordingly I returned to England, and resumed my attendance
at the meetings of the company on June 5th; that would be about the date—on June 5th I reported the result of my journey to Johannes burg and Pretoria to arrange as to the registration in South Africa of the company's property, and informed the board that I had made the necessary sworn statement in the Transvaal Government office as to the purchase and payment, and had obtained a copy of the official chart and survey map of the district, so as to locate the geographical position of the property, and by my presence on the spot had effected a saving to the company of £150—I left the official chart and survey map in the company's office when I resigned—I never saw them after I left the company's office—I located the geographical position of the company's property in Barberton—I am hardly competent to say that is a good place for it—I located it in Barberton, with the assistance of one of the officials in one of the offices I the Pretoria, and Philips' map of South Africa, at a farm marked clearly on the Government books and papers as Surkersboschkop B—as far as my memory serves me only two Surkersboschkops are on the map, A and B—I am only speaking from memory now; I think the size of the farm is 1,200 acres; it is a very large piece of property, with a good water supply—a map was sent out to me to help me to find the placo; I wrote for one—this is it—it is Philips' authentic map of South Africa; I think I located it very closely, but it is very hard to judge without going on to the pro-perty—roughly speaking I gut 300 or 400 miles from the property; they do not measure by miles out there, but by so many days' journey—I calculated it at eight days' journey, having no railway makes it so long—I did not go on because I had no money—I was present at another meeting on June 19th—I reported then that the balance at the bank was £11 16s. 2d.—cheques had been drawn for directors' fees, £74 7s. 6d., secretary's salary, £10 16s. 8d., office cash, £10—I reported that I had paid into the company's bank £100 received from J. A Comper, Esq., for 100 shares—Comper was one of Lupton's clerks—I was present also at a meeting on July 2nd, and reported that the balance at the bank was £6 15s. 9d.—cheques had been drawn for the secretary's salary and office cash account—I reported the receipt from Lupton and Co. of the sum of £200 in respect of the half-crown agreement—200 shares were allotted to Lupton's nominees—I also reported the purchase of 60 shares of J. A. Comper, Esq., for £60, the shares were allotted to him—Comper was Lupton's clerk—I was also present at a meeting of June 16th—when the balance got down to £6 15s. 9d. I was instructed to negotiate the sale of 400 shares at par to discharge the debts, and also to forward the necessary money to Pretoria to pay the transfer and registration fees—on July 29th I reported that I had sold 400 shares to H. S. Adams, Esq.—that was a fictitious name for Lupton—it meant Lupton—cheques were drawn for directors' fees, my salary, and a cheque for the solicitor in South Africa, £190, and part of the expenses of my journey was paid and the rent of the office, &c.—I also reported that I had carried out all the instructions given me by the board relating to financial matters', and also that I had, in conjunction with J. M. Coward, Esq opened negotiations with certain parties as to disposing of a small portion of the company's property at a price showing a fair profit, and I was in-structed to continue the negotiations on the basis of selling 100 acres at
about £1,500 cash, so as to provide the necessary money to start developing the company's property—at that time, July 29th, 1896, nothing had been done, to my knowledge—it was to start developing the company's property, and I was further instructed to report progress in the matter at the next board meeting, which was resolved to be held at the-beginning of September, the month of August to be used as a vacation—the; certain parties that I was negotiating with were the Umtali Gold Reefs Company and the Abercorn Beefs—those companies were Lupton's—I negotiated with the boards of directors of both these companies—Mr. Coward was a director of both companies, and Messrs. Burgoyne Watts and Co were the solicitors—on September 9th there was a meeting, at which I was present; at that meeting I tendered ray resignation—I had nothing further to do with carrying out these negotiations in any shape or form; I took no further step in the matter whatever—at all the meetings at which I was present the two defendants, Coward and Stephenson, were present; I do not think I can say at all of them without referring to book—on July 3rd, June 5th, and January 29th Coward was not present; he appears to have been present on the other dates when I was there, and Stephenson appears to have been present on all occasions—up to the time that I left the company William Watts was the man I always saw there as the solicitor—Coward, besides being a director of this company, was director of the African Gold Concessions, the Umtali, and the Abercorn; I knew him in connection with the City Times; I understood him to be the editor—it is a difficult thing for me to say that I knew he was the editor, as I had no personal knowledge, but he was always, in my idea, the editor, and everybody I came in contact with thought so—the offices of the. City Times were in the same building; Mr. Coward was there, and sometimes a clerk—when I resigned I asked Mr. Coward about it; Colonel Lambart spoke to me privately, and said it was the wish of the board I should resign—at a board meeting I asked for an explanation why I was being got rid of, although I resigned, and Lanibart's reply was that, in conjunction with Mr. Fife, I had been talking about the companies with outsiders; I think those are the words—Fife was not a secretary of some of the other companies; he had been secretary of the Umtali, but had resigned.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I do not remember seeing Mr. Lupton at any of these board meetings—so far as the minutes are entered in my handwriting, and purport to record what took place, they truthfully record it—as far as I am concerned, they contain a true record of what was done by the company—this book was made up from previous memoranda; the previous minute-book purports to contain entries of the minutes of the board meetings that had taken place in the early part of the life of this company—I do not remember whose handwriting they were. in because I saw very little of it—when it was banded me to re-write I handed it directto the clerk—I could not say whether he was Lewis—I have no recollection whether the former book was written by Lewis; I handed it to the clerk to re-write: that is to copy in this book what was found in the other, with memoranda, which I was given to understand were corrections of errors—I asked the reason of its being re written and I was told it was to correct errors, and that it had better be re-written entirely
—as far as I know, the earlier entries in the present book correspond, in point of date, with the entries that there were in the original minute. book—to the best of my knowledge I think they do, because it was one written up by the clerk Lewis, and I read it over with him to see he bad entered it up correctly, with the book which it was made up from, and the memoranda, to see we had got the minutes according to the proper dates and numbers, and to see that he had correctly entered in the second book the entries of the first book, with these corrections—these having been so written up, they were signed by the proper persons, who would have signed them in the original book—there must have been some signatures in the original book—I should have noticed if there were a series of minutes without any chairman's signature to them; I am positive there must have been—each minute would show who was in the chair, and, therefore, whose name ought to be signed to the minute of the previous meeting, so that that book was made complete up to date—the memoranda from which the corrections were made were not destroyed, I think—I think they were given back to Mr. William Watts with the old minute-book, but I should not like to swear what became of them—there was no use or importance in them after the minute had been once put in proper form; I do not think I should attach any importance to them—I did not want them for any purpose—there were some papers handed to me by Mr. Marshall—to the best of my recollection I simply took those papers; I am not quite sure whether I tied them up or not, but I put them into a desk; I do not think I looked at them—I never saw any report in the office from anybody, but at the same time I do not remember looking through these papers—I heard that Mr. Hamilton had made a report on the entire property of the Lionsdale, of which this formed a portion—I did hear distinctly there was a report on the Lionsdale estate, and this formed a portion of the estate, and I endeavoured to get a report, but I never got it—I inquired from the secretary of the Lionsdale Company; I went to see him personally—I could not give you his name; I do not think I ever knew it; we always used to address one another as "secretary"; he might not have known mine—I endeavoured to communicate with Mr. Hamilton when I was in the Transvaal—I did not distinctly 6nd out where he was at that time, but the manager of the British and Transvaal Financial Corporation, to whom I obtained an introduction when endeavouring to locate the property, told me that Mr. Hamilton was somewhere about Cape Colony, but nobody knew where, and he said, "I can quite understand you having no answer to your letter"—I did job apply to the solicitors of the Lionsdale for a copy of the report; I applied to the secretary only—Mr. Dale, of Corn-hill, is the secretary, I think—I did write to Dale, Newman and Co.—I applied to them as well as applying to the secretary—when I was in the Transvaal I did not get nearer to the Lydenburg district than Pretoria—from Lydenburg, roughly, I calculated it at 600 miles distant, but I might have been mistaken; they do not calculate by miles; when you make inquiries, they say it will take so many days—to get to the Lydenburg property from Pretoria would take, I think, six or seven days journey—this map was sent to me—the Lydenburg district is a large district at the extreme east of the Transvaal; if you look a little north of
Lydeuburg you will see a place called Pilgrim's Rest; that was the spot I was supposed to make for—it is "Pilgrim's Rest"; gold "underneath it" that was where the property that the Lydenburg thought of buying was situate—Lydenburg is a name applied to a very large district—that does not include the Barberton district, where the Sheba mine was found; Barberton is just below Lydenburg—it appears to be a small township, but it is spoken of as the Barberton district—this is a map from Philips—I marked the position of the Surkersboschkop on the map, where the little cross is—that is on the Komati River—I ascertained that not from anybody connected with the company, but by reference to the officials in the Transvaal—the place I went to was the Court House, the Law Offices of the Transvaal—there is a detailed map of the Transvaal there; it is kept in sections—I did find Surkersboschkop—I found a farm called Surkersboschkop, and one part was called Surkersboschkop A, and the other part Surkersboschkop B—I found that property was one of exceptional excellence in regard to water—the Komati formed a boundary of the property—the Komati River runs down towards what is called Komati Port, which is the frontier station of the Transvaal, and only a short distance by railway to Delagoa Bay—the railway from Delagoa Bay to Pretoria is the most important channel in that part of the world; I mentioned in one of the letters I wrote home to Mr. Lupton the importance of the place being opened up by a railway—when I went there I found from this information that the statements made with regard to the advantages of the situation and for purposes of trade, as well as from the water supply, were in fact true—I was there in connection with the registration of this company at Pretoria—I did it myself with the exception of paying the fees; they were sent on afterwards by cable—I do not know from personal know-ledge, because it was done after I left the office—that was all that was necessiry to complete the title of the company; everything else was in perfect order—Surkersboschkop B is a little to the right-hand side of Johannesburg and Pretoria.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. I left Cape Town on May 13th, 1896, and it takes eighteen days to get to Southampton—when I came back I went and saw Mr. Coward, and found him ill in bed—he had been very ill for some time; I went to his private residence—he had very bad health indeed; I might mention that at several board meetings he had to lay on the floor, he was so bad—I thought he was dying—he was always most anxious for the company and to push it forward—he certainly was bona fide doing his best in the interests of the company while he was acting as director—as a matter of fact, I did not know he had resigned the position of director of the two companies, Umtaliand Abercorn, at the time the sale took place; I had left the company at that time—of course I had no actual knowledge that he was the editor of the City Times; I took it for granted; he was spoken of as such—I do not know that it was a company.
Cross-examined by MR. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Stephenson was not present at either of the meetings of February 12th or 14th—I have said that all the minutes that I took are true records of what happened, except during the time that I was away, and that appears on the minutes—
Mr. Abbott, who took my place, was a thoroughly reliable man—I saw Mr. Stephenson frequently in my position as secretary—as as I could judge, he acted bona fide and honesty in what he believed to be the interest of the company—I remember a threat of legal proceedings was talked of at a board meeting—I have not the date, but it was mentioned at a board meeting—this letter was found upon Mr. Stephenson "Dear Sir,—Having been unable to obtain the settlement as promised by Messrs. Lupton and Co, I have, in accordance with your esteemed directions, instructed the solicitors to issue a writ at once for £500 under the clauses of the agreement dated February 14th"—it is a letter from Mr. Thompson to Mr. Stephenson—I wrote that letter, or I caused it to be written; it was done under my directions.
Cross-examined by MR. RUFUS ISAACS. I never saw Mr. Walter Burgoyne Watts in relation to the Lydenburg on any circumstance whatever—the negotiations for the sale to the Umtali and Abercorn Reefs were after my time—I am trying to remember exactly; I fancy I am right in saying no communication passed to the solicitors, Burgoyne Watts and Co., because at that time, so far as I know, the matter was only just mooted of effecting the sale—the effect was, as far as I remember, nothing—this is the transfer with respect to the 500 shares of pope to Walter Burgoyne—I have some experience of transfers—there would have been no difficulty, in making that transfer for those 500 to Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts, solicitor, to the name of Mr. Watts; we accept all transfers in any name—there was no liability of any kind, and it would not matter to the company at all—very often I have seen a transfer in blank of shares to be filled up.
Cross-examined by MR. TRAVERS HUMPHRKYS. I had seen Mr. William Watts before I met him at the office of the Lydenburg on December 11th—I thought he was a solicitor in partnership with his brother—I should gather when I went on December 11th to the Lydenburg Company's office that he had attended a meeting of the Lydenburg—he was not introduced to the meeting—I understood he had attended before as solicitor—I have no accurate recollection of when I received the old minute-book—I knew that I had it at some time or oiher, and it must have been after I became secretary—I have no recollection of the actual receipt of it—I do not re-member being in communication with Mr. Marshall before I took up my duties as secretary; I might have walked into the office once or twice, as he was an old clerk of mine—I recollect Mr. Marshall giving me some memoranda—I do not think I looked at them; I have no remembrance—the minute-book was complete in itself without the memoranda that Mr. Marshall gave me as far as my memory serves me, but I am only speaking from memory—I do not think it was a minute-book in the office—it appeared to be a complete minute-book apart from the memoranda which Mr. Marshall handed me—he gave it me at the same time that he gave me the material from which it was made up—when I got the minute-book it was complete in itself—I remember that there were some of the meetings that had not got dates—possibly it was with respect to the filling in of those dates that I went to the office of Messrs. Burgoyne Watts to see if they could assist me—I do not recollect that I asked for Mr. Watte or
Mr. Burgoyne Watts and was told he was not in, and that I saw a clerk of the name of Parkins—I might know him and not know his name—(Mr. Parkins stood up), I know him as one of Mr. Burgoyne Watts' clerks—I do not remember going round to the office at all—I have frequently seen Mr. Parkins at Mr. Burgoyne Watts' office—I knew him as a clerk in the office—I should not like to say that it was Mr. Parkins who looked up the dates and gave me the dates to fill in the minute-book; it was not so; it is very possible it was so—with regard to the first minutes, which were not signed, I heard that Mr. Marshall had been to persons who had attended the first meetings, but had not been able to get their signatures; I heard some-thing of that—I do not remember Mr. Parkins telling me that some of those gentlemen were known to him personally, and that he could obtain their signatures, because they were known to him personally; I have had such a lot go through my brains since then, but at the same time it is very possible—if Mr. Parkins said it was so I would not say it was not so—he did not take it away; my recollection is that Mr. William Watts took it from the company's office—I recollect his saying he would take it away to get the signatures, and possibly he may have mentioned Mr. Parkins as the agent; it is very possible; I was very busy, and perhaps I did not listen to what he was saying—after this lapse of time I have no recollection of such a little circumstance as that—I do not say the old minute-book was not there, but I say I never saw it—it may possibly have been there without my seeing it—it would not be in use while I was secretary—it is quite possible for it to have been in any one of the desks in the outer office, because I never opened those—I am certain I did not see it afterwards, but I could not swear it was not there—with regard to the Strickland agreement of December 5th I never asked to see it or ever looked for it; I never troubled about it—that could hardly have been in the office without my knowing whether it was there, or not—I never looked in Colonel Lambart's drawer; he kept it locked up—he was the chairman of the company the company had no safe in their office, but Colonel Lambart had that drawer, which he kept locked—I never looked into the drawer; I did not trouble my head about whether the agreement was there or not—I think you will see it appears from the minutes on March 4th that Mr. Burgoyne Watts was present—Messrs. Burgoyne Watsand Company supplied me with a power of attorney when I went out to South Africa to register the property in the company's name—that was given me by Mr. William Watts—that was the last thing that the solicitors had to do as far as I was concerned with the company—when I came back from South Africa they ceased to have anything to do with it, as far as I know; I do not recollect having anything to do with them.
Re-examined. I had known Mr. William Watts, both by sight and personally, before I vent to the Lydenburg Company—I knew him in connection with his brother, Burgoyne Watts, at the solicitor's office, in Gresham Street, as solicitor to the African Gold Concessions Company, for one, and the Umtalile and the Abercorn for another—the African Gold Concessions Company was the company, by which I was employed before I went to the Lydenburg—Mr. Lupton asked me to accept the secretary ship of the Lydenburg, but independently of the African Gold Concessions—I took the other up as well; I acted for
both; I frequently saw Mr. Lupton in connection with both—there is a letter from myself to Mr. Stephenson, written in pursuance of the instructions referred to in the minute of June, 1896: "The secretary reported the balance at the company's bank to be £11 16s. 2d., and that cheques had been drawn since last report as follows: Cheque No. 719,830 directors' fees for May 4th and June 4th, £74 7s. 6d.; Cheque No. 719,831, secretary's salary, May 11th, £10 16s. 8d; Cheque No. 719,832, office cash, £10"—that is correct—I reported the fact of that balance, and that cheques had been drawn—"The secretary reported that he had received and paid into the company's bank the sum of £100 from J. A. Comper, Esq., being the amount of purchase-money of 100 shares at par, and it was resolved, That 100 shares, Nos. 108 to 207, be and they are hereby allotted to the said J. A, Comper, Esq."—Mr. Comper was one of Mr. Lupton's clerks—there is a letter from the company's solicitors at Pretoria about fees for registration, and then it goes on, "That the solicitor be instructed to at once enforce by all legal methods the agreement entered into on 14th February last to provide the necessary funds for the company"—in consequence of that I sent this letter—at that time funds were necessary, principally to send the money out to complete the registration, and for directors' fees, and current expenses, rent, etc.—current expenses would be directors' fees and rent—I forget what the rent was; I think it was £60 a year, but I will not be sure—then there was the secretary's salary, £120, and office cash—this letter in the company's press letter-book of August 19th, 1896, I caused to be written by the clerk and sent—it is from me as secretary of the Lydenburg to the Lionsdale Company—(Read: "August 19th, 1896. Dear Sir, I have been requested by my directors to ask if you will kindly furnish them with a copy of the report on the Lionsdale property Surkersboschkop B made by Mr. Hamilton. You are, no doubt, aware my company purchased a portion of the property in question. By furnishing in directors with this as early as possible you will greatly oblige. I am, dear sir, yours faithfully, per pro. W. H. THOMPSON, sec., A. PHILLIPS ")—I think I got an answer to this letter—this is the copy made by the clerk, it is dated August 20th, 1896.
JAMES CONNOLLY . I live at Park Grove, Glasgow—in October, 1896,. I was in the employment of the Birthday Amalgamated of Western Australia—I know Mr. Lupton—in October, 1896, he spoke to me about going from the Birthday Amalgamated to the Lydenburg—he asked me if I thought I should like the berth, and he would use his influence with the directors to obtain it for me—this conversation took place in Mr. Lupton's office, where I had been in the habit of going occasionally, on business connected with the Birthday principally—he was promoter of the Birthday—I was engaged in October, 1896, as secretary of the Lydenburg, and remained there until January, 1897—I attended the directors' meetings from October 14th, 1896, to January 6th, 1897—I have the minute-book before me—October 14th was the first day, and on October 14th Colonel Lambart, Major Prust, Mr. Stephenson, and Mr. Coward, and myself as secretary, were present, and on October 28th Colonel Lambart, Mr. Stephenson, Mr. Coward, and myself as secretary; Major Prust was not present at that meeting; his name was put in and
was afterwards erased—then on November 4th Colonel Lambart, Mr. Stephenson, and Mr. Coward—on November 9th, Colonel Lambart, Messrs. Stephenson and Coward—on December 4th, Colonel Lambart, Major Prust, and Mr. Stephenson—on January 6th, Colonel Lambart, Major Prust, Messrs. Stephenson and Coward—that was the last meeting I attended—I ceased to be secretary; owing to a dispute with Colonel Lambart, the chairman, I was asked to resign—I heard of the Strickland agreement of September 5th, 1895, but I never saw it—I had no communication with Mr. Hamilton; I have heard his name—I never had any communication from him about this mine, or on any other subject—I never, during those months, heard of anything being done to develop the mine—I remember the seal of the company being affixed to the agreement for the sale to the nominees of the Umtali and Abercorn on October 28th—I know Coward—he had been previously connected with the Umtali and Abercorn; I understand he had resigned prior to that date—while I was secretary I heard of the Strickland agreement—these two letters were written by me as secretary of this company—this one of November 17th, 1896, is to C. E. N. Howgate, 31, Grosvenor Terrace, York—he is a shareholder, I presume, from the tenor of the reply to a letter—I had heard from him: this appears to be a reply to a letter from him: "Dear Sir,—In reply to your letter I am instructed to write and inform you that far from the shares of our company being at such a low ebb, the business of the company has been of such a nature as should have improved their value. The only reason to be ascribed is that a large block were issued upon the market at a time when it was least able to absorb them, and as the shares had to be released the quotation has fallen to its present value. Speaking unofficially I should say the shares are absurdly low and will soon recover"—the second letter is November 23rd 1896, to Mr. T. Craddock: I presume he is a shareholder from the tenor of the letter—it is a reply to his letter apparently: "In reply to your favour the 20th inst., I beg to say that we have no information of any importance to send the shareholders. Owing to the unsettled state of affairs in the Transvaal, the progress of mines, etc., has been much retarded. At the same time the directors hold a very good opinion as regards the future of the company. The date of the general meeting has not yet been fixed"—that is all—those letters were written by a clerk at my dictation—I had instructions to write them from the directors as to the general tenor of the letter; the wording, of course, was left to myself.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. It was in the latter part of 1896 I called on Turner Lupton—I was very likely to be out of employment, but I was not absolutely out of employment at the time—I was looking out for something better if I could get it—I heard the secretaryship was vacant—I went to Lupton and got it—he had nothing to do with any of these board meetings—I never saw him meddling in the affairs of the company after.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBSON. The sale to the Umtali and Abercorn Companies was carried out during my time—that was a sale of 116 acres of this property belonging to the Lydenburg—it was fifty-eight acres to each of the companies—£1,200 cash was received from both companies
from the sale of the 116 acres: £600 from each (that cash was actually paid) and 100,000 shares of 5s. in both companies: 50,000 in each company.
Cross-examined by MR. RUFUS ISAACS. Mr. Beall was acting as the solicitor for the Umtali and Abercorn Reefs; I never saw Mr. Waller Burgoyne Watts at all.
Re-examined. Mr. Beall seemed to be acting for both parties as solicitor, the Umtali and Abercorn Reefs and for the Lydenburg Company—he was not employed by me, the negotiations had commenced prior to my appointment as secretary, they were only concluded in my time—he rendered a bill to the Lydenburg—I was in the employment of the Birthday Amalgamated at the end of 1896, but was likely to be out of employment, as I was not getting on very well with the chairman there.
HAROLD MAXMILLAN SEARE . I became secretary of the Lydenburg Consolidated on January 27th, 1897—I have got the entry in the minute-book of the meeting of January 27th—it is not the only meeting in my writing; there is another—I made entries with reference to the meetings of January 6th and January 27th—I was appointed secretary by the directors—I was employed by another company at the same office—they met at that office—the company was the Anglo-African Gold Properties—I do not think I ever attended any board meetings of the Lydenburg—I had no salary; I expected to get some; I put in a claim at the Receiver's office for what I considered due, and I shall expect to get paid—I have not got any salary up to now—I do not remember who told me to be secretary—my' salary was not fixed—there was no written agreement—someone came to me and told me I was secretary, I forget who it was—I continued secretary of the other company as well—I was able to bear the strain of both positions—when I became secretary of this I obeyed the directors' orders of both companies I was working for—I do not remember where I got the material for entering up the meetings of January 6th and 27th, but I think it would be from the chairman, Colonel Lambart—I cannot say that when I became secretary I took possession of the books of the company—I saw the cheque-book and countersigned the cheques; at board meetings I expect—I did not attend any board meetings, but after the meeting was over cheques were produced for me to sign—I attended no meetings at all, but I did write in two meetings from materials given me by someone—I signed the cheques on the various dates I suppose on which they were drawn—I signed all the cheques after the 27th I most probably received this letter (produced)—it bears my endorsement, and most probably this one (another)—it is merely an endorsement for filing—that letter was in my possession at the office of the company—the letters that came there addressed to me as secretary of the company would, as far as I remember, be handed to one of the directors or the chairman—I did not see the pass-book of the company until the liquidation, and never had the cheque-book in my possession—the cheque of January 27th 1897; for £8 15s., to Coward, I was directed to countersign—I do not know how it was or who it was told me to sign it the next cheque is for Major Prust for £8 15s., I countersigned that in the same way—on
March 31st there was a cheque for directors' fees, £50—there is no entry of any minute sanctioning the drawing of that cheque—the next cheque is for £182 15s., February 3rd, drawn to L. S. Lupton, and is countersigned by me—I do not remember how it was or when it was I did that, only on instructions—there is no record of any board meeting where that payment was sanctioned—it might have been one of the directors who asked me to countersign that cheque—the next cheque is for £179 5s.; that was countersigned by me in the same way, and also the last cheque of March 31st for £74 9s. 1d.—I was asked to do it at the office of the company; that is all I remember about it—I wrote this letter of February 10th, 1897: "Dear Sir,—I shall be extremely obliged if you will let me have per return the resignation asked for, unless you are prepared to attend the meeting for winding-up, which It is intended to call as speedily as possible. I shall also be gad if when you are in the City you will call upon me with reference to another company.—Yours faithfully, L. S. LUPTON"—I signed it in that way, I sup-pose, on Mr. Lupton's instructions—my initials are on it—I may have written letters in Lupton's name on other people's instructions; I cannot say for certain—I wrote this letter, I should think, at the instance of Mr. Lupton or on his instructions, personally or otherwise on April 12th, ad-dressed to Major Torkington, Inns of Court Hotel, Holborn: "Dear Sir,—Herewith I have the pleasure to enclose copy of the Articles of Association of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines. Mr. Coward, who is a director of the company, would be very pleased to meet you and give you full particulars of the company. He will call on you at the Inns of Court Hotel on Wednesday next at 11.30 a.m. Kindly wire me if this is not a convenient time and fix your own appointment for that date. He has the whole history of the company, and can give it you right off.—With kindest regards, yours very truly, L. S. LUPTON"—it is copied into the letter-book of the Lydenburg—I ceased my connection with the company at the winding-up, some time in March I think—I stopped there from January to March doing what I was told without getting any salary—I think I mentioned salary once or twice to some of the directors—I believe I did ask for a cheque for my own salary—I am not even certain of that—I devote the whole of my attention now to the Anglo-African Gold Company.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I cannot say I remember anything about Mr. Lupton giving me instructions as to these letters, or whether I ever saw him with regard to them definitely—there is a company's ledger, and I think there is an account in that showing on what ground, or for what reason, that £182 odd was made payable.
Cross-examined by MR. RUFUS ISAACS. I may have seen Mr. Walter Watts and William Watts; I won't say definitely—I do not think I ever had any business with either of them.
Re-examined. I wrote up the books of the company after it went into liquidation—at the time I signed these cheque? that have been put in no explanation was given me as to what they were for.
Limited—Lupton is the only person I have known in connection with the business—amongst other printing work I have printed circulars and supplied the wrappers—the business of the addressing of wrappers is done by other firms; the wrappers are then returned to me, and I should deliver the circulars to Post Office vans—this circular of October 16th, 1895 was printed by me for Lupton, I believe; I recognise my printing—the manuscript would be supplied to me, and we should send it out with the proof—I printed 126,200 copies of that circular, and banded them and posted them—the price £190 is exclusive of the postage—I received a cheque on account from Turner Lupton and Company on October 14th—I believe the circular of November 2nd is our printing; we printed 200,000 copies of it, bonded, folded, and stamped them—the cost of the issue of that circular was about £340—I printed 50,000 copies of the circular of February 12th, 1896, and folded them for envelopes at a cost of £53 16s.—I remember a paper called the City Times being started in January, 1894; I had an interview with Lupton about it—I gave him an estimate for the printing of it; I printed the first number—it was a weekly paper; the offices of it were at Copthall Buildings—I knew Mr. Coward as editor; he supplied me with manuscript for the paper—those we delivered were delivered at 5, Copthall Buildings; most of them were folded, banded, and handed over to the Post Office van—I keep a file of papers that I print only for about twelve months; in consequence of the accumulation I must get rid of them—the City Times after it had been started some little time was turned into a company, and the account ap-pears as the proprietors of the City Times—the number of copies I printed weekly varied considerably; sometimes I printed as few as 1,000 or 1,500, and sometimes 50,000—for the week ending August 24th, 1895, I printed 1,500—on August 12th, 1895, I printed what was called a special number, at the order of Turner Lupton and Company, Limited; it was issued in four or five days; it amounted altogether to something over 900,000: 200,000 odd per day—those were delivered into Post Office vans—that special number cost £2,270—this (produced) is the inside sheet of that special number; we were paid for the printing and despatch of that special number by Turner Lupton and Company, Limited—I had £500 on August 30th, £500 on September 3rd, and on August 22nd 1,000—the accounts for the, ordinary weekly number were sent to the office of the paper at 5, Copthall Buildings, to be passed by Mr. Coward—I printed another special number of the City Times on August 27th, 503,405—in addition to printing circulars and those special numbers, I also print and supply books for companies—I supplied the set of books for the Lydenburg Company, a complete set of books—I supplied them on the order of Turner Lupton and Company, Limited; it is an item of £4117s. 6d., to the Lydenburg—taking the two together, the first account was £29 7s. 6d.—I do not seem to have supplied a minute-book—I en-graved a seal for them—I also supplied books for other companies for Mr. Lupton.
Cross-examined by Sir EDWARD CLAKE. Turner Lupton and Co guaranteed the account of the City Times for three months after its first issue; he said he would run it three months after it started—after that time they had nothing to do with the ordinary issue—I sent the account to the office, and had cheques from Mr. Schloss.
Cross-examined by Mr. MARSHALL HALL. I suppose Mr. Coward had instructions what articles to write; still, I looked on him as editor—what I said was, "I saw Mr. Coward occasionally about the paper. I took instructions from him. He spoke as though he had his instructions from someone else"—the date of the first starting of the paper was January, 1894—it ran for three months on the original guarantee—the account was afterwards opened in my ledger under the head of "Proprietors of the City Times"—a distinct account.
Re-examined. Besides Lupton and Coward, I have seen a Mr. Thompson there; I think he was connected with it also; Mr. Thompson and Mr. Schloss—not Mr. Thompson who has been called as a witness here; Thompson, an outside broker I think he was.
CHARLES BATEMEN PRUST . I am a major, retired; I was in the service—I made Stephenson's acquaintance first, and he introduced me to Lupton, at Lupton's office, 5, Copthall Avenue—Colonel Lambart was introduced to Lupton at the same time—he is now dead—I was introduced to Lupton for the object of becoming a director of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, or rather of having the proposition put before us—I discussed the question of my becoming a director with Mr. Lupton—I also saw the director Coward at that interview—I do not know that any introduction took place—he was there—I am not sure that I knew the name exactly before we went there of the company that I was to be a director of, or was asked to be a director of; it was told to me either by Stephenson or Lupton—it was put before us that the company was going to be brought out, and we were asked if we would become directors—we did not decide at that first meeting—there were only two meetings at Lupton's office; I should say, as far as I recollect, it was at the second meeting that it was definitely agreed that he would join the board—the terms of the purchase were explained to us, £100,000 in shares; the whole capital of the company was, I think, to be £150,000, £50,000 was to be for working capital—the directors were not to take any shares; there were no qualifying shares—the whole thing was discussed—we saw reports as to the company—they were shown to me by Mr. Lupton; they were placed on the table of Mr. Lupton's office and reports of the property—I was not invited to embark my money in the mine personally—nothing was said about whether I was to embark any money in it—I asked no question on that subject; I knew there was to be no qualification—Lupton, I fancy, told me this at the first meeting—I learnt that there was no directors' qualification—the reports produced to me were reports of the mining engineers—I did not know any of them—I understood that Mr. Lupton was the vendor, but the original vendor of the property was the Lionsdale—Mr. Lupton was the vendor to the company, and he had purchased from the Lionsdale; that was my impression—Lupton was the only person I came in contact with—the reports that I saw were laid on the table by him—I do not think any further steps were taken; we took the reports as true reports; we had no reason to suppose they were otherwise; they were produced by Mr. Lupton—I cannot say that any particular steps were taken to test the value of the property—the remuneration was to be £100 a year for the directors, and I think something extra for the
chairman, paid monthly—the company was not to be offered to the public; there was no prospectus—at that time affairs in South Africa were very flourishing; there was no reason to suppose at that moment that we should not have been able to sell shares of the company—nothing was said as to offering the property to the public by means of a prospectus or inviting criticism; it never got so far as that—it was never discussed at any time—of course some money would be wanted to start the thing; we should want an office, and a set of books, and a seal, and so on—Mr. Lupton was to provide the money requisite for carrying on the office in London and generally until we were in a position to stand on our own feet—that was the result of verbal communications—there was no written agreement to that effect that I remember—Mr. Lupton was to supply a secretary and so on—when I agreed to be a director of that company I did not retain possession of any documents handed over to me at all—the price of the property was not fixed by us as directors; we accepted the price fixed by the vendors, £100,000 in shares—we were told at the first meeting that the solicitors to the company were to be Messrs. Burgoyne Watts—the vendor appointed them—we did not provide for their remuneration—Mr. Lupton introduced me to them—I think it was at his office I first saw Mr. William Burgoyne Watts—I was introduced to him as the solicitor to the company, and I supposed he was—the directors decided at one of the meetings at Lupton's to take offices at 3, Newman's Court—that was in the same building that Stephenson's place was—I had not been connected with other companies much at that time—these were early days—as far as I can recollect Mr. Stephsnson said these offices were to let at Newman's Court; he knew of it because he had offices of bis own in the same building, and we considered they were suitable offices and we took them—the rent was to be paid by the Lydenburg Company, out of money provided for the purpose of keeping up the expenses in England by the vendor; that was the arrangement, I take it—by this minute-book there appears to have been a meeting held on August 22nd—I do not know any of those gentlemen who were signatories to the memorandum and articles of association: Mr. Raichlen, Mr. Robert Evans, Mr. H. Buckland, and Mr. Emery—I was not present at any meeting where they elected me a director—I was to pay 7 1/2 per cent of my fees or salary for my introduction to this company, and being made a director of it—I was to pay that to Stephenson; so far as I was concerned, with reference to this company only—by the minute-book a meeting appears to have been held on August 29th—Colonel Lambert was proposed as chairman—I remember that took place—I see also it was proposed that Alfred Ernest Marshall be appointed secretary pro-tem., but I cannot remember when he was appointed—I see there that Mr. Marshall is represented as being present at a meeting on August 29th—I cannot fix the date when Mr. Marshall was first present at any meeting of the company; it was some little time after the company had started—I do not understand how it was that he is represented as being present on August 29th—the next meeting appears to have been held on September 2nd—I see here "it was resolved that Mr. Hamilton be asked to undertake the duty of managing engineer to the company and that the
secretary be instructed to write him to that effect and also to inquire of him what remuneration he expected"—I do not know who was the secretary at that time; I think one of Lupton's clerks acted for us until Mr. Marshall was appointed—the company had all the necessary books for carrying on business—we had a complete set of books—I do not re-member seeing a copy of any letter written to Mr. Hamilton asking him to undertake the duty of managing engineer—I have never seen Mr. Hamilton at any time—on September 5th at that meeting I do not appear to have been present according to the minute-book—as to the statutory meeting I did not know of any resolution having been passed; it appears that that resolution was passed at the meeting of September 5th, but I was absent—nor apparently was Colonel Lambart present—the next meeting was on October 4th: I proposed that the London and South-western Bank should be the bankers of the company—the account would he opened by money furnished by the vendor according to his verbal agreement—it was resolved at that meeting that the 100,000 shares were to be allotted to the vendor in payment of the property acquired—we acquired the property by our arrangement with the vendor to pay 100,000 shares for it—we had not the title deeds at that moment—up to October 4th I do not know that we had done any thing as directors to acquire the property—I had not been present at any meeting where any agreement had been produced between the vendor and the company—there was a meeting held according to the minute-book on September 5th—that agreement was never discussed at any meeting at which I was present, nor ever produced to me to my know-ledge—I do not recollect any resolution ever passed at any meeting that I was present at as to the execution and sealing of that agreement—I did not see that agreement until the company was in liquidation—I have never heard of Strickland—I did not know that Bertrand G. Nash was an office-boy of Stephenson's—he never attended any of the meetings of the company I was present at—I did not appoint him secretary, or have any knowledge that he was secretary—at these early meetings the solicitor to the company was always present—he did advise me as to the conveyance, the acquisition of the property, the agreement—I only knew one Watts—I got notice of the meeting of October 15th, but I do not recollect that it was by telegram—in consequence of some notice I got I went to the Cannon Street Hotel with regard to the meeting that was required to be held by statute—the first thing was I found that Colonel Lambart, the chairman, was not going to be present, and I was asked to take the chair—I know the statutory meeting is a meeting held within a certain time at which the shareholders are invited to be present—I am not certain when the transfers were signed, it would be in the minute-book—I found Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Coward there—I was under the impression that Mr. Lupton was at that meeting, but I cannot swear to it now; I have heard he was not, and I will not undertake to swear that he was—there was the secretary and from eight to a dosen altogether there—I do not know who the others were—I was asked to take the chair; I demurred to doing so at first; it was a very awkward position to be in two minutes before the meeting to be called on to preside at it—I thought that Colonel Lambart would be there, of course, and I was placed in a very awkward
position, but I did go into the chair and explained to the meeting how I was circumstanced; I said I had no idea I was going to he asked to pre-side; I had no speech; I knew nothing about it, and I could do nothing I told them, but read the notes, or rather it was a type-written short speech prepared for Colonel Lambart—I heard no objection to it—I read the type-written notes; they were brought to the meeting with the different papers, not by a member of the audience; I take it the secretary brought them—they were placed on the table before me when I took the chair, I should say the secretary placed them before me—I read the notes and the report—the necessary steps were taken; the fact of the meeting having been called together and the notice that was read by the secretary—the speech was: "The Act of Parliament compels us to call you together, and although there may be opinions as to the use of such a meeting, I think it is a very wise one, and one that should be compulsory, even within less time than the four months"; that was the introductory observation—it was my first experience of taking the chair at a statutory meeting—I only knew at that time that a report had been made by a man of the same name, Hamilton, which was one of the reports we saw at one of the preliminary meetings—there had been no engineer appointed for the Lydenburg at that time—This reads: "The directors are in negotiation with several financiers"—I do not know who they were—we had not employed the engineer to give an unbiassed and thoroughly impartial opinion—(The engineer's report was here read)—a considerable amount of work had been done on the property before it came into our possession—this would read as if work was being done on the property, but there is no pretence that we ever did any work—I understood that an engineer was reporting what had been done by someone else before we got possession of it—I said that no doubt the report was highly satisfactory, aid invited any questions—a question was asked, "Does the company propose to work the whole of the property?" and I gave the answer that, of course, we never intended to work the whole 1,200 acres as one mine; our raison d'etre was to be a promoting company; we should have sold blocks, to form subsidiary companies, to whomsoever would purchase—I did not know that this report of the engineer and this meeting were going to to made public—I did not in any way sanction the insertion of this in the newspapers, or authorise the secretary to do it—I did not know it was done at the time—I learnt that afterwards—I did not retain possession of the notes of the speech and the report, they were taken away with the other papers and books—I never heard any remark with regard to the report by either Mr. Stephenson or Mr. Coward—I did not discuss it with them to my recollection—I took it then, and I take it now that that report was one of the reports before us at the preliminary meetings; there were four or five reports of different mining experts—I had no reason to disbelieve that it is one of the reports I saw originally nor have I now—it was read as a report of "our engineer"—I was pre-sent at the meetings held on October 17th and December 5th—at the meeting of December 5th it is said, "The solicitor produced copies of the agreements spoken of at last meeting and informed the board that the transfer of the property to the company is in course of completion"; that statement was made by Mr. Burgoyne Watte, the solicitor—I have
forgotten what those agreements are, or what has become of them—Mr. Marshall, the secretary, was dismissed about the end of the year—I remember a question about the writing up of the minute-book since at the Police-court; I knew nothing about it before that—I do not remember that when Mr. Marshall was there the minute-book was written up by him, and that all the minutes were signed at the same meetings, or a question being raised as to the insertion of the dates at which the meetings had taken place—I never heard Mr. Marshall say that the meetings had never been held—I do not know what became of the original minute-book—I did not know that there was a minute-book like the other books, gold lettered outside "minute-book"—I do not know where that minute-book came from that is before me—I remember Mr. Thompson coming there as secretary in place of Mr. Marshall—I think he was recommended to us by Mr. Lupton—Mr. Lupton was present at a great many of those meetings; we used to send for him to his office—if was wanted information either about the company or about the title of the company, we applied to our solicitors—we sent for Mr. Lupton for a special specified matter—we found after the company started, some little time before we could get it registered in South Africa, certain fees had to be paid in the Transvaal, and those fees, we were told, amounted to £400; we had no means of getting the £400, and getting absolute possession of our property, unless we got it from the vendor; we were in no position to sell shares, we had no way of raising the money in the state of the market at that time—having an interest in the company, I followed the thing with interest—the vendor's shares were being dealt with in September—50,000 shares were allotted to the company—they remained as unissued shares—if things had remained prosperous in South Africa, as we expected, those shares would be sold—we had power to sell them—we had no power to sell shares in this way, that we could not sell shares under par—it would be absurd to try to sell shares at par in a prospecting company in the state of the market at that time—we had the transfers, so that we must hare known at the end of August and throughout September that the public were having the benefit of shares transferred to them—on October 17th we had passed 168 transfers—those shares were sold by Lupton; he could sell at any price he liked, but we could not—I knew shares were being sold; I never knew they were sold at a premium—the money that was to be provided for developing the property was to come at some time from the sale of our shares—we were first to sell our shares, and with that money employ people to develop the property, or by a sale of the land—we never meant to sell the whole; we should keep the beet as the Lydenburg Mine; the choicest part of it—in the meantime, until we were prepared to do that, the public were getting the shares and we were passing the transfers; we realised that, and that we were signing certificates for shares—I never looked at the price shares were being sold for; I never saw a quotation for that mine—up to this time we had not been able to open any banking account—I remember there was an attempt made to place shares in Glasgow, but on what date I am not sure; that was later—it was not worth taking shares at that time; those were to be the company's shares—up to January 22nd we had not
opened any banking account—a meeting was held on January 22nd, 1896—that was the beginning of the banking account; we started with £100—on January 29th the secretary reports that we had sold 100 shares of the company; I understood that they were sold to Lupton—with that £100 the banking account was opened, and then cheques were at once drawn for the payment of the directors' fees and secretary's salary and office cash; those would be the first fees that were paid—I became a director at the end of August, and fees were paid to us as directors month by month—our fees must have been paid from some source before there was any banking account—we were paid all the time I was on the board; when I left the company there were no fees due—the directors' fees came from Mr. Lupton—I knew we were having our fees paid by Mr. Lupton up to the time that this banking account was opened—when the account was opened and the £100 was drawn upon, the result was to leave a balance of £35 19s. 7d. on February 5th—cheques were drawn at that meeting for £10 18s. 9d. for Colonel Lam-bert, £8 15s. for Major Trust, £8 15s. for Mr. Coward, £8 15s. for Mr. Stephenson, and £10 16s. 8d. for Mr. Thompson; but there was only £36 19s. 7d.—we passed a resolution or instructed the solicitor to raise a small loan temporarily, not exceeding £15—I take it that he paid £12 into the bank, and we were all able to take the money at that time—I examined the pass-book and cash-book from time to time when we met—I remember the arrangement being entered into to finance the company by putting 2s. 6d. a share on the shares sold by the vendors, Turner Lupton and Co., Limited—that contemplated that a very large number of shares would have to be sold in order to keep the thing going—that agreement was discussed at one or two meetings, and then I find on March 4th a meeting where transfers 251 to 260 were passed, and certificates issued, and then again cheques drawn for the directors' fees and the secretary—then, again, there was a meeting of April 1st, where transfers were again passed. 279 to 286, and certificates issued and cheques again drawn for the directors' fees and petty cash—on April 15th at a meeting there is a minute that it is desirable that a director should proceed to Glasgow regarding negotiations of some shares, and it was agreed that a cheque for five guineas for travelling expenses should be drawn, and an attempt to place the shares there, which was unsuccessful—at the meet-ing of April 29th transfers were again passed and the bank balance had got down to seven guineas—then there was a meeting on May 5th, where it is reported that cheques had been drawn for different matters, but apparently there was no money at the bank to meet them; then Mr. Thompson returned from South Africa and was present at the meeting on June 5th: he is down here—I remember his report; I do not remember a map; he had obtained a copy of the official chart—the secretary's salary was £10 16s. 8d., and the office cash was £10; there was apparently not the money; then it was reported that 100 shares had been sold to J. A. Comper, Esq.—those cheques were cashed, and that brings the balance down again to £6 15s. 9d.—I see a report of a further sale of shares on the same date—on July 16th the balance in the bank was £6 15s. 9d.—Mr. Scholtz is the attorney at Pretoria—on July 29th I find that it is reported that shares have been sold to H. S. Adams
Esq.; £300 and £100 respectively was received from Mr. H. S. Adams—I do not know who he was, or whether he was a real person or not—we were enabled to draw a number of cheques upon that date—I take it that Adams was a fictitious name, and that that was money coming from Mr. Lupton—I see here that the secretary reported that he had carried out all the instructions given him at the last board meeting, and that he had in conjunction with Mr. Coward opened negotiations with certain persons as to disposing of part of the property—I do not remember that; I was not present, nor at the next meeting on September 9th, nor at the meeting on September 10th or 11th—I was not present at any meeting where there was a negotiation to sell part of the property to Mr. Wilson—I do not know who Mr. Wilson is—I had no notice of these meetings at which these negotiations were to take place on September 10th and 11th, and did not know of them till afterwards—I do not say that I had not notice of the 9th—I was living at Kensington—on September 10th I was not in London; during all that time I was in Herefordshire—I remember a discussion taking place as to irregular meetings which had been held—the meetings of 10th and 11th were impugned as irregular—those are meetings at which Mr. Coward and Mr. Stephenson appear to have been present—I do not know any-thing about the meeting of the 10th; that is one of the meetings I was not at—I heard afterwards, when it was an accomplished fact, that the property was sold; I understood that Mr. Beall acted for the purchasing companies, the Umtali and Abercorn—he was never employed by me or my directors, as far as I know—there was no resolution to employ him to my knowledge—I did not know he had been employed until after the thing had occurred—I do not know who had the £100 commission—I did not have any of it, and knew nothing about it—the question of the commission and these meetings was discussed at a later date—on October 28th I was not there—I was there again on December 4th—at that time 582 transfers and certificates were issued, numbered 316 to 318, and certificates 579 to 582—in Dacember, 1896, things were looking better—the property was going to be developed when there was sufficient money in hand to do anything—was had at that time, from the sale of the property, £915 in hand—I was there on January 6th, and cheques were drawn for directors' fees, and a cheque for Mr. E. Beall, £35—I do not recollect at whose instance; I have no recollection of it—the last meeting I attended was January 27th and se last thing apparently done was to draw cheques for directors' fees—that was the date of my withdrawal from the company; I sent in my registration in December; I was asked to hold over for a short time, and I attended two meetings in January after that, and then confirmed my resignation; it is not on the minute-book—the last fees I got were on January 27th—I did not get further fees after I had resigned—I remember receiving a letter from Mr. Lupton inviting me to send in my resignation, and saying he would like to see me about another company; I have some recollection of his asking me to meet him; I have never thought of it since—I went twice after I resigned, that was including January 27th—I went to two meetings after sending in my resignation—my letter was written in December—I was asked to hold back my resignation for a short time;
I think the idea was about the appointment of another or two other directors in place of Colonel Lambart and myself—I did not attend the winding-up—I severed my connection with the company absolutely until the company was being wound up, and in the course of the winding up; I did not see the Strickland agreement.
Wednesday, 3rd August.
MAJOR CHARLES BATEMAN PRUST . Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I had no acquaintance with Mr. Lupton before I went into this company's business—I was in no way connected with him or under any obligation to him of any sort or kind, absolutely independent—so far as I know, Colonel Lambart was in the same position—I never received any shares or anything of that kind from Mr. Lupton—I never had any shares in it—on having this matter proposed to me I considered the proposition to the very best of my ability, before I agreed to lend my name to it as director—whatever name was used as the name of the go-between between the vendor and the company, I understood that Mr. Lupton was the real vendor—I do know it is constantly done; that a nominee is put forward as the vendor; and that fact would not have suggested to me then, nor does it suggest to me now, anything improper in the business—we were informed that this property was being obtained from the Lionsdale Company at the first preliminary meeting when I was making inquiries—I never heard what was actually paid in money by Mr. Lupton for this property—as a matter of fact, in the bargain that was being made with the company of which I was to become director, Mr. Lupton was not to receive from the company any cash at all—the company was to have 150,000 shares—100,000 of these shares were to belong to Mr. Lupton, the vendor—that left us with 50,000 shares to sell, which we should be entitled to sell at par, but could not sell under as it is not legal—if the South African matters had gone on in the prosperous way we then contemplated, those 50,000 shares, if issued to the public, would have given us ample capital for developing the property—it was the contemplation that the company was formed rather to make other and smaller companies, than to embark on the work of gold-getting and quartz-crushing ourselves—the idea was, as we developed, to sell portions of the property—we meant to develop the property first—it would have added to the value for selling the rest—will should have appointed a mining engineer, a mining expert, and we could have had the property well explored, and on part of it we should have employed, on our behalf, workmen, and we should have appointed a manager, and begun some sort of mining operations, and then sold other parts in blocks to subsidiary companies finding some other names as godfathers and godmothers—it was to be what is commonly called a parent company—there was no prospectus—we got our information from the reports we had before us, from the mining experts—I cannot recall the names of the persons whose reports we had at that moment—of course, I remember the name of Hamilton—I think I should remember the names of the others if they were repeated to me, but I cannot say—I do not know if Mr. Pouter was one of them—I do not recall that name—I think I can say I know both the names, Furlonger and Day—not Howitt—Hamilton I know—the report of Mr. Hamilton, the mining
engineer, was one of the reports put before us—I do not remember the reports sufficiently to say as an actual matter of fact it was the same report that I read at the meeting, but I have no reason to doubt it—that was the Mr. Hamilton with whom it was afterwards resolved to open communications about this property—we decided that Mr. Hamilton should he appointed managing engineer of the property—there is only one Mr. Hamilton in the case—that is the Mr. Hamilton who made this report—I had not the least reason to doubt that this was a valuable property—having regard to all I have seen and know about its situation and opportunities for development, I am still of opinion that it is a valuable property—until the shares were issued Mr. Lupton was providing the out-of-pocket expenses, so to speak, of the company—that was the perfectly. well-known arrangement entered into by me with perfectly good faith, and so far as I know entered into in perfectly good faith by all the other gentlemen who were parties to it—during the autumn of that year, 1895, a change came over the South African market—unfortunately for us it took place almost immediately this company started—I should think within a fortnight or three weeks—if that change in South African affairs had not taken place which came about in September or October, 1695, I have no doubt we would have been able to have developed this property and make this a prosperous company—I did not make any objection to the statement which I made at this statutory meeting being published—so far as I am concerned my statement was an honest one, made to all or any persons interested in the matter—I had not the slightest objection to its being published—the effect of this change in South African affairs was to send down the prices of all South African stocks, and when it had taken place it became clear that we could not place the 50,000 shares at par—it would have been absurd to try—it would have been impossible—an attempt was made at Glasgow—I did not go to Glasgow—Mr. Stephenson, one of my colleagues, knew Glasgow very well—I do not know if he went to Paris, but he went to Glasgow in order to try and place those 50,000 shares—unfortunately the moment had passed for that, and it could not be done—quite at the end of that year the Jameson Raid came, which quite stopped all hope of doing business in South African affairs and absolutely destroyed, the future we expected—we were hung up, as about a hundred other African properties were at the same time—though we found that the title to the property was in order, before it could be registered certain fees had to be paid to the amount of about £400—we also became aware that in the early part of the year 1896 the registration of deeds of this kind was practically stopped by the Transvaal Government—when things had quieted down and things were settled we hopel the market would revive—I believed that the property had in itself such real value that when this exceptional state of things had passed away it would justify the expectations we had formed, and it was in that belief that we sent Mr. Thompson out to Pretoria in order to secure the registration of our title to the property—he did go there—he made inquiries and found out all about the property, and he got the registration of the deed subject to payment afterwards being made of the fees—was sent out those fees, and the registration was completed—the deed of registration was sent to us and was received by
us in this country, as appears by one of the minutes—I do not know of anything we left undone that we possibly could have done in order to carry forward the development of this place—there is no reason that I can see other than these exceptional incidents in South Africa that caused the failure of this company—I do not know whether this report is Mr. Pouter's (produced)—I could not swear that this is one of those I saw—I have no reason to doubt it, the name Norrey is perfectly familiar to me—although I do not remember having seen the Strickland agreement, I knew from an early period practically what it contained—I should not have any hesitation in signing it—I he no reason whatever why that agreement should have been signed in a hole-and-corner way, if it was so—it is of 5th September, carrying out the conditions of purchase—I see no reason for any secrecy—I cannot imagine what can have been the object of it; it is a perfectly straightforward agreement, and if I had been there at the meeting (I think I can say the same of Colonel Lambart), I could take no exception to it—it represents what we knew, the terms of the purchase—I am aware that the original agreement is filed at Somerset House—there were options put before us very early in the history of the company, I remember, by Mr. Lupton—it was for a very large block of land in the Lydenburg district—I do not remember if it was for 28,000 acres; I know it was for something very big—we could have had the advantage of those options of the right of purchase—they were put before us at an early period—if the directors at their meetings wanted to communicate with Mr. Lupton they sent to his office to ask him to see them—it happened very often, because he was rather a difficult man to get hold of—he was a very busy man and his time was not always our time—when these South African difficulties checked the progress of the company, we had to find money from time to time for different purposes, sending Mr. Thompson out, and so on—it all wanted money, and that was the reason of what we call the half-a-crown arrangement; an arrangement that for every share that was sold Mr. Lupton should pay half-a-crown to the company, he having agreed to bear the expenses of the company in the interval before it got property of its own and issued its own shares—that was the mode adopted for supplying the company with money—it did not occur to mean at the time that the agreement was made that there was anything improper about it—it was under the advice of our solicitor—it was in fact a method of carrying out the engagements into which Mr. Lupton had entered—it was only a method adopted for paying the fees in South Africa—and he did, in fact, supply money the company needed for sending out Mr. Thompson, and so on, up to the time when £1,200 was realised by the sale of a portion of the property—I do not see any-thing that we could have done beyond examining the reports which bad been made with regard to ascertaining the value of the property—it was not suggested that I should go out myself—I believed that those reports were given by persons qualified to speak on the subject—I believe so now—so far as I know the other persons who were joining in the promotion of this company were relying on the same materials as I was—neither of them pretended to have any personal knowledge of the Transvaal—neither Mr. Lupton nor anyone else in the company represented that he
had been there and seen the place with his own eyes, but they and myself relied on the evidence of people we believed be bona fide, and I now believe to be true.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBSON. Of the moneys the company was receiving from Mr. Lupton, every penny was applied by the company to the purposes of the company—no part of the money paid by Mr. Lupton to the company went into the pocket of any individual director—Mr. Lupton paid it to the company for the company, and was applied for the company—I had known Mr. Stephenson socially over two years before he introduced me to this company—it was a social, not a business acquaintance—I was introduced to him by a relation of mine—I saw the reports, and attended two preliminary meetings, and then made inquiries and satisfied myself—that is the short history of my joining the board—I saw what Mr. Hamilton's report was—it was put before me and my fellow directors at the preliminary meeting—I had no reason to doubt that it existed, and I have no reason to doubt now that such a report was made—the property we were buying was part of a larger property—the Lydenburg was part of the Lionsdale, which was, as I understood and believed, a property in course of development—the Lydenburg shared in that general development which had been reached by the Liousdale—after I joined the Board I was informed at these preliminary meetings of the terms on which the property was to be sold by Mr. Lupton—he was to have so many shares, the company was to have the remainder—if the time had remained favourable to the issue of fresh shares it was the intention of the directors to frame a prospectus and go to the public with their 50,000 shares—we did not expect to get the public to take the 50,000 shares, except on a prospectus—that is the usual course; gentle-men who join the Board have to satisfy themselves by private inquiries and personal inquiries, and if they are satisfactory and they join the board, then they issue a prospectus—and that was the course which would have been followed in this instance had the market remained favourable—since the September of that year (before the Jameson Raid) there was more or less a panicstriken condition in the South African market—a good many people out there knew what was going to happen, though a good many people here seem not to have known what was going to happen—that affected the market—I certainly never understood there was anything wrong in signing transfers which gave Mr. Lupton possession of those shares—I knew the terms of the Sale, and the general substance of the agreement for sale, though I have not seen the document itself—the company never made any attempt to put any of their shares on the public—Mr. Stephenson was a director with me—in the course of my transactions with the company I never saw anything to lead me to doubt the honesty and good faith of Mr. Stephenson or of any of the directors—I have no doubt that some such resolution as this was passed at the meeting of October 17th: "The secretary was instructed to write to the solicitors of the company respecting the due registration of the title, and asking them for office copies of the various agreements entered into by the company, to be placed in charge of the secretary"—I do not doubt the accuracy of the minute at the meeting on December 5th, which says: "The solicitor produced copies of the agreements spoken of at last
meeting, and informed the board that the transfer of the property to the company is in course of completion"—I understood we were taking the ordinary sreps to complete our title and secure our registration—nothing remained to secure possession of the property that we did not to the best of our ability do—at a meeting on January 8th, it is stated: "The secretary reported that in consequence of the disturbed state of South Africa the solicitors did not think it advisable at present to send money cut there for the due registration of the company's property, but same would be done immediately it was safe so to do"—that is correct—the raid took place on December 31st—January 8th was the time at which no one could send money to the Transvaal, and certainly not for the purpose of registering a company in the Transvaal Republic—at a meeting on January 27th, "It was resolved that in view of the company's property not having yet been duly registered in Africa, this meeting be adjourned till 2 o'clock p.m. on Wednesday next, to further consider the state of affairs"—and at a meeting on January 29th, "The secretary reported that he had, in conjunction with the solicitor, made inquirie and ascertained that in consequence of the prohibition issued by President Kruger in the Transvaal, it was impossible for the present for any property out there to be transferred or registered from one name to another, but that as soon as the prohibition was removed all steps were to be taken to enable the company's solicitors to complete the due registration out there"—that is so—that was a political measuid of President Kroger, President Kruger being more or less then in a state of war, as a political measure, would not have any new companies registered or transferred—on June 19th there came a letter: "The secretary produced a mail letter dated May 21st, 1896, from the company's solicitors at Pretoria respecting the fees necessary for due registration of the property in South Africa, and having regard to the present condition of the company's finances"—the registration was to be paid by Lupton—we got the money for the registration from Lupton and spent it on the registration—"It was resolved that the solicitor be instructed to at once enforce, by all legal methods, the agreement entered into on February 14th last."—that was the agreement with Mr. Lupton—we were going to take proceedings against Lupton to get the money—because we had not got it then—we did not take action against Lupton—he found the money—he supplied half-a-crown per share on the shares sold by him up to a certain number, and claimed from us under that agreement to receive shares at par value equal to the number of half-crowns—if he sold 100 shares, that would be £8 we should become entitled to, and thereupon we had to transfer to him eight of the company's shares—under that arrangement the registration fees were paid—the half-crowns we so received went to the purposes of the company alone—at the next meeting the secretary reported the balance at the bank to be £6 15s. 9d., and that there were certain payments overdue, viz., rent, directors' fees, &c., but that he was negotiating the sale of 400 shares at par, which would enable him to discharge said debts; also to forward the necessary money to Pretoria to pay the transfer and registration fees, and he was instructed accordingly—the minute of October 16th says, "The secretary also reported
that Mr. Beall had communicated with Mr. Scholtz, of Pretoria, South Africa, with reference to the titles of the company, and that gentleman's reply would be laid before the board on receipt of same from South Africa"—on December 4th, 1896, the minute is: "A letter from Mr. Scholtz, of Pretoria, was produced, together with title deed of property, which was ordered to lie on the table until next meeting"—the title was completed and the registration was completed in due time—I see at the meeting on September 2nd, 1895, there is a retolution "That Mr. Hamilton be asked to undertake the duty of managing engineer to the company, and that the secretary be instructed to write him to that effect, and also inquire of him what remuneration he expected"; but I cannot say that I remember it—I believe that under the Companies Act an agreement like thin of September 5th for the purchase of this property most be filed at Somerset House—every shareholder who liked to go and look at the agreement could see it.
Cross-examined by MR. HIGGINS. The Lydenburg Company sold a portion of its property to the Umtali Gold Reefs and the Abercorn Reefs—the consideration received by the Lydenburg Company from both these companies was £1,200 in cash and 100,000 shares of 5s. each—as far as I am able to judge, Coward did all he could in the interest of the company—I have no reason to doubt he acted in a bona fide minner.
Cross-examined by MR. ELLIOTT. During the whole time I was connected with the company I never saw Walter Burgoyne Watts, the solicitor, neither at the meetings or anywhere else, from first to last—I think the last date upon which any representative of his attended our meetings was March 4th, 1896—we went on without a solicitor—the minute of September 10th, 1896, says: "The minutes of the last meeting were read and confirmed. The transfer of part of the company's property sold to Mr. Wilson for £1,200 were perfected, and the purchase money received. Commissions connected with the sale of the property were limited to £100, and ordered to be paid. Mr. Beall, solicitor, attended on behalf of the company to see the transaction carried out"—I was not present at the meeting—from the minute I have no doubt—on October 6th the minute reads: "It was resolved that Mr. Beall be instructed to write to Mr. Scholtz, solicitor, of Pretoria, South Africa, with reference to part of the property sold to the Umtali Gold Reefs Company, Limited, and Abercorn Company, Limited, also with reference to the title of the company"—Mr. Beall was then acting as solicitor to our company, and acting for the Umtali Company, I believe, acting for both—I do not consider we had any other solicitor acting for us at that time—it would have appeared if we had one—I never to my knowledge made any attempt to see Mr. Walter Bichard Burgoyne Watts.
By SIR EDWARD CLARKE. This matter was before the magistrates as long ago as March of this year—Col. Lambart died on June 26th.
Cross-examined by MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS. Apart from the minute-book I have no personal recollection who attended any particular meeting of the company—I could not possibly recollect at this length of time—Mr. Marshall was the first appointed secretary—I remember him attending board meetings as secretary, up to the time he left—he had
left some time before I had left the company—I thought William Watts was at meetings before December, 1895—on the 17th October, for the first time, the secretary was instructed to write to the solicitors of the company respecting the due registration of the title and asking them for office copies of the various agreements entered into by the company, to be placed in the charge of the secretary—my own impression was that he attended meetings before that—I cannot swear—I recollect at the meet-ing on December 5th he did attend and did produce certain documents—I do not remember that he produced the agreement of September 5th, the Strickland agreement—I never saw that agreement—I saw all the documents that he produced—it is so long ago I do not remember the facts, but I take it that they are facts and that they are on the minutes—I said at the Police-court: that "I was present at the meeting of December 5th, I do not remember if a copy of the agreement of September 5th, 1895, was included in those documents. I will not say it was not included "That is very much what I say now.
Re-examined. This was not the first company I had been connected with—I had had very little experience before in mining, I have had some experience since; in four or five of a similar nature—I regarded everything done in connection with this company had been done in a business-like way—looking back, nothing could be done better; I have nothing to be ashamed of; with the materials on our hands, I do not know anything that we did not do—I knew the shares of this company were being dealt with on the market—I knew Lupton was dealing with his own—the only cause of failure of this com-pany was the Jameson Raid, that and the previous slump with everything in South Africa—the slump took place before political disturbances—early in September, 1895; it was unfortunate; I can almost fix the date because it was almost immediately after the company was brought out—by the slump I mean everything connected with the company went down—the purposes of the company for which the money was applied were the secretary and office expenses—salaries to the secretary and office rent; it was applied always to the keeping up of the company, directors' fees, registration of title—the company never spent anything in working this mining property—it was never opened at all by this company—so far as I know it was never opened at all—I only believed it was ever opened at all by the reports that were placed before us—I think Mr. Hamilton's report will bear out that workings had been done upon it; we did not suppose there had been any development—it was more of a prospecting company—we did not suppose that the 1,200 acres that we purchased had all been developed—on 2nd September, 1895, there was a meeting at which I was present—it was resolved that Mr. Hamilton be asked to undertake the duty of managing engineer to the company, and that the secretary be in-structed to write him to that effect, and also inquire of him what remuneration he expected—up to that time our company had no engineer—I have no recollection of a letter from Mr. Hamilton before October 15th—in the account of the meeting of 15th October in my speech I say: "At any rate as far as this company is concerned, although no actual business is transacted, it enables the directors to lay before you the exact position of the company's affairs and the report of
the property which has been made by our engineer"—the engineer there referred to was Mr. Hamilton—we had no engineer then—it ought not to have been "our engineer"—Mr. Hamilton was the engineer of the Lionsdale, that sold the property to us; so I understood—the report read at the meeting is the report that was placed before us—I do not know if it was made by him as engineer for the Lionsdale when the Lionsdale sold us the Surkersboschkop—I do not know who employed him to give a thoroughly unbiassed and impartial opinion of the property in a report relating specially to the Surkersboschkop—I only knew that that was the report of Mr. Hamilton, and I suppose it was a report of that property, and it was the report that had been placed before us—our company had no engineer then—it had resolved to have one—when I had finished reading the document whish I read out as the report of the engineer I replaced it on the table—the secretary took it up, I fancy—it would be taken with the books and papers—I do not know where it is now—I did not know that it was missing—the speech handed to me was type-written—I did not speak extempore—I read a type-written speech—I will not swear it was handed by Mr. Lupton, but it was handed to me going into the room—I read the engineer's report to the meeting; I remember that—I never have seen the original of the document I read as a report—I know that batteries are used for crushing quartz—there was no battery at Surkersboschkop B. to my knowledge—I know what shafts and stopes are—I do not know if there were ever any shafts and stopes on Surkersboschkop B.—I never heard of any—I know that there are some statements in the document which was read as a report about batteries and shafts and stopes, and that a dam had been formed, and a race—it is in Hamilton's report—I never from any other source during the time I was director of the company heard about these batteries, stopes or shafts, nor the dam nor the race—the battery has not been started—we never worked the property—it had never been worked to my knowledge beyond the report—assuming that the report refers to the Surkersboschkop, then some work had been done on it unless we are to disbelieve the report—we had some apparatus of some kind for crushing and so on—"there is a stream running through the valley in which the present works are situated which supplies the greater part of the water to be used in them; is joined at some 300 yards below the battery by another stream of equal volume; from this point the mainstream forms the boundary line"—I suppose it would—it is 9 feet thick, I see—I was not present at the meeting on June 19—I was a director at the time—the last entry in the minute is "That the solicitor be instructed to at once enforce by all legal methods the agreement entered into on 14th February last to provide the necessary funds for the company"—I suppose the solicitor there referred to was Mr. Burgoyne Watts—I never heard of any other solicitor except Mr. Watts acting for the company except in special matters of the Umtali and Abercorn—practically we were without solicitors in the latter months of the company's existence—I never knew the circum-stances, but I believe Mr. Burgoyne Watts had withdrawn from the company some time in 1896.
By SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I told you in cross examination with regard to that, although I could not swear to the details of it, looking at the
substance of the report which I read on 15th October, I believed it was the same as one of the reports put before me at the preliminary meeting.
By THE COURT. I did not know anything about the City Times—I had heard of it—I never saw that our company was being so lauded—I never knew anything about it—I never had a copy of it—I do not know what the options were we had—I never saw a circular sent out by Messrs. Turner Lupton and Co. recommending the Lydenburg Consolidated—I do remember options for a large company—we might have an acre or ten thousand acres—the price was very high. I remember we did not entertain it. We had no possibility of getting the money—we had some difficulty in getting rid of the 1,200 acres—we were not in a position to buy 28,000 acres—as far as I recollect when those options were put before us we did not know we were in that position then that we could not sell our 50,000 shares. It was before the slump in the market took place in September that we had those options—in November it was worse than in September, going down and down every day—when I went into this matter I did not hear of Strickland's name—I do not know what the property was—I knew it was the Surkersboschkop farm, in the Lydenburg district, of 1,200 acres—I knew from what I was told—I did not see any papers in confirmation of that story.
ALFRED BYRNE . I am clerk to Messrs. Corbett and Newson, 17, Gracechurch Street, architects—they have the letting of No. 5, Coptball Buildings—on December 25th, 1893, three rooms on the lower ground floor of No. 5 were let to Lupton—this is the agreement that was signed by him upon taking the offices, and witnessed by James A. Comper—Lupton had at that time already rooms of which he was in possession on the ground floor of that same building—the rent was paid under that agreement up to June 24th, 1896.
VICTOR HERBERT TYMMS . I am a clerk in a firm in Fenchurch Street, and live at Stroud Green—at the end of August, 1895, I received through the post, addressed to me, a newspaper, and I may have received a circular also—I read it—I purchased through my brokers twenty shares in the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines on August 29th, 1895, at the price of 1 13/16, and paid for them £37 3s.—this (produced) is the transfer of the shares to me—they are transferred to me by James Pope—this is the certificate (produced), dated September 13th, 1895—the transfer was lodged on September 12th.
AMI BENJAMIN CLAVEL . I am a merchant at St. George's House, Eastcheap—in August, 1895, my attention was called to the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines Company through an article I read in some news-paper, I forget which—upon that I bought 25 shares at 113/16—Mr. Melville was my broker—I paid £38 8s. 9d.—I received a certain number, 275—it is an ordinary certificate for shares dated 17th September—this is the transfer which I have got of these shares (produced)—it is from James Pope—I do not remember when I got the certificate—in June, 1896, I received the circular (produced)—I do not remember if there was a stamped telegraphic form with the letter of June 29th, 1896—very likely there was—I did not take any more shares.
By the COURT. It was addressed to me.
a corn merchant—in 1895 I received by post a copy of the City Times newspaper—this is a copy of the one I received (produced)—that is the issue of August 28th, 1895—I believed the statements I saw in the City Times with reference to this company at the time, and, in con-sequence, on September 4th, 1895, purchased, through my broker, ten shares in the company, at 2 7/32—this is the transfer of the shares to me—I find Mr. James Pope is transferror, and his signature is witneased by James A. Comper—following my purchase of the shares, in June, 1896, I received this circular (produced), addressed to Mr. Wright—there was enclosed a telegraph form with a sixpenny stamp on it—having bought the shares, I got a certificate of shares from the company—I believe I subscribed to the City Times for a few months—I cut this out from the City Times of September 28th, 1895 (produced): "Lydenburg Consolidated—This district is being opened up very energetically, and it is noticeable that in the recent set-back, resulting from realisations of Band shares, those of this company, as well as some other Lydenburg companies, were only fractionally affected in sympathy. Since the carry-over a marked hardening tendency has set in which may be more pronounced in a few days, as we hear that a very important deal is likely to be carried through which cannot fail to enhance the price of the company's shares, which now stand a fraction over 2"—also an extract from the issue of October 26th: "among the shares included in group B in our Mining Trust article these hold a very favourable position. Although they felt some effect of the first scare, they have well maintained their position since leaving off firm at 13/8 yesterday. Few under-takings outside the Rand, or on it for that matter, possess more encouraging prospects, and if development is maintained at its present rate, Lydenburg Consolidated should before long be included in the list of dividend payers."—I also cut from the Financial Times the report of the statutory meeting of 15th October.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I only made one purchase of shares—these extracts were all after I had made the purchase.
JOHN REEVES . I am a partner in a firm of bankers at 41, Thread-needle Street—my attention was attracted, by receiving circulars, to a company called the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, and I purchased 100 shares—I bought them at £2 5s. each—there were shares transferred to me from the name of James Pope—I have got the certificate here, dated 23rd September, 1895.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. At the Police-court I said I received circulars, notices, and prospectuses, but I did not understand the question—I do not remember—I received piles of circulars, and newspaper extracts—I did not keep any of them—I received hundreds of them about different companies, in that year and even now—I have not kept any of them—I did not have a prospectus of this company—on September 12th I paid for them—I had circulars about this company before that date—to the best of my belief I must have had—I received printed notices of different kinds praising the company up, and saying what a good company it was, and so on,; before I bought those shares—
Re-examined. This is the transfer relating to my shares (produced).
remember receiving by post a copy of the City Times at the end of August, 1895—I could identify the paper if I saw it—that is a copy of the paper I received (produced), a copy of the same issue—I read the article through about the Lydenburg Consolidated—acting on that I bought some shares in the Lydenburg Consolidated—in consequence of what I read there, I bought 10 shares at 21/4 for the mid-September account—I wrote direct to Messrs. Lupton and Co.—that is the account that was sent to me—it is made out, "James V. Turner" Lupton and Co. Limited, sold to G. Moon, dated 5th August, 1895—James Pope is the transferror—the date of the transfer is September 12th, 1895—the certificate is dated 18th September, 1895—in July, 1896, I got another letter about these shares from Lupton and Co.—I have not got it here—in consequence of that letter I made a further purchase—I went direct to Messrs. Lupton and Co. again—that account includes a purchase of 20 further shares—I bought them through Turner Lupton and Co.—the price was £7 10s. for the 20 shares—that is the transfer (produced), dated 4th July, 1896, from James Arthur Comper, of 5, Copthall Buildings—that is the certificate dated July 31st.
JOHN KERSHAWE O'DONOGHUE . My address is 24, Moorgate Street, and I am manager of an insurance company—in 1895 I bought some shares, I believe through Lupton—I could not identify him—I went to their offices at 5, Copthall Buildings—a man named Prosser took me there—I thought it was a Mr. Lopton I saw there—I think I bought 300 shares of the Lydenburg—I went really to buy some Noltzykop shares, but they induced me also to buy these shares, or suggested that I should, and also some of the other company with which I was not concerned—I have the certificate of the Lydenburg—it is dated November 30th, 1895—the date of the transfer was October 29th, 1895, from James Pope, of 7, Oakfield Road, N. W.—I paid for the shares by cheque to Turner Lupton and Co.—that is the cheque (produced)—these two cheques included the payment for these shares.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. Mr. Prosser brought the matter under my notice—he had nothing to do with Mr. Lupton as far as I know—it was not any circulars or newspaper article that specially induced me to buy these—Prosser was a man who confessed he was under an obligation to me, and he spoke to me about the amount of money he was making in mining shares, and that there was a great boom on at the time, and I thought that I should like to have a little speculation, and he took me to these brokers and suggested buying these shares—it was the general boom that induced me to go into shares as a speculation—I really do not know the exact month I bought them—I did not buy them with the idea of taking them up at all. It was only when I found I lost so much money that I took them up, which was not probably until a month or two afterwards—I said at the Police-court that Lupton looked more straightforward than the man I saw at the office—office the man I saw had a very hang-dog expression about him—I think he knew the whole thing was a swindle.
read the circular I purchased some shares—I think the name of Lupton was on it, Lupton something, but I forget—I sent it to the Treasury—this (produced) is the circular I received, or a similar one—this is the transfer I signed (produced).
Cross-examined by Sir EDWARD CLARKE. I instructed a broker in Nottingham to buy these for me—I do not know whether it was January or February—this is my signature, "As witness our hands and seals this 3rd day of February"—it was prior to that I ordered the broker to buy them—I am quite sure that I received a circular—that is the only one I have in my possession—possibly I might have received another circular—I did not keep them.
Cross-examined by Mr. RUFUS ISAACS. I bought these shares in the ordinary way through our brokers on the Stock Exchange—when the time came to get delivery of them I would give my name to the broker—I had instructed my brokers to have the shares transferred into my name—I gave my name Joseph Tussaud Byng as the name to which these shares were transferred—those shares would be bought in the ordinary course by a broker from a jobber on the Stock Exchange—I should instruct my broker in Nottingham and he would instruct a broker in London—he goes and buys them from a jobber in the ordinary course and takes delivery in my name—as far as I am aware I never saw, or knew, or had anything to do with Mr. Walter Richard Burgoyne Watte—all I knew was that he was the transferror—I found it stated he was the transferror of these shares into my name—that is the only time I had occasion to know the name in any way.
JOSEPH BARNES . I live at Greenwich and am a railway store-keeper—my attention was first drawn to the Lydenburg Consolidated Oold Mines Corporation by seeing a report of a statutory meeting of the company of the 15th October, 1895—I read that in the Financial Times—I accepted that statement of course; the report that was read by the chairman at the meeting as was stated in the Financial Times—in consequence of that I instructed my brokers to purchase thirty shares in the company for me—they were bought at 11/16—I paid for them with this cheque for £86 18s. 2d. which is now produced—I did not get the transfer of the shares nor the certificate—I do not remember who the transfer was from for the moment—(handed to the witness)—it is from Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts—that is the certificate.
Cross-examined by Sir EDWARD CLARKE. I cut out the report of this meeting from the Financial Times and kept it by me, and have produced it here—that is the one—I had this report on the 17th October—I bought in February or March of the following year—I kept the cutting tall recently and watched the market—one watches the market and the date of the reports—I was buying other shares in March at same time, other South African shares—the shares were tumbling down at the time of the Jameson Raid in 1895—I am not sure at the moment whether they were getting up again or not—I do not recollect—I paid 11/16—that is 13s. 9d. for £1 shares—they were all speculative in mines.
Cross-examined by Mr. RUFUS ISAACS. I got these shares also through a broker, a London broker, no doubt a very respectable man, or they are, that is the firm—I presume he would buy the shares from a jobber
on the London Stock Exchange—I do not know—he did the right thing, no doubt—I bought thirty shares—the transfer is only twenty-five—there was another five—I have no doubt this is correct—I gave my name to my broker as the name in which I wanted the shares transferred—I found the transfer had the name of Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts upon it, but I was not aware of that—that is all I know about Mr. Watts—it made no difference to me who my transferror was as long as I got on the register for them.
CHARLES S. LOTT . I live at 97, Stormont Road, Clapham Junction—I am a clerk—about June, 1896, I received a circular from Lupton & Co.—I have not kept it—it is destroyed—it was a circular similar to this (Exhibit 33) enclosing a stamped telegraph form—after getting that I called at Lupton's office—I saw Lupton, and referred to the circular—I was not a shareholder at that time—on the information I received from Lupton, I said that I would think the matter over about purchasing some of the shares—I did not ask very many particulars, but I asked if he thought it was a good company—to the best of my recollection his reply was a favourable one—he did not mention the name, but he said they belonged to a client for whom he had to sell them—he remarked that I would have to pay no commission, but that the commission would be paid by the seller of the shares—my recollection is that he said he had bought them at a higher price than he was offering them to me at—he made me the offer as contained in the circular, 7s. 6d. a share free of commission—I think about 700 shares were offered in the circular, but I was only to treaty for about 100—one hundred shares I only took—I went away, and a few days later went again to the office and saw him again—I agreed to purchase 100 shares of the 750 shares at 7s. 6d.—this is the contract—this is the cheque I gave for £37 17s. 7d.—it is drawn in Lupton and Company's favour, and endorsed by them—I have got the transfer—the name of the transferror is James Arthur Comper.
FLORENCE LAMPRELL . I am the wife of Frederick Lamprell, of Ravenscroft Park—in January, 1895, I was in the service of Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts—I continued in that service until March, 1897—I was employed there as a shorthand writer and type-writer—he carried on business as a solicitor under the style of Burgoyne Watts & Company—his brother Frank was in the office—a firm of Ford and Turner were law stationers to Messrs. Burgoyne Watts & Company—I have no recollection of seeing this agreement of September 5th in the office—I see on the first page the words "Burgoyne Watts & Company, 77, Gresham Street," in the hand-writing of one of the clerks, Mr. Parkins—on the next page is the attestation clause, also in the handwriting of the clerk Parkins—the word "inclusive" on the front page of the agreement, to the best of my belief, is in the handwriting of the defendant, Walter Richard—the word "inclusive," in my opinion, is in the same writing; that is to the best of my belief—on the back of duplicate I see the word "registered"; that's in the hand-writing of Parkins—I have here before me the memorandum and articles of association of the City Times—I see a signature of Burgoyne Watts, witnessing the signatures of the persons signing the memorandum and articles of association—to the best of my belief it is in the writing of
Mr. Walter Watts—the signature to the certificate of incorporation is Williams to the best of my belief—when I took letters (tpyewritten) from either of the defendants I identified by whom they were dictated to me by initials; all except those dictated by Mr. Walter—any letter not dictated by Mr. Walter I initialled, so was to identify the person, as a rule—the letter of the 11th March was type-written by me at Mr. William's dictation—I say that from the initials—it is also signed by him—this (Exhibit 48) is a letter signed Mr. Walter—this letter of the 17th October (Exhibit 49), to the best of my belief, is in the handwriting of Mr. William—(read) "77, Gresham Street, Guildhall, London, E. G., September 11th, 1895. Dear Sir, I think it would be advisable to call a I meeting of the directors at an early date. Please advise us time and place—Yours faithfully, Burgoyne Watts and Company. The Secretary, the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines." The next is dated "17th October, 1895, to Messrs. Dale, Newman and Company, 75, and 76, Cornhill, London, E.C. We hereby request and authorise you to transfer the above-mentioned property into the name of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited, instead of into the name of Noltzykof Company as provided in the agreement in your company, dated 1st October, 1895.—Yours truly, Burgoyne Watts and Company."—the next is Exhibit 50, that is that signed by Mr. Walter—it is addressed to J. M. Coward, Esq., and is marked private—"77, Gresham Street, Guildhall, London, E.G., 29th November, 1897. Dear Sir,—Umtali and Abercorn. We have now received these petitions, and shall be glad if you will favour us with a call to-morrow, as our Mr. Burgoyne Watts leaves to-morrow night for Dublin, which will detain him for a lew days. Yours faithfully, Burgoyne Watts and Company"—this letter is signed by Mr. William—that letter was dictated to me—I get that from the initials "W. F."—it is: "March 31st, 1897—77, Gresham Street, Guildhall, London, E.C. Dear Sir,—We understand there is to be a meeting of your directors to-day, and as promised we shall be glad if you will bring before the board our letter of the 11th inst., and obtain for us a cheque for the amount of our costs as therein mentioned. Yours faithfully, Burgoyne Watts and Company. To the secretary of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited."—this is Mr. William's—(read) "April 22nd, 1897, Dear Sir,—Re Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited. Adverting to our letters of the 11th and 31st ult., we shall be glad to have a reply thereto, as we cannot understand what object your directors can have in maintaining this silence. We have every desire to assist everyone concerned, and it is for that object that we have hitherto refrained from delivering our bill of costs in detail, but unless we hear that your board are prepared to settle with us upon the basis of our letter of the 11th ult. we shall deliver our costs in full. We shall not renew our offer unless it is accepted this week. Kindly convey this to your directors. Yours faithfully, Burgoyne Watts and Company. To the Secretary of the Lydenburg Gold Mines, Limited"—looking at the signatures of these transfers they all appear to be signed by Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts.
Cross-examined by MR. RUFUS ISAACS. I was in the employment of Messrs. Burgoyne Watts and Company for something like 31/4 years—daring that time there was a Mr. Horsefall there—he was the conveyancing
clerk, I thought; he is now dead, I understand—I was acquainted with his handwriting—a Mr. Parkins was also in the office, the office boy Noble, and a commissionaire—during the time I was there there was a good deal to attend to—sometimes I would see agreements, and some-times not—I do not know whether I saw the agreement of 5th September; I might have, or might not—I left in March, 1897—from that date until I was examined at the Police-court in this case I had not seen either of the Messrs. Bourgoyne Watts's handwriting—during the interval I was married—I had seen a good many letters which were not in the Messrs. Watts's handwriting, no doubt—during those 13 months I did not see Mr. Horsefalls writing—I thought that Mr. Horsfall's writing and Mr. Walter Burgoyne Watts's writing very closely resembled each other—the only word which in the agreement I recognise is the word "inclusive"—that is the only word I thought was in Mr. Walter Richard Watts's handwriting—I would not swear to it—that would be the work Mr. Horsefall would do as conveyancing clerk—Mr. Walter Watts was very irregular, indeed, in his attendance; he was irregular both before his marriage and after, but I forget the months—I really forget when he married—he did not come and attend as regularly to his business as he used to before he was going to be married—he was away a considerable part of that time—he seemed to come and go away so quickly—after his marriage for some little time he did not become more regular in his attendance—he was more irregular at first—he lived at St. Leonard's-on-Sea for a considerable portion of the time, after his marriage—after that he went to live at Hayes in Middlesex, I under-stood—whilst he was away the conveyancing part of the work was done by Mr. Horsefall, so far as I know—I have had to copy a good many documents which were in Mr. Horsefalls writing.
Cross-examined by MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS. At the back of the agreement of September 5th I see some pencil writing—"Miss C."—that is myself; "Copy on brief," and the date 4-12-95—that shows that I had to copy on brief that document at the date of the 4th December, 1895—that is what it would mean—that is Mr. Horsefalls writing.
JAMES SECCOMBE PRIOR ,—I am a partner in the firm of John Gibbs, Son and Company, Stockbrokers, of 29, Cornhill—I have known Mr. Lupton for some years, and have transacted business for him for the last 8 or 9 years—originally we transacted business with him as J. V. Turner Lupton and Company, and at a later date as Turner Lupton and Company, Limited—Mr. Lupton was the person with whom we dealt, with whom we had our business transactions—considerable transactions from time to time—I was the partner in the firm who generally looked after his business—I received instructions from him personally, so me times, sometimes through a clerk, and sometimes on the telephone—I used to call at the office of Turner Lupton and Company, Limited, and see him—in August of 1895 we received instructions to sell shares in the Lydenburg Consolidated Mining Company—whether he gave them to me personally I cannot say—I produce an account showing the transactions we carried out for him in respect of the Lydenburg Consolidated Company—the first transaction that we had in connection with the Lydenburg mine, was the sale of shares on August 27th to sell a lot
of 600 shares at 1 1/2, a lot of 825 shares at 1 1/2 and another lot of 500 shares at 1 9/16—(Handing to the witness an account and reading it up to 31st August and September 16th)—the shares then began to fall in value—we continued selling shares through the rest of September and the early days of October, down to 1 3/8—at the same time that we were selling shares we were also supporting the market by buying shares—we had our instructions to buy and sell—we did buy shares in August and September; down to the 20th September; at prices always at a premium—some of them at a considerable premium; 2 and as high as 2 3/6—altogether 3,155 shares, the prices totalling up to £6,517 16s. 3d.—and we sold shares as between the 27th August and 10th October, 10,497 shares for £19,229 10s. 6d.—the difference between the shares sold and the shares bought, left a sum of £12,711 14s. 3d. in favour of Mr. Lupton's account—those are the figures here—they are not a copy of our books—that is not an account I took out myself—I have not got my book here—Mr. Morris, my assistant, took it—the manager is here with the books.
By the COURT. I do not know who took the account out—it is the first time I have seen it—Mr. Morris is here with the books—we were purchasing other securities for Mr. Lupton at this time—I mean for Lupton and Company.
By MR. GILL. We were purchasing for Turner Lupton and Company, but I looked to Mr. Lupton—we were purchasing a variety of securities for the firm; for the special account—I do not think he ever paid for any shares or took them up in his own name—the books would shew it; but it would take a very long time—this account was opened in the name of the limited company—he took up shares bought apparently for investment and paid for them.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I have seen Mr. Woolaston—I believe Mr. Woolaston was a director of Lupton, Limited—I had no communications with him—I have heard he was, and I have seen him in the office, at the tune we were doing business for them—I saw Mr. Woolaston at the office—I understood he was a director—as far as the accounts are concerned I have not taken any accounts out from our books myself—I have not really seen the books or gone into them—we have bought a great number of shares—it is the usual habit for persons dealing in shares to buy and to sell—it is very usual, having bought shares in a particular company for a client, to sell shares in the same company that day or the day after.
WILLIAM HENRY G. MORRIS . I am manager of the business of John Gibbs, Son and Company, stockbrokers—I have the books of the firm showing the transactions that we had for Turner, Lupton and Company, Limited, towards the end of 1895—I can give from the books the sales and the purchases made of shares in the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines pi have not seen the account (produced)—I was not in the office when it came in—the 30th of August was the first one, I think; on that day we sold 600 shares in the market at 1 1/2—I sold 600 shares in the market on August 27th, 1895—on the same day I sold 825 shares at 1 1/2 and 1 1/32—(numerous other transactions of the same nature followed)—I did those through two jobbers on the Exchange named Weber and Winckheim—the shares were delivered from J. V. Turner Lupton and Company—the
shares were purchased of Lupton, we only took the names—the share we bought we did not want they made up—the monetary difference between the shares I bought and sold was £9,000—I have not checked those figures, I have not taken them out at all—I cannot tell you the sum for which I sold the shares without taking it out—I have never taken it out—I can tell you the number of shares I have bought and the number of shares I have sold—roughly the figure would be about £9,000—I do not think it would take very long to ascertain it, I will do so.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. The things are entered in my book to the mid-September and end of September account, and so on—it is for the account at the end of the month—we have got other transactions in these books as well—I was dealing for Messrs. Lupton and Company, Limited, in other shares—buying and selling—there was nothing exceptional in these transactions—it is the same sort of account that we have for other people who are dealing in shares—selling and buying shares—no one confines himself to buying or selling any particular class of shares—the highest price mentioned here is for the 400 shares on 11th of September at 2 3/8—that is the only transaction of the kind—at I that price Lupton & Company bought 400 shares—they bought for a higher price than they ever sold for—there is nothing unusual in dealing in shares before a company actually comes out—it is very well known that there is dealing beforehand—it was an ordinary outside broker's business.
Re-examined. No transfers were ever taken of the shares bought; we took names for the balance—the effect of buying shares that are not wanted is that you have a fortnight running for the account—people buying at 1 5/8 sell them before the end of the account at 2; they take the difference—they do not want the shares—it is simply a transaction for differences—that tends to keep up the market—all buying tends to keep up the market.
MR. THOMAS. I am a stock and share broker, of Founders Court; a member of the firm of Severs and Thomas—our firm did business on the Stock Exchange for Turner Lupton and Company—I saw Mr. Lupton—it was on Mr. Lupton's instructions that we bought and sold—I have taken out from our books the particulars of the shares bought and sold on Lupton's orders in August and September, 1895—I have the books here and the account—the first shares bought were 50 at 40s. 3d. the total number bought being 2,475—I did not take out the aggregate price—the total number of shares sold was 3,177 at prices amounting to £6,362 19s. 5d.—the excess of those sold over those bought was £804 13s. 10d.—it came into the account in the general way—no transfers were taken over for those bought.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. Turner Lupton and Company were outside brokers dealing with a great many classes of shares—buying and selling—these came in as an ordinary part of quite an ordinary account.
JOHN OVEREND WATSON . I am in the employment of Messrs. Tomkin-son and Price, stockbrokers, of 3, Copthall Buildings—I know the defendant Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts and have done business for him—on February 12th, 1896, he instructed me to sell 200 Lydenburg
shares; and I did—on February 18th or 19th he gave me a further order to sell another 200 shares—I sold 100 shares then, and a further 100 shares in March; altogether 500 shares—I had an account at that time with Mrs. Burgoyne Watts—I settled for those Lydenburg shares in the account with Mrs. Burgoyne Watts—the total sum that I realised by the sale of those Lydenburg shares was 278l.
Cross-examined by MR. RUFUS ISAACS. I have done business with Mr. Burgoyne Watts for four years in various kinds of solid securities quite apart from speculative gold mines; in bank shares—the price of the 200 Lydenburg shares at 5/8 was 12s. 6d.
By the COURT. The other 200 shares at 19/32, that is 10s. 10 1/2 d., and the last hundred at 1/2, 10s.—they were all sold considerably under par—they were sold, in the ordinary regular way, on the market—we got our instructions from Mr. Burgoyne Watts to sell the shares for him just as I got other instructions from him to deal with other securities—we sold them and transmitted the profits to Mrs. Watts—I had an account at that time for Mrs. Watts in other securities—I was selling other securities for her during the time of that fortnightly settlement—I made out one account—she having the larger amount the cheque was made in her favour—altogether she had a larger amount to receive than 278l.—instead of two cheques I made out one including that—the account was kept on for her during the whole settlement—the shares were all transferred out of the name of Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts—there was no secrecy or concealment of any kind about it.
NORMAN FRITH HERBERT . I am a member of the Stock Exchange, I acted as reporter to the Exchange Telegraph Company—that company publishes daily a list of prices showing the fluctuations in stocks and shares that are being dealt with on the market—they distribute that information to the different newspapers and others who are our subscribers on the tape—for the purpose of getting information as to whether the shares of a company are being dealt in, we obtain quotations from the jobbers—the quotations were given to me by them, almost invariably—there is now a rule by which you do not quote the shares of a company, or the dealings, unless on application of six members of the Exchange, I am not quite certain about the date, but it was about September that the rule came in—before that date we quoted any shares of which we had information as to the price—among the papers we supplied with the quotations was the Financial Times.
ARTHUR EDWARD MURRAY . I live at Clifton Court Mansions, and am assistant editor of the Financial Times—we take from the Exchange Telegraph Company the quotations of shares being actively dealt with on the Exchange and publish daily those prices as returned on the tape—the Lydenburg Company was first quoted on the 27th August, 1895—as long as it was quoted as a company whose shares were being dealt with, we published the quotations from day to day, in the usual course, simply giving the tape quotations—that went on up to January, 1896—in the financial Times on October 17th, 1895, Exhibit 7, there is a report of the statutory meeting of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines—that report was supplied to me by our advertising agent, Mr. Skinner—it was Published by me in the precise form in which I received it—and I charged
for the insertion of it £7 10s.—it was a case in which no reporter of ours was present at the meeting—we were publishing what was furnished to us through what we supposed was the secretary of the company, through our advertising agent.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. It is not usual to publish in our paper reports of meetings as advertisements—it is not the custom it is done from time to time—it is not usual, it is occasionally done—if a company supplies a statement of what occurred we take it as an official document—we publish it as an advertisement if we are paid for it—it is not an unusual course for us to take—it happened occasionally—the companies send to us statements of what takes place at their meetings—we send our reporters as a rule.
Re-examined. This was brought to us by Mr. Skinner.
WALTER A. SKINNER . I am an advertisement agent, at Nicholas Lane—I know the defendant Lupton—I have known him over 10 years—I have done very considerable business for him as an advertisement agent—I remember taking the report of the meeting of the 15th of October to the Financial Times—I received a telephone message early in the morning to call upon Turner Lupton and Co. with reference to business; after that a message was sent through the telephone from Mr. Lupton asking me whether I had received the report of the meeting, and accord-ing to my call book I should gather that I went to the office of the company to get the report—I took it to the Financial Times—I had an account with them—I paid a certain amount for that advertisement—I have a running account with them—the charge for advertising was £7 10s. or £7 12s., I think—Turner Lupton and Co. paid me.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. I am an advertisement agent—I acted in that capacity for the City Times—I was a representative for a short time for the City Times—Mr. Schloss engaged me to represent the paper for a time, and paid me what he owed for the work I did for him by contract—I know Mr. Coward—I have seen him occasionally at the office of the City Times—I should say he was receiving a salary from Mr. Schloss as a paid servant at the time—Mr. Schloes was the proprietor—Mr. Schloss engaged me on the paper—I never got any orders from Mr. Coward, nor did Mr. Coward do any thing to represent he was the responsible manager of the paper.
By the COURT. Before Mr. Schloss had been editor of the paper he was in the City ns an outside broker—outside the City he was a gentleman, I suppose.
By MR. MARSHALL HALL. I should infer he wrote articles, but I cannot say he wrote them—he wrote for the City Times—he did not write for any other paper to my knowledge—where he is I cannot say; he has not been seen lately—I believe he has gone abroad.
By the COURT. I have seen other clerks—he was not a clerk—I have seen other clerks in the office.
STEPHEN JOHN ALDRIDGE . I am an assistant in the department of British books in the British Museum—I produce from the British Museum the file of the paper called the City Times—copies are supplied to us by the publishers—I have copies of the City Times for 17th and 24th August, 1895—There is no copy of 28th August—there is a copy dated
the 31st August, and another dated 28th September, and the 12th and 26th October—on the 17th August in "Answers to Correspondents," page 10, there is—"Dick—any broker will buy these shares for you; if you have not a broker apply to Turner Lupton, 5, Copthall Buildings."—"E. N. E.—if you have not a broker apply to Turner Lupton and Co."—"T. A. W.—apply to Lupton Turner and Co."—on the 24th August there is "Lydenburg—the prominence which has been given to this district lately and the success of the many promising enterprises which are being developed claim the special attention of investors and speculators; in our next issue we shall take an opportunity of dealing with the subject in some detail"—the issue of the 28th August was not filed—on the 31st August there is "Lydenburg—the attention which Lydenburg has claimed and is likely to claim is sufficient reason for setting out the following table which cannot fail to interest those holding shares in Lydenburg companies; taking the quotations current on making-up day the market value of the gold properties in the Lydenburg district is as under—then, there is a table set out—"Amongst the companies mentioned are the Lydenburg Consolidated, capital £150,000, yesterday's quotation 15/8 per share, equal to £242,750; average £30,000; present value per acre £8 2s."—then there is, "the above properties were capitalised at an average of about £5 3s. 4d. per acre, their present average market value is in excess of £22 per acre; it will be seen from the above that Lydenburg Consolidated are the cheapest of all the successful undertakings, although the price is steadily rising"—on the 28th September, 1895, on page 9, "Lydenburg Consolidated—the district is being opened up very energetically; we hear that a very important deal is very likely to be carried through which cannot fail to considerably enhance the price of the company's shares, which now stand at a fraction over 2"—on 12th October, 1895, page 13—"latest advices are of a highly satisfactory character and point to results far more favourable than could have been anticipated a few weeks ago; market operations have been such that the shares have declined to a very limited extent during the sharp set-back which has characterised the general fall during the account now concluding and at the present price of 1 1/2, are certainly a very excellent purchase"—on the 26th October, 1895, page 10, "Lydenburg Consolidated—among the shares included in group B in our Mining Trust article, these hold a very favourable position; although they felt some effect of the first scare they have well maintained their position since, leaving off firm at 13/8 yesterday; few undertakings outside the Rand, or on it for that matter, possess more encouraging prospects, and if development is maintained at its present rate Lydenburg Consolidated Mines should before long be included in the list of dividend pages."
Cross-examined by Mr. MARSHALL HALL. With regard to the issue of the 28th August, of which I have no copy, that would have been an issue in the middle of the week—an irregular issue—they are generally published on Saturday—the 28th would have been an extra issue—the 24th is Saturday and the 31st is Saturday—I believe there is an obligation on every paper to send every number to the British Museum, but I have no copy of the 28th—it never was sent to us.
of Coleman Street, Law Stationers and Printers—I know the defendant Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts as carrying on business as a solicitor in the name of Burgoyne Watts and Co—I have done business for him—on the 20th August, 1895, I received instructions to print proofs or the memorandum and articles of association of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines—with regard to the firm of Burgoyne Watts and Co., I only came in contact with him and his clerks—I printed the proofs and submitted them on the 20th of August—subsequently I printed 50 copies on September 7th—(looking at one) that is our printing—the agreement of the 5th September, the Strickland agreement, was engrossed by us from a draft supplied by Burgoyne Watts and Co.—we returned the draft with the engrossment—the duplicate is not here—in our engrossment it describes the property as the "Lydenburg Consolidated Gold Fields"—that I took from the draft supplied to us—"Gold Fields "have been struck out and the word "Mines" substituted—I find also the word "inclusive "has been written in paragraph 2 after it left our office—this agreement, Exhibit 6, was also engrossed by us on the instructions of Burgoyne Watts and Co.—the engrossing of those agreements, and the printing of the memorandum and articles of association were all paid for by Burgoyne Watts and Co.
Cross-examined by MR. RUFUS ISAACS. We have done business with Burgoyne Watts for about 10 years, the ordinary work that would be done by us for a solicitor—that has been the nature of all our work—during that time a good lot of work was done—the agreement of the 5th of September is a pretty short agreement, a page and a-half—that is Strickland's agreement—that agreement we engrossed from a draft sent on to us by them—I did not myself see Mr. Watts about this—I do not suggest that Mr. Walter Burgoyne Watts came and gave me instructions about these things—in the ordinary course, somebody or other from Burgoyne Watts and Co. would send on to us to engross—or our own boy might have brought it in the ordinary course of work—I do not say I ever saw Walter Burgoyne Watts at all about this matter—this Strickland agreement of the 5th of September came to us just in the same way, in the ordinary course of work—there was nothing to prevent them, if they wanted to, copying it in the office—they sent it on to us and we engrossed it.
Cross-examined by MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS. I know a clerk named Horsfall—I generally saw him over this matter—I think on two or three times altogether I have seen William Watts—that is all—I knew him to be one of the clerks in his brother's office.
By the COURT. I knew him as a clerk—I knew he was not a partner—Horsfall was about 40, I should think.
Re-examined. I only saw William Frank Burgoyne Watts at our office two or three times—we printed one or two memoranda and articles of association for them—the memorandum and articles of association of the City Times paper was printed by us.
WILLIAM HENRY G. MORRIS (recalled) I have checked the account which I gave with the figures in our book—I have brought out as the result of checking the figures with the figures in our book the total—the result is £12, 237 as the difference between the price of the shares sold and the shares bought.
GEORGE INGLIS BOYLE . I am a messenger in the Record Office of the Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of proceedings in the Bankruptcy of Louis Simons Lupton, of 5, Copthall Buildings, Throgmorton Street, described as a stock and share dealer, trading as Louis Simons Lupton, of 5, Copthall Buildings, Throgmorton Street, City of London, stock and share dealer—the petition was filed on the 9th December, 1892—the act of bankruptcy set out in the notice in October, by Lupton, was that he was about to suspend payment—there is an affidavit by Lupton on the file of the proceedings of the 25th January, 1893—in the 7th paragraph of that I find this statement "With regard to the 7th paragraph in the affidavit it is true—it is true that there is a limited liability company under the name of James V. Turner Lupton & Co., Limited. No part of my property has, however, been transferred or otherwise assigned to that company"—the receiving order was made on the 25th January, 1893, and there was an adjudication on the 15th March, 1893.
MANASSKH JOHNSON . I am a clerk in the High Court in the Companies' Winding Up Department—I produce the file of proceedings in the winding up of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited—the file contains the affidavits made in reference to the winding up by the persons interested in the matter—the file would also contain the Official Receiver's report, and the notes of the examinations of the persons connected with the company—the statement of affaire and the observations upon them, and so on—I find 011 the file an affidavit of Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts, sworn on the 14th May, 1897, filed on the 18th May.
Cross-examined by MR. RUFUS ISAACS. If a resolution had been passed by the shareholders of the company to wind up voluntarily, it would be see out in the petition—I do not know if it was so, I have not read the petition—the petition is the first-thing on the file—they could present a petition for a compulsory winding up—the Court would have nothing to do with it—it would be wound up by the liquidator himself, who is appointed by the shareholders, but an application can be made to the Court—after that any person or shareholder who opposes can petition the Court for a compulsory winding-up order or supervision order—the result of which is that if there is a supervision order the mere winding up is continued by the liquidator, but subject to the supervision of the High Court—a creditor can always press for a compulsory winding-up order apart from a supervision order—in this case I find that a compulsory winding-up order was made—the order is on the file—Mr. Grimwade was the liquidator appointed by the shareholders voluntarily—the petition was presented on the 4th of May, 1897, by George William Fowler Tomlin, a shareholder of the company—it was heard on Wednesday, the 19th May, and the compulsory order was made—that application was supported by the affidavit of Mr. Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts, and that was the object with which that affidavit was filed—Mr. Tomlin was a shareholder—he, in fact, was not a creditor at all, but a shareholder—Burgoyue Watts at this particular date was not a shareholder, in May, 1897—the affidavit has been read—I was not in court when the petition was heard—a compulsory winding up order was made—the last paragraph of the order is this, "And it is ordered the costs of the said Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts be taxed and paid together with £15 15s. in respect of the costs
of W. Tomlin, and £10 10s. the amount allowed by the court in respect of the said company out of the assets of the said company"—the petition was presented by Mr. Tomlin; the company appeared, and Burgoyne Watts appeared as a creditor—the order as to costs was £15 15s. to Mr. Tomlin, and a sum of £10 10s. to the company, and they ordered Mr. Burgoyne Watts' costs to be taxed and paid to him out of the assets of the company—that is on the petition that was heard on the 19th of May—it was a shareholder's petition—the only affidavit of any creditor in respect of the petition to wind up compulsorily is Mr. Walter Richard Bargoyne Watts—I cannot say if this is the Official Receiver's file—the printed statement of affaird made by the Receiver after the order is on the file—in the statement of affairs there are two unsecured creditors for £208 15s.—one of them was the secretary, I think, Mr. Scare—in order to get a public examination of the directors it is necessary to have a compulsory winding up order under the Act of 1890, on the Official Receiver's report—it can only be got if there is a compulsory order, under section 8—under a supervision order there can be no such order made.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. I have not the register of shareholders at the time of the winding up—I think there is a list of shareholders there on the statement of affairs—I know that Mr. Coward was the other one, £8 15s., and Mr. Burgoyne Watts £200—that is the creditors' list—I have the shareholders 'list—Mr. Coward's name appears there as the holder of 120 shares.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBSON. John Hunter Stephenson is on the list of shareholders on that winding up—101 shares.
Thursday, August 4th
WILLIAM FREDERICK NEALES . In 1892 I entered the service of Lupton—he was at that time carrying on the business of an outside broker—I remember towards the end of 1892 his bankruptcy, and in 1892 I remember the business being turned into a limited liability company—I audited certain books, the cash book chiefly—I was paid 30s. weekly—I was there from ten till five, not after five—I had occasionally work in the evening—when the business was turned into a limited company I signed the memorandum and articles of association and became a director of the company called James V. Turner Lupton and Company, Limited—I had shares in the company—they were given to me—as a matter of fact money was handed to me to pay for the shares by one of Mr. Lupton's brothers—after I became a director of the company my salary continued the same, and I always received it—from time to time Lupton had six brothers employed in his office, never all at the same time—there was a clerk there in the employment named Mackenzie—Mackenzie and I sat in what was called the general office—there was another office called the telephone office—a clerk named Coraper and another clerk named Cries sat in that office—I knew Coward first by his coming to the office—I cannot give a date for it—I have seen him at the counter often before he was in any way connected with it—after he became connected with the business he had an office—for a short time he was in a small room we knew as the private office—that was only for a week or two, and after-wards he went downstairs in the basement in the same building; the City Times office it was after; but whether it was at first I will not be
sure—I knew Watts by sight—the one I took to be the clerk I knew as Watts, and the other I knew as Burgoyne—there were a dozen clerks sometimes, counting the boys, in Lupton's office—when Coward went downstairs to the City Times office there was nobody employed in the same room with him; I think there was in the same set of offices—when Turner, Lupton and Company, Limited, was first started, I believe Stevenson Lupton and Woolaston signed the cheques for a few weeks, and after that I signed with Stevenson Lupton—I believe Mr. Woolaston, the chairman, signed first—I did afterwards—I thought they, would be required in the course of business, and I knew my signature would be required; so I signed—I had the key of the safe; I could get the cheque book whenever I wanted it—I do not think Woolaston could—nearly all the cheques drawn were entered in a book before pay day, and a man would come for a cheque and perhaps I should draw it and perhaps I should not—I have drawn cheques there—I have drawn cheques for the purposes of the business, not for any other purpose—I often signed blank cheques—the only times I can tell you when I signed any particular number was when I was ill in bed, and then I signed fifty at a time on two occasions—at other times I never counted them—I signed what I thought was necessary—when the thing started I was a director, so were Stevenson Lupton and Carlton Woolaston—Stevenson Lupton is not the defendant—there were three directors—after a time Stevenson Lupton ceased to be a director and left London altogether—I continued to sign cheques up to December 5th or 6th, 1895—I was not in the office all the time—Lupton controlled the business of Turner Lupton and Company, Limited—he managed for the limited company—the limited company consisted of the shareholders who held shares—I could not tell who held shares—we had a meeting of the shareholders—there was a Mr. Simons at the meeting—he was connected with Ind, Coope & Company—he was a shareholder; I think he held 50 or 100 shares—as an accountant I should not call it a balance sheet, but a statement of affairs was made up every fortnight, after every settlement—there was never a balance sheet of the company—I never saw a balance sheet such as would be produced at a meeting of shareholders—Mr. Mackenzie was a shareholder, and Crick, I believe, and Comper—I do not know who Andrew Wilson was—I do not remember what the capital of the company was—while I was there there were some companies promoted—the Lydenburg I believe was—I went round to the office of the Lydenburg—Mr. Lupton asked me to go—the reason he gave me at the time was that there was no one in the office when he had just come from there, and would I go over, and I went and stayed there one day, and the next day I was asked to go again, and I did go—I went there every day except Sunday for rather more than two months—I did very little of the business of the company, the secretary did the work; I was not there to do the work—if the secretary was not there then I gave a receipt for the transfers to whomever brought them, and took the fees—I was there practically all day except when I went out for an hour in the middle of the day—unless I went out for ray own requirements I was there—I was there part of September, October, November, and part of December—in September and October I do not remember a board meeting being held, but then they might have held one
—when I was out I often stayed out an hour and a-half at dinner if I required to—I was a director of Lupton and Company; I remember a meeting on December 5th of the Lydenburg—I heard talking in the private office; I was not at the meeting; I was in the outer office—the talking attracted my attention; the doors were closed; I could not hear what passed—after this Marshall left, he told me he had resigned when he came out—after that meeting Lupton sent for me to Copthall Buildings, and I went—I believe he asked me why I had made such a damned fool of myself—his idea was that I had been at the meeting, and had said something I ought not to have said, but I was not there—I think he said I bad better stay away—I did not go to the office again after that, neither the office of the Lydenburg nor Turner Lupton and Company—I took my salary in lieu of notice for about six months—I went on drawing it every week—I went and called for it—I think on one or two occasions it was sent to me—I was drawing my salary down to June or July, 1896—that was when I first heard that Turner, Lupton and Company was being wound up—I made an affidavit—my salary ceased at about that time—I do not know who commenced the litigation about the winding-up; Woolaston told me about it—during the time I was away for the six months taking my salary I did not sign any document at all—I transferred my shares to someone—I signed a blank transfer—Mr. Lupton had got a private office.
Cross-examined by MR. MARSHALL HALL. I went there in 1891, but I became Lupton's clerk in 1892—I remember the City Times being started, but I do not remember the date; somewhere in 1894—the control of the paper was in the hands of Lupton for only about three months—during those three months up till about March, Coward was in fact editor of that paper—I know Lupton did dispose of the paper; I could not say when—I do not know that when he disposed of it Coward ceased to act as editor of it—Mr. Lupton was very ill about that time—I believe Mr. Schloss was in some way connected with it, but whether he paid for it or not I do not know.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBSON. The relation of Mr. Lupton's called Stevenson Lupton was no relation to the defendant Stephenson—Stevenson Lupton was a brother of Mr. Lupton.
Cross-examined by MR. ELLIOTT. I knew both the gentlemen of the name of Watts—I knew one as Mr. Burgoyne and the other simply as Mr. Watts—I knew Walter R. B. Watts as Mr. Burgoyne—I only saw him, I believe, once or twice—I was with Mr. Lupton from 1891 to 1895—I cannot swear that I did not see the gentleman you have described as Mr. Burgoyne more than twice, because I may have seen him without knowing who he was; I may have seen him in the street a dozen times—I do not believe I saw him in the office more than twice—during the whole time I was in the office of the Lydenburg company I never saw Mr. Burgoyne there at all.
JAMES ARTHUR COMPER . I am not in employment at present—I was in the service of Mr. Lupton for a considerable time, and continued in his service when the business was turned into a limited company: J. V. Turner Lupton & Company—I was a book-keeper, not a confidential clerk—during the time that the business of J. V. Turner Lupton & Company,
Limited, was in existence I attended to the business at 5, Copthall Buildings—in 1895 part of the business had to do with the promotion of companies—I knew of the Lydenburg Consolidated as one of the companies promoted—there was a clerk in the office named Mackenzie—he occupied the position of secretary—James Pope was a clerk that came in to do extra work after hours—I prepared transfers and signed them myself, as transferring shares—I accepted 7,862 shares in the Lydenburg to hold them from James Pope—that is James Pope's signature, so far as I know.
The defendant Coward lure fainted, and the Court adjourned till to-morrow Friday, 5th August.
MR. THOMAS BOND . I examined Coward yesterday along with his medical attendant—I found him in a very broken-down condition—I found him very depressed and exhausted, his pulse was 120, he was foeble, his tongue was very foul and tremulous, his reflexes were much exaggerated; that means that his nervous system was much broken down, and he complained—I of constant vomiting and great pain over the abdomen and stomach found him suffering from no organic disease, but he was very ill from nervous exhaustion and functional nervous breakdown—I do not consider his life in any danger, and I do not think very seriously of the fit which I am told he had in court—I think he was in a hysterical emotional condition to a great extent.
By the COURT. I saw him after the fit, but I heard the history of the fit—I think the prolonged strain is gradually breaking him down, and if he is not relieved from that strain he will not have much chance of getting much better.
DR. HOWEL. I have attended Mr. Coward many years—during the course of this investigation at Bow Street he had to undergo a very severe intestinal operation with a view of saving his life; excision of the rectum, the removal of the lower part of the large bowel—he has recovered from that—I heard from Dr. Chatterton what the attack he had yesterday was—I have examined his heart many times—there is some heart affection, decidedly—in my opinion it would be dangerous to his life as well as to his health to remain for the remainder of this trial here in the state of health he is in—any excitement is dangerous to his life—I should not like, as a medical man, to accept the responsibility of his remaining here during the rest of this trial.
The Jury were discharged from giving any verdict as to Coward.
JAMES ARTHUR COMPER (examination continued)—I have no particular explanation why James Pope was transferring shares to me—according to Exhibit 72 I am transferring 400 shares to Stephnson—I did that on instructions from either the secretary or the manager of Turner Lupton and Co., or instructions of someone in Turner Lupton and Company—I also executed other transfers, when they were put before me, or when I was instructed to do it—I was appointed liquidator of Turner Lupton and Company, Limited, and Walter James Wall acted with me in the matter—we had meetings with regard to the liquidation—at the time of the liquidation Mrs. Lupton nominally held the shares, but they were in various names; her nominees—I mean that nominally they were the shareholders, but in reality she was-—I had to do certain things in the winding-up, and one of the steps I took was to destroy the books of
Turner Lupton and Company on instructions; from the resolution passed at the final meeting; all the books, minute-books and everything—I saw a minute-book—Mr. Mackenzie kept it—the final meeting was held in December, 1896—I acted in the liquidation of Turner Lupton and Company, Limited, oil the instructions of Mr. Benjamin the solicitor—a resolution was passed by those present to destroy the books—three or four shareholders were present: Mr. Crick, a clerk at Lupton's, Mr. Lupton's brother, W. Lupton, and both liquidators, and, I think, there was another—by both liquidators I mean myself and Mr. Wall—the principal shareholder was not there—Mrs. Lupton was not there—the resolution to destroy the books was I believe carried out by Mr. W. Lupton—when Turner Lupton and Co. was wiped out and the books were destroyed I went into the employment of Mr. Lupton's brother, W. Lupton, a stock and share dealer.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I was in Mr. Lupton's office—I never saw Bertrand Nash there, except one evening when he came and wanted to get employment for night work—when he was there I believe he signed his name on a blank piece of paper to see whether he could write well enough for the work, and then he was told he was not old enough and he was given 6d. and sent away—on that occasion he only signed his name once—he did not sign any agreement or witness anything—I remember in 1895 the introducting to the office of this Surkers boschkop property—it belonged to the Lionodale "Company, which was represented by a Mr. Cummings—I believe he is a director of various companies in the City—he is to be found in Gracechurch Street——5,000 was paid by two cheques, one of—1,500 and the other of—3,500—that would be in September, 1895, I think—a firm of solicitors were employed on behalf of the Lionsdale Company; a firm at 77, Cornhill, Dale, Newman and Hood—at the time of the introduction of this property certain reports were in the office with regard to it—I saw them—I under-stood they went to the Company's office afterwards—I saw them tied up together in a packet; they were all kept together, and when the Lyden-burg Company was started they did not continue to be at Mr. Lupton's office—I knew of negotiations going on with regard to options of other properties besides the Surkersboschkop—Mr. Solomon was the gentleman from whom those options were obtained—I do not know where he is now—I believe he came from South Africa—there was a good deal of money paid to him, I should think, in respect of those, between—6,000 and £7,000, by Turner Lupton and Company—I saw the papers referring to the options—I cannot say what language they were in; they were certainly in a foreign language—I believe the area the options covered was something near 30,000 acres; I understood that at the time—Lupton and Company had a large business in shares, and when blocks of shares were taken, whatever company it was in, they were usually put in the names of the clerks—that was for the more convenient dealing with the transfers—the shares of about 100 different companies were dealt in at one time—when they acquired a quantity of shares they put them in the names of the clerks for convenience, and if they had them for sale—I never signed the name of Pope; some shares were put in that name—I remember Colonel Lambart and Major Prust coming on one occasion—the reports
were taken into the private office to them; I think Mr. Lupton was present—I took them in and also the documents relating to options—they were taken into the room when Colonel Lambart and Major Prust were there.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBSON. The transfer to Mr. Stephenson was in April, 1896—that would be seven or eight months after the incorporation of the company, and after all the agreements and so forth that I have been speaking of—Nash wrote his name on an ordinary scrap of paper—it was not an agreement or anything of that sort—I cannot say Mr. Stephenson was in the private office.
Re-examined. The reports went to the Lydenburg Company's office—the options I speak of were in writing—I believe they went to the Lydenburg Company's office too—the signature of Bertrand G. Nash to this agreement of September 5th, 1895, I should think is Nash to writing, I could not say definitely—I do not know if the Lionsdale Company was taken for the Noltzykof Company first—it was another promotion of Lupton and Company.
GEORGE STAPLETON BARNES . I am the Senior Official Receiver under the Companies' Winding-up Act of 1890—in that capacity I acted as liquidator of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited—I had to examine into the books, accounts, and the business of the company generally—I made a very full examination of the history of the company from us promotion to its liquidation—I never got any reports upon the property of the company—there were no deeds of any sort, or any options over any properties—no deeds of any sort or kind came into my possession, the agreement of 5th September, the Strickland agreement, is on the file—I never came in contact with any person named Strickland—I examined the directors and Lupton—I reported to the Court the result of my enquiries before the examination—the order, for examination was made on my report to the Court—the further report was made before the public examination of the directors and promoter—subsequently the matter was brought to the attention of the Treasury, and I laid the information in the case, on which process was granted—at the commencement of my inquiries I communicated with Lupton as the promoter of this company, and I received this letter from him (produced), dated May 24th, 1897 (read)—"To the Official Receiver in Companies Liquidation, 33, Carey Street, Lincoln's Inn. Sir, Re Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited In reply to your letter of the 22nd inst., I beg to inform you that I was not concerned in the promotion of this company, nor has the company had the am of my offices at any time. Evidently you have been misinformed. I am, dear sir, yours faithfully, L S. Lupton."—I have in the course of my investigation of the affairs of this company had the particulars with regard to the statutory meeting that was held on 15th October, and the report that was read at that meeting—with regard to this property I should have been prepared to sell it if any one would buy it—the difficulty is to get any offer at all, because I have nothing to show that I have got any title; but the Lionsdale, who were the original vendors, offered £100 fow it.
Cross-examined by SIR EDWARD CLARKE. I have communicated with Pretoria, but it would cost a considerable sum of money to find out
whether it is registered or not, and that money it is not in my power to spend—I have no reason to doubt that it is registered—the Noltzykof Company bought from the Lionsdale, and at the request of the Noltzykof the Lionsdale transferred direct to the Lydenburg—it would not be unusual for a person or company to buy a property and then have it transferred to the ultimate purchaser—it is done in landed estates every day—I have no reason to doubt that £5,000 was paid to the Lionsdale—I have communicated with Mr. Cummings.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBSON. I have been in possession of the property since the order to wind up, about May, 1897—owing to the lack of funds I have not sent anybody out to South Africa—I have not attempted, of course, to work the mines—I fancy it would be a very difficult matter to find then.
WALTER JAMES WALL . I live at 58, Landseer Road—I entered the service of the defendant Lupton as clerk in January, 1895—the business was then carried on as Turner Lupton and Company, Limited—Mr. Lupton was managing director of the company—I continued in the service till the winding up of Lupton and Company—the office of Lupton and Company were at 5, Copthall Buildings—I know the paper the City Times—it was carried on in the same building—I did not go to the City Times office itself—I went to the same building—I had no business with the City Times for Lupton—I had nothing whatever to do with it—the housekeeping expenses for the City Times office, I believe, were paid by Lupton and Company, Limited, fortnightly—there were other clerks in Lupton's office besides myself—the number varied considerably—at one time there might have been between 20 and 30, perhaps—the lowest was about 8 or 10, perhaps—when Turner Lupton and Company were ordered to be wound up, myself and Mr. Comper were appointed liquidators—the books were destroyed—the last meeting was called, and attended by two or three of the shareholders—I believe one was Mr. Mackenzie—he was secretary of Lupton and Company, Limited; the other was, I believe, Mr. Crick, a clerk in the office of the company—I believe there was another—I cannot say who the other was—all the books and papers after that meeting were destroyed—everything connected with it—I have used the name of William James Wallace, but never to my knowledge have I signed a document in reference to the Lydenburg—they are not my own Christian names—I do not know how I came to use the name of William James Wallace—the shares in the Lydenburg were put in that name—a block of 20,000—I did not know when it was done—I never transferred any—they remain in my name to this day—this (produced) is a transfer signed James Pope—I do not know the writing—I see there is a witness, I do not know whether it is R. W. Wallace or N. W. Wallace—it is not mine—I do not know any other person using the name of Wallace.
Cross-examined by Sir EDWARD CLARKE. I said at the Police-court it was not mine; I was asked to answer definitely, and I said no—there was a brother of mine in the same employment—his name is Reginald Wallace Wall—the City Times office was down in the basement, and Lupton, Limited, was on the ground floor—I knew that Mr. Lupton had let the office of the City Times—so far as I know or heard Mr. Lupton;
had nothing to do with the business of the City Times—there were at one time a good many shareholders in Lupton, Limited—I cannot remember the number, but I should think probably 15 or 20—I do not know what the capital was—there were 2,500 shares at £10 each—they were all taken up I believe.
Re-examined. Mrs. Lupton was the shareholder at the termination of the liquidation—she was the last person in possession of shares.
REGINALD WALLACE WALL . I am a clerk living at 2, Mount Grove Road, Highbury—I was in the employment of Turner, Lupton and Co. up to the end of 1896—I went there in 1893—I cannot say whose writing this is; I do not recognise it at all—it is not my writing—I do not know the writing in which James Pope is written there—I do not know anyone of the name of R. or N. W. Wallace—I cannot say I know a James Pope but the name seems familiar.
EDWARD HENRY BLAKENEY . I am an inquiry clerk at the head office of the London and South-Western Bank, Fenchurch Street—I know the defendant Lupton—he had an account at our bank, which began on May 28tb, 1887, in the name of J. V. Turner and Co.—there was a J. V. Turner Lupton and Company, Limited, account opened on the 14th November, 1892—it continued down to 1893, when it was J. V. Turner and Company, Limited—up to May 9th, 1893, it was J. V. Turner, Lupton and Company, Limited—up to 5th December, 1895, it was J. V. Turner and Company, Limited—the signatures we honoured on the account of J. V. Turner and Company, Limited, were S. Lupton and E. Mackenzie—at a later date there was Mr. F. Neales' signature—in May of 1893 the persons authorised to sign cheques were Louis Simons Lupton, and W. F. Neales, and Mackenzie as secretary—in November, 1895, the only signature we honoured was that of Louis Simons Lupton; that was with regard to a letter to the bank stating that after a meeting held at 5, Copthall Buildings, Louis Simons Lupton will sign all cheques and documents—I produce a copy of the account from May, 1895, down to July, 1896—it is an account of considerable magnitude—it is the practice of our bank to return to the customers cheques which have been honoured.
HARRY V. TAYLOR . I am an Examiner in the Department of the Official Receiver in Companies' Liquidation—I have examined the books of the Lydenburg Consolidated Company and the share transfers—I have them here—the company was registered on 24th August, 1895—up to 30th September, 1895, I find that 7,569 shares were transferred out of the name of James Pope for a total consideration shewn on the transfers of £14,780 14s.; up to the 7th December, 10,981 for a consideration appearing in the transferred of £20, 135s. 6d.; up to 14th February, 1896, 12,138 shares had been transferred; the amount is only increased by £22 10s.—all those shares were transferred out of the name of James Pope—of that total number 1,429 were transferred for no ninal considerations, 500 of them being to W. R. Burgoyne Watts—the consideration shown in this transfer (produced) is £50—I have said nominal consideration; it is £50 for 500 shares; it is a part of the shares standing in the name of James Pope—687 shares were transferred to Mrs. Josephine Florence Lupton—the considera-tion on the face of the transfers for that was £10; dated the 23rd July, 1896—
7,862 shares were standing in the name of James Pope 15th February, 1896—they were transferred into the name of Comper, I believe on 14th February—that exhausted all the shares in the name of Pope—there were sales by W. R. Bnrgoyne Watts of the 500 shares held by him between the 2nd March and the 21st July, 1896, at £342, I believe—from the 19th June up to the date of the winding-up order further shares were transferred into Com per' a name to the amount of £460—that would make an aggregate of 8,322 in the name of Comper—1,942 shares were sold for a consideration of £885 11s. 10d.—of those 1,942 shares, 400, I think, are Mr. Stephenson's—the consideration for that is five shillings—£885 would represent the price of 1,942 shares, deducting the 400 from 1,942—of the 400 shares transferred to the defendant Stephenson, 299 shares were sold for £449 10s.—at various dates between 17th April, 1896, and February, 1897 there was a sum of £801 17s. 6d. paid to the company by Turner, Lupton and Co., and £111 11s. 3d. paid to the company for directors' fees—£1,200 was paid in respect of a sale of property to the Umtali and the Abercorn companies, £12 was lent to the company by Mr. Thompson, the secretary, and £42 10s. came from various sources—that makes a total of £2,167—the directors' fees paid according to the cash book were £654 15s. 6d.—the secretary was paid £196 10s.; there was commission to somebody for £100 and £33 15s. returned—I have included the £33 15s. in the statement of monies received for them—monies were paid to Turner, Lupton and Company amounting to £451 9s. 1d.—I do not know what it is for; there were fees of registering the company in South Africa and other amounts which I put in the same heading amounting to £354 Os. 7d.—there was a payment of £353 made to both the solicitors, and £204 8s. I have pot under various odd headings, making a total of £1,996 3s. 2d,—£171 16s. 7d. was the balance at the date of liquidation.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBSON. Mr. Stephenson was left on the liquidation with 101 shares standing to his credit—he had received for the shares he had sold £41 10s.—that appears on the transfer—the transfer to him was for a nominal consideration.
CHARLES RICHARDS . I am an inspector of the Metropolitan Police, New Scotland Yard—on the morning of the 9th March, I was with Sergeant Harris, at Highgate, and had a warrant for the arrest of Lupton; I saw him come out of a house atighgate, I followed him to the City, and stopped him at Broad Street Railway Station—I said, "I think your name is Lupton." He said, "Yes, Louis Simons Lupton." I said, "I am Inspector Richards, and this is Serjeant Harris from Scotland Yard. I have a warrant for your arrest for conspiracy in connection with the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited." He said, "Can I go to my brother's office." I said, "No."—I took him to the Police-station—the charge was entered, and read to him—he said nothing. About half-past eleven on the same day I went to 77, Gresham Street and there saw Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts. I said to him, "Is your name Waiter Richard Burgoyne Watts?" He replied, "Yes" I said, "I am a police-officer and have a warrant for your arrest in connection with the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited." He replied "I do not know anything about it. I am a creditor for £1,200. I do
not understand it. I know nothing about it"—I took him to Bow Street Police Station—on the way there, he said, 'I do not think I registered the company. I never attended any of their meetings." The charge was read to him at the station? Re said, "Yes, all right."—On the 10th March, at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, I went to tit. Michael's Alley, Cornhill, and there saw the defendant Stephenson in a public hones called "The Jamaica"—I said, "Stephenson, you do not remember me."He said, "No, where did I have the pleasure of meeting you," I said, "Your name is Stephenson," and he replied, "Oh, yes" I said, "I am a police-officer. I have a warrant for your arrest." He said, "Are you joking"? I said, "Certainl not." He said, "What is it for"? I said, "It is a warrant in connection with the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited." He said, "I know." I said, "cannot read the warrant here, come round to your office"—we went round to No. 3, Newman's Court—I there read to him the warrant, charging him with conspiracy and fraud. He said, "I know nothing about it Well, of coarse, I do now you have read that." I said I would search the office—I found the writing desk was locked, and I asked for the key. He replied, "I have not gut it." I took hold of the desk as though I was going to break it open. He asked, "Must you do that"? I said, "Yes." He then handed me the key. While I was speaking somebody came into the office and spoke to him-something was said about the case coming on at Bow Street—Stephenson said, "Have you found out anything, captain"? The captain replied, Yes, they come up again to-day at Bow Street, at 11 o'clock." Sergeant Harris said, "You have made a slight mistake." I said, "Yes, it is 4 o'clock," I then told the gentleman who we were, and he left the office. The defendant said to Major Prust, who came to the office, "Watts got up the whole thing." On the way to the station he said, "Coward intros used me to Lupton, and he afterwards told me that Lupton was an unprincipled blackguard. It was rather too late then. "I subsequently searched the desk in Stephenson's office. On the 13th May, I arrested the defendant William Prank Burgoyne Watts at the Bow Street Police Court---a warrant had been issued that morning charging him with being a party to the conspiracy—on the warrant being read, he simply said "Oh"—subsequently he had some conversation with me—when I searched the desk at Stephenson's office I found some books and papers—I found a cash book showing monetary trans-actions with Lupton and Co. and Major Prust; and a rough note in Stephenson's handwriting, apparently for entry in the minute book of the Lyldenburg; in reference to the appointment of Mr. Briggs as secretary; this letter from Mr. Coward, My dear Hunter,—Had we not better elect your man as secretary and give notice to the bank, otherwise we shall not be able to draw any cheques.—Yours always, J. M. C."; and this extract from the minutes with regard to the appointment of secretary; and a letter on the City Times paper, 32, Fort Crescent, Margate. September 9th. "My dear Stephenson,—Sorry to hear of your accident why did you not let me know before? I am recuperating down here, so have only just got your letter, consequently could not inform L. of your inability to see him to-day, but I doubt not Tuesday will do. Have the matter perfectly clear on the lines I wrote. Hope you are better by this.—Yours
faithfully, J. M. Coward. The company's seal is in my office for you if you want it. Shall be up on Friday morning"; also this from Lambart to Stephenson about the 7 1/2 per cent.—then there is a telegram which had been addressed to Mr. Lambart about the meeting of the 15th October: "Kindly attend meeting of Lydenburg at Cannon Street held to-day at 12 o'clock, noon; a letter on the paper of the Lydenburg Consolidated from Mr. Thompson with reference to the notice of a meeting, and later on with reference to a transfer. Then there is a letter to Stephenson as to Mr. Thompson having seen Mr. Lupton with reference to making arrangements for opening a banking account and a communication from Thompson. Later, there is a letter from Lupton with regard to the transfer of Lydenburg shares and a letter from Abbott of the 1st April, saying that "Lupton's brother had no instructions to pay cheques to the Lydenburg." Then there are notices of meetings and other documents. Then there is a letter from Coward to Stephenson: "I can't very well issue special numbers to puff your friend's wares. I said the matter would appear in next issue, which is to-morrow. Your friend called yesterday, and I told him so. After all, where do I come in?"—Mr. Stephenson occupied the offices which I entered about 30 years I think—I had no search warrant—I never ask for a search warrant when having to break an office desk when I arrest a man—I think when I arrest a man I am entitled to search his premises without a warrant.
Cross-examined by MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS. I have been in charge of this case from the very commencement—I was present at all the hearings at Bow Street except one—there were about 12 hearings altogether—I was present on the second hearing on the 18th March, when Major Trust was called as a witness—quite at the commencement of his examination I remember Major Trust saying that he had never seen the defendant Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts—he was then the only person of the name of Watts in the dock—at that time the defendant William Watts was in Court—he stood up in order that he might be identified as the person who had attended some of the meetings of the Lydenburg Company—I saw him in attendance from that day for the nine following hearings at Bow Street up to the 13th May—I heard in the course of those proceedings that William Watts was to be called as a witness on behalf of his brother—he told me—no warrant and no application for a warrant against him was made until the 13th May, the tenth hearing at the police court.
Re-examined. The warrant was granted by the same magistrate who granted the other warrants after a great deal of evidence had been taken.
Counsel for the defendants submitted that upon the various counts of the indictment there was no evidence to go to the jury as to their respective clients. The Sclicitor-General abandoned counts 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 20 as against all the defendants; all counts except 4 and 5 and the conspiracy counts as against Stephenson; and all counts except the first as against W. R. B. Watts and W. F. B. Walts, and with these exceptions the indictment was left to the jury
Witness called on behalf of Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts.
Lydenburg Concessions coming into our office—it came into our office and I recollect the memorandum and articles of association being prepared—Herbert Horsfall was the conveyancing clerk in the employ of Messrs Burgoyne Watts and Company—he has died—he prepared the memorandum and articles of association in our office—I remember the agreement of the 5th September which has been referred to here as the Strickland agreement, 1895 Horsfall prepared that—the word "inclusive" there is in Horsfall's handwriting—that would be in the ordinary course of his work as conveyancing clerk, when he examined it with the draft, no doubt—I went to the office of the Lydenburg Consolidated with that agreement—I went to the office of the company and fetched this agreement away for the purpose of registering it—it required legislation under the Companies Acts at Somerset House—in August and September, 1895. Walter Richard Burgoyne Watte was in attendance at the office—it continued for some months before August and after September.
Cross-examined by MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS. William Watts was my senior managing clerk—in receipt of a weekly salary—I attended a meeting of directors at the Lydenburg Company's offices on December 5th, 1895—I went with Watts—he did not appear to know Mr. Stephenson or Colonel Lambart, but he knew Mr. Coward—he was introduced at that meeting by Coward to the other directors—he did not appear to have met them before—the 5th September agreement, the Strickland agree-ment, was among the documents produced—my recollection is clear upon that—there appears upon the back of this document "Copy on brief 4th December, 1895" that is in pencil and in Horsfall's handwriting—the copy having been made on 4th December, it was produced to the directors ou 5th December in my presence—I recollect Mr. Thompson, when he was made secretary of the company, calling at the office of Burgoyne Watts and Co.—he asked me for dates on which meetings had been held by the Lydenburg Company—he said he proposed to write up a new minute-book—I had the old minuie-book at that time—I gavehim what dates I could—he then went away and brought me back the new ininute-book when it was written up—he said he had been to see the signatories, when they would not sign the book—some of them were known to me—to my knowledge they were not known to Mr. William Watts—I was asked to get them—they did not know Mr. Thompson—it was only a formal resolution that they had to sign—I went to those gentlemen, and they signed the minute a in my presence, and I took the book back to Thompson—I never saw the old minute-book again—I last saw it in Thompson's possession—he brought it down when he came to the office to ask for the information—he must have taken it away again to make up the new minute book. He could not make it up without.
Cross-examined by MR. GILL. Walter Richard Burgoyne Watts is the solicitor—William Frank is the managing director—Messrs. Turner Lupton and Company, Limited, was the client in connection with the Lydenburg who brought the Lydenburg out—I knew Mr. Lupton, his managers and clerks in connection with Turner Lupton and Company, Limited—We have had instructions at times from Mr. Lupton—I know that Lupton and Company, Limited, is registered as a company
under the Companies Acts—I knew it was a limited company—I do not know that I was at the office when we first had any business for Lupton and Company, Limited—I have seen Louis Simons Lupton frequently—not very frequently at the office, but in the street down Copthall Buildings way—I should think he was a client of Burgoyne Watts—Burgoyne Watts registered four or five companies for him—not fifteen or sixteen—there was the Lydenburg—there was the Jumper Extension—not the African Gold Concessions—the African Gold Mining Company—he acted for several companies that had nothing to do with Lupton—there may be some more—some of them did not get further than the registration of the company—we registered the Abercom Keefs—and the Umtali—we acted as solicitors to the African Gold Concessions—I do not remember having played any part beyond that of a clerk—I did not purchase from the African Gold Concessions property that was to become the property of the Abercom—all I did was to act as trustee for a company to be formed, called the Abercom, I believe, It was as trustee for a company to be formed—I do not know in what capacity I was doing it—it was only a formal matter—I only know I was acting as trustee—the agreement was prepared and registered by Burgoyne Watts & Co.—I was described there as an insurance agent—I was clerk to the solicitors, Burgoyne Watts & Co., but I was an insurance agent as well—I do not know upon whose instructions the memorandum of the 5th September was prepared—Horsfall prepared the draft—I could not tell where he got his instructions from—this draft agreement was sent over to Turner Lupton & Co., Limited, for the signature of Mr. Strickland to be obtained to it—at that time Burgoyne Watts & Company were the solicitors to the Lydenburg—I think we were not present when the agreement was signed—it is signed by the directors and witnessed by the secretary—after it was signed I took it up to be registered—I got it from the office of the company—we were solicitors to the Lydenburg, we did not know who the secretary was—we had no idea what Mr. Nash was, we made no enquiry—this is my writing upon the agreement as witnessing the execution of it by the directors, but I did not witness it—"witness to the signature "of so and so—that is in my handwriting—my name is not on that—"witness to the sealing of the Lydenburg Consolidated Mines, Limited," and there is a signature of George Strickland—I wrote the whole of that in—that was not before I sent it, but when the agreement was handed to me—after it had been executed by Stephenson & Coward, directors of the company—I did not know who Bertrand G. Nash was—the agreement was handed to me—it was fully executed, that is to say, the signature of Stephenson, Coward & Nash were all effected—Somerset House will not accept the agreements unless they are in, unless there is an attestation clause in—that is their rule—it is witness to the sealing of the agreement and to the signing of the name of Mr. Strickland which took place in the presence of Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Coward—I wrote in there Nash as witness to the signature of Strickland—I got this agreement completely executed in this way from the office of the Lydenburg company—I cannot say from whom—I know I got it, because I first registered it—I first knew that Bertrand G. Nash was a boy of twelve years of age at the police court—the duplicate agreement came from my possesion—I have not added in
any attestation clause—I see here, "After deducting the actual registration fees received, our costs amount to £250, which include the drawing, preparation and printing of the articles and memorandum of association, also approving the title of the company to the property acquired by them, and the intricate work done since the formation of. the company"—I really could not tell what the intricate work was—after that letter of March 11th Mr. Burgoyne Watts did not get money from Mr. Lupton—I believe he got on 25th March a cheque for £150, bat it has nothing to do with this—it was a coincidence if he did receive that money. I do not know that he did—I could not say what it was for, I know it was not for this because costs were proved in the winding up for 200 guineas—one objection to deliver a bill of costs was that the directors had not acted upon the advice that Mr. Watts gave them, and our bill would have shown that Mr. William Watts gave them certain advice which they did not think fit to take, stopping the company going on without any working capital.
Re-examined. We gave the directors certain advice as appears by the minutes—that would not affect Watts—the firm of Burgoyne Watts at the same time as I was there engaged in a large number of matters in no way connected with Turner Lupton and Company—I was there from 1887—during that time they carried on the 01 unary business of solicitors—they were solicitors to other companies apart altogether from these—part of a solicitor's business is to prepare memoranda and articles of association—he takes his instructions from whoever is concerned, and simply prepares them on that—Mr. Horsfall was in the employ of Burgoyne, Watts and Company about six or seven years—when he died last March he was about forty—the firm consisted of Mr. Walter Richard Burgoyne Watte—he started as Burgoyne Watts and Company in 1887—he was the only partner—his brother was only managing clerk, my senior—in April, 1894, we received instructions from Mr. Schloss to register a company called the City Times—as a matter of fact there was some hitch and a question of the rights of the paper that could not be transferred, and the company was not registered till November, 1894—when the company was registered Lupton and Turner Lupton and Company were not our clients; we bad not been introduced to them at that time—we were not brought into connection with Turner Lupton and Company until December, 1894; not in connection with the City Times at all—it was in connection with the African Gold Concessions, I believe—I was generally an outdoor or an indoor clerk in Burgoyne, Watte and Company's office—except what I saw from going through the office I should not know what the instructions were that were given.
LUPTON, STEPHENSON, and WALTER RICHARD BURGOYNE WATTS, GUILTY . WILLIAM FRANK BURGOYNE WATTS, NOT GUILTY . The JURY considered the conduct of Major Prust as a director of the company most reprehensible; and they recommended Stephenson to mercy on account of his age. The Solicitor-General concurred in this recommendation.
LUPTON— Five Years' Penal Servitude. STEPHENSON and W. R. B. WATTS— Twelve Months' Hard Labour each. The Court commended the conduct of Inspector Richards and Sergeant Harris.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. AVORY and STEPHENSON Prosecuted, and MR. MUIR Defended,
WILLIAM HENRY FOWLER . I am clerk to the Magistrates at West Ham Police-court—I produce certified copy of the depositions taken by me at West Ham Police-court on May 26th on a charge of stealing a bicycle against John Bagalay Adcock, a witness in this case, also exhibits referring to that charge—Harvey was called as a witness for Adcock—he signed the deposition, and I have the original signed by the Magistrate as well—the charge was dismissed on June 27th—this is my note. Francis Harvey says: "I am manager at Mile End depot, and have been thirty years. Prisoner is also in same employ, and has been eighteen years, not under me. He is an auditor, and attends twice a week to audit the accounts of the depot. On May 7th I purchased a second-hand Maynard bicycle from a man named Payne, of 13, Floriston Street, Bow. He is a dealer. He gave me a card. I have had previous dealings with him. I paid him £4 13s., and he gave me the receipt produced. The bicycle produced in court by Hutton is the one I so bought on May 7th. I handed bicycle to the prisoner. He said, 'I have friends who require bicycles, and as you have already sold me one, I think I can sell this.' I allowed him to tike it away." By the Magistrate. I put price at £7, prisoner to have commission of 10s. I did not go on this bicycle. It stood in office from 7th to 16th. I have bought seven altogether. I have two boys and two girls, and I wanted one for each and myself. I have seven bicycles now. I bought most of them of William Payne, and I have I think a receipt for each one at home. I paid Payne in cash for the machines at the time. I have sold two machines, one to Adcock and one to a friend of his, before this one. I got £6 each for them. I gave him a receipt. He gave me the money in two amounts. I think I bought all seven from Payne within past twelve months. I did not like Rickett Smith's names coming out—that's why I objected to its being known. Payne is a bicycle dealer, and a tradesman near me told me he had bicycles to sell.
Re-examined. I have been to Payne this morning, and saw him. Examination continued, June 2nd, 1898. By the Magistrats. I have not seen Payne since, although I have tried to find him, but he has gone away. I sold the second bicycle (produced) to Mr. Adcock, the prisoner, about February 10th, 1898. I produce the receipt. I bought it of Payne. It is one of the seven I bought. I bought it, I think, in December, 1897. All seven bicycles I purchased are second-band machines, Payne brought me other bicycles beside the seven. I never went to Payne's until after the prisoner was arrested. A coffee-house keeper recommended him to me. I have four bicycles at my place now." The seven receipts handed in by Harvey, in addition to five, which were not exhibited, but which were retained by the Court, are:—"May 7th, 1898, W. Payne, 13, Floriston Street—Bought of W. Payne, one Maynard
second-hand bicycle, for the sum £4 13s.; paid, W. Payne." "December 20th 1897, bought of W. Payne, one second-hand Ashton cycle for the sum of £4 paid, W. Payne." "July 23rd, 1897, bought of W. Payne, one second-hand Way machine; sum, £4 18s." "July 23rd, 1897, £4 15s.; paid, Payne." "July 23rd, 1897, bought of W. Payne, one second-hand machine, £4 7s, 6d.; paid, Payne." "April 19, 1898, 13, Floriston Street, Canal Road, Mile End, bought of W. Payne, one second hand cycle for the sum of £4 15s.; paid, April 19th, 1898, W. Payne." "April 27th, 1898, W. Payne, 13, Floriston Street, Mile End Road, bought of W. Payne, one second-hand Townend cycle, £5 12s.; paid April 27th, 1898, W. Payne." "May 4th, 1898, W. Payne, 13, Floriston Street, Mile End, bought of Mr. Payne, one second-hand new net cycle, £4; paid May 4th, 1898, W. Payne."
Cross-examined. Harvey objected to state where he was employed—the Magistrate told him he must do so—there were two remands subsequent to June 2nd, when the receipts were produced—Adcock was re-leased on bail—Payne and Harvey were subsequently brought up.
CLARA BAILEY . I am the wife of Samuel Bailey, of Herbert Street, West Ham—on May 5th, in the afternoon, Payne came and asked for Mr. Bailey—he said he had come to see Mr. Bailey's bicycle—I let him, look at it—he took it away and never brought it back.
SAMUEL BAILEY . I am the husband of the last witness—on my return home on May 5th my wife spoke to me about my bicycle—it was gone—I never authorised anyone to take it away—I saw it produced by Con-stable Hutton—it is a Maynard make—I bought it new last July—this is the receipt—I used it for about 100 miles.
MARTHA HIND . I am the wife of William Hind, of Miralda Road, Bermondsey—on July 23rd, 1897, a man called and took his bicycle away—I have since seen it in the possession of the police—my son identified it.
JANE BLAKE . I live at 1, Castle Place, Kentish Town Road—in July, 1897, Mr. Cockerell was a lodger in the house—he had a bicycle—on July 24th, 1897, Payne called for the machine—he took it away, saying he was going to repair it.
CHARLES COCKERELL . I lodge with the last it ness—the bicycle taken away on July 24th was mine—it is called Aldays No. 1—its value was about £10—I gave £11 for it new—since I lost it it has fresh handles.
Cross-examined. The handles were off when it was stolen, but they were given up to the man who stole it—I have the lamps—that js why I take £1 off the price I paid.
JAMES ROBERT LEWIN . On June 29th, 1897, I left my bicycle outside the Black Lion Inn, Plaistow, about 7.30 p.m.—when I came out it was gone—on June 9th I saw it in the possession of the police—it is called the Flying Wheel—its value is sixteen guineas—I paid that for it about three weeks before I lost it—it has different wheels and rims now—"Stokes Brothers," whom I bought it from, was on it, but the transfer has been rubbed off.
Cross-examined. Since I lost it it has had a lot of wear—I recognise the toe clip and bag, and the frame: they are Bermondsey Small Arms manufacturers' fittings.
ISABELLA CHRISTMAS . William Lingley lodges at my house at Black-friars—on the afternoon of December 20th, 1897, the prisoner Payne called upon me—in consequence of what he said, I let him have Lingley's bicycle for repairs—he did not bring it back.
WILLIAM LINGLEY . I lodge with the last witness—I missed my bicycle On December 20th—I have since seen it in the possession of the police—its value is £7—I gave £10 for it shop soiled—it is called a Waterloo—there is a different bell on it—it is made by T. Ashton, of the Waterloop Road.
JANE LANSDOWNE . I am the wife of Joseph Lansdowne, of Northampton Street, Clerkenwell—on March 4th Payne came to the house and asked for Mr. Lansdowne's bicycle to be repaired—he took it away—it belonged to my son Joseph—I next saw it in the possession of the police.
JOSEPH LANSDOWNE . The bicycle taken away on March 4th was mine—its value was £9—I had had it nine months—I gave £8 10s. for it—I had added a pneumatic brake, rifle clips, and other fittings—I bought it nearly new, in June, 1897—when I saw it again it was rather dirtier—I belong to a volunteer bicycle corps.
Cross-examined. I became acquainted with Payne through my son, who is employed at the Gunmakers' Arms—Payne said he bought and sold bicycles—I offered him £4 10s., but he would not take it; he said he had given more than that for it.
EDITH FEEST . I am the daughter of the last witness—the bicycle that was taken away in April last was mine—it is called a Townend—its value was ten guineas—I had had it about nine months—I paid ten guineas for it new—when I saw it in the possession of the police there was a different gear-case and dress-guard—I have no difficulty in identify-ing it—also the actual gear-case I had (produced)—mine is not so nice—the other is smarter in appearance.
CHARLES GARDNER . I live at Hammersmith—a bicycle belonging to me was taken from my lodgings on May 3rd without my authority—I afterwards saw it in the possession of the police—it is called a New North—I bought it second-hand for £8 10s. on February 26th from a private owner.
Cross-examined. This is the receipt—the seller was a friend I had known a long time.
HARVEY received a good character— NOT GUILTY . There were seventy-three cases against PAYNE— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HARRISON Prosecuted.
FREDERICK CHARLES GILBERT . I am a cycle manufacturer, of 40, High Street, Bromley-by-Bow—about 9.30 a.m. on June 1st the female prisoner hired a bicycle for 5s. for the purpose of learning—I thought I knew her, and let her have it—she did not return it—the next day I in formed the police—I next saw it at a pawnbroker's in the Commercial Road on June 25th—its value is £7—I identified the prisoner at the Police-court from several others.
WILLIAM CROFT . I am assistant to Mr. Lawrence, pawnbroker, of the Commercial Road—on June 1st, in the evening, a bicycle was pledged with us in the name of Randall for 50s,—I saw the man hand Mr. Lawrence this receipt. (For £4, from A. J. King and Co., general contractors, and dated March 7th, 1898)—I afterwards identified the main prisoner at the Police-court.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner Fred. It might have been pledged in the afternoon—I do not know whether your wife was there—there was a woman outside.
HARRY WHIT (Detective-Sergeant K). On June 18th I saw the male prisoner at the Police-court—I said to him, "Your wife has been identified this morning as having hired a machine from Gilbert's, High Street, Bromley. Can, you tell me anything about it? If so, I shall be pleased to toll the Magistrate, and recover the machine"—he said, "I am sorry to tell the truth; we pawned it the same day at the corner pawnbroker's, new Wright's Biscuit Factory, Commercial Road, and got £2 10s. I tore up the ticket"—I went to Lawrence's, and found the bicycle (produced—when he was charged at Stratford he said to the inspector, "I plead guilty"—I charged the female prisoner; she made no reply.
Fred Randall handed in a written statement that he regretted doing it, but had been out of work, and he and his wife were in very poor circum stances, and that it was his first offence.
FRED RANDALL GUILTY .—There were four similar cases against him, he had been discharged from the Army invalided.— Six Months' Hard Labour.
GERTRUDE RANDALL NOT GUILTY .— There were two similar indictments against her, upon which the Prosecution offered no evidence. —
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
GUILTY .— Discharged on Recognisances.
Before Mr. R. M. Kerr, Esq.,
MR. TUDOR Prosecuted, and MR. O'CONNOR Defended.
MARY GILESPIE . I am married, and live at 53, Czar Street, Deptford—was at my son's lodgings on July 9th—between 6 and 6.30 my eon went down to the wash-house to wash himself—he had been down about five minutes when he called out, "Mother, I am stabbed"—I ran down and saw the prisoner holding him up in a corner, with a knife in her hand—his hand was bleeding—I said, "Mrs. Ring, don't do that," and she pointed the knife at me—I then caught hold of my son, and pulled him away—no one was present then—my son's wife came and helped me, also a man named Tipping, a lodger—he could not have seen anything that happened—I did not see my son kick or strike the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I never said my son was absent eight minutes—it might have been eight minutes—Mrs. Ring did not make a lunge at me—we met Mr. Tipping on the stairs—he did not try and take my son away from Mrs. Ring, we had already done it—my son was not very violent—he was holding Mrs. Ring's hand with the knife in it—when I pulled him away, she was still hitting him with her fist—we had not very much difficulty in getting him away.
Re-examined. She made a movement towards me with the knife—I am not surprised my son was violent—he had been in the house three or four months—I was only at the house accidentally—the prisoner had had some words with my son's wife on the Friday.
ALBERT GILESPIE . I am a riveter, of 62, Paradise Street, Rotherhithe—I am married—on July 9th, between 6 and 6.30, I went downstairs—the prisoner was there standing by a cupboard door—she had a loaf of bread and a knife in her hand—I washed my face and hands and was leaving the wash-house when she attacked me with a knife—I had not spoken to her—I cannot account for it.
Cross-examined. I did not see the prisoner on the Friday on my return from work—I did not say on a former occasion, "I accused her of knocking my baby about when I first came home"—I was in the wash-house from five to eight minutes—the prisoner was there all the time—my back was turned to her—I do not know why she did not take advantage of me when I was washing my hands—I still say that I offered no provocation to her—I did not say, "You Irish cow, I shall pay you for hitting my baby yesterday"—I did not make an attack on her, and the wounds were not inflicted in the struggle—I did not kick her in the abdomen or about the legs—I did not pull the hair out of her head or give her a black eye—my wife had had a bit of a scuffle with her on the Friday—there has been no angry feeling with me, or between the two women, that I know—I saw Mr. Tipping when it was all over—he came down the passage—if he said I was violent, or that I was
assaulting Mrs. Ring, and that he had some difficulty in getting me away it would be untrue—I might have been violent because of the wounds, but not with Mrs. Ring, because I was not near her.
RICHARD RIXON (11 R R). On Saturday, July 9th, I was called to 8, Bingley Place, Deptford—the prisoner was outside the gate and the prosecutor against her—he said, I wish to give this woman in charge for stabbing me; I was having a wash and she ran at me with a knife, and cut my hand and chest"—she said, "I did it; he kicked me in my privates. What am I to do?"—they were both sober—I went to the house and found two knives—I showed one to the prisoner, and she said, "That is the one" (produced).
Cross-examined. The prisoner had two nasty cuts on his hand and one on his chest—I do not know if he is at work again now.
DR. WILLIAM STANLEY CARPENTER . I live at 13, Abinger Road, Deptford—I examined the prosecutor—he had a wound about 2 1/2 inches long on his left breast: one on the front, and one on the back of his left thumb; and a scratch on the shoulder—the wounds had been caused by a knife—the prosecutor was not intoxicated—I think the wounds on the hand were caused by holding out the hand to ward off a knife.
Cross-examined. I think it is possible that the wounds were caused in a struggle: they were not dangerous.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "She went downstairs to cut some bread and butter, and the prosecutor said, 'I shall pay you for hitting my baby yesterday.' I said, 'I thought you were a man, and would not hit me.' He hit her, and she put her hand up to protect her face, and the knife cut his hand. When the prosecutor saw the blood he said 'I will kick your guts out,' and began kicking her, when the people came and took him away."
Witnesses for the Defence.
JOHN TIPPING . I live at 8, Bingley Place, Deptford—Mrs. Ring lodges there—on July 9th I was in my room upstairs, and was called down by a little girl to a row that was going on in the passage—I saw the prosecutor and Mrs. Ring having a row, and the prosecutor struggling with his mother—I told her to take her son upstairs—he wanted to get away—she was holding him back—the prosecutor was very violent—Mrs. Ring said she had been kicked—I knew Mrs. Ring about a fortnight before this happened: she was well behaved and sober.
Cross-examined. I only came on the scene after the prosecutor was wounded.
By the COURT. I think there had been a row on the previous Friday.
FRANCIS BAKER . I live at 17, Gray's Street, Deptford, ad am the wife of Robert Baker—Mrs. Ring lives near me—I can see into the front of her house—I saw her on Friday, the day before the assault, spoke to her, fetched her away, and kept her a whole night, because the prosecutor's wife and other women were at her for days—I did not see her again till she was arrested—I saw the police taking her by my house on the Saturday evening—she was very white, and looked distressed—she had a black eye, and her hair was torn out of her head—she was released on bail, and made a communication to me, and I examined her—she had great bruises on the lower part of her abdomen, her arm was one mass of bruises, and her hair torn out of her head.
Cross-examined. I did not see anything of this row—I do not know if the prosecutor gave the blows or not.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
EDWARD HORNSBY . I live at 4, William Street, Woolwich, and am of no occupation—I am seventy-three years of age—on July 19th, about 11.40, I was in Union Street, on the right-hand pavement, and the prisoner, whom I did not know before, came across from the Duke of Sussex, and walked before me about thirty yards, and then heard him footsteps, and went on about forty yards, and saw him by a lamp poet—he struck me on my chest, and took hold of my watch—I held it, and he broke the chain—I afterwards found the watch in his pocket, and the chain broken, and a compass and wheel attached—I value them at £6—I gave £8 15s. for them—the prisoner ran down Union Street—I gave information, and on the Thursday afternoon I picked him out from a lot of men at the station.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not say at the station that the man who robbed me had his hat over his face; it was on his head.
ALFRED DEACON (438 R). I took the prisoner—I said, "You answer the description given me by an old gentleman who had his watch stolen"—he said, "When?"—I said "Last Tuesday"—he said, "What time?"—I said, "Just before twelve"—he said, "I know nothing about it"—he was taken to the station, and the prosecutor picked him out—he said that he wore his cap over his eyes—afterwards he said, "I could walk out of this station as free as you, I know who did it, but am not going to put him away"—he gave a description which was very like himself.
Prisoner's Defence. I told them to fetch the man who did it, but they would not trouble.
GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at woolwich on June 9th, 1896, and nine other convictions were proved against him.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Justice Lawrance.
MR. GRANTHAM Prosecuted.
SARAH ANN BEER . I am the widow of Samuel George Beer—on Saturday afternoon, June 25th, through the window, I saw my husband in our back yard, and the prisoner challenging him to fight—I went out and said to my husband, "Come indoors and don't have anything to say to him"—my husband said, "Let me alone; I have not said anything yet—he said to the prisoner "Go into bed and have a sleep; that is the beet thing you can do"—the prisoner started swearing and calling my husband names, and said, "I will sleep you," and tried to get over the fence, but his landlord and his wife pulled him back and tried to get him into the yard door—we went back into our wash-house and shut the door—I left
toy husband talking to my son, and the next minute I heard Collins come in at the front door and get nearly to the stairs—he said, "If you don't come out I will fetch you out"—he then went back to the front door and my husband followed—I then went out and saw my husband lying on the other side of the road insensible—Collins was raving about, and my son was trying to help his father up—Collins would have hit him again—a neighbour brought out some water; my husband was bleeding—we got him into the house; he was insensible for ten days—the doctor said it was very serious, and he bled till 4 o'clock on Sunday morning—he was insensible till he—died.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You came home on Saturday, about six o'clock—I was in the kitchen—my husband did not jeer at you over the fence—your landlord pulled you back over the fence—he did not say anythiug—my husband was not a fighting man—you are—you were fighting the same afternoon—you did come into our passage—I heard you—my husband had not been out of bed fifteen minutes—he could not have fallen down by himself—it was such a thud.
HARRIET BEER . I am the daughter of the last witness—on this day, when my father was out in the yard, I heard the prisoner asking him to have a fight—father came indoors, and went into the wash-house with my mother, and talked to my brother—Collins came into the passage afterwards by the front door—father and I went out—the prisoner was outside, and attempted to strike father—I did not see whether he did hit him, because it was done so quick—father fell down—Collins was in the road—he would have hit him again only a lady over the road stopped him—I called out to my mother—I could not see whether my father tripped over anything—he was lying on his back in the load.
Cross-examined. At the Police-court I did not say that as father came out of the door you hit him, and he fell down—when he fell I went back to the door step.
ANNIE CHAMPION . On this day I was in Foley Place, and saw the prisoner and Mr. Beer—I was standing at the corner, looking up the street, and I saw Collins come out of Mr. Beer's house—Mr. Beer followed, and the prisoner struck at him, and he staggered and fell in the road—I do not know where he struck him, it was so quick—Collins turned round—they were face to face—he fell with his feet towards his own house—there was no blow from Mr. Beer—Collins was going to fight him, and his son as well, but somebody pulled him off and stopped him—I was about eight yards off.
Cross-examined. I know Mrs. Beer's two daughters—I did not say at the Police-court that I saw you and Mr. Beer in the road—Mrs. Vincent picked him up—I said I was very sorry I had had anything to do with it—I did not say, I could not see if Mr. Collins hit him, bat he"
WILLIAM FREDERICK TERRY (Surgeon). I was called in to examine Mr. Beer—he was suffering from concussion of the brain—he was partially conscious—I found a wound at the back of the head, from which blood was flowing, and there was blood coming from the nose—the post-mortem showed that the blood from the nose came from a fracture in the roof of both orbits—the wound at the back of the head could be caused by a fall or by direct violence—I came to the conclusion there
was serious injury at the base of the brain—I attended him till July 5th, when he died—I made a post-mortem, and found three separate and distinct fractures in the base of the skull; blood proceeding from the seat of the injury; at the back of the head one long fracture extending about eight inches; there was also injury to the substance of the brain itself—the injury over the eye was very bad.
ALEXANDER THOMPSON (Sergeant 37 W). I arrested the prisoner and charged him with violent assault on Mr. Beer—he said "I never struck him; never had a chance; he slipped on a loose stone and fell heavily on the back of his head and came in contact with the kerb"—it is quite possible that there are some loose stones in the road.
WILLIAM FREDERICK TERRY . (Re-examined.) There was nothing on the face of the deceased man to show that there had been a blow—the deceased was rather a small man—he must have gone down with a tremendous crash.
Witnesses for the Defence.
MARY HOPKINS . I live next door to Mr. Collins—I heard a disturbince at the back of his house, and saw Beer and Collins outside—Mrs. Collins asked Mrs. Beer to take her husband in, and she said her husband could take his own part any day—Mr. Beer challenged the prisoner to fight—Collins went through the house to the front, and stood at Mr. Beer's door, but did not enter the place, and they both went out into the middle of the road—before a blow was struck Mr. Beer seemed to wheel round and fell on his back—somebody came and helped him indoors—I was standing in my garden.
Cross-examined. My brother did not try to pick the deceased up—I did not see Collins out at the back—I could hear there was a row there—Collins went into his own house—I got out into the front before Collins did—Collins did not walk backwards into the middle of the road and turn round—I did not see any blows—when Collins turned to face Mr. Beer, Mr. Beer seemed to slip and fall—I did not see Collins trying to get over the fence at the back—he was drunk.
FANNY FRENCH . I live with my sister, the last witness—I heard Mr. Beer and Collins quarreling in their garden—Mr. Beer was challenging Collins to fight, and said he was Collins' man any day—Mrs. Collins asked Mrs. Beer to keep her husband back, but she said, "No; let them fight it out"—they then went into the street by going through their own houses—they had one or two round when Mr. Beer slipped and fell—I did not see any blows struck—they attempted to hit each other.
Cross-examined. I do not know if Collins is a bit of a fighter—I and my sister went out and saw the disturbance behind, and then we went out in front—I thought there was going to be a row—there was a few minutes'
delay—we went through our passage—Collins got out in front first—I did not hear any shouting before we got to the front—I first saw Collins wait-ing for Beer—Beer was the challenger—Collins was waiting on Beer's door-step—both went into the road—Collins was the worse for drink.
The Prisoner, in his defence, said he never struck Beer; that he was drunk; he thought Beer was drunk too.
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the JURY.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.
MR. H. AVORY Prosecuted.
FLORENCE CUNNINGHAM . I am the wife of the prisoner, and lied with him at 134, Cavendish Road, Balham—we have been married ten years—he carried on the business of an umbrella maker, and we occupied the first floor back-room—on June 1st we were together in that room in the even-ing—he had been indoors all the day—he was sober—between six and seven I was doing some umbrella work—we were on very comfortable terms, sitting on the sofa, and he got up to light his cigarette at the fire, and he took up the poker, and said, "You have all been having a fine game with me—I was going to ask him what he meant when he struck me on the back of my head with the poker—I made my way as well as I could to the sofa and then fell on it, and he struck me again with the poker—at the fourth blow I put up my hand and he broke the poker and smashed my hand—I remember four blows, and I remember nothing more—when I became unconscious I saw the police in the room, and I was taken to the Bolingbrook Hospital—as I fell the head of the poker fell.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I was in the hospital four weeks—Sarah, my daughter, visited me there on June 9th—I have been to Hampton Court since I came out of the hospital; I do not know the date—you have knocked me about before several times.
Re-examined. I think the last time was two years ago, when he blacked my eyes—I have been a cripple to rheumatism for four years, both hands and feet.
FRANK EDWARD COOPER . I carry on business as boot and shoe maker at 134, Cavendish Road, Balham—the prisoner, his wife, and myself have lived there nearly two years—they had the use of part of the shop for their business—on June 1st, about 6.30, I heard a noise upstairs like something heavy falling on the floor, and then sounds of blows like a bashing—I went upstairs and tried to open the door—I got it open a little way after a time—I don't know how it was fastened—I saw the woman at the end of the couch lying with her head over a pail and the prisoner striking her with this hammer, which he uses in his trade—he was hitting her at the bock of the head, saying he would bash her b—brains out—I ran downstairs and got a long pole, which I put through the door and tried to keep him from striking her—he got so savage he tried to hit me with the hammer—I caught him by the arm, but he went over to the fireplace—I don't know what he took up—I threw the hammer downstairs and went for the police, but could not find them, so returned and found the prisoner out on the landing with the tongs—he went for
the three of us, and hit Skelton and Jefferies with the tongs—since they have been living there he has been in the habit of drinking, and is very passionate under the influence of drink—I have seen him violent to his wife more than once.
Cross-examined. I did not say the door was locked—I do not know how it was fastened—I have seen you assaulting your wife.
Re-examined. The last assault was four or five months before this.
WILLIAM SKELTON . I lodge on the second floor of this house—on June 1st, about 6.30 p.m., I heard a noise in the prisoner's room—a woman's voice, yelling with pain—I went out on to the landing and saw the woman coming up the stairs to my landing—her head was covered with blood, and the prisoner following with a pair of tongs in his hand—I rushed towards them, and the prisoner struck me several blows on the head with the tongs—a constable came up and took him away.
Cross-examined. I was in the hospital a fortnight.
HENRY FREEMAN (173 W). I was called to this house on June 1st, and saw the last witness coming down the stairs—the prisoner struck him a heavy blow on the top of his head, and said "I have killed the b—and will kill any b—who comes near me"—I did not see Mrs. Cunningham—I caught hold of the prisoner and wrenched the tongs away, got him downstairs, and took him to the station—I returned to the house and found Mrs. Cunningham sitting in a chair, bleeding from the head—she was taken to the hospital—the prisoner said nothing when charged at the station.
Cross-examined. I was only away from the house about ten or fifteen minutes.
Re-examined. The woman appeared to be very seriously hurt indeed: she was smothered with blood.
CECIL LYSTER . I am medical superintendent at the Bolingbrook Hospital, Wandsworth Common—Mrs. Cunningham was brought in by the police on June 1st—I examined her—she had seven distinct separate wounds on the left and back of the scalp, a very bad contusion on the left arm, and two broken bones in the left hand—they all might have been produced by a poker or hammer, or tongs—she was in a state of collapse from loss of blood and injury—she was in great danger, certainly for the first week—I think she was discharged on June 27th.
Cross-examined. There were two freshly-broken bones in her hand—she was suffering from rheumatism.
ROSE CHARLWOOD . I am the wife of Frank Charlwood, living at Brixton Hill—Mrs. Cunningham is my husband's sister—on May 28th the prisoner called about eleven a.m, and asked if I could take in some furniture—I said "No"—then he asked if we could take in some pictures—I said "No, we have no room"—he said, "Well, we are in dreadful straits, we have had to break open the child's box to get a loaf of bread"—I said, "What do you mean?"—he said, "It will end in a case of suicide or drowning"—I said, "Joe, what are you talking about?"—he said, "I mean it, Good-bye, and God bless you. I am going to see brother Jim," meaning my husband's brother.
Cross-examined. You did not ask if I knew where there were some rooms.
MARY ANN CHARLWOOD . I am the wife of James Charlwood—Mrs. Cunningham is his sister—on May 28th the prisoner came to see me between eleven and twelve—he said he had been to see the other brother, and that he had called to know whether we would take a room-full of furniture for his wife until such time as they could pull themselves together again—he said, "Something must be done; she must be got away from here, or there will be murder or suicide"—I said he must see my husband about it—he went away, but returned in about twenty minutes—I said, "Have you seen my husband?"—he said, "No, he is out. I will try and go and make 1s. or 2s. and come back again"—he did not return.
FREDERICK CHARLWOOD . I am a coachman, living at Brixton Hill, and brother to Mrs. Cunningham—in consequence of what my wife told me, I went to see the prisoner on May 30th at 13 4, Cavendish Road—he and his wife were together—I said I wanted to know what he meant by saying he was going to commit suicide—he seemed confused over it, and did not give a decided answer—I said, "If you knock my sister about I shall very soon knock you about"—I told him to be careful what he was doing—I gave my sister 1s.
Cross-examined. You did not say that you did not know what I was talking about.
Re-examined. He did not say anything about the children, or that he had no intention to knock anybody about—I had a glass of beer with him and my sister—I treated them both.
Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I remember nothing about it."
The prisoner, in his defence, said he did not intend to injure his wife, and that he and Mr. Skelton were like two brothers.
MR. H. AVORY stated that the prisoner had been sentenced to fifteen years penal servitude for cutting the throat of his former wife.— Twenty Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. A. GILL Prosecuted.
LILLIAN WALKER . I live at 10, Hurley Road, Kennington—I am employed in the choruses at theatres—I have known the prisoner about seven or eight months—I was then living at 71, Cambridge Street, with my mother—about a month afterwards I became closely intimate with him—two months ago he came to live with me at 78, Brook Street, Lam-beh; we occupied two rooms on the top floor—I did not feel very happy because I did not want the man; I wanted to get rid of him—we had two or three quarrels—I told him the best thing he could do was to go away, to go abroad—at that time I had a sweetheart, whom I was very fond of—the prisoner knew I had this sweetheart, and he said he would snoot him and shoot me; he was always threatening me—I did not speak
to him of going away with him; from him was my idea—on that night I went to bed about twelve or half-past; I was very tired—the next thing I remember was his pulling me out of bed—he said, "You are going to leave me"—I went to the door to try to get out, but the door was fastened on the inside and the key was taken—I turned round to the prisoner and said, "Of course, I might have known you were going to do this," because he had threatened me all along—he then brought out the revolver—he did not say anything at first—he said, "You have asked for it, and now you have got it"—I screamed, the landlady came to the door—I called to her, and asked if she had another key, "He is going to shoot me"—I don't know what she said—it was not something that he could have heard—I believe she said she was going to send her nephew for the police—after that he shot me—I was standing just by the door—he did not say anything, but shot me, and afterwards walked round the room—I believe it was one shot—I fell down, and then I got up and sat on the bed—the prisoner took a draught of beer, and then shot himself and fell down on the bed—I remember that the police broke open the door—we had not had any quarrel that evening, but I intended to leave that evening, but could not manage it—I was going to wait till the Monday—he knew that—he appeared all right to me as to sobriety—I have been in the hospital five weeks.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I first knew you in Chapman Street, about seven or eight months ago—I left Charlwood twelve months ago—you came there to help me move—ray young man was going away, and he asked you to help me—I was not in trouble with my landlady—I owed some rent—you never got me any references—after that you sneaked in at night—I did not want you—I was supported by some one else—I decline to say in what way—I had my special young man, and you knew it and tried to take me away from him—you could not help me—you lived with me at my place, and ray furniture—we went from there to Kenning-ton Road—I took the apartments for my sister and mother—it was my mother's furniture—she lent it me—you came to the house—the people did not want you—I did not tell the landlady you were my husband—on the Thursday before this happened, I went out with you—you said you wished to get rid of the revolver—I did not like the thing; I saw it then; I had not seen it before—you took it in to the pawnbroker's; I did not see it—you asked me in Brook Street to marry you—I did not say I wanted to be your wife—on the Saturday we went out about four—we were told the apartments were required: we were to leave—you said you would go to Paris—I said it was a nice thing to leave a woman in this distress—we did not have drink that morning—we went into a good many house—you did not give me any money—I have lent you heaps of money and never got it back—I had money from my young man, which you knew perfectly well—I had no money from you—you ask if I was happy—you know I wanted to get rid of you—I did not know that you were offered a berth as steward on board a ship—I did not beg you not to go—we got home at past twelve that night—I had not been drinking heavily—you appeared all right when I went to bed—I undressed myself so far—it not true that I lay down with my clothes on—I don't know that you laid down by ray side—I was very tired—you pulled me out of bed—I did
not commence grumbling—I say you shot me—I did not get up and say anything to you, nor did you say "What have I done?"—you did not say "Good-bye" and kiss me—I had not been drinking from the Thursday—I don't know now that yo laid by my side—I was very tired—you did pull me out of bed—I did not commence grumbling—nothing of the sort—you did not say, "What have I done?"—I did not hear you say anything—you seemed all right—I do not know how many drinks you had when you were out—we bought marketing—we brought in everything for Sunday—we brought in some whisky—I went with you because I was frightened of you, and did not know how to get rid of you.
Re-examined. On the Thursday he kept me up all night—I was pleading with him—he loaded the revolver in front of me—he said "The revolver is no good, it would not have hurt you; I will throw the thing in the Thames"—I said, "Think of your children"—he raid, 'If you scream I will shoot you at once, and the first man that comes up I will shoot him."
ELIZABETH DEAL . I am landlady of 100, Brook Street, Kennington—the prisoner and the last witness lodged in my house at 78—at half-past two in the morning of April 30th I heard Miss Walker screaming—I went up and tried to get into the room—it was locked—she said, "Try and save me, Mrs. Duval, as my life is in danger"—I knocked at the door and asked the prisoner to open it and let her out—he said something which I could not hear—I went downstairs and asked my nephew to come up, as they were rowing, and asked him to go for the police—I went upstairs after that—I was there for a few minutes, and she screamed again—then I heard three shots go off—they went off in two or three minutes—two went off first and one afterwards—I went down again and asked my nephew to go for the police, and after the police came I went in—I did not notice where the key of the door was—it was lost, and we have never seen it since.
Cross-examined. When you lived there I thought you were very quiet, and gave no trouble, she never spoke to me about leaving you—I thought you were man and wife—I did not notice any drinking—heard no noise at all between you.
FRANK TYEZ . I was porter at 78, Brook Street—I was called up by aunt about half-past twelve on May 1st—I found the prisoner lying at the foot of the bed, shot, partly unconscious—Miss Walker was sitting down.
WILLIAM MONTGOMERY (Police Constable 223 L). In the early morning of May 1st I went to 78, Book Street, with Thompson, about five minutes past three—I found the second-floor back room locked—we knocked, and heard a female voice say, "I can't open the door, he has got the key; he has shot me"—we broke often the door, and found Miss Walker behind the door, sitting on the side of the bed, holding her left hand to her ear, which was bleeding down to her stocking—she was not quite conscious—the prisoner was lying across the bottom of the bed—I paw a wound on his left chest—he had a revolver 'in his right hand—the other Constable took charge of it—I sent for a surgeon.
Cross-examined. You had your trousers, stockings, and shirt on—Miss Walker had her skirt on, and a kind of shawl round her shoulders.
TIPPORT THOMPSON (313 L). I was with Montgomery when we entered the room—Miss Walker said, "Look at my poor head, he has shot me"—the prisoner was unconscious—after he recovered he made a motion with his left hand and said, "Lil, where are you? I love you. I am so sorry"—he afterwards looked up at me and said, "Policeman, this revolver is no good"—I took it from his hand; I did not examine it—I gave it to Inspector Coghlan.
Cross-examined. Miss Walker had then gone into the next room with the doctor—the bed was disarranged, as if you had been sleeping there I did not examine the room.
PATRICK COGHLAN (Inspector, L). I went to 78, Brook Street, on May 1st, about ten minutes past three—I examined the revolver; it was loaded in four chambers, three had been discharged—the prisoner said, "I fired three shots, one blank, one at her, and one at myself. If you (pointing to Tye) had not come up this would not have happened. I am very sorry for what I have done. I thought I had made a more complete job of it"—they were both taken to the hospital that morning—she was discharged on June 5th, and I arrested him for shooting her and attempting self murder.
Cross-examined. The bed was slightly disordered—you were lying across it—she was soon lifted into the front room—you had some whisky; you were in a comatose state—I did not see any scratches on your face; you were somewhat flushed—you were removed to St. Thomas's Hospital about half-past four—you were standing by the bedside—there was a light in the room when we got there; she was dressed in a petticoat and chemise—the bed had been laid in; there was blood on the pillow-case—I did not look for any letters; I don't know what has become of any.
Re-examined. He smelt very strongly of drink—he was excited, and made a rambling statement.
GEORGE NICOL HENRY . I am a divisional-surgeon, of 175, Kennington Road—I was called in on May 1st—I examined the woman in the top front room—I found a bullet wound behind the left ear—it appeared to penetrate the skull—I did not see any other wound at the time—I sent her to the hospital—I saw the prisoner in the back-room, lying across the bottom of the bed—he was suffering from extreme shock, almost pulse-less—I found a wound about an inch below the left nipple—he rallied after a bit—he made several statements—he said he had shot the girl because he was jealous—in my opinion he was not sober then.
Cross-examined. You asked me if you were dying—I said I thought you were, and I believed so—you asked me how Lil was, and you may have said, "May I kiss her?"—you said, "I am sorry I shot her"—your face was very pale—I did not notice any scratches—they may have been there—the shock might have removed the effects of any drink—the girl had on a petticoat and chemise, and a wrap round her shoulders no boots—you inquited particularly about her—I told you I had sent her to St. Thomas'.
FRANCIS MACLEAN . I am house-surgeon at St. Thonmas'—I attended the prisoner and the prosecutrix on May 1st, about four o'clock—she was suffering from two bullet wounds in the skull—one about an inch and a-half just above the ear—the other about one and a-half inches behind the
mastoid, about an inch and a-half away from the other—they could not have been caused by one shot—I extracted one bullet—the other I have not-one had only bruised the bone—I don't think they are dangerous, but it is very difficult to give an exact opinion for a year—something might occur, but I don't think it likely in her case—the prisoner was suffering from a bullet wound in the chest—this one in the lungs lodging behind the left shoulder blade—I extracted that bullet—it was a serious injury—the only statement he made to me was that it was all through the damned drink.
Cross-examined. You were conscious when brought in—you were under my care until June 16th, when I discharged you—it will have a serious effect; it will seriously impair your health—it may shorten your life—you showed anxiety as to her state of health.
Witnesses for the Defence.
REV, MR. WEIGALL. I visited you several times at the hospital—you told me a good deal of your history—you said you were very sorry for what you had done, and asked me to go and see her, and beg her forgive-ness—I only saw her once—she never said the word "forgiveness "
---- ---- HART (Inspector, L Division). I went to the room the morning after this happened—I found one bottle containing whisky, but no letters.
Prisoner. I shot the girl, and am very sorry for what was done. I was not aware of what I was doing.
GUILTY of Unlawfully Wounding. — Three Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. KERSHAW Prosecuted, and MR. THOMPSON Defended.
MARGARET HOLMES . I am barmaid at the Feathers public-house—on June 23rd I was serving in the bar about 7.30 p.m.—the prisoner came in—her husband came in afterwards—they spoke together—she accused him with being with another woman the night before—she seemed angry—I saw her draw a bottle from her pocket and smash it on the counter, just in front of herself—her husband was standing near her—some of the contents went over Miss Cox, who was standing opposite the prisoner—the prisoner took up the pieces of the bottle and threw them at her husband, saying, "There, there"—I thought she was in a rage—she could have thrown it at her husband or at me.
The JURY here found the prisoner
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
RICHARD JOYCE RADFORD . I am the licensee of the Station Hotel, Ricimond—the prisoner stayed there for three or four days in January, and then asked me to cash this cheque for £25 on a Saturday—a friend
of his had come to stay there a few days before, and the following morning he asked me to cash a cheque for him, and I cashed it—Forester left on the Saturday after breakfast, and Clarke came down with another cheque for £25, and presented it to me—I said that when my cashier came down I would give it to him, but before that the bank messenger came with the first cheque, and the prisoner said, "Don't make any fuss about it; if you will give me a sheet of paper I will draw you another cheque. I closed that account two months ago. What a fool I must have been"—I left him at the hotel to make inquiries at the bank—he said he had an account at Bishops Stortford—he came back between six and seven and was taken into custody.
By the COURT. When Forester presented the cheque he did not say why he was presenting the prisoner's cheque—but I thought they were great friends—the charge here is for obtaining the second sum—I wanted a warrant for the two—he followed me into the smoking-room and said, "I hope you are not going to make any bother about this," and before I could reply the officer took him—I had only known him two or three days.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I cashed the cheque, and you divided the money between you—I gave you four five-pound notes and five sovereigns.
Re-examined. I saw the prisoner write the first cheque—Forester was there.
JOSEPH FINNER (Police Constable V). On Saturday, June 25th, I went to the Station Hotel at seven p.m., and saw Mr. Radford—the prisoner came in and began to talk to Mr. Radford—I followed, and said, "Is not your name Clarke?"—he said "Yes"—I said, "I am a police-officer, and shall arrest you for attempting to obtain £25"—I read the warrant to him, and took him to the station—the inspector read the charge—he made no reply—I found on him two cheque-books, 5s. in silver, some racing cards, but no loose cheques—Mr. Radford gave me a cheque for £25—there were some counterfoils in the cheque-books, and several blank cheques.
HENRY JOHN BRAGG . I am chief cashier to Woolridge and Co.—I know the prisoner as a customer as Alberic Clarke—I produce a copy of the prisoners banking account, and his pass-book—the account is not verified in the usual way, but I made it out—I know him by seeing him there—he opened his account with a cheque for ten guineas—I did not see him prior to June 24th, but I communicated with him by letter closing the account.
Prisoner's Defence. did not know that my account was closed, met Forester at Windsor. I owed him £30. I was staying with him at the prosecutor's house, and gave him two cheques, and on the Thurs-day I won £100, which was due to me on the Monday, and not knowing my account was closed, asked Mr. Radford to cash the cheque—I told him I would see Forester, and get him the £25—I failed to meet Forester, and was arrested—I had no intention to defraud.
R. J. RADFORD (Re-examined). When the messenger came back with the first cheque, marked, No account," I showed it to the prisoner—he said, "Tis that Forester's cheque returned"—I said, "It is," and then he said, "What a fool I was."
GUILTY .— Twelve Month' without Hard Labour.
542. JOHN BAKER (24) , to breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Thomas Caught, with intent to steal; also to assaulting William Holloman and inflicting on him grievous bodily harm, and having been convicted at Newington on April 14th, 1897— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
Before Mr. R. M. Kerr, Esq.
MR. EVANS Prosecuted.
DANIEL RANSOME . I live at 8, Devonshire House, Margate Street, Old Kent Road—I was going home on Saturday, June 11th, about 12 30 a.m. when I saw the prisoners and another man—Richards took me by my right arm and another man, who put his hand in my pocket, by my left, while Richards and Lee held me by the throat—they could not get my money—I struggled and got away, and gave information to a constable—we went together and I identified them—we caught the prisoners and one of them struck me on my jaw.
Cross-examined by Richards. You held me by my throat—I struggled and got away—no one said anything or took any notice—you held me five or six minutes—I did not tell the Magistrate a quarter of an hour.
Re-examined. I did not have a fight or quarrel with the men—I never saw them before.
RICHARDS, in his defence, denied, the prosecutor's story. LEE, in his defence, said that it was a fight, and that the prosecutor only preferred the charge to escape a hiding, which he deserved in respect of an old grievance—
NOT GUILTY .
ADJOURNED TO TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13TH, 1898.