CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
FIFTH SESSION, HELD MARCH 10TH, 1902.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND BY
Short-hand Writers to the Court,
ROLLS CHAMBERS, No. 89, CHANCERY LANE.
STEVENS AND SONS, LIMITED, 119, CHANCERY LANE.
Law Booksellers and Publishers.
On the King'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, March 10th, 1902, and following days,
Before the Right Hon. SIR JOSEPH COCKFIELD DIMSDALE, Knt., M.P., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir WILLIAM GRANTHAM , one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir JOSEPH SAVORY , Bart., M.P.; Sir GEORGE F. FAUDEL-PHILLIPS , Bart, G.C.I.E., and Sir FRANK GREEN , Bart.; Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON , Knt., K.C., Recorder of the said City; Sir MARCUS SAMUEL , Knt.; Sir WILLIAM PURDIE TRELOAR , Esq.; and HENRY GEORGE SMALLMAN , Esq.; other of the Aldermen of the said City; ALBERT FREDRICK BOSANQUET , Esq., K.C., Common Serjeant of the said City; LUMLEY SMITH , Esq., K.C., Judge of the City of London Court; and JAMES ALEXANDER RENTOUL , K.C., M.P., LL.D., Deputy Judge of the City of London Court, His Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
DIMSDALE, MAYOR. FIFTH 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, March 10th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
221. WILLIAM SEWARD PLEADED GUILTY to obtaining £31 12s. 7d. from Archibald Graham by false pretences. Also to obtaining £164 3s. 6d. from Gerald Atchieson Bird by false pretences. Six months in the second division. —
(222) ALFRED YOUNG CHICK , to converting to his own use and benefit a certificate for French Rentes for 33,000 francs entrusted to him as a banker for a special purpose. He received a good character. Discharged on recognizances. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(223) FRANK ANDERSON (22) , to stealing a watch from the person of Bella Georgina Edwards, having been convicted of felony at this Court on July 23rd, 1900. Four other convictions were proved against him. Eighteen months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(224) THOMAS BLAKEMAN (24) , to attempting to break and enter the shop of Nathan Israel with intent to steal. Also to being found by night with house-breaking instruments in his possession without lawful excuse, having been convicted of felony at Clerkenwell on May 7th, 1901, as Thomas Morgan. Eighteen months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(225) WILLIAM JAMES SPILLER (23) , to stealing four post letters containing postal orders for 15s., 7s. 6d., 3s. 6d., and 20s., the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office. Re received a good character. Four months in the second division. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(226) JOHN DANBURY , to stealing two post letters containing postal orders for 7s. 6d. and 15s., the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office. Nine months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(227) WILLIAM DEMERY (34) , to stealing a half chest of tea, the property of the Great Western Railway Company, having been convicted of felony at Clerkenwell on April 20th, 1896. Four other convictions were proved against him. Fifteen months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
stealing two pictures, a number of pocket books, and other articles, the property of McCaw, Stevenson and Orr, Ltd., his masters, having been convicted of felony at Clerkenwell on February 14th, 1900. Nine months hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
(230) JOHN LAWRENCE , to stealing six shirts the property of Edward Jennings, having been convicted of felony at this Court on January 10th, 1898. Seven other convictions were proved against him. Eighteen months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
NEW COURT.—Monday, March 10th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
231. JAMES JONES (34), PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a coat, a walking stick, and other articles, the property of Charles de Zouche Marshall, having been convicted at Newington on March 14th, 1900; also to assaulting William James Spooner and occasioning him actual bodily harm. Six other convictions were proved against him. Three years' penal servitude.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
WILLIAM BROGDEN (Police Sergeant, H.) On February 22nd, at 12.30 a.m., just at closing time, I was in the Commercial Tavern, Spitalfields, with Deacon and other officers and saw the prisoner there; I called him out and said, "I am a police officer and want to see if you have any counterfeit coin in your possession; "he said, "You have made a mistake, I have got a watch and chain; "I said, "I am going to search you"—he put his left hand in his coat pocket—I seized it, and took out a tobacco pouch containing 15 counterfeit florins—he struggled to get rid of it, but he was not particularly violent—he said, "Now you have got them"—they were each wrapped up separately in tissue paper—I also found a small tin of blacking—he made no reply to the charge at the station, and refused his address, but he afterwards gave it, and I went there and found some pewter, and silver sand, and blacking.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I found the things at the address of a woman with whom you cohabit, and I have seen you there.
GRANT DAVIS . I live with the prisoner on the front floor at 23, Peach Street—Brogden came there and found these things—I do not know how long they had been there, they do not belong to me—they were in a cupboard—he has been away about a month, and I had a young woman there then.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am inspector of coin to H.M. Mint—these 15 florins are counterfeit—they are wrapped in separate pieces of paper—they rub lamp black on them so as not to have them too bright, blacking is the same kind of thing—this is silver sand—all these articles produced occur in coining cases.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I plead guilty to being in unlawful possession of the counterfeit coin, but not with intent to utter."
GUILTY . Several previous convictions were proved against him. Four years' penal servitude.
OLD COURT—Tuesday, March 11th, and
NEW COURT—Wednesday, March 12th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. MATHEWS Prosecuted, and MR. MUIR Defended.
HENRY WITHERINGTON . I am the second clerk at the Marylebone police court—I produce six summonses taken out on December 20th and returnable on December 27th against Charles Levy Wolmark, for that he, having the care and management of certain, premises at 177, Portobello Road, Notting Hill, used them for the purposes of betting on November 29th and 30th, and December 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th—on December 27th the prisoner appeared in answer to those summonses—Mr. Curtis Bennett was the sitting Magistrate—the prosecution was conducted by a representative of Messrs. Wontner on behalf of the Chief Commissioner of Police—I was the acting clerk, and took down the evidence—Sergeant William Roy lance was the first witness, P.C. James Howes the second, and Inspector Turrell the third—the case for the prosecution being concluded, the defendant tendered himself as a witness on his own behalf—he was represented by a solicitor—he was sworn, and I took down his evidence (Read): "I live at 138, Walmer Road. I manage 177, Portobello Road, for my brother, Caesar Wolmark. We have been in business there 18 months. Up to November 23rd I took money on commission of 5 per cent, for a man who is a bookmaker. I am not a bookmaker. Since November 23rd I haven't done anything. Since the flat racing season my governor, having lost heavily on it, determined to give it up. It ended on November 23rd. On none of the days referred to by the officers did I receive slips of paper of any sort; that is, November 29th and 30th and December 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th. I haven't taken any money since November 23rd. The man for whom I acted on commission was Arthur Hewison, 213, Westbourne Grove. He is the only man I have done commission or made bets for. I never took a slip relating to betting in the shop either before or after November 23rd. I took them in the street in the Portobello Road, and from one or two tradesmen on whom I used to call. In taking them I walked past my shop. I did not know my premises were being watched. A genuine business is done in the shop. As a rule, a purchase taken at a jeweller's takes some time, five or ten minutes. I have done no betting at all since November 23rd. I can't say who was the man who the police say took slips outside my shop on December 6th. Nothing of the kind was carried on outside or inside the premises. I did not tell the Inspector I managed the shop for my brother Mark. I said I managed it for my brother Caesar and lived with my brother Mark. I swear I mentioned my brother Caesar's name. Mybrother Caesar is the owner of the shop. He pays me 25s. weekly for managing it. Every word the constables have stated is false. Per Court. I began managing the shop for my brother Caesar about 14 months ago. I have been always there for the last three years. During the last 14 months I have been there every day. While working for the bookmaker I was out daily from 12.30 to 2 p.m. That ceased on November 23rd. Since November 23rd,
from 9 a.m. till 9.45 or 10 p.m., I have been in the shop, except when I went to dinner or to the City. I produce invoices showing that on December 2nd I went to the City, also on November 29th. I can't exactly say at what hour. It was the afternoon, before dinner. I swear I said my brother Cesar, not Mark, was the owner. He asked who I worked for. I said my brother Caesar, and that I lived with my brother Mark. I swear 13 men did not come into the shop that day, simply no one but a customer, perhaps, who wanted to buy something"—a witness named David Jacobson was called on his behalf—the prisoner was fined on the summonses—the total amount was between £50 and £60.
Cross-examined. William Roylance was the first witness called, and Howes the second—this is their evidence (Reading Roylance's and Howes' depositions.)—before the defendant went into the box, the Magistrate warned him that if he did not believe him he should direct a prosecution for perjury, and he did so, and granted a summons and committed him for trial.
Re-examined. The hearing at the police court was adjourned from December 27th to January 4th, then to the 10th, then till January 24th, and he was committed for trial on January 31st.
WILLIAM JOHN GREEN . I am manager to my father John Green, a corn chandler, at 3, Elgin Terrace, Notting Hill—I produce an agreement dated October 1st, 1896, between my father and Mark Wolmark, whereby a shop only at 177, Portobello Road, was let to Mark Wolmark upon a yearly tenancy at 10s. a week—that agreement is still in force, under it Mark Wolmark is the tenant—it is a jeweller's shop—I have collected the rent from Mark Wolmark—sometimes it was sent by post, sometimes it was brought by Mark Wolmark, and sometimes by the prisoner—it was paid every month—I did not go to 177, Portobello Road, to collect it, but to Mark Wolmark's premises at 138, Walmer Road, that is a jeweller's shop—I do not know a "C. Wolmark" or a "Wolmark' connected with the premises.
Cross-examined. My father pays the rates and taxes for the shop—originally the name "M. Wolmark "was over the shop, and about two years ago "C. Wolmark "was substituted—I first saw the prisoner at the shop four years ago, I have seen that man at the shop (Caesar Wolmark.)—I do not know his name—that other man is Mark Wolmark.
Re-examined. Walmer Road is about threequarters of a mile from Portobello Road.
WILLIAM ROYLANCE (Police Sergeant, 39 X.) Last November I was taken from my own division to watch this house in Portobello Road—on November 29th I kept observation from 2 to 2.30 p.m.—I was in plain clothes, on the opposite side of the street, at the spot I now mark on the plan—I moved about to obtain the best point of vantage—I would just pause at the door and then pass on—I was backwards and forwards the whole time—during that time I saw six persons enter the shop—they went to the defendant, who was in the shop—I could see him—I did not know him by sight before—each person handed him something and then left the shop—he was in the public side of the shop—I looked through the door, which was open and fastened back—I could not see what they handed—
the prisoner was two or three feet from the entrance of the shop—the persons who went in would only stay a second or two—none of them made any purchase while I was there—on November 30th I again kept observation from 1.10 to 2 p.m.—I was in plain clothes, and had been sent there because I was not known, being in another division—I saw 10 persons enter the shop—the prisoner was in about the same position as on the previous day—the 10 people handed slips of paper to the prisoner, and then left the shop as soon as they had done so—I was walking about in the same position as the day before—one of the persons, dressed like a butcher, wrote something in the street on a slip of paper which he copied from the sporting column of a newspaper—he was about 11 yards from the shop then on the opposite side of the road—he walked across and gave it to the defendant in the shop—I saw a milkman write in the street on a slip "Eastern Friars 2/6 to win"—that is the name of a horse—that was done in Portobello Road, at the corner of Elgin Crescent, by a corn chandler's shop—I was standing by his side—he went into the shop and handed the slip to the prisoner—I saw the prisoner leave the shop at 1.30 and walk along Portobello Road for about 100 yards, he stood by a fish shop for a moment and returned to his shop at 1.35—there was a man outside the fish shop, he had no communication with him—when the prisoner returned I saw four persons going into the shop—they did not go in together—they handed something to the prisoner and went away—the next day I kept observation was on December 3rd, from 1.10 to 1.45 p.m.—during that time I saw 13 persons enter the shop, hand the prisoner slips and then come out as before, no purchases were made as far as I could see—at 1.15 I saw a man in the street write on a slip "The Sapper Is. to win, stake on Sidewing the first attempt 1s. to win, stake on Snapshot"—he had a newspaper with him—"Sidewing" is the name of a horse—the man entered the shop and gave the slip to the prisoner—I was on the opposite side of the way—on December 3rd, under my instructions, my wife entered the shop at 1.25—she came out with the defendant, and they both looked into the window, where goods were displayed, she pointed out some article in the window and then they both returned to the shop, and she made some small purchase—the prisoner stayed on the public side of the counter while he served her—there was another man behind the counter working at a bench—I think his name is Jacobson—the prisoner took the money from my wife and handed it to Jacobson—on December 4th I watched again from 1.40 to 2 p.m.—the prisoner was in the same position in the shop—I saw five persons enter—each of them handed slips to the prisoner—I saw two of those five slips written—they copied what they wrote from newspapers—I could not see the horses' names—the persons left without making purchases—on December 5th I watched from 12.45 to 1.30 p.m.—I saw eight men enter and hand slips to the defendant and leave—at 1 p.m. I saw a man write on a slip of paper in the street, "The Shifter 2s. to win," he then took a coin from his pocket, wrapped it in the paper, went into the shop, and handed the slip to the prisoner, who put it into his pocket and then left the shop with the man and walked up Portobello Road and stopped at a fish shop in conversation with the other man; I left them then—on December 6th I
watched again from 1.10 to 1.45 p.m.—the prisoner was inside the shop, and a man I do not know was outside—I saw five men and a boy walk towards the shop at different times with slips in their hands—they were stopped by the man standing outside, who took the slips from them and entered the shop and handed the slips to the prisoner—the man outside did not look at them, but the prisoner did after receiving them—I saw two of them written, but was unable to see the horses' names—I reported the result of my observations each evening—those reports were founded on my notes which I made at the time—I had that note before me when giving my evidence before the Magistrate on December 31st—on December 18th I went to the shop with Inspector Turrell—there was a conversation between the Inspector and the prisoner in my hearing—I did not make a note of it—the prisoner said the shop belonged to his brother, Mark Wolmark—we were in plain clothes—the Inspector told the prisoner who we were—I asked the prisoner how he accounted for the difference; in the initial on the shops, because the shop in Portobello Road had "C. Wolmark" on it, and the shop in Walmer Road had "M. "Wolmark"—he said, "I cannot account for that at all, I do not know"—I was not present when the summonses were served—I was present at the hearing on December 27th and gave my evidence—I heard the prisoner examined upon his oath—on December 18th, when I went to the shop, the prisoner did not make any statement about his brother Caesar being the owner of the premises or carrying on business there—he made no reference to Caesar at all.
Cross-examined. I have been on this special class of duty about six years—Howes, who was also watching, has also been on the same class of duty before—I have watched betting both in the street and in houses—when it is in houses both watchers very often get inside the house to see what goes on—I did not go inside in this case, because I could keep observation outside just as well—I have seen all manner of tradesmen betting—the first time I saw one of the slips written was on November 30th—I saw a butcher write a slip almost opposite No. 177—the majority of the people who I saw write the slips wrote them some distance from the shop—I have seen a slip handed to the prisoner while I was standing at the' spot I marked on the plan—I did not say before the Magistrate that the prisoner was standing three yards from the door when slips were handed to him, I said "about," because I did not know the measurements of the shop—I told my wife to go to the shop and make a purchase, and to take notice of anything she saw—I did not tell her I was watching the shop or that the prisoner was suspected of betting, or to get the man outside the shop—I do not know why he was brought outside—I wanted to see what part the prisoner had in the business, because we did not know him—each day I compared the names I saw written on the slips with the evening papers, and on each occasion I saw that the horses whose names I had seen written on the slips were runners in races—there was not a single non-starter—sometimes I looked in the "Evening News "and sometimes in the "Star"; I do not know why—on the 29th I could not see what was handed to the prisoner—the slips I saw varied in size—I have seen a man sitting in the window working while I have been watching—he was not there every day—I never saw a purchase made in the shop except that made by my wife.
Re-examined. We were told to go at the time we considered best, so we went at dinner time.
JAMES HOWES (551 X) I was on the special duty of watching 177, Portobello Road—I first went there on November 29th from 1.35 to 2.30 p.m.—I kept observation apart from Sergeant Roylance—I was in the roadway, but not always in the same place—I saw the prisoner in the shop—13 men entered separately and left again very shortly—each of them handed the prisoner a slip of paper—I saw a milkman write some thing on a slip from a newspaper and hand it to the prisoner—on November 30th I kept observation from 1.20 to 2 p.m. in about the same place—the prisoner was just inside the shop—I saw nine persons enter the shop as before—they handed slips to the defendant and left shortly—I did not see any purchases—I saw the same milkman whom I had seen the day before hand a slip to the prisoner on the second day—about 1.30 p.m. the prisoner left the shop for a little distance and then returned, and a man spoke to him and they went into the shop together—the man handed the prisoner a slip—on December 3rd I watched from 12.45 to 1.40—17 people went in—about 1.10 on that day I went into the Portobello Arms, on the other side of Elgin Crescent—I saw a man write on a slip, "The Sapper 5s. to win"—he left the house with two others and went to the prisoner's shop and handed the slip to the prisoner—I also saw a woman go into the shop on that day—on December 4th I watched from 1.35 to 1.55—seven people went in—the prisoner was in the same place in the shop—each handed him a slip—I had seen two of them written outside after reference to a newspaper—on December 5th I watched from 12.45 to 1.30—I saw-five men enter the shop—in a coffee house I saw "Prince Leo 1s. each way"written on a slip—the writer handed the slip to the prisoner—on December 6th I watched from 12.15 to 1.40—the prisoner was in the shop, and a man was standing outside, who received 11 slips, which he handed to the prisoner—the man did not look at them before he handed them to the prisoner—I saw a man write on one of them in Kensington Park Road, "Degenerate Is. to win, 1, 2, 3"—Kensington Park Road is about 20 or 30 yards from the shop—I saw it handed to the prisoner.
Cross-examined. I have been engaged on this class of duty for eight years, on and off—I have been in the force 21 years—I have been a sergeant, but was reduced eight years ago for being the worse for drink on duty—I may have seen butchers write on slips in other cases, I cannot remember, I have had so many cases—when I saw the prisoner receive slips I have sometimes been on the footway and sometimes in the road—I did not see any persons I knew write slips—I went into the public house to see if a man was writing a slip—it is a common thing to find—I went into the coffee house to have a cup of coffee—the longest period I watched at one time was 1 1/2 hours—I was about five minutes having my coffee—I went into Kensington Park Road to see what was going on—I compared the names I saw written on the slips with newspapers the same evening or the next day, and I found they were horses which were running that day—I do not think I said before the Magistrate that 13 people Handed the prisoner 13 slips, I said 13 people entered the shop—the door of the shop was always open while I was there—I never saw a
customer transact business there—I only saw one woman visit the shop, that was Mrs. Roylance—some of the men had the slips in their hands, and some took them from their pockets.
Re-examined. I never saw the prisoner do any writing to any of the slips handed to him at the shop—he put them into his pocket.
(The Jury were taken to view 177, Portobello Road, to see if the police could have seen what they stated they saw from the positions they gave.)
MARY ROYLANCE . I am the wife of Police Sergeant William Roylance—on December 3rd, at 1.30, I went to 177, Portobello Road, and saw four men—the prisoner is one of them—he was standing near the counter, not behind it, another man was at the door, and one behind the door—they went up to the table and took a small piece of paper, which the prisoner put in the pocket of the overcoat which he was wearing—he gave nothing in exchange, as I could see, and nothing was said—one man went behind the counter and turned round to the other man—they had some fancy ornament—nothing was said—they made no purchase—I asked the prisoner for some brooches—he showed me some—I said, "There is one in the window"—he went out with me and I pointed out which it was—we both returned to the shop, and he took it out of the window—I paid him 1s. for it and left.
Cross-examined. I examined the jewellery in the window before I went in—when I went in he was standing where this mark on the model is—I have been married 11 years—I never read my husband's cases in the papers—he has been engaged in watching public house betting during the last two years—I do not know that in betting cases slips of paper are passed—I was instructed to make a purchase and take notice of anything I saw done in the shop—I did not see a man working in the window—the man behind the counter was doing nothing the whole time—I did not take the prisoner outside, he simply asked me to go out and point out which brooch I wanted—it was not part of my scheme to get him to go outside—the evidence I gave in the perjury case is correct—he was close to the counter except when he went out.
WILLIAM TURRELL (Police Inspector, F.) Under my instructions, Roylance and Howes watched these premises and reported the result—on December 18th I went to 177, Portobello Road, with Roylance, and saw the prisoner—I said, "I am a police officer, and have come to see what position you hold here, as we have received information about betting"—I asked him his name; he said "Charles Levy"—I said, "Is your name Wolmark?"—he said, "Yes"—he gave his address 138, Walmer Road—I never mentioned Caesar Wolmark, nor said that he was the proprietor of the business—he did not say, "I do not know how 'Caesar Wolmark' was put up outside"—on December 21st I took six summonses to Portobello Road and served them on the prisoner—he read them, and said, "I have not done no betting for months; those who say they saw me betting will have to prove it"—on December 27th the summonses came on for hearing before Mr. Curtis Bennett; the prisoner gave evidence on his own behalf, and I saw a man in Court who I now know as Caesar Wolmark—he was not called as a witness for his brother—the only witnesses called for the defence were himself and Jacobson, the shopman.
Cross-examined. I do not think I asked him who he worked for—I took a note as soon as I left the shop, which I have here—he did not say he worked for his brother Caesar and lived with his brother Mark—the first time I heard the name of Mark was at the police court—I do not know Hewett, a betting man, but I have heard of him—I do not know that the prisoner was working for Hewison—those proceedings were instituted on my instigation—I knew that 177, Portobello Road, was used for betting, but I had no idea who was carrying it on—I do not know that Hewison had ceased to carry on the business on November 23rd.
Evidence for the Defence.
DAVID JACOBSON . I am a watch maker, and have been employed at 177, Portobello Road, three years, at 30s. a week, repairing watches and jewellery—I have been kept pretty busy—people brought watches to be repaired, and there was sometimes a biggish trade done there; people came morning, mid-day, and night, and sometimes watches were sold on the instalment principle—little bits of paper are given when watches are left to be repaired, and the prisoner or I stamp them with a rubber stamp—Caesar Wolmark is the governor—these are some of the slips which have been used (Produced.)—one of them is given to a person who leaves a watch to be repaired, with their name on it and the number of the watch, and they have to bring them back—if they do not leave a watch they do not have a paper—we give a receipt for each instalment on articles sold on the instalment principle—the manager does that—they come in bringing their piece of paper, get it signed, and take it away—I never knew persons to come in and go out—without doing any business—Charley Wolmark does not stand in the doorway.
Cross-examined. He does sometimes, and sometimes in the middle of the shop—the door is not fastened—we write the number of the watch over the man's name—duplicate tickets have to be made out, and we sometimes use pen and ink for that, and the price to be charged for the repair is put down—I sit in the window; only the manager is behind me—there is no other person in the shop—I have never seen people come in with little slips of paper and give them to my employer, except these slips—I do not remember Mr. Charles Wolmark standing outside these premises and receiving little slips of paper—he did not do so before February 23rd for an hour in the middle of the day—he used to go out from 12 to 2 o'clock, but I did not notice that he stood in the street in Portobello Road; I was inside—I never bet.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his youth. Four months in the second division.
234. WILLIAM CRAIG (26), and ALFRED ROSE (36), withdrew their pleas of not guilty, and PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a purse and 10s. 6 1/2 d., the property of Ruth Watts; Craig having been convicted at Clerkenwell on August 4th, 1897. and Rose at Clerkenwell on June 6th, 1900. Four previous convictions were proved against Craig, and ten against Rose. ROSE— Four years' penal servitude ; CRAIG— Eighteen months' hard labour.
NEW COURT—Tuesday, March 11th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
235. WILLIAM BARR (29), PLEADED GUILTY to certain counts of an indictment charging him with obtaining divers small sums by false pretences, with intent to defraud (He had been convicted by a Military Tribunal of a like offence.) Eighteen months hard labour.
MR. PERROT Prosecuted.
Upon the evidence of Dr. Scott, medical officer of Holloway Gaol, the Jury found the prisoner guilty of the act, but insane at the time. To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.
For the other cases tried this day, see Essex Cases.
THIRD COURT.—Tuesday, March 11th, 1902.
Before L. Smith, Esq., K.C.
237. JOHN WILLIAM PICTON (54), PLEADED GUILTY to three indictments, for forging and uttering orders for the payment of £3 3s., £3 3s., and £4 8s. 6d. He received a good character. Three months' imprisonment in the second division and
(238) JOHN WILSON (42) , to stealing 45 lbs. of lead piping, belonging to James Stapley, having been convicted of felony at this Court in February, 1898, in the name of Walter Plats. Two other convictions were proved against him. Three years' penal servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, March 12th, 1902.
Before Mr. Grantham.
MR. CAMPBELL Prosecuted.
Upon the evidence of Dr. Scott, the medical officer at Holloway Gaol, the Jury found the prisoner of unsound mind and unable to plead. To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.
MR. BIRON Prosecuted, and MR. ABINGER Defended.
ELIZABETH GOGIN . I am married, and live at 21, Severn Street—the prisoner and her husband, a carman, have lodged with me for 13 years—she has five children—on February 24th, about 9.30 a.m., the prisoner came down for a Jug of water—I did not notice anything about her condition—she went out and returned at 10.40 am.—then I went out, and when I came back I saw her little girl in the passage—she said
something to me—I went upstairs and saw the prisoner lying on the bed—I said, "Oh, my, what have you done?"—she said, "I am poisoned, me and my baby"—I called Mrs. Batt, and tried to get a doctor, and afterwards I gave the prisoner and the baby some salt and water.
Cross-examined. I was brought up with the prisoner—she has always been a good and sober woman—she has been too kind with her children—she had a severe illness when her last child was born—I do not think she is undergoing the change of life—I know she had influenza.
MARY BATT . I live at 24, Severn Street—I was fetched by Mrs. Gogin—when I got into the prisoner's room I said, "What have you done?"—the prisoner said she had poisoned herself, and said, "I wish to God the Almighty God would take me"—I saw the baby there, and said, "Have you poisoned the baby, too?"—she said, "Yes"—I gave the baby salt and water.
Cross-examined. The prisoner is a sober woman, and a good wife—I have never heard anything against her.
THOMAS JONES . I am divisional surgeon, and on February 24th I went to 21, Severn Street, and saw the prisoner and her child there—the child was collapsed, and I administered emetics to it, and to the prisoner, who was also collapsed, but not to such an extent as the child—I did not form any opinion then as to her mental condition—while I was there she said, "I wish I was dead"—I saw a bottle there, it contained atanic fluid, containing carbolic acid.
Cross-examined. Carbolic acid is a very good antiseptic—the child was suffering from an eruption of its head—the carbolic acid would not have been useful for application to the head in that condition—it is in the Pharmacopeia as a poison—I am not quite sure if it can be sold without an order from a doctor—this was a sort of disinfectant containing carbolic acid—it is a poison if taken internally—it would be a proper thing for the prisoner to rub the child with if it was more diluted; swallowing it would cause pain.
JAMES HURLEY (Police Inspector H.) I saw the prisoner on February 24th—I asked her what she had done—the only reply I could get was, "I wish I was dead, I wish the Lord would take me," which she said several times, as well as on the way to the hospital.
Cross-examined. She appeared to be in great pain—both she and her husband are very respectable.
WILLIAM HIREBOURN . I am house physician at the London Hospital—I received the prisoner and her child there on February 24th—they were suffering from poisoning—a fluid was brought to me in a bottle—there was no label on it—the child was collapsed and was in danger, unless proper remedies had been applied—the prisoner said she had been greatly worried about the child, because of the eruption of its head, and that she intended to use a lotion for its head—she was under my treatment eleven days—she had-paroxysms of melancholia occasionally—they would come on from time to time, then pass off and leave no trace—she was not suffering from melancholia when I first saw her—I did not hear her say she wished she was dead.
Cross-examined. The baby has recovered from the effects of the poison—carbolic acid is an antiseptic, and would be a proper thing to prescribe
for its head, in a weak solution—I do not think it is in the schedule of poisons under the Pharmacy Act—the prisoner was low-spirited, and seemed to appreciate that she had been guilty of an extremely foolish thing—I gathered from what she said that she loved her child.
WILLIAM BUTLER . I am manager to Henry Bell, an oilman in Cable Street—I remember selling to the prisoner some carbolic solution in a bottle like this—she asked me if it was poison, and I told her it was—it is used as a disinfectant when mixed with water.
Cross-examined. I did not ask her what she wanted it for, and she did not tell me; it is not usual for us to caution people how to use it—we do not dilute it—it comes from an oil merchant.
By the COURT. The only other poison we sell that I know of is spirits of salts—we label that—we do not label the carbolic solution, because we do not think it necessary—we do not sell it as a poison, we sell it as a disinfectant—we do not sell it pure—we do not mix it, we sell it as we get it in bulk—I do not know what the parts are—this (Produced.) is a guarantee from Davis Bros., varnish manufacturers, of South Hackney, to Mr. Bell (This stated that they guaranteed him from all liability in connection with the Pharmacy Act arising from the sale of the disinfectant.)—I do not know what it is made of.
THOMAS DIVAL (Police Officer.) I saw the prisoner on February 24th—she said, "What have I done?"—she was in a semi state of collapse, and I sent her to the London Hospital—I went there a few days afterwards—she was weeping bitterly, and seemed to be pondering over her child—I said nothing to her then, on account of her condition, and when she had cooled down, I took her to the station and told her the charge.
Cross-examined. The Magistrate offered to let her go back with her husband after the committal, if a person could be found to look after her—a person could not be found, so I sent her to Holloway.
WILLIAM HIREBOURN (Re-examined.) I saw the bottle in this case—there was a small quantity of fluid in it—I had it analysed—it is an impure tar product, and has been used as a disinfectant and preservative—it contains other poisons very difficult to separate.
Cross-examined. I should call it a disinfectant.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I did not want to poison my child nor myself. I bought it to bathe her head in. A dreadful sensation came over me, and I did not know what I was doing. "When the sensation came over me I drank some and gave the baby some."
Evidence for the Defence.
JOHN BALSER . I am a carman—the prisoner is my wife—we have been married 18 years last December, and have had seven children—she has always been a kind and affectionate wife and mother—I have never seen any signs of insanity in her, she has never threatened me or the children with violence—some little time ago she had influenza—the baby had a rash, which all the doctors put down to teething—on February 24th I went to my work—my wife was perfectly well when I left—I was going home when I heard of this—I saw her the same night at the London Hospital.
Cross-examined. I have not noticed anything about my wife's health lately—the child has been a lot of trouble—I have never known my wife to suffer from fits of melancholia.
By the COURT. I have only been in my present employment since last October—I was at my last place for five years, and only left to better myself.
DR. JAMES SCOTT . The prisoner has been under my observation since she has been in Holloway Gaol—she has been nervous and depressed at her position, and full of regret for her act—I have not detected any insanity—she has been rational in her conduct and conversation—I think she is approaching her change of life—that sometimes causes mental aberration—I could not at present certify that she is insane.
Cross-examined. The bulk of her depression and nervousness was from her position and at what she had done—she appreciated what she had done.
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury. Discharged on recognizances.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, March 12th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
241. WILLIAM JOHN BATHO (44), PLEADED GUILTY to two indictments for forging and uttering shares of the capital stock of the London County Council, also to uttering a forged transfer in the books of the Bank of England, also to uttering a forged transfer of £2,000, also to aiding and abetting an unknown person to personate another. Three years' penal servitude. And
(242) JOHN HENRY HALL (72) , to stealing a valuable security for the payment of £500, also a bond for the payment of £500, the property of Henry Thomas Carlo. The prosecutor missed securities value£25,000 or £30,000— Eighteen months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
For the case of Emmerson Matthews, see Surrey cases.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, March 12th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. GREEN Defended.
The COURT suggested that a mistake must have been made in the figures in the delivery notes, and the Jury stated that the case ought not to have been brought before them.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. GREENFIELD Prosecuted.
The evidence is unfit for publication.
NOT GUILTY .
[See page 353.]
FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, March 12th, 1902.
Before Alexander Rentoul, Esq., K.C.
MR. MUIR, MR. A. GILL, and MR. LEICESTER Prosecuted, and MR. STEVENSON Defended.
JOHN FISK . I am a clerk at the "Westminster County Court—I produce the record in the action of John Davies v. Penfold and wife, heard on April 11th, 1899, before Judge Lumley Smith—judgment was given for the plaintiff for £30 10s.
MARY PENFOLD . I am the wife of Henry Penfold, of 1, Great Hanbury Street—in October, 1898, my attention was directed to an advertisement in "Lloyd's Newspaper," and in consequence, on October 10th, I went to the Northampton Coffee House, Compton Street, Clerkenwell, where I saw a Mr. David Davies, and I eventually agreed to purchase the coffee house from him for £130—this (Produced.) is the agreement—David Davies informed me that he was taking £20 a week and making a profit of £7 a week, that he had been there 12 months, and had a 10 years' lease—I did not ask to see his books—I paid £25 on signing the agreement, £75 when I took possession on the 15th, and I gave this bill (Produced.) endorsed by my husband for the balance of £30, with 10s. interest—I had not seen John Davies until I took possession and paid the £75—he came into the shop and said to David Davies, "Is it all right?"—David said, "Yes"—I said, "That is your brother, Mr. Davies"—he said, "No"—he said he would keep the lease till the bill was paid, and he then went away, giving me his address at Northampton, and the first letter I wrote to him there was returned through the post—I wrote to him because I was not satisfied with the business; the takings never came to more than £7 a week, and I made no profit, and I never received the lease—when the bill was coming due I received this letter from David Davies. (This stated that he was unable to call, but had discounted the bill for£30 10s. to a gentleman in Queen's Road, Peckham, who would probably call next week, and had left the agreement and landlord's consent with the bill)—the gentleman from Peckham called on February 18th, when the bill was due—he turned out to be John Davies—he asked me if I was prepared to settle the bill—I told him I wanted to see David Davies first, as I was not satisfied with the business—I said, "You must know where David Davies is, you are his brother," and he said "No," and that he believed he was in the country; he had not seen him since he gave him £25 for the bill—he went away, and soon after I was served with a summons to attend at the Westminster County Court on April 11th—I instructed my solicitor, Mr. Morley, to defend—John Davies gave evidence, and was asked if he knew where his brother David was, and he replied that he had not seen him for five weeks, and that he was in Northampton—judgment was given against me, and I paid.
Cross-examined. All the transactions with regard to the coffee house were with David Davies—when I was paying the £75 to David Davies, John Davies came in and asked if it was all right, and that is how I recognised him again when he came with the bill—I am quite
certain John Davies said at the County Court that he had not seen his brother David for five weeks, and I believe he said he was in Northampton.
Re-examined. I have refreshed my memory by the notes I made soon after the misrepresentations were made, nearly four years ago.
WILLIAM PENFOLD . I am a son of the last witness, and am a licensed victualler—I was present at Westminster County Court on April 11th, 1899, and I heard John Davies say in his evidence that he had given his brother David £25 for the bill, in a public house—he was also asked if he knew where his brother David was, and he said he had not seen him for about five weeks, he thought he had gone into the country to buy cattle, and that is what he had the £25 for.
Cross-examined. I do not remember any witness being called to prove that the money for the bill had passed.
JOHN EVEREST . I am clerk to Ernest Pheasant, solicitor, 10, Duke Street, Adelphi—I produce the call book for February, March, and April, 1899—on February 18th, 1899, David Davies called to see Mr. Pheasant to give instructions—he called again on February 20th, and gave further instructions—he called again on March 3rd, 9th, 13th, and on April 6th there was a letter to him and John—on April 8th both David and John Davies called and had an interview together with Mr. Pheasant—that was the first time I had seen John Davies—they both called again on April 29th, when the matter was settled—we had never received any instructions from John Davies.
Cross-examined. David Davies had been a client of ours before then.
Re-examined. At that time there was no other business except that action.
ERNEST WILLIAM PHEASANT . I am a solicitor, of Duke Street, Adelphi—I acted for the plaintiff in the action of John Davies against Mary Penfold—I received my instructions from David Davies—I did not see him at the trial—the question was put to John Davies whether he knew where David was, and he said he did not—after judgment was given, Mrs. Penfold called and paid me the money, and I paid a cheque to John Davies on April 29th, for £29, in the presence of David Davies—I cannot say who endorsed the cheque.
Cross-examined. I have no recollection of John saying that he had not seen his brother for five weeks.
JAMES MORLEY . I am a solicitor, of 22, Philpot Lane, City—I acted for Mrs. Penfold and her husband in the action brought by John Davies—I was present at the trial, and instructed Counsel—a question was put to John Davies by Counsel: "When did you last see your brother?" and the answer, which I have a note of here, was: "I saw my brother five weeks ago at Northampton."
Cross-examined. I have not got a note of the question; as to that, I am simply speaking from recollection.
ARTHUR PERCY WARR . I am a clerk at the London and County Bank, Covent Garden Branch—Mr. Pheasant has an account there—this cheque (Produced.) for £29 was cashed on April 29th, 1899, in four £5 notes, Nos. 64369 to 64372, dated December 13th, 1898, and £9 in gold—this £5 note, No. 64369, is one of the notes given in part payment of this cheque endorsed "D. Davies"—these are the other three notes (Produced).
CHARLES JOHN WILLIAMS . I am a clerk in the Accountant's Department in the Bank Note Office, Bank of England—I produce the four £5 notes which have been identified, one of which, No. 64369, is endorsed "D. Davies"—they came back to our Bank in the ordinary course of business, and were all in by May 26th, 1899.
THOMAS HENRY GURRIN . I am an expert in handwriting—the Exhibits Nos. 2 and 30 are, in my opinion, in David Davies' writing—the endorsement, "John Davies," on the cheque is in the writing of David Davies—it is nothing like the writing of John Davies.
GUILTY . One year's hard labour. (See next case.)
MR. MUIR, MR. A. GILL, and MR. LEYCESTER Prosecuted, and MR. SIMMONDS Defended.
Cross-examined. I had never been in the coffeehouse business before—the takings were never over £7 a week—they were not what he represented them to be, £20 a week—he said he had the premises on a ten years lease, which I found he had not.
CHARLES GROUT . I acted in 1898 as agent for the landlord of 67, Compton Street, Clerkenwell—in June, 1898, I entered into this agreement (Produced), on behalf of the landlord, with David Davies—up to that time he had not had possession of the premises—I promised him a lease after he had been there three years, which he never applied for.
Cross-examined. He had gone before the three years were up, and the premises had been empty six months prior to his tenancy—I have known the premises as a coffee shop for the past 10 years, and the same business is being carried on there now.
ERNEST WILLIAM PHEASANT repeated his former evidence and added:—John was my client, but I looked to David for my costs in the event of the action being unsuccessful—I advised David to be present at the trial, but I did not see him there—as far as I recollect, John was asked if he knew where his brother David was, and his answer was "No"—I did not hear him say he had not seen him for five weeks—when the settlement took place on April 29th, I saw both John and David—I gave John a cheque for the amount of his claim, and he gave me this receipt, which I saw him sign.
Cross-examined. I thought it advisable that David should be present at the County Court in view of the affidavit filed by Mrs. Penfold.
Re-examined. Mrs. Penfold's defence was, practically, that the bill had been obtained by fraud.
By MR. MUIR. The Judge held that the defendants had not established their case.
WILLIAM PENFOLD, ARTHUR PERCY WARR, CHARLES JOHN WILLIAMS, WALTER BETTS, ERNEST HILL, and THOMAS HENRY GURRIN repeated heir former evidence. (See page 357.)
GUILTY .— One year's hard labour.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, March 13th, 1902.
Before Mr. Justice Grantham.
247. ARTHUR STOPFORD FRANCIS (46), PLEADED GUILTY to that he, while being a trustee of £500, £2,500, and £3,500, under a marriage settlement for the benefit of Constance, Countess of Orkney did unlawfully convert the same to his own use with intent to defraud.
Five years' penal servitude.
MR. MUIR prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL defended.
ROBERT DUDGEON , B. M. I live at 1, Cadogan Terrace, Victoria Park—the deceased was brought to my surgery on February 13th, about 7.30 p.m.—he died about two minutes afterwards—I found some bruises on his face, which might have been inflicted with a fist, and his lip was split—I made a post-mortem examination afterwards, and found that all the injuries to his head, with one exception, were apparently caused by blows from a fist, and not likely to befatal with the exception of one 1 1/2 inches long and 1 inch broad, on one side of his head, apparently caused by a fall—there had been a rupture, but I did not find any blood there—the cause of death was compression of the brain.
CHARLES MEARS . I am a porter employed at the Britannia Folding Box Factory, Old Ford—the prisoner and the deceased worked there—about 10.45 on February 13th, I saw them working—the deceased beckoned to me, and asked me what I thought "punter" meant—I said a man who backs horses—he said to the prisoner, "There you are"—the prisoner said, "You never said anything of the kind"—the deceased called the prisoner a liar—I went away, and looked round in a few minutes—I saw the prisoner hit the deceased, and the deceased hit him back—I rushed across to them, and I heard the deceased say he had had enough—the prisoner held out his hand, and said, "Shake hands, and we will say nothing about it"—the deceased said he would have him when, they got outside—they went to work then—at dinner time the deceased spoke to me, and at two o'clock I saw the prisoner outside the works—I heard him say to the deceased, "All right; at seven o'clock"—at seven o'clock all the hands adjourned to see the prisoner and the deceased fight—they went down two or three side streets—they pulled off their coats, and the prisoner suggested they should shake hands, which they did—they fought two or three rounds, when the deceased got a blow on his chin, and seemed to stagger—he fell to the ground, which was frozen hard—we helped him up, and took him towards the station to get him some brandy—I left him in the hands of some friends, and went home.
Cross-examined. I have been working at this place about seven years—the prisoner has been there about seven months—when the discussion about a "punter" tookplace, I saw the deceased take hold of the prisoner and push him against the partition—that was after the blows had been exchanged—it was then that the prisoner said, "You had better shake hands and make it up, and say no more about it"—the deceased said, "I would not shake hands like that"—I did not hear him call the prisoner a b—at one o'clock the men go away for dinner, and at two o'clock the deceased said that the prisoner had gone away without waiting for him—when the prisoner came back at two o'clock, the deceased asked him why had he not waited for him, and then said, "Seven o'clock," and the prisoner said, "All right, seven o'clock"—the prisoner did not relish fighting at all—the deceased was a little the taller—from first to last the prisoner was trying to avoid a fight.
Cross-examined. When the men came back to work at two o'clock the deceased was waiting for the prisoner outside, and when the prisoner came up, the deceased said, "I will meet you to-night at seven o'clock and have this matter out"—the prisoner laughed at him, and said, "All right, when you like"—at one o'clock the men were going out to dinner and the deceased came down from his workroom and said to me, "Has Smith gone out"—I said, "Yes, he has gone out"—he said, "Why did not he wait for me"—I said, "I don't know"—he said to me, "I will punch his b----head, I will b----well kill him"—at two o'clock 1 heard him say to the prisoner, "Why did not you wait at one o'clock?"—the prisoner laughed at him—the deceased said, "Come at seven o'clock," and the prisoner said, "All right"—at seven o'clock they passed out in the usual manner—I should think the prisoner was trying to avoid a fight.
WILLIAM BROWN (Police-Sergeant.) At 8.15 a.m., on February 14th, I went with Inspector Mellish to arrest the prisoner—we took him to the station—on the way, when told the charge, he said, "Very good, I did not want to fight, he forced the fight on me; in the morning he nearly strangled me by getting hold of my throat; last night when we left off work, he blew through the tube and asked if I had gone, as he wanted to fight me; there were plenty there who saw it was a fair fight"—when he was charged he said, "I had better not make a statement now."
Cross-examined. I have made inquiries about the prisoner—for 12 years 'before his present employment he was in the employment of a Mr. Alright as a driver—I do not know if he was for some years at work on This own account—he bears the character of a peaceable man.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I am very sorry anything should have happened along of two young fellows like ourselves. He called me out of my name, and that was the cause of the fight. I—wanted to shake hands and he would not."
NOT GUILTY .
MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted.
FREDERICK ANGLISS . I am a labourer, of 11, Deny Road, Edmonton—a few minutes after 5 p.m. on February 19th I—was in Telegraph Street, near Moorgate Street—I saw the prisoner and some other men come out of the Butler's Head—when they got outside, the prisoner and the deceased began fighting—the prisoner struck the first blow—after they had had several rounds the deceased said, "I am done; I will give in"—the prisoner went after him again—the deceased turned round and butted him in the stomach and threw him to the ground and fell on top of him—the deceased then got up and said again, "lam done; I will give in," and he walked off—he had gone about 15 yards when the prisoner overtook him and dealt him a terrific blow behind the right ear and knocked him down—the blow twisted him right over—he struck him from behind—when I raised the deceased's head, blood came from his nose and ears—the police were called—the prisoner did not do anything to help the deceased; he walked away—I think he was sober—the deceased was most assuredly sober—I followed the prisoner as he walked away and gave him into custody in a public house—both the men were strangers to me.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You were thrown to the ground by the deceased butting you—I did not see him catch hold of you by the legs.
EDWARD JONES . I am a plasterer, and live at 48, Aden Park Road, Shepherd's Bush—on February 19th I was working in Copthall Avenue—the deceased was working on the same job—we left work at 5 p.m. and walked down together to the Butler's Head—we went into the bar, where we found the prisoner and two or three others—the deceased said to them that the language used in the house the previous night to the barmaid was something dreadful, and ought to be put a stop to—the prisoner and the others said, "Was it any of us?" and the deceased said "No," and the prisoner called him a b----Scotchman—the deceased walked out of the bar, and the prisoner struck at him—the deceased went out, and the prisoner followed—they had three rounds, and both fell to the ground—after the third round the deceased said twice, "I am done; I am finished"—he went three steps away when the prisoner hit him a cowardly blow behind the ear—the deceased did not butt the prisoner in the stomach—they did not hit one another after the three rounds—the prisoner fell to the ground, and lay on the kerb—the blow was from behind.
Cross-examined. You struck the blow first—the deceased did not butt you in the stomach.
GEORGE SNEEZMAN . I am a clerk, and live at Ivy Lane, Brockley—the prisoner and the deceased were strangers to me—I am employed in Tokenhouse Yard, and my office overlooks Telegraph Street—on this afternoon I heard a noise in Telegraph Street—I saw the prisoner and the deceased fighting—they both fell down—the deceased said, "I am done; I have had enough"—he attempted to walk away—several men there urged the prisoner to go for him again—the prisoner rushed at him again—as the prisoner was going to strike him, he put his head down and butted him, and they both fell together—they both got up, the deceased
uppermost—he walked away about five or six yards—the prisoner went after him, and from behind dealt him a terrific blow behind the right ear—the blow was quite audible in our office—he fell directly, and his head struck the kerb.
JOHN JAMES BLOOMFIELD the elder. I am a wire worker, of 6, Acton Street, Gray's Inn Road—I know the prisoner well—on February 19th I met him in the Butler's Head, about 3.40 p.m.—the deceased came in, and said something about the barmaid having been insulted the previous night—he said: "It is a shame these men should be allowed in the bar where a barmaid was insulted"—the landlord came in, and the deceased said to him, "You ought to have cleared the men out"—the landlord said, "Mind your own business; it is nothing to do with you. I am quite qualified to look after my business. If you don't look out I shall clear you out"—the deceased went out—then the prisoner went out a few seconds afterwards—I was not one of the men who said, "Let him have it"—I went out after the prisoner, and I saw the deceased going to take his coat off—I said, "My good fellow, don't you fight; take my advice, and go home"—he said, "I can look after myself"—I did not hear what led up to the fight—I took it that there was something about the barmaid—I do not know who struck the first blow—I did not hear the deceased say anything then, I was twelve or fourteen yards away—there did not seem to be people between me and the men fighting—both men fell down—I did not see them walk away—I did not see the blow behind the ear—the last I saw was the deceased getting up.
JOHN JAMES BLOOMFIELD the younger. I am a wire worker, of 6, Acton Street, Gray's Inn Road—on February 19th, I was in the Butler's Head, about 5 o'clock, with my father—I saw the prisoner and the deceased arguing over something—as the deceased went out, he said, "Come out, I am ready for you"—I saw one round outside, and then my father called me away.
WILLIAM HADDER (449 City.) On February 19th, shortly after 5 p.m., I was in Moorgate Street—I heard a police whistle in Telegraph Street—I went there, and found the deceased lying on the ground, about twenty-five to thirty yards from the Butler's Head public house—his head was close to the kerb, and he was bleeding from the right ear and his nose—I took him on an ambulance to St. Bartholomew's Hospital—about 10 p.m. the same evening I saw the deceased detained at the station—I charged him with a violent assault—I did not arrest him—he was perfectly sober when I saw him.
RICHARD WORTHINGTON . I am house surgeon at St. Bartholomew's Hospital—on February 19th, about 6 p.m., I saw the deceased—he was in an ambulance, and was quite unconscious—there was a large swelling behind his right ear, due to blood under the skin—he was bleeding from his right ear, and he had dry blood on his nose, as if in had been bleeding—he was evidently suffering from compression of the brain—he was admitted into the hospital, and during the evening he was trepanned to see if the pressure could be relieved—we could not find any fracture to the skull before the autopsy, which we made next morning, and found that death was due to pressure on the brain—a blow may have caused the fall, but I am of opinion that the fracture of the skull was due to his fall on the kerb—the swelling behind the ear may have been caused by the blow.
Cross-examined. During the night the deceased vomited once, and the vomit smelled of whisky.
The prisoner in his defence, on oath, said, that he fought with the deceased because he said he had used bad language to the barmaid the previous night; that during the fight the deceased fell and struck his head on the kerb; that he was quite a stranger to him; that he did not want to fight, but that the deceased made him; that he did not want to hurt the man, and that he did not strike him behind the right ear from behind.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the jury. He had been convicted in 1897 of unlawfully wounding a woman. Six months' hard labour.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, March 13th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
250. WILLIAM JOSEPH WOODLEY (27), CHARLES WILLIAM HOLLINGSWORTH (21), LIONEL GREEN (32), and LEON SUKERMAN (37) , Stealing three diamond rings, two diamond and opal rings and other articles, the property of the Gordon Hotels Company, Woodley having been convicted at this Court on October 25th, 1897.
WOODLEY and HOLLINGSWORTH PLEADED GUILTY to the stealing and GREEN to receiving one ring.
MR. HUTTON, for the prosecution, offered no evidence against SUKERMAN.
NOT GUILTY . WOODLEY**. and GREEN— Twelve months' hard labour each ; HOLLINGSWORTH— Nine months' hard labour.
For the case of Emmerson Mathews, tried on this day, see Surrey cases.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, March 13th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Sergeant.
MR. MUIR for the prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. A. GILL and MR. CAMPBELL prosecuted.
THOMAS KEITH . I am employed by William Donaldson, a master carman, of Crutched Friars—I am in custody on another charge—on February 5th, I was driving a van of Mr. Donaldson's along Great Prescott Street, containing eleven chests and four half chests of tea—in Mansell Street, in consequence of a woman speaking to me, I examined my van—the tailboard was let down, and a whole case of tea was missing—I ran up Great Prescott Street, and saw a light van draw from a gateway—the prisoner Avey was driving—I pulled the flaps apart and saw my chest of tea—I caught hold of the pony's head—Avey
threw the chest of tea into the road, and said, "Now you have got your chest of tea; now go"—he jumped down and pushed me away—another man came up and struck me, and Avey jumped up in the van and drove off—I went back to where my van was standing, but it was gone—I am certain Avey had no black eye—I communicated with the police—about four days afterwards I was sent for from the station, and picked out Avey from a number of men—I am sure he is the man.
Cross-examined by Avey. The light van was about 90 yards off my van—I was away from my van ten minutes or a quarter of an hour—a woman I had left in charge of it had gone—when I identified you, you said, "Did I have this black eye"—I recognised your voice.
Re-examined. I picked Avey out, and five minutes afterwards I heard him speak.
EDWARD WEBSTER . I am a gatekeeper, employed by the London and North-Western Railway in Mansell Street, at the entrance to the goods station—on February 5th I was on duty at 4.55 p.m., and my attention was drawn to three men sitting in front of a light pony van going down Mansell Street towards Great Prescott Street—there was a stoppage in the traffic, as the road is narrow—Avey was driving; Murray was sitting by his side; and a man not in custody by the side of him, all sitting in front—the van was about 70 yards from Great Prescott Street—Murray and the other man got out opposite my gate, and walked to the corner of Great Prescott Street, and Avey drove the van in the same direction—it stopped a minute or two in Mansell Street before it turned into Great Prescott Street, when I lost sight of them—I went into a little shop and saw Murray coming towards me from Prescott Street—I purchased a pennyworth of tea, and I saw him jump on to Donaldson's van—the horses' heads were towards me, and I saw the name of Donaldson on the front of the van—it was loaded with chests of tea—no one was attending it—Murray turned the horse round and drove towards Chamber Street at a rapid pace—he was about 40 yards from the corner—I had seen Donaldson's van draw up at the corner of Swan Street, and the driver, Keith, jump off his van and go in the opposite direction towards Great Prescott Street—about 10 minutes after that I saw the three men in the light van—I could not leave my post, so I sent for the police immediately and gave them a full description of the men—I saw Keith come back with a chest of tea—on February 10th I was sent for to Leman Street Police Station, and immediately identified Murray from 12 or 13 men, as the man who drove Donaldson's van a different way—on February 13th I identified Avey as the man driving the pony van—I have not the slightest doubt.
Cross-examined by Murray. I bought my tea at a little shop at the corner of Sloane Street—in the shop I was about six or seven yards from the van—I was looking out at the window.
Cross-examined by Avey. The three men were coming from Aldgate Street towards me, and passed my gate in Mansell Street.
HENRY POTTER (302 H.) I found Donaldson's horse and van, on February 5th, about 7.45 p.m., in Oxford Street, Mile End, drawn up between two street lamps—the name in front of the van was covered over with a loin cloth—there was only tea-dust in the bottom of the van.
JOHN GILL (Police Sergeant H.) I arrested Murray on February 9th—I told him I was going to take him into custody, on suspicion of being; concerned, with three others, in stealing a horse and van, eleven chests of tea, and four half chests, in Great Prescott Street and Mansell Street, on February 5th, about 5 p.m.—he said, "Have you got anyone to identify me?"—I said, "Yes, if you are one of the men"—he replied, "All right"—on the way to the station he said, "I haven't had any work since the last affair"—on February 10th he was identified from a number of others by Webster—he said to Webster, "Are you sure it was me?"—Webster replied, "I am sure it was you"—Murray said, "If I prove where I was at work, will you swear it was me 1"—Webster replied, "Yes, I am quite sure"—Murray said, "I can prove I was not in the job"—on. February 13th Avey was charged—when he was identified by Keith, he said, "Was I dressed the same as lam now?"—Keith replied, "I believe you was, but you had a collar and tie on, with a muffler over it"—he then assumed a threatening attitude towards the witness, and said, "Did I have this black eye?"—questions were put to Webster as to the black eye and he said he did not notice it.
Cross-examined by Avey. We are looking for the third man—you came to the station and asked why the police had been to your house—I found you there.
Re-examined. I had been looking for him since the robbery.
CHARLEY SMITH (Policeman H.) I was with Sergeant Gill when he arrested Murray on February 9th, at 9 a.m. in bed—Gill told him that he should arrest him on suspicion, for being concerned with two others, in stealing a horse and van containing eleven chests and four half-chests of tea, at Mansell Street and Great Prescott Street, on February 5th—he said, "Have you got anyone to identify me"—Gill said, "Yes"—he said, "All right"—on the way to the station, he said, "I have not had any work since the last affair, I can prove I was not in the job"—he was placed with nine others at the station, and identified by Webster—he said, "Are you sure it is me?"—Webster said, "I am quite sure it is you"—on February 13th Avey was charged about 9.30, and said, "I am sure I did not leave off work at four o'clock, it was either five or six o'clock; I remember the day quite well, but I do not want anyone to go to where I worked until after I am identified"—we were alone—I had seen the prisoners together on January 16th, about 10.30 a.m.
Cross-examined by Murray. I never caught you thieving—I saw you and Avey walking towards Cable Street together.
JOHN SIMMONDS . I live at 35, Bank Street—I am foreman of the Victoria Wharf, Limehouse—the prisoner Avey sometimes worked there—I produce the time-book which I keep—he is paid sixpence per hour—on February 5th he worked from 6 a.m. till 4 p.m., with one hour off for dinner.
Cross-examined by Avey. You have always done my work all right—you had a black eye on the morning of the 6th.
ROSE GINBURG . I live at 35, Langdale Street—I am a barmaid at the Sir John Falstaff public house, Windmill Street, King's Road—there was a wedding party there on the night of February 5th—Avey came in between 7 and 7.30, and remained till 11 p.m., when he had a quarrel with a man—they both got black eyes.
Cross-examined by Avey. You had a short coat, no overcoat, no collar or tie, but a blue handkerchief round your neck—your missis came, and you went away together.
FREDERICK WENSLEY (Police Sergeant H.) On February 13th Avey came to the station, about 9 a.m., and said, "My sister Sarah tells me that Mr. Gill and Mr. Smith have been to my house this morning, I have come to see what it is for"—I said, "Two police officers have been to your house this morning for the purpose of arresting you for being concerned with Murray and another man in stealing a van-load of tea in Mansell Street, on Wednesday 5th"—he said, "I told my missis I expected that that was what it was for; the Sun man came to my house and told me Murray was locked up"—a reporter I suppose he meant—I told him I knew it—he said, "I can prove I was at work on that day at the Victoria Wharf, Limehouse; I left off work at five or six in the evening, and was paid 5s. 9d.; I was there in my own name, and I have been there this morning, but could not get on; I do not want you to go to the place till I am identified"—about 10 the same morning he was placed with nine others of similar build and dress—he was asked by Inspector Divall if he was satisfied, and he replied, "Yes"—Webster and Keith then came in and identified him without hesitation—Avey said, "They have been told to do this; I want you to go to Mr. Simmonds, and he will tell you that I was at work on this day"—after an interview with Simmonds, I told Avey I had seen Simmonds, who had showed me the day book, showing that he had left off work at four o'clock on that day, and that he came to work on Thursday or Friday with a black eye—Avey said, "Yes, I got it on Wednesday night, after having a fight"—at Avey's request, I took down this statement, which he signed: "George Avey, aged 26, labourer, 13, Havering Street, Commercial Road, E., says: I am not sure whether it was 4 p.m. or 5 p.m. when I left off work on Wednesday 5th inst., but I went straight home. I lit the fire, and sent my daughter, Katherine, to the butcher's for some meat; my missis came home and saw me with my boots cleaned; she asked me where I was going; I said I believed I was going to the Paragon; I said 'If you like, you can come with me'; she said, 'Can you afford it?'; I said, 'If you can give me your odd 4d. I might be able to go'; she said she did not think she could afford it; I said, 'I shall alter my mind, and go round to Abbes and see how the wedding party is going on, and you had better come later on; I then went to this place, the Sir John Falstaff beer-house, Langdale Street, arriving there between 6 and 7 p.m. and met Mike, Murphy and Natty Bensuson in the tap-room; I asked Mike if he had been at work; he replied, 'I have been ill for two days and could not go'; I treated him and his mate to a drink; and had one myself—I was not wearing a collar and tie on the night in question—I stayed in the public house till about 10 p.m., and left the house with my missis."
Cross-examined by Avey. I did not go to Peter O'Brien's house—another detective went to arrest him and he is still wanted—the police
have been told many places where he may be found but have been unable to find him, or he would be with you here.
Re-examined. I have seen the prisoners and O'Brien together—Avey and O'Brien have been constant companions—I have seen Murray with them at a recent date.
Murray, in his defence, stated on oath that he was not near the robbery, but was miles away at the West End, and witnesses who were with him, that night had promised to come and give evidence for him, but they did not answer.
Avey, in his defence, said that he was at work that day and was not at the robbery; and called:—
HESTER GREENHILL . I live at 15, James Place, Davenport Street, the Cable Street, and near Liverpool Street—I am single—I lived with Avey and looked after his two children, aged nine and seven, at 13, Havering Street, up to the time of his arrest—on the night of the robbery, February 5th, I came home about 4.50—Avey was cleaning his boots, and I asked him what he was cleaning his boots for—he said "I am going to take you to the Paragon "; that is the play house—I said I did not want to go, as I had been washing, so he said he would go down to the little public-house, the Falstaff, at the corner of Langdale Street—he did not go out' till 6.45 to the Falstaff; because he stopped to have his tea, and he waited there till I went to him, and we stayed till 11 o'clock, when he, and another man, had a fight, and then the beer-house was going to shut.
Cross-examined. The landlady opened the door to him about 4.40, and he opened it to me 10 minutes after—I saw Murray in the beer shop a decent while ago with Avey—I am out all day washing, and did not hear of Murray's arrest till Avey told me in the evening or the next day—then the detectives came and looked under the bed and out at the back window, and asked the landlady if there was any back way for Avey to get out at—then Avey went to Lime Street and asked what they wanted him for—the detective told me that he was on suspicion, but not about the robbery—I know it now—I knew it first when I went to see him at Holloway within a week of his arrest—I know he was at work on the Tuesday and Wednesday, because I gave the landlady 5s. 6d., and his little cousin who keeps the beer shop was married on February 5th, and he went there and got a black eye, which he had not when he came home about 5 p.m.—if he said that he had got the black eye at the time of the robbery it would not be true—I was outside the police court waiting to be a witness—the landlady was called, but was not there to answer.
HESTER KLYNE . I live at 15, James Street—I opened the door to Avey about 4.40 p.m. on February 5th—on that day I received Is. from his little girl—I know the time, because I serve the tea at 4.30—it was a good while after when he left the house, because I heard him go to the back—I am sure he was at home at 5 p.m.
Cross-examined. Avey as a rule came home about five, but I do not trouble to watch when lodgers go in and out—Mansell Street is about twenty minutes walk from Havering Street.
GUILTY .—AVEY then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Clerkenwell on June 23rd, 1898. Four other convictions were proved
against him, and he was stated to be an associate of thieves. Five years' penal servitude. MURRAY— Twelve months' hard labour.
OLD COURT.—Friday, March 14th, 1902.
Before Mr. Justice Grantham.
253. HENRY RUSSELL (47), and ANNIE RUSSELL (34) , having the care and custody of Beatrice Rendall, a girl under the age of 18, did wilfully neglect her in a manner likely to cause her unnecessary suffering and injury to her health.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
ALICE THURLBORN . I live at 6, Shamrock Passage, Cambridge—I have known the female prisoner for seven years—I took charge of her child for her about seven years ago, it was then six or seven months old—the prisoner was then living in London, I believe she was a cook—she found the clothing for the child, and I fed it and kept it—on October 24th I went to the Relieving officer at Cambridge, because the prisoner got so terribly in my debt—she owed me £2 11s., and I could not afford to keep the child, which was then in perfectly good health, and had been attending school up to October 23rd—I communicated with the prisoner that I was going to give the child up—I have not seen it since October 24th.
Cross-examined by the female prisoner. The child had its bath every week and a change of clean clothing.
EMMA WALKER . I am the wife of George Walker, Relieving officer at Cambridge—on October 24th I received the child Beatrice Rendall from the last witness—it was a nice, healthy, clean child, seven years old—I brought it to London that day and handed it over to the female prisoner.
ANNIE SAUNDERS . I am the wife of Arthur Saunders, a handy man in the decorating line, and live at 14, Redcar Street—the prisoners have lived next door to me—I have known the male prisoner for two years—he married the female prisoner nine months ago, and they both lived next door to me—he is a carpenter—he was a widower with two boys—I saw the little girl Beatrice on Saturday, October 26th, in a shed about 8.30 or 9 a.m., she was a very healthy looking child—I saw her again about the middle of November, she looked as if she was being kept down, but healthy—I next saw her on February 11th when I went with the Officer,—I had never seen her playing about outside or coming out of the house at all—on February 11th the man next door knocked at my door and I saw Inspector Welby in the prisoners' house—I saw the child behind the parlour door, and her state nearly sent me into hysterics—she looked a skeleton—the officer was supporting her with one hand, and he held up her chemise with the other—I saw a bed on the floor—I did not examine it—it looked like a parcel of black rags.
HARRIETT DUKE . I am the wife of William Duke, a carpenter, of 15, Redcar Street—I have known the male prisoner about 15 years—I remember when he married the female prisoner—she was a stranger to me—I remember Beatrice coming about October—she was very clean then and in good condition—I live upstairs in the same house as the prisoners—I noticed that the child got very thin during the next three or four months—I never saw her running about the house, and she never
went out—I saw her three times in four months—she never made any complaint—the mother was a stranger to me, and I never spoke to her—I saw the child on February 11th when the Inspector came—she looked very thin and very dirty.
Cross-examined by the female prisoner. I do not know that my little niece took your child out three times.
Cross-examined by the male prisoner. You and your first wife were very great friends, but you cannot get on with this one—I speak very highly of you.
By the COURT. I do not know what time he went to work—he came home about five—during the last three months he has been out of work because he was ill.
JAMES WELBY (Inspector N.S.P.C.C.) On February 11th I went to 15, Redcar Street—the female prisoner opened the door—I said, "I have come to see a little girl who is said to have been here four months and who has not attended school, is she here now?"—she said, "Yes," and took me towards the parlour door—I followed her, and behind the door I saw what appeared to be a human form covered over and lying down on the floor—I said, "Is this the child?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "Is she awake?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "Is she ill?"—she said, "No, she is ailing to-day"—I said, "Can she get up?"—she said, "Oh yes, she can get up"—then she said, "Get up, Beaty," in a harsh manner—the child partly uncovered its head—I went towards it, uncovered it, and saw it was in a weak, sickly-looking condition, and its face pale and white—I took hold of her to assist her up—she had on only a chemise, which was black with dirt—I lifted her chemise, and found her in a very thin, emaciated condition; in fact, nothing but skin and bone—the bedclothes consisted of an old piece of sheet, an old piece of blanket, both of which were perished, and the top covering was a piece of glazed window blind—the child's back, loins, stomach and private parts were all brown with dirt, and her skin was rough from it—there was vermin in her head—her hair had been recently cut, but there was vermin still in it—I got her some hot milk, which she took very ravenously indeed—the female prisoner was very well dressed—I pointed out the child's condition to her—she said, "When I was married to my husband he did not know of the existence of the child, who was then out at a nurse at Cambridge. I was unable to keep up the payments, and on October 24th the child was returned to me. She first was laid on the couch to sleep; we found the couch became verminous, as also did I and my baby. My husband said she was not to lay there any more, but I was to lay her on the floor, and she has been laying there, and not been dressed since Christmas, or just after Christmas, as she has no stockings, and I have not been able to buy her any"—I said, "What about her thin condition?"—she said, "Well, I have been sending her food in by my husband's little boy, and a fortnight ago the boy told me he had eaten the food himself instead of giving it to the child"—she meant sending the food in from the kitchen where they lived—the male prisoner came in then—he was very well dressed in working clothes—I said to him, "What do you say about the condition of this child?"—he said, "Well you know, I did not know anything about this child's existence when I married, so you
can see how it is; we have had words about her, and her presence here is objectionable"—the prisoners slept in the back parlour, and the male prisoner's two boys, aged 13 and 14, slept in the room with this girl—the male prisoner also said he had been ill for some weeks up to three weeks before my visit—I got a constable, and had the child removed to the workhouse in a cab.
WILLIAM JAKE (693 J.) I went with Inspector Welby to 15, Redcar Street—the child was being dressed—I took it to the workhouse—I heard the description of the child given by the Inspector at the police court—I agree with that.
WALTER DUNLOP . I am medical officer at the St. Pancras Infirmary—this child was admitted on February 11th—she was about seven years old—I examined her at once—she was emaciated, and weighed 2 stone ¼ lb., about half the normal weight for that age—there was no organic disease to account for her condition—the surface of the body, especially the abdomen and the back, was coated with dead skin and dirt, owing to want of cleanliness and washing—ordinary washing would have kept that clean—on several prominences of the spine there were abrasions caused through her lying too long in a recumbent position—there were sores on the lips, and a discharge from the nostrils—her hair was verminous—if she was kept in a room for six weeks or two months, that would cause injury to her health—that would account for the symptoms I noticed—when she first came to us she could not walk alone, and was in a tottering condition—she took food ravenously at first—she has improved now, and within the first week gained 3lbs.—in my opinion her condition was caused simply from want of food, and not from inability to take it.
Cross-examined by the male prisoner. She is now at the North Western Hospital—it is doubtful whether she has now a sore throat of a diphtheric nature, or only a sore throat, but it was probably produced through the insanitary condition in which she lived.
The male prisoner, in his defence, said that he did not know anything about the child till he was married; that the child was fed while he was about, and that his wife told him she washed it; that he was in bed for nine weeks with an ulcerated leg, and had not seen the child for some weeks; and that it was dirty in its habits.
The female prisoner, in her defence on oath, said that the child was dirty, and her skin yellow and rough when she came to her; that she had the same food as the rest of the family; that the boy said he had eaten some if it, but that she did not know if it was true; that she bathed her on February 1st, and that she was up to dinner with the rest, that night.
DR. DUNLOP (Re-examined), The child is quite clean in her habits.
HENRY RUSSELL— NOT GUILTY ;
ANNIE RUSSELL— GUILTY .
Twelve months' hard labour.
MR. BLACKNELL Prosecuted.
ALEXANDER HOW (N.R. 4.) On February 16th, about 10.30 p.m., the prisoner came into the police station, and said, "I wish to give myself up for setting fire to Messrs. Meyers' premises last night"—I said, "Be careful what you say, as what you say I shall take down in writing, and it will be used in evidence against you"—he then made this statement, which I wrote down, and read over to him; he put his mark to it, and I witnessed it (Read)—"I have been in the employ of Messrs. Meyers & Co., horse hair manufacturers, 752, High Road, Tottenham, for the past eighteen months, and on Friday last (the 14th inst.) I was discharged without a moment's notice. I was employed as a hair-drawer. I afterwards tried to get work elsewhere, and was unable to do so, and on Saturday night, the 15th inst., I took it into my head to set light to the premises. I went to an oil shop in High Cross, Tottenham, and purchased a pint of paraffin oil; this was about 9.30 p.m. I then went to Messrs. Meyers premises. I gained access from Paxton Road to the premises. I was unable to enter the workshop, and I spilt the oil underneath the door, and then set light to it. I then went to a lodging house, off White Hart Lane, and slept there for the night. I have been treated badly, and have done it out of spite."
By the JURY. There was no loss of life.
FRANCIS CHARLES ALLEY . I am a horse-hair manufacturer, one of the firm of Meyer & Co., of 752, High Road, Tottenham—I have known the prisoner a number of years—he was apprenticed to my father—he has been working for the firm for about 18 months—he was discharged on February 14th—I had spoken to him repeatedly before that—he had taken to drink, and about a month before that I was forced to discharge him—I told him if he did not alter I should have to discharge him—he said, "Give me another chance, and I won't drink any more"—he went from bad to worse—I gave him a month's notice, and he left on the 14th—on the evening of the 15th I saw him in the street—he asked me for 2s. 6d.—I said the firm had paid more than was due to him, but if he mended his ways I would try and get him back—he said, in an abrupt manner, "All right, we will see"—I left him, and went home—about midnight I went to the factory, and found it was burned down—the damage comes to between £1500 and £2000.
DR. JAMES SCOTT . The prisoner has been under my observation, while he has been in prison, since February 27th—at first he appeared of weak mind, but showed no insanity—he gave a pretty clear account of the circumstances connected with this charge—during the last few days he has been very depressed and nervous, and in the condition he is in now—he is reported to have had a fit the day before yesterday—I did not see it, but its character was rather doubtful—he did not appear to be insane until some time after he came into custody.
GUILTY . Five years' penal servitude.
MR. CAMPBELL Prosecuted, and MR. ABINGER Defended.
MARY HAROLD . I am the wife of Charles Harold—we occupy two rooms on the first floor and one room on the second floor at 115, Cable Street—the prisoner and his wife occupied the second floor front room—the prisoner is a coal carman, and his wife was a paper sorter—on Saturday, February 22nd, they did not go to work because they overslept themselves—in the morning the deceased was doing her house work—she went out about 4 p.m.—she came back at 5 p.m.—she came into my room, and went out again a few minutes afterwards—I heard the prisoner and the deceased come in together about 6.30 or 6.45—they went upstairs to their room—I went into my downstairs room and closed the door—there was a confused noise in their room, it sounded like crockery smashing—it went on for half an hour or 20 minutes—then the prisoner came downstairs—he said to me, "Look at my head and my elbow"—they were both bleeding—I said, "Come upstairs, I have a kettle of boiling water and I will bathe it"—He said, "I wish I was dead," and closed the door—he said he was going to the doctor's, and he went away—I went out and returned about 8.40—my little girl said something to me, and I went up to the prisoner's room—I went into the room—there were some broken dishes—the deceased laid with her head to the cupboard door by the window, and her feet to the bedstead—she was quite dead, and her body quite cold—I said, "Mrs. Abel, Mrs. Abell"—there was no answer, and I told my little girl to call the landlady—she could not come up, and a policeman was sent for.
Cross-examined. I have known the prisoner and his wife about two years—I believe he was in constant employment—his wife was not in work at this time—they both used to drink—I do not know if the prisoner complained of his wife drinking—I do not know if he came home day after day and found his wife in the public-house—the deceased told me she had been to meet her husband on the afternoon of February 22nd—I am sure she had not been drinking—I did not say at the police court "I cannot say if she had had some drink"—when I went up to the room there were no signs of a struggle except the broken crockery; the chairs and the table were not overturned—I did not move anything in the room—there is a fender there and a hearth-rug—the deceased was lying on her back between the hearth-rug and the chair bed—her arms were straight down by her side—there was no crockery near her head—I did not see a broken tobacco jar, I saw some broken glass dishes—I did not see the prisoner come home.
DR GEORGE ANDERSON . About 7.45 p.m. on February 22nd I attended to the prisoner—he had two incised wounds on the left side of his head he said he had quarrelled with his wife, and that she had thrown a sugar basin at him—he begged me not to put a bandage round his head, so I simply strapped his head, and he went away.
Cross-examined. I think that the wounds were done with two blows—they were about 1 1/2 inches to 1 1/4 inches long—they were superficial, but bleeding profusely—he showed me a wound on his elbow—I did not dress it.
BERTRAM ROBERTS (474 H.) I was called to 115, Cable Street, on February 22nd, about 9 p.m.—I went up to the second floor front room, and found the deceased lying on the floor, on her back, leaning up against a cupboard, apparently dead—I did not move the body—her head was about 1 1/4 feet from the fender—there was a quantity of broken crockery and glass on the floor.
Cross-examined. The body was lying with the arms extended, the feet closed, and the head back—I should not expect to find a woman who had been suddenly knocked down in such a position—I did not examine the fender.
FRANK WENSLEY (Police Sergeant H.) I was called to 115, Cable Street, about 9 p.m. on February 22nd—I went upstairs to where the body was lying—I found some crockery ware on the floor—the deceased was lying on the floor with her head against the cupboard, and her feet towards the bed—her head was about 18 inches from the fireplace—I did not move the body—I had gone there with a doctor and Inspector Dival—later in the evening I returned to the house; the prisoner came in—I said to him, "We are police officers, and are going to arrest you on suspicion of having murdered your wife this evening"—he said, "She has got up a row because I have not been to work, and threw a sugar basin and saucer at me, cutting my head, I pushed her away, that is all I know"—the crockery consisted of a sugar basin, a butter dish, and a plate—the butter dish had the appearance of having been pulled off the table by the tablecloth—there was an impression of it upon the butter.
Cross-examined. Roberts was there before me—I have not got the pieces of the butter dish here,—I did not think it necessary to bring them—the glass was fairly thick—a glass sugar basin was also broken—that was fairly thick glass—there was a broken plate—I did not see a broken tobacco jar—I arrested the prisoner about 12.30 midnight—I was inside the house—he walked in, and I arrested him.
THOMAS JONES . I am surgeon for the A Division of police—I was summoned to 115, Cable Street, on February 22nd, about 9.45—I went up to the second floor front room—I found the deceased lying on the floor flat on her back, her arms by her side, the right hand slightly flexed over the stomach, her face inclined towards the fender, her feet were straight out towards the bedstead, and her head was a few inches from the cupboard, and about 18 inches from the fender—blood was oozing from her mouth and nose—there was a wound on her chin on the left side—it was crescentic in shape, and about three-quarters of an inch long—the outside skin of the wound was on a lower level to the inside of the wound, which penetrated the lip into the mouth—a hard blunt substance suddenly used with violence would have caused it—on the back I found a large bruise to the left of the spine about three inches long and 2 1/2 inches wide, the blood having extravasated—I held a postmortem on February 25th—I opened the brain cavity—there was slight congestion on the surface—the substance of the brain was healthy—both ventricles were filled with blood clots, and there was a good deal of extravasation of blood on the base of the brain—there was no fracture of bones—the hemorrhage occurred from the laceration of a large number of small blood vessels—there was nothing to indicate any disease
of the arteries—I think the laceration of the vessels of the brain was due to a direct blow—there was no scalp wound—I think death had taken place two or three hours before I saw the woman.
Cross-examined. The wound on the chin was just below the teeth—no teeth were knocked out—there was extravasation of blood near the jaw bone, and a slight swelling—she had slight congestion of the right lung, of new standing—her liver was healthy—if she fell down on the corner of a fender or a cupboard, that might cause the shock and compression to the brain—I am quite sure the blow was not dealt with a knife—I noticed the fender in the room—its edge was sharp—the body could not have fallen in the position it was found—the table was not overturned, and I think the tablecloth was on it.
AUGUSTUS PEPPFR , F.R.C.S. I reside at 13, Wimpole Street—I examined the deceased's body on March 5th—a post-mortem had already been made—the body was that of a well-nourished, muscular woman, not very stout, but healthy—there was no disease of the internal organs—the lungs were extended and congested—that would be from the mode of dying—they were gorged with blood—there was an injury to the left side of the lower jaw—the first part was simply an abrasion on the lower margin of the jaw—it was seven-eighths of an inch long, and continuous with it was a lacerated wound, half an inch long, which went through the lip into the mouth at a higher level, and it was slightly curved—the jaw was not broken and the teeth were not loosened—I found that the blood vessels of the brain and the brain substance were healthy—there had been marked hemorrhage into the cavities of the brain, and on the surface and underneath the brain—the hemorrhage was from hundreds of thousands of small vessels—it was a swamp, the patient would become immediately unconscious, and probably be dead in two or three minutes—I believe the wound on the jaw was due to some blunt substance striking the jaw in an oblique direction—in my opinion, the body was flat on its back when that injury was caused—I have no doubt that the laceration of the vessels in the brain was due to the impact of the head with great fore against the floor—there was blood smeared on the floor in the middle, where the back of the head would lie—the patch was 11 inches across, and about 11 inches from the fender, which had a sharpish edge, and very sharp at the angle—the corners projected from the margin of the fender, and were quite sharp.
Cross-examined. I think the blow was delivered whilst the woman was on the floor—the wound was not directly opposite the jaw, and it was in a slanting direction—if a man got a black eye or was hit with a hammer, I could not say if he was sitting in a chair or standing up—I have never seen a wound like this which could be caused in any position except in a flat one.
THOMAS DIVAL (Police inspector H.) I went to this house on the night of the 22nd—on the 23rd I charged the prisoner with the murder of his wife—I said, "I will charge you with wilfully murdering, on the 22nd inst., your wife, Elizabeth"—he said, "My wife threw a sugar basin at me and I walked out and left her"—after the charge had been read over he said, "It is a wrong accusation"—he paused a few moments, and then said, "I won't say anything about it."
The prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that his wife took to drink eight or nine months after they were married, that she had struck him on several occasions; that on this night she came home drunk and called him names, and picked up a cup and hit him on the elbow with it; that as he was looking at the wound it caused, she hit him on the head with the sugar basin which smashed and fell on the floor; that he shoved her away; that as he was going out of the room she picked up the butter dish and hit him on the head with it, and then threw it at him and hit him again; that he shoved her away again violently; that the table went over and she fell down behind the bedstead; that he then walked out; that she called him a filthy name as he went downstairs; that when he left the room, he did not believe his wife was dead, and that he did not intend to hurt her.
Evidence for the defence.
JOHN ABEL . I am employed by the London, Tilbury, and Southend Railway—the prisoner is my brother—he has always been very quiet in his manner, and I have never seen him drunk—the deceased was a very bad-tempered woman and a very drunken woman for the last eight months; she was brought home once from the public house by a woman and a girl—on February 22nd I saw my brother, about 12.25 a.m., on Tower Hill—I asked him what was the matter at the coal wharf, he said the trouble was not at the wharf, but at home—he showed me his head, which was bleeding, and I enticed him to go home, when he was arrested.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Friday, March 14th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. GREENFIELD Prosecuted.
The evidence is unfit for publication.
Ten previous convictions were proved against ELLEN MARKS and-two against HOWARD. Three years' penal servitude each. JOHN MARKS, against whom seven previous convictions were proved, Four years' penal servitude.
MR. SANDS Prosecuted.
FRANK HENRY DUELL . I am a clerk to Walker, Parker & Co., 63, Belvidere Road, Lambeth—on November 18th a man brought me this paper, on which I have added my figures. [Headed, T. Seymour, Electrician, 118, The Grove, Hammersmith, and signed T. Seymour, specifying articles to which the prices were added.]—this is a copy of the invoice I made out—the next day the same man brought this cheque for £168s. 1d. on the National Bank, Limited, Belgravia Branch, with this type-written
letter, to deliver goods to bearer by van as per quotation—I gave him the receipted invoice, which authorised him to get his load from Bridges.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. The man was dressed in a blue Melton overcoat and velvet collar, a collar, a tie, and had a moustache, but no beard—[The prisoner had a beard.]—I do not know you—it is over three months ago—I do not think you are the man I sent to Bridges.
CHARLES BRIDGES . I am warehouseman to Walker, Parker & Co.—I received this request for a quotation, and the next day the prisoner brought a receipted invoice—another man was with him—they had a horse and van which was unsuitable for the goods, and which they did not seem to be able to manage—he had a dark blue and black overcoat and a hard bowler hat, but no beard—I booked his goods and conducted him to the office, where the carman always signs—I next saw him at Westminster police court on February 21st, and identified him from several others.
Cross-examined. I assisted you to load the lead—there are five men in my gang.
GEORGE PALMER . I am works foreman to Walker, Parker & Co.—on November 19th Bridges brought me some particulars for some lead—I made out this receipt, and passed it to the man who came to sign for the goods—he signed it—he had a blue-black overcoat, and a hard bowler hat, a dark moustache, but no beard—only his head and shoulders came in view of my window, where I passed the book out, and saw him sign "George Johnson."
THOMAS SEYMOUR . I am an electrician, of 70, Highfield Road, West Brompton—the request for a quotation, and the cheque produced, are not signed by me, nor by my authority—I never authorized anyone to use these forms on a bill head—one is not my form at all.
PERCY NILEN . I am a clerk to Brady & Co., of 352, Euston Road—I produce a cheque for £23 18s., which the prisoner brought on November 17th, with this type-written document—he had no beard—I supplied him with goods—the cheque was returned as it is, from my bank—I identified the prisoner, on November 21st, at Westminster police court.
Cross-examined. You had an overcoat, and a moustache—I did not take your signature, we do not when goods are paid for.
ALFRED POTTER . I am warehouseman to Brady & Co.—on November 7th I helped the prisoner to load some zinc—I identified him at Westminster police court on February 21st as the man I served. Cross-examined. I know you by your face and expression.
CHARLES MYALL . I am clerk to Alfred Goslett & Co., Limited, of 127, Charing Cross Road—the prisoner, in November, brought me this cheque for £71, and this type-written order, and I directed Borer to deliver goods to him—the cheque was returned from the bank as it is—I cannot swear to him.
Cross-examined. I know Pearson, of old Compton Street—he is a customer—I do not recognize you—we deal with a good many little firms—you may have been in our place, and given orders for goods.
Cross-examined. You had a moustache—I do not recollect how you were dressed, or about the beard, or serving you-with piping—I will swear I have never seen you in our place before, and that I had only seen you on November 22nd until I had identified you.
Cross-examined. I saw you at the "World's End, when I was going to Poulton Street—in June you were in business in the King's Road as an electrical engineer, and you had everything on your board—a lamp was brought to me to be repaired, which was passed to my father—Timmis took it back—I have no spite against you.
FREDERICK SAWYER WINSER . I am a sanitary engineer, one of the firm of "Winser & Co.—these three cheques were stolen from me—I gave no authority to the prisoner to pass them, nor to anyone to sign them.
Cross-examined. I told you what the charges were—I have not known you three years—you were in business in Chelsea last summer as a plumber and gasfitter, then I lost sight of you till you were in custody—the landlord of the World's End public house knows you had no beard—your wife told me you were clean shaven in November.
Evidence for the defence.
ELIZA PLATS . I live at 81, Bridge Road, Battersea—the prisoner is my husband—his name is Walter Plats—he took the name of Wilson in business—I was living with him in November at 81, Bridge Road—his beard was always as it is now—he went to the barber's occasionally to have his cheek bones shaved and his neck made tidy.
Cross-examined. Bedford came to search my room—he asked if my husband ever shaved—I knew you must mind what you say to a detective, and I said yes, he went occasionally to a barber to get his cheek bones shaved and his beard trimmed.
GERTRUDE BAYLIS . I live at 81, Bridge Road, Battersea—the prisoner has lived in my house since September 23rd—he dressed as he is now—I saw him in a brown overcoat once or twice—he wore that hat—I never saw him go out in another hat—he has worn a beard since I have known him—I have seen him three or four times a day, but always with a beard.
Cross-examined. The prisoner and his wife lodged in the two top rooms—I never noticed his beard before trimmed or different—I knew him as Plats.
WILLIAM AYRES . I keep a boot shop at 613, Fulham Road, Putney—my son and I have a shop at 312, King's Road—I knew you in business before you left the King's Road, about 18 months ago—I have been in your place hundreds of times, five or six times a day—on November 16th or 17th you came for a reference for a shop you took—you had a brown overcoat, a nicked hat, and a beard—I never saw you without a beard.
Cross-examined. I knew him intimately, because he was a neighbour—his wife asked me if I would give him a character—I did not know he was
in custody—I sent a post-card to say I would—I know Timmis is in business in the King's Road—I do not know him personally.
CHARLOTTE TURTON . I live at 4, Davis Place, Cheyne Walk—I have seen you wear this hat—I have known you about three years in Chelsea—I have never seen you without a moustache or beard—you were a frequent visitor to see my boys and my husband.
Cross-examined. I lived next door but one to him in October—he left sixteen or eighteen months ago—Mrs. Plats asked me to give evidence—his beard may have been a little more close sometimes.
The prisoner added in defence that this was a spiteful plot, and that he was not the man who forged or uttered the cheques, though he had bought goods honestly, and signed for them in the name of Green.
NOT GUILTY .
FOURTH COURT.—Friday, March 14th, 1902.
Before Alexander Rentoul, Esq., K.C.
MR. MUIR and MR. H. LEYCESTER Prosecuted, MR. ELLIOT and MR. LAMON appeared for David Davies, and MR. FITCH for Robert Davits.
WILLIAM HUEY . I am clerk to Messrs. Clark & Charles, estate agents, of Harrow—in July last I let Strasleigh, St. Kildare Road, Harrow, to David Davies—references were obtained—I produce the answers I got, and on the strength of them the house was let—the rent was paid fairly well for some time—the premises are now empty—I think David Davies went out of possession some time in November, but am not sure—at that time I had no knowledge of any person named Thomas living at the house.
Cross-examined by MR. LAMON. I think David Davies went into possession about the end of July, 1900—he was a fairly desirable tenant—Mr. Clark did not sign the agreement, as a matter of fact.
THOMAS POCKLINGTON . I live at Oldfield House, Acton Vale, and am the owner of a shop at 5, Beaconsfield Road, Kensington—in January those premises were empty—they were fitted up as a coffee shop—David Davies called upon me the day after I advertised them, and I agreed to let them if his references were satisfactory—I think the previous tenant used them as a coffee shop, or restaurant—they had been empty about six months—one of the references was Mr. Thomas, Strasleigh, St. Kildare Road, Harrow; and one, Mr. Jones, Harlesden—David said he was a tenant of Mr. Thomas, 27, Cloth Fair, Smithfield—I wrote to both and got answers, but Mr. Jones' answer I cannot find—they were both satisfactory, or I should not have let the shop—I got the cote produced from David Davies—on February 8th this agreement was executed at my house—I executed a counterpart of it, which David took away—the rent was £65 a year, payable monthly, on a three years agreement—at the end of the first month David called on me, and said he was unable to open the place, and I waived the month's rent, and charged him a week's rent, for which I gave him a receipt, dated March 13th—the next month's rent was paid, but none after that—I called at the premises, and found nobody there—
afterwards I found Mr. Hill in possession—I cannot say the date—I wrote numerous letters to David Davies, at Cloth Fair, but got no reply—I believe my clerk called there—I could not trace David, and I forcibly took possession—the rent due was not paid, three or four months, I think—I could not get it from the tenant who took the premises from David, because he was not my tenant.
Cross-examined by MR. LAMON. The place was in very good repair when David took it—I told him I had no objection to a lift being put in, as long as it did not interfere with the construction of the premises—I might have promised to do two or three rooms up, but no repairs—that was not why the rent was not paid—I never saw Robert Davies.
CHARLES FREDERICK LANSDALL . I am a glass merchant, of 24, Shepherdess Walk, City Road, and the owner of 27, Cloth Fair, which I let to David Davies by this agreement of September 22nd, 1900—H. C. Thomas, of Strasleigh, St. Kildare Road, Harrow, was not the owner of 27, Cloth Fair—I knew no such person in connection with the place at all.
Cross-examined by MR. LAMON. I believe 27, Cloth Fair, was a coffee house when I bought it—I bought it when it was shut up—I found David a good tenant—he always paid his rent regularly—I gave him several references.
OCTAVE LAFFINEUR . I keep the shop 27, Cloth Fair, which I took on January 14th, 1901, from David Davies—this is the agreement (Produced)—he told me he was a farmer living in Northamptonshire, and the shop was doing about £17 a week, and that he used to charge 6d. for dinner, but I found it was 4d., and that the takings on the average were about £12 a week—I paid £85 for the business—I am there still, and have managed to work up a better business—I paid the rent every month to David Davies—he asked me to allow him to have letters addressed there, and he had three or four, and sometimes more, a week—that lasted till last October—I did not know his real address at the time—I never knew Robert Davies.
ERNEST HILL . I am a coffee house keeper—in January last I advertised in the Chronicle for a coffee house—David called upon me and offered me the shop at 5, Beaconsfield Terrace, West Kensington—I entered into an agreement with him, dated February 13th—on February 8th I paid £1 deposit—this is the receipt I got for it from David—I saw him write it—I paid £11 besides the £1—David was to supply the utensils, but never did so—I only kept open three days, as I had no utensils—I found him at 85, Upper Ground Street, and he told me if I could find another tenant he would give me back my deposit, and if I could not I was to do the best I could—I could not find a tenant, and did not get my deposit back—I paid no rent—on April 8th I gave him up the key.
Cross-examined by MR. FITCH. There was no inventory—I took about eighteenpence—I had sufficient utensils for that, but I expected to do more trade—that was using my own utensils—I knew there was no trade at the time, and that I had to start it.
I got a letter from David Davies, but it is in Robert's writing, and dated from 67, Upper Ground Street, Blackfriars—after receiving it, David called upon me, and said that he was looking out for a shop, that he had other coffee shops in the city, one at Upper Ground Street, which he had had for six months, and paid a couple of hundred pounds rent, and another at Cloth Fair, which he had had two or three years, paying £45or £50 rent; he wished to remove to a better locality with his wife and family, and that this place suited him—I asked for references, and he gave me two or three—this is a note I sent him—he told me Charles Thomas was the landlord of some premises he had had for a number of years at Willesden—the references were written to, and I got three replies, one from Charles Thomas, Strasleigh, St. Kildare Road, Harrow; one from R. Davies, 91, Princess Road, Notting Hill; and one from Mr. Jones, of 1, Hosier Lane—in consequence of those, I let the premises to him under the agreement dated June 3rd, at a rental of £55—I had many other people applying for the premises, who offered a premium, but I chose him in consequence of those references, because I thought him a most desirable tenant, and the premium was waived—I afterwards called at the premises and found David Davies there—and a couple of females attending one or two people—he stayed there under three months—after that I found a servant there, or some one he had sub-let it to—in September I accepted another tenant, Mr. Dyer—I saw Dyer pay him some money—I did not see the money counted, but I understood it was £95—Dyer paid the rent then due, and that was the only rent I got up to the time Dyer went in, so that I had no rent from Davies—I do not remember at this moment who actually paid, they were both there, and the money was handled between them—it came out of Dyer's pocket.
Cross-examined by MR. FITCH. Dyer was taking over the business, and I was present when the exchange took place—probably it was out of the money Dyer paid that the rent was paid me—Dyer is still carrying on the business, and as far as I know it is a good business.
WILLIAM HAMMON DEVENISH . I am a solicitor, and one of the firm of Ponsford and Devenish, 13 and 14, Walbrook—Amelia Henrietta Merry-weather is a client of mine—she is the owner of the shop and premises 9, Broadway, Barnes, which has always been used as a milk shop—on June 4th Robert Davies called upon me and discussed taking the premises—I made a note of the references he gave me and the particulars—the references were Mr. Thomas, Strasleigh, St. Kildare Road, Harrow, and Mr. Jones, 10, Wilton Road, West Kensington—I wrote to them that night and got a reply by post from Jones the following morning—I also got a reply from Thomas—Robert Davis afterwards called on me, and I said his references were in order and that I would prepare an agreement—I got Miss Merry weather to execute an agreement, which I posted to him, which he signed on June 10th and returned to me—on the same day I posted the counterpart to Miss Merry weather, which I got back on June 12th, and I identify her signature—that was done on my advice—I should certainly not have let the premises if I had not believed the references to be genuine—the first rent, which was payable quarterly, became payable on September 29th,
—I had reason to believe it would not be paid, and I received instructions for a distress to be put in the day after—I got a letter from Robert dated October 22nd—it took the brokers three weeks to get in—they got in on October 28th—the next day he called and asked me to remove the man in possession—I said I would remove the man when he made some payment, not otherwise—he made no payment on that day—this receipt is in my managing clerk's writing, it is for £3 which was received—I got further promises of payment by letter, but I got no more rent—I have got possession of the premises now, but not until after the arrest—he had done no repairs; on the contrary, the shop shewed the appearance of wilful damage, glass broken, and many doors taken off the hinges.
Cross-examined. I have not mentioned wilful damage before, because I did not know of it until I took possession—I am not prepared to say how long the premises were vacant before the prisoner took them—he was to put in new fittings and fixtures—I think it would have cost him £35 to properly equip the shop—£35 was allowed off the first year's rent for that—I am two quarter's rent out of pocket.
THOMAS HENRY GURRIN . I am an expert in handwriting, and have given evidence in courts of justice for the last seventeen years, and am employed by various public departments—I have examined the various exhibits produced to me—Nos. 2 and 30 are in David Davies' writing—in No. 51 the signature "R. Davies" is in Robert Davies' writing—the letter signed "H. Hill "is Robert Davies'—the letter to Mr. MacEachran signed "D. Davies" is in Robert Davies' writing—the letter dated from Strasleigh signed "C. Thomas," giving a reference to David, is David Davies' writing, but certainly not in his natural writing—Exhibit 60, signed "R. Davies," is in Robert Davies' writing—Exhibit 63 is David's writing—the lettter signed "C. Thomas" Exhibit 50, is David's writing.
Cross-examined. Different pens being used are not sufficient to account for the differences—I admit that if a man was ill or suffering from extreme nervousness it might make that difference—it is very common for people's writing to vary considerably—I do not say they are intentionally disguised, but I say they are not in David's natural writing—it might be owing to ill health.
GEORGE INGLIS BOYLE . I am a messenger at the Bankruptcy Courts Carey Street—I produce the file in the bankruptcy of Robert Davies, which shows liabilities £1,337 8s. 6d. gross, and assets £20 18s. gross—he was adjudicated bankrupt March 10th, 1899—he has never received his discharge—there was a public examination, which was signed on each page in the usual way and sworn to.
Cross-examined by MR. FITCH. He did not pay 10s. in the £—no application was ever made for his discharge—proofs are placed on the file for safe custody.
ALFRED DEACON (Detective Officer.) I arrested Robert Davies at 9, Broadway, Barnes, on January 27th, as he was coming out of the house—I told him I was a police officer, and held a warrant for his arrest—I cautioned him, and he made a statement—the warrant was in connection with Clark's case—I took his statement down—he said, "I can soon get out of that, this is the first thing I did for him"—I found on him the receipt for £3.
Cross-examined by MR. FITCH. I understand that D. Davies is no relation of Robert—I believe the Mr. Jones mentioned does exist—I do not know about Mr. Tebbitt—he told me he had written a reference for Hill—I swear he did not tell me Thomas was there when he wrote the one signed "H. C. Thomas"—I have not seen Hill, but I understand there is a Mr. Hill.
ALFRED WARD (Detective Sergeant.) I have had charge of this case, and arrested David on October 30th on another charge—I found on him a number of documents—I am not sure they all refer to this case—his house is Strasleigh, St. Kildare Road, Harrow—I have made enquiries about Mr. Jones and Mr. Tebbitt.
Cross-examined by MR. FITCH. Mr. Hill was here the other day, but is missing to-day.
GUILTY .—DAVID DAVIES— One year more, hard labour (See page 336);
ROBERT DAVIES— Four months' hard labour.
MR. BYRON Prosecuted.
WALTER NAEGELY . I live with my wife at 15, Castle Street, East—I came over to this country about 1895—I had previously been clerk for three years in a merchant's office in Paris—on coming here, I was head of the bill department in the Societie General Bank, Fenchurch Street—in 1896 I unfortunately lost my father, and since that time I have had a small competence, upon which I live—I married on December 10th last, and we live at 15, Castle Street, where the prisoner lived on the floor above—I have never had any business with him—I understand his wife or daughter, I do not know which, carry on a manicure business, and there is a plate on the door—I had occasion to speak to the landlord about what was going on, and afterwards the prisoner had notice to go—on February 6th I was shown the document produced, and being satisfied that it was written by the prisoner, I applied for process against him—there is not a word of truth in the document from beginning to end—I never defrauded my employers—my wife is not known as a prostitute by the public—I pay £2 a week rent.
Cross-examined by the prisoner, I have been living on my means since my father's death—I never was rude to you, and never said you poisoned my dog—I have about £160 a year income—I know Madam Poupon—she never made any imputation on my wife—she was servant to my wife before I married.
ADELBERT HEDDUGOT . I am a tailor, at 15, Castle Street East—the prosecutor lives with his wife, on my premises, and the prisoner lived on the floor above with a woman—I do not know whether she is his wife
or daughter—there was a plate on his door with the word "Manicure" upon it—in November I received certain complaints as to what was going on there—among other people who complained was the prosecutor—I gave the prisoner notice to leave—the libel was shown to me—there there is not a word of truth that I allowed prosecutor to use his rooms as a brothel.
Cross-examined. The prosecutor pays me £2 a week rent.
ALFRED SCHOLES (Detective Sergeant D.) On February 11th I arrested the prisoner—I told him I was a police officer, and held a warrant for his arrest—he said "Oh "and asked me to allow him to read the warrant—I did, and he said, "What I have said is what Naegeley's friends told me"—he was taken to Tottenham Court Road police station, and the charge was again read over to him, and he said, "Very good"—he gave his name as Samuel Darville, and wrote it down—he gave me an address in Paris, where he said he was known as a doctor—I found on him a copy of the libel.
THOMAS HENRY GURRIN . I have seen a letter written by the prisoner, also a note made by him in the last witness's book, in pencil, and the envelope sent to Prike, and in my opinion they are all in that handwriting.
Cross-examined. I stated in my report that the libel was written in a different style to the other documents.
Re-examined. The envelope containing the libel is clearly in the prisoner's writing, also the libel, but that is not in his natural flowing hand.
Evidence for the defence.
GEORGE STEEGIR . I am a pianoforte importer—the prosecutor was a tenant of mine since July 1900, and I have never known him to do any work—I must see the prosecutor's wife before I can say that she is the same woman that I knew as Georgette Dervall.
—CLEOANTIS. I know the prosecutor—I do not know of his doing any work.
—DARVILLE. I lived at 15, Castle Street-several times during January last, sitting at the window, I have seen Georgette Dervall bring home gentlemen.
Cross-examined. I do not know Madam Naegeley, I only know Georgette Dervall.
GUILTY .—A previous conviction was proved against him.— Eight months' hard labour.
NEW COURT—Friday, March 14th, and
OLD COURT—Saturday and Monday, March 15th and 17th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
261. CHARLES FREDERICK WAY (31) , Unlawfully conspiring with Edward Barrow to defraud certain persons of their money. Other counts for concurring in making certain false statements, he being a, director of a public company.
MR. CHARLES MATHEWS and MR. A. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. DE MICHELE Defended.
HOWARD CHARLES JONES . I am a solicitor, of 85, Blackfriars Road, and am a trustee of a warehouse and premises in Surrey Road, Blackfriars, which were let on April 30th, 1901, to Edward Barrow and Charles Frederick Way, at £120 per annum—I produce the counterpart of the lease executed by them.
Cross-examined. My negociations were with Barrow and Mr. Hall—I do not think I had any interview with Way—the lease is for 7, 14 or 21 years—I never called to see whether any work was going on, nor did I go to 190, Holborn—my co-trustee made enquires as to the respectability of the parties, in consequence of which the lease was executed.
DANIEL MORGAN . I am secretary to a limited company—in March, 1901, I saw this advertisement in the Daily Telegraph. (This was for a gentleman to act as agent, who could invest£100, application to be made at 190, High Holborn.)—I went there and saw Barrow and Way—Barrow did most of the talking, but Way took part in it—they said that they were general merchants and drysalters, and that their net profits were from 50 to 200 per cent., that it was going to be turned into a limited company, and I should receive a bonus of £200 in shares or cash, or either, for my £100 invested, and receive £2 10s. a week till the company was formed, and then £5 a week under a five years agreement, and if I could appoint travellers at a lower percentage I was to receive the difference, and my money was to remain at 10 per cent., to be returned at two months notice—I said that I would consider the matter—they said they had taken premises for the factory at Surrey Road, Blackfriars—I returned about March 26th, and still wanted time to consider—on April 9th this agreement was signed between Barrow and Way and me, and I paid them £100—they both signed it—I went into the performance of my duties three weeks afterwards, on May 1st, but in the mean time I received the £2 10s. a week while I was doing nothing—there was some hitch with the landlord—there was no stock when I went in—a couple of labourers were employed there cleaning up the premises—after an interval, some corn flour came in, in May, and some permanganate of potass and salts from Holborn—the stock never exceeded £250 in value at any time—the total value of orders executed from May to August 22nd did not exceed £50—the private expenses were £8 or £9 a week for wages—as far as the manufacture of goods was concerned, there was a profit, but always a loss on the sale of them—there was no net profit, there never was a profit: I include rent and salaries—the average loss was between £20 and £30 a week for rent, taxes, and salaries, including Holborn—the turnover did not exceed £15 a month—I wrote to Barrow, at the factory, asking him to come or send—he said that he was too busy, and Mr. Way came—I told him about the unsoundness of the whole affair, and that not a—single article was being sold at a profit—he said that I was wrong, that I was in error—I said that it was absolutely impossible that they could manufacture any article if they paid their travellers 50 to 80 per cent.—(the things were hair washes, pomades, and rhubarb and castor oil, lime juice and glycerine, and that kind of thing.)—Way replied, "I am very
much worried over the matter myself, but I cannot do more than I am doing"—I pointed out to him that Mr. Barrow had much more experience, and said, "Perhaps he is deceiving you, he seems to have no more experience than I have"—I had had no previous experience of the business—he said, "I am perfectly aware of everything that is going on, Mr. Barrow never does anything without consulting me"—Mrs. Holden, the manageress, was there—from then down to August there were different interviews—Mr. Way said, "The only solution will be a limited company," and he begged me and Mrs. Holden to give him a free hand for a fortnight or three weeks, I suppose to obtain money from the public—I had written again and again for a copy of the draft prospectus, and Barrow and Way handed me this memorandum in August—it is not a prospectus—I said, "It is simply absurd to go to the public with a minimum of £100,000"—they both said I knew nothing about company matters, and Barrow said that he had floated nineteen or twenty companies successfully—I told them that I differed very much with them on the conduct of the business—I left them, and on August 22nd I wrote this letter, in which I fully set forth my views. (This stated that the goods were being manufactured at a loss, and had been an absolute failure from the beginning, even with small salaries, and tendering his resignation, and giving two months' notice.)—I enclosed the notice—this is it (Produced)—I then received this letter of August 30th: "Dear Morgan, can you make it convenient to come over here for a chat?"—I went and saw them both, but Mr. Barrow had to leave—I then received this letter: "Dear Mr. Morgan. We accept your resignation, and will take up the salary in a week or two. Wo will send you the salary. We are appointing another messenger. C. F. W."—I replied the same evening, saying, "I cannot accede to your request until I receive the amount of my investment; I defy anyone to prove I have not studied the interests of the company"—on the 22nd I received this: "Your salary will be sent to you. If you have any belongings, please remove them to-morrow"—I then went to the factory, and removed my belongings, and waited for the expiration of the notice—I was paid my £2 10s. a week for two months—I never got my money back—I wrote, and receiving no answer, I placed the matter in the hands of a solicitor, issued a writ, and got judgment.
Cross-examined. The stock at the factory never exceeded £250 during my management—looking at this document of May 15th, 1901 (Produced) I deny that stock to the amount of £510 15s. 10d. came into the factory in one day—I am one of the prosecutors in this case, and Mountain—I am now the secretary of the Insurance Representation Company, and I belong to the Loyal British Collecting Society—I joined one in June, and the other this year—three men, and from four to six women, were employed in the factory, not including the manageress—she came at the end of May—I did not get on well with her—there were plenty of hands, but they were idle for want' of materials—the principal thing is to manufacture stock and sell it at a profit—the stock there would realize 50 or 100 per cent, if sold at a retail price, but not net profit, as they paid 80 per cent for selling it—it was sold at an absolute loss, after deducting the cost of manufacture, and the salaries, and rent, and the cost of distribution—I have spoken to Way about Barrow, and find that
he has not a satisfactory previous history—Way wrote letters in the office—Hall was 40 years with W. H. Smith & Son, and 14 years with Messrs Hughes & Kimber—he was bailed by Mr. Kimber—I received £70 in salary—when I was manager the stock at 190, Holborn, was never worth more than £15 to £20; £500 is an excessive value for fixtures and furniture at 190, Holborn and at Surrey Road, £50 would be more like it—lease of premises, £1,000 is excessive—King Edward's salt is all right, it is a good sauce, but not worth £2,000 or 2,000 shillings—I have gone through Mr. Thompson's document, it is not a valuation—the valuation of £4,500 is wrong, £500 would cover everything—the recipes and formulae are worth nothing—I knew that it was not formed into a company when I joined—I was to have my profit after the formation of the company, somewhere in October—I brought an action against Barrow & Way at the end of October—I was not present at a meeting of the directors after the prisoner was in custody—I did not express an opinion that it would have been a very good company if it had not been managed by Barrow and Way, nor is that my opinion now—I saw Way twice at the factory—I know one of Barrow's sons-in-law, White; Reed was the other—he had not a shop to my knowledge—I do not know that they took a good deal of stock from the factory—I have had no disagreement with Barrow—he induced me to join the "Sovereign Remedies" Company, and agreed that I should receive so many shares in Barrow and Way—I could not help accepting some shares in the company in August—I did not sell some of them, I gave 200 away—he was to accept anything he could get for them, a shilling for a £1 share—I have heard that there were 200 travellers—there was one cart and harness—there were three people at Holborn besides Barrow and Way—Colonel Peters came on the scene before I left—I never saw Mr. Mayo there—Mr. Hall was always there—the premises at Holborn were not for the carrying on of the business—the factory at Blackfriars was suitable for drysalters on a small scale—I had nothing to do with the correspondence or accounts.
Re-examined. No books or accounts were kept at Blackfriars—Mr. Hall is an investor to a considerable extent in the company—I have been a licensed valuer 18 years—the two employments I had in May and June were known to Way, and assented to by him.
ARTHUR BERNARD TAYLOR . I live at Barnes, and am a salesman of machinery—in June I saw an advertisement for a salesman in the Daily Telegraph, in consequence of which I called at 190, High Holborn, about June 15th, and saw Barrow, Way, and Hall—they told me that the business was a drysalter's, and that a district would be allotted to me in London, and I should receive 30s. a week, and 15 per cent commission—Barrow and Way both said it was a very flourishing business, and one of them said that I must deposit £50, which I did not like without security, and I said that I did not wish to invest it—the word "invest" was used in the first agreement, but altered in the second to "deposit"—I paid the £50 by this cheque, which is endorsed by both Barrow and Way—orders were sometimes not executed, and I asked Way how he could make it pay; he said that some of the other men were doing very good business in London, and one man paid for what another did not—I received this letter from Way in August—(This stated: "We are advertising for a
gentleman, as secretary, in August; the qualification is the investment of £100, and if you can make your £50 up to £100, we shall be happy; kindly think it over. G. F. W.)—that is Way's writing—I declined verbally—I received a certificate for 75 shares in the limited company on its formation, and I believe I wrote saying that mine was a deposit and not an investment, and I saw Way afterwards and told him so; he said "Oh, no," and denied it—I asked him how the company could possibly go on—he said they had bought a jam factory—that was after the formation of the company—I left and consulted a solicitor, and the police took the matter up.
Cross-examined. They referred me to Mrs. Harvey and gave me the name of their banker, and I was satisfied—they all three spoke to me, and I think it was Way who got down a photograph of the works—excepting that, I cannot give you a single word that Way said independently of the others—Hall said that he had put £500 into the business, and that in his opinion it was perfectly genuine—I have ascertained that Hall has been 40 years in the service of W. H. Smith and Son—I did not see the factory—I saw Mr. Harvey, the referee—I was four months in their employment—I was supplied with price lists—I got very few orders, not more than 60 or 70 per cent, of them were executed, and I was not likely to get a second order when the first was not executed—I suggested that I should be more useful inside the business than outside—I think Way assigned me my district; he offered to get rid of some of the shares which were allotted to me under protest—I handed them back to the man' who gave them to me—he said that he could get 10s. a share for them—I had a very poor opinion of them—I was present at the shareholders' meeting; a great many persons were present, and Colonel Palmer and Mr. Hewitt—I heard Mountain make some remarks—I did not hear him say that it was a perfectly genuine business, or any one say publicly that the foundation of a good business was there.
By the COURT. If I could have got my £50, I should be very glad to get away before—I got my salary.
Re-examined. This is the photograph Way showed me (Produced)—this building on the left has nothing to do with it—I have seen the factory.
HENRY CORBET JONES . I am town clerk for Holborn—the Borough are landlords of 170, High Holborn, which they let to Edward Barrow in October, 1900, for three months certain, rent to be paid monthly in advance—I produce the agreement.
Cross-examined. I made enquiries with reference to Barrow—I never saw Way.
ALBERT HALL . This prospectus (Produced) was registered on October 18th, 1901, it is dated the 19th—C. F. Way and E. F. Barrow, are among the directors—this is the only prospectus registered—it has remained on the file till now—there is an agreement between Barrow and Way to offer their interest in the company for £15,000 in shares—there is a provision that none of the shares have been underwritten, and that the directors propose to go to allotment on £100.
Cross-examined. There are seven signatories, they are original signatures—everything was done with regularity according to the ordinary form—it was handed over the counter, I cannot say whether by Mr. Way.
WILLIAM LIDDIARD . I am a clerk—in June, 1901, I saw this advertisement (Produced) in the Daily Telegraph for a gentleman wanted from June 7th—I went to 190, High Holborn, and saw Barrow, Way, and Hall—they said that it was a good concern and the profits were 50 to 70 per cent, and salaries about £30 a week—they asked for my references and I asked for theirs, which they gave me, they said it did not matter about mine, because as I had been in the Metropolitian police that would be good enough—they showed me a photograph of the factory—I took till June 10th and then went again, and gave them this cheque. (For£100 on the Provincial Bank, Portsea.)—I should not have parted with it if I had not been assured that the business was being carried on at a profit—my agreement states that I can either receive it back or in shares—I was superintendent of agents and trade dealers—on June 15th Way gave me this advertisement to insert, and this list of newspapers (This was for a clerk at£5 a week, £50 investment required to cover stock)—he gave me a cheque for £10 to cover the expenses of the advertisements—I spent about £3 of it on the Daily Telegraph and Times and £3 on the Chronicle—the others were a little over a sovereign—on July 20th I received a proposal from Barrow to put another £100 into the business, but I did not undertake the offer—my salary was paid—I did not get my £100 back—Way and Hall were arrested on November 29th—I went to Holborn from time to time—the stock was worth about £30.
Cross-examined. I am not a valuer—I appeared here last Session to prosecute Jackson and Phillips (See page 221), and the jury acquitted them both—I said that I helped myself to some of the King Edward sauce, I took away half a dozen bottles and I have got five left—from June to October I thought the business was all right—I had no opportunity of judging the stock at the factory—it was only after hearing something about Barrow in October that I began to have suspicions—he took a leading part at No. 190—Way looked after the correspondence and interviewed people—Way asked me the questions, and I said that I did not want to put the whole of my savings into one basket—I have saved £5,000 or £6,000—Way paid my wages, and at the right time except once—I know nothing about actions against Way and Barrow—there were 200 travellers, but they were not employed and there was no salary—none of them put anything into the Company—I did not go to the factory at all, and do not know of the business done there—I gave the travellers instructions, but the prices were much too high and I never saw any more of them—some of them brought back their samples—I had a price list of the goods—the travellers can only take orders—I received 200 shares after October—I received my wages up to the arrest of Hall and Way—I did not hear Mountain or Morgan say that they intended to wreck the Company—I met them before the Company was formed—I made no enquiries about Barrow—I formed my suspicions when I found that there was no capital and no business was being done and there were large expenses—I said to Way"There are some things against Barrow, but I do not think they can find out anything against you"—I had received information—I had heard something said by Mountain in October, but took no interest in it—he said that Barrow was connected with a Company that had gone wrong,
or something to that effect, and that Barrow had gone by the name of Prendergast and had made misrepresentations to him of the others—he had been applying over and over again for his money back—I was in the habit of meeting Mountain very frequently after that—I went to the office but not for information—Mr. Smith was the secretary—I believe Mountain's feelings were very strong against Barrow—he was present at the shareholders' meeting after these men were arrested, and made a speech—I did not hear him say that it was a genuine business and would be a success under other management—he said to me, "This thing might be carried on with other things added to it, so that people would not lose the whole of the money they put in, but if the system had been good the business would have been good "; and I was of that opinion, too—I did not go to the factory till the day of the arrest, and did not ask to—this photograph is from a drawing, not from the premises—I never saw Mr. Thompson, and did not know that he was appointed the valuer—I have said, "Barrow was the spokesman, and all the statements were made by him," but Way joined in the conversation. (The witness's deposition was here put in and read.)
NATHANIEL STEVENS COUCH . I am a coal merchant, of Fowey, Cornwall—I was a master mariner—I saw an advertisement in the Standard of June 18th, of £100 per annum, to act for an industrial company—I answered it, and received this letter from the Barrow and Way Company, of High Holborn, written by C. F. Way. (This stated that they had laid the foundation of a very large business, and taken a large factory, and required a director.)—I replied that I expected to be in London in July, but was diffident about my qualification for a director, who ought to have some knowledge of the business upon which he entered—they answered saying that it was the managing directors who required to understand the business—I replied on June 29th saying that I would arrange a meeting when I came to town—I came up on July 11th, and saw—Mr. Barrow, Mr. Way, and Hall—Barrow informed me about the Company, and said that since Mr. Way joined them the business had largely increased, and they had to take larger premises, and that agents would introduce business, and they had upwards of 1,000 applicants for the agency, who were to give £ 50 apiece—I went back to Fowey, and wrote this letter. (Stating that the business seemed too risky for him to embark in it.)—that was answered by this letter, "Dear Sir, Replying to your telegram, there is still one vacancy, kindly decide this week"—I then wrote this, "If the directorship be still open I shall be pleased to serve"—they then wrote, "You are absolutely free from liability, we have only one opening and three applicants"—my reply was favourable, and I seat them this cheque for £100. (Payable to Barrow and Way, and endorsed by each.)—I got this receipt—shortly afterwards I left Fowey altogether, and came to Dulwich, as having invested money in the business I thought it necessary to be on the spot—the Company was registered about October 2nd—I attended two meetings of the directors, one on October 7th, when the prospectus came up for discussion—Colonel Peters took exception to the valuation when the prospectus came up for discussion—I understood that it required an expert—I remained till November 12th, and then sent in my resignation—I should like to get my money back—I
have lost it all—I did not read the prospectus—I did not know that the Act of Parliament has made great changes in the law.
Cross-examined. I believed the representations made to me up to the third week—that was in November—I had from June 19th to July 27th, when I paid the cheque, to make enquiries—I asked Barrow what expert he was employing—he said that he had an expert in the person of Mr. Hall—he handed me a printed paper showing the manner in which he intended to carry on business, and said that it was to be formed into a company in October—he said, in Way's presence, that his own business was worth £1,000 a year—I do not know that Way put in £150—I was told that Hall had been 40 years with Messrs. Smith & Son—I enquired from them as to my responsibilities as a director, and they said, "All the responsibility we take on our own shoulders"—I went to the first meeting of the directors, on October 7th—Barrow, Way, Hall, Colonel Peters, and the secretary were present—the prospectus was put before us, and considered—I believe it was originally dated October 7th, but it was not issued till the 19th—I do not think that prospectus was offered to the public—Mr. Hall was the chairman, and the managing directors, Way, Hall, and George Smith—the assets in trade were valued in at £4,500, which Colonel Peters challenged as being excessive, and a valuation was placed on the table—I do not recognize this valuation (Produced), but I remember the name of Mr. Thompson—that was after Colonel Peters made the objection—the difference between the £4,500 and the other was made out by the non-issue of shares—the new valuation was put in on November 4th—the stock was then valued at £2,200—the prisoner was arrested on November 29th—I had sent in my resignation before that—I do not know that Barrow had two sons who were dealing with this stuff—I have heard since that a son of his has a shop—I heard that Mountain had been trying to wreck the company for some time—I think it was at the meeting: I asked him if he was prepared to buy it, but he said nothing—he said that he would drop the name of Barrow & Way, and call it the Phoenix Company—he is one of the prosecutors in this case—I understood him to say to Taylor that he had been trying to wreck the company for months—I went to the factory with Mr. Hall, in October, and saw the stock there—I thought the valuation was considerably in excess—I believed it was a genuine business, but as to the value, I did not know—that expression of Mountain's about wrecking the company was early in December, after the prisoner was in custody—I received three letters from Mountain—I understood he had a bill of sale in a friendly way—there was a complaint by Mountain against Barrow.
Re-examined. I never saw Mountain till after the prisoner was in custody early in December—he did nothing to my knowledge to injure the company before Way's arrest—this is one of the letters he wrote me—in my letter of November 6th I say that the weekly expenses exceed the weekly returns—prior to November 4th I had not seen any books, but as soon as I saw the books I wrote this letter, and tendered my resignation—I have never had my £100 back.
"Way, and Hall, on July 6th—Barrow spoke; they said that they had been in business some time, and were going to make it a limited liability company, and if I would pay £100 I should receive 200 paid-up shares and a seat on the board, that it was a prospering business, and they were paying their way now, and with the capital they should get they should carry on a very large business—Mr. Barrow gave me an introduction to Mr. Harvey, a solicitor—I paid the £100 and got this receipt—(This stated that it was for the preliminary expenses of floating the company.)—I afterwards went there once or twice, and it was said that the business would begin in about six weeks—I was never shown any books of the projected company—I went to the factory, but saw no books, I saw some stock—the first meeting of the directors was on October 7th; the prospectus was produced; Way and Barrow were there; I pointed out the valuation, £4,500, and they agreed to have it valued, and to make it agree, by arranging some of the shares to the vendor—on that understanding I agreed to go to allotment—neither Way nor Barrow gave me any information how the £4,5000 was arrived at—no books were produced—the allotment took place of 1,500 vendors'shares to various persons—they were given, but to save the trouble of transfer we arranged to issue the shares straight to those persons—I do not know what was done with the remaining 5,000 shares—the public subscription at that time was just £100—some figures were produced at the meeting, but I never got any balance sheet—I think it was at the special meeting of October 25th that I found that no books were being kept; they were not open—I found that the managing directors were drawing £7 a week between them—I was not a managing director.
Saturday, March 15th.
E. N. PETERS (continued.) May I enlarge my answer with regard to the interview of July 5th and 6th, I think I said they had a good business and were hoping to pay their way; I do not think anything more was said with regard to the specialities, the Prince Edward sauce and new business, and that by the £50 shares they hoped to have a double interest in the company—I saw no balance sheet or statement of account—at the meeting we enquired if regular books were kept—before I became a director I had read the new Companies Act of 1900—after the company was formed there was a cash book—I saw nothing but this cash book—it was dated about October 25th—looking at it I find the wages for the week ending October 5th, £20 4s. 4d.; 12th, £29 13s.; 19th, £35 10s. 10d.; 26th, £20 5s.; £9 6s. 8d. and £4, totalling £33 11s. 8d.—those are the outgoings for wages during that month—the receipts for sales total £21 5s. 7 1/2 d. up to October 31st—I do not think I saw this book, which purports to be a ledger—the goods purchased are stated here to total up to £73 19s. 10d. from October to November 6th; the latest date, and the only goods which appear in the ledger as purchased during the existence of the limited company—of that there appears to be paid on November 25th £9 13s. 9d. as cash for stores—on November 5th a question arose at the offices, after the meeting, as to raising £49 for stamping the agreement—Darrell told us there was about £5 in the bank, and the rest was agreed to be made up by the directors,
somehow—Way was there—four directors besides Bower and Way subscribed £8 5s. each after some demur, as we thought the vendors ought to have paid all the preliminary expenses—there was a meeting about November 18th, and I remember there was a discussion with regard to the prospectus, which we disapproved of, as misleading—after the meeting I wrote a letter, of which this is a draft, to Barrow and Way (Stating that unless by Saturday, November 23rd, satisfactory statements of account were received, the shareholders' attention would be called to the total absence of available funds, the small amount of business, and the heavy liabilities, suggesting the calling of an extraordinary meeting to consider the necessity of immediate liquidation.)—Mr. Drewitt, another director, acted in conjunction with me—this is the reply of Barrow and Way, in Way's writing, and with both their signatures (Suggesting that as it was impossible the business could be done properly and the company developed in the face of continual expressions of disapproval, that Colonel Peters and Mr. Drewitt should resign.)—I was not present at the meeting at which my resignation was accepted (The minutes of the meeting of November 27th, 1901, accepting the resignation of these two directors, and that they should be repaid£8 5s. was read.)—the £8 5s. was money that we had advanced—I was not paid—if the company was a success, we were to receive our fees up to the time our services ceased—I never got them.
Cross-examined. I have been in the Royal Engineers about 38 years—Barrow's reports to me were a few days after the first meeting—we expected the company to be formed, but had to wait till it was formed before we could see any books—I advanced £100 towards the expenses of promotion, and I was to have received 200 fully paid up shares, had the company floated, to represent the amount I advanced, and the profit—Barrow was the principal spokesman at the offices—they consisted of a front and back office and a room upstairs—Way and Barrow were together mostly—Barrow said they were doing a good business, and wanted more capital to extend it, and that they were going to turn it into a limited company—Hall said he had invested £500 in the business, that he had been connected with it four or five months, and had taken a factory for them—I agreed to become a director, paid £100 on July 8th, and took this receipt, signed by Way and Barrow—that was for preliminary expenses before the first meeting, on October 4th or 7th—Drewitt and I queried other items besides the £4,500 valuation—I thought the lease of the Holborn premises very cheap—I saw the premises in Blackfriars—the rent was £120 and the option 7,14, and 21 years—I thought that was an advantageous bargain—John Thompson's total valuation was £2,199 10s. 9d.—all the directors were present when the prospectus was discussed, Barrow and Way being invited in after the meeting began—a resolution was passed that there should be an independent valuation and that the vendors' shares should be increased or decreased according to the result of that valuation, and that vendors' shares should be issued for the difference—£,5000 was to be paid in shares—the vendors were called upon to refund, but that was never done—the vendors' shares were not issued—the preliminary prospectus was withdrawn—I would not have become a director and advanced £100 if, instead of £2,190, £5,000 appeared in the prospectus—the capital was not reduced at the Board itself to
represent the difference between the £5,000 and £2,190—the whole 15,000 shares were already issued to Barrow and Way, or their nominees, and no alteration was made in consequence of that second valuation—the shares were not returned—when I advanced my £100 I believed the business was carried on at a profit, I would not have advanced it if I had not—we afterwards proceeded to issue a prospectus and allot shares—it was represented to us that it was very important to go on with the company as fast as possible, and we thought we had provided for all contingencies by the promise of the vendors to make good the difference—the prospectus was registered at Somerset House—my interview with the defendant at Margate was subsequent to the issue of the shares—we discussed the valuation and the adjustment necessary upon it—I did not know the defendant was subject to a month's notice and a payment of a month in advance for the Holborn premises—Smith, the secretary, kept some books—I spoke to him about them—he said he had not got the figures from Barrow or Way for the amounts—I objected to a whole week's expenses being excluded—books should have been opened immediately after the formation of the company—there were no regular books—I knew salaries were being paid—I did not hear that 200 travellers had been appointed by Lidiard—I understood there were a small number—I saw five or six girls and women and three or four men in the factory mixing and packing—I did not see the van—that was before the formation of the company—I was called upon to ratify the engagement of employees, at, I think, the first meeting—I pointed out the large amount of weekly wages, and asked for the cash book—the amount for the week ending October 26th was £33 11s. 8d—Barrow's wages were £4 and Way's £3—Hall said that we should be increasing our business very largely, and then be able to pay our way, and with capital coming in, he hoped to be successful—at the meeting on November 4th the valuation was discussed, but there was no resolution on that, but there was a resolution come to that shares representing the difference between the £2,500 valuation which bad been accepted and the £4,400 should be issued to the vendors—at the meeting of November 18th I drew attention to the valuation of the stock again—by that time we had received an explanation from the auctioneer, Mr. Thompson—I said that the quantities were not given, and we could not tell whether the prices given were of selling or purchasing prices—at my suggestion Hall wrote for an explanation—this is Thompson's reply. (Dated 16th November 1900, and stating that he had to consider both sides, the vendors and the directors of the Limited Company, they only having received paper for their consideration; that he reckoned a 20 per cent margin, and the value of the valuation being 2 1/2 per cent., no sensible man could expect it to be made for£10, but about£48; that he had spent two evenings at the factory and three hours in the day time, and that a business man would consider the valuation a fair one and would be glad to receive the cheque.)—I saw a copy of that letter—on November 27th there is a resolution accepting my resignation, and on the 29th Hall was taken into custody, and it was out of our power to do anything with regard to the liquidation—I thought that a high-handed proceeding—the goods were removed—I have not seen Barrow since—at a shareholders' meeting in December Mr. Mountain
made a speech, the tenor of which was that something might be made of the business—they were buying and selling goods—if they sold according to the price list they must have realised a large profit—if the goods were not sold at a net profit the business might be genuine in view of ultimately becoming a paying concern—I consider it proper to convert a business into a company in which the whole of the goods are sold at a net loss if" the establishment charges are too large for the business then carried on, in the hope of doing more business—there are many cases where there might be no business carried on until the public subscribed—we do not know what profits were made anterior to the formation of the company, there were no books, and we accepted the statement of Barrow that they were paying their way and covering expenses—a great many private businesses are turned into public companies and become developed afterwards—Barrow has absconded—Barrow and Way's word was a factor in the evidence shewing good business—another was the fact that goods were being made and packed—one is not in the habit of thinking everyone a swindler who is engaged in promoting a company—Hall appeared to me to have thorough confidence in the business—he was on nearly all occasions with Way and Barrow when conversations took place—I did not hear him say, "This is a chance of a lifetime," but he was a very sanguine man, and always said it was very good business, and he appeared to have great confidence in it.
Re-examined. If he had said to the contrary, of course I should not have invested in it, and should not have become a director—Barrow expressed great confidence in it—I depended upon those expressions to a great extent—I saw no books at all till October 25th, 1901, yet there were five filed, and my signature attached to the prospectus of October 18th, 1901—that prospectus contained a statement of the profits of the company and the manufactures are stated to be very large—that I understood from Barrow and Way was perfectly clear, and that the profits were large—they told me what the goods cost, and what they sold for—I took no exception to that statement—it was no part of my duty to enquire, or examine into books, before the company was launched—I did not subscribe to the company—as directors we expected not to see details of the accounts, but some general statement, and I asked for it, when I was informed that no regular books had been kept—I did not ask for bank accounts and for auditors' certificates, nor for verification of the accounts of the business, which was to be converted into a company, by an accountant of repute—I was impressed by the fact that there were a number of employees at the factory—if I had known that those employees had been obtained by reason of a premium obtained from them, that would have put a very different complexion on the matter—if I had known that the banking accounts of Barrow & Way had been entirely fed by premiums they had obtained from people, that would have prevented my joining, but you will remember I had subscribed £100.
EDWIN POWELL . I am a coal merchant, of Purley Oak, Addiscombe Road, Watford—on October 23rd I saw an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph for a traveller for a company, at a good salary, commission and expenses, and that the qualification was an investment of £50 in the company's shares, in consequence of which I went to 190, High Holborn,
on that day—I saw Barrow and Way, and enquired the nature of the business, which they told me was a drysalter's; and Barrow, who was the spokesman, told me the names of some of the goods that were being sold, and that the business had been established about a year, and that the limited company had been formed for about a month—I asked to look at the prospectus of the company, which was shewn me, with this valuation—I read it, and noticed that the profits were good—I looked at the list of directors, and was informed that Mr. Joseph Hall, the chairman, had been with W. H. Smith & Sons forty years, and that, in a measure, influenced me; and I thought from the names of the other directors on the prospectus that those gentlemen would be sure to thoroughly investigate the matter, and see that it was quite right—among them I saw the names of Barrow and Way—I told them I would consider the matter—I believed the prospectus correctly represented the condition of affairs—on October 28th I returned and paid £50 to, I think, Way, in nine £5 notes, and £5 in gold—I started on October 31st as a canvasser and traveller for orders—I was not very successful—on November 22nd I received this letter from the defendants (Asking the witness to become a director, and to invest a further£50 as a qualification.)—I called at the office in Holborn next day, and saw Hall, Barrow, and Way—I asked to see the list of shareholders—I was shewn them—then I asked what the remuneration of the directors would be—I was told it would be £100 a. year—I asked how often the meetings of the directors would be held, and was told they would be arranged by the directors themselves—I wrote this cheque (Produced.) when I got home the same night, deducting £3 a week for two weeks' salary and 9s. travelling expenses—I arranged in the morning when I saw the directors that I was to qualify as a director, and I sent the cheque by post on Saturday from Watford—it was returned to my bankers paid—I believed the statements made to me, and upon that belief parted with my £46 11s.—between October 28th and November 23rd no statement had been made to me that the prospectus was in any sense unreliable—I was told that two directors had been called upon to resign; I believed that—I was not told that they had resigned because they discovered that there was great discrepancy in the valuation—Barrow told me he could not get on with them, that they were continually writing him letters and asking him a lot of questions, and that be could not agree with them—I quite believed that—if I had been told that at the first meeting of directors, on October 7th, the intention was to withdraw that particular valuation, I would not have had anything to do with it—I continued in the business till about December 6th, the day before I received notice, which was on the Sunday morning—the total orders I got were between £3 and £4.
Cross-examined. I have no experience in drysaltery—all the conversations were between Barrow and myself—I have not received any of my money back.
ERNEST GEORGE SMITH . I am a clerk living at Derby—in August I saw an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph for a factory manager to a London manufacturing company, the qualification being £150, and in consequence wrote to the address given and received this reply, asking me to call, and enclosing a drysalters' price list—I went to 190, High.
Holborn—I saw Barrow and Way—Barrow said they had been in business 30 years and were doing very well out of it, and the thing had got into a large way and grown so much that they were turning it into a limited liability company, that they were making about £30 a week profit, which was about 50 to 70 per cent, on the articles sold, and that they had received orders for £60 worth—Way was present—I believed those statements, and paid first £60, and on September 5th £90, and took this receipt—they offered me the post of manager of the factory or assistant secretary—I selected the position of assistant secretary, and took up my duties on September 16th—I did not see any books—Way started me drafting a prospectus out, supplying me with the materials; to be issued in connection with the formation of the company—I was to receive 50s. a week to commence with, and on becoming foreman of the company, £3 a week—I received 50s. till October 2nd, the date of the registration—Way and I wrote the correspondence—after the formation of the company I became secretary at £2 10s., and prepared to open the books by obtaining, with Mr. Alltree, my assistant, information from Way and two of the clerks, Jackson and Phillips, downstairs, and we commenced writing in the books towards the end of October—I first knew that the prospectus was disputed at the first meeting of the directors towards the end of November—I was present as secretary—I knew of Colonel Peters' complaint, and of his subsequent resignation—I was paid up to the middle of November, but not afterwards, from September 16th to November 16th, two months, at £2 10s. a week—that was all I received of my £150—I gave my services at first—I saw the banking account and endeavoured to make up the books—I told Way that things were not what they were represented to be, and that the business was very poor—he said he was aware they were rather in a poor way, but Mr. Couch, a director, was coming forward to relieve them with about £300—the book was there for Way to see the figures—this is the summary I prepared, showing the outgoings and incomings—the outgoings in October were £148 4s. 2 1/2 d., including wages, and for November £194 13s. 4 1/2 d., making a total of £342 17s. 7d. for the two months—on the other side there is the directors' qualification, including sums of £50 from Mr. Easam, £50 from Mr. Baldwin, and £50 from Mr. Powell, who were employees—Mr. Easam was a traveller—Mr. Powell paid in another £50 in November—that left a deficit of £52 3s. 5 1/2 d.—Wallis, who paid £25, was a traveller—there was a deficit of about £227 for the two months during which the company was in existence.
Cross-examined. I was in the firm a fortnight or three weeks before it was formed into a limited company—the books were written up towards the end of October—they extend to November 26th—I knew that travellers were out with considerable quantities of samples—I went to the factory—I am not aware of premiums being paid by the employees—my room was upstairs at the offices in Holborn—Way was in the managers office below, in the front room—Way went out during part of the conversation with Barrow—I thought the business was genuine till we made up the books, then I did not think that things were properly straight, considering the great loss and the expense incurred—I went to the factory about twice before the arrest—I did not know Read—I knew
White by sight, I have never spoken to him; I have seen him at Holborn—I was paid to November 23rd, except that a week was owing—I was a servant of the company—I heard of the two actions by Mountain and Morgan against Way and Barrow, one in which Mountain was unsuccessful, and the other in which they were successful against Way—Mountain never complained to me of Barrow—I never met him till two or three days before the arrest—I heard of a quarrel between them about a bill of sale—I knew of Thompson's valuation of the stock at £2,199—an allowance was made of vendors' shares in respect of the difference between the valuation in the prospectus and that valuation—Hall was the chairman—Hall and Way seemed to believe in the business—Hall's daughter was engaged as a typewriter since I went there—Hall said that he had satisfied himself that Way's business was genuine, from inquiries, so much so that he had invested a further sum of £500 in it—from October 7th I was responsible for the financial part of the business, although Way occasionally gave me directions to draw a cheque—it was resolved at the meeting of November 27th to amend the valuation paragraph of the prospectus, in consequence, I think, of Colonel Peters and Mr. Drewitt's complaints—the first prospectus issued was to be withdrawn—that was two days before Hall and Way were arrested—I was at the office when the police came—I could not prevent someone from going off with the King Edward sauce, I could not be all over the place—I had nothing to do with the horse and van at the factory.
Re-examined. Way said at the end of October that it would never be a big concern—Way introduced Thompson's valuation—I knew Powell went originally as traveller, and paid £50, and on October 28th another £50, and joined the board—I was present at the meeting of directors when Colonel Peters drew Way and Barrow's attention to the £4,500 and £500 stock valuation—it was agreed to be rectified—I did not ask how the figures were arrived at, though I put money into the concern—it struck me afterwards when the correct figure was said to be £2,199 10s. 9d.—as secretary, I was constantly there, and in communication with these men.
PERCY WILLIAM PUTTOCK . I am a warehouseman, and live at Spring Heath, Weybridge—in consequence of seeing an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph in August last for a factory manager, qualification £150 investment, well secured, I called on August 29th at 190, High Holborn, and saw Barrow, who said they were going to turn the business into a limited company—I paid £100 that day, and got a receipt signed by Barrow—I never got my money back—I succeeded Morgan in taking charge of the factory—I estimated the stock early in October at about £250—the average amount of goods sold at the factory was £6, the average wages £7 to £9—Way wrote to me about an inventory—the letter was destroyed—I sent an inventory to Barrow and Way, at Holborn, setting out the quantities, but not the prices—Way asked me in his letters not to include the prices—I copied from the list of quantities, and carried them out at what I thought would be a fair price—the disinfectants, valued at £196, I estimated at £4 0s. 6d.—the figures in Thompson's valuation, making £400, I put on October 5th at £4 0s. 6d.—the 300,000 labels and wrappers were worth about £45, Thompson put them at £262 6s.: the jellicoe tins he puts at £27 were no good for sale.
Cross-examined. I went to Holborn in September, and got my experience by referring to price lists—I am a warehouseman in the furnishing trade—I think I said before the Magistrate that if there had been more stock we could have executed a third more orders, both before and after the formation of the company—I found out accidentally that Barrow had a son-in-law, White, but I did not know Read, who is said to have kept a chemist's shop—White was employed at the factory, and delivered goods—he never had orders for Read—I saw Thompson only once, and I was at the factory from 9 a.m. till 6 p.m., when I locked up—I knew where White took out his orders, but many of them came back again—I may have stated that if the business had been re-organized it might have become a bona-fide business—I did not know of the employees paying premiums, I engaged most of them myself—I heard Mr. Mountain say at a meeting that he could introduce several novelties, or that he knew a person who could introduce business and make it a success.
Re-examined. I paid £100, and the manageress, Miss Ward, £100—on the solitary occasion I saw Thompson in the factory, he was there about half an hour—since the arrest I have been to the premises and made this valuation—the total value of the stock at that time was £342 11s. 2 1/2 d.—I knew the extreme cost of the materials for the disinfectants, and I added the cost of the bottles, labels, and corks.
Monday, March 17 th.
CECIL BARNES . I am in the employment of the Daily Telegraph—I produce some written instructions for advertisements, the first is dated June 4th and 5th, 1901: "Partnership share in manufacturing business: with separate offices and works, sleeping or active, suit lady or gentleman, exceptional profits insuring large income, £300 required; address "Income,"Box 518, Postal Department, Daily Telegraph"—and this one: "Gentleman wanted for permanent confidential position in manufacturing firm, salary and share profits, sure £300 per annum, investment £100 required; address, "Progress,"Box 522, Postal Department, Daily Telegraph."—those advertisements were inserted in the paper.
ERNEST JAMES LUNN . I am a clerk in the London and South-Western Bank, Harrow Road branch—I was in the Bloomsbury branch, where there was an account in the name of Barrow and Way, of 46, Southampton Row—I know the prisoner's signature, he drew cheques upon the account, both signatures were on each cheque—in June, 1901, I find £133 was paid into the account, including a cheque for £100 on the Portsea Bank—in September £350 10s. 6d. was paid in, including £100 on September 2nd, £60 and £90 on the 5th and 6th, and £100 on the 25th, the balance of 10s. 6d. came from some other source—an account was opened in the name of the Barrow and Way, Company, Limited, on October 17th, which continued in existence till November 30th—I produce a certified copy of that—on November 27th I find credit of a cheque for £46 11s. on the Watford Bank—if that cheque had not been paid in, the account would have been overdrawn on the 27th or 28th—when the account was closed there was a balance due to the bank of 2s. 7d.—I should say these advertisements are in the prisoners writing.
Cross-examined. £2,150 was paid in altogether to the account of Barrow & Way—there is no case where only one of the partners signed a cheque—I do not know if I ever had an interview with Barrow, or if it was he who opened the account first—we had a reference when the account was opened.
ALBERT HAWKINS (Detective Sergeant E.) Amongst the documents taken possession of at 190, High Holborn, there was what purported to be an order book belonging to Barrow & Way, from April 1st to October 5th, 1901—I have been through it—the total value of orders purported to be taken during that time is £288 10s. 3d., and those executed £78 8s.—I also took possession of a document which purports to show the sales between October 2nd and October 29th—they amount to £21 1s. 1 1/2 d.—I found invoices from wholesale dealers and manufacturers for £19 19s. 1 1/4 d.
Cross-examined. I was present when Hall and Way were taken into custody on November 29th—we took possession of the office on that day—there were several people there, who we asked to take charge of the keys, but they would not, so we had to—the bailiffs were put in a few days afterwards—we found a lot of price lists and catalogues, but not many letters at the office, some were from travellers complaining that they had not got the articles they wanted, and also from people pressing for their accounts—I did not ascertain that there were over 100 travellers employed—I was present when Mr. Thompson's valuation was challenged at Bow Street—I took a statement from Thompson—I do not think I served him with a subpoena—he was subpoenaed—I believe this telegram was sent on January 23rd (Stating that Thompson would not be required to attend at Bow Street to-morrow in the case of Way and Hall.)—Colonel Peters did not complain about the conduct of the police in seizing the premises on the 29th—I went to the premises with Inspector Pugsley with a warrant to arrest the prisoner—we searched the premises—it was subsequent to that that somebody put in a request for rent—the stoppage of the business was the pressing for rent—I believe they have cleared the place out.
Re-examined. Nobody was left to carry on the business—nobody would even take the responsibility of keeping the keys.
WILLIAM PUGSLEY (Police Inspector.) About 2 p.m. on November 29th I went to 190, High Holborn, with Sergeant Stephens—after some opposition on the ground floor, I went up to the first floor front room, where I found three persons, including the prisoner—I said, "I wish to see the managing director of this company"—the prisoner said, "I am one of them, I am co-director with Mr. Barrow"—I said, "Where is Mr. Barrow?"—he said, "I don't know," handing me a letter—I said, "I have a warrant for your arrest," and I read it—he said, "At present I have nothing to say"—I took him to Bow Street, where he was confronted with Hall, who was also charged, and I read the warrant to him there—neither made any reply.
Cross-examined. Barrow has two sons-in-law, White and Read—I have been informed that Read kept a chemist's shop—similar goods were found there to those that belonged to the company—I do not know to what extent—I went to the factory, but could not get inside—I did not see any gas engine there.
and Hall on Lady Day last year, as a superintendent of agents—I paid £10 on that day—I think I saw Barrow, Way, and Hall on that day—they all signed my agreement—on the Saturday previous, Hall had said to me that it was the chance of his lifetime when he had invested his money, and that he had gone thoroughly into the business—he said it had taken him a great many years to get the money he had put into the business, and that he hoped to double it in a few months—Barrow and Way were not present then—I agreed to invest £100, and I signed an agreement that I should have a certain number of shares—I paid the £10 as a preliminary deposit—the £90 was to be paid subsequently—when I paid the £90, on May 11th, I requested that the receipt should be in my wife's name—it was her money—I was employed as superintendent from March 25th to June 6th or 8th—I found the orders I obtained were not executed, and I mentioned it to Barrow—he said that the goods were coming in, and that they had run out of them for a time—on May 22nd I gave notice to leave, because I saw things were not going as they should, and I was not satisfied with the way Barrow was treating me—my previous employers had dismissed me—I sued them for wrongful dismissal and was unsuccessful—that action was tried on April 16th—they asked me to pay, and I said I could not—I saw Barrow, and he asked me how long this had been pending—I said, "I shall be ruined"—he said, "Can you pay?"—I said I could not—he said, "Do you think of paying?"—I said, "I want to pay if it is possible"—he said, "I would not pay if I was you," and he suggested having a bill of sale on my furniture—I got a bill of sale, and he paid the money for my furniture over, in front of a solicitor—it amounted to £250—I returned the bulk of it to him the next day—I did not hand it back to him at the same time—the money was in cash, notes, and a cheque for, I believe, £50, I think £120 was in notes—I gave Barrow £5 for doing the bill of sale—he never returned the bill of sale—I was not angry about it, it upset me terribly—I wrote to him and saw him, and complained about its not being returned—I did not join any other companies—I never said that I thought this was a bona fide or a good business, or that I knew of a person who would take it on—I did not make up my mind to wreck the company—I warned people about Barrow—I was present at the meeting on December 7th—I said then I knew a man named Appleton, I did not say he was likely to take up the business, or that he was running the British Commercial Development Alliance—I made a statement at the meeting and said that Mr. Appleton suggested bringing forward the business, and could introduce some novelties and possibly make the business a success—I said it was a pity to lose over £100, which would lost on account of the criminal proceedings—I was one of the informants and gave the prisoner into custody—I knew that Morgan had joined another company, but quite apart from this.
By MR. GILL. From the first Barrow led me to believe that the goods were very profitable—on one occasion I asked Way if he could enumerate any article in stock which was profitable, and he pointed to some horse food and said "The profit on this is something enormous,"I was told the profit was 50 to 70 per cent.—I lost my wife's money as well as my own—I drew attention to the fact that they were paying their agents
54 per cent., and that it was a commission no firm could possibly pay their people—they doubted my figures, and I proved that I was correct—that was in April, before I parted with my £90—I never did anything to injure the company, beyond warning people against Barrow—I wrote letters to the directors after the company was formed.
The prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that he never made any false representations about the company, that it was a new venture, that he understood that Barrow had had 30 years experience in the trade, that none of the witnesses were told in his presence that the firm had been established 30 years, or that it was being carried on at a profit, but that the profit was on the articles themselves before the expenses were deducted, that all he had to do with the prospectus or the valuation was copying the particulars given him, and that Morgan might have been told the profits ranged from 50 to 100 per cent., as it had been worked out to him (the prisoner.)
Evidence for the Defence.
JOSEPH HALL . I live at 66, Camberwell Grove—I was for over 40 years employed by Messrs. W. H. Smith & Son, Strand—my daughter was employed by Barrow & Way as typewriter—it was through her means that I became acquainted with this business—I saw Barrow, and I invested at various times £500 in the business—the last sum was £200 in March, 1901—I believed it was a bona-fide business—I came into intercourse with Way—I found him straightforward—I did not know then that he had put money into the business—I did not draft this prospectus—I got notes from other prospectuses, but the notes I got were materially altered—Barrow and Bowton are responsible for the prospectus—Bowton is a man who Barrow said was an expert in prospectuses, and he formed the prospectus and the Articles of Association—the prisoner had nothing to do with the valuation that I know of—I could not find out Barrow's address—I was arrested at the same time that the prisoner was, and after many days hearing Sir Albert de Rutzen dismissed the case against me without my going into the box.
Cross-examined. I was sometimes at the offices in Holborn for a few hours a day and sometimes not at all—to each of the witnesses who called I was introduced as the gentleman who was going to be chairman of the company, and as one who had been for 40 years in the employment of Messrs. Smith & Sons, and as one who would not for a moment lend himself to anything that was not proper—I did not take any steps to ascertain what the real position of the business was—I had the statement from Barrow and I had the same thing told me as I heard told to others—I knew nothing except what was told me, and I accepted it—I did not ask to see the banking account—I did not know that apart from the—money obtained from these people little or nothing went into the account—Barrow and Way kept it—Way never confided to me that in September, 1901, that there was nothing except 10s. in the account—I did not know that the wages list far exceeded the gross receipts till the question was raised and the books opened towards the end of October or November—I cannot say that up to that date I thought a profit was being made—the thing was going on all right and I never heard anything to the contrary—I never heard it represented as a flourishing company.
JOHN THOMPSON . I am a valuer, of 77, Merritt Road, Brockwell, and Stockwell Road, Brixton—I received instructions from Barrow to value the plant and stock of the Barrow and Way Company about October—I had no prospectus with me at that time—I made about seven visits to the factory, after business hours generally—Barrow let me in with his key—this (Produced) is the valuation I made—this is signed by me, but id is not the inventory I made—Barrow took mine—I should think this would be correct—I had a book with me, but Barrow took it to copy this from to save expense—this document is not in my writing—I do not know whose it is—I was subpoenaed to attend at Bow Street as a witness—I received this telegram telling me not go—I have not been paid for my valuation.
Cross-examined. I think I saw Mr. Puttock twice at the factory—I saw a young man there—I do not know if he was the manager—I did not have any conversation with him with regard to making the valuation—I had nothing to do with him, I had to do with Barrow—I made out the inventory myself at the factory—I handed it over to Barrow—I have not seen it since—he afterwards brought to my office what he said was a copy of it—I never compared the one he brought with my book—the total amount is £2,199 10s. 9d., and out of that disinfectants £196—I believe the disinfectants were worth £200, but it is six months ago—I should think these figures are correct—the trade name of the disinfectant is Albion Fluid—I should think Albion Fluid and the disinfectant in the inventory are the same, but I am not a chemist—I see "Albion Fluid £200" and "Disinfectant £196"—I should think the £196 is for that in bottles, and the £200 for that in cask—I do not say there was £400 worth of disinfectant there—I did not put quantities in my book, because I could not get exact quantities—I was instructed by a man who knew more than I did—I arrived at the £2,000 by getting what figures I could—I took the quantities from Barrow—I should soon know if he was telling me an untruth—he did not tell me what the cost was, I did not want to know that—I made a statement to the officer in the case—I did not say, "The valuation I made was the cost of the articles, not what they would realize, the cost of the articles was told me by Barrow"—I told the officer that I took my valuation on the first cost, and that means the wholesale price—I did not say I was given the figures by Barrow—I said, "Neither did I value the Albion Fluid and the disinfectant, as they are one and the same thing"—there were 300,000 or 400,000 labels, and we averaged them at 15s. a thousand—I was not hard up at the time I wrote this letter, but you are bound to say you are hard up, or you would not get your money—it was impossible for me to examine and see if what Barrow told me was true or not—I took the quantities from him, it is done every hour—I should not think it worth his while to give me wrong quantities.
Re-examined. I spent two or three hours of an evening at the factory seven or eight times—I endeavoured to find out what the stock was worth to the best of my ability—we always rely upon the information regarding the stock given us by the persons who employ us—it would be nonsense to say that the disinfectant there was only worth £4—I always went to the factory with Barrow—I went to the office in Holborn about three times—I saw the prisoner there about once—I looked upon him as a clerk—I did not speak to him.
By the COURT. I have known Barrow about two years—I had never made a valuation for him before—I knew him as Barrow.
FREDERICK JACKSON . I was employed at 190, Holborn, from February to December, 1901, as a clerk—the prisoner was a junior partner there, and to a certain extent looked after the books, correspondence, and typewriting—he drew cheques, and paid wages—he was never at the factory to my knowledge—it was my duty to forward goods to the factory—these goods checked here were sent to the factory from May 15th to June 15th, the valuation of them comes to £532 15s. 10d.—this document (Produced) was all made at one time, but I take it from a book where the goods are entered as they go out—Mr. Puttock came into the employ last October—I received invoices at 190, Holborn, for goods supposed to be delivered at the factory, which were vouched for by the people at the factory—there were two clerks at Holborn—there was a van which was used to carry goods from 190, Holborn, to Blackfriars—Barrow has two sons-in-law, White and Read—goods were delivered at Read's shop from Holborn, and were properly invoiced by Read—I have not seen any of those invoices since—I do not know that any goods were removed from Blackfriars to Read's shop.
Cross-examined. This document was written about a month ago, and since this prosecution was instituted—I was asked if I could account for the goods which went away from Holborn to the factory—there is no entry in the books of the firm of this list of goods, they are valued according to the valuation—I valued them when I put the prices in from the price list—I entered the service of the Barrow & Way Company last February twelve months—before that I was living at Hoar Bros., Hampstead Road, from September to February—before that I lived at 47, Telson Road, Peckham—I am not prepared to say where I was in 1895, because I do not think it right—I am on ticket-of-leave now—on December 12th, 1892, I was sentenced to two terms of five years' penal servitude, each by His Lordship—I decline to say if I had been in penal servitude before that.
Re-examined. I did not tell Barrow and Way my previous history—I have been getting an honest living since I came out of prison.
RICHARD GODSALL KIMBER . I am a printers' engineer material manufacturer—my business was established by my father in 1820—I value for the London County Council, and have had considerable experience in valuing printers' materials, etc.—I should not give as many details as there are in this valuation unless I was asked for an inventory in detail; I should only give a round figure—I have seen a sample of the labels at this factory—I did not see the quantity—some of them are worth £3 a thousand, some less—none of them are worth so small a sum as 3s. a thousand, nothing under 7s. 6d.—some of them were printed in five colours, and are very expensive—I have known the prisoner 13 or 14 years—he came into my employment as a boy—his character has always been thoroughly satisfactory—I have trusted him with thousands of pounds, and would do so again.
The prisoner received a good character.
Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury on the ground that he was largely influenced by Barrow, and on account of his character. Six months' in the second division.
Before Mr. Justice Grantham.
MR. CAMPBELL Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.
GEORGE PLATTEN . I keep the Jolly Bargeman public house, Cheshunt Marsh—I know the prisoner—he came to my house on February 22nd, about 4.15 p.m., driving a pair of horses in a four wheeled van—he drove over the grass instead of on the road—when he got down I said, "Would not it have been easier for your horses down the road instead of on the grass; see how you have cut it up"—he said, "Have I done the grass any damage?"—I laid, "Well, you have not done it any good"—he said, "I do not want to come here at all"—I said, "Well, you had better tell the firm so when you get home to-night"—he had had a drop too much, he staggered against the gate-post—he was in the house about ten minutes—he was not served; I should not have served him if he had asked to be served.
Cross-examined. He has been driving biscuits round to my house for about 12 years—there has not been any unpleasantness between us latterly—I complained to his firm in the early part of the summer about his not coming to my place for about a month, and I had an apology from the firm—he left my house about 4.35—I know the time because I had two colts in the stable, and I was in the house when the prisoner was there, and as I went out to feed the colts I looked at the clock.
DENIS ROACH (Police Sergeant.) I have measured the distance from the Jolly Bargeman to where the deceased was run over—it is four miles 1,745 yards—I measured it on a bicycle with a cyclometer—I have tested the cyclometer from one mile-stone to another.
THOMAS HUMMINGS . I keep the Swan beer house, High Street, Ponder's End—on February 22nd, between 4.30 and 5 p.m. I was looking out at my bedroom window—I saw the deceased and a boy named Felton playing at whip top on the west side of the road—I saw a van belonging to Wright & Son, biscuit manufacturers, London, coming along on the east side of the road—I saw the deceased follow up the top, which was whipped across the road by Felton, when the van knocked the deceased down, and the two near side wheels passed over him—no attempt was made to pull up the horses, which were going quite ten miles an hour—he was knocked down about four feet from the kerb.
Cross-examined. I had been watching the boys for about half an hour—one boy was on one side of the road, and one on the other, and they were sending the top across from one to the other—I could see about 60 yards along the road towards Hertford—it is a Macadam road—there was no vehicle in the road except the prisoner's van—the boys were on the west side of the road, and clear of where the driver should have been—the off side was the west side—my house is on the off side—the road runs due north and south—the van was going towards London, it was between me and the boy when he was knocked down, and he was running from the off side to the near side in a slanting ditection—he was not running
from the near to the off side—if he had kept on, the van would not have cleared him—he did not turn and make his way back to the pavement—he was about four feet from the kerb when he was knocked down—I called out, "The driver is not in fault"—that was my impression at the time, because the boy was running across the road immediately in front of the van, but when I saw the driver did not attempt to pull up I altered my opinion.
By the JURY. One horse was trotting and the other cantering—there was only one top between the two boys.
CHARLES HOY I am a labourer, of 3, Boundary Cottages, Ponder's End—I was in High Street, Ponder's End, about 5 p.m. on February 22nd—I saw a van coming from the direction of Hertford, by Dr. Agar's—the near side horse was galloping very fast, and the off side horse was trotting—the prisoner was driving and hiding the horses, with the reins in his left hand, and with a whip in his right—two little boys were playing in the road—when I first saw the van, it was about 100 yards from them—the prisoner beat the horses till he got within 50 or 60 yards of the boys—after he stopped beating them, the reins were hanging very loosely—when he got 15 or 16 yards from the boys, he shouted—I saw the near side horse hit the deceased and knock him down, he was on the near side of the road then, and three or four feet from the kerb—he ran skew-ways across the road after his top from the off side of the road to the near—I ran to pick him up—a policeman named Gibson said to me "Look after the van, stop the van," and I left the boy, and ran after the van, and shouted to the man to stop—he stopped after he had gone 50 or 60 yards—he got down just as I got agin the van; he staggered about, and in my opinion he was tight—if he had had the reins in his hands, as men generally do, I do not think the accident would have occurred—he could not hold the horses and it took him some seconds to gather up the reins after he had knocked the boy down—that was the cause of his going so far.
Cross-examined. Gibson and I were 15 or 20 yards away when the boy was knocked down—we did not call out to the driver as he passed, he was not whipping his horses then—they were not going so fast when they came upon the boy as they had been—I looked at my watch as soon as the accident had happened, it was 5 p.m. then—I did not see the boy hit the top or run after it, all I saw was the boy running from the off side to the near—I had seen him on the near side a few minutes before—when he was knocked down he was making to the near side—the instant before that he must have been running to the off side, and upon the approach of the van he turned instead of continuing on and was caught the van was well on its proper side—the prisoner did not seem very much upset after the accident, he was not trembling or very much agitated—he seemed to be a great deal the worse for drink—I was present when the Coroners' jury, found a verdict of accidental death.
Re-examined. The horses were going eleven to twelve miles an hour at the time of the accident—I have driven horses, I have driven three in a team to London—I did not halloa out, because I thought that if I had been driving I should have pulled the reins and missed the boy.
the off side of the road—I noticed a two-horse van coming from the direction of Hertford—the horses were going at a furious rate—the prisoner was driving—he was whipping the horses—the reins were hanging loose—when he got opposite us he called "Hi, Hi," which called my attention to the deceased, who was playing in the roadway—I had not seen him before—he was twenty or twenty-five yards from me, and about ten feet from the kerb, on the west side of the road—when the prisoner shouted I saw the deceased dodge in front of the horses to the east side of the road—the near horse knocked him down—we ran after the van, and called to the driver to stop—he stopped about fifty yards away, and got down, I found that he was drunk—I told him I should take him into custody for being drunk when in charge of a van, and furious driving—he said, "Who are you, then?"—I said, "I am a police officer"—he said, "You are a fly man, aint you?"—I said, "I do not know that I am, I shall take you to the police station for being drunk while in charge of a van, and furious driving"—I took him into the house of the deceased's father—the boy was there, and we waited till the doctor arrived—the prisoner said to the boy, "Stand up cocky, you are not much hurt"—I took him to Enfield Highway police station.
Cross-examined. When the prisoner spoke to the deceased the doctor had not arrived—the prisoner was at the house seven or eight minutes—I did not call out before the van reached me—I made no effort to stop it till after the accident—I saw both boys in the road—the prisoner was driving on his proper side.
Re-examined. The van was about twenty yards from the boys when I first noticed it—I did not call out, because I was in plain clothes, and I did not consider he would take any notice of me.
DR. PHILLIP FRANCIS EVANS . I live at Darby Road, Ponder's End—on February 22nd I went to Mr. Star's shop in High Street, Ponder's End, about 5 p.m.—I saw the deceased there in a very collapsed condition—he was conscious—I saw him four times altogether—he died at 12 p.m.—on February 26th I made a post mortem examination—the cause of death was the rupture of the left kidney and abdominal hemorrhage—the injuries were such as were likely to be caused by a van passing over his body.
EDWARD STAR . I am employed at the Royal Small Arms factor, Enfield Lock, and live at High Street, Ponder's End—I saw nothing of this accident—my boy was 9 years and 11 months old—the prisoner came into my shop with the constable and said to my boy"Stand up, cocky, you are not much hurt"—he was the worse for drink, and was supported by the constable.
Cross-examined. The doctor came in while the prisoner was there and said that the deceased had collapsed, and he would see him again in a short time.
WALTER FREDERICK HAINES (Police Sergeant 63 N.) On February 22nd the prisoner was brought into the station at Enfield Highway at 5.30—he was drunk—his unsteady gait, his smelling strongly of drink, and his utter indifference to the seriousness of the charge made me think so.
Cross-examined. I did not tell him that he smelt of drink—he did not seem nervous or agitated—the constable brought him in on a charge of drunkenness, and I said to him "You hear what the constable says"—he said nothing—I had not heard that the doctor had said no bones were broken—I was relieved from duty at 6 o'clock—I believe the prisoner was allowed out on bail by another officer.
WILLIAM SULLIVAN (Police Sergeant 34 F.) I am Station Sergeant at Enfield Highway—I relieved the last witness on February 22nd at 6 o'clock—I took the charge against the prisoner at 6.20—he was charged with being drunk in charge of a pair of horses and a van, and with furious driving, and with causing bodily harm to Edward Lewis Star—he said "Do you consider that I am drunk?"—I said "Yes, I do"—he said "I hope you will not put me along with Dick Burge"—I thought he was drunk—at 10.50 the same night he was bailed out in one surety in £100.
Cross-examined. I thought he was drunk from his unsteady gait, and he treated the whole matter in a jocular manner while the boy was alive and the degree of his injury was unknown—I should think the accident would have sobered the prisoner instead of making him unsteady—it might have made him nervous—I believe he has been 18 years in his employment.
----HART (Police Inspector.) I saw the prisoner at his house, 156, Armagh Road, Old Ford, on February 23rd—I told him the boy Star had died at Ponder's End on the previous night, and that I was going to take him into custody and charge him with manslaughter—he said, "I am sorry"—I took him to the station, where he was charged—he made no reply.
Cross-examined. One of the witnesses called before the Coroner was Isaac Rainberg the van-guard, who was with the prisoner.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I am not guilty, and will call witnesses on my behalf."
The prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that he had been to Hertford, where he had stayed the previous night, delivering biscuits; that he had called at a number of public houses on the 22nd and had had several drinks, but was not drunk; that his horses had been out since 9 a.m. and were tired; that they were going eight or nine miles an hour; that one of them would not trot, and had to wear a special boot to prevent him hitting himself; that the deceased ran to the centre of the road and then seemed to get confused, ran back again, and was knocked down; that if he had kept on he would have cleared the horses; that it was impossible for anyone to hare avoided the boy; and that after the accident he pulled up as soon as possible.
Evidence for the defence.
ARTHUR BURLES . I am a glass blower, of 10, Southbury Road, Ponder's End—I was a witness before the Coroner—at the time of this accident I was walking in High Street in the opposite direction to the cart—when I first saw it it was 10 or 15 yards from where the accident happened—I saw the boys playing at tops—I heard the prisoner call out, "Get out of the road"—the boys were then whipping the top across the road—when the prisoner called out they both started to run to the off side—one of them cleared the van, and the deceased seemed to
get a bit confused and turned back—he was five or six yards from the horses when he started to run—I do not know how near he was when he turned round, because the horses knocked him down—I believe he would have cleared the horses if he had kept on running—the driver could not prevent it, he was too close—I had never seen the prisoner before—the van stopped 20 or 30 yards further on—when the prisoner got down he started to run towards the spot where the boy was knocked down, then he stood talking to the constable—he did not seem drunk to me.
Cross-examined. I believe I said before the Coroner, "He was not out of-the-way drunk"—he did not seem to be drunk at all to me.
JOSEPH DENNISON . I am a glass blower, of 6, West Street, Hackney—I was with the last witness in High Street, Ponder's End, on this evening—I saw the boys playing at top in the road—I saw the van coming along, and I heard the driver shout out as loud as he could, "Get out of the road"—he was about fifteen yards from the boys then—one of them ran to the near side of the road, and one towards the off side—then the latter came back and met the horses, and the wheels went over him—the driver pulled up as quick as he could—somebody shouted out, "It is not the driver's fault" when the prisoner came back to the spot.
Cross-examined. I was sober—when I was in the High Street no one spoke to me about creating a disturbance in the street—the constable who took the prisoner said he was drunk, and I said he was not drunk—he shivered like a leaf on a tree—no constable spoke to me that afternoon—I was solid sober—I was at the inquest—I was going to give evidence—I spoke one or two words, when the Coroner said, "That is enough, stand back"—that was because I spoke too quick—he said he thought I was drunk—I did not know the prisoner before—Buries is my brother-in-law—I was in just the same condition before the Coroner as I am now.
WILLIAM LILPLAIN . I am an engineer, of High Street, Ponder's, End,—I have a shop in the High Street—I was standing at the door when this accident happened—I heard some shouting, and saw a boy lying in the road, and the wheels of a van going over him—the driver and the constable met in the road—the constable said, "You can see what you have been and done," and the driver said, "Yes, unfortunately I can"—the constable said, "I shall take you to the station"—the prisoner said, "Who are you?"—he said, "I am a policeman"—the driver said, "You are a clever man"—the constable said, "You are drunk"—he said, "No I am not"—he was very excited, and I think he went three or four different colours while the policeman was speaking to him—in my opinion the man was not the worse for drink—I have been in Ponder's End about fifteen years—the prisoner is an entire stranger to me.
Cross-examined. I say the prisoner was not intoxicated—he was excited and trembling—he went red, blue, and white, not green.
GUILTY.—Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury. Four months, hard labour.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. METCALFE Prosecuted.
THOMAS HENRY EVERED . I am a coffee-house keeper, of 4, High Street, Stratford—on Sunday, January 5th, I left the premises at 10 a.m. securely fastened—nobody was left there—I returned about 10 p.m.—I live there also—I found the drawers had been opened and the contents scattered all over the floor—a desk had been opened and the things thrown about, and two suits of clothes were taken out of a chest of drawers—the entry had been made through a back window, where there is a yard with a wall—I communicated with the police—I have identified my clothes since—I value them at about £2 each suit.
JOHN BARBER (649 K.) On February 21st, about 2 p.m., I went to 227, Bow Road, which is a coffee-house, where I saw Allen—she is employed there as a servant—I said to her, "It has come to my knowledge that you have in your possession a number of pawn tickets relating to some stolen property, what have you to say about it?"—she said, "I have no tickets, I know nothing about any"—I said, "I have positive knowledge that you have some tickets"—she then said, "Well, I will tell you the truth, if you will come to our house I will give them to you"—I accompanied her to 3, Water Court, close by—I said the tickets related to some stolen property—I did not say what it was—she gave me two tickets, one numbered 1038, on T. H. Downton, 190, Bow Road, for a suit of clothes, pawned on January 6th, 1902, for 10s., in the name of Phillips; the other, No. 2552, pawned with the same pawnbroker on December 10th for 3s.—that one has nothing to do with the case—she took them from behind a picture which was hanging on the kitchen wall—she is 18 years of age—when she gave me the tickets she said, "These are all there are now, I gave the others to a chap named George, about 10 of them, you know, Bill, who you saw me with that night"—she referred to a night some six weeks previously when I had seen her with Biscoe—"He got me to pawn the stuff and asked me to mind the tickets for him I wish I had never seen him now"—I took her to the police station—on the way I saw Police Constable Carpenter with the other prisoner—the female prisoner said "O God, here is Bill, they have soon got him"—in answer to the charge she commenced to make a statement—she said,—"I," and then left off.
GEORGE CARPENTER (536 K.) At 2.30 on February 21st I saw Biscoe in Bow Road—I said I should take him into custody for breaking into the coffee shop near Bow Bridge, and stealing two suits of clothes—he replied, "All right, I will go with you, but you know where I have been, it could not have been me"—I took him to the police station—he said, "Now I will tell you the truth, you know where I live; Tager Amos came in and said, "I have got two suits of clothes to run in; I said, It is no use for me to take them in, they know me, but I have a young woman who can do it, and she can take them"—the prisoners were both charged—Biscoe said, "We did not know they were stolen, we could not pawn them, so I gave them to her to take it in"—on the way to the police
court he said, "I am going to take all the blame on myself, I brought her into it."
THOMAS CROSS REEVE . I am assistant to James Henry Downton, pawnbroker, of 190, Bow Road—I produce certificate 1038 for a suit of clothes pawned on February 6th by the female prisoner—I knew her before as Phillips—I lent her 10s. on them.
The prisoners statements before the Magistrate. Briscoe says: "I was washing in a lavatory in Girdon Chambers and Tager Amos came in to me and said, 'Hulloa, stranger, I have got two suits, I have been discharged from sea, and asked me to run them in for him; I said, 'No, I won't, I have got a young lady that will;' I got this young woman."—Allen says: "All I say is that I only pawned one suit."
The Recorder considered that there was no case against ALLEN.
NOT GUILTY .
Biscoe's defence. "I did not know the property was stolen when I took it."
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. ATTENBOROUGH Prosecuted, and MR. METCALFE. Defended.
CHARLES ARTHUR BECK . I live at 14, Windmill Lane, Stratford, and manage the pawnbroker's and jeweller's business, which belongs to my mother, Caroline Beck—I employed the prisoner, on her behalf, from about the end of May till July 28th last year, as a salesman—for that purpose he had access to the jewellery—he was again employed for three days in October, while I was away temporarily—after he left I received information from Bowring, and went to another pawnbroker, Mr. Sheffield, in January, where I was shewn this silver watch, my mother's property—I recognize it by the stock mark D B inside—it was not sold out of stock—it had been pledged, was out of time, and was put into stock—I also went to Hows & Lambert, pawnbrokers, of Ilford, and identified this lever watch and 18-carat keeper ring (Produced) as my mother's property—the watch bears the stock mark C E O inside—it had never been sold out of the shop—the Albert (Produced) I do not identify, but the ring is an 18-carat keeper with our stock mark D inside—Bowring shewed me this wedding ring with the stock mark C inside—that is my mother's property—the two watches and two rings I value at £6—I never gave the prisoner authority to pledge them—if the prisoner bought out of stock, his duty was to have paid me, and to have entered it in the sale book on the day it was paid—he only bought the two which are entered, for which he paid, and they were entered in the stock book, as these should have been if bought.
Cross-examined. We do not erase the stock mark when we sell—the goods are entered in the sale book when sold, and these are not entered—the prisoner was ill after he left, he did not leave on account of illness—we took stock on August 1st—I did not give him a character, I referred him to Mrs. McCarthy, his last employer—I gave him a personal
character to her—I missed a certain amount of stock, but not the four articles here—I have the sale book here—we do not put down each article separately in the stock book, but the total amount—the prisoner's duty was to put the money in the till, and to enter the sale in the sale book—this was checked by me—goods do not come back across the counter not approved of, without my knowledge—it does happen but very seldom—I do not remember an instance—I have been in business 27 years.
Re-examined. If it did happen the goods would be crossed out of the sale book—the result of the stocktaking in August was that we were £12 short, and that pledges of stock were not entered—I told Mrs. McCarthy that the prisoner was a pushing salesman, but I did not like some of his ways, that I was rather short in stock, but could not prove it to be through him, and referred her to Mr. Wild, of Barking, from whom I had him.
LEWIS HAMMETT . I am manager to James Sheffield, a pawnbroker of 22, Axe Street, Barking—this silver watch was pledged with me on September 25th, 1901, in the name of G. Hawkins, 21, Cambridge Road—22s. 6d. was advanced on that and a ring.
Cross-examined. I had seen the man before—I did not ask his name—the boy wrote out the ticket—he might have given a false name.
JOHN EVAN LAMBERT . I am a pawnbroker at Ilford—the silver watch, Albert chain, and 18-carat keeper ring produced were pledged with me on October 11th, 1901, in the name of George Hawkins, Cambridge Road, Barking, for £3.
EDMUND BOWRING . I am manager to Mrs. McCarthy, pawnbroker, 205, Caledonian Road—the prisoner entered her service as assistant on October 24th, and left on February 11th, as salesman—in consequence of something said to me, I examined the prisoner's coat before he left—I found two pawn tickets, one of Lambert for £3, and one of Mr. Sheffield for 22s. 6d.—I spoke to Mr. Beck about it—the prisoner sold me this ring about three weeks before he left, some time in January, for £1—he told me he had it for a customer, but was a little late and lost the sale, as the customer had already purchased one, and that it was no use to him—I showed it to Mr. Beck.
Cross-examined. I was not surprised to see the prisoner in possession of jewellery, that is usual with pawnbrokers' assistants, who are good judges and make money by their judgment—he was a good salesman and increased the sales considerably, but he had the advantage, which his predecessors had not, of the electric light, which improved the appearance of the windows, and thus increased the sales—I never complained about his abilities—my assistant Frederick Williams suggested that I should look in the prisoner's pocket—I never did so before.
Re-examined. I had good cause for looking, which was confirmed by the result.
HENRY GRAHL (Police Sergeant K.) I arrested the prisoner on February 14th—I asked him his name, he said "Hawkins"—I said "I am a police officer, I shall arrest you for stealing a quantity of jewellery from Mr. Becks, a jeweller, of Stratford, between May and August last"—he said, "I bought a lot of jewellery of Mr. Beck's and can produce the receipt for it."—I took him to the station and he was charged.
JOHN MARSHALL (Detective Officer K.) I searched the prisoner after he was arrested on February 14th—I found on him three pawn tickets, a gold enamelled locket, a gold chain, a gold watch and chain, a silver watch, a pair of scissors, a purse and, 14s. 3d. in money, some memoranda, a cigar case, and a silk handkerchief—two of the pawn tickets were issued by Lambert and by Sheffield.
The prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that he bought some of the articles over the counter and others in the ordinary way of business to make a profit, that he put the money for what he bought in the shop in the till, but the book was not always there to enter it, but when it was he entered it.
NOT GUILTY .
267. ELIZABETH SUTTON (53) , to stealing a dress skirt, the property of Alfred Thompson and another, having been convicted at Clerkenwell on February 5th, 1901 (Several other convictions were proved against her). Fifteen months hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(269) WILLIAM THOMPSON (40) to obtaining a set of harness from Alois Brommer by false pretences. Two previous convictions were proved against him. Twelve months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. SANDS. Prosecuted, and MR. STEWART. Defended.
DAVID WILLIAM PICKERING . I am a corn dealer, of 550, Romford Road—on February 5th I, at 5.30, put a pony, a cart and harness in charge of my boy and saw him take them to the stable—I went there at 7.45 and found the door open, but no pony or harness—I went to the police at once, and next day I went with Sergeant Bell and saw them in a stable at Kingsland—they are worth about £56.
Cross-examined. I do not know whether it was the prisoner's stable—it took me half an hour this morning to get from Ilford to Bethnal Green, and from Ilford to Spitalfields would take about the same time.
WILLIAM EUSTACE (Police Sergeant K.) On February 6th, between 8 and 9 p.m., I went with Sergeants Bell and Wren to a stable in Aston Mews, Haggerston, occupied by the prisoner, and found a horse and cart and harness—I afterwards took them to the prosecutor, and he identified them—I waited at the stable till 3 a.m.—I saw the prisoner at his house, 200 or 300 yards from the stable, on the 2nd, and said "I am a police officer, I want you to come with me to your stable"—when we got there I showed him the pony and harness and said "This horse and harness were stolen last night with a cart; how do you account for the possession of them?"—he said "I found them here on Wednesday night at 11
o'clock; on Thursday morning two men came and took the cart away; I did not buy the pony; I told them I would if they took it up to the stones; I do not know them; I have seen them a number of times at the Market; I promised to see them at 12 o'clock"—I took him in custody—he was admitted to bail on the Friday morning at the police court, but he was in prison at 12 o'clock on Friday—I have been with him to the Market, but be could not point the men out or give a description of them—there were three other horses in the stable.
Cross-examined. He has carried on the business of a horse-dealer—taking them to the stones means on the Caledonian Market—a large number of horses are sold there by people who buy them in a casual way, and no warranty is asked for; anybody can go in—the prisoner was in bed—it was 3 a.m.—the stable was not open—we have not recovered the trap—it is a four-stalled stable—this was between 8 and 9 p.m., '26 hours after they were stolen—he said he had seen the men several times at the market.
EDWARD BELL (Detective Officer.) On the morning of January 6th I examined this stable door and found that it had been forced—the lock of the coach-house is inside, and of the stable outside, and both were broken—the marks were probably made with an iron instrument—I went to the prisoner's stable the same night—I was with Eustace all the time—the other officer is not here.
Cross-examined. There were no marks on the door—I found the prisoner in possession of recently stolen property, but beyond that I do not point to any evidence inculpating him.
Evidence for the defence.
WILLIAM EUSTACE (Re-examined.) Staples is a corn dealer at Spitalfields Market—I do not know whether steps have been taken to get him here—I have seen him, and he made a statement to me—he is employed in Spitalfields Market—that is not near the stones.
MRS. DARKINS. I am the prisoner's wife—I remember his being called out of bed in the middle of the night by Inspector Eustace—on the day but one before that, Wednesday, the 5th, between 6 and 8 o'clock, I was at home—my husband came home and we had tea, and afterwards he took me out for a drive—I do not know how many ponies he had in the stable apart from this one—I never lost sight of him.
Cross-examined. We came in from the drive about 11.30—I do not think he came indoors with me.
HENRY RYDER . I am generally known as Joe—I have been employed in the prisoner's stable about five or six weeks from to-day to clean out the stables—on this Wednesday a couple of young fellows who I had never seen before, knocked at the door and said, "Is the governor at home?"—I said, "No"—they said, "What time will he be in?"—I said, "It might be 8 at night and it might be 8 am."—he was out driving with his wife—they came again about an hour afterwards, 9 p.m., and brought a pony and harness and cart and wanted to put them in the stable—they said, "We got it in exchange at Romford and we think the governor might buy it"—I let them put it in—they have sales at the Caledonian Market on Fridays—on Thursday night two officers came, and I turned the gas up and they saw the harness hanging up.
Cross-examined. I saw Eustace there—I have not talked to him about the pony—he asked me whose stable it was, and I told him my governor's, I did not know his name—Eustace said that it was a stolen pony—I told him that the horse and harness came in on Wednesday night—I did not say, "It was here last night when I came at 9 o'clock; I do not know how it came here: I did not see it come in, and I do not know who brought it"—I had gone away from the stable at 5 o'clock that afternoon, but did not tell the detective that, or that I came back about nine and unlocked the door and went in and saw the horse and harness—it is absolutely untrue. I locked myself into the stable—I told him the same as I have told you.
Re-examined. I was at the Court when the charge was preferred, if they wanted to call me—I was not called—no other persons put these questions to me; this is the first I have heard of it.
Evidence in reply.
WILLIAM EUSTACE (Re-examined.) I had a conversation with the last witness and took a note of it—he said, "I work for Ginger Tom"—I asked him how the horse came there—he said, "I don't know, I only came here last Tuesday, it was here then"—I pointed out the particular horse and harness—I said, "You had better be careful"—he said, "The truth is it was here last night when I came here at 9 o'clock, I don't know how it came here, I did not see it come and cannot say who brought it; I left the stable at 5 o'clock and locked the door and came back at 9, unlocked it and came in and saw it here. Tom told me to look after them while they were here; I sleep in the stable."
Cross-examined. That was all said to me by Joe, and therefore it was within my knowledge before the Magistrate—there was a solicitor—he did not call Joe—Joe had told me a lie at the very outset, being frightened—the prisoner's statement was that the horse had been brought and he refused to buy it.
GUILTY —He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Row Street in 1893, of a like offence. Three years' penal servitude.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
THOMAS FOX GOULD . I am a master baker, of 39, Plaistow Grove, West Ham—I used to serve the prisoner's house, 28, Melrose Road, Leyton, with bread, and on November 22nd, about 8.30, I went there for some money which he owed me—before getting to the door I had to go through a gate with an iron railing—Mrs. Foulsham came to the door and closed it again, and the prisoner came behind me while I was facing the door, and seized me by my throat—I had a basket on my arm—he flung me on some iron bars, but the basket saved my life—before I came in contact with the railings I saw his face, and am sure it was the prisoner—I had never seen him before—I became insensible, and was bleeding from my head—he dragged me by my shoulders over the pavement, and I sent a lad for a constable, who came, but the prisoner had then gone inside—I saw him go into the house—I saw Beale there, and there were
two men on the pavement who I should say were friends of the prisoner—I made a statement to the constable, who went and knocked at the door—I was taken to a doctor—I went three days afterwards with a constable and Beale to the prisoner's house and identified him—I said, "That is the man who did it"—he said, "I have not done with you yet, I will do time for you"—he was arrested two days afterwards.
THOMAS BEALE . I live at 9, Alma Terrace, West Ham—on Saturday, February 22nd, I went with Mr. Gould to Melrose Road with the van delivering bread—I went with him to the door of the house, and the prisoner picked him up and dragged him outside—I had never seen him before—I identified him on the 25th.
ALFRED ROWSELL . I live at 40, Barber Street, Stratford—on February 22nd I saw Mr. Gould assaulted, but cannot identify the person who did it—he threw him against the iron railings and then dragged him outside.
GEORGE HOWARD (Policeman.) On February 22nd I was called to 28, Melrose Road, and saw Mr. Gould on the footway outside the prisoner's house, with his forehead laid open—I knocked at the door—the prisoner opened it—I said, "A man has been seriously assaulted by some one in this house"—he said, "I know nothing about it; I have been sitting here"—he was in a chair—I took Gould to Dr. Nicholls—on February 25th I went to the house with Beale and Gould and another officer, who addressed the prisoner through the door—I heard a portion of the conversation—on February 27th I arrested the prisoner on a warrant—he said, "You have made a mistake"—I should say that Gould was sober on the night of the assault—the prisoner was perfectly sober.
JOHN HOWITT (Police Sergeant.) On February 25th I went to 28, Melrose Road, with Gould and Beale—Beale said, "This is the man who pushed Mr. Gould down"—I asked the prisoner to oblige me by putting on the cap which he wore last Saturday night, and again said to Beale, "Are you sure this is the man?"—he said, "I am sure"—the prisoner said to Gould, "I will enter an action against you, you b----; I have not done with you yet; I will do time for you"—we then left.
SIDNEY RICHARD NICHOLLS . I am a medical practitioner, of 235, Leytonstone Road, Stratford—Mr. Gould came to me between 7 and 9 o'clock with a contused and lacerated scalp wound, two inches long, extending through the soft tissues—it could have been caused by his being thrown against some railings—I dressed it—he was not at all the worse for drink.
Evidence for the defence.
Cross-examined. I picked him up and wiped his face—a policeman came and took him away—I did not see anyone go into the prisoner's house after that—I—went in and asked the prisoner"what was the matter—he said, "This is what you get by asking for your rent"
MARY PORE . I am single and live at Leytonstone—I answered the door to Mr. Gould and told him to come on the Monday—he said that he wanted the amount—I live there—I did not see what took place—the prisoner was in the kitchen sitting on a chair when I opened the door.
Cross-examined. No other man was in the house.
JANE FOULDSHAM . I am the prisoner's wife—I gave evidence before the Magistrate—Mr. Gould came to the door on February 22nd, and said that he came for his money—I said to Miss Pore, "Tell him to come on Monday"—he said, "I want my money"—I went to the door and he said "I want my rent, you b----, I will have my money"—he stood knocking at the door, but I saw no more of him—nobody touched him, or threw him down—my husband was in the kitchen and did not go out.
Cross-examined. Miss Pore was there the whole of the time—I do not think she heard what he said to me—there was no other man in the house—Gould knocked several times—the knocking did not wake my husband up—I told him about it when he woke up at 8 30—he did not go out then—Sippitt came in not half an hour after the prisoner had gone, and Gould was taken away—my husband was asleep then—he woke up and I told him what had happened—there was money owing—when the prisoner came on the 25th, my husband did not say that he would be even with him yet, or"I will do time for you"—Gould could hardly stand upright.
By the COURT. My husband did not wake up before Sippitt came, and Sippitt came after the policeman—my husband did not close the door and answer the prisoner"I know nothing about it, I was sitting here."
By the JURY. Nobody could get out the back way.
GUILTY . Two months' hard labour.
MR. GRANTHAM Prosecuted.
LYDIA JANE BRADFORD . I am a nurse—I was attending the prisoner's wife, who was confined in February—the child was eight days old—the prisoner had a long dark moustache on the Tuesday—he did not come back to sleep that night—on the Wednesday afternoon he came back and had no moustache—I was standing at the foot of the bed—I did not hear a knock at the door, but the wife did, and I went to the landing and saw the prisoner and his wife's father in the passage.—I saw that there was something wrong—I did not know whether he had had too much to drink, but I ran into his wife's room and locked the door—he burst it open and rushed in, and his wife threw a stick at him from the bed—she was sitting up, and he put both his arms round her neck—she put the sheets round her head or over her shoulders, and he produced a revolver—I took it to be in his right hand—he pointed it towards her face—I grasped it by the barrel and put one arm round his neck, and got it away—it did not go off—he was making towards me and I knocked him down between the dressing table and the washing stand—I called the police and gave the revolver to the father—I removed the poker from the fireplace and threw it under the bed, and removed a bottle of medicine, and the father came in, and a great St. Bernard dog, and we could not get the dog away.
ago he threatened to cut my throat, and on a Tuesday, at the end of November, he cut the throats of ten chickens—on Tuesday, February 4th, he had a big dark moustache—he went out and stayed away that night, and returned next day, shaved—I did not know him when he came in—he burst the door open and stood at the foot of the bed and said, "Will you come,? or I will shoot you"—I said, "Yes, I will"—I was sitting up in bed—the revolver was not very far from me, but I threw up the clothes over my head and saw no more—the nurse very likely saved my life.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You did not say to my father, "I only did it to upset her"—I can understand what you say (The prisoner is a German.)
Re-examined. He came home ill—I cannot say if he was in a fit, but not to my knowledge—there was a bother between us the day before, and he said he would not stand it any longer (The prisoner handed in a paper to the Recorder, stating that he had a fit, and the father-in law accused him of shamming, and he said that he only did it to upset the mistress; that he walked about all night, and pawned his wife's watch, and got a drop of drink, but did not know how he got the revolver; that he had no intention of doing his wife any harm, but he had been drinking whiskey and beer all day; that on the Tuesday he said, "Lizzie, promise me you will come with me when you are better, if you don't I will shoot you."—I cannot say whether he was sober or drunk—he said, "I will shoot you "on the Wednesday but not the rest of it—he did not say on Tuesday, "If you don't come with me I will shoot you"—my father and mother do not live in the house.
WILLIAM CLARK . I am the prisoner's father-in-law—he had left on the Tuesday, and I was there on Wednesday, February 5th, when he returned home—he had taken off his moustache—he seemed rather excited, and walked about the kitchen, and then ran upstairs—I saw something on his left side, and told my eldest son to go for the police—I heard the door burst open, and the nurse said, "Go for the police"—I got my hand on the lock of the street door, and heard something go downstairs with a thump, and went up and saw the nurse with a revolver similar to this in her hand—I took it out of her hand with the prisoner after me—I threw it out, and he backed me against the door, and shut it, and lamed my hand—he said at the station that he would have his own back, and that they could not hang him for it—this photograph gives a correct idea of him with his moustache on February 4th.
By the COURT. He had quarrelled with his wife before—he threatened to cut her throat about November.
Cross-examined. You lifted up your fist to me on Monday night—I did not say, "You are wanting to pay funeral expenses by killing your wife"—I did not on the night before threaten to send for a policeman if you did not go away.
—I went out to the prisoner and said "Come along, old fellow, pull yourself together"—he said, "Let me lie down for five minutes"—I said, "No, come along with me"—I searched him at the station and found one ball cartridge on him—when he was charged he said, "Not at my wife."
CHARLES RAWLINGS (614 K.) I was called to the prisoner's house on the Wednesday, and this revolver was handed to me—I found four ball cartridges and one empty one in it—the prisoner was lying down, apparently in a fit—he was taken to the station on an ambulance.
ALEXANDER CONNELLY (Police Sergeant, 45 K.) I saw the prisoner lying down in this house, and sent for an ambulance—he was going to make a statement, but I stopped him—when he was charged he said, "You can't hang me, and no matter what I get I will kill then when I come out, this is not the first time I have been in the dock."
Cross-examined. You bear a very good character.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I have only been married nine months, and not to the whole family—I have always given her my earnings. "
GUILTY — Nine months' hard labour.
MR. METCALFE Prosecuted.
GEORGE WILSON . I am stable foreman to Arthur Chambers, of Childs Mews, West Ham—his bay gelding, cart, three cushions and whip were safe on February 6th at 7 p.m.—the stable door was locked and the gates padlocked.
ARTHUR CHAMBERS . I am a coal merchant of 600, Mile End Road—on February 7th, at 4 a.m., from information I received, I went to my stable and found the lock of the door and gate forced, and missed a horse, a trap, a set of harness, and a whip—they were produced to me at the police court—there were marks of some iron instrument about the lock.
WILLIAM EUSTACE (Detective Sergeant, K.) On February 6th at 10.50 p.m. I was with Bell and Wren at Aston Mews, Kingsland, concealed—I heard a cart drive up, I looked through a small wicket gate and saw a cart with the prisoner and two other men in it drive into the Mews—the prisoner was on the off side—he had the reins, and there was a lamp on that side—he turned the light inwards, which prevented it shining into the Mews—I went out and he got out—the horse was very wet and the harness did not fit, it belonged to a pony—neither of the men spoke—I caught hold of the prisoner, and another officer of another man—there was a struggle and one of the men went against the horse—they shut the wicket, gate and shut out the other con-stable, and I was left alone to struggle with two men—the prisoner struggled to get away—the two other men got away—I moved the horse, and the prisoner said, "I know nothing about it; I do not know them; they asked me to have a ride, that is all I know"—
I said, "You were driving"—he said, "No, you are wrong"—I said, "I am a policeman; I shall detain you"—I did not know that the things were stolen, but I found it out the next day, and told the prisoner so, and that he would be charged with receiving them—he made no reply.
EDWARD BELL (Police Sergeant K.) I was concealed in the stable with another officer—I saw Eustace go out and I went to open the door but could not for the wheel, when the Sergeant forced the prisoner against the gate—I said, "What is your name?"—he said, "William Coe. I do not know anything about it, governor, the men asked me to have a ride"—I took him to West Ham.
GUILTY .—The police stated that the prisoner was connected with Darkins (See page 390.) Nine months hard labour.
MR. HOPKINS Prosecuted.
GEORGE GODBOLD . I am a butcher of Hanwell, and have another shop at Southall, which I shut up securely on Friday, February 21st, and went home—next day, about 8 or 8.30, I found the shop window broken and unfastened, and missed a leg of pork, a shoulder of mutton, and some sausages, value 9s., and on the Sunday morning I found that the gas meter had been opened and closed again—it was a shilling in the slot meter, and I had put Is. in on the Wednesday night, which was not there.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I have known you some considerable time—I have known you at work.
Re-examined. He was sometimes a customer of mine—I know nothing about his character.
ROSE BALLARD . I live at Clarence Road, Southall, opposite this shop—on February 21st, about 11.40, I was looking out at my window and saw the prisoner leaning against Mr. Godbold's shop, and a few minutes afterwards I saw him again and lost sight of him and then saw lights in the shop—soon afterwards he came out with a parcel in newspaper under his arm, and the light went out—I saw him go home to his own house—I have known him some time—he came back and whistled to his wife, who was standing three gates from my house—he went home and she went the other way.
THOMAS BALLARD . I am a son of the last witness—on the night of February 21st I saw a light in Mr. Godbold's shop and a man inside who I do not know—I went in further and saw the prisoner's wife leaning against the railings—I went home to where my mother was and saw the prisoner come from the alley, where there is a back way into the butcher's shop, with a parcel—he went towards his own house, came back, whistled to his wife and then went home—his wife walked the opposite way—I did not see whether he went into his house—it is in the same street, about 30 doors from the butcher's.
I saw the prisoner coming up the road—I went towards him and he ran across the road into his front garden—I said I should take him fur breaking into 39, Clarence Street, and took him to the station.
ALBERT VOGWELL (109 T.) I was on duty at the station when the prisoner was brought in—before the charge was taken he said, "You will have to prove that I stole the meat," but when the charge was read over he said, "That is right"—I had said nothing about stolen meat, but something was said in his presence about the prosecutor giving me information—I went to the shop—a back window downstairs was broken and the catch put back, which enabled a person to get in—I found blood on the broken glass, went back to the station and found blood on the prisoner's left wrist and a slight puncture which had been bleeding—the hasp of the gas meter had been forced and the lock had come off—here is a piece of glass from the window with blood on it—it would be almost impossible for a right-handed man to do it; the hole was where a man would put his left hand.
Cross-examined. I did not say before the Magistrate that I took some glass out of the pantry—you asked if I took a piece of glass out of your wrist and I said, "No."
CECIL NEWELL . I am collector to the Brentford Gas Company—I collected the rate last on February 18th—it is a shilling in the slot meter—I examined it on February 24th and compared the contents with the record—there was a deficiency of 14s., and the hasp had been bent so as to enable anybody to take the money out.
Cross-examined. I found two other gas meters broken open—the Company issued a notice warning customers against two men going about with tools, and this last week men have been sent to take the money.
Prisoner's Defence. I am as innocent as you are. I was coming home and saw two men standing by the butcher's shop. The constable said he wanted me for stealing meat, and that is why I said "I do not know anything about any meat."
GUILTY . He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Middlesex Sessions on April 13th, 1901. Judgment respited.
Before L. Smith, Esq., K.C.
275. THOMAS RUSBY (15), THOMAS ROSS (15), and WILLIAM KNOCK (14), PLEADED GUILTY to breaking and entering the shop of Thomas Saunders and others and stealing four packets of jelly, having been convicted of felony at Stratford, Rusby, on November 30th, 1901; Knock on December 24th, 1901; and Ross on February 3rd, 1902. To enter into recognizances ; and
(276) MICHAEL DONNELLY (26) to feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Henry Douglas with intent to steal; also to breaking and entering the dwelling house of John Pierce and stealing a quilt, a blanket, and a pair of sheets; having been convicted of felony at Clerkenwell Sessions on November 15th, 1898, in the name of John Kelly. Four other convictious and three summary convictions were proved against him. Three years' penal servitude on each indictment, to run concurrently. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
Before Mr. Justice Grantham.
277. CHARLES LYNN (26), PLEADED GUILTY to receiving 14 yards of cloth, 18 pairs of socks, and other articles, the property of Collette Jones, knowing them to have been stolen. Seven other convictions were proved against him. Three years' penal servitude.
MR. SYMMONS Prosecuted.
RHODA MULLINS . I am the prisoner's wife—he is cowman to Mr. Bywood, at Chapel Farm, Eltham—we lived at 1, Chapel Farm Cottages, they are attached to the farm—up to February we had lived on—good terms—we have been married seven years, and have three children—the last was born on February 4th—after the child's birth my husband seemed very strange—on February 11th he said he did not feel well, he was so shaky—he had an attack of influenza in December—he stayed at home for a few days—he appeared to be weak—there were no signs of any unkindness to me then—on February 11th he did not sleep at night at all—on the 12th he was very strange all night and did not sleep—he was no better on the 13th—he went to-work during the day—he came in at 6 a.m., then again at breakfast, and again at 10.30 a.m.—at those times he seemed very strange, and he seemed very quiet—I did not know what was the matter with him—I suggested that he should see a doctor—on February 14th, about 12 a.m., I was in my bedroom on the second floor—my husband came up to me—he had a cup of cocoa with him for me—he came and sat on the box beside me and said, "Well, dear, how are you?"—I said I was better—he gave me the cocoa—I drank a little of it, but not much—I put the cup down on a chair—there was no quarrel between us—he got up and took hold of the back of my neck and said, "You b----I will do for you"—he pushed me on the floor—he held me with his left hand—I do not know what he had in his right hand—I felt something come across my throat—I caught hold of it and found it was a sharp instrument—my fingers were cut—there was a cut across my throat, and one on my head—while I was on the floor he kicked me two or three times on the side of the head—Ethel Rywood, who was in the room ran out for help, and a man named Digmot came in—my husband rushed for him—I got up and went out of the room—I went into the lodger's room, and put a sheet round my neck—my throat was bleeding—I went to the next door neighbour, and was afterwards seen by a doctor—I have recovered now.
HENRY SHERWIN TOOGOOD , I am medical superintendent at the Lewiham Infirmary—the prisoner was brought there about 3.20 p.m., on February 14th, suffering from a wound in his throat—I did not see it then because it was dressed, and it was not wise to meddle with it—the
front of his clothes were stained with blood—he was under my care for thirteen days—I formed the opinion that he was of unsound mind—I saw the wound whilst he was with us—it was a deep wound, but it did not sever any important structure—during the whole of the time he was in the infirmary he did not speak to anyone, and lay with his eyes on the ceiling—he only answered a question when he was pressed, and then reluctantly—he did not ask for food at all—when the Justice of the Peace visited him, and asked him why he hurt his wife, he said because he saw two men climbing into the window, who were coming to kill him and his wife—he is a man of not very good intelligence—if he took drink, that might temporarily unhinge his mind, but he did not present any symptoms of delirium tremens—I think there must have been mental unsoundness.
JAMES SCOTT I am the medical officer at Holloway—the prisoner came to the prison on February 27th—since then I have seen him from time to time—he has been quiet and reserved, he is evidently of weak mind—I have not been able to get any evidence of actual delusions, but his mind is a weak and unstable one, and one likely to be easily upset—I think he would be easily affected by alchohol—I am certainly of the opinion that he did not know what he was doing at the time.
GUILTY, but insane at the time. He had also previously made an attempt on his own and his wife's life. To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.
280. CHARLOTTE EARDLEY (37), and JAMES EARDLEY (39) Having the care and custody of Elsie Eardley, Lilian Eardley, and Maud Eardley, did neglect them in a manner likely to cause them unnecessary suffering, and injury to their health.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. STEWART and MR. NOLAN defended
ELIZABETH MURPHY . I am the landlady at 35, Church Street, Deptford—the prisoners have occupied two top rooms there, for the past eight months, paying 5s. a week rent—he is a carpenter, and goes to work at 6 a.m.—he returns between 6 and 7 p.m.—the female prisoner did not do any work—I believe the male prisoner's wages were 10 1/2 d. per hour—they have three children at home, Maud, aged seven, is the eldest; Lilian, two and a half or three and Elsie about five months—I was present at the time of Elsie's birth, she was a healthy child—I think the female prisoner suckled it for about six weeks, then she said she fed it by hand—about six weeks after its birth I noticed it began to get very thin—I advised her to give it milk and barley water, and take it to a doctor—I have seen it about four times since then—a fortnight before Christmas the other children were out, and the baby was left quite alone—I heard it moaning—I went into the room—the other children had been out about 45 minutes then, and the mother had been out about two hours—the child was on an old couch—it had only a bit of old covering on it—its face looked very cold and haggard—there was some sugar, and condensed milk smeared on its face—the room is very large, and was very cold—tried to cover it over, it was very cold—the female prisoner returned about two hours afterwards—I next saw the child on Christmas Eve, about 3 p.m.—it
was on the sofa—there was nobody else in the room—it was left alone for four or five hours—there was no fire in the room, and the child was blue with cold—I next saw it on January 25th, about 6 p.m.—the female prisoner had had a few words with her husband—the child was poorly clad—the female prisoner was going out—I advised her to stay in, and offered to mind the baby by my kitchen fire—Mrs. Shaw came to pay me my rent, and she advised the prisoner not to go out, but she went out about 11 p.m—I have known the prisoner to leave the child alone for four or five hours on occasions—sometimes Maud was left there, but she is only a child herself—I do not knew what she did when she went out, her rooms were not at all comfortable, and were very dirty—one of the rooms was more like a dust hole or w.c.—the children never looked clean to me—the female prisoner was often drunk, she was a sly drinker.
Cross-examined by MR. NOLAN. I have sat in my kitchen and seen her go outside to drink—I occupy the first floor and the ground floor—I am at home all day—I used to open the front door for her when she came in—they had a key but they did not often use it—the prisoner had not had a miscarriage a short time before the birth of this baby—I was not very much interested in what the prisoner did—she had to pass my room to go in or out—when I saw the child, alone a fortnight before Christmas it had only an old petticoat or crochet or a piece of old shawl on—it was not enough to cover it—its feet were exposed—it had a diaper on—I did not look under the petticoat—Maud went out about 3 p.m. on Christmas Eve, and the female prisoner had Lilian out with her—Maud had gone out before I went up to see—the baby—I went up because my dog had just had pups, which were on the top of the stairs, and when I went up to them I heard the baby—it had a piece of flannelette round it—it was less warmly clothed than before—it had a nightgown on—there were no bedclothes on the sofa—the female prisoner came down on the Tuesday before January 25th and said she thought her child was dying—she had no money and she wanted to get it two pennyworth of brandy—I had not the money, so I lent her some things to pawn to get the brandy with, but I cannot say if she got it—she had words occasionally with her husband, but I do not know him as a quarrelsome man, they seemed comfortable enough—I have seen him the worse for drink about four times, but I only saw him come in two or three times a week—he did not come home rather late on Saturdays, he came home about 1 o'clock and then went out shopping with his wife and came home about five or six and did not go out again—I have never known him to ill-treat her—on January 25th she told me he was going to strike her, and that was why she ran away—I had not seen him come in that day—on the 27th the female prisoner went to the mill and annoyed my husband at his work—I did not notice what the child had on then—I was annoyed with her for going to my husband because she intended to get him discharged, she told me that—that was not the only time I had a dispute with her—when she was confined she allowed her dirty washing to lay about in my yard and. I did not like it—on Saturday, February 1st, we had a raw—she struck my daughter on the mouth—I could not get at her to hit her and I threw a piece of coal at her—if my husband had not held me back I should have struck her—she had a black eye—on February 2nd the baby died—I had not told
anybody about the ill treatment before the gentleman from the Society called at my house—the female prisoner has a respectable old mother—I do not know if she has got a sister married to a sergeant in the Artillery—I did not inform her people the way the children were being treated I did not know where they lived—I did not think they were being as ill used as they were.
Re-examined. When the female prisoner returned on January 25th with the child she had had plenty to drink.
By the JURY. She annoyed my husband from spite—the child was insured.
By MR. NOLAN. I never said anything about the child being insured before—she used to get my little girl to say she was not in when she was in when the insurance man called, so he was not paid—I do not know if the policy has lapsed—the man was not paid for seven weeks, and he never came any more.
Cross-examined by the male prisoner. I have always said you were a good father so far as I know—I have never seen you the worse for drink—your little girl has attended school 24 times out of 27.
CHRISTOPHER GOODING . I am a fully qualified medical practitioner of 81, High Street, Deptford—Elsie Eardley was brought to me on January 27th in an emaciated condition—she looked in a miserable state of health—she had been ill for a long time and ought to have had medical attendance—her condition must have been obvious, because she had lost nearly all the fat off her body—I gave her certain directions—she brought it again on January 30th—there was no noticeable difference in it then—I did not weigh it—it was not unusually dirty.
Cross-examined by MR. NOLAN. There were no traces of sores—the mother gave me to understand that my instructions had been carried out—I stopped the brandy which she had been giving it—it is impossible for me to say if the child's condition was from mal-nutrition or want of nourishment—it did not strike me that she was insufficiently clothed.
Re-examined. There was nothing about the child which led me to think that my instructions had been carried out.
By the COURT. Being left in a cold room by itself would make it more difficult for the child to assimulate food.
Cross-examined by the male prisoner. I do not remember your wife asking me if there was eczema on the child's neck.
WILLIAM JOHN DAWSON . I am a medical practitioner of 71, High Street, Deptford—on February 2nd, about 9.30 a.m., I went to the prisoner's house—I saw the baby—it was in a dying condition—I examined it—it was very emaciated and weighed 51b. 7oz.—it ought to have weighed 12lbs.—I made a post morten examination on February 4th—it had sores on the left side of its neck—it was in a very neglected and dirty state—there was no fat about the body or in any of the internal organs—I saw no organic disease "which would have prevented it from—taking nourishment—I should say the child had been neglected for some weeks—its condition could have been caused by irregular or improper feeding.
Cross-examined by MR. NOLAN. A child of 11 months should have nothing but milk—when first I examined the child there were sores on
Its private parts and on the left side of its neck—I think they were caused from caused from and dirt, not from eczema.
Re-examined. I found no traces of diarrhoea—the child died about three hours after I saw it.
JAMES CHOWN (N.S.P.C.C. Inspector.) I went to the prisoner's house on February 4 th—I saw the two rooms and the children—I sent for Dr. Alexander and pointed out the condition of the children and the rooms to him.
Cross-examined by MR. NOLAN. I went there about 12 a.m. on February 4th—the back room was in a shocking state, and almost devoid of furniture—the front room was the one used for living in—I went there on account of receiving a complaint from the police—the male prisoner, came to my office and made a statement and signed it—I have been told that he was bound over for assaulting his wife.
DR. JAMES GUY ALEXANDER . I was called in by the last witness on February 5th—in the outer room an attempt had been made to clean it, but the room in the rear was in a most shocking condition—the bed and the couch were very dirty and grimy—I think it was injurious to health to sleep on them—I examined Maud superficially by pulling up her clothes—she was very dirty about the legs and lower parts of the body—she was thin and emaciated—I saw nits in her head—her hair had been recently cut as if an attempt had been recently made to clean it—I saw some vermin, but not many—I examined Lilian in the same way—her skin was flabby and she was emaciated—I do not think I took any notice of her hair—I do not think there was any organic disease to account for their condition.
Cross-examined by MR. NOLAN. The back room was used as a lumber room—vermin in the hair is common among children of this class, and more particularly in delicate children, and these were very delicate.
INSPECTOR CHOWN (Re-examined.) I went the day before the doctor did, and advised that the child's hair should be cut.
Charlotte Eardley, in her defence, upon oath, stated that she could not suckle her children and had to feed them on milk, that the last baby did not thrive, that the policy on its life had lapsed some time before it died, that for husband treated her very unkindly and had struck her many times, that he allowed her about 28s. a week, out of which she had to pay the rent, that she had had 12 children, that she fed this one on milk and barley water, that she did not (get drunk, that she washed the sheets of the bed once a week, and that she did not leave the children alone for hours at a time.
Mr. Nolan called
MATILDA BARNES . I live at 51, Regent Street, Deptford—my husband is a general dealer—I have known the female prisoner for two years—I was with her when this child died—I saw the child with the prisoner in the street before it died—it was in a shawl wrapped up very nicely.
LOUISA TILLING . I am the wife of a sergeant in the Royal Horse Artillery, and am the female prisoner's Sister—I have frequently seen her at her home—the children were kept in a very good and clean condition, and she was always very kind to them—she was not kindly treated by her husband—I offered to take care of the two girls, and she accepted my offer, but the male prisoner would not let them come—I never saw the child.
NOT GUILTY .
Before L. Smith, Esq., K.C.
MR. ARTHUR GILL and MR. CAMPBELL Prosecuted, and MR. BIRON
JESSIE DOBSON . I am the wife of Frederick Dobson, a stockbroker, of 36, Ranelagh Gardens, Barnes—on December 10th I left the house in charge of my servant, Annie Gardner—on returning on December 20th there were missing a plated claret jug, toast rack, silver mounted crumb scoop, a plated fern bowl and fruit dish, and sugar basin, value £10—I identified them at the police court.
Cross-examined. I have had the articles about five years—when I value them at £10 I suppose I should have to pay £10 for them.
BENJAMIN LEESON (Detective H.) In consequence of information received on January 29th I went to 45, Blakesley Street, St. George's-in the-East, about 3 a.m., the residence of James Burgess, the prisoner's father and prisoner's brother Hugh—on searching the premises, in a cupboard in the front room used as a parlour, I found a brown paper parcel, which I opened in the prisoner's presence—it contained eight or nine pieces, and amongst other things the articles produced—I took them to Arbour Square police station—the prisoner and his brother Hugh were in the charge room in custody—I said to the prisoner, "How do you account for this silver being at your father's address? '—he replied, "I know nothing about it, and I do not know how it came there"—his brother made the same answer—on February 5th, the charge connected with tobacco, on which the prisoner was arrested, was dismissed between three and four p.m., and the prisoner came into the charge room, and referring to the silver said, "That is my property, I bought it of Silvester Collins, I know I have done wrong, but I have been led into it"—I told him he could not have it.
Cross-examined. The prisoner gave me the address where I should find the tobacco, but not till I said I was going there—I went there—I first saw the prisoner about 1 a.m,—he was in the charge room until I made inquiries—the father said I should find nothing there, but when I found the parcel, and asked, "Whose is this,?" he replied, "I do not know, my son Hugh brought it here, he will get into trouble"—I was present when he gave his evidence at the police court—he is 72 years of age, and respectable, and not in good health—I did not caution the prisoner before questioning him—he was there on another charge, I had no intention of charging him—he was detained for unlawful possession, which had nothing to do with me—the silver was in a box—the prisoner was in the police station about two hours to await inquiries whether the Customs would take action in regard to his possession of tobacco, as to which he had been discharged, because the marks had been obliterated, and it could not be identified as stolen—his statement as to the silver was
voluntary, and I did not question him, but it was lying there, and he wanted it—the charge was withdrawn against his father and his brother Hugh—the father died last Friday—I do not know if it was from the shock of this charge—the prisoner made a long statement to the effect that he had bought the silver and the tobacco from Collins.
Re-examined. The prisoner was detained on a charge of the unlawful possession of tobacco—when I questioned him as to the silver no charge had been made with regard to it.
THOMAS DIVALL (Detective E.) The prisoner and his brother Hugh were arrested on January 29th, about S a.m.—the plate produced was exposed in the police station—I said, "A quantity of plate and silver has been found at your father's house, he has been asked to account for its possession, he denies all knowledge of it;" he said, "I know nothing about it."
Cross-examined I was making inquiries as to this plate which had been found at the father's house; and the prisoner was detained, as had been done in a similar case to ascertain whether he would be charged under the Customs Act, with carrying tobacco without a license—the prisoner was discharged by the Magistrate on the charge of unlawful possession—I had seen the manufacturer, Mr. Palmer, with regard to the tobacco—I asked for a remand to enable me to make inquiries as to the plate found at the father's house.
FREDERICK WEMBLEY (Detective H.) On January 29th, about 8 a.m., I went to the prisoner's addresses at 13 and 15, Mansell Street—he was then in custody at the station—he occupies one room as kitchen, bedroom and sitting room at 15, and at 13 a sort of cellar, where he carries on a cheap, stationer's and hawker's business, and where he has a small ante-room and another small room which is occupied by his niece—I believe he employs two hands—on February 7th I went again to 13, Mansell Street—I had been in communication with Mrs. Dobson between that and the fifth—I said to the prisoner, "The silver plate found at your father's house has turned out to be the proceeds of house breaking, and I shall arrest you for being concerned with your father and your brother, in receiving this property, well knowing it to have been stolen"—he said, "My father and brother know nothing about it, I bought it from Silvester Collins and cook it to my father's house"—then the postman brought this letter, which the prisoner opened. (From Mr. Wells, the prisoner's solicitor, dated February 6th, advising the prisoner to give the police particulars of goods he had purchased from Silvester Collins.)—as soon as I read that letter I said, "Have you any other property here, as I am going to search your place?"—he said, "Yes, I will let you have it" and "I have had no sleep since I have been home, expecting to see some of you gentlemen here every night"—he then went into 15, Mansell Street, his place of business, and produced this clock from the front room, which was not in his occupation—he said, "I got this at the same time from Silvester Collins"—I said, "Whose room is this 1"—he said, "Mrs. Connor's," and after a pause, "I have been advised by my solicitor to say nothing, and he will pull me through"—the room was poorly furnished and the clock was inconsistent with any of the furniture there—the police have not been able to trace Silvester Collins—there is a large family of Collinses.
Cross-examined. The prisoner read the letter before he made his statement—the clock was not in the room when I went there first on January 29th.
Re-examined. I notice at the end of the letter, "If you agree with this and will send us a list thereof, we will write a letter to the police giving the particulars. "
ALEXANDER FULLERTON (Detective B.) I received the prisoner into custody from Wensley and he was charged at Mortlake with burglary—I have made inquiries for Silvester Collins—I have not been able to find such a man.
Cross-examined. I have been to a house said to be his, and seen a woman said to be his wife.
DAVID THOMAS MORTON . I am a clerk—I live at 3, Thornton Road, Mortlake—on January 3rd my house was broken into—amongst the articles stolen was the clock produced—the price was 24s. wholesale—it is a combination of thermometer, barometer, and clock, in one case.
The prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that he bought the goods of his brother-in-have, Silvester Collins, to please his wife, although he had no present use for then, and that he paid £1 for the basket, 7s. 6d. for the dish, 15s. for the claret jug, 7s. 6d. for the fern bowl, 5s. for the toast rack, and 5s. for the crumb scoop, and he took them to his father's for safety, as he had no place to lock them up at his business in Mansell Street, bud he had no suspicion at that time that they had been stolen.
Evidence for the defence.
SARAH EMMA BURGESS . I have been married to the prisoner 13 years at Christmas—I have a brother, Silvester Collins—until this enquiry I knew nothing against his character my husband bought these articles from him on the Sunday after Christmas—"William Riley was present—my brother Silvester came in and said he had these things for sale, and, of course, I said I should like them—ray husband first said he did not think they would be any use—my brother named the prices: £1 for the cake basket, 5s. the toast rack, 7s. 6d. for the fern bowl, 5s. for the crumb scoop, and 15s. for the claret jug—we took them home the same night to 15. Mansell Street, but I am forgetful in locking the door, and I said: 'Until we have a better place it will be best to take them round to your mother's," and we took them there—the clock came from Silvester, and I gave it to Mrs. Connor, who lives in the next room, as I heard the other things were probably stolen—up to then I had no such idea, and I had never known the prisoner's family nor my family do wrong.
Cross-examined. I had no use for them—I was going to have a glass case to keep them in as ornaments and use them when I wanted them—I did not know that was a claret jug—other articles were bought about a fortnight or three weeks before Christmas—then on the Friday Mrs. Fetshfold brought the message that my husband was in custody for being in possession of tobacco—I knew he was in custody about 5 a.m. and that the police had possession of the things about 8 o'clock—I was told that the detectives said if he knew anything about them there was five years for him, and I went to the Court—I telegraphed to Silvester that Will (The
prisoner.) was in trouble and to come at once—I have not seen him since—my husband was not at home when the clock was given to Mrs. Connor.
GRACE COLLINS . I am a niece of Mrs. Burgess—I work for the prisoner in his paper business—my husband is John Collins—my father lives at Mortlake—I was present when Mrs. Sil Collins brought the things in—they were laid on the table and my aunt took a fancy to them—her husband said "I do not think they are of any use to you," but after a while he bought them—on February 7th the police came to Burgess place, and I fetched the clock and gave it to Divall.
Cross-examined. Aunt told me she had given the clock to Mrs. Connor as a present, because it was stolen.
Re-examined. I do not remember whether I said before the Magistrate that it was because the other things were stolen—my aunt took the clock to Mrs. Connor.
WILLIAM RILEY . I live at 13, Mansell Street—I am one of the prisoner's machine hands—I was present when the property was brought into the house by Silvester Collins, in a portmanteau, which was opened, and some things taken out.
LEONARD STANLEY MELVILLE WELLS . I am the prisoner's solicitor—I was present when James Burgess, the prisoner's father, gave evidence—it was read over to him, and I saw him sign it—he was sworn and submitted himself to cross-examination—I never told him if he held his tongue I would pull him through—he came to me to know what he should do, and I said "I do not know what to advise you, I will drop you a line," and my advice is in the letter produced.
Cross-examined. I made no arrangement—I have the certificate of the fathers' death.
The deposition of James Burgess teas then put in and read:—"I am the father of the prisoner, and was formerly charged with him. The prisoner brought the silver things I see here, to mind for him for a few weeks until such time as he got an other place. They were put in the cupboard, and remained until the police came. I told the police that they belonged to my son, and that he asked me to mind them until such time as he got a place where they would be safe, as he thought they would not be safe where he lived. I did not mention his name, I merely said 'My son.'"
Cross-examined. The police told me they were looking for tobacco—I did not say"You can find nothing here"—they found the brown paper parcel with the stuff in it in a cupboard in my room—I believe they searched two rooms before they found the parcel—I deny saying that my son Hugh brought the property there.
The prisoner received a good character
NOT GUILTY .
MR. A. GILL offered no evidence
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
283. HARRY KENDALL (62), PLEADED GUILTY to obtaining by pretences two bracelets and a ring from James Bond, a watch and other articles from George Woodrow Wells, and two rings from Joseph Burns, with intent to defraud, having been convicted at Clerkenwell, on March 8th, 1881, as Charles Adolphus Waterman. Three other convictions were proved against him. Twelve months' hard labour , and
MR. PASSMORE, Prosecuted.
JOHN BOND . I am a printer of 22, Commercial Road, Lambeth—on March 1st, I was in Mepham Street—I was set about from behind by three men, who knocked me down—I got up, and they knocked me down again—I cannot recognize the man on my left, but the prisoner had his hand in my right-hand pocket—one of the other men had his hand in my left pocket, and I had my hand in the same pocket—when I got up a constable came up, and I said '"That is the one"—the constable ran, and I ran after him—I saw the prisoner's face when he had his hand in my pocket—these are my keys which were in my pocket—I have not seen my money again—this is my knife, it was in the pocket where the prisoner's hand was.
ELIJAH THURMAN (63 L.) On March 1st, about 10.45 p.m., I was at the corner of Mepham Street, York Road—I heard someone shout "Help"—I was in uniform—I saw the prosecutor with two or three men struggling—he was just getting up and they were holding him down—I ran up, they all three ran away—I ran by the prosecutor, who was getting up—he said, "After them, policeman, they have knocked me down"—in the next street there were two men running, the prisoner and another—there were not many people in the street and nobody else was running—I caught the prisoner—he said nothing—the prosecutor came up and said, "That is one of them"—I said, "What has he done"?—he said, "He has knocked me down"—I said, "Have you lost anything?"—he searched and found that he had lost his purse and money—after the prisoner was charged I went back to duty and found these keys on the spot where I arrested the prisoner—I do not remember the prosecutor saying he had lost any keys—I saw him a night or two afterwards—I asked him if he had lost anything, and he said he had lost a knife and some keys—about two hours after the assault I was looking for the purse—the knife I found where the assault was committed—when I arrested the prisoner he said, "I have got nothing to do with it, I was just going through the street, I was running after the other people, I did not know what was the matter."
By the JURY. There was a light close by—I did not have to use my lantern to find the keys.
By the COURT. It was not a dark night, it was quite light enough to see a man's face.
The prisoner, in his defence, on oath, said that he was going with his brother towards Hungerford Bridge; that he heard some shouting and
saw some persons running, that he started running and slipped down on some gravel; that somebody shouted out "That is one, hold him," and the constable claimed him, and that he was only starting to run when the constable caught him.
Evidence for the defence.
DANIEL CARNEY . I live in the Borough and am a costermonger—on Saturday week my brother was walking with me down to Waterloo Station when he fell into this trouble—he is absolutely innocent and we were not running—I did not see the prosecutor knocked down and robbed—I am sober now—I cannot say how many people were running.
GUILTY . He then
PLEADED GUILTY. to a conviction of felony at Southwark Police Court on January 25th, 1901. Six months hard labour
MR. ATTENBOROUGH Prosecuted and MR. O'CONNOR Defended.
JOHN FRASER DONALD . I am a surveyor, in partnership at Twickenham—in April, 1901, the prisoner used to come to my office and to my house at Wimbledon—he said that he was a surveyor in the service of the Great Western Railway employed by them in buying land, and that he could get me a situation of £580 odd—he showed me some documents in July—these (Produced) are some of them—I did not read them—he said that they represented 38,000 stock—I saw big figures on them, some thousands of pounds—he asked me to take care of them for him—I found him an envelope and he put them in and wrote on them in blue pencil "Mathews, Bank of England"—these application forms are in his writing—they are filled up by him to the best of my belief—on August 3rd we met at Twickenham and walked to the King's Head at Richmond where he said that he wanted £35 to pay the men—I gave him this open cheque (Produced) for £35—he did not endorse it in my presence, but this endorsement is his signature—it was afterwards paid by my bankers—on August 9th he came to me again and wanted another cheque for 67 for the same purpose—I went to a bank in Richmond which cashed it, and it was afterwards debited to my account at my bank—on December 2nd I went with him to Putney, and gave him this cheque for £100 on the London and South Western Bank, Putney, and he cashed it in my presence—on September 5th I met him at Wandsworth, and he wanted three separate cheques for the same purpose—I gave him these three cheques (Produced)—they bear his endorsement, and my bankers paid them on October 15th—he called to see me at "Wandsworth, he said that he was going to Reading and had not quite sufficient money, and asked if I would send some if he wired for it—I said 'Yes," and got a telegram, and sent him this money order for £5—ha said that he wanted the money, as the Company would not settle with him till September 26th—I also gave him other money—I believed his statement about his being a surveyor paid by the railway, I would not have advanced the money if I had not—he came to me and wanted the documents back—I do not know the date—I was to be paid out of them—I gave him back the security—I have never been paid; he kept putting it off from day today.
Cross-examined I did not tell the Magistrate that he said that he was paid at intervals by the Great Western Railway, or that I gave him back the scrip, because he might want them before I came back—I was not asked—I am 27 years old—I am not an engineer—I never had anything to do with railways—it did not come into my mind that a man surveying land would not want to pay men—I do not know that the Great Western Railway is the most wealthy Company in Great Britain—I do not think they would send their men out without money—I made no enquiries of him, I trusted him—I thought he was a bosom friend—I did not tell my partner about this because the prisoner told me not to tell anyone—he first told me that he was a surveyor in June, he was going to buy an estate of mine at Whitton—I did not ask him to find a purchaser for it—I did not say that I could not get my money out of the partnership, and that was the reason—he said that he was going to get the money back with his salary—I gave him the money to pay the men—I have never said that I gave it to him because I trusted him as a friend—I thought I had security, and that he was going to do a lot for me—I trusted him as a friend—he went to my wedding, and he paid my fare up for my wedding, and back, and my wife's fare—I have goods belonging to him, and he gave me a blue satin dress, a dress piece, a necklace, two dozen knives a dozen dessert knives, a garden roller, and some choice trees and plants—I had lent him £30, and those things would not amount to that—he paid my fare to Carlisle and back three times, and my wife's sister's fare from Euston—he gave me two bottles of whiskey, and lots of chickens and ducks—I have got two guns of his, a rug, and a fox boa—I did not ask him for a note of hand for any of this money—I got suspicious in October or November, and asked him for the money, but the letters came back through the dead letter office—I never said that there was no necessity for any security—I lost sight of him at the end of October, and had to write to him at the Richmond post office, but the letters never reached him—I heard where he was, and got a warrant, and he was arrested at Torquay about three weeks ago—I could not find him between October and February—I did not have the documents in my hand, he was standing by my side, and showed them to me in his hand—I only got a glimpse of them—I saw the figures £3,005—he gave them to me in the envelope, and I put them in the safe.
Re-examined. I believed all his statements about the Great Western Railway—I said before the Magistrate he was to pay me when the dividends came.
THOMAS CHARLES BROOKS . I am postmaster at Richmond—these are three forms of application to invest Government Stock—they can be obtained at any post office—they do not imply that the man has got the stock—it is not possible for any man to have £3,000 or £5,000 stock—it is limited to £500 Stock and £200 deposit, if a man states on these forms, "I hereby state that £3,500 is standing to my deposit account, that must be untrue.
Cross-examined. These are not very recent documents, they were printed in 1888, and one 1889.
Re-examined. There is no such number of a book as is here stated.
HARRY COLEMAN . I have been 27 years in the secretary's office of the Great Western Railway, and know all the surveyors personally—the prisoner was not one of them—Mr. Williams is the only person authorised to acquire land—so far as I know the prisoner had no power as a surveyor to engage men.
Cross-examined. Surveyors have no money to pay, they are paid by the company—if a man said that he required money to pay the men I should not let him have it.
WILLIAM HECKEMER (Detective Sergeant.) I found the prisoner detained in custody at Torquay, on February 20th, and read the warrant to him charging him with obtaining money by fraud—he said, "That is right"—I searched his lodgings at Torquay, and his wife gave me a bunch of keys—he was taken before a Magistrate on the 28th—I found this envelope sealed up in a bag at his lodging and asked his wife to open it—she did so in my presence—it contained two blank pieces of paper gummed together and this. (A request for the transmission of dividend by post.) and this bill (Produced.)
The prisoner, in his defence, stated upon oath that he was an engineer practising at Richmond; that he never told the prosecutor that he was a surveyor to the Great Western Railway or anything like it, or that he had to acquire land and pay men, or that he had the power to get him a situation; that the prosecutor took a fancy to him and they ware great friends, and once when he had not enough money in his pocket the prosecutor offered him £5, which he accepted and returned the next day or the day after, when the prosecutor told him if he ever wanted money to ask him for it, and he took him at his word and borrowed other sums to pay bills which he now produced, and was never asked for a receipt or security or I.O.U., and that the prosecutor asked him to sell some property at Whitton, and said that he would lead his partner to believe he pave more for it and would divide the profit with him, the prisoner; that he always intended to repay the prosecutor and was still able and willing to do so; that he never looked into the safe; that he did not write the papers produced, which were very old; and that Donald said at Torquay that—he was very sorry he had him arrested.
J. F. DONALD (Re-examined.) It was the prisoner who proposed that I should secure an estate for one sum and pretend to my partner that I had sold it for a larger sum and divide the difference—I did not agree to it—that was last September or October.
GUILTY . Eighteen months' hard labour.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, JUNE 7TH, 1902.