CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
SECOND SESSION, HELD DECEMBER 15TH, 1902.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND BY
MESSRS. BARNETT AND BUCKLER.
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, December 15th, 1902, and following days,
Before the Right Hon. SIR MARCUS SAMUEL , Knt., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir CHARLES JOHN DARLING , one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir JOHN WHITTAKER ELLIS , Bart., Sir DAVID EVANS , K.C.M.G., Lieut.-Colonel Sir HORATIO DAVIES , K.C.M.G., M.P., Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON , Knt., K.C., Recorder of the said City; JOHN POUND , Esq., FREDERICK PRAT ALLISTON , Esq., and THOMAS BOOR CROSBY , M.D., other of the Aldermen of the said City; ALBERT FREDERICK BOSANQUET , Esq., K.C., Common Sergeant of the said City; LUMLEY SMITH , Esq., K.C., Judge of the City of London Court, and JAMES ALEXANDER RENTOUL , Esq., 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
SAMUEL, MAYOR. SECOND 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, December 15th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
66. JOHN DAVIS (21), EDWARD HETTY (23), ALBERT JONES (24), and ISAAC ZUCKERMAN (19), PLEADED GUILTY to breaking and entering the warehouse of Arthur and Cook, Limited, and stealing fifteen blouses, three pieces of silk, and £1 16s., their property, Davis having been convicted of felony at the Thames Police Court as George Williams on March 14th, 1902, Jones at Worship Street Police Court on October 10th, 1902, Zuckerman at the Thames Police Court on July 3rd, 1901, and Hetty at this Court on October 21st, 1901, as Patrick Hopkins. Three previous convictions were proved against Davis, seven against Hetty, and four against Zuckerman. DAVIS and HETTY, Six years' penal servitude each; JONES, Twelve months' hard labour; ZUCKERMAN, Eighteen months' hard labour. —
(67). HENRY GILBY , to breaking and entering Holy Trinity Church, Haverstock Hill, and stealing two vases and one penny, the property of Benjamin Saunders Lloyd, having been convicted of felony at Marylebone Police Court on August 26th, 1898. Judgment respited. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]—
(68). WILLIAM BEVAN , to forging an endorsement on an order for the payment of £30 15s. Also to stealing a sheet of paper, an envelope, and an order for the payment of £30 15s., the property of Thomas Bentley Westacott. Also to forging and uttering an endorsement on an order for the payment of £4 11s. 8d. Also to stealing two sheets of paper, two envelopes, and two orders for the payment of £4 11s. 8d. and £1 10s., the property of Thomas Bentley Westacott, Also to forging and uttering an endorsement on an order for the payment of £4 11s. 8d., with intent to defraud, having been convicted of felony at the Guildhall, Westminster, on January 5th, 1901. Four other convictions were proved against him. Five years' penal servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
CONSAUVE PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. BODKIN Prosecuted, and the evidence was interpreted when necessary.
JEAN MENEZ . I live at 28, Mortimer Market, St. Pancras—in August I possessed 100 three per cent. Panama Bonds—they were held for me by M. Guyon, of Paris, for 1,500 francs—I came to England about June 25th—amongst other people, I met the prisoners shortly after my arrival—I had a valise and a parcel—I had these elector's tickets (Produced) in my luggage—the two signatures "Menez," at the bottom are in my writing—in August I went to Mitcham to work as a mason—I met with an accident there—I came back to London and went to 25, Frith Street—while there I saw Consauve, and he told me that Hoffmann wanted to see me—I went to see him at his house—he expressed his satisfaction at seeing me again. I was going to the hospital, and I gave my valise to Consauve, and paid him 6d. for the trouble of looking after it for me—the documents were in it then with this other document (Produced)—I was in the hospital eighteen days, and afterwards I went to a convalescent home at Brighton—I went to the hospital on September 9th, and went straight to Brighton when 1 came out, but I changed my clothes at Hoffmann's before I went to Brighton—he came to see me two or three times in the hospital—I was at Brighton for three weeks, and about the middle of October I went back to Mortimer Market—I there found a letter from M. Guyon, dated September 6th—I never gave anybody authority to sell my Panama Bonds nor did I intend to sell them—after I got the letter of the 6th I saw both prisoners—I told them that my name had been falsified and my bonds had been sold without my authority, and that I had a suspicion of them. Hoffmann said, "I am an honest man; I have not done anything," and he suggested that I should go back to France, and that he would find the money to enable me to go—I made up my mind to stop in England—if I had known that my bonds had been stolen I should have gone to France—I obtained my luggage, and opened my valise in the prisoners presence and two other Frenchmen—I said to the prisoners, "You have not stolen anything"—all my papers were there—neither of these letters dated September 11th and 16th were signed by me or by my authority—tin's cheque is not endorsed by me—I never saw it till I was at the police court the other day—I afterwards went to the police.
GEORGE GUYON . I live at 6, Boulevard St. Bastaville, Paris, and am a banker—I know Menez—I held his 100 Panama three percent. Bonds up to the middle of September against a loan of 1,500 francs—about September 11th I got this letter from London, dated September 11th: "M. Guyon, I am writing you to ask you to be kind enough to sell the whole of my bonds to the best possible advantage and as soon as
possible; I have just had the offer of a little business which will add materially to my income. I have succeeded in persuading this person to let me have the business at my own price, and I must strike the iron while it is hot. Please don't lengthen the transaction by a lot of correspondence, but act us if it was for yourself; I shall be satisfied, but act promptly. Immediately I receive in full, I will acknowledge same by registered letter. Awaiting a reply by return of post, yours, &c, Menez, 76, Whitfield, Street, Tottenham Court Road, London"—upon that I sold the bonds and sent the balance on September 15th—I have no London agents, sol went to Messrs. Jorden, Cohen, and Co., in Paris, and they gave me this cheque on Parr's Bank in London for £92 4s. 6d. (Produced)—I crossed it and sent it to 76, Whitfield Street in a registered letter—on September 17th I got this letter, dated September 16th: "I beg to acknowledge receipt of your favour of the 15th inst. I have received your cheque for £94 2s. 6d., for which I thank you. I have some difficulty in getting the money as the cheque is crossed, but it is only a question of a few hours, and I think I shall be able to get it to-morrow morning. I am writing to my children at the same time as to you to ask them to send me back the receipt for the deeds which I left with them. Immediately I receive it I will return it to you. Believe me, sir, yours sincerely, Menez"—later in October I got some letters from M. Menez—I believed those two letters came from the M. Menez who had deposited the bonds with me.
ARTHUR DANIEL MATHEWS . I am a postman, of Sidmouth Street Grays Inn Road—On September 16th I delivered a registered letter from Paris at 76, Whitfield Street—I cannot remember to whom I delivered it.
ROLAND MERRY . I am a clerk at Parr's Bank, 77, Lombard Street—I remember the prisoners coming there on September 16th, between 1 and 2—this cheque was tendered to Mr. Jarrett, the cashier—he spoke to me and I spoke to the prisoners in French, and explained to them that as it was a crossed cheque we could not pay it across the counter, or in fact pay it at all, as it would have to come through another banker—they seemed rather upset about it and asked me whether we could not do something—I asked them if they had any friends in London who had a banking account and who could change it for them, and they said "No"—I asked them if they were staying at an hotel and if the landlord could pay it for them—they said "No"—I then said if they would pay for a telegram to Paris and we could get instructions from Paris, we could pay it although it was crossed; that is the custom of bankers—that was done—they left and came back about 3.30, but the reply had not then come from Paris—they called at 10 a.m. next day—the reply had come from Paris the afternoon before—the cheque was then in order for payment—I asked them how they would like to receive the money—they said, "In gold;" I said, "Would you not like some notes?"—they said, "No, all in gold," and they had it all in gold—when the cheque was brought in on the 16th it was already endorsed—
they both helped themselves from the pile of money on the counter—I have compared the endorsement with the two letters—I should say decidedly that all three signatures are in the same writing.
Cross-examined by Hoffmann. The cheque was endorsed before I saw it; it may have been endorsed in the bank.
GEORGE PARKINSON JARRETT . I am chief cashier at Parr's Bank, Lombard Street—I saw the two prisoners come in on September 16th—I cannot remember seeing the cheque endorsed—when it came into my hands it was already endorsed—I referred the men to Mr. Merry, as I do not speak French—on the 17th we cashed the cheque—to the best of my recollection Hoffmann took up the money.
ALBERT DRAPER (Detective Sergeant.) On November 26th I was in Old Compton Street—I saw the prisoners there—I told them, in French, who I was, and said I should take them to the police station for obtaining a cheque for £92 4s. 6d., and forging an endorsement to it; Hoffmann said, "I did not take anything, I accompanied my friend Consauve to the bank; he obtained the money and signed for it. I did nothing, nor signed for it"—we went to the station, where I showed them the cheque—Consauve, in Hoffmann's hearing, said, "Yes, that is the cheque, and the endorsement on it is mine; I and my friend Hoffmann were in Charlotte Street one day, I don't know the date, and a young man came to us and asked us if we would do him a service; he then took us to a bank in the City, but before going into the bank he took us into a public-house and gave us something to drink. He then produced a cheque and a letter which bore the signature Menez, also a sheet of white paper and told me to copy the signature Menez on the paper. This I did several times. He then told us to go to the bank and ask for the money, and if they wished it to sign the name Menez on the back of the cheque. He came outside the public-house; at the bank they were not willing to pay, and said we must go the next day; we told the man"; the next day we saw him again; we went to the bank and the stranger remained outside; I endorsed the cheque on the back on the counter, and they gave us the money in gold as the man had directed us; I went outside and gave the gold to the man; the man gave me £1, and as Hoffmann owed me 2s. I kept the £1."—I took that statement down in writing.
Hoffmann's statement before the Magistrate. "I am innocent; I am sorry I went into the bank."
Hoffmann's Defence. "I have nothing to say; I wait for the decision of the jury: I am innocent."
HOFFMANN, GUILTY †— Twelve months hard labour; CONSAUVE, who received a good character, Nine months in the second division.
NEW COURT.—Monday, December 15th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
71. JOHN WILLIAM HOWLETT (25) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a gold watch, the property of Elizabeth Martin; also to stealing a gold ring and other articles, the property of John Strong; also to stealing a pair of trousers and other articles, the property of David Walsh; also to forging and uttering a notice of withdrawal of £3 10s. from a deposit account; also to stealing a Savings Bank book, the property of H.M.'s Postmaster General. Twelve months'hard labour. —
(72.) ALFRED GEORGE BARNES (25) , to stealing, while employed in the Post Office, a post letter containing orders for 7s. 6d. and 1s. 6d.; also to stealing a post letter, the property of H.M.'s Postmaster General. Nine months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(73.) EDWARD WILLIAM RICKELL (31) , to stealing, while employed in the Post Office, a letter containing postal orders for 7s. 6d. and 1s.; also to stealing a letter, the property of H.M.'s Postmaster General. Nine months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(76.) THOMAS VICTOR PARKER and EDITH JANE ASHLEY , to obtaining £6 5s. and other sums from Walter Charles Douse by false pretences; also to forging and uttering a paper writing purporting to be signed by Henry Lendener; PARKER also to stealing £4 4s., £6 5s., £24, £1 15s., £10, £7, and £50, the monies of Walter Charles Douse. PARKER, Five years' penal servitude; ASHLEY, Five days' imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, December 16th, 1902.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
NOT GUILTY .
78. ERNEST HENRY BISHOP and SARAH ANN BISHOP were again indicted for unlawfully and wilfully neglecting Rose, Lily, and Florence Bishop, children under sixteen years of age, in a manner likely to cause them unnecessary suffering and injury to their health, to which SARAH ANN BISHOP" PLEADED GUILTY . Six months in the second division. MR. HUTTON, for the prosecution, offered no evidence against ERNEST HENRY BISHOP
NOT GUILTY .
MR. NICHOLSON Prosecuted.
ELIZABETH KNEE . I am the prisoner's wife—we were separated about two months ago under an order of the Court on account of his persistent cruelty—I was living with my two children—on December 1st, about 9 p.m., I was visiting some friends—I returned home and found the prisoner in the kitchen with the two little girls—he asked me if I did not think it was time I went back to him; I said no, but if he liked to be a teetotaler and show me he would be good to me I would take him back in six months—he wanted to come back there and then—I put my two little girls to bed—
he wanted to sit and talk to me—I did not feel able to do so, and all at once he jumped up and took this table knife (Produced) out of the table drawer in the kitchen, and cut my throat—I had a struggle with him and he cut my arms and my hands: I have the marks now—I screamed, and my lodger from upstairs came down; she ran to open the front door and then help came—I got the knife away from the prisoner and flung it down by the door—when he found that he could not do any more with it he jumped on my stomach and back—I had felt the knife at my back, but I had my clothes on so it did not cut me—when the prisoner first started at me he said he would do for me—the police came and took him away—he was sober—he has said he would do for me ever so many times.
By the JURY. The knife was bent as it now is in the course of the struggle—it was quite straight when he took it out.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You had been in my house before December 1st—I did not ask you to stop and have a cup of tea with me—Lily brought you in on the Sunday evening—you did not have supper with me then, I would not speak to you—I did not toast any muffins for you—when I came back on December 1st you asked me to come back to you and I said I could not trust you—I did not say that you had been the cause of our child's death.
The prisoner. "Her saying that was the cause of my doing what I did; I lost my temper, and I got the knife and went and stabbed her."
HARRY BROWN . I am a physician and surgeon, of 308, Lily Road, Fulham—on December 1st I was called to the prosecutrix's house—she had a cut on the upper part of her right arm about 3 in long and in deep, also two cuts not very severe on the left side of her neck, and one behind the ear; that was more of a bruise than a cut—there were a lot of scratches and abrasions on her hands and face—two of the fingers of her left hand were badly cut—this sort of knife could have caused the wounds—it is very blunt, considerable force must have been used to inflict the injuries.
WILLIAM KEEN (1 T.R.). I was summoned on December 1st to the prosecutrix's house—I saw the prisoner there and arrested him—he said, "I will go quietly; I was coming down to the station"—this knife was handed to me by one of the witnesses—there were slight stains of blood on it—the prisoner was quite sober.
The Prisoner's defence. I had great provocation; she caused me to do it. I did not go to the house with any intention of hurting the woman until she said I had been the cause of the child's death; I done it in my temper; I have been to the house several times before and nothing had happened.
GUILTY . Twelve previous convictions were proved against him, and the police stated that he was a violent man and had treated his wife with great cruelty. Fifteen years' penal servitude.
MR. LYNE for the prosecution offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT. Tuesday, December 16th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
81. GEORGE LOCK (31) and GEORGE WILLIAMS (20), PLEADED GUILTY to stealing twelve shirts, the property of E. F. Vowles and Co. Limited, Lock having been convicted at Clerkenwell on May 18th, 1897, in the name of George Warren. Four other convictions were proved against Lock and three against Williams. Twelve months' hard labour each.
MR. HUGHES Prosecuted.
ABRAHAM GANZMAN (Interpreted.) I keep a restaurant at 72, Cromer Street, Gray's Inn Road—on November 11th the prisoner came to the back entrance, and my waiter told me that he wanted to see me—he was a stranger to me—I went into the kitchen with him; he said, "I have been told by some friends that you keep a gambling place, and I am in a postion to do you something good, so that you should not have any damage."—I refused to pay him money, and he went away—the following Sunday a messenger came from the prisoner that I should meet him at Portland Road Station—I did not go—on Monday the same messenger came with a man named Semel—he wanted me to go out, but I refused, and told him to come inside—he then said, "I am going to protect you, but if it is impossible for you to pay me £10 at once you can pay me £2 per week; you can afford it because you have, got two places;"I said, "I am not going to pay you; I do not require your protection; I am not doing anything wrong here"—he then said that he was a detective, took some papers out of his pocket, and said that everything was ready to give me into custody, and that he had done such things on previous occasions—I understood at once that he could not be a sworn detective, and I accompanied him to the police station and gave him in charge—he then said that he was a tailor—I said, "You told me you were a detective"—Semel and another man walked behind us to the station.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I do not know you—I saw you at my house for the first time—I do keep a restaurant in the East End—you did not use to come there—I did not come to your-place three months ago with Max Lewis, I do not know him—he is not a partner of mine—you did not tell me you were a detective on the first occasion—you said you were a friend of mine, and would protect me—I did not hear Max Lewis say that you had made him pay £50 for keeping a gambling club, and that he did not care if you made him pay another £100.
By the COURT. I know Max Lewis, he keeps a restaurant in the neighbourhood—he was fined £50 for keeping a gambling house—I do not know that the prisoner gave information to the police that Max Lewis was keeping a gambling club—I am a stranger to Max Lewis, because I am his rival in business.
By the prisoner. I did not say to Max Lewis, "All right, you keep quiet, I will take your part," nor strike you in the chest with my fist—I did not tell the policeman that you represented yourself to be a detective
because I could not make myself understood, but I tried to make him understand that he should arrest us both until I found an interpreter—I have not paid £5 to a witness to give evidence against you, nor have I collected £40 for the expenses of this trial: it will not cost so much as that, and I had no need to collect that sum—I did not send a man to you to ask you not to give information against me for keeping a gambling and disorderly house—I have never kept a gambling house, neither have I been convicted.
SIMON SEMEL . I live at 8, Phoenix Street, Somers Town, and am a boot-maker—on November Kith the prisoner came to my house and asked me to take a message to Ganzman to come to Portland Road Station—he came again on the 17th and asked me why the prosecutor did not meet him—I said the prosecutor said he was very busy and could not leave his place—the prisoner then asked me to go and tell the prosecutor to come out and see him—I told him I could not ran about taking messages for him, and he said he would pay me a day's wages, as he was a detective—I then went with him to the prosecutor's shop, and told the prosecutor to come out and see the prisoner—the prosecutor said he could not come out—the prisoner then said, "Tell him I am a detective and must not show my face inside where there are so many people"—the prosecutor then came out and saw the prisoner at the side door, and the prisoner said to him, "Are you going to give me the £10?" If you cannot afford to give me £10 give me £2 a week, as you have two restaurants"—the prosecutor said, "I have done nothing to give you money for"—the prisoner said. "You know I am a detective; I can protect you, and you can do what you like"—they both walked to the railway station, Gray's Inn Road, and I saw the prisoner pull out some papers from his pocket—he said to the prosecutor, "I have got you down in the papers, and if you will not give me the money I will put you away"—further up they were talking together and came up to a policeman, and the prosecutor said, "Arrest me with the prisoner, and I will go to the station and explain what I mean"—we all went to the station together.
Cross-examined. I have known you three years—you never said what my day's wages were to be—you said, "A detective must not show his face when there are too many people about"—I do not know what sort of people there would be in the prosecutor's place who would be frightened of a detective going in—I do not know what papers you produced—I have not received £5 for giving evidence, nor five farthings—I do not keep a brothel—I was convicted six years ago of selling a ship's card to America; it was not genuine, and I had three months—it is not true that if anyone wants a witness I am willing to become one so long as I get paid.
Re-examined. Since the prisoner was arrested he has been to my shop to see me—I told him I did not want to see him any more—he said, "Simon, I want you to be kind and do me no harm. I want you as a witness, so do not go against me, and do not say anything against me"—I said I did not want him—I do not keep a brothel, I work hard for my living as a boot maker.
Street, Regent's Park—I told him he would be arrested for falsely representing himself to be a police constable—he was also given into custody on this charge, and I issued a subpoena for the sergeant who was there and the constable who arrested him to come to this Court and give evidence to-day—the present charge was not properly gone into until the day after his arrest, but I understand the constable is not here, as he is suffering from enteric fever—in answer to the charge the prisoner said, "That is what they charge me for, is it?"—the Magistrate dropped that charge and proceeded with this charge.
Cross-examined. Max Lewis was with me when I arrested you—you did say something about their wanting to have their revenge—I found no papers on you.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I have witnesses to prove everything. Last Monday afternoon I was standing at the corner of Euston Road waiting for a 'bus, and the prosecutor and Max Lewis and several others came up. The prosecutor struck me and I went to a policeman for protection. The prosecutor said to the policeman, That man wants money of me.' Max Lewis said, 'You make me pay £50 fine; I do not care, I can afford to spend another £100, I will put you away.' I went to Bow Street Police Station to complain, and in the meantime the prosecutor took out a warrant against me for falsely pretending to be a police constable because I had informed against him, and when I find out anything wrong I will inform again. I do not make a living by informing. I am a tailor by trade. The Inspector was at my place several times."
The "prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that nearly three months ago he gave information against Max Lewis for keeping a gambling club, who was fined £50, and since then he had been threatened several times by the prosecutor, Max Lewis, and others.
Witnesses for the Defence.
ABRAHAM BLAVOTSKI . I saw the prosecutor standing at the corner of King's Cross—I asked him what he was doing—he said he was waiting for a 'bus to go home—I then went away about ten yards and saw two or three people come up to him and strike him on the chest and take him to the constable.
Cross-examined. I did not see him with Ganzman and Semel—I did not hear what was said—I did not go with the prisoner to ask the prosecutor not to give evidence—I do not think the prisoner was struck for the purpose—they got hold of him to take him to the policeman.
WILLIAM PUGSLEY (Police Inspector E.) I first saw the prisoner in July, when he came to me and complained of having been swindled in a gambling club, and said that the prosecutor and Max Lewis had offered him money not to make complaints against them—I took a statement from him and applied for a warrant to raid the club, and the prisoner gave evidence in that case—after that I had to protect him for some time—I know that the prosecutor keeps a reputed gambling house, and I have had several complaints about it—I know nothing about Semel except what I have heard in connection with this case.
Cross-examined. I have accepted evidence from the prisoner in cases,
and have paid him for it—I am not hoping that the prosecutor will get convicted, but if I can get evidence I shall certainly proceed against him—I have had complaints—the prisoner has not had instructions to get evidence—I do use him to obtain evidence with regard to gambling clubs—it is not his business, he is a working tailor—I have seen him working—lie has once been a witness, and on other occasions he has given me information, and I have paid him for it—as far as I know, he has not been convicted.
(Police Sergeant 32 E.) On the first occasion there was no charge made of demanding money—it was in consequence of some subsequent information that the prisoner had represented himself to be a detective, that the warrant was granted—if there had been a charge of demanding money by menaces on the first occasion I should have detained him, but no such charge was made.
Cross-examined. I do not know Semel—he was not at the police station.
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Tuesday, December 16th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
CECILIA MAYHEW . I am an assistant in the fur department of Harrod's Stores—on November 18th, about 1.30 p.m., I was in the fur department—Miss Wright was at the umbrella counter next to me—she helps me to sell the furs—I saw the prisoner Jordan speak to her—the prisoner Cameron was standing a little way off near the stand where the sable ties are—I said to Cameron. "Arc you being served?"—he said in an undertone and indistinctly, "Yes"—he had a sable tie in his hand value £48, the only one we had at that price—Jordan went from the counter where he had been speaking to Miss Wright and stood beside me and Cameron—he said, "That gentleman is with me"—I left them and went to pack my parcels—a minute or two afterwards Jordan followed Miss Wright to the next counter—Cameron had gone—Jordan remained about two minutes afterwards and left—about an hour afterwards Mr. Smith went to serve a customer and we both looked for the tie but could not find it—I went away from 1.45 to 2.15, no other customer came in before I left—I identified the prisoners on November 18th or 19th at the police-station from other men, without any doubt.
LETITIA WRIGHT . I am an assistant in the umbrella department at Harrod's Stores—on November 18th I saw Jordan near the fur stand—I asked him if I could show him any furs—he said, "I want a martin tie for a lady"—I went to where the ties were hanging on brackets—I took some down and tried one on—he said, "Yes, that is very nice, but that is not quite the style"—I went over to the glass counter, where there were some more martin ties—looking at them Jordan said, "I want a double fur"—he had a cold, and it was difficult to hear what he said, I had to
bend quite close to him to know what he wanted—he talked about ties, and said, "That is not a double fur; you know what ladies are if they make up their minds they won't have it"—after that he said, "Thank you very much for the trouble you have taken, I will bring the lady to-morrow" and went away—I saw another man standing near whom I cannot recognise—I was on duty the next day and the day after—Jordan did not come back, I did not see him again till he was passing into the dock at Westminster Police Court—I knew he was the same man—this was on the ground floor.
THOMAS SMITH . I am a salesman in the fur department at Harrod's Stores—on November 18th I relieved Miss Mayhew from 1.45 till 2.15 p.m.—during that time no customer came to that counter—about 2.30 a lady came—I showed her some sable ties—I looked for one at the price of £48 10s., but could not find it—I spoke to Miss Mayhew, and we both looked for it—I had seen it about 1.15 when I went to dinner.
Cross-examined by Cameron. Customers do not pass the fur stand, they pass along the centre of the shop to go out at the door—no one could have taken the fur without my seeing them, the table is some way off the door—I was at my counter all the time—I was not busy at that hour.
EDWARD REANY (Detective Inspector, Harrod's Stores.) Between 1 and 2 p.m. on November 18th I saw Cameron standing close to the fur counter—afterwards when he was charged he said he had never been to Harrod's Stores in his life.
ROBERT FULLER (Detective Officer.) On November 25th I saw the prisoners at Westminster Police Court—they were wearing frock coats—I examined Cameron's coat—he had a continuous pocket in the lining of the coat with hooks and eyes—Jordan's coat was the same, except that it had no hooks or eyes, and the lining was ripped open.
The prisoners desired that their coats should be examined, and on Jordan's coat the lining was torn at the bottom so that anything would drop through; they both stated that they knew nothing of the theft, and that hundreds of people passed through the department.
There were two other indictments far similar, offences against them.
Jordan had been previously convicted. JORDAN— Seven years' penal servitude; CAMERON— Three years' penal servitude.
84. CORNELIUS MARINUS VAN DER VOORDE , Being a director of a public company, viz., The Union Preserving Company, Limited, fraudulently applying to his own use and benefit £16 1s. 3d., and omitting to enter in the ledger of that company £16 1s. 3d.
MESSRS. ELLIOTT and WILLIS Prosecuted, MR. MUIR Defended.
The Jury being-unable to agree were discharged without giving a verdict, and the trial was postponed to next Session.
FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday, December 16th, 1902.
Before J. A. Rentoul, Esq., K.C.
MR. LEWIS Prosecuted.
PAUL GASTAVE WAUER . I am a licensed victualler—in February, 1901, I kept the Carlton Tavern, Kilburn—I know the prisoner as a customer—on Saturday, February 8th, he came in and produced a cheque drawn by a John Rawlinson upon the Lombard Street branch of Lloyds Rank for £86 10s., and asked me to cash it—he said that it had been given him by an architect on account of some cottages he was building at Cricklewood—I told him I could not cash it, but lent him £6 on it—on the Monday we went together to Mr. Rawlinson's office, 65, Chancery Lane, to have the cheque made open—the prisoner went upstairs, but came back and said Mr. Rawlinson was out—we went and had a drink and then returned, after which he said Mr. Rawlinson was out for the day, and would I pay it into my bank—I consented to do so, and paid him another £14—he gave me a receipt for £20—I saw him write it—I paid the cheque into my bank, but it was returned marked, "Please state on what account drawn"—I then went to Lloyds Bank and also to see Mr. Rawlinson, and in consequence of what they told me I communicated with the police—I applied for a warrant and it was granted.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You were a regular customer for about three weeks—you used the saloon bar—I cannot produce anyone who saw you there—I have been in the public-house trade for seven years—I have never preferred a criminal charge against anyone—a man was taken to the police station for stealing a dog, but he returned it, and he was not charged.
JOHN RAWLINSON . I am an architect and surveyor of 65, Chancery Lane—I have no account at Lloyds Bank—the cheque produced for £86 10s. is not mine—I do not know the prisoner—I have never employed him to build any cottages for me.
Cross-examined. The signature on the cheque is not mine—it is a slight resemblance of mine—I do not know the prosecutor.
BRUCE PRINGLE . I am a clerk at Lloyds Bank, 72, Lombard Street—the cheque (Produced) was presented at our bank on February 12th, 1901, and returned unpaid—we have no account in the name of John Rawlinson—the cheque form is one issued by our bank to Captain Martineau.
Cross-examined. The cheque was presented to us through the London and South Western Bank.
FRANCIS MARTINEAU . I live at 72, Warwick Gardens, W., and am a captain in the Militia—in April, 1899, I desired to let my house and advertised it in the Daily Telegraph—the prisoner called and was shown into the smoking room—I keep my cheque book in a drawer of a writing table in that room—he was left alone for about five minutes—the next morning I looked at my cheque book and found that seven forms had been extracted—this cheque is one of them, I have the counterfoil belonging to it—I identified the prisoner at Marylebone police court—I am positive he is the man I saw at my house.
Cross-examined. I only saw you for about five minutes, and it is three and a half years ago—you called about five o'clock or 5.30 p.m.—I look at my cheque book nearly every morning as I draw cheques nearly every day—I said at the police court that you were the man to the best of my
belief, but that was only a form of speech, and by that I meant that you were the man—I was not at home when you first called, but my wife showed you over the house—I saw you in the dining room—you were shown into the smoking room first by the servant, previous to my wife seeing you—I had no hesitation in picking you out—I think I could identify any of the other men I saw at the police court.
THOMAS HENRY GURRIN . I carry on business at 59, Holborn Viaduct—I have made a study of handwriting—I have given evidence at this and other Courts for eighteen years—to the best of my belief this receipt for £20 and the cheque for £86 10s. were written by the same person.—(The prisoner here wrote a receipt.)—there are little things in this which lead me to suspect it is the same writing.
CHARLES WALKER (234 E.) On November 10th, about noon, I was on duty outside Gray's Inn Road police station, when the prosecutor spoke to me—in consequence of what he said I followed him and saw him shake hands with the prisoner, who appeared to be reading the advertisements on a hoarding, and heard him say, "Halloa, when are you coming to see me"; the prisoner replied, "One of these days"—from what I heard I told the prisoner that I should take him into custody for defrauding the prosecutor—lie made no reply—I took him to Gray's Inn Road police station, and then to Harrow Road station, and handed him over to Detective Hedley.
Cross-examined. At the station you said you did not know the man, and again when you were charged.
Re-examined. I saw the two men shake hands—the prisoner appeared to know the prosecutor then.
PAUL GUSTAVE WAUER (Re-examined.) I applied for the warrant immediately after I discovered I had been defrauded—it has been standing for a year and nine months—I had known the prisoner for about sixteen months before he came to the Carlton Tavern—I saw him outside the Holborn Town Hall, Theobald's Road.
GUILTY . Judgment respited.
87. GEORGE SWINEY (49) , Attempting to steal a gelding, a set of harness, and a hansom cab, the property of Thomas Brickland; and a whip, waterproof, apron, and rug, the property of Robert Walter Cook.
ROBERT WALTER COOK , I am a cab driver of 8, Cardigan Street, Shepperton Road—on November 30th, about 10 p.m., I drove into Cannon Street Station—I left my cab for about three minutes to go to the urinal—when I returned I saw the railway constable standing beside the cab and the prisoner on the dickey preparing to drive away—the constable
asked me if it was not my cab; I said, "Yes"; and the prisoner said it was his—he eventually got down and I gave him into custody—I did not leave my cab in his charge.
Cross-examined. You did not speak to me—you did not have a cab in the station yard.
CHARLES RICHARDSON (S.E. and C.R. Constable.) I was on duty in the station yard, Cannon Street, at about, 10 p.m. on November 30th—I saw the prisoner loitering about and ordered him away—he returned at 10.15, and proceeded to the prosecutor's cab; he took the nose bag off and fastened it to the rear of the cab, and then mounted the dickey—he put the rug round him and was in the act of driving away—I knew it was not his cab and stopped him, and asked him what he was doing—he said, "It is my cab, I have a right to be here"—the prosecutor then came up—I asked him if the prisoner had a right to be on the cab, he said, "No"; I said, "What are you going to do?"—he gave him into custody—I handed him over to 506 City.
Cross-examined. There were only two cabs in the yard, and the other was occupied by another man.
CHAS. WESTERN (506 City). On November 30th, about 10.30 p.m., the prisoner was given into my custody by Richardson—he said, "If I was there an hour and a half before, I should have got away with it all right"—he had been drinking, but was not drunk.
Prisoner's defence. "My cab was in the station yard, and I mistook the prosecutor's cab for mine."
GUILTY . Discharged on his own recognisances.
MR. DUMMETT Prosecuted.
EDWARD HARGREAVES . I am in the employ of Charles Pervis and Co., 270, Central Markets—on November 14th I sold six pigs to Mr. Stone, a customer—they were to be taken by Mr. Tidd, a carrier—he has a number of men in his employ—his men took four away, and the prisoner the remaining two—he came into the shop and said, "On for Stone"—I asked him if he was working for Tidd, the carrier—he said, "Yes"—Mr. Tidd afterwards applied for the two pigs, and I told him I had sent them—I then communicated with the police—on the 28th I was with Detective Burge—I saw the prisoner—as soon as he saw us he ran away—I followed and caught him—I said, "I want you"; he said, "What for?"I said, "For those two pigs you had out of our shop"; he said, "I was working for the Great Western Railway on that day"—I have no doubt that he is the man that came for the pigs.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I know you well as a porter in the market—on the 28th I did not speak to you in the market; you ran out.
HENRY TIDD . I am a meat carrier, of 9, Victoria Terrace, Upper Tollington Park—I carry meat for Mr. Stone—he has no van of his own—on November 14th I had an order from him for six pigs—I only got four—I sent for the other two, and they said they had been sent—I know the
prisoner by sight—I have occasionally employed him—I did not employ him on this occasion.
Cross-examined. Mr. Stone's name is not on my van.
Cross-examined I have been employed by Messrs. Pervis one year and four months.
ROBERT BURGE (Market Constable.) On November 18th I received information of the robbery—I was on duty on the 28th—I saw the prisoner, and kept him under observation—I then went and fetched Hargreaves—when the prisoner saw us he ran away—we gave chase, and he was eventually caught and taken into custody—he was a licensed porter; he was licensed in 1898, but he has not renewed his licence since 1900.
Cross-examined. I never spoke to you in the market.
Prisoner's defence. I was commissioned by Mr. Stone to fetch the pigs.
GUILTY . Two years' hard labour.
MR. S. J. THOMAS Prosecuted.
THOMAS STRICKSON . I am a lift attendant, of 10, Malmesbury Road—on November 16th, about 2.30 p.m., I was in Middlesex Street in a crowd watching a man selling vaseline, when all of a sudden I felt a jerk at my watch chain—I turned round, and the prisoner turned round also, and walked away—when he saw I was following him he turned round and asked me what I wanted—I told him he had my watch—he said, "No, I have not; search me; fetch a policeman; if you don't go away I'll punch your jaw"—I saw a policeman a little way off and said, "Here is one"—the prisoner then turned round and ran in the opposite direction, and I saw him pass the watch to another man—I caught hold of the other man, and they both hit me in the face—the watch is worth about 10s.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not see you take my watch, but I felt it, and you turned round and walked off immediately—I saw you hand it to another man.
WILLIAM DARDNELL (2 H.R.) On November 16th, about 3 p.m, I was on duty in Middlesex Street—I saw the prisoner running, and heard cries of "Stop him"—I chased him about fifty yards—he doubled round some barrows, and was afterwards stopped by two men and handed over to me—the prosecutor then came up and gave him into custody.
GUILTY . He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Clerkenwell on February 4th, 1902, and another conviction was proved against him. Three years' penal servitude.
MR. PERCIVAL HUGHES Prosecuted.
ROBERT GEORGE AUSTIN . I live at 14, Almack Road, Clapton—on November 14th, about 4 p.m., I was in the City Road, when I was suddenly knocked down and trampled upon—I am unable to identify any of my assailants, but I identify the prisoner; he stole my chain—two detectives then came to my rescue.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I cannot say who threw me to the ground—I am positive you are the man who snatched at my chain.
ALBERT HELSON (Detective M.) On November 14th, about 3.45, I was with McDonald in the City Road—I saw four or five men loitering about, and as the prosecutor came along, the prisoner and two other men knocked him down—when he was on the ground the prisoner knelt upon his chest and took his watch-chain—I seized him, and he struck me on my mouth, cutting my lip, and kicked me several times—the other men then rescued him and threw me to the ground—I followed him, and he was eventually arrested by another officer—as he was running I saw the chain in his hand—just previous to his being stopped he threw it away—it was found three doors from the garden in which he was arrested—when charged he said, "If I had known you were a b—y copper I would have kicked your f—g brains out, and don't think you will get off easy, as my pals will do you in if I don't"—he did not know me; my division is in Southwark.
Cross-examined. I can swear that you knocked the prosecutor down and took his chain—I was about four or five yards away at the time—I struck you twice, but not till after your resistance—McDonald is a colleague of mine.
WILLIAM MCDONALD (Detective M.) On November 14th, about 3.45, I was with Helson in the City Road—I saw the prosecutor thrown down by the prisoner and two or three other men—there was a crowd of sixteen or twenty altogether—I seized one man, but I got thrown down, and the men got away.
Cross-examined. You were getting the prosecutor's chain while one of your companions was punching him—I should say it was 200 yards from where the robbery took place to where you were arrested.
LOUIS DENNETT (287 G.) On November 14th I was in Britannia Street, City Road—I heard whistles blown and saw the prisoner running—I followed him and caught him in a yard in Bearley Street—just before I arrested him I saw him throw something away—he said, "You have got the wrong man this time, guv'nor"—at the station he said, "I wish I had known you were a P.C., I would have kicked your f—g brains out."
Cross-examined. I did not look for the chain—the enquiries were taken up by a plain-clothes constable.
GUILTY . The Jury added that they thought the prisoner deserved the cat. He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Clerkenwell on December 21st, 1897, and six other convictions were proved against him. Twenty-five lashes with the cat, and seven years' penal servitude for the robbery with violence, and five years' penal servitude for the attack
upon the constable, to run concurrently. THE COURT commended Helson and McDonald for their courageous conduct.
MR. FULTON Prosecuted, MR. WARBURTON Defended Golding.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, December 11th, 1902.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
MR. CHARLES MATHEW and MR. BODKIN Prosecuted; MR. DICKENS, K.C., MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS and MR. BOYD Defended.
Francis Charles Reed, an assistant in the City Surveyor's Office, produced and proved a flan of Post Office Court, Lombard Street.
ADRIENNE LIARD . I am the landlady of 18, Duke Street, Portland Place; I let lodgings—the deceased came there by himself about July 21st; he occupied a room on the first floor—at first he paid £1 1s. per week—about a week afterwards, the prisoner came and occupied the room with him—she was not introduced to me, But when he took the room he said he wanted it for himself and his wife, who would be coming in a week—she was addressed as Mrs. Baker—in October the room was changed for a less expensive one—the deceased went out in the mornings—I do not know if he went to business; he did not go out every morning—the prisoner used to stop in the house a little later, and then go out—on the night of Friday, November 7th, there was some noise in their room—next day I spoke to the prisoner about it, and the same day I gave the deceased notice to quit—on Monday, November 10th, he came to me and had some conversation with me, and later in the morning the prisoner came and said she wished to apologise for the noise they had made in the night; she said, "You have given us notice and we have got to go"; I said, "Yes, you have got to go tomorrow Tuesday, but he will stop another week"—the deceased had asked me if he might stop for another week, and I agreed to it—the prisoner said, "Well, next week you will hear something very dreadful"; I said, "What is it," and she said,'"Well, Madam, don't you tell him if I tell you, because he bangs me so," she then said there would be a divorce with him and his wife—I said, "As you are not his wife, why do you support all the ill-treatment he gives you"; she said, "I love him so"; I said, "Why don't you go to work"; she said, "I lost my character, and I cannot get any work now; he used to come alter me, and I lost the whole of my character"—I told her the deceased had spoken to me, and I said to her, "He has just told me you are not his wife, and you are no class," and that she would go next morning to her sister's, and that he would stop another week with me—when I told
her that, she said, "He wants to send me to-morrow to my sister; all I know I see."
Cross-examined. I said before the Coroner that the deceased had been kicking up a row, that is correct—at 7 p.m. on Friday, he was drunk, the prisoner was sober; she showed me her hat which he had torn, and all the bed was nearly on the floor and his stick as well—I have never seen her intoxicated—when I went into their room, I asked the deceased why all the things were on the floor; he did not say anything, but the prisoner said, "Oh, we have been playing millinery"—he was drunk nearly every day—the first thing in the morning the servant used to go and fetch brandy for him to drink—that habit existed practically all the time he was in my house—when the prisoner said, 'I cannot leave him because I love him," she spoke very earnestly—when I told her the deceased had said she was no class she said, "I am a brewer's daughter"—I said, "Is it possible, what do you live with a brute like him for?"—it was than that she said "Because I love him, and I have lost my character, and I cannot get an work"—I said, "Why are you always screaming like that"—she said, "Well, how can I help it when he comes and strangles me, and puts his hand on me like that; how can I help it"—I had not heard her screaming constantly, but I had that night—I asked her why she lived with a brute like that, because he was always knocking her down—as soon as he came home, the quarrelling began, and then you heard a bang—when he was sober, he was a perfect gentleman, but he was very seldom sober.
Re-examined. The deceased was drunk nearly every day from July to November—I have heard noises in their room before November 7th, but not screams.
ISABEL KINGETT . I am servant to Madam Liard, at Duke Street—I used to go there in the day time and leave about 8 p.m.—I have been there since January—on November 10th, the prisoner wanted to speak to Madam Liard—about 11.15 a.m. they had a conversation—I then saw the prisoner coming downstairs,; she said to me, "I have told Madam all about myself and Mr. Baker, and now I will go and interview Mr. Baker"—she seemed very excited; I did not see her again that morning.
Cross-examined. I took up their breakfast that morning; they seemed on good terms then, and also on the previous morning—when the prisoner said she was going to interview the deceased there was emotion, in her voice—she was always sober; the deceased was exactly the opposite, but when he was sober he seemed very fond of her, and she seemed to be very fond of him, although he treated her very badly—she did not eat her breakfast on the 10th; they had their breakfast taken up to their bedroom.
RAPHAEL LIARD . I am the son of Madam Liard, of Duke Street—I have been living there for some time—on November 10th, about 11.45 a.m., I saw the prisoner going out of the house; she was in a hopeless condition, and was crying.
Cross-examined. As she was going out she said. "Oh, my poor Isabel!" she mistook me for the servant; she was always sober, in spite of ill-usage she seemed very fond indeed of the deceased; he was a brute to her, and many times I have seen her on the staircase running away from him—I have
heard her many times say that he was going to kill her—he was drunk nearly every day—I cannot say if he seemed fond of her when he was sober, because he did not speak much.
JAMES MOORE . I am a cutler and silversmith of 211, Oxford Street—I was in my shop on Monday, November 10th, about 12.30, when the prisoner came in and wanted to see some knives—I was about to show her an ordinary pocket knife, when she asked for a long or strong single-bladed knife—I am not certain which word she used—I then showed her a long two bladed knife, which had what is called a flush spring—I opened the long blade—I stooped down to look for another description of knife, and when I looked up she was trying to close the blade that I had opened—I said, "Oh, you will not be able to close it, it has a lock"—she said, "Oh, I do not know, I have firm grip, see!" and suiting the action to the word she grasped me across the hand; she had a moderately firm grip for a young person—I said, "Of course, you know best, but it is not a lady's knife; is it for your own use?" she said. "Yes; is it nice and sharp?"—I showed her another knife; this is it (Produced)—a flush spring knife has a spring which does not project as this one does—a projecting spring once in operation fixes the blade absolutely firm in the hasp of the knife, and can only be released by pressure of the spring—I said, "You will be able to manipulate this better, it has a projecting spring"—upon my showing her how to open it, she said, "Oh yes"—she asked the price of it, I told her 6s.—she asked me if I had not got one for about 5s.—I said no, and then I said, "I will let you have it for 5s. 6d., and eventually she bought it at that price—she again asked if it was nice and sharp—I said, "Oh, yes"—I think she—paid me in silver—I asked her if she would have it in paper, and she said, "Oh, no," and put it into her muff which she was carrying—the knife was closed then—I had closed it before handing it to her; she then; left the shop.
Cross-examined. The police communicated with me on the morning of the 12th—I am in the habit of serving in the shop myself—I have a moderately large business.
JOSEPH FRAYER . I live at 34, Warner Street, Barnsbury, and am a counter clerk at the Lombard Street Post Office—on Monday, November 10th, about 1.15 p.m., I was there behind the counter—there are two entrances, one from King William Street, and the other from Lombard Street—about that time the prisoner came in by the King William Street entrance—I had seen her before, she had been there before to send express messages—when she came in on November 10th, she said "Good morning" to me, and then went to one of the receptacles at which the public write telegrams—I saw her writing on a telegraph form—she then asked me for an envelope—I gave her one with an embossed stamp—she enclosed what she had written in the envelope and closed it and returned to the desk to address the envelope—she returned to the counter, and it being Lord Mayor's day I said to her, "Have you seen the Lord Mayor's Show"—she said she had no wish to see it—I was called away from my desk and was absent about ten minutes—the prisoner was at first calm—I saw her later on when she called for her reply—she had gone out of the office while I was.
away—when she came in again she said to me "Have you the reply"—as I had not accepted her express letter I referred her to the clerk who took it in my absence—the prisoner was then rather excited—when she first came in she seemed hurried.
Cross-examined. I was engaged with ordinary counter clerk's work when the prisoner first came in, but being Lord Mayor's day there was then nobody in the office—she gave her letter to another clerk—when she came in the second time she was rather excited.
PHILLIP HENRY MORLEY . I am an overseer at the Lombard Street Post Office—I was there on Monday, November 10th, about 1.15 p.m., when the prisoner came in, and went to a telegraph desk and wrote something—she then handed me this envelope (Produced) addressed "Reg. Baker, Esq., Westralian Market, Stock Exchange"—(The message inside was,"Dear Reg., I want you a moment, importantly, Kitty")—she asked that it might be sent by express messenger—the charge for that was 3 1/2d., which she paid for with a florin, and received the change—I handed the envelope to Mr. Chivers, a counter clerk in the office—I had seen the prisoner in the office several times before—she had come there to send express letters in the same way.
Cross-examined. I should say the prisoner was perfectly sober.
ARTHUR STEPHEN CHIVERS . On November 10th I was a counter clerk at the Lombard Street Post Office—I was handed this envelope with an embossed stamp on it, to have it expressed—I gave it to a messenger boy named Coleman, who went away with it—I saw the prisoner at the office directly after 2 p.m.—she asked me if she might remain at the end of the counter—I replied, "Certainly, Miss"—she appeared very worried and seemed to be brooding over some trouble—she was leaning on her right elbow, which she rested on the counter—as she was approaching the counter I noticed she had a muff, but when she came up to me it was below the counter, and I could not see it.
Cross-examined. I did not take much notice of the prisoner—I cannot say which hand was in her muff.
WILLIAM ROBERT COLEMAN . I am a telegraph messenger at the Lombard Street Post Office—on Monday, November 10th, I received from Mr. Chivers an express message to deliver—I took the envelope to the Stock Exchange—I left the post office about 1.24 p.m.—I could not get the letter to the addressee, as there was a considerable crowd it being Lord Mayor's day—I remained about fifteen minutes trying to deliver the message—I returned to the post office, where I arrived about 2.5 p.m.—I saw the prisoner there—I said to her, "I could not deliver the message as the gentleman is in the reading room"—she said, "Take it back again, and try and deliver it"—I went back and was successful in getting to the deceased—he opened and read the letter and returned with me to the post office—I think we got there about 2.30, but I did not notice the time—we both entered the post office—the prisoner was not in the office then—the deceased spoke to one of the clerks at the counter about some payment that was demanded for the extra waiting—it was only 2d., I think, and he refused to pay it—the deceased then left the office and immediately afterwards I saw the prisoner in the
office, but I did not see her come in—I went out and spoke to the deceased, and he immediately returned with me to the post office—the prisoner was still there and I saw them in conversation—I did not see them meet, as I went behind the counter—I could not hear what they were saying—I saw them move towards the Lombard Street door—the deceased went first and the prisoner was about a yard behind him—the deceased went out of the door—there are about three steps leading into the court outside the office—he went down the steps—the prisoner paused on the steps and then followed him—I believe they were talking then, but I could not hear what they said—I saw what I thought was a knife in her hand—that was after she had paused and she had begun to go down the steps—I called out something—I do not think the prisoner could hear what I said—when she got to the bottom of the steps she turned to her right and so went out of my sight—she appeared to go faster—I did not see what happened next—I afterwards looked out of the King William Street door, and I saw the deceased lying up against the wall on the opposite side of the court—he was partly sitting and partly lying—he looked very white—I did not see any blood—I do not know where the prisoner was.
Cross-examined. When the deceased went out of the post office the last time I do not know if he went out backwards—the door is a double swing door—he went down the steps, and I did not see him any more—I am not sure if the door was closed after the prisoner had gone out—before I saw what I thought was a knife, the prisoner was evidently talking to somebody down at the bottom of the steps—when I say I saw something which I thought was a knife, I mean that I saw something flash—I do not know—which hand it was in.
By the COURT. I called out after I saw the knife flash—I am sixteen years old.
JOHN FINN . I am a clerk at the Lombard Street Post Office—I was there on November 10th, about 1.55 p.m.—I saw the prisoner on the top step leading to the post office door in Lombard Street—she looked through the glass door several times—after a few minutes' delay she came in and said to me. "When will that boy be back"—I went and asked a question and then returned to the prisoner and told her that owing to its being Lord Mayor's day the lad was probably delayed, and could not deliver the message—she remained in the office about fifteen or twenty minutes altogether—she seemed to be labouring under some sort of excitement—she walked up and down the office and looked at the various notices on the walls—she leant on the counter at the telegraph end of the office—she had a muff in her left hand—Coleman returned almost as I was speaking to her—he told her that he could not deliver the message, and she said, "Take it back, Mr. Baker will come at once when he knows I am waiting"—the boy went away again and the prisoner left the office—whilst she was away the deceased returned—I did not see Coleman come in—after a short conversation he left the office by the Lombard Street, or north, door—almost as he left the prisoner came in by the same door and placed herself with her back to me—I heard Mr. Dunn explain to her that there was 2d. due because Coleman had had to wait more than ten minutes—she
replied, "All right, old boy, I am worth 2d."—I saw the deceased then come in by the Lombard Street door—he made straight for the prisoner—he said something which I did not hear, and she said, "You must pay the 2d., pay it with this," and she put forward her right hand in which she had a florin—she tried to put it into his waistcoat pocket—before she took out the florin the deceased said, "I shall not," he backing towards the Lombard Street door; the prisoner followed him, holding the florin out all the time, and attempting to press it into his waistcoat pocket—they went through the door where there are three steps—the deceased went down them—the prisoner paused for a moment on the top of the steps and she then seemed to spring from the top steps in the direction of the posting boxes which are immediately outside the door on the right as you pass from the door—Coleman made an exclamation—I did not go to the door; I remained behind the counter.
Cross-examined. My duty at the time was the sale of stamps—I was about ten feet from the Lombard Street door—the prisoner leant both of her hands on the counter while she was waiting—I should not like to swear she had both hands on the counter, but that was my impression—when she was on the steps I noticed she had a muff on her left hand—she went out at the same door that the deceased came in by, and he came in again about a minute after she had gone out—my impression was that the deceased did not wish me to hear what he was saying—I am positive the prisoner tried to force the florin on the deceased with her right hand—I could not hear what passed between them when they were on the steps because the glass door was between us.
WILLIAM MARTIN DUNNE . I am a clerk in the Lombard Street Post Office—I was there shortly after two o'clock on November 10th—I remember Coleman returning with the letter which he could not deliver—the prisoner was in the office then; she told the boy to take the message back, which he did—he returned shortly afterwards with the deceased—the prisoner had left the office then—I had some conversation with the deceased with reference to the extra charge created by the delay in delivering the message—I said to him, "There is 2d. to pay, owing to the delay in the delivery"; he said he would not pay it, it was nothing to do with him, and it was the business of the lady—he did not pay it—the prisoner came in; I told her there was 2d. to pay; she said, "That is all right, old boy, I am worth 2d."—the deceased then came in and said to her, "You owe the post office some money, you had better pay it"—she said, "No, you pay it"—he said, "No, I will have nothing to do with it."—she pressed a silver coin on him and asked him to pay the 2d. with it—he pushed his arm as she went to put it into his waistcoat pocket—she seemed rather to insist upon giving him the coin, and he began to back towards the door—as he went out I heard her say, "I will go out, too"—the next thing I heard was an exclamation by Coleman.
Cross-examined. I did not hear all the conversation between them—he spoke rather sharply; the prisoner was calm—I do not know what passed between them on the steps.
ARTHUR STEWART WIELAND . I am an accountant of 10, Walbrook—about 2.30 p.m. on November 10th, I was posting a letter in Post Office Court, which is outside the Lombard Street Post Office—this is a correct photograph of the boxes—I saw the deceased standing against the letterbox next to the one in which I was posting my letter—he had his back towards me—I saw the prisoner standing on the post-office steps, presumably they were talking, but my attention was not directed to them until I heard the man say rather loudly, "No, I will not," or "No, I cannot"—I heard the prisoner repeat a question rather imploringly, and then he replied in a more pronounced manner and loudly, "No, I will not"—the prisoner rushed off the steps towards him—I did not see anything in her hand then—she had a muff on, I think, her right hand, but I am not sure which hand—she appeared to be buffeting him with both hands, first one side and then the other, and in a sort of regardless way—she used both hands, but I cannot particularise how they were used; she was striking very rapidly—it appeared to me to be on his head—his back was turned towards her as though retreating, and I should say the blows fell more particularly on the right side of his head—he continued to retreat to more than the middle of the court, and for five or six yards—the prisoner still continued to attack him—when they reached past the clock I saw something gleam in her hand—I then realised for the first time that it was a serious matter—there were two blows very rapidly one after the other with what I thought was a hat pin—I ran forward, but the second blow had fallen before I got up to where she was—he had turned his face to her, when he saw, I think, for the first time the knife in her hand—I think one of the blows fell on his head and the other on his shuolder, but it is difficult to decide—he fell down, and I think the prisoner fell with him, as I found her on the ground when I got up to them—a man named Lockie was holding the prisoner by the wrists—I did not see a weapon lying on the ground—as the deceased fell he was about a yard from the wall opposite the post office—that would be about as far as he could go in that direction.
Cross-examined. When Lockie was holding the prisoner she was trying to get at the body on the ground and was calling out, "Oh, Reggie, Reggie, let me kiss him!"—she seemed in great distress—I only heard the conversation they had imperfectly, but I heard her ask him something imploringly, and then he said something angrily—I think she had got her muff on one of her hands—I do not know definitely which hand, but I think the right—when she dashed down the step she simply buffeted him with both hands, the muff being in one of them, and she followed him down the court doing that—at that time I thought she was only doing what a woman in a bit of temper would do, simply hitting him over the head with her muff and hand together; there was no extreme passion shown—my impression then was that she did not intend to hurt him at all—I had my eyes riveted on her all the time; she could not at that time have got the knife from her pocket—I suddenly missed the muff, whether it fell to the ground or not I do not know, but it had gone when I saw the knife in her hand—I think the knife was in the same hand that the muff had been in—the
two blows which were administered with what I thought was a hat pin were a matter of a second.
Re-examined. While I was watching what was going on, I did not hear anything said about a knife.
WILLIAM HENRY LOCKIE . I am a labourer of 11, Cory Square, Commercial Road—I was passing along Post Office Court about 2.30 on Monday, November 10th—I had entered at the King William Street end and was going towards Lombard Street—I was nearly through the court when I heard a cry—I turned round; I saw the prisoner and the deceased near the wall opposite the post office—the deceased was the nearer to the wall; he had his back to the wall and the prisoner was in front of him—I saw her hand come down twice with a knife in it—one of the blows came down on the left side of the deceased's head and one towards his breast—after the second blow the deceased slid down the wall on to the ground—I ran across and caught hold of the prisoner's left hand—I heard the knife drop to the ground after I caught hold of her hand—someone picked it up and handed it to a constable—it was a knife similar to this one—it was open when it was picked up—while I had hold of the prisoner's hand she said, "Let me go to see Reggie, my dear Reggie"—I said, "No, you have done enough now"—I did not leave go of her—I held her until the police came—I saw a straw hat on the ground which I thought was a woman's hat—I did not see any hat belonging to the deceased—I saw a brown muff there—they were not far from the knife.
Cross-examined. I caught hold of her left hand and the knife was in her right—when she said, "My Reggie, my Reggie!" she seemed dazed and silly.
WALTER THOMAS HUNT (386 City.) On November 10th I was on duty near to and I was called to Post Office Court, where I saw the body of the deceased lying on the ground—I at once sent for an ambulance—the prisoner was being held by Lockie—I heard her call out, "Let me kiss my Reggie, let me kiss my husband"—a post-office clerk named Russell was in the court, and he handed me this knife—it was open at the time—I took the prisoner to the station with the knife—she did not say anything on the way—she was very excited, she kept trying to throw her arms about and wrench away from me.
Cross-examined. She was not trying to escape from me, but was in a state of great agitation—she seemed slightly dazed.
EDWARD JOHN RUSSELL . I am a counter clerk at the Lombard Street Post Office—I was there on November 10th when the deceased and the prisoner were there—I heard Coleman say something—I went out into the court in consequence of what he said—when I got outside, the deceased was lying on the ground on his right side in a huddled-up position on the far side of the court—I saw an open knife on the ground—I picked it up and handed it to a constable—before the police came I raised the deceased up, and as I did so a 2s. piece fell to the ground—I noticed two wounds on his head, one over the left temple and the other over his right eye—there was some mud on him—I did not think then that he was dead, and I endeavoured to restore him—he was quite unconscious, and he never
recovered consciousness—my belief now is that he was then dead—I noticed a slit in his jacket just above the breast, over the heart—the prisoner was being held by Lockie when I went into the court—I heard her say, "Let me get to him, let me kiss my Reggie"—she was in a very excited condition.
FRANCIS ERNEST BAKER . I am employed on the Stock Exchange, and am a brother of the deceased, who was a member of the Stock Exchange—I saw him on November 10th about 2.5 p.m.; he was then in perfectly good health—at his request I gave him a florin.
JOHN MANN (526 City.) On the afternoon of November 10th I took the deceased to St. Bartholomew's Hospital—I was handed a florin which had been picked up by Russell—I assisted to search the deceased in the hospital mortuary—I did not find a florin on the body—I found a number of documents on him, and amongst them the envelope with the embossed stamp—there was no money on him.
FREDERICK FOX (City Police Inspector.) I was on duty when the prisoner was brought in at 2.45 p.m.—I subsequently learned that Mr. Baker was dead, and at 5 p.m. I told the prisoner that the man she had stabbed in Post Office Court was dead, and that she would be charged with murdering him by stabbing him several times about the body with a knife; that she need not make any answer to the charge, but whatever answer she made would be taken down in writing and used for or against her—she said, "I killed him willingly, and he deserved it, and the sooner I am killed the better"—at 5.40 p.m. I again visited her in the cell, and she said, "Inspector, I wish to say something to you; I bought the knife to hit him but I did not know I was killing him."
Cross-examined. When she was brought to the station she was not in an extremely agitated condition but very excited—she was very firm and looked at you in a very determined manner—she did not have to be put to bed—a bed was provided for her at 5 o'clock—in the ordinary course she would not have a bed at all, but I thought this was an exceptional case, and that she could either sit or lie down or go to bed if she thought proper—she was not excited or agitated when she made the first statement—I do not remember using the word "agitated" at the Police Court—I have made a mistake; I did not intend to say that she was not excited; what I meant was that she was not so much excited as when she was brought to the station—her second statement was, "I bought the knife to hit him, but I did not know I was killing him," not "I bought the knife; I hit him, but I did not know I was killing him"—I am quite positive about that statement; I wrote it down at the time.
Re-examined. She was not so firm at 5.40 as she was at 5 o'clock.
JAMES FINLAY ALEXANDER . I am house surgeon at St. Bartholomew's Hospital—on Monday, November 10th, at 2.45 p.m., the dead body of. Arthur Reginald Baker was brought there—there were four wounds upon him; one about three inches long on the left side of the head, above and
in front of the ear, going down to the bone—there was another bruised wound on the head above the right eye, which might have been caused by falling on the stone pavement, there was dirt on it—there was a third wound about the third rib on the left side over the breast bone—I probed that; it went down to the breast bone—the fourth wound was over the left shoulder blade about three inches deep—it did not penetrate the chest—those wounds were such as would be caused by the knife produced.
FREREDICK GORDON BROWN , M.R.C.S. I am surgeon to the City Police—on November 12th I made a post-mortem examination of the body of Arthur Reginald Baker, and saw the four wounds which have been described—I agree with the last witness that the wound over the right eye was probably caused by a fall on some stone substance—there was dirt on each side of it—the wound above the left ear was clean cut, and about three inches long—it would not have caused death—part of the wound in the breast went clean through the breast bone into the aorta—considerable force must have been used, and it was bound to have caused almost instantaneous death—the person who struck the blow must have been standing immediately in front of the deceased—he died of that wound—there was also a wound on the right side of the left blade bone, going down towards and separating the muscles of the spine—that blow must have been struck while the deceased was in a stooping or falling position—the blow on the chest would make him faint directly, and he would die almost immediately—his liver was of normal weight—there was no sign of prolonged drinking.
Cross-examined. The deceased's liver was not that of a drunkard, it was of normal weight—the first wound was above the temple bone and the second in front of the chest, which was a fatal one, the third was inflicted as he was falling forward.
GUILTY, with the strongest possible recommendation to mercy by the Jury. DEATH .
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, December 17th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. BIRON Prosecuted, and MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS Defended.
SOLOMON PINCUS KONSKI . I am a furrier, of 34, Handforth Road, Brixton—the prisoner was lodging there—he went away on November 11th, and some time after I missed this cheque book (Produced.)—a number of the cheques are filled up in some one else's writing—this cheque for £25 came out of my book; it is endorsed by a Mr. Cockerton—I kept the cheque book in a locked drawer which had been broken open.
WINIFRED CHAMBERS . I live at 1, Beecham Place, and am book-keeper to Messrs. Joyce and Mathews, butchers, Brompton Road—on November 13th the prisoner brought this cheque for £25, endorsed by Mr. Cockerton, who I knew to be a customer of ours, and I gave him £25 in gold for it—I did not know the prisoner; he asked me to oblige Mr. Cockerton—the
cheque was sent to the bank and returned, marked"Cheque taken from a book which has been stolen."
EDWARD WILLIAMS (Detective Sergeant B.) On November 13th, at 7 p.m, I received the prisoner, who was in custody—I searched him, and found in his overcoat pocket £10 10s. in gold, 19s. 6d. in silver, and 1s. 6d. in bronze—in a purse in his trousers pocket I found £5 in gold, and in a pocket book there were two £5 notes, and eight cheques filled up and endorsed—he said, "I filled them in, and the endorsement is in my proper writing"—four of these cheques had been uttered that day and the day before—he had a directory on him containing the names of customers—he also had the key of a bedroom at the Hotel Cecil, where he had been staying that night and the night before—there were also bills for clothing paid on the 13th, including one for £12 10s.
Cross-examined. The total amount obtained on cheques from Mr. Konski's book is £60—when he told me he had written out the cheques he did seem to be ashamed of himself—he refused his name and address or to say anything about himself—he seemed quite calm and said he did not want his parents to be disgraced.
Witnesses for the defence.
THOMAS FRANCIS RAVEN , M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P. I practice at Broadstairs—I have known the prisoner since childhood—I know his family history, and there is insanity on both sides of the family—he is the son of Lieut.-Colonel Walter, and had a most excellent home—when at school he commenced stealing, and obtaining goods by false pretences and shammed illness to get off work—there was no example before him to teach him how to steal or do anything of that sort—he was sent to Dr. Langdon's home at Hampton Wick, and escaped from there—on March 11th, 1901, I and Dr. Biddell certified him to be of unsound mind—this is the certificate (Produced)—he was then sent to Dartford Asylum—on October 23rd, 1901, at Hastings, I again certified him to be insane—he was then charged at Hastings Quarter Sessions with fraud—he was again sent to Dartford, and subsequently transferred to Haydock Lodge Private Asylum, and escaped from there—in July last at Sandwich I again certified him as insane—he was there charged with similar offences—he was sent back to Haydock Lodge—I describe him as a moral imbecile of dangerous character—he is quite incapable of controlling his moral impulses—he may know what is right, but he does what is criminally wrong without being able to help it—he has threatened to stab his parents, and he may become dangerous at any time—he has a brother who is an idiot.
ERNEST WILLIAM WHITE , M.R.C.P. I am medical superintendent at Dartford Asylum, and Professor of Psychological Medicine at King's College—on March 11th, 1901, the prisoner was admitted under certificate to our institution—we have to make returns to the Commissioners of Lunacy, and on March 18th I made the following Return: (Read) "He is insane and suffering from mania, weak-minded, impulsive, dangerous, and
actually suicidal; lacks moral tone, and is mischievous"—he got better under our care and was discharged on May 21st, 1901, on condition that his father should send him to sea, under the strong moral control of a skipper in the Merchant Service—he was re-admitted to our institution on October 23rd, and I then formed the opinion that an asylum was the best place for him—he was transferred to Haydock Lodge on January 29th, 1902, at the request of his relatives.
Cross-examined. I do not think he can appreciate the seriousness of his acts or the penalties attached thereto.
GUILTY, but not responsible for his actions. To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure. There were five other indictments against him.
NOT GUILTY .
98. JONATHAN EASTWELL (48), GEORGE SMITH (30), and JAMES KEEGAN (32) , Unlawfully attempting to break into certain premises. Second count, Being found by night with housebreaking implements in their possession.
MR. DAVIS Prosecuted.
WILLIAM INGRAM (272 City.) On November 21st, about 12.40 a.m., I was on duty in Fenchurch Street, and saw Keegan standing there—shortly afterwards I saw Eastwell—they remained in conversation two or three minutes—shortly afterwards Smith came round from the direction of Snow Hill, and they walked towards Blackfriars—Eastwell followed them on the west side, but crossed over and joined them about fifty yards on—there is a shop with a portico, and there is a gate before you get to the door—the gate is outside the porch—they stood there some minutes, and Keegan went to make water somewhere—they stood outside the porch; Eastwell was apparently watching—Smith came back—a constable was coming up and Keegan and Smith went to the porch—the other constable waited while I went across the road to Harp Alley and asked what they were doing—Keegan said, "That is my business"—I said, "That will not satisfy me, I shall take you to the station"—I went to 23, Farringdon Street and found marks on the gate and door, and the letter-box broken—I saw the constable pick up this file—they were taken before the Inspector and charged, and another small file was found in Keegan's pocket.
Cross-examined by Eastwell. You did not ask me the nearest way to Guildhall, or ask me to direct you—I did not fetch you out of a cell, but another man did—nothing was found on you.
Cross-examined by Smith. You and Keegan were walking down Farringdon
Street together on the Snow Hill side—I saw someone go and get a light under the Viaduct.
DICK MOSS (341 City). On December 1st, at 1 a.m., I was on duty at Snow Hill Police Station, when the prisoners were brought in and charged—I was watching them, and saw Keegan move his right arm and put it behind him—I looked behind the chair where he was seated, but could not see anything—when he was in the dock I felt on the floor and found this large file (Produced)—I also saw the small one produced from his right hand coat pocket when he was searched.
FREDERICK WILKINSON (264 City.) On December 1st, about 1 a.m., I noticed the three prisoners standing outside No. 23, Farringdon Street—Keegan and Smith went into the dark towards No. 23—they came out again and joined Eastwell—Keegan and Smith went back into the dark again and remained some time—they came out again and joined Eastwell, and they all crossed over the road to Harp Alley, where they were arrested.
Cross-examined by Eastwell. You did not cross over to them—you all three crossed over from 23, Farringdon Street to Harp Alley.
Cross-examined by Smith. You stood outside No. 23, Farringdon Street, close to the kerb.
Cross-examined by Keegan. When you were detained you said you were not there at the time.
WILLIAM PENFOLD (41 City.) On December 1st, about 1 a.m., I watched the prisoners' movements—Eastwell was on the right-hand side of Farringdon Street, facing No. 23—the other two men were on the footway outside No. 23—Eastwell crossed the road and joined the others and they walked a few yards towards Blackfriars Bridge, and then they crossed back to Harp Alley—I was exposed to view and concluded that Eastwell had given the others information, and I instructed the other officers to prevent them getting away—I examined the premises at No. 23, and found the tin letter box had been torn off the gate, and there were recent marks on it of someone having put a foot there—I found four marks on the door corresponding with the large end of the large file produced—I asked the prisoners what they were waiting about for, Keegan said he had a perfect right to be in the streets if he liked—I again asked him what he was doing and he said, "That is my business"—I then asked Eastwell what his occupation was, he said he was a waterside labourer out of work, and had come to look for a job—I said "Where have you been to look for a job?"Keegan said, "I do not see why my friend should answer your questions; if you want to know anything, take us down to Bridewell"—Smith said, "I am a printer, and live at Clerkenwell; that is all you are going to get out of me, governor"—they were all taken to Snow Hill Station.
Cross-examined by Smith., I gave evidence about the letter box on the second hearing before the Magistrate—there was only evidence of arrest taken on the first hearing—you were all charged about twenty minutes after you were brought in—the Inspector in charge of the district was not at the station, and we had to send for him, and that caused the delay.
Saturday previous to this occurrence I left the premises safe and well locked up—the front door, gate, and letter box were perfectly safe—on the Monday morning following, my younger brother met me coming along and informed me of the occurrence, and I saw four or five marks on the door, and the letter box was off the gate.
Cross-examined by Keegan. I cannot vouch for anything—no doubt somebody did it—who it was I do not know.
Smith, in his defence, said that it was not possible to make marks on the door and wrench off the letter box in a few minutes under the observation of the police, and that if the police saw them get over the gate why were they not arrested then?
Keegan's defence: If the police saw us in the gateway why were we not arrested then?
SMITH then PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at Newington, on February 12th, 1896, and five other convictions of felony and misdemeanour were proved against him. Eighteen months' hard labour; EASTWELL, Four months' hard labour; KEEGAN, Discharged on recognisances.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, December 17th 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
WHITING PLEADED GUILTY . (See page 4.)
MR. MUIR Prosecuted.
RICHARD JAMES . I am a tobacconist at 42, Peacock Street, Newington Butts—I have been employed at Wishart's, Panton Street, Haymarket, for 4 1/2 to 5 years—I have lived at 42, Peacock Street two or three years with my parents, and brothers and sisters—it is a tenement—on Saturday, October 25th, I left to go to see the illuminations about 7.30, with two friends, Harry Clarke and Richard Jinks—they remained in my company till about 10.30, when we got separated in Leicester Square—we stood speaking to Mr. Enright, who keeps the stage door of the Empire Theatre, before we were separated—Enright joined me about 11.20—we went down to Parliament Street and I left him at the corner of Bridge Street at about 12.15—I was quite sober—about 12.15 I started to go home from Westminster Bridge along the Westminster Bridge Road—at the corner of Kennington Road and the Lambeth Road, five or six fellows came from the Lambeth Road, caught hold $$$ my arm and took me along the Lambeth Road—they said if I made a noise they would murder me—I was too terrified to make any noise—they took my overcoat off, they set me down on the steps of the Lambeth Baths, cut the laces and took my boots off—they took a signet ring from my finger, and my watch and chain from my waistcoat pocket—in my overcoat was my tobacco and pipe, and in my trousers pocket some money—they went towards the Lambeth Road—I called after them—the next morning I made a complaint—I afterwards gave evidence against Abrahams at this Court—Hillman gave evidence for the defence—I think I heard part of it—it is not true that I took off my coat at a coffee stall and put it on
the side or wheel of the stall, nor that my watch was in my overcoat pocket, nor that I tried to take off my boots and fell, nor that I was drunk—I had two coats on.
FRANCIS WILLIAM POLLARD . I am an officer of this Court—I produce the bill of indictment found by the grand jury on November 17th, against Ernest Alfred Abrahams for robbery, and receiving stolen goods—Abrahams was tried on that indictment before the Recorder on November 17th and 18th, convicted, and sentenced—this is a copy of the indictment, marked A.
ALFRED EDWARD FITZGERALD DALTON . I am clerk to Messrs. Barnett and Buckler, the official shorthand writers to this Court—on November 17th and 18th I took down in shorthand the whole of the evidence in the charge against Ernest Alfred Abrahams for and against the prisoner—the prisoner was sworn and gave evidence—among others he called the prisoner George Hillman—this is the transcript, marked D, of my note of that evidence—he was sworn on the 17th and recalled on the 18th. (The prisoner Hillman's evidence, given at the trial on November 17th and 18th was then read. See page 4.)
HENRY CLARKE . I have lived at 65, Brook Street, Kennington Road, about a year, with my mother—I have been employed by Humphreys and Grigg, military tailors, Haymarket, for six years—on October 25th, about 7.30 p.m., I called upon Richard James, 42, Peacock Street, and went with him and Jinks round to see the illuminations—I parted from them about 12.30 a.m., in Leicester Square—the whole time James was perfectly sober.
WILLIAM ENRIGHT . I live at 40, Turner's Buildings, Erasmus Street, Westminster, and am a packer at the Army Stores, Grosvenor Road, Pimlico, in the day time, and am employed at the Empire Theatre stage entrance in the evening—I am an old soldier—I saw Richard James on the evening of October 25th at the stage door of the Empire about 8.50—he was quite sober—about 11.20 p.m. James came and complained that he had lost his friends—he waited till about 11.40—we went to the Princess Head, where I purchased a small brandy for my wife, and he had a lemon and bitter, we walked on to Guest's, and then through Whitehall to the bottom of Parliament Street, where we stood talking outside the London and North Western Railway Company's offices till 12.15, when I left him opposite the Parliament Houses—he was quite sober.
JOSEPH CROSS . I live at 21, Warwick Street, Blackfriars Road—I keep two coffee stalls—on October 25th and 26th, the night of the illuminations, I had one opposite the Lambeth Baths—I was attending to it from 10 p.m. till 1 a.m.—I attended this Court last month to see whether I knew James—he was not at my coffee stall that night—no drunken man hung his coat on the stall, or on the wheel of the stall, that is an impossibility, because he would have knocked the goods down; nor did any drunken man take off his boots—I saw Abrahams when he was convicted, but I did not know him—I never saw him at my stall—I saw no man that night at my stall who was drunk.
Cross-examined by Whiting. I have only one shelf and one counter—I
do not keep pastry at the back of the counter I keep the cups on the counter.
ROBERT JOSLIN . I live at 8, Charlotte Street, Blackfriars Road—I help Joseph Cross in keeping his coffee stall—I was with him at the coffee stall opposite the Lambeth Baths on October 25th and 20th, the night after the South London Procession—ray light shone on the first door and not the second door from the stall in the Kennington Road—I never saw James there—no drunken man hung his coat on the ledge of the stall nor on the wheel that night nor fell down drunk.
Cross-examined. It would not have interfered with the pastry, it would have interfered with the cups—there would be room to hang a coat where there is no pastry.
Re-examined. There was no coat put there that night—I was there with Cross from 9.30 p.m. till 4 a.m.
ALFRED LONG (Detective Sergeant L.) James complained at Kennington Lane Police Station on October 26th—on November 3rd I arrested Abrahams—the coat he was then wearing was identified by James as stolen from him on the night of October 26th—Abrahams was afterwards charged, brought up here and convicted—Sergeant Beard arrested Hillman and Whiting.
JOHN BEARD (Police Sergeant L.) On December 4th I arrested Hillman at 31, Broad Street, Lambeth—I told him I was a police officer, and that he would be charged with another lad who was arrested on the charge of perjury in a case at this Court—he said, "I say now 'what I said before, what I said is the truth; if it is not, I hope I may not see my mother and father alive again"—I took him to the police station, where the warrant was read to him—he was subsequently charged—he made no reply.
HILLMAN., GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the jury, thinking he had not realised the gravity of his action. Four months' hard labour; WHITING, who PLEADED GUILTY. received a good character. Seven days' hard labour.
FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, December 11th, 1902.
Before J. A. Rentoul Esq., K.C.
MR. GREENFIELD Prosecuted, MR. HUTTON. Defended Dodd.
NOT GUILTY .
101. MARY KINGSTON (36), WILLIAM WALKER (21), SARAH ANN WRIGHT (22), and GEORGE WEBB (23) , Robbery with violence, with another person unknown, upon George Walker, and stealing from him two watches, a chain, and £5, his property.
MR. METHUEN Prosecuted, MR. FOWKE Defended Kingston.
Kingston and Wright asked me to stand them a drink—I did so—we then went out of that house into another across the road—I stood them some more drink and also some lunch—they then asked me to go home with them and have a cup of tea—I consented, and they took me to No. 6, Clarendon Street—Wright invited me upstairs into a bedroom—I asked for a cup of tea, but Kingston brought me a glass of what she said was stout, and said, "Have a drink, young man, it will do you good before you have a cup of tea"—I now know it to be a mixture of stout and snuff—I had two drinks and almost immediately fell asleep—the next I remember is Walker hitting me on my jaw, saying, "What are you doing here, you had better clear out"—I then discovered that I had been robbed of two watches, a chain, a belt, and six sovereigns which were in a purse—I said to Walker, "I have been robbed; you and I had better go downstairs together; you are in the swim"—I seized him, but after struggling for about ten minutes he got away—I saw Kingston outside and gave her into custody.
Cross-examined by MR. FOWKE. I have served with the colours in South Africa and in India—I did not see a third woman at the house—I had had three or four drinks, but I was not drunk—after I drank the black liquid Kingston kept popping in and out of the room—I cannot say who took my watches, chain, and money.
Cross-examined by Walker. I was not awake sitting on the bed when you came into the room—the punch you gave me woke me up—when you slipped away from me you left your hat and scarf in my hands.
Cross-examined by Wright. You were not fully dressed lying across the foot of the bed—you undressed and we went to bed together—I had the drink before you undressed.
Cross-examined by Webb. I never saw you.
RICHARD KINGSTON . I am the son of Mary Kingston, and live at 6, Clarendon Street—I was at home about 1 p.m. on November 11th when Miss Wright and a Mrs. Webb came in with the prosecutor—my mother was not with them—Mrs. Webb asked me to get her a quarter of snuff and half a pint of stout—I went, and when I returned she was waiting for me on the stairs, and I saw her mix the two together on the stairs—she then took it into the room where the prosecutor and Miss Wright were—I do not know what became of it afterwards, but Mrs. Webb told me that she had given it to the soldier to drink—I do not know Walker, Wright, or Webb—I know Mrs. Webb.
Cross-examined by MR. FOWKE. It is untrue to say that my mother mixed the stuff—she was not there; she was at the Jubilee public house—she came in about a quarter of an hour afterwards.
Cross-examined by Walker. I let you in.
Cross-examined by Webb. I have never seen you before.
ALICE SARGENT . I am the landlady of No. 6, Clarendon Street—Kingston has been a lodger of mine for seven months—on November 11th I saw Mrs. Webb, Miss Wright, and the prosecutor come into the house—I saw Mrs. Kingston go in and out two or three times.
Cross-examined by MR. FOWKE. The prosecutor did not come into the
house with Mrs. Kingston—I did not see her bring in any drink—the people were in my house about an hour or an hour and a half.
Cross-examined by Webb. I have never seen you before.
Re-examined. I did not know that Mrs. Kingston let her room for immoral purposes—she has two rooms—she has brought strange women in at different times.
HERBERT HARMER . I am thirteen years old and go to school—on November 11th, about 4 o'clock, I saw Walker and the prosecutor struggling in the street for about ten minutes—I saw Walker strike the soldier on the jaw—Walker then ran away leaving his hat and scarf in the soldier's hands.
Cross-examined by Walker. You were struggling when I first saw you I did not see you speaking to the prosecutor.
Cross-examined by Wright. I have never seen you before.
Cross-examined by Webb. I have never seen you before.
ARTHUR HALL (631 Y.) On November 11th, about 4 o'clock, the prosecutor gave Kingston into my custody and said, "I have been robbed, and this is one of the women"—Kingston replied, "I have not got it, but good luck to her for getting away; I shall not tell you, I know all about it"—when charged she said, "It was never taken at 6, Clarendon Street, but in the street; the gentleman had a gold watch and chain on in my place and he had it on when he went out; go to 12, Lancing Street and fetch Mrs. Webb, she will tell you"—she had been drinking, but was not drunk—enquiries have been made about Mrs. Webb, but at present they have been unsuccessful—the next night at 11 o'clock I arrested Wright—Webb was present—I told her I was a police officer, and should arrest her for being concerned with a man and woman in custody in stealing £6 in gold and a gold watch and chain and a gun-metal watch—she replied, "I know I done wrong in going to the house with him and the other woman; I got into bed with him, and he had some stout to drink that sent him of to sleep; I had none of the money or stuff."
Cross-examined by MR. FOWKE. The prosecutor was not sober when he gave Kingston into my custody, but he understood what he was doing.
FREDERICK WATTS (489 Y.) On November 11th, about 8 p.m. I saw Walker outside the Exmouth public house, Exmouth Street—I told him I was a police officer and should arrest him for being concerned with others in custody and others not in custody in stealing from a man a purse and other articles and money in Clarendon Street—he replied, "I know nothing about it"—when charged at the station he said, "I do not know nothing at all about it: have you got my handkerchief and cap? I was called to the house to turn him out."
WILLIAM BARBER (135 Y.) On November 13th, about 12.20, Webb came to me and said."I may as well tell you I pawned the oxidised watch at Saunder's in Fitzroy Square for 5s., which I received from Mrs. Webb, who was with my wife which came from the soldier: I was not there, I do not know anything about it"—afterwards he said, "You have pinched my wife and I am done"—I understood him to refer to Wright as his wife.
"Cross-examined by Webb. You did not use the word "missus."
HERBERT ATTWOOD . I am in the employ of Mr. Jay, a pawnbroker of 73, Charlotte Street, Fitzroy Square—I produce a gun-metal watch pledged with us for 5s. in the name of Wells—I cannot recognise the man who pledged it.
GEORGE JONES (549 Y.) On November 11th I went to 6, Clarendon Street to search, and found a coat and some Army papers on the bed and a purse under the bed—they have been identified by the prosecutor—the following morning I went to the house again and found in the same room these two glasses (Produced) which contained a mixture of snuff and stout.
Cross-examined by Mr. Fowke. I know it to be snuff and stout by the smell.
By the COURT. Its effect is to send anyone to sleep—I have had experience of that in the course of my duties as a police officer.
A written statement by Webb before the Magistrate was here put in stating that he met Wright and Mrs. Webb in Charlotte Street, and Mrs. Webb handed him a gun-metal watch and asked him to pawn it, which he did for 5s. and handed it to her; that he did not know of the robbery until the following evening, when Wright was arrested; that he then went to the station voluntarily and told the police that he had pawned it and surrendered himself.
Kingston, in her defence on oath, said that Mrs. Webb asked her if she could take two friends into her rooms to have a wash, as they were going to a music-hall; that she consented, and followed about a quarter of an hour afterwards; that she did not see the prosecutor and Wright in bed together, and did not give the prosecutor anything to drink; and that she had nothing whatever to do with the robbery.
Walker, in his defence on oath, said that he was at work at the Exmouth Arms when Mrs. Webb offered him 5s. if he would turn a man out of Mrs. Kingston's room, that he went and when he got there the prosecutor accused him of robbing him.
Wright, in her defence on oath, said that she was with Mrs. Webb when the prosecutor asked them to have a drink; that he then asked them to go to a music-hall; that they agreed; that Mrs. Webb then saw Mrs. Kingston in another bar of the public house, and asked her if they could go into her rooms and have a wash; that all three went; that the prosecutor sent Mrs. Webb out for some beer; that Mrs. Webb brought it, and that she drank out of the same glass as the prosecutor and immediately felt queer and vomited; that she did not go to bed with the prosecutor, but was lying across the foot of the bed; and that she had nothing whatever to do with the robbery.
Webb, in his defence on oath, said that he was in Charlotte Street when Mrs. Webb asked him to pawn a watch for 5s.; that he did so, and handed the money to her; that he did not live with Wright as man and wife, but only knew her by knowing her parents.
KINGSTON and WRIGHT, GUILTY of robbery; WALKER, GUILTY of robbery with violence : WEBB, GUILTY, as an accessory. WEBB then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at the Marylebone Police Court on August 13th, 1898. Four previous convictions of assault were proved
against Walker. KINGSTON, Six months' imprisonment ; WALKER, Twenty-five lashes with the cat and twelve months' hard labour; WRIGHT, Six months' imprisonment; WEBB, Twelve months' hard labour.
OLD COURT—Thursday, December 18th, 1902.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
MR. BOYD Prosecuted.
MARIE LAING . I now live at 8, Bangor Street, Kensington—I lived with the prisoner from the end of last January till October 8th—a week before that a man named Webley came to stop with us—the prisoner is a cat's-meat vendor—he had a small round—I also used to work and pay for the things in the house—I partly kept him—if he gave me a shilling he wanted it back—he worked till the end of July—from July 9th I kept him by my prostitution—I had not been a prostitute before that, but he complained of my having no money, and I had to do something—on the afternoon of October 8th I was with the prisoner, a woman named Budden and Webley in my room—I told Coombe that he would have to leave me, as I did not intend to keep him any longer—I offered him 5s. to get a start with, and offered to pay a week's lodgings for him—he said, "What's the use of 5s. to me? If you give me a quid I can do something with that"—I said that I could not give him a quid because I had not one for myself—he said I could not turn an old man like him in the street, and that before I could leave him he would do me and my two children' too—between 6 and 7 p.m. I went out with Budden—I came back at 10 p.m., but went out again at one o'clock because I had no money, and came back a little after three—Budden was lying on the bed in her room—I told the prisoner that Webley had told me that he, Coombe, was going to do me—I saw the end of the poker sticking out under the bed—I asked the prisoner what that was for, and said, "You are going to do me with the poker, are you?"—he said he would knock my brains out if I did not go to bed, but if I did not do anything before the morning he would go to bed, and he did lie on the bed—I did not go to bed—about 7.45 I heard the landlord's son come into the next room—the prisoner appeared to be asleep on the bed—I went into that room and said to Budden, "As you are paying your rent now, I think I will pay mine"—I did not notice that the prisoner had followed me till he said, "That is the woman who has got no money"—I had said that I had no money—I went back and lit the fire, and then into the passage for water for the kettle—the prisoner said. "You are going for the police, are you?"—I said, "No, I am not, I am going to make the tea"—I put the kettle on the fire, and then went to the bed to take the baby up when he struck me twice with this poker on the side of the head and twice on my left arm—I said, "Do not beat me any more, I won't do anything"—he caught my hair and dragged me on to the floor, took a razor out of his pocket and started cutting me on the back of my neck—I screamed out—the landlord knocked at the door and came in
and took the prisoner away from me—I had taken off my coat and put this jacket on because it was cold—here is the gash he made in the collar, and here is the cross cut that he made with the razor in the back of my neck and left hand.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. You took the poker from under the mattress—I was not fighting Annie Budden—we were drinking tea—I never asked you for 10d.—always when I came in you said, "How much money have you got?" and this time I said, "No money"—I never struck you with the poker—I did not come home drunk—I did not throw a cup and saucer at you—because I would not get up and make you a cup of tea you started making a noise, and that is the way the window was broken—I have had too much of that kind of life, and I have advertised for work—Webley did not bruise me—you did not take my part against Webley, you are too much of a cad—you were living on me—a cabman's wife asked if you were my father, no one asked if you were my husband—no woman wanted me to summon her husband for knocking me about—Webley told me to be careful, as you said you would do me in and my children too—I said, "You won't do that," and you said "Won't I?"—you said you had done five years for your own wife, and you would laugh at doing so for me—you called me a dirty rotten w—I did not take my clothes off, but lay on the bed till 7.30 a.m.—I did not put the poker under my skirt—I did not speak to you when I came in at one o'clock—I did not say "You will have to f—g well go now,"I said, "You will have to go to-day!"—I did not threaten you with the poker—you struck me three times with it—the policeman picked it up—I did not fall on the fireplace—with my head on the grate—you dragged me from the bed across the side of the table, and my back hair got singed—you bolted the door, but the; landlord pushed it open and got between us.
CHARLES HOFFMAN . I am the landlord of 5, Kenley Street—the prisoner and Annie Laing occupied the front room—about 8 a.m. on October 8th I heard a woman screaming—I knocked at the door and asked what was the matter—Laing halloed out, "Come in, Mr. Hoffman, he is murdering me"—I went inside—Laing was face downwards and Coombe was hacking at her neck with a razor, which I took away—I held the prisoner against the wall till Laing got out—I conveyed Laing to the next house and called my wife to assist—when I came back the prisoner started running—I ran after him—he cut his throat with a razor going along—I was assisted by a friend from a coffee shop—we put him on a coal wagon that was passing and conveyed him to the doctor—I took the razor out of the prisoner's hand and gave it to a policeman.
ROBERT ALEXANDER JUDSON . I am a medical practitioner of 11. Portland Road—on October 8th I examined Laing—she had several incised wounds about her head and face one on the right side of the back of her neck was an inch and a half long, two on her throat, one on the right side two inches long and one or the left an inch long—she also had three bruises on her left arm and a cut on the back of her left hand—they were not self-inflicted.
Hospital on November 1st—I told the prisoner I was a police officer, and should arrest him for causing greivous bodily harm to Marie Laing by beating her across the head and shoulders with a poker, attempting to murder her by cutting her throat with a razor, and for attempting to commit suicide by cutting his throat—he said "All right"—I conveyed him in a cab to the police station, and when the charge was read over he said, "I did not beat her with the poker, she did it herself. I did not attempt to murder her, but I did attempt to murder myself."
The prisoner in his defence stated that Laing had provoked him and threatened him, after he had protected her and her two children, by attempting to turn him out for Webley; that she hid the poker in her skirt and struck him with it, and that he saved her from the fire.
GUILTY . He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at this Court on October 17th, 1892. Fire years' penal servitude.
For other cases tried this day see Essex and Surrey cases.
NEW COURT—Thursday, December 18th, 1902.
Before Mr. Recorder.
103. HENRY SAMUELS and JOSEPH SAMUELS PLEADED GUILTY to conspiring with David Samuels and Rosa Samuels and others, to set fire to divers houses and shops, of which they should be the occupiers, with intent to defraud such fire insurance companies as should grant them policies of insurance: HENRY SAMUELS also PLEADED GUILTY to wilful and corrupt perjury upon the hearing of an arbitration. Two years' hard labour on each indictment, to run concurrently. JOSEPH SAMUELS— Two years' hard labour.
THIRD COURT .—Thursday, December 18th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. ROOTH Prosecuted.
JOHN ALFRED FRENCH . I am a cellarman, of 17, Lockyer's Street, Clapton Park—on Saturday, November 29th, I was outside King's Cross Station, of the Great Northern Railway, engaging a cab on the rank for myself—I was suddenly gripped by both my arms and felt a knee in my back, somebody holding my throat and neck, and at the same time I felt hands down my trousers pockets—as soon as I was released I saw my eldest brother chasing two or three men—I lost 24s. which I had loose, and a purse—my youngest brother said, "Keep your eye on him," meaning the prisoner, who was there—I saw the prisoner immediately after he left me, when he went towards the cab from behind me and then into a urinal—my brother fetched a constable, and the prisoner was arrested as he was leaving the urinal—I charged him—I could not swear he took my purse;
I saw him come from behind me—there was a crowd, but they cleared off—the prisoner was searched at the police station—£1 was found in his mouth—the purse has not been found.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I was sober—the cabman was engaged.
ARTHUR FRENCH . I am a labourer, of 3, Walton Road, Kentish Town—I was with my brother when he was speaking to a cabman—two men came up in front of him and held his arms—the prisoner came behind him—one of them went to his waistcoat pocket—the prisoner put his hand in his right hand trousers pocket—I told my brother to keep his eye on this man—as soon as the prisoner heard what I said he went into the urinal in front of the cab horse's head—I went with my brother and charged him.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I was perfectly sober—my brother charged you at the station with robbery and assault, I suppose—I could not hold your hand to see what you had in it, but I kept my eyes on you when you went into the urinal—my brother said that he had lost his money and purse from his pocket.
FREDERICK FRENCH . I am a labourer, of 1, Carlton Street, Kentish Town—I was with my two brothers when one was robbed as he was talking to a cabman—five men came up with a rush—one or two came round my brother, got hold of his arms and held him—I rushed for the men who were holding him, but they slipped away and went up York Road—I cannot swear to the prisoner, it was done so quick—I pursued the two men who were in front of my brother but I was tripped up by another one who came behind me—I had got down Caledonian Street when a man came behind me and put his shoulder against me and threw me in the street.
Cross-examined. I was sober—the inspector at the station stopped me from speaking.
SAMUEL MIDDLETON (420 Y.) I was on duty about 6.20 on Saturday, November 29th—Frederick French spoke to me, and I saw the prisoner running—I was only five yards off—he ran into the urinal, and I ran to the opposite end, and as he was coming out I caught him in my arms—he had only time to run through it—the prosecutor and Frederick French came up and charged him—he said he knew nothing about it—I took him to the station—he was searched—on him was found a 6d. and 5 1/2 d.—when he was put back in the cells I found in his mouth two two-shilling pieces and a half-crown-the total found on him was 7s. 5 1/2d.
Cross-examined. You did not stay in the urinal long enough to make water—you were not doing your trousers up—you were charged with stealing money out of the prosecutor's pocket.
The prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that he knew nothing about this matter till the prosecutor asked him far his purse.
GUILTY . He then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Clerkenwell on November 6th, 1900, and five other convictions were proved against him, and he was stated to be a desperate man and companion of thieves. Seven years' penal servitude.
FOURTH COURT. Thursday, December 18th;
THIRD COURT, Friday, December 19th; and
THIRD COURT, Saturday, December 20th, 1902.
Before Lumley Smith, Esq., K.C.
105. CHARLES MAJOR SMITH (42) , Obtaining credit for £50 and £35 from Fred Belcher and £21 from Frederick George Charles Ford without informing them that he was an undischarged bankrupt; and obtaining by false pretences from William Arthur Adams a cheque for £100; and other sums from other persons with intent to defraud; and being entrusted with £3 by Frederick George Charles Ford for a special purpose, did fraudulently convert the same to his own use.
MR. CHARLES MATHEWS, MR. A. GILL and MR. TRAVERS HUMPHREYS conducted the Prosecution.
GEORGE INGLIS BOYLE . I am a messenger in the Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of the bankruptcy of Charles Major Smith—the adjudication was on August 2nd, 1900—according to the debtor's statement of affairs the liabilities were £2,855 2s. 10d. and the assets nil—he has never been discharged from that bankruptcy—he is described as an accountant of 55 Victoria Street, Westminster—his private address is given as 31, George Street, Hanover Square.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. There are unsecured liabilities to the amount of £1.444 12s. 1d., and contingent liabilities to the amount of £1,410 10s. 9d.
JOHN CLARENCE LYELL . I am an electrical engineer, and carry on business as J. C. Lyell and Co. at 55, Victoria Street, Westminster—in the autumn of 1899 the prisoner took two offices from me on the first floor of 53, Victoria Street, in the name of C. M. Smith and Co., at a rent of £40 a year, but in January, 1900, he gave those up and took two offices at 55, Victoria Street, at a rent of £80 a year—the March rent was paid in advance, but in June, 1900, I had to distrain for it and again in September—it was paid out on each occasion—in September I gave him six months' notice to leave, but on March 24th, the day before the rent became due, he removed all his goods and furniture—he did not let me know that he was going, and I have never received the rent—I understood him to be an accountant—there were a number of names upon a tablet in the passage, but there was no name of Drummond and Co.—I did not see anyone there in authority except him.
Cross-examined. I first made your acquaintance in the autumn of 1899, when you and Mr. Clemenson came to me with reference to taking the offices at No. 53—I saw Clemenson several times, but I had no business transactions with him—I do not remember ever meeting a Mr. Edwards—I may have distrained for the rent the same day as it fell due, but it was to protect myself because of the bankruptcy notice—after your bankruptcy the National Prudential Insurance Company took over the tenancy of the offices and it was agreed to extend the tenancy till June provided I had a satisfactory reference from the National Prudential Company—I wrote to them upon the subject but I never received an answer—you left on March 24th—the office doors were not padlocked on the 25th not for several days after—you did not put up any notice as to your change of address—when I discovered where you had gone I issued a writ against you for the £40 rent—leave was given you to defend the action and it was subsequently heard
before Mr. Justice Wright—I do not remember whether the Judge nonsuited me—in October I saw a notice in the paper referring to your address, and I gave information to the police.
GEOGRE RUSSELL SEWELL . I am manager of Jones, Lang and Co. Estate Agents of 27, Chancery Lane—in March, 1901, they had the letting of some of the building—on March 15th I received an application from Messrs. Drummond and Co., of 55, Victoria Street, offering £72 a year for rooms 25, 20. and 27, Lonsdale Chambers, Chancery Lane—they gave three references, which proved satisfactory, and an agreement for three years was subsequently given to them—I called each quarter for the rent—the cheques I received were signed "Drummond and Co."—the first cheque was dishonoured—we wrote to Drummond and Co. in consequence and received instructions from them to present it again—we did so and it was duly honoured—the September rent was paid—the cheque for the Christmas rent was dishonoured—we distrained and were paid out—we also had to issue a distress for the March, June, and September rents before we were paid—I believed exhibit 20 to be a genuine reference.
Cross-examined. After your arrest I went to the offices with the police—I then found this agreement (Produced) lying upon the table—we have distrained for the rent since your arrest and have been paid out—the furniture has been removed to avoid payment of the Christmas rent—a person giving the name of Drummond first inspected the offices, and having approved of them we received the letter of March 15th from Drummond and Co.—we then sent them a draft agreement, and Mr. Drummond brought it to us already signed by the Company, and we handed him the original signed by the landlord—he paid the costs—I have never seen him since.
FRED BELCHER . I live at 42a, Mersham Road, Thornton Heath—I was introduced to the defendant by Mr. Seabrook about three years ago—he then had offices in Victoria Street and was carrying on business as C. M. Smith and Co.—I saw other names up but not the name of Drum-mond and Co.—I heard the name of Drummond mentioned about March. 1901, but I did not see him—in January, 1901, I had a conversation with Smith—I told him my mother wanted to invest a little money—he introduced me to a firm of solicitors, but they took such a long time over it that he eventually did it himself—I gave him £50, and he gave me a promissory note for £55 on January 15th payable one month after date—about a fortnight afterwards he gave me some debentures in Hill and Co.—I have since recovered £5 on them at the City Court from a Mr. Powell to whom the business was sold—the promissory note was never paid—when I parted with the money I knew he had been bankrupt, but I thought he had got his discharge—in June, 1901, I found out that he was undischarged—on the same day I handed him another £35, for which he gave me a promissory note for £41 payable three months after date—he told me he was making an advance to Messrs Barber and Co., and that my £35 was included in the loan—that £35 has never been repaid—I have also advanced him small sums amounting to 36s. 6d.—I have never been in his employment—I remember him telling me in November, 1901, that
Drummond and Co. had been turned into a limited company—I was a director of the Company, and also one of the signatories—my qualification as a director was twenty shares—I believe they were issued but never delivered—I had no remuneration as a director—the inducement held out to me was that I was to have a very good situation in another company that the prisoner was forming—I never got the situation—exhibit 11 is a minute of a meeting of the directors held on November 19th—it is not true that that was the only meeting held by the directors—part of it is in Mr. Seabrook's writing—he was in the employ of the company at the time—I sometimes signed cheques for the company and sometimes Seabrook did—before I signed one I always had instructions from Smith to do so—I sometimes signed cheques in blank—exhibit 13 is the ledger of Drummond and Co.—some of the early entries are in Seabrook's writing, but most of them are mine—down to May 16th there were payments out to the Pension Tea Co. to the amount of £105 and receipts from the Pension Tea Co. to the extent of £18 15s.—the capital account of the Company on February 28th, 1901, was £7—Smith's salary as secretary of the company was £3 a week—I went to Chancery Lane nearly every evening till June—I only went once or twice after June.
Cross-examined. I was frequently at Victoria Street during 1900 and up to the time when you removed in March, 1901—in July, 1900, I knew about your bankruptcy in connection with Grenier Gervais—you told me it was due to a mistake on the part of the solicitors and not due to your own liabilities—you also told me that you had arranged with Mr. Edwards, of the National Prudential, to take over your business—I do not know whether your initials were dropped and the business carried on as Smith and Co.—when I gave you the £85 I knew that your liabilities were about £3,000 and that you had not paid any part of them—I knew Mr. Clemenson and his partner Mr. Hill, at 55, Victoria Street—I saw Mr. Hill there constantly—he seemed to be in authority—I also saw him at Chancery Lane—he seemed to be in occupation of the offices there—I know his writing—there are entries by him in the cash book—the signature to exhibit 19 is his—I had nothing to do with Drummond and Co. before it became a limited company—I saw a Mr. Middlemiss at Chancery Lane when Mr. Hill left—he owned the furniture at Chancery Lane—when he left he sold it to Mr. Brown, who is a director of Henry Drummond and Co.—I did not give you the £85 for your personal use—I understood it was to be lent to a Mr. Box and Messrs. Barber—I am perfectly satisfied that the money was lent—I do not know whether it has been recovered—Mr. Brown found the money for the formation of Drummond and Co., and paid for its registration—I know you paid about £150 into it—I believe it was Mr. Brown who asked me to become a director—Mr. Brown and I signed the order to the bank as to how the cheques were to be signed—you never asked me to draw cheques for your own personal use—the whole of the moneys received and paid by the company are shown in the cash book, which was kept by me—for my services I was to have £100 in cash and an appointment in the Traders' and Consumers' Provident Association when it was floated—I know that that association had been arranged to
be financed to a very considerable extent—Messrs. Bennett and Charts were to advance £2,000—after the formation of the company there were frequent meetings of directors—it was your duty as secretary to draft the minutes and other things that were to be attended to, and they were subsequently copied out and signed at the next meeting and kept in a drawer in the office—the minutes produced are only drafts—a share register was kept, and I believe kept properly—I do not remember a meeting of the seven signatories after the registration of the company, but I remember a meeting of four—at that meeting the directors were appointed and Mr. Sea brook was elected chairman—your salary was £3 a week, but after June, 1902, it was to be increased to £500 a year—I have never seen anything irregular in the conduct of the company since I have been connected with it—I know by keeping the cash book that all the money paid to the company has been used by them—your name was not up at the offices in Chancery Lane—I believe a balance sheet of Henry Drummond and Co. has been prepared, I had nothing to do with the preparation of it—the company is still carrying on its business and flourishing—I have no idea as to its present financial condition.
Re-examined. I remember the defendant telling me about his bankruptcy, but as far as appearance went, I did not notice any difference in January, 1901, to his position before the bankruptcy—when I gave him the money I was perfectly content to rely upon his promissory notes—until I was shown exhibit 19 I did not know that Hill had been using the name of Drummond—there were no signed minutes except the one produced; there were several rough drafts—I have no knowledge of the negotiations between the company and Bennett and Charts, except what the defendant and Mr. Brown had told me—I do not think Drummond and Co. have had any banking account since July—on June 13, when Mr. Adams' £100 was paid into the company's account, the account was overdrawn to the extent of ninepence.
LEONARD JAMES BULL . I am a clerk living at 3a, Talbot Road, Forest Gate—in March last I answered an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph for an assistant secretary—I received a letter from Smith as secretary to Messrs. Drummond and Co., asking me to call upon him at 27, Chancery Lane—I called and Smith told me that in order to take up the position I should have to take some shares in the company—I took fifty shares—he told me they were paying 10 per cent., and that the interest would be paid yearly—I was to get a weekly salary of 45s. with an increase in three months, rising up to £3 in nine months—Smith told me that he held between 500 and 600 shares—I believed his statements to be correct, and upon March 17th I went to the company's offices to commence my duties—upon the 18th I paid Smith £25 in cash, and gave him a cheque for £25 a day or two after—I was only at Chancery Lane two days when I was sent to Stratford to try and find a suitable depot for the Pension Tea Company—I had very little to do during the two days I was at Chancery Lane—Smith had a number of callers—I only remained about ten days in the employ of the company when I spoke to Smith about terminating my agreement and asked him for the return of my money—he told me
that as I had entered into an agreement there would be a little difficulty, but eventually I got a cheque for £25 and another cheque post-dated a month for £23—I agreed to allow him £2 for expenses in transferring the shares—I presented the cheque for £23 at the bank, but it was returned marked, "Refer to drawers"—it has never been paid—I received two weeks' salary of 45s.—I saw nobody in control at the offices of Drummond and Co. except Smith—Brown came in several times during the day—his offices, the Pension Tea Co., were on the opposite side of the way—I never saw anyone of the name of Drummond.
Cross-examined. You often spoke to me of seeing Mr. Drummond—when I first saw you at Chancery Lane you told me that you were secretary of the company, and that the company was doing such a big business that you wanted an assistant—before I parted with my money and took up my appointement I made a few inquiries about the company, and they were satisfactory—I know that a Mr. Johnson answered the same advertisement as I did—I found out afterwards that you were advertising again for an assistant secretary when I had already taken up the position, and in consequence I asked to have my agreement cancelled—you objected and said that you had no power to cancel it, but must see Mr. Drummond and the other directors about it—I eventually got £25 returned—I know that twenty-five of my shares were transferred to Mr. Johnson—I did not know that he was going to take up the remaining twenty-five at the end of a month, and that that was the reason my cheque was post-dated a month—when the cheque was dishonoured I put the matter into the hands of my solicitors—before I went to them I saw you about it and you had not got the money—I know a writ was issued against you, but I do not know that the costs were £7—I was approached by the police to come and give evidence.
Re-examined. The reason I wanted my agreement terminated was because I found that he was negotiating with Johnson for the very position that I had paid £50 to hold.
HARRY JOHNSON . I am an engineer's clerk of 101, Fore Street, Ipswich—on February 25th, last my attention was attracted to an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph—I answered it, and called upon Henry Drummond and Co. some time in March—I saw the prisoner, and he told me that the appointment was in connection with a friendly society called the National Thrift, that the capital was to be £1,000,000, that its business was in connection with the sale of tea, and that if I took the appointment he should want a deposit as a guarantee of good faith—I agreed to deposit £25 and received a certificate signed by Belcher and Smith of twenty-five preference shares, each carrying an accumulative preference dividend at the rate of 10 per cent per annum—I believed the statements made to me by Smith with regard to the company—I began my duties on April 7th at a salary of £2 a week, at 27, Chancery Lane—I had very little to do—I stayed till about the middle of May—my salary was paid, but not regularly—I never saw anyone named Drummond nor anyone in authority except Smith—I never got my £25 repaid to me, and I eventually
sent the certificate and other papers to a firm of solicitors and left the matter in their hands.
Cross-examined. I never saw any Mr. Drummond—I did not know whether such a man existed—I looked upon you as the representative of the company—all I had to do was to prepare six or eight sets of rules for friendly societies—I do not know that anything you told me was untrue—the Pension Tea Society had not been registered when I left—I paid the £25 to you, but I do not know what became of it afterwards—I went back to Ipswich when I left you—when I left and found that I could not get my £25 back I agreed to leave it with the company—later on I received a letter from Bull asking me to communicate with his solicitors in London—in consequence I left my share certificate with them—I was asked by the police to give evidence.
Re-examined. I did not ask any questions as to the bankers or the financial position of the company—I have had no dividend' on my shares yet—several people called at the offices while I was there, but I did not know what business they came on—I never bought or sold any tea.
FRANCIS HENRY SEABROOK . I am a clerk of 88, St. Stephen's Avenue, Shepherd's Bush—I was in the prisoner's service when he was trading as C. M. Smith, at 55, Victoria Street, and afterwards as C. M. Smith and Co.—I know his writing—I should say that exhibit 20 is his writing—I did not know anyone of the name of Drummond as a sub-tenant of his—I have lived at 15, Speenham Road, Brixton—Miss Smith was living there then—she is a sister of the defendant—in November, 1901, I went into his service at 27, Chancery Lane; for two months—a Mr. Drummond was frequently spoken of by Smith, but I never saw him—I am one of the original signatories to Henry Drummond and Co., Limited, and also a director—I had twenty-five shares given me as a qualification—I never got the scrip, but I understood it was issued, and that Mr. Smith had It—I could have had it by asking, but I never asked; I was quite content to leave it with him—I never had any remuneration as a director—I only attended one meeting of directors, that was soon after the company was formed—at that meeting I acted as chairman—only Mr. Belcher, Mr. Smith, and myself were present—no reporters were present.
Cross-examined. I first met you at your sister's house at Brixton—it was in the early part of 1899 that I first entered your service at 53, Victoria Street—I saw a Mr. Clemenson there—he was in joint occupation with you—he was known also by the name of Ballantine—I do not know that that name was assumed because of some money he inherited—I know his initials are W. H. D., but I do not know what the letters stand for—I did not know that he had been connected with a firm of Drummond and Co. in Argyle Street, Regent Street—soon after the war broke out in 1900 he went out to South Africa, and his partner, Mr. Hill, took his place—Mr. Hill came about the time I left—I called at the office occasionally afterwards, and sometimes saw Mr. Hill there—I have seen a Mr. Dearing and a Mr. Davis at Victoria Street—Mr. Dearing is some relation of Mr. Hill—I remember you becoming bankrupt, and that a Mr. Edwards, the proprietor of the National Prudential Insurance Company took over your
business and carried it on in the name of Smith and Co.—you then acted as manager—your cash book shows that from July, 1899, to July, 1901,. about £8,000 was received by you in business—I should say your earnings were £400 or £500 a year—I know you lost £1,200 in connection with Greinier Gervais, and that the business was afterwards purchased by Messrs. Swan and Edgar—I think you were the heaviest creditor with 750 debentures—I first went to Chancery Lane about the middle of October, before the formation of the company—I was there when the company was formed—I was one of the first signatories—Messrs. Brown, Smith, Belcher, Davis, Elliott and Collins were the others—I have been the secretary of one limited company—I think all the requirements in connection with the legal-registration of Henry Drummond and Co., Limited, were complied with—I remember seeing a Mr. Middlemiss there—he had his name on the door—I think he owned all the furniture in the offices—I do not know if he held the lease—I remember you making advances to Messrs Barber and Co.—I was in their employ subsequently to being with you—I know that the money has been repaid—£100 of it has been paid to the solicitors acting for Barber and Co.—twenty-five shares were allotted to me as a director, but they were never issued—it was agreed that 500 were to be allotted to you in consideration of services rendered—I remember the Pension Tea Society being started while I was at Chancery Lane—that business was to buy and sell tea—I had nothing to do with it—Drummond and Co. was a perfectly bona fide company when I left in January—I have had nothing to do with it since—during the three and a half years I have known you I have not seen anything that was not perfectly straightforward.
Re-examined. When Smith acquired the business of Madame Gervais he undertook the assets and the liabilities of the business and then turned it into a company and raised money on the debentures—some of the liabilities of Madame Gervais were paid, but some were not—I do not know whether Mr. Belcher received any of the money repaid by Messrs. Barber and Co. to Messrs. Huxham and Rawlinson—the National Prudential Insurance Company in Victoria Street has nothing to do with the great Prudential Insurance Company.
ALBERT EDWARD HOLE . I am a clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, at Somerset House—I produce the registered file of Henry Drummond and Co., Limited—the company was registered on November 15th, 1901—I also produce the registered copy of the memorandum and articles of association of the company—it was established to carry on amongst other things the business of transfer agents, auctioneers, house and land and general financial agents—on March 10th, 1902, a register of directors was filed—Charles Major Smith is described as the secretary—no agreement has been filed showing the acquisition by the company of any property—no auditor or manager has been appointed—there is no list of shareholders—on March 10th, 1902, there were 157 £1 shares issued in all.
Cross-examined. I am acquainted with the requirements of the Act of Parliament relating to Joint Stock Companies—we should not register
a company unless all the requirements of the Act were complied with—by the memorandum the directors have power to issue shares to any persons for services rendered in connection with the formation—an auditor may be appointed by the articles of association, but it is not compulsory—when a list of directors is filed no manager need be appointed—no debentures have been registered by Drummond and Co.
WILLIAM ARTHUR ADAMS . I am a grocer's assistant of 116, High Street, West Norwood—in May last I answered an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph for a partnership—on the 28th I called at the offices of Henry Drummond and Co., and saw the defendant—he told me he was secretary of the company, at a salary of £600 a year; that they were doing a very big business, and that they wanted somebody to do the extension work, and that they had 800 members—I saw him several times after May 28th—he told me I should have to invest £150 in the company, and on June 11th I gave him a cheque for £100—it is endorsed "For Drummond and Co. Limited, C. M. Smith, Secretary"—in return for the cheque he gave me a certificate for 100 fully-paid preference shares of £1 each, carrying a dividend at the rate of 10 per cent., signed by Mr. Belcher and himself—I entered upon my duties on June 16th, at Slough—I stayed there eleven weeks, during which time I received from Smith two cheques, one for £3 and one for £5, both of which were dishonoured—I wrote to him about them, and in consequence of his answer I paid the £5 cheque into my bank again, and it was again dishonoured—I was to get a salary of £3 a week, but I never received anything—I wrote several times for it, but he always made excuses, none of which" turned out to be true—I was in his employ for seventeen weeks altogether, eleven weeks at Slough and six weeks at Chancery Lane—scarcely any business was done at Slough—I only took £4 4s. 6d. in the eleven weeks—the business was to sell tea—the whole of the net profits of the Pension Tea Society were to be paid to and funded with the British National Thrift Friendly Society—I was never told who were the Committee of Management, or the trustees, or the treasurer or the secretary of the National Thrift Society—the Pension Tea Society was afterwards changed to the Pension Trading Society—I paid expenses at Slough amounting to £9—I kept the £4 4s. 6d. I had taken over the counter, and I received £3 from Smith, so that I am out of pocket altogether £153.
Cross-examined. I received two letters from you before I saw you—the first was signed "C.M. Smith," and I could not find you—the second letter bore the company's stamp—when I saw you we did not discuss the partnership, but you went straight to the Pension Tea Society—you said that it was to run on similar lines to Nelson's, which you had put on a footing—I knew Nelson's to be a good business—Brown was not introduced to me as a director of the company, but as being connected with the working of the Pension Tea Society—I understood I was paying in £100 to the company as a guarantee of good faith—I paid the money to you—Brown was present—I made no enquiries about the business before I paid the money, I was perfectly satisfied with what you told me—you told me—that Mr. Brown had put £150 into the business—you did
not tell me that you had any money in it—the Pension Tea Company's office was a little room on the top floor of 84, 85, and 86, Chancery Lane—while at Slough I was not working under Mr. Brown—I took directions from him, but I thought he took them from you—when I returned to Chancery Lane I was employed with issuing policies in the British National Thrift Society—on September 11th the Company owed me £39, but I did not then owe them £50—I was not to find the other £50 until three months after 11th August, the date of the agreement—you told me that £2,000 had been promised by Messrs. Bennett and Chart for the extension of the Pension Tea business, and you took me to see the solicitors, but they said they could not do anything till the head of the firm came back at the end of the week—you did tell me that when this money or a portion of it came in my salary would be paid—I lent you £10, for which I have your I O U now—later on I found out that instead of 800 members there were only twenty-one—I was present when you were arrested at Chancery Lane at the company's offices—I have never made any application for the return of my capital—I was bound under my agreement for a year.
Re-examined. Mr. Brown was present at one of the interviews I had with the defendant—he heard everything that passed and he verified the defendant's statements—I first knew that Mr. Brown was a director of Drummond and Co. when I received the articles of association some time in September.
ALBERT TAYLOR . I am a clerk in the employ of the London and South Western Bank, Fleet Street branch—I produce a certified copy of the account of Henry Drummond and Co.—it was opened on November 27th, 1901, with the payment in of £100—the last entry is July 1st, 1902—there was then an overdraft of £1 8s. 4d.—on March 19th there is a payment in of £25, and another payment in of £25 on the 20th—on the 21st £35 was drawn against those two amounts—on April 1st there is a payment in of £25, and on April 2nd a payment out to Bull of £25—on June 12th there is a payment in of £100—before that was paid in there was an overdraft of 9d.—on the following day there is a cheque drawn to self for £50, and two days later a payment out to Brown of £10—the total payments into the Bank from January 1st, 1902, to June 30th, 1902, including the payment of £100 and three payments of £25 each, is £377 17s. 4d.
Cross-examined. The total payments in from November 27th, 1901, to June 30th, 1902, is £508 7s. 4d.—the Pension Tea Society's account was under the control of Mr. W. A. Brown or Mr. G. M. Smith, either could sign—the total payments into that account between November 28th, 1901 and July 3rd, 1902, is £475 16s. 11d.—Drummond and Co.'s cheques were to be signed by one director and the secretary.
Re-examined. On July 10th the Pension Tea Society's account had 4s. 2d. to its credit, and a cheque was drawn on July 30th for 4s. 2d., closing the account.
FREDERICK GEORGE CHARLES FORD . I am a clerk living at Plumstead—in the early part of June I saw an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph for an assistant secretary to a friendly society—I wrote and received a
reply from C. M. Smith, asking me to call at 27, Chancery Lane—I called and saw the defendant—he showed me a copy of the rules of the British National Thrift Society, and told me that I should have to handle large sums of money in connection with the society, and he should require a guarantee of £500—I agreed—the Law Guarantee Society was mentioned, and he asked me whether I should take it out myself or whether he should do so for me—he told me he could get it at a cheaper rate, and I gave him £3 to cover the expenses on July 7th—my salary was to be £3 a week—I entered on my duties at 27, Chancery Lane on August 25th—all I did was to fill in policies appertaining to the Pension Tea Society—I stayed in the employ about seven weeks, but never received any salary—on October 8th, the day before the offices were closed, Smith called upon me at Brixton and told me that Brown had the money of the company, and that after Adams had been settled with I should get my money in full—the next day I spoke to Mr. Brown about it, and the day after I lodged an information with the police at Bow Street.
Cross-examined. The financial condition of the society was never explained to me—my salary was £3 a week, not £2—I was to be paid monthly—at the end of the month I did not make an application for £8—I did not see anyone named Drummond—I never heard you personally assume the name of Drummond—with regard to the £3 I gave you, you distinctly suggested going to the Law Guarantee Society—I do not recollect telling you that Mr. Adams was in communication with Bow Street—I have not been employed by the police.
Re-examined. I have never been in communication with any society in reference to a policy of guarantee—after I had been to Bow Street I tried to trace the defendant, but I was not employed by the police; I was a fortnight altogether doing so.
LOUIS WILLIAM BENNETT . I am in the employ of the Law Guarantee Society, of 49, Chancery Lane—no guarantee policy has been taken out with that Society by Mr. Smith or Drummond and Co., Ltd., in respect of Mr. Ford—I have not seen any proposal form, nor has any money been received by the Society—we have had some communication with the firm in connection with other people—Smith is not in a position to obtain guarantee policies from the Society at a cheaper rate than any other person.
Cross-examined. I have been to see Drummond and Co. once or twice—the last time was in connection with a Mr. Fountain—I am not aware that he was in the employ of the Pension Tea Society—before we issue a policy we require to be furnished with a printed prospectus of the Society—there might be a saving in the cost of the premium if several persons were included in one guarantee policy—I do not think we gave you a quotation of 10s.
WILLIAM STEPHENS (Detective-Sergeant E.) On October 21st I searched the offices of Drummond and Co., 27, Chancery Lane, and found Exhibits 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 22 and 23, and a register of members of Henry Drummond and Co., Ltd., and a share certificate book.
Cross-examined. There is no lettering upon the share register book
to identify it as Henry Drummond and Co.'s, but I think it bears the Company's stamp inside.
ALBERT HAWKINS (Detective-Sergeant E.) On October 21st I went to 2 7, Chancery Lane—I saw the prisoner in the offices of Henry Drummond and Co.—I told him I was a police officer and held a warrant for his arrest for obtaining £100 by false pretences from a Mr. Adams—he said that Mr. Adams was not the only one that had put money into the business, and that he had had no more to do with it than Mr. Brown.
Evidence for the Defence.
WILLIAM ALFRED BROWN . For a good many years previous to 1901 I was in business as a retail grocer—I first met Smith in 1901, and we discussed the formation of a company to run, among other things, the Pension Tea Society—Henry Drummond and Co., Ltd., was then formed—I became one of the signatories and one of the directors—I knew Mr. Seabrook and Mr. Belcher as directors—as soon as the Company was registered I paid £150 into its account, and I have since put in another £200—some of my friends have also put in about £100 between them—I have assisted the Company on and off right from the start—Smith held the position of secretary—several meetings of directors were held and minutes drawn up—I do not recollect any arrangement by which Smith got 50 per cent of the receipts from the general commission business apart from his salary—I do not think he was drawing £600 a year from Drummond and Co.—I remember the transactions in connection with Bull, Johnson, and Adams—their moneys were received by the Company and applied for the carrying on of the business—I do not think any of it reached Smith—in June, 1902, the Pension Tea business was in a flourishing condition—the members were about 800—in October, the business had practically doubled itself, the number of members was between 1,500 and 1,600—the business is now at a standstill owing to these proceedings—I had nothing to do with the signing of cheques for Drummond and Co—Mr. Belcher used to keep the cash book, and I saw it occasionally—when I went to Chancery Lane, Mr. Middlemiss was occupying the offices with Smith—Middlemiss continued in occupation till March—when he left I bought the furniture and the lease of the rooms from him—I do not know how he got it—I understood Drummond and Co., Ltd., had taken it from Jones, Lang and Co.—after the formation of the Company most of the time was occupied in framing rules of different friendly societies—it was arranged to finance the societies before they were really registered—amongst the societies formed were the Pension Trading Society, the Traders' and Consumers' Provident Association, and the British National Thrift Society—in the formation of these societies Drummond and Co. were acting practically as agents of eminent financial people—no false representations were made to Mr. Adams or Mr. Bull about the business—at the time Mr. Adams paid in his £100 I had arranged to invest some more money in the Company—it was the rule that the agents should pay their salary out of their takings—very few agents took less than £3 a week—all Mr. Adams' orders were executed—the British National
Thrift Society was formed to take the profits of the Pension Tea Society—the profits from 1,600 customers would be about £20 a week—the British National Thrift was a properly registered friendly society—Ford was in the Company's employ at a salary of £2 a week—we had twelve or fourteen agents, and arrangements had been made to guarantee them through the Law Guarantee Society, who were waiting for the names of the trustees and the prospectus, which we did not get till October 3rd—I do not know anything about the £3 that Mr. Ford paid Smith—about October 10th Smith sent in his resignation to Drummond and Co., and it was at my request that he remained on—at the time of his arrest certain matters were nearly completed, and within a day or two Drummond and Co. would have got £250—Smith's salary in connection with the Traders' and Consumers' Provident Association was to be £8 a week—that association was formed to take over the goodwill of the British National Thrift—I do not know the price that was to be paid—there is no ground for suggesting that the business of Henry Drummond and Co. was not a bona fide one—it was a properly registered company—if it goes down I shall lose £400 or £500—at the time of Smith's arrest it was perfectly solvent—the Pension Tea Society is still carrying on business in a small way.
Cross-examined. The date of Smith's resignation might have been the same day that the offices were closed; I do not know—I do not know when Mr. Ford laid his information at Bow Street—when Smith resigned he went away; I do not know where—I think Henry Drummond and Co. held the lease of the offices in Chancery Lane before Mr. Middlemiss—I met Smith at 27, Chancery Lane, as the result of an advertisement—at the time I did not know anything about Henry Drummond and Co.—Smith told me he had taken over Drummond's business—there are no entries in the cash book after June, 1902—I did not know the account was overdrawn in June—I knew it was very low, and I had arranged to put some more money in, only Mr. Adams' £100 went in instead—I was present at an interview between Smith and Adams before Adams parted with his money—I did not hear Smith say anything that was false—I do not think he referred to the banking account—on March 21st, 1902, I drew £35 from the account of Drummond and Co., but I repaid it on the 29th—in March only £2 was paid into the bank—I had very little to do with Drummond and Co.—I had the Pension Tea Society to look after—I have not made any entry in the books of the Pension Tea Company since May last—the British National Thrift Society were to be paid 3d. a week in respect of every member in the Pension Tea Society—20 per cent of that profit would have gone to Drummond and Go. For working expenses—the National Thrift was a genuine society—I do not' know who the trustees were—they were mere nonentities for the purposes of registration—I do not know that anyone was appointed to look after the pensions—I have no record of the net profits funded with the Society—the business of the Pension Tea Company indirectly involved life insurances, but the British National Thrift was not formed to get over the difficulty of depositing £20,000.
Re-examined. The profits of the British National Thrift during the first twelve months were expended in extending the business—both the National Thrift and the Pension Tea Societies were placed voluntarily under the supervision of the Board of Trade and had their approval.
GUILTY of obtaining money by false pretences with intent to defraud. Four previous convictions were proved against him. Five years' penal servitude.
NEW COURT.—Friday, December 12th, 1902.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
OLD COURT.—Friday, Saturday, and Monday, December 19th, 20th, And 22nd, 1902.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
108. WILLIAM BARMASH (26), and SOLOMON BARMASH (46), PLEADED GUILTY to forging 400 £50 notes, 200 £10 notes, and 200 £5 notes, purporting to be issued by the Bank of England, with intent to defraud, and PHILIP BERNSTEIN (36) , to forging a £50 Bank of England note with intent to defraud, Solomon and William Barmash having been convicted of felony at this Court on May 6th, 1893. WILLIAM BARMASH, Ten years' penal servitude; SOLOMON BARMASH, Fifteen years' penal servitude; BERNSTEIN, who received a good character, Twenty years' penal servitude. (See next case.)
109. MATHEW ROME (47), JOE ZUBESKY (27), SYMON OBOLNICH (31), ADOLPH ZIEKEL (50) , having in their possession three forged Bank of England notes for the payment of £50, £10, and £5, knowing them to be forged, and without lawful authority or excuse, to which ROME PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. CHARLES MATHEWS and MR. LEESE Prosecuted; MR. DOHERTY appeared for Zubesky; MR. BRAY for Obolnich, and MR. SIMPSON for Ziekel.
WILLIAM JAMES FLYNN . I am an agent in charge of the United States Secret Service Department, New York—that is a division of the United States Treasury Department—on January 22nd, a man giving the name of Jacob Stern was arrested on a charge of attempting to utter £155 worth of counterfeit Bank of England notes at the State Bank of New York—there were nine notes, some of the value of £50, some £10, and some £5 (Produced.)—the man was subsequently released, as he claimed that he had found the notes and did not know they were counterfeit—we did not believe him, but we could not prove otherwise.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. I cannot say that I have ever seen the informer Schmidt before—I do not think I have.
Cross-examined by MR. DOHERTY. I have heard that Schmidt lived in America for some years—I do not know that the American police were looking out for him.
JOHANN SCHMIDT (Not sworn). I am a German, and an engraver by calling—I have been resident in England about four years—for three years I have been acquainted with Soloman and William Barmash—I first met them at their house at 25, Broad Lane, Tottenham, and afterwards at a house in Brady Street, where some people named Samuels were living—at Brady Street the Barmashes and I arranged that I should undertake the manufacture of forged Bank of England notes—I commenced by making some samples to show my skill—I showed the samples to the Barmashes, and I was instructed to proceed with the work—at first I was employed on £10 and £5 notes—on July 1st, 1901, William Barmash took a house at Southsea, where I went and carried on the same work in reference to the £10 and £5 notes—later I received instructions to manufacture notes of £50 face value, which I did—these six notes (Produced) are my manufacture, and also this one for £10—I believe I made about 400 £50 notes in all, but about half of them were spoiled and not delivered—I made about 200 tens, about fifty of them were spoiled—I endeavoured to bring out about 300 fives, about 100 of them were spoiled—I do not know what were done with the spoiled ones—I have not seen the spoiled ones—I gave them to the Barmashes in good condition, and they spoiled them by keeping them too long in chloride of lime—that was to whiten the paper—the Barmashes supplied me with the paper—I believe they got it from Wiggings, Teape and Co., in Aldgate—it was bond paper—I believe I made the water-mark on forged paper to the extent of about 600 fifties and about 300 each of tens and fives (£34.000)—I made the paper look like bank note paper—I did not know Philip and Hyman Bernstein—I had never done this to Bank of England notes before—I had forged things before in England, not in Germany—the whole of the work was finished by January last—we commenced in 1901—I received 30s. a week while I was employed, and I was to receive 7 1/2 per cent on the face value as the notes came back—I do not know where they were to come from—in January I pressed for money, and I received about £40 on percentage from Solomon Barmash—I learnt from him that William Barmash had left this country, and there was some question of money from Solomon Barmash to me for the purpose of bringing William back—I did not accede to his request, and I have never spoken to either of them since—we did not exactly quarrel—we had an argument—in July I saw an advertisement in the newspapers with regard to the forgery of bank notes—I read of the trial at this Court of a number of people charged with uttering a number of forged bank notes.
(Devenport and others, Vol. CXXXVI, page 581.) It was after that trial that I read the advertisement—in September I went to Messrs. Fresh field, the solicitors to the Bank of England, and saw Mr. Edwin Freshfield—he referred me to the police—I saw Mr. Edwin Freshfield again, and he again referred me to the police, and some time in September I made a
statement to Detective-Inspector Ottaway—I do not remember the date—I have known Zubesky about four years—he is supposed to be a carpenter—he very seldom works—he is a Russian Jew, I suppose—he does not come from the same place that I do—I have known Obolnich about four years—as far as I know he is a tailor and presser—in September last he was living at 59, Nelson Street—he is a Russian Jew—when I spoke to Obolnich and Zubesky we spoke in Yiddish—I did not know Ziekel before last September, and I have known Rome about the same time—I went about with Zubesky last August—I made two statements to the police quite close one upon the other—I cannot give the dates—after that I acted in accordance with their instructions—about the time I was making statements to the police I went to 59, Nelson Street and saw Obolnich—we talked on general matters first, and finally he asked me if I could supply him with some Bank of England notes—that was just before I went to the police—he meant forged notes, he knew I was in this sort of line—I said, "I will see about it"—he said if they would be as good as the ones he had handled before, he could buy any amount—he meant some he had had from the Devenport gang—I said, "I will see," and he said he would like to see some samples before he went into it—I told him the amount I could supply him with would be £10,000 face value—then I learnt the amount would be £13,000—after I had seen the police I saw Obolnich again, when the larger amount was mentioned—I afterwards had a conversation with Zubesky, and he told me that he had learned from a man, who I subsequently learned was Rome, that the Barmashes had a parcel of notes, and they were going to send the man abroad with it to dispose of—I suggested to Zubesky the idea of getting some samples and trying to sell them here instead of abroad—he was to get them from Rome, and Rome was supposed to get them from the Barmashes—I saw Zubesky again, and he said if I wanted to have the samples I must make an outlay or somebody else must do so to get them from abroad, and that he would require £2 13s. for the passage—he had learnt that the notes were abroad from Rome—I saw Zubesky again—I do not remember if it was the next day at the Whitechapel Library—I do not know if the police were there—we went inside—I received £3 from the police for the expense of bringing the notes from abroad—I did not give Zubesky the money—he said the notes would be over here in a day or two—I knew the police were keeping me under observation at this time—one evening about eight o'clock I went with Zubesky to the Lord Nelson, at the corner of Philpot Street—Nelson Street, where Obolnich lived, is in the neighbourhood—I left Zubesky and went to 59, Nelson Street—Obolnich was not at home—I went into the street and afterwards saw him in the street—I said I had some samples for him, and that there was a man waiting at the Lord Nelson with them—he said, "All right, I want to see them at my own house"—we went to his house and I left him and went to the Lord Nelson, where I saw Zubesky—I got samples of a £5, a £10, and a £50 note from him—I showed them to Inspector Davidson, who was not far off—he was away with them for a short time—he returned to me and I went to Obolnich's house with them—I looked at them myself and recognised them as some of
those I had made for Barmash—I showed them to Obolnich—he said, "All right; I must see a friend of mine, I must see somebody else"—he gave them to me back, and we went into the street—he parted from me and found the man he wanted—he afterwards rejoined me with Ziekel—in the meantime I had given the notes to Zubesky—then Obolnich, Ziekel Zubesky and myself went to Ziekel's house in Philpot Street—Zubesky produced the samples—Ziekel looked at them—I do not think he made any remark—he gave them back to Zubesky, and then said he wanted to compare them with a genuine note—Zubesky would not allow him to have them—we met the following day at the Three Nuns Hotel in Aldgate, between 3 and 4 p.m.—I then left them, and had some communication with the police—next day I went to the Three Nuns—I met Zubesky coming away from there—he said I was a little late and that Ziekel had been there but had not brought the genuine notes—later that day I had an interview with Zubesky, Obolnich and Ziekel at the Clyde public house—before that I had told Obolnich that the face value of the forged paper was £135,000, and at this interview Ziekel offered £300 for the £135,000—Zubesky had told me that at least 7 per cent of the face value was required by the Barmashes—I stated that in the presence of Obolnich and Ziekel—on' the following day I had a meeting with Zubesky and Rome, when it was agreed that Rome should tell the Barmashes that they would get the 7 per cent in order to get the parcel out of their hands—when it was taken out of their hands they were not to be given anything—it was to be sold to Zubesky and Ziekel for the £300—that could not be worked because one of the Barmashes wanted to be present at the deal—I remember one day going to the Lord Nelson and Zubesky handing me a sample £5 note for me to take to 59, Nelson Street, and show to Obolnich—on my way there I showed it to Inspector Davidson—he kept it a short time and then returned it—I went to Obolnich's, but did not find him there—I afterwards saw him in the street with Ziekel and went with them to the Lord Nelson—I told them I had a £5 sample note—they said it was no good to look at it if I could not show them samples of the £10 and £50 notes—next day I went and saw Rome and had a conversation with him, in consequence of which I got a sample of £50, £10 and £5 notes—I went to the Lord Nelson with Zubesky—I left him there and went with the notes to Obolnich's—I produced the notes—I believe Ziekel was there—they took the samples in their hands and looked at them—they said they must keep them to compare, and Obolnich retained them—I then went out with Obolnich—I borrowed half a sovereign from Obolnich for Zubesky—I did not show the notes to the police on that occasion—the notes were supposed to be returned" to me next morning but I did not get them from Obolnich until the second night—he did not say if he had compared them—I gave them to Zubesky, who was supposed to give them to Rome for the purpose of returning to the Barmashes—the attempted deal with Obolnich and Ziekel went off because one of the Barmashes wanted to be present, and because Rome got a little suspicious about the samples being kept so long.
Cross-examined by MR. DOHERTHY. I was never known as Jacob
Liebermann—when I was in Russia I was known as Schmidt—I was not born in Kovno—I lived there about five years—I left because I wanted to travel—I did not escape from prison there—I was never charged there with having stabbed a man—I went from there to America—I have been here four or five years—I have spent about a year doing honest work—I travelled for a tea merchant for three months—I received 18s. a week, and I was engaged for three months at a factory in Gray's Inn Road—I married while I was out of employment—I thought that was a convenient time—I borrowed money from a man who is now in prison—I know a man named Noek—he lent me money—I was not connected with these forgeries for nearly twelve months before I met Zubesky—he had no hand in these forgeries when I was at Southsea and Edmonton with the Barmashes—I will not say he had no knowledge of them—he knew I was engaged in something—he was introduced to me as a man who handled forged money in Russia—he knew I was an engraver—he could not say whether I was honest or dishonest—I have had some experience in connection with the forging of Russian notes and stamps—Zubesky had connection with forgeries of that kind—I do not know if he was charged or not—I have not been charged before—I had no money when I saw the advertisement of the reward of £1,000 for the discovery of the men who forged the notes—I was determined to get it, but it was conditional upon my securing the conviction of certain men—I did not entrap Zubesky; he entrapped himself—he had not the forged notes in his possession in September—the other prisoners have seen the notes in his possestion—I got £3 from the police to give to Zubesky to get these notes from abroad—I had no means at that time myself—I put the money in my pocket, because this came forward without it.
Cross-examined by MR. BRAY. I did not mention Obolnich's name when I went to Messrs. Freshfield, or when I went to the police the first time—I went to Zubesky before I went to Obolnich—I was to get the notes from Zubesky to give to Obolnich—I do not know the first day I went to 59, Nelson Street—it was in the evening—I saw the landlord's daughter—Obolnich was supposed to be at work—I did not say what I wanted to see Obolnich for—when Obolnich took the £5, £10 and £50 notes from me we were in his house—no one else was present the first time—he examined them—he did not keep them—he did not see the £5 note that I offered to show him because he said he did not care to see it unless he had the other two samples—I do not know why he should not want to see it—I might say they had somebody else behind them—all the notes were the product of my forgery—Obolnich never offered me any money in respect of the notes—I never saw him in the presence of Rome—Obolnich came to me once—it must have been 2 1/2 years ago—that was in connection with this matter—I went to him—he asked for my address, but I never gave it to him.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. I left Kovno between 1888 and 1889 and went to America—I did not say I went direct—Kovno is in Russia—I never said I left Germany for America—I was fifteen when I went to America; I am thirty now—I did not go from Kovno to America—I did
not return from America to Germany before I came to England—I left America for London because I was advised by a friend of mine to come here to start in business—it was not the same business which I was carrying on in America—the business in America was not forgery—I do not remember what boat I came over in—I might swear I landed in Liverpool—I might have sworn before the Alderman that I landed in London, but I did so by train—I did not know Ziekel until I went to find other purchasers for the notes—I saw him about four times—the first time I saw him was on the night of his seeing these three notes—I do not remember the date—I suppose it was September—the second time I saw him was in the Clyde public house—the third time was in the street, and the last time in the Lord Nelson, I believe—I never gave him these notes—I never saw them in his hands—when I told the police that I had given the notes to the prisoners they did not search me—I do not know if they took any steps to see if I had given them up—the whole of my acquaintance with Ziekel lasted about fourteen days—he offered me £300 for the notes, and Obolnich, Zubesky and I agreed we should tell the Barmashes it was £600—Ziekel did not know anything about that.
Re-examined. The three first notes were given back to Zubesky, because they were not allowed to be retained for comparison—Rome and Zubesky represented the agents of the sellers in the matter—Obolnich and Ziekel I understood to be the agents for the buyers—Obolnich made me no offer, but he was present when the £300 was offered by Ziekel—I never gave the notes into the hands of Ziekel, and I do not think he was present when they were handed to Obolnich—I was convinced Ziekel knew of the negotiations, because when I should have got the notes back I met him in the street, and he said he could not give them to me then because he was hunting someone else up, and I must wait a few hours more—he was always looking for things in my line.
JOHN DAVIDSON (Chief Inspector, City.) Schmidt was sent to me on September 5th by Messrs. Freshfield—the first statement I had from him was on September 26th—after that, police observation commenced on the prisoners and on Schmidt—on September 27th I was in High Street, White-chapel—I saw Rome—I had followed him from West Ham—I saw him meet Zubesky outside the Whitechapel Library—on September 29th I gave Schmidt £3—that did not come back—on September 30th I was near the Lord Nelson at 8 p.m.—I saw Schmidt with Zubesky go into the Lord Nelson—Schmidt came out—I spoke to him in Philpot Street—I then followed him to 59, Nelson Street, which turns out of Philpot Street—after he had left Obolnich's house he joined Obolnich in the street—they remained in conversation, and went into Nelson Street—they retraced their steps and went into the Lord Nelson—Obolnich came out first and ran across to his house—then Schmidt came out with Zubesky—he left him and I followed Schmidt, who handed me what purported to be three Bank of England notes—I know now that they were forged—I took them to Inspector Dinney, who was close by—we examined them—one was a £50 note N/50 02077, one for £10 L/50 65040, one for £5 J/61 43540
—we did not take the date of making—I returned to Schmidt and handed the notes back to him—I then followed him to Nelson Street—he knocked at 59, entered, and remained some time—he came out and joined Zubesky, who had been standing in the street—they remained in deep conversation and then parted—I then joined Schmidt—on October 1st, about 4 p.m., I was close to the Three Nuns with Inspectors Dinney and Ottaway and Constable Landley—I saw Zubesky and Ziekel in Aldgate High Street—Schmidt arrived shortly after they had passed and followed in their direction—on October 4th I was outside the Lord Nelson at 10 p.m.—I saw Schmidt and Zubesky—they went to the Lord Nelson together—Schmidt came out and brought me what purported to be a £5 Bank of England note—I took it to Dinney and examined it—the number was J/59 24383, dated September 13th, 1901—I gave it back to Schmidt, who went to 59, Nelson Street, knocked at the door and went in—he came out almost immediately, went into Philpot Street, and met Ziekel and Obolnich—they all remained in conversation, and then all crossed the road and joined Zubesky, who was outside the Lord Nelson—they all went in—when they came out Obolnich and Ziekel went away together and Zubesky and Schmidt together—on October 5th Schmidt made a statement to me, in consequence of which, about 7 p.m., I went to the Whitechapel Road with other officers—I saw Schmidt, Zubesky, and Rome together at the corner of Osman Street, close to the library—they walked up Osman Street, followed by Landley and Atkins—about 7.15 I saw Schmidt and Zubesky in Whitechapel Road—I followed them to 59, Nelson Street—Schmidt knocked at the door and entered, leaving Zubesky outside—he came out shortly and joined Zubesky—they both stood outside No. 59 for some time, and were joined by Obolnich—they all went into the Lord Nelson, where they remained some time talking and drinking—when they came out Schmidt and Obolnich left Zubesky, walked down Philpot Street and stopped on the footway in conversation—Schmidt took something from his inside jacket pocket, handed it to Obolnich, who put it into his inside jacket pocket—it was something white, and, from the distance I was standing at, looked like paper, about the size of an envelope—I then saw Obolnich place his hand in the pocket at the back of his trousers and take something out, which he handed to Schmidt—both walked away together and joined Zubesky in Commercial Road—Obolnich then left Zubesky and Schmidt and went towards Nelson Street—about 9 p.m. that night I saw Schmidt again, and he made a statement to me—I did not see any notes that day—on October 6th, at 1 p.m., I saw Schmidt with Ziekel in Commercial Road—Ziekel left Schmidt and got into a tram going west, followed by Detective Fitzgerald—I had another conversation with Schmidt—at 2.40 p.m. I saw Schmidt with Rome—they went to the Lord Nelson and remained there some time—Zubesky arrived, and went in also—at 4.30 p.m. I saw Schmidt come out and go to Ziekel's house at 9, Philpot Street—Ziekel and Schmidt came out and went to Obolnich's house—I saw them standing in the passage of the house in conversation with another person—I do not know who he was—shortly after 9 p.m. I saw Schmidt and Zubesky in the Lord Nelson—Ziekel
entered the same house—Schmidt came out and in several times going to Philpot Street and Nelson Street—about that time Rome and Zubesky came out and went to a Jewish restaurant at 2. Bedford Street, Commercial Road—at 10.15 p.m. I saw Zubesky, Schmidt, Ziekel, and Obolnich in Philpot Street—I followed them to the Lord Nelson—they remained there some time, came out together, and walked to Nelson Street—I did not arrest any of these prisoners.
Cross-examined by MR. DOHERTY. These men appeared to know each other—I do not know if Schmidt treated them—I do not know if he had any money in his pocket—he had to see me from time to time—I took care he did not concoct anything because I had other people watching him—when he made a statement to me I knew if he was telling the truth or not, because I had him watched—I do not think he knew he was being watched at first—he did later—he knew me, but he did not know the other officers—he told me he had given the £3 which I had given him, to Zubesky for the purpose of bringing the notes to the country—I do not know if he gave it to Zubesky or not—if he says he did not give it to Zubesky he has deceived me—I believed him when he said he had given Zubesky the £3—I do not admit any smartness on his part—I did not put on an old woman's garb to find out for myself what he did—I was dressed as a costermonger, a seaman, or a coalheaver—I just suited myself to the neighbourhood I was in—when I saw something white passing between Schmidt and Obolnich I was about twenty yards away—I did not entirely rely on Schmidt's statements—I never saw notes in Zubesky's possession—I do not know if he ever saw one of them.
Cross-examined by MR. BRAY. I watched Obolnich very closely from September 30th to October 6th—he was then in honest employment, I believe, somewhere in Finsbury—he is called "Symon the presser"—I did not arrest him—I did not inquire how long he had been at 59, Nelson Street—when I went into the public-house on September 30th I did not go in with Obolnich and Zubesky—I was not in the same compartment—I could see into their compartment—I did not see anything pass—I could not hear what was said—I do not know if Obolnich was at work till 8 p.m.—he may have been under observation by other officers during the day—Schmidt said that Obolnich was working—I should think that the conversations between them went on after Obolnich had finished work—I did not see anything passed on October 4th, I did on the 5th—that was between 8 and 9 p.m.—it was quite dark—there were not many people about—I saw Obolnich take something out of his hip pocket and give it to Schmidt—I was told afterwards by Schmidt that that was ten shillings—he told me it was not the consideration for the note—I did not follow Obolnich any further that night—I cannot say from my own knowledge whether he met Ziekel or not—I never saw him in Rome's company between September 30th and October 5th—Obolnich, Ziekel, and Zubesky were neighbours—I did not attempt to arrest Obolnich on October—5th.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. I do not know where the £50 note has gone—the only information I have about the £10 note is Schmidt's word
that he gave it to Males—I never saw Ziekel in Rome's company—I have not seen the prisoners together before September 27th—it is not in my district—whilst I had them under observation I consdered their conduct suspicious—I knew Zubesky was going backwards and forwards to the Barmashes, whom we had had under observation for some months—we knew of some facts before Schmidt came to the police—if I had not known what Schmidt was I should not have bothered my head about the prisoners at all when he was with them.
Re-examined. Zubesky lived somewhere in the East End at a lodging-house.
By the COURT. We suspected the Barmashes of being concerned in forgeries of bank notes before Schmidt came to us—my officers followed them and reported that they had met Schmidt—Zubesky was called the Great Pearl Street man and Schmidt was called the Brady Street man—we did not know their addresses—knowing that Schmidt had met the Barmashes, when he came to us I was inclined to investigate and find out what he could tell us—he mentioned certain facts, so I knew at once he knew what he was talking about.
Cross-examined by MR. BRAY. Previous to Schmidt coming to us I had not watched Obolnich.
----DAVIS (City Detective.) Between July 20th and August 15th I saw a man who I now know to be Rome going several times to 25, Broad Lane, Tottenham, which I have since discovered was occupied by the Barmashes.
CHARLES ATKINS (City Detective.) From July 20th to August 15th I kept observation on Zubesky and Schmidt—I saw them together on several occasions—Zubesky went to 25, Broad Lane, Tottenham, almost daily—I next kept observation on September 29th, when I was in Whitechapel Road, at 4.30 p.m., I saw Schmidt there with Zubesky—at 8.5 a.m. on September 30th I saw Zubesky come out of his house, 1, Old Montague Street, and go to Rome's, at 114, Harcourt Road, West Ham—he shortly afterwards came out with Rome—about 11.30 a.m. the same day I saw Zubesky go to Schmidt's house at 17, Brady Street—he stayed there a short time, and then went away—on October 1st, at 11.50 a.m., I saw Rome and Zubesky meet at the Whitechapel Library, and about 1.30 p.m. I saw Schmidt and Zubesky go into the London Distillery public-house—at 4 p.m. I saw Zubesky leave the Whitechapel Library and meet Ziekel—they went to the Essex Tavern, in Aldgate High Street—Zubesky came out and went to the library again—he met Schmidt outside—Zubesky said to Schmidt, "You are late"—they went to the Princess Alice in Commercial Street, and about 5 p.m. to 59, Nelson Street—Schmidt went in, Zubesky remained outside—after a short time Schmidt rejoined Zubesky—they met Obolnich in Church Street and had a conversation there—they left him and went to the Whitechapel Library and then to Nelson Street—they met Obolnich again in Philpot Street shortly afterwards—on October 2nd, at 2 p.m., I saw Schmidt and Zubesky outside the Whitechapel Library,—and at 8.10 p.m. I saw Schmidt and Obolnich in the Commercial Road—on October 3rd, at 4.15 p.m., I saw Zubesky go to 59, Nelson Street—he
was met at the door by Obolnich—Schmidt shortly after joined them, and they all went to the Seven Stars—on October 4th, at 5.50 p.m., I saw Zubesky leave the Whitechapel Library and meet Rome outside—he then left him and met Schmidt—they went together to 59, Nelson Street—Schmidt went in and came out with Obolnich—they joined Zubesky, who was in the street, and all went to the Lord Nelson—while they were inside I saw Ziekel standing opposite the Lord Nelson—the three men inside came out and parted—at 8 p.m. Rome and Zubesky met at the Anchor restaurant, 31, Commercial Road—they came out at 8.15 and parted at the corner of Commercial Street—Zubesky got on a tram and then Rome went down after him to Tottenham—they parted at the terminus—Rome went to 25, Broad Lane, at 9.20; Zubesky stayed at the terminus—Rome came out at 10 p.m. and joined Zubesky at the terminus—they walked up Stamford Hill, when I saw Rome take something from his inside coat pocket and hand it to Zubesky, who looked at it and put it into his inside jacket pocket—it looked like a small piece of white paper—they parted on the hill—on October 5th, at 2.25 p.m., I saw Schmidt and Zubesky outside the Whitechapel Library—at 6.50 I saw Schmidt, Zubesky, and Rome outside the library—at 7.30, Zubesky and Schmidt both went to 59, Nelson Street—at 8.30 Zubesky, Schmidt and Obolnich came out of 59, and went into the Lord Nelson—they remained in there some time and came out and parted—I did not see Ziekel then, I saw him later with Obolnich in the Commercial Road—on October 20th, at 2.15 p.m., I arrested Zubesky in he Whitechapel Library—I searched him, amongst other things I found an envelope addressed "Mr. H. Morris, 25, Broad Lane, Tottenham"—this piece of paper was inside it (Read.) "I am glad it is all over in good shape and order, will see you soon, Monday"—I cannot say whose writing that is in.
Cross-examined by MR. DOHERTY. I have seen Zubesky with Schmidt, Rome, and others on many occasions—I have never seen anything in his conduct to connect him with these forgeries except on that Saturday when Rome gave him the piece of paper at Tottenham—I do not know if he is a carpenter—all the time I have been behind him he has done no work—I was behind him for a few weeks only—if he told me he was at the Barmashes mending furniture I should be surprised—I do not know what the paper was which Rome took from his pocket and gave to Zubesky—I was not surprised that Schmidt, Zubesky and the others should be talking in the Lord Nelson—I was looking out for something suspicious—it is rather unfortunate I could not speak Yiddish—I should not expect to hear any thing about the forgeries—I simply went to see what they were doing.
Cross-examined by MR. BRAY. I have not made any enquiries with regard to Obolnich's employment—I believe he was employed all this time—I do not know how long he lived at 59, Nelson Street—I never saw anything pass between him, Schmidt and Zubesky, or heard their conversation—I do not think that Obolnich ever went to Schmidt during my supervision of Schmidt—I think Schmidt always went to Obolnich—I never saw Obolnich in Rome's company—I never saw anything which would lead me to suspect that Obolnich had ever been in communication
with the Barmashes, except the fact of Zubesky and Rome going down to Tottenham and going back and joining Schmidt, and then going to Obolnich's house.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. I saw Ziekel meet Zubesky on October 1st—they went into the public house—I saw them on October 4th standing outside the public-house—I did not see anything suspicious—between July 20th and October 4th I did not see anything to arouse any suspicion in Ziekel's conduct except in the meetings—it was Schmidt's presence which made me suspicious.
JOHN OTTAWAY (City Police Inspector). I watched the movements of Schmidt and others after September 27th with other officers—on October 22nd at 9.15 a.m. I saw Rome go to 25, Broad Lane—I saw him about 3 p.m. at the Whitechapel Library, when he left Schmidt and Zubesky—on that day I saw Rome tear a letter card to pieces which I picked up and put together—(Read)—"Dear friend, very considerably surprised you did not come to my place to-day as arranged. Please be at my place not later than 10 o'clock to-morrow morning; don't fail."—it is addressed, "Mr. Rome, 114, Harcourt Road, West Ham, Essex."—Post mark, "September 30, London, W.C."—that is in William Barmash's writing—Rome threw it into the street as he left 2, Bedford Street, Commercial Road, where Zubesky was then staying—this letter addressed to H. Morris, 25, Broad Lane, Tottenham, which is a name under which William Barmash went from time to time, is in Rome's writing—on October 3rd Rome met William Barmash in Stratford High Street—on October 4th, between 4 and 5.30 p.m., I saw Rome meet William Barmash in Bishopsgate Churchyard—they walked about together and amongst other places they went to Artillery Passage—as they were walking through the passage their coats were buttoned—I saw their coats unbuttoned, and a movement towards each other as if something was being passed—immediately afterwards I saw Rome go to the Whitechapel Library and meet Zubesky—they remained there a few minutes—they walked away and parted, and Zubesky returned to the library—I arrested Rome and Ziekel—Ziekel made no reply to the charge—I arrested Obolnich—he said, "I suppose you have someone who has given information, but I know nothing about it"—I found this newspaper cutting on him—(This was the report of forgeries on the Bank of England, and stated that some hundreds of Bank of England£5 notes have been put into circulation.)—I had Rome under observation on October 5th—I saw him go to 25, Broad Lane—some documents and books were found on Rome, in one of them I find the entry, "Sal. £2 from Joe Zubesky, 4, Bedford Street, Commercial Road," and "1, Old Montague Street"—that was another address of Zubesky's—I also found the entry 63, Slater Street; that was an address of a man named Salisbury—I also found a document addressed, "Mr. Henry Morris, 25, Broad Lane, Tottenham"—and this telegram, dated October 15th, with the Stratford stamp upon it, "Rome, 114, Harcourt Road, West Ham. See me at once, home; waiting, bring"—also a number of envelopes containing letters signed "W.," and some post cards—the letters are in William Barmash's writing
—one dated October 4th from William Barmash,"Dear friend, please excuse me not calling upon you as promised. Please call upon me not later than Wednesday, without fail, yours"—there is no initial to that.
Cross-examined by MR. BRAY. Schmidt made his original statement to me; he did not mention Obolnich's name then—I was not watching Obolnich on October 5th—between September 30th and October 5th I did not see anything pass between Obolnich, or Obolnich and Zubesky, or Obolnich and Ziekel—I never saw him in conversation with Rome or the Barmashes—he was employed at Brice, Palmer and Co.'s for, I think, a few months—he has been living at 59, Nelson Street for some years.
Re-examined. When I arrested Obolnich I found on him several small stones that had been taken from rings or pins—I said, "Where did you get them from?"—he explained he dealt in various properties, and bought, as a dealer, things he could raise money on, and these were some of the things he had bought.
WILLIAM FITZGERALD (City Detective). On October 8th, about 9.10 p.m., I saw Schmidt, Zubesky, and Obolnich come into the Clyde public-house, talk together a little time, and then part—about 7.45 that evening I had seen Obolnich and Ziekel together in the Commercial Road—on October 15th, about 10 p.m., I saw Schmidt, Obolnich and Ziekel together near the Commercial Road—after meeting Ziekel and Obolnich at the Clyde, I saw Schmidt with other people after that.
Cross-examined by MR. BRAY. I was eight or nine days watching the prisoners—I saw nothing pass between them—I did not hear their conversation.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. They only aroused my suspicion by the way they looked about.
ALEXANDER GOODGE . I am an Inspector in the Bank Note Department of the Bank of England—the nine notes produced are all forged—no genuine notes for £10 were ever issued by the Bank with the serial No. L/50 65040, nor £50 notes with the serial No. L/50 02077—a £5 note dated October 19th, 1901. with the serial No. J/61 43540 was issued on October 14th—that was received back into the Bank on January 28th, 1902, therefore the note of September 30th,. 1902, could not have been genuine—the £5 note with the serial No. J/59 24383 of September 13th, 1901, does not tally with any note issued upon that day.
Zubesky in his defence on oath said that he had no connection with the forgeries; that he never had forged banknotes in his possession; and that he knew Schmidt through being engaged to his sister,' but had no other connection with the prisoners than in business or casually meeting them at public-houses.
Obolnich, in his defence on oath said that he met Schmidt in a restaurant, and that he afterwards came to him about the employment of a tailor's
machinist; that Schmidt never mentioned forged notes, and no transaction took place between him and any of the prisoners with regard to forged notes, but only with regard to business; and that he did not know Zubesky, although he might have seen him among other men at a public-house.
ZIEKEL then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony on July 26th, 1900, at this Court. (See next case.)
110. MATTHEW ROME and JOE ZUBESKY were again indicted with ISRAEL SALISBURY (48), and MORRIS MALES (73) , For having in their possession without lawful authority or excuse two forged Bank of England notes for £50 and £10, well knowing them to be forged.
MR. MATHEWS and MR. LEESE Prosecuted; MR. J. P. GRAIN appeared for Rome; MR. DOHERTY for Zubesky and Salisbury; and MR. SIMPSON for Males.
MR. SIMPSON objected to MR. MATHEWS, in his opening speech, mentioning a statement made by Males to the police on the ground that statements made in fear were not admissible; MR. JUSTICE DARLING agreed that statements made under threat or influence were not admissible, but ruled that a statement made in fear alone was admissible; MR. SIMPSON then submitted that it was not admissible because it was not made voluntarily; MR. JUSTICE DARLING ruled that it was admissible, but asked MR. MATHEWS not to mention it in his opening.
JOHANN SCHMIDT . I was employed from June, 1901, to January, 1902, in manufacturing spurious Bank of England notes—as far as I knew I was doing that at the instance of the Barmashes, who lived at 28, Broad Lane, Tottenham—last September I saw in the newspapers a reward offered by the Bank of England—I saw Messrs. Freshfields, and then went to the police, and put myself under their instructions—I had known Zubesky and Salisbury four and a half years—Rome I did not know at first—I had only heard of Males casually—I saw him in the later stages—the first deal with the notes with Obolnich and Ziekel did not come off, and as a consequence I had to find some fresh buyers—on October 15th I met Rome and Zubesky by appointment in Liverpool Street, and went with them to the Mail Coach in Camomile Street—Rome handed me a £10 and a £50 forged Bank of England note—they were to be given as samples to the new buyers—they were notes which I had made—this (Produced) is the £10 note—about 3.15 p.m. I took the notes to the Cannon Street Hotel, and saw Inspectors Davidson and other officers—I handed the notes to Inspector Davidson—I can hardly remember if the £50 note had a Bank stamp upon it—about 8.30 p.m. I went to Salisbury's house at 63, Slater Street—I had been there a good many times before—I am a German Jew—I have known Salisbury to be a Russian Jew—I do not know what Males is—when we talked together we spoke in Yiddish—I knew Salisbury as a shoemaker, but I had other dealings with him—I lived in his house for some time—on October 15th I did not find him at home—I left word
where he would find me—he came to me, and we both went to his house—we went upstairs with Males, who also arrived—I told Salisbury I had the samples which he wanted to show to Males—they both looked at them and took them into their hands, and Males said, "They are all right"—he put them into his pocket, and said, "I will let you know tomorrow at five o'clock; I will give it to you back with an answer"—it was agreed that I was to have 5 per cent on the face value—I suppose the buyers were to pay that—Males said that he had got a man, who was a receiver, and was quite rich enough to sign a cheque for £10,000—I left the notes in the possession of Males—we all three went and had a drink—we were to meet next day at Salisbury's house—I went there next day—they were not there—I saw Salisbury later and he said it was supposed that the buyer had retained the samples—he would not give them back unless he saw the man who gave them to him (Salisbury)—I did not see Males at all on that day—I promised to call next day at twelve o'clock, and on the way there I saw Salisbury standing outside the Princess Alice in Commercial Street—I asked him if Males had been home—he said he did not know as he had not been down home—we went to 63, Slater Street—we did not find Males there, so we parted, and after a time I saw the police—I afterwards saw Males coming out of a public-house in Commercial Street—he fold me the same story about the notes being retained by the purchaser—I readily consented to see the man, and a meeting was to take place in the White Hart Road, not in a public house—I went there, but neither Salisbury nor Males kept the appointment—on October 18th, about 11.30 a.m., I went to 14, Short Street, where Males lived—he was coming out of his house to go to the Synagogue to worship—he said that as soon as he had done at the Synagogue he would go over to Salisbury, who had the notes in his possession—I waited until he had done his devotions, and when he came out he made straight for Salisbury's—I followed him—we went to Slater Street, where I saw Salisbury—I demanded the notes I had given to Males, who said he had not got them in his possession, and that Salisbury had them—Salisbury said that as he had not got them out of my hands he could not get them back—I suppose he had got them from Males—he wanted me to give him some money, and he demanded £10 as purchase money to get the notes back—of course I said that was out of the question and that he would not get any money—I could not get my notes back—I left the house with Males—Salisbury and another man followed us—I did not know at that time that one of the notes had been uttered—next day I went to Rome's—I told him the samples had been retained by a man to whom I had given them, and who wanted money—Rome wanted to see the man—until then he did not know anything about him—we went to Salisbury's house—we saw Salisbury—I introduced him to Rome as the man who had the notes in his possession—at first Salisbury denied having them but, after speaking to Rome, he changed his mind, and said he would let him have them for £3 or £4—Rome said he would try and get it, and he "charged me with the commission of getting it—I left with Rome, and we went to see Zubesky at the Whitechapel Library—we had a row, and Zubesky insisted upon going to Salisbury's place, as he
did not believe what I said, and he and I went back to Salisbury's, who at first did not want to speak to Zubesky at all, then he said, "I do not know anything about these notes; if you want to find out where they are you had better go and see the old man Males"—Zubesky and I then went to Short Street—we found Males—I said I wanted the samples—he said he could not help it, they were not in his possession—I went again to Salisbury's place with Males—Zubesky remained outside—I saw Salisbury in Males's presence, and it was arranged that Salisbury should have a few pounds the following morning to induce him to return the samples—that was about 12 p.m.—the interview was to beat Salisbury's house, not later than 12 o'clock next day—I did not see Salisbury again that night—I saw Zubesky, and told him I would get the money for him—I saw the police, and made a communication to them—the appointment next day was not kept, and the police on that day made a number of arrests.
Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I think I first saw Rome in October last—I think I first saw him two weeks before—I went to the Mail Coach on October 15th—I had seen him in the street in Aldgate with Zubesky—I believe it was in the forenoon—I have spoken to him there about bank notes before October 4th—I first communicated with the police in September—I never told Rome that I had been in communication with the police—I did not read the advertisement of the reward to him—I did not tell him the purport of the advertisement—I did not offer him a portion of the reward if he would assist me in recovering the notes—I did not ask him whether he knew the Barmashes—I was told that he was acquainted with them—I never saw Rome at the Barmashes' house while I was there—I never heard his name mentioned by the Barmashes, Zubesky, or Obolnich up till October.
Cross-examined by MR. DOHERTY. I am a German Jew—I did not mention at the Mansion House that I spent six years in Russia, because I was not asked—I was born in Munich—my father kept a private school there—I was five years old when I left Germany—I stayed at Kovno, in Russia, till I was eleven, when I went to America—I stayed there ten or eleven years—I am thirty now—I was not guilty of forgery in America—when I came to London I went to Brick Lane—I had an acquaintance there—during the four and a half years I have been in London I have devoted six months to honest work, for which I received 18s. a week—I did not obtain my two situations by false pretences, they required no references—I travelled for the British Tea Company—I had no money except what I earned—I borrowed from friends—all of them are not now in prison as thieves and rogues and card sharpers—they lent me honest money—I rendered them some service—I do not think it was an honourable service—I altered some little things for them—one thing was a letter of credit for £1,000—I knew I was not doing right according to law, but I had not much scruples about it—I was most naturally afraid of the police—my conscience did not prick me—I got hardened to it—it is very hard to do the first thing—I think it is dishonourable to betray my associates—I should not have betrayed the prisoners if they had been real friends of mine—Rome handed the £50 and £10 notes to me—Zubesky did not have them,
but I saw some notes in his hands—as far as I know from June, 1901, to October 15th, 1902, Salisbury had no idea of the forgeries—I lodged in the same house as he did when he was at 1, Old Montague Street—I did not wish to entrap him—he said many times he wished I would give him a chance in some such transaction, and he at the same time said that he could furnish a buyer—I knew he could not buy himself, and he was merely using me as an instrument against the other parties—no one except Males saw the notes in Salisbury's hands—I looked to Males to procure the purchaser for the notes—Males told me the name of a would-be purchaser, but I found it was a hoax—I never saw the notes again after Males took them away with him—Salisbury never told me he would get a man to purchase the notes.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. I came from America to London—I do not think I said at the Mansion House that I left Germany fifteen years ago, nor did I say that I determined to entrap Salisbury—I had spoken to Males before October 15th—Males told me that the man who could write a cheque for £10,000 hired out cabs, and I believe he also had some public houses—I heard also that he was a receiver—except the occasion when I showed the notes to Males, at 63, Slater Street, I have never seen any notes in his hands—I have never seen him with Rome—the police gave me £3 to give to Zubesky for the notes—I told them I had used it for that purpose—that was untrue; in a sense it was true, I used the money on Zubesky, and I gave him some money out of it—when I told the police that I had given the notes to Salisbury and Males, they took my word that I had done so—they did not search me to see if I still had them. '
Re-examined. When I first met Rome it was in connection with the forged notes, and to widen out the scheme where we wanted to cheat the others—I had been to his house once before, the time that I went there in connection with the second deal—I procured some sample notes from Zubesky and Rome, and submitted them to Obolnich and Ziekel—Zubesky told me that Rome knew the Barmashes—Salisbury knew I had been engaged in previous forgeries—he always complained that I did not give him a chance—I believe I saw Males three years ago, and I saw him again at Salisbury's a short time before these negotiations started—Males was—to find the financier.
JOHN DAVIDSON (Chief Detective-Inspector, City). On October 15th I saw Rome, Zubesky, and Schmidt together in Liverpool Street at 1 p.m.—I followed them to the Mail Coach—they all three went in and came out after a short time—Rome left the others, who went to Osman Street, White-chapel Road—about 3.45 p.m. I was at the Cannon Street Hotel with other officers—I saw Schmidt there, he showed me what purported to be two Bank of England notes, one for £50, numbered N/49 72522, and dated March 6th, 1901, and the other a £10 note, L/50 24529 (Produced.)—the £50 note had "Lloyds Bank, Limited, Holborn Branch," stamped on it—I handed them back to Schmidt, who made a statement to me—at 7.45 p.m. I saw him near Slater Street, and I followed him to No. 63, where Salisbury lived—I do not think Schmidt knew I was following him—he went into Salisbury's house—he came out with Males and Salisbury—
they went to the Swan in Bethnal Green Road—they remained there some time and then came out together—Schmidt left the others and I followed him, when he made a statement to me—on October 17th, about 12.30 a.m., I was in Commercial Street—I saw Schmidt and Salisbury in conversation—later on in the same day I saw Males and Salisbury together—I followed them to Parkholm Road, Dalston—Males went into a house there, Salisbury remained outside watching about—I followed Males and Salisbury there once that day, but Males twice that day—I followed Males on the second occasion—Salisbury and Males left 63, Slater Street together about 8.30 p.m.; they parted at Shoreditch Church—Salisbury appeared to be giving some directions to Males—they parted, and Males took a tram to Dalston, and we followed him to the same house that we had followed him to earlier in the day—he went in and remained there some time; when he came out we followed him by tram to Shoreditch, and then he joined Salisbury again in Slater Street—they went into the house, they remained together and walked about the neighbourhood till shortly before 10 p.m.
Cross-examined by MR. DOHERTY. I do not know what took place inside Salisbury's house on October 17th—when Schmidt, Males and Salisbury came out they went into a public house—I did not follow them into a public house—I saw nothing suspicious except what I have described—when Salisbury was outside the house at Dalston he was looking about in a very suspicious way—I saw no notes pass—on the way to Dalston Males got inside a tram—Salisbury went outside and kept looking back at the road—he changed his seat, and he kept looking on to the knifeboard—he looked particularly at somebody riding a bicycle—at Dalston, Males went on by himself, and Salisbury followed behind, continually looking behind.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. The presence of Schmidt made me suspicious—from my own knowledge I never knew that Males ever had the notes, but Schmidt said to me, "I have actually given the note to the man with the white whiskers"—he did not know his name, but it was Males—Schmidt asked me for some money, and explained that it was necessary for £2 13s. to be given to Zubesky to be handed to the persons who were to bring the notes to this country, or somewhere out of London—I believed he had given the money to Zubesky—I have heard it said in Court that he did not give it to Zubesky, but Schmidt has never told me so—I have not known Males long—I do not know that he is an itinerant glazier.
CHARLES ATKINS (City Detective). On October 16th I met Salisbury about 4.15 p.m. coming out of 63, Slater Street—he went to 2, Charlotte Street, where a man named Greenfarg lives—he remained there till about 6 p.m., when he returned to his shop—on the 18th, about 9.40 a.m., I saw him go to 2, Charlotte Street—he remained there a short time and then returned to 63, Slater Street—he went back to Charlotte Street about 10.20, and I saw him meet Greenfarg outside No. 2—at 11.25 I saw Schmidt and Males together in Bethnal Green Road—Males went to 63, Slater Street; he came out and joined Schmidt again; they then both went to No. 63, and presently came out again with Salisbury and another man—they appeared to be quarrelling as they were walking down William
Street—on October 9th I saw Salisbury at 12.20 p.m. go to 2, Charlotte Street—he left Greenfarg, who stayed there till about 1.5—Salisbury went to Slater Street—on the same day I saw Rome and Schmidt go to 63, Slater Street—they stayed there till about 2.20—when they left, Salisbury came outside—I saw him speak to his son, who followed Rome and Schmidt down Wheler Street into Commercial Street, and then he went back to his father—on August 20th, at 12.10, I saw Males go to 63, Slater Street—he sat down and talked to Salisbury—I arrested Zubesky on that day—I was present when he was searched—I found a letter in an envelope addressed to Mr. H. Morris, 25, Broad Lane, Tottenham, upon him (Read.) I am glad it is all over in good shape and order, will see you soon"—the Barmashes lived at 25, Broad Lane.
Cross-examined by MR. DOHERTY. Salisbury, Males, Schmidt, and a stranger were all quarrelling as they walked along—when I saw Salisbury's little son following Rome and Schmidt I thought the boy was suspicious of them—I think he was trying to see what they were doing.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. The presence of Schmidt made me suspicious—I was not present when Schmidt told Davidson that he had given the notes to the prisoners.
JOHN OTTAWAY (Police-Inspector, City). I arrested Rome on October 20th inside the Whitechapel Library—I had had him under observation for some time prior to that—on October 2nd, I saw him tear up a letter card—I afterwards gathered up the pieces and put them together; it is William Barmash's writing, and is addressed to 114, Harcourt Road, Tottenham "Dear Friend, Very considerably surprised you did not come to my place to-day as arranged; please be at my place not later than 10 o'clock tomorrow morning; don't fail"—on his arrest I found on him a telegram, with the post office date of October 18th on it—this is the original, and is in William Barmash's writing: "Rome, 114, Harcourt Road, West Ham; See me at once, at home; waiting, bring"—I arrested Salisbury—he did not make any answer to the charge—he made a motion that he did not understand what was being said—I also arrested Males—he made a statement, which I wrote down some hours afterwards—I said to him, "I am a police officer, you will have to accompany me to the police office, Old Jewry, where you will be charged with having in your possession a forged £10 and £50 Bank of England note with intent to defraud." (MR. SIMPSON contended that the prosecution must prove that the statement was made voluntarily; MR. JUSTICE DARLING suggested that MR. SIMPSON should examine the witness upon the point.)
By MR. SIMPSON. I did not warn him in any way—I did not (ask him whether he wished to make a statement—the statement was made in a cab, and he made it without any questions being asked of him. (MR. JUSTICE DARLING ruled that the statement was admissible).
By MR. MATHEWS. He said, "I will tell you all I know; the other day a man gave me the notes as samples and asked me to find a buyer for a lot, which is worth £13,000; if I found one I should get a lot of money—I was afraid to keep them, so I gave them to the shoemaker; I have just left him, we have been talking of sending them to Scotland Yard; if you
come back with me to the shoemaker I can get them for you"—by the time I had arrested him it came to my knowledge that one of the notes had been uttered.
Cross-examined by MR. DOHERTY. I searched Salisbury when I arrested him, and I also searched 63, Slater Street—I found nothing of a suspicious nature there—he made no statement.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMPSON. I arrested Males soon after 5 p.m., as he left Salisbury's house—I think we arrived at Old Jewry about 5.30—he made another statement to me, saying that he had assisted the police before, and was willing to assist them now—he said he had given information to the police on various occasions, and brought people to justice—I wrote his statement down next morning, about 9 a.m.
Re-examined. I caused inquiries to be made about Males.
By the COURT. I have not been able to ascertain that he has given information to the police before—he mentioned a Sergeant Wright—I cannot find such an officer—I have found an Inspector White—I do not know if that is the man he means—Males worked as a canvasser—he has not got a shop.
STEPHEN JAMES MARTIN . I am the manager at the Holborn Circus branch of Lloyds Bank—that is our only branch in Holborn—a bank note passing through our bank would have a circular stamp with the date that we received it upon it with the words, "Lloyds Bank, Limited, Holborn Circus Branch"—a note with "Lloyds Bank, Holborn Branch" on it would not be stamped by us.
ALEXANDER GOUGE . I have seen the ten notes produced, nine from America and one presented to the bank; they are all forgeries—the £10 note came to the bank for the purposes of examination, and was at once pronounced to be a forgery.
GUILTY . One previous conviction was proved against Obolnich. ROME, One month's hard labour; MALES, Twelve months' hard labour; ZUBESKY, OBOLNICH, ZIEKEL, and SALISBURY,† Eighteen months' hard labour each.
His Lordship commended the police for the manner in which they had conducted the inquiries.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
MR. FITZGERALD Prosecuted, and MR. GRANTHAM Defended.
CHARLES CLARK . I live at 11, Kimberley Road, Plaistow—on November 11th, I was at the Royal Albert Docks—I met the deceased there—I had known him about a year—we went on board the barge Fiji about 2.30—while we were going down the Royal Albert Dock on the Fiji
the prisoner, who was a stranger to us, came alongside on the barge Queen—the deceased said, "What are you rowing for, the Greenwich Coat?"—the prisoner said, "What is that to do with you?"—the deceased was in a stooping position to pick up a boat-hook to push the Queen away—the prisoner stepped aboard the Fiji and struck the deceased a blow in the face, and knocked him down on the deck—the deceased had not picked the boat-hook up—I went to his assistance, and put him in a sitting position—blood was oozing through my fingers from a cut on his head—the prisoner got on board his barge and commenced rowing away—I called out, "Are you going to leave me with the man like this, he is bleeding to death?"—the prisoner came back with the man on his barge—he said to the deceased, "I am very sorry for what I have done, here is 1s. to get some brandy"—the shilling slipped out of his fingers, and he picked it up and put it into the deceased's pocket—he then went on to his own barge—I got assistance and took the man ashore and to an hotel—he was in a dazed condition—he could walk with my help—I got him some brandy and took his ticket to Canning Town, the nearest station to his address—he was sober—he was not using bad language.
Cross-examined. When the deceased stooped to pick up the boat-hook the prisoner was within a few feet of him—the boat-hook is 14 or 15 ft. long—I cannot remember if the prisoner helped me to wash the deceased's head.
WILLIAM HENRY GILBERT . I am a lighterman of 23, Yews Fields, Deptford—I was on board the Queen in the Albert Dock on November 11th about 3 p.m.—we were going to the steamship Virginia; we were not going very fast—I remember passing the Fiji—the deceased called out, "What are you rowing for, the Greenwich Coat?"—people on the river often pass remarks like that in chaff—the prisoner said he wanted to get by, and he shoved against the Fiji with his feet—the deceased said, "Where are we going to" and the prisoner said, "Where are we going to?"—I did not hear either of them say anything else, but the deceased took two or three steps and picked up his boat-hook—the prisoner stepped aboard the barge, and said, "Will you?" and struck the deceased on the jaw—he fell down on the deck of the barge—the prisoner stepped back on to the Queen and shoved the barge away, then he stepped back aboard the Fiji, and I saw him run across the other craft and get a cup of water and help to fetch the man to, and tied a white handkerchief round his head—when the prisoner knocked the deceased down and came back to the Queen, I said to him, "You had better go and see what you can do for the man."
Cross-examined. As far as I could see the prisoner hoped to separate the barges by giving the deceased's barge a shove—it looked as if the deceased was going to strike the prisoner with the boat-hook; he had it by the middle in his hand—it was only a few feet from the prisoner.
Re-examined. The deceased had the pole in both hands and was pointing it towards the prisoner—we punt the barges along with the poles; they have iron shoes on the ends—I did not hear the deceased say anything threatening—he seemed to lose his temper because the prisoner shoved
against his barge—I did not hear him say anything, I was too far away—the barge was a good-sized one; the prisoner was at the head of it.
JAMES HERBERT DREW . I live at 30, Muriel Road, Lee—I was on board the Queen on November 11th—about 3 p.m. we came alongside the Fiji—the prisoner had his hands on the Fiji and his feet on the Queen, and was working the barge along—I saw the deceased make two or three rapid strides towards his boat-hook—the prisoner stepped on to the Fiji and struck him, and he fell down—the deceased had taken hold of the boat-hook—I do not know if he had picked it up—I did not see him do anything with it—the prisoner returned to his own barge, and then returned and helped to bathe the deceased with water; then he came back to his own barge and we went away.
ARTHUR CLIFFORD DORMFORD . I am Divisional Surgeon of Police of 153, Bow Road, Bow—on November 11th, about 6.15 p.m., I saw the deceased at Bow Police Station—he was lying on the floor with a handkerchief bespattered with blood round his head; he was unconscious—I removed the handkerchief; there was a lot of mud on his head, and a wound nearly two inches long on the right side, just over his ear—his breathing was stertorious, his pupils were fixed and unequal in size—blood and slime were coming from his mouth—the state of his eyes showed that there was some paralysis to the muscles, due to compression—he was suffering from concussion of the brain, and compression afterwards—I do not know what was the cause of the concussion—I do not know if his skull was fractured—I did not even probe the wound—I thought it best to get him to the hospital at once—I did not see any injury to the jaw.
CHARLES HEWITT MILLER . I am a bachelor of surgery and receiving officer at the London Hospital—the deceased was brought in on November 11th—he was unconscious, his breathing was stertorious, and he smelled of alcohol—there was a bruise on his right eye and a scalp wound about two inches long, which did not go down to the bone on the right side of the head and behind the ear; both pupils were fixed; there was dry blood about the nose; his pulse was slow—he died a little after midnight—I was present at the post mortem the same day—there was a fracture on the right side of his head; one of the arteries had been torn—there was a large blood clot four inches by three inches in size, the blood had apparently come from the torn artery, and it compressed the brain—in my opinion the cause of death was due to pressure on the brain from the blood clot; the fracture of the skull was the primary cause—the fracture was caused by an injury of some kind—it might be caused by falling against something or being hit by something.
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Jury. Discharged on recognisances on the understanding that he would give £25 to the widow of the deceased.
MR. MUIR, MR. LEYCESTER, and MR. MURPHY Prosecuted, and MR. GRANTHAM Defended. The evidence was interpreted when necessary.
MAX ANDOS . I keep a restaurant at 85, Charles Street, Fitzroy Square—on November 15th the prisoner entered my service as kitchen maid—on November 25th and 26th she was ill—she said her legs were bad and she went to bed—on November 27th she left, saying she was going into the German Hospital; she took her luggage with her—she came back the same night—I did not see her then; she slept at my house that night, and left about 8 a.m.—I did not see her in the morning—she said she was going to the hospital again—while she was with me she sent everything up wrong and made a lot of mistakes.
Cross-examined. She looked queer.
FREDA BUGENHEIM . I am the wife of Jacob Bugenheim—we live at 139, Wins Terrace, Forest Row, Walthamstow—the prisoner is my sister—she is not married—she lived in Germany until last June, when she came to live with me—my mother had written to me saying that the prisoner was in the family way, and on October 3rd she was delivered of a child at my house—she was attended by Dr. Horner—on November 15th she went into the service of Mr. Andos, where she remained till November 28th, when she came back to me—she brought a cardboard box with her; there was a cord round it—when she went to her situation she left the child with me; it was healthy, and was still with me when she returned from her situation—when she returned she was crying and complained about her legs being very painful, and said the work was too hard—she slept at my place that night; the child slept with her—next day, Saturday, my husband came home from work at 2 o'clock, when we all had dinner together—the prisoner was very downcast all day—at 3 o'clock my husband went out to play football—I went out at 4.20—I took my own child, aged 10 months, with me—I left my sister and her child behind in our flat; nobody else was there—she used a zinc bath for a cot for the child, and when I went out it was lying in the bath in front of the fire in the kitchen—it seemed to me to be asleep—the prisoner was sitting at the table with some needlework in her hand, but she was not properly working; she was staring on the floor—I got back at 6.30 with my husband and child; the prisoner was sitting on a box and crying out—my husband said, "What is the matter?" twice in German—she did not reply at first—we looked at the child, it looked white and strange; it was still lying in the zinc bath in the corner of the kitchen—he prisoner was sitting before the fire—the child was covered with a white napkin, and we could not see its face—the prisoner watched my husband's movements, and when she saw he looked at the child she said the child had fallen from her arms on to the floor—then she picked it up and pressed it to her breast, and it gave-one or two gasps—my husband then went out—as he was going he said, "Don't touch anything"—he was away about 15 minutes—while he was away the prisoner did not say anything at first; she only stared—I went out to the gate to look out for my husband—I went back again and the prisoner asked me where my husband had gone—I said, "I suppose he has gone to report the case; I fancy he has gone for a doctor"—she asked me for a nightgown for the child—I told her the place where they were kept—she got one—she lifted the bath
from the floor on to the table, and took the child out—then I went out again—then my husband came back with the police.
Cross-examined. The prisoner was very fond and kind to the child—for the first few weeks after the child was born she suckled it—she left off giving it the breast when she went into employment—she was away nearly a fortnight; when she came back she complained of headache—she looked very strange and dazed and her face was so red—the child wore a nightshirt (Produced)—it was fastened round the neck—it wore a short shirt during the day—when I came in on the 29th the child was wearing the short one—when the prisoner bathed the child on the Saturday morning she said, "Oh, look, here is that every day"—I said, "Yes, don't trouble, it is every day"—we had washed it several times—she showed me a sore on the child's throat; it was from the milk running out of its mouth—the sore went round both sides of its neck—the child was a very healthy baby—it had a fat neck—there was a table in the room where the prisoner washed the child—there was no lamp on the table when I went out, but when I came back there was a lamp and one or two other things on the table—before my sister went to her situation she went to a chemist and got some plasters to stop the milk from running from her breasts—it was still running when she left to go to the situation, and also when she returned—she showed it to me—it was quite hard—she said it was painful; she had a plaster on them—I am two years older than my sister; we are ten in family—I have been in England three years—I used to live at home with my sister; she was twelve years old then—when she was between twelve and thirteen she had brain fever and was away from school for eight months—my mother is alive, but she is not always well—about four years ago she had a kind of stroke and sometimes she does not know what she is doing.
Re-examined. I do not know if this (Produced) was the cord round my sister's box; I did not look very closely at it.
By the COURT. An aunt on my father's side was wrong in her head; she died young, having gone mad—I only heard of it; I was quite a little girl then.
JACOB BUGENHEIM . I am the husband of the last witness—I remember the prisoner coming back from her last situation on November 28th—I saw her box when I got home—the box was in the kitchen and the cord had been cut off with a knife—I think this is the cord (Produced)—on Saturday, November 29th, I went home with my wife about 6.30 p.m.—I saw the prisoner in the kitchen sitting on a box in front of the fireplace crying—I asked her twice what was the matter—she would not answer me—I looked into the zinc bath where the baby was lying—its face looked strange to me—I said in English, "What have you been doing with the child"—she did not understand; she said in German, "Look here, the child has dropped from the table"—she said she was washing the child, and that she took a towel to clean it properly, when it slipped from the table to the floor—I said to my wife, "Don't touch anything, I am going out"—I went out and came back with Inspector Row—I then saw the child on a table in the bath—I saw a mark on its neck—I had not seen it there before.
ARTHUR DAVY , L.R.C.S. I live at 370, Forest Road, Walthamstow—at 6.30 p.m. on November 29th I was called to 39, Wins Terrace—I saw the dead body of a male child there—I examined it—it had this white cotton garment on (Produced)—there was a mark on each side of the neck and on the middle of the right side, but that was only a rub—I should say the child had been dead about an hour—the nightshirt was tied with an ordinary band round the body, and tied loosely round the neck.
Cross-examined. The string on the nightshirt was round the base of the neck, not high up—I do not agree that the child had marks round both sides of the neck—there was a mark on the middle line—it was not 2 in long—I should not call the marks sores or the skin rubbed; I should call them wounds—the third mark was a rub—I said at the police-court, "The surface of the skin was moist owing to the superficial layer of the skin being rubbed."
Re-examined. I only saw the child at the house—I was not present at the post mortem; that courtesy was not extended tome; I do not know why—I think the marks were due to pressure from some band, not by the fingers, but by a rather wide band—there was nothing about the shirt which the child had on which could have done it—I think this string could have caused the marks, especially one of them.
By the Jury. It is impossible that they were caused by the milk running from the child's mouth.
By MR. GRANTHAM. The third mark might have been caused by the prisoner's fingers.
By MR. LEYCESTER. That is the mark over the right shoulder.
RICHARD ROW (Police-Inspector). On November 29th, about 7.45 p.m., I was called to 39, Wins Terrace, by Jacob Bugenheim—I went to the house—on the kitchen table I saw this bath (Produced) and the dead body of a child in it—the head and face were lightly covered with a napkin—it was dressed in a nightdress—I saw a red mark in front of the neck, another on the neck above the right shoulder, and another behind the right ear—the prisoner was sitting in a chair, crying—the baby's nightgown was tied loosely with a small string—I saw a cord there.
By the COURT. The post mortem was on the 1st—the body was brought to the station by the Coroner's officer, and taken then to the mortuary—the Coroner arranged the post mortem, and the Coroner's officer summoned the witnesses—the police had nothing to do with it.
WILLIAM KNOTT (Detective-Sergeant). On November 29th I went to 39, Wins Terrace, and I found this piece of cord in the scullery—I arrested the prisoner and took her to the station—she made no remark to me on the way.
CHARLES JULIAN HORNER , L.R.C.P. and M.R.C.S. I am Divisional-Surgeon of the Police at Walthamstow—on November 29th I was called to 39, Wins Terrace—I got there about 7.55 p.m.—I there saw the dead body of a male child—I attended the prisoner in her confinement—I think that was the same child that she had been delivered of—when I saw it on November 29th it was lying in a zinc bath, undressed, on its right side—I got there after Dr. Bell—the child's face was quite pale—its tongue
was slightly protruding between the gums—its lips were congested—there was a depressed mark 1/4 in at its widest part, and a little less at its narrowest, in front of the neck, just over the larynx, extending posteriorly on each side to a line drawn vertically at the back of the ear—the edges of the mark at the middle were slightly abraded and the skin red, the redness tapering off on the left side—there was a mark going right round the neck, the edges of it were excoriated on the right side—there was a depressed red mark—there was no excoriation except in the middle for 1 1/4 inch—on the right side of the neck there was another pale and somewhat glistening depressed mark, 3/4 inch below the ending of the first, extending upwards and backwards for 1 1/2 inch—there was a semi-circular red abrasion below the right ear—it might have been produced by a thumb nail—I afterwards saw the body at the station—the marks were then more apparent and the face had become deeply congested—on December 1st, by direction of the Coroner, I made a post-mortem examination—the question as to who should make the post mortem is a matter entirely for the Coroner—it was made in the presence of Dr. Pepper, of the Home Office—there was no fracture of any bone, or anything to indicate any injury from a fall—in my opinion the cause of death was asphyxia from strangulation caused by something like a cord being put round the neck—the marks I saw might have been caused by this cord—they could not have been caused simply by the child dribbling—there is a possibility that the front mark might have been caused by this tape in the short shirt if very tightly restricted, but I cannot account for all the marks with it—it would require excessive force to make the marks I saw.
Cross-examined. I do not think the marks could have been caused by the woman clasping the child round the neck with her hands.
By the COURT. I do not know how it was that Dr. Bell was not called to the post mortem—if I had been in his position I should have expected to have been summoned to the post mortem by the Coroner's officer—I should not have had the slightest objection to meeting Dr. Bell.
AUGUSTUS JOSEPH PEPPER , F.R.C.S. I am a Master of Surgery, and a Bachelor of Medicine at the London University—I was present on behalf of the Home Office at the post mortem on the deceased—I agree with the evidence given by Dr. Horner—the marks on the neck were correctly described by him—the two lower marks might have been caused by that cord—the one below the ear was not caused by it, that could have been caused by the thumb-nail—they could not have been caused by soreness arising from dribbling—the tape in the nightgown could not account for the presence of all the marks—I agree with Dr. Homer as to the cause of death.
RICHARD ROW (Re-examined by the COURT). I gave the name of Dr. Bell and Dr. Horner to the Coroner's officer—I do not know why he did not give notice of the post mortem to Dr. Bell—he always acts under the Coroner's orders—Dr. Ambrose is the Coroner, and William Hasp is the officer—he is a constable attached to the station.
Evidence for the defence.
doctor who had charge of her does not speak German—I first examined her on December 15th—I have made this report—(This stated that the prisoner appeared to be now in fairly good health, that she was rather nervous and depressed when examined; that the witness had not detected any insane delusions; that the prisoner had suffered from frequent headaches during the greater part of her life; that about six years ago she had an attack of what she called "nervous fever," and has had attacks since; that in 1901 she was seduced under promise of marriage; that she became pregnant, and that the man refused to marry her or to help her; that her health was affected by trouble; that she had had swellings and pains in her legs; that her confinement was rather a bad one that her working for long hours in a hot kitchen would not be conducive to good health; that the witness did not consider her now insane; that on November 29th he considered that she was in a very confused state of mind, the result of want of sleep, trouble, and pain, and was probably scarcely in a condition to know what she was doing, but that he considered her fit to plead.)—one form of puerperal insanity is sometimes due to lactation—trying to wean the child suddenly would probably cause the prisoner a good deal of local pain—she seems to have been of a melancholic disposition—the mental worry which she had would depress her very much—women in her condition may have tendencies to homicidal mania—I agree that one of the degrees of homicidal mania is where the impulse to kill is sudden, unresisting, unreflective, and uncontrollable.
Cross-examined. I did not observe any symptoms of puerpural insanity in the prisoner—she was nervous and depressed—I did not detect any signs of any mental disease.
Re-examined. She has been in hospital for two or three weeks, and I have no doubt that she has much improved in health.
GUILTY, but insane at the time. To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
(115) WILLIAM JAMES RANKIN (57) , by false pretences, to defraud Emily Elizabeth Cowland; and obtaining by false pretences from another person 1s., 2s., 3s., and 9s. and 5s, with intent to defraud. Rankin stated in the hearing of the Jury that he was guilty.
GUILTY.— Six months' hard labour each.
116. JOHN BRANCH (40), PLEADED GUILTY to making a false declaration before Robert Alexander Gillespie, a Magistrate, knowing the same to be false. He received a good character. Discharged on Recognisances. —And
(117) HENRY CHARLES NICHOLLS (18) to stealing, whilst employed under the Post Office, a post letter containing an order for 2s. 6d. the property of the Postmaster-General. Nine months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
Before J. A. Rentoul, Esq., K.C.
118. ERNEST IRELAND (44) and THOMAS MORRIS (32) , Stealing a set of harness and other articles, the property of William Smith; and a saddle and a pair of reins, the property of Edward Baker. Second Count, Receiving the same.
Ireland PLEADED GUILTY to receiving.
MR. GRANTHAM Prosecuted.
WILLIAM SMITH . I am a greengrocer of Leyton—on December 1st, about 5 p.m., I saw this harness (Produced) safe in my stable—I missed it about 7.30 the same evening and gave information to the police—I value the things I lost at about £6 10s.—Baker has a stall in my stable.
WILLIAM HYDE (532 J.) On December 2nd I was with P.C. Stiff in Park Road, Leyton, and saw the two prisoners drive up to the Antelope together in a pony cart—both went inside—Morris came out first, and I asked him if it was his pony-cart—he said, "No, I am minding it for a chap inside the pub"—Ireland then came out and was spoken to by Stiff.
Cross-examined by MORRIS. I am positive you drove up with Ireland—the following morning you gave me a dart.
ARTHUR STIFF (613 J.) On December 2nd I was with P.C Hyde outside the Antelope public house, and saw the two prisoners drive up together—they went into the public, and I had an opportunity of looking round the cart—I saw some sacks at the rear of it, inside them I saw some harness—when Ireland came out I said to him, "Are you in charge of this pony and cart?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "What have you in those sacks?"—at first he said, "Nothing"—he then said, "Harness"—I said, "Where did you get it?"—he said, "I bought it about an hour ago from a man I do not know outside the Baker's Arms for 25s."—I told him I should take him to the station for enquiries—Smith identified the harness, and the prisoners were charged—Morris said, "I know nothing about it"—Ireland made no reply.
Cross-examined by Ireland. You told me that you had seen P.C Friend, and that he had' asked you to assist him in recovering the harness.
Ireland, in his defence on oath, said that Friend asked him to try and recover the harness, and was taking it to him when he was stopped at the Antelope.
Morris, in his defence on oath, said that he was playing at darts at the Antelope, when Ireland asked him to mind his pony and trap while he had a drink, and that he knew nothing of the robbery.
----FRIEND (Policeman). I saw Ireland on the 2nd instant in Lea Bridge Road—I spoke to him about the harness that was stolen, and he told me he would try and find out who had it—I gave him no commission to find it for me or to bring it to my house, or to use my name in any respect.
Cross-examined by Ireland. I stood you a whisky before you left.
GUILTY . Ireland then
PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony on July 4th, 1900, at Chelmsford, in the name of George Maynard; and Morris to a conviction of felony on November 14th, 1901, at Romford
Six other convictions were proved against IRELAND. Eighteen months' hard labour. MORRIS, Three months' hard labour.
Before Mr. Common Sergeant.
MR. BYRON Prosecuted, and MR. FITZJAMES Defended.
SIDNEY HOBBS . I am a driver in the 49th Company of the Army Service Corps, Woolwich—I am a depositor in the Post Office Savings Bank—I signed this form when I opened the account—on June 18th this year, I was drafted to London—the prisoner was in my. Company and I gave him my bank-book to take care of in a little cardboard box with some letters—it was not locked—I returned in September and asked the prisoner for it—he said that he had mislaid it in the Company's stores, where everything is kept, but that he would find it—he said nothing then about a box of his having been broken into in July—I spoke to him again afterwards, and he made the same reply—I did not give him authority to draw money from my savings bank account—this receipt for £5 is not my writing, or written by my authority.
Cross-examined. I did not give him the book to keep in the Company's stores, but to keep as a friend—he said that it was lost, and advised me to apply at the Post Office, which I did some time afterwards—he offered to go to the post-office with me, but did not go—I went to Greenwich with him, but we did not go to the post-office—I did not say to him, I think we will go to the post-office and enquire about my bank-book this night"—I filled in a form which the General Post Office sent me—I know nothing about the prisoner's writing.
JOHN ROBERT SCARFE . I am a sorting clerk at the Woolwich Pot Office—on Monday, August 25th, just before 10 a.m., this notice of withdrawal was brought in, and I sent a telegram to the Savings Bank Department—I got a reply, and later on a man called dressed in uniform, who signed the receipt, and I handed him the money.
Cross-examined. I will swear positively that he was in uniform—he had to produce a small book with his name in it, but on this occasion I did not require it.
Re-examined. It must have been 2.30 because I got off at 3—I got the reply in an hour and a half or three-quarters.
MATHEW TOWER (Police Constable). In consequence of a complaint I made enquiries, and on October 13th I saw the prisoner at Woolwich—I told him I was investigating the loss of Hobbs' book, also the receipt for £5 on August 25th—he replied,"I know of it; the box was stolen and I missed some other things, some cigarettes and money, I have not seen them since"—he filled in this form in my presence; after that he said, "About the end of July I missed some money and cigarettes and a silver chain from my box; I did not miss the book; I reported the loss to the quartermaster; the things were
taken from the breast pocket of my tunic and were replaced"—on November 14th I took him in custody on this charge—when he was charged he said, "That is correct"—I was at the police court when he made a statement about Annie Stanford—she gave evidence, after which he said, "Well, I will say no more, I saw her at the time"—she was called by him for his defence.
Cross-examined. The words he used were not, "If that is the case I will throw up the sponge"—I swear he did not say so—when I charged him he said, "Not correct"—he denied it—I asked him to fill in a form, he made no objection, and I told him what to write.
Re-examined. If he had said what is suggested I should have heard it.
JOHN COMPTON . I am a clerk in the General Post Office, and have had some experience in the comparison of handwriting—this receipt for £5 and the notice of withdrawal are written by the same person—I do not remember all the prisoner said at the police court, but I know he said, "I will throw up the sponge, I am guilty."
Cross-examined. There is a difference in A and B in the word "soldier"—that naturally would be in the case of anybody forging another person's name—the "W" is differently made—A is the prisoner's writing—there is a slight dissimularity in the writing in "B."
Re-examined. Hobb's signature appears in the bank book.
WILLIAM TATTERSALL . I am quartermaster-sergeant in the 49th Company Army Service Corps—the prisoner was a driver in that corps—he went on leave on August 25th—his leave began at 6 a.m., and he was away till the night of September 21st—supposing he left for King's Cross at 12 o'clock on the Sunday night it would have come to the knowledge of the military authorities—he could not have passed, some one must see him go out, so he would have been reported absent by the corporal in charge of his mess—I should have known if he had been absent—about the end of July he reported to me, he said that somebody had been to his box and taken some money and cigarettes; I asked him how they got at it; he said that he left his key on the shelf—he told me nothing about Hobb's bank book being taken with the other things—he may have told me how much money he missed.
Cross-examined. He is a man of good character and a smart man—if he is acquitted he will be taken back—other men in the company would not see his writing, but he would see theirs—he signs his name to documents, but does not give them signatures, that I am aware of—he would not have to make out lists—he may have made lists of arms.
ARTHUR PAGE . I am a driver in the 45th Company of the Army Service Corps—I remember the prisoner going on furlough—I do not remember on what day, but I know it was not on a Sunday—I carried his kit down to the station for him—I did not see him get into the train; I left him at the station.
with him to New Cross and then to King's Cross, and we went to St. Neots together—it was on a Monday.
Cross-examined. I kept him waiting before I met him.
The prisoner's statement before the magistrate. "I am not guilty of the crime; I was not in Woolwich when it was done; I was away from the 25th, but I waited at King's Cross six hours; I picked up a young lady at St. John's and she is here to witness."
The prisoner, in his defence upon oath, stated that on August 25th he had his dinner in barracks at 12.30, and then went and got his luggage and went by train to St. John's, where he waited for a young lady who he had known some time, and went with her to King's Cross; that when he cleared his box he left his key and the key of the stores in a coat on his bed in a room where eight other men slept, and came back and found them in the same place, but a day or two afterwards he opened the box and found he had been robbed of a cigarette case and other things, but did not miss the bank book till the driver asked him for it, that he then went to the store room and could not find it there, and about two months afterwards he went with the prosecutor to the Government office about it; that he could only write with difficulty; that he never said that he would throw up the sponge, or used the word, but he had no heart to go on after the witness had told a lie against him, and said that he was guilty with a broken heart; and that he was not in Woolwich when the crime was committed.
—WILLOUGHBY. I saw the prisoner in the stores very nearly all the morning—he was not on duty because his leave had commenced—the stores were about three minutes walk from the post office.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
MR. LYNE Prosecuted, and MR. ELLIOTT Defended.
----FRITH (Sergeant P 2.) Produced and proved a plan of Loam Pit Vale, Lewisham.
FREDERICK PIKE (Inspector P.) On November 11th, about 8.30 p.m., I saw the prisoner at Lewisham Police Station—from what I was told I told him he would be charged with being drunk while in charge of a horse and gig at Loam Pit Vale, and running over the deceased at the same time and place—he was then drunk, and said, "All right, I ran over him"—the gig was then in the station yard.
Cross-examined. He spoke in a peculiar way—I thought it was through drink—I have not spoken to him since—at the police-court next day he spoke peculiarly.
Re-examined. He had recovered from the effects of drink then.
By the COURT. I have seen hundreds of drunken people—in my opinion the prisoner was undoubtedly drunk.
cry of "Oh," and I see, a man on his back in the road by the kerb—I saw a wheel go over him—I saw a cart with the prisoner driving—there was another man in the cart—they drove on and then came back—the other man got down and put the deceased into the cart—the prisoner put his arm round the deceased's neck to keep him up, and then drove off—I did not see any more of it—the deceased had been pushing a truck—the cart was coming down behind him on the near side when he was knocked down—there was room on the near side for the horse and cart to have passed—I did not see any other horse or cart there.
Cross-examined. The man who got down from the cart was sober—I persuaded them to take the deceased to the infirmary—they went off all right as far as I could see—I did not see the actual contact between the cart and the truck—when I saw the deceased on the ground his feet were about six feet from the kerb—the truck was also near the kerb—I did not notice where the cart was.
FREDERICK MORGAN . I am a labourer—on November 11th, about 6.30 p.m., I was walking with Goodall in Loam Pii Vale—I saw Poulton's trap knock the deceased down—I ran to pick him up, and called to the trap to stop—it stopped and returned and a man got out and put the deceased into the trap and drove off.
Cross-examined. The man who got out was quite sober—I saw Poulton in the trap—he appeared to be all right.
HENRY SCOTT (108 R.) On November 11th, about 6.30, I was on duty in Pawson Street, and saw a trap driving along—the prisoner was on the near side of the trap—I did not witness the accident, but was informed of it—I saw the prisoner and asked him how it had occurred, and he said that he had knocked him down—I directed him to drive the man to the infirmary, and I followed on a tramcar—on arriving at the infirmary the prisoner was not there and I went to try and find him—in the Hollingham Road I found him sitting in the trap, the injured man on his off side and Constable 90 P. standing there—a doctor then appeared and certified the man to be dead—I told the prisoner to get out of the cart—he did so and staggered, and I then saw that he was drunk—I told him I should charge him with being drunk while in charge of the cart, and took him to Lewisham Police Station, where he was charged.
Cross-examined. I did not notice that he was drunk while he was sitting in the cart—he is lame in his right foot and walks with a limp—it came as a shock to me when the doctor certified that the man was dead—he was alive when I saw him first and spoke to him.
BENJAMIN MAY (90 P.) On November 11th, about 6.30 p.m., I was on duty in Loam Pit Yale, Lewisham—I was called to the Railway Arch in Pawson Street—there was a big crowd and it was very dark—the driver stood leaning on the off-side shaft—I asked what was the matter, and he said he had run over the deceased, who appeared to be dying, and I sent for medical aid—I led the pony in the direction of the doctor's residence, and about 200 yards from the house the doctor came up and pronounced the man dead—Scott then came up and ordered the prisoner out of the gig—when he got down he staggered, and it was then that I was convinced
he was drunk—I took the body of the deceased to the mortuary—there was a deep cut over his right eyebrow—I did not take the prisoner to the station.
Cross-examined. Until he got out of the trap I did not notice that he was drunk—when the doctor pronounced the man dead the prisoner seemed cool and unconcerned.
ROBERT VINCENT DONNELLAN . I live at 2, Lewisham Park, and am Divisional Surgeon—on November 11th, about 11.20 p.m., I was called to see the prisoner at the police-station—he seemed to be in a dazed condition—I noticed that his foot was injured—he smelt strongly of drink, and from his talk I formed the opinion that he was drunk—I saw him the next morning, and he was in an extreme alcoholic tremor—he said that it was the tea they had given him at the station.
Cross-examined. I have not seen him since the morning of November 12th—I have known cases of extreme nervousness arising from tea drinking, but the prisoner told me he never touched tea—one cup of tea could not cause the extreme nervous tremor that I saw in him.
Re-examined. I have no doubt as to the condition he was in.
DR. CEASAR. I was called to the deceased on the night of November 11th—I found him sitting in the bottom of the gig dead—I examined him at the mortuary—the only external marks of violence were a cut on his right eyebrow and a slight contusion on the nose—death was caused by syncope, due to hemorrhage, from a rupture of the liver—a weight going over the liver would rupture it—I examined his stomach, but found no trace of alcohol.
Evidence for the Defence.
JEREMIAH HAYLEY . I am a costermonger of 28, Wood's Place, Grange Road, Bermondsey—on the evening of November 11th I was in Lewisham High Road going towards New Cross when I heard a shout—I looked and saw two men driving along in a gig and a man staggering in the roadway pushing a perambulator—I cannot say whether he was drunk or not—it was a very muddy night, and the road was very slippery—when I first saw them I should think there was 20 yards between the gig and the deceased—he was then in the middle of the road—the next I saw was the man knocked down and the wheel of the gig went over him—it was not possible for the gig to pass the man on the near side—he was walking towards the pathway—after he was knocked down the gig went on about 30 yards, and then turned back, and I helped to put the man into it.
Cross-examined. I am a stranger to all parties—I cannot say which of the two men in the trap shouted—in my opinion the deceased had time to get on to the pavement out of the way of the gig.
ARTHUR TRIMMER . I am a carman, of 30, Claremont Street, Greenwich—on November 11th I had been with Mr. Male in the trap to Forest Hill to try and sell it—we reached High Street, Deptford, about 5.30 p.m.—in the High Street I saw Poulton—I got out of the trap and he got in—I knew him by sight—Mr. Male remained in the trap and the two men drove off—Poulton was quite sober.
Cross-examined. I did not have a drink with Poulten when we parted—it was a very good pony.
COSTELLA MALE . I am a horse keeper of Fisher's Rents, Deptford—on the afternoon of November 11th I had been with Trimmer to Forest Hill to try and sell the pony—we reached High Street, Deptford, about 5.30 p.m.—in the High Street I saw the prisoner—Trimmer then got out and the prisoner got in—we then drove away to the Five Bells at New Cross Gate, where we had a glass of ale each—the prisoner was quite sober—when we left the Five Bells he took the reins—he was sitting on the off side—we then went along all right until we saw the man with the perambulator in Loam Pit Vale—he was about three yards from the gutter when I first saw him—he seemed to be rolling about the road—I shouted to him, but he did not seem to hear—we were going about six miles an hour—there was no room to pass the man on either side, and we pulled up as best we could, but the point of the shaft caught him and knocked him down, and the wheel went over him—we did not deliberately run down the man.
The prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that he was a horse dealer; that he had been at work all day on November 11th, and had only had three glasses of ale, and was quite sober; and that the occurrence was a sheer accident.
GUILTY. Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury. One month's hard labour.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. GANZ Prosecuted.
CAROLINE FLORENCE STEEL . I live at 6, Sandringham Buildings, Walworth, and am married—I have two children, one aged seven years an Horace aged three—on November 12th, at 1.45 p.m., I sent them both to school at Larcom Street, Walworth—at about 4.30 p.m. the elder one returned home alone—he said something to me, and I went to the school and afterwards to the police station—I received Horace back the next day at 7 p.m.—this is the child.
SOPHIA SMITH . I am an assistant mistress at St. John's School, Larcom Street, Walworth—the child Horace attends there—he attended there on November 12th, and left about 4 p.m.—I do not know whether he left alone or with his brother—that is the child which has been here.
GEORGE SIMPSON . I am Assistant Superintendent of the Lambeth Casual Ward—on November 12th, at 5.30 p.m., I was outside the Elephant and Castle and saw the prisoner with the child produced—I know her as Catherine Freeman, and an inmate of the Lambeth Casual Ward—knowing she has no children of her own I followed her down Newington
Causeway—she was leading the child by the hand—she went into the Newington Sessions House and spoke to another woman—I went up and asked the other woman if the child was her's—she said, "No "and that she did not know the prisoner—the prisoner then came outside the Sessions House and the child began to cry, and did not seem inclined to go with her—she then pushed it to the ground and made it scream—at Stones End Police Station I spoke to a constable about her, but he refused to take any action—I saw no more of her till I was asked to go and identify her at the police station on November 22nd—she was perfectly sober on the 12th.
MARY ANN NEVILLE . I keep a lodging house at 2, Floridine Street, Whitechapel—on November 13th, at 9 a.m., I went through the rooms, and in one of them I found the prisoner and a man and the child produced, in bed—I came out then, and went in again soon after, and the prisoner had gone and left the child in bed asleep—the man was then getting up—I got the child up and gave it some breakfast and then took it to the police station—the following night the prisoner came back drunk and asked for the child—I asked her where she got it from—she said from the Elephant and Castle—I then turned her out—I identified her the next night.
JAMES HUTCHISON . I am a doctor residing at 44, Rodney Road, Walworth—I examined the child Horace Steel on November 14th, and found it suffering from bronchial catarrh, consistent with recent exposure—it is all right now.
FRANCIS MACKAY (Police-Inspector L.) On November 15th I saw the prisoner at Commercial Street Police Station, Whitechapel—I told her I was a Police Inspector and should arrest her for stealing a child named Horace Steel, on November 12th—she said, "Yes, sir, I picked the child up; I know I ought not to have done so, I did not know what I was doing. I picked it up close to some high buildings where there were several postoffice vans near"—I took her to the police station, when the charge was read over, she made no reply.
The prisoner's statement before the magistrate. "I could not steal it when I picked it up. I was wrong because I did not take it to the police."
The prisoner in her defence said that the child produced was not the one she picked up; but that she was wrong in not taking it to the station.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. FORDHAM Prosecuted.
SIDNEY NEVILLE . I am a labourer of 42, Upper Kennington Lane—on November 15th, at 10 p.m., I was in the gallery of the Canterbury Music Hall—I left my seat to go to the urinal, and on coming back the prisoner said to me, "Is your name Sid Neville"—I said, "Yes"—and he then pointed this revolver (Produced) at my head—a man named Breywood seized him, and while they were struggling I went for a policeman—I had never seen him before.
THOMAS BREYWOOD I am a bricklayers labourer of 48, Walk Lane, Lambeth Walk—I was in the gallery of the Canterbury Music Hall on this night—the prisoner was behind me with about ten others—I heard someone say to the prisoner, "I will show him when I come back"—I then saw Neville coming back along the gangway, and the prisoner asked him if his name was Sidney Neville—Neville said, "Yes"—and the prisoner then drew the revolver, produced from his right-hand jacket pocket and pointed it at Neville's forehead—he had his finger on the trigger—I seized his wrist and pointed it to the floor—a policeman arrived and he dropped the revolver—it did not go off—while I was struggling with him to get the revolver away I got one finger broken and another fractured.
CLEMENT EVANS (276 L.) On November 15th I was on duty in the gallery of the Canterbury Music Hall—between 9 and 10 p.m. my attention was called to a disturbance—when I arrived the prosecutor was struggling with the prisoner, and Breywood picked up the revolver produced and handed it to me—Neville said he would charge the prisoner with attempting to shoot him, and I took him into custody—he said, "It is not my revolver, some of those other chaps put it in my pocket."
Cross-examined. The prosecutor did not come for me—I saw the disturbance and went there—there was a disturbance before this occurrence, but I did not notice whether they were the same parties—I cannot say where Breywood or Neville were at that time—Breywood did not hand the pistol to the attendant—he gave it to me.
HENRY BAULCH (28 L.) Evans handed the six-chambered revolver to me—I examined it—it contained four loaded cartridges and one which had been discharged—I searched the prisoner and found on him a box containing thirty-three full cartridges like those in the pistol—the prisoner said they must have been put there by someone else, as he did not know they were there.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I did not commit the assault. The prosecutor and the witness and four or five more started on me, and said they were the champion fighters of Lambeth. I do not know who handed the revolver to me."
The jury, being unable to agree, were discharged without giving a verdict. The prisoner was again given in charge to the same jury on an indictment for a common assault upon the said Sidney Neville. The COURT read over the evidence in the former case.
The prisoner said in his defence, that the weapon was given to him by somebody in the Cantrebury Music Hall but he could not recollect by whom.
GUILTY . Four previous convictions were proved against him. Nine months' hard labour. The COURT awarded £5 to Breywood.
123. CECIL WILFRID FRANK WALLIS (31), PLEADED GUILTY to marrying Annie Clutterbuck, his wife being then alive. Also to obtaining £62 from the same person by false pretences with intent to defraud. Five years' penal servitude on the first indictment , and twelve months' hard labour on the second, to run concurrently.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant. '"
MR. METCALF Prosecuted.
WILLIAM PENDLE . I am manager to Meek, Jones and Co., brass shop front manufacturers, 47, Blackfriars Road—the prisoner was employed there from about September 12th to November 12th—about eighteen months ago I had an account with the City and Midland Bank, when it was closed, and I banked with the London and County Bank—I had forty-nine or fifty cheques left over—on November 7th the prisoner brought me a form to fill in from Somerset House—on November 12th he absconded after we had attached his account—the cheque, dated November 15th, is drawn on one of the forms I gave him to take to Somerset House and is his writing, including the endorsement "F. H. Hall," with the exception of "Account closed."
FREDERICK HOOPER . I keep the Marlborough Arms, Old Kent Road—I knew the prisoner as being in Meek, Jones and Co.'s service—on November 15th he brought this cheque and said that he had been at the office and that the firm had left him his salary, but it was too late to get it cashed, and would I let him have £2 till Monday and he would repay me; he asked me not to pay it in—believing his statement I gave him the £2—he came back in an hour's time and had another sovereign—I did not pay the cheque in on the Saturday—he came on the Monday morning and wanted another sovereign and I would not let him have it—I paid the cheque in on Monday, 17th—it was returned marked "account closed"—I gave information to the police—I saw no more of him till he was in custody—I had two wires, and I waited ten days or a fortnight before I took the matter up.
BENJAMIN GULLY (Police-Sergeant L.) At 3.30 a.m. on November 29th I saw the prisoner detained at Bow Street Police Station—I said, "I have reason to believe your name is Frank Hall. I am a sergeant of police. I hold a warrant for your arrest for forgery, and shall take you to Kennington Road Police Station"—on the way there he said, "Who took the warrant out against me?"—I said, "Meek and Jones"—he said, "They had £5 of that. Suppose I paid it?"—that referred to another charge.
The Prisoner's defence. I only did it for a temporary accommodation till I should have money.
GUILTY . Twelve months' hard labour.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
MR. GANZ Prosecuted and MR. CLARKE HALL Defended.
ELIZABETH GARE . I am single—for some years I have been living with the prisoner as his wife at 29, Abbey Road, Merton—we have had two children—the eldest was three years old, and the youngest, Rhoda, was
10 1/2 months in November—the prisoner is a general dealer—he used to go out every day and return early in the afternoon—on Monday, November 10th, he came in about 4.30—I was at the front door with my two children, the baby on my left arm and the little boy at my side—I could see that the prisoner had had drink—I went indoors—he went into the kitchen—I followed with the baby—I said, "Holloa, mate, you have been on the booze to-day"—he struck me with his fist—I snatched up this broom in my right hand to prevent the blow, holding the baby on my left arm—he snatched the broom from me from the bottom part and began to strike me with it—it glanced off my head on to the baby's—it screamed—I ran into the street—I spoke to a neighbour, Mrs. Biggs, and ran for Dr. Randall, who examined the child—it died the following morning.
Cross-examined. I went over to the mantelpiece—the prisoner stood by the passage door—he raised his right hand—his other hand looked as if it was by his side—he caught the broom with his left hand.
By the COURT. He bears a good character—his business is too bad to marry—he has kept me three years—he is a good husband to me—I do not mind marrying him.
MARTIN RANDALL . I am a medical practitioner at Worple Road, Wimbledon—I was called to see the child Rhoda Gare on November 10th, about 5.15 p.m.—the mother spoke to me—she took the child to the Cottage Hospital—I examined it—I treated it all through—it was partially conscious—there was a large bruise on the right temple, another large bruise above the left ear, the skull was fractured behind the left ear, the child was suffering from convulsions and the right side of the body became partially paralysed—I imagine there was only one blow—this broom stick would cause the injuries—the child died of shock, a fractured skull, and laceration of the brain.
Cross-examined. At eleven months the child's head would be soft—it would take considerable violence to cause the fracture—pulling the lower part of the-broom stick from the woman's hold would not have caused it to strike such a blow—I would not say that was impossible, but in my opinion it was improbable—the child was very well nourished. The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY. Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury. To enter into recognizances. On the understanding that he would marry Elizabeth Gore.
(128) EDWARD JAMES BENNETT (36) , to committing an abominable crime with Frederick Hart; also to another indictment for a like offence with him. Ten years' penal servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. GANZ Prosecuted.
Upon the evidence of Dr. James Scott, the Medical Officer at Brixton Prison, the Jury found the prisoner was insane and unfit to plead. To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.
MR. MATHEWS and MR. BODKIN Prosecuted, and MR. PERCIVAL HUGHES
CHARLES KIRK . I live at 1, Stewart Road, Battersea Park—the prisoner is my sister—she is unmarried, and up to November 1st was a laundress at Spiers and Pond's at Battersea—she received 10s. a week—she lived in a room at 32, Austin Street, for which she paid 2s. 6d. a week—she had a child last March—she was confined at her mother's house—some months afterwards her mother told her to clear out of the house and go to the work-house—I lived with my mother and my other brothers then—I do not live there now—I am married now—my sister said to my mother, "You have no pity for the child, but never mind, I will go"—she went first to Park Road and then to Austin Road—while at Austin Road she paid 4s. to a neighbour for the keep of the child—on Saturday, November 1st, it was arranged that I and my wife should meet the prisoner—I and an uncle of mine met my wife and the prisoner—we were together the whole evening—I and my uncle then left the women and went to a public house—after that I heard something and went to Austin Road.
Cross-examined. It was just after the child was born that the prisoner was turned out of my mother's house—the prisoner was very much upset about it—she has always been a very hardworking woman.
ELIZABETH MARY KIRK . I am the wife of the last witness—I met the prisoner on November 1st—I called upon her about 5.45 p.m.—I knocked at her door, and went into her room—she was there with the baby, which was awake, and she went out to get the baby's bottle and some milk—I half-filled the bottle, and handed it to the prisoner, who gave it to the child"—she then suggested that I should go and tell my husband at the top of the street that she would not be long, but would see the baby to sleep and then join us—I did so, and about five minutes afterwards she joined us—she was asked if she had seen the baby to sleep—she said, "I have tucked my baby in, bless her heart"—we all went as far as Vauxhall—we met an uncle of my husband's, Frederick Kirk—we were all together till about 9.45—I went back with the prisoner to her room—she went in first—as she went in, she said, "Good God, someone has been in my room"—she nearly pushed me downstairs in her excitement—I do not know if she fainted, because I tore downstairs and fetched my husband and uncle from the top of the street—I did not look into the room before I went—I had only got as far as the top step—I did not go upstairs when I got back.
Cross-examined. I played with the child at 5.45, when I went into the prisoner's room—the prisoner always seemed very fond of it—there was nothing in her manner during the evening which struck me as strange—when we went into her room she appeared to be absolutely terrified at what she saw.
DAVID VOICE (451 V.) About 10.30 p.m. on November 1st I went to 32, Austin Road—in a first-floor room I saw the body of a female child about twenty months old lying on the bed apparently dead—I found this ordinary tableknife (Produced) lying between its legs—I sent for Dr.
Kempster—the room was somewhat disarranged—there were some torn letters lying about and some clothes lying outside a box.
By the JURY. The room was upstairs—nobody could have got in at the window even if it had been open.
FELIX CHARLES KEMPSTER . I am divisional Surgeon of Police, and practise at Battersea—I went to see this child at 32, Austin Road—it was then dead—it had a cut across its throat, which had only gone through the small vessels of the neck—the windpipe was cut—I afterwards found that the cause of death was asphyxiation, from a clot of blood having formed in the windpipe—the blood had fallen backwards and there coagulated—the child was well nourished and very clean.
Cross-examined. There were no signs of blood in the washstand, or traces of the blood having been washed up.
Re-examined. There was some blood on the prisoner's skirt—I came to the conclusion that it was arterial blood, which had spurted out.
By the JURY. The child had been dead about five hours when I saw it—I reckoned that the wound had been inflicted about 6 o'clock or a little later.
FRANCES WILLIMOT . I am the matron at the South-West London Police-Court—on November 3rd the prisoner was given into my charge before she went before the magistrate—she was crying—I said to her, "Don't cry, I am very sorry for you"—she said, "I should not have done it if Fred had not laughed at me when I told him I was three months gone again; I cut her throat with a table-knife at five minutes to six, and left her; I then went out to meet my friends; God knows I loved my baby, and I hope they will allow me to see her once more."
FREDERICK JAMES KIRK . I am a labourer of 23, Wraughton Road, Battersea—I was at work the whole of last year and this, and I am the prisoner's uncle, and am thirty-four years old next week—I am not married—I was not the father of the deceased child—I did not say before the Coroner that I was the father of the dead child—the prisoner told me she was in the family way—I said before the Coroner, "She told me about five or six weeks ago that she was in the family way; I did not laugh at her; I suppose she told me because she thought I was the father of it; I have had relations with her, but I am not the father of the deceased child '—she told me of her condition—I did not laugh at her—I told her to let it take its course—she was earning her living as a laundress—I have never given her anything towards her support—she never asked me for anything—she spoke to me in September, and said she was about a month gone—I saw her once or twice a week after that—I met her on November 1st in Lambeth Walk, and spent the evening with her—we went shopping—we went home about 9.45—she came downstairs screaming—I went up and found the baby smothered with blood on the bed—I did not know what she paid for her lodgings—she told me she had to pay is a week for the keep of the child.
Cross-examined. I have only bought the baby a pound of biscuits now and again—that was not my own baby—she did not consult me the first time she was pregnant—I was not having intercourse with her at the time
—she asked me for a few halfpence now and again, and I gave them to her—I first had connection with her about two years ago—I believe the first child was born in March, 1901—I still say I was not its father—I have known the prisoner since I came home form the Army in 1895—I have not been living with her—I lived near her—she was not turned out of her house because I visited her, as far as I know—I only called at her mother's house once—I was walking out with her—I did not know she was turned out—when she was in her own room she sent for me—I had not made any allowance for her yet—she said she had great difficulty in making both ends meet—I was going to help her—I did not laugh at her—we were all out together, and we were laughing and talking, but not over this affair—she seemed jolly.
By the COURT. I have no idea who was the father of the first child—she summoned one man for it, and she lost the day as she could not prove it.
JOHN JAMES PITCAIRN . I am medical officer at Holloway, where the prisoner has been under my care since November 1st—I have informed myself of the facts of the case, as well as of her family history—her uncle and her grandfather committed suicide—her cousin has been more than once detained in a lunatic asylum—the prisoner is, I think, strongly predisposed to insanity—I have formed the conclusion that, in my opinion, at 6.30 on November 1st she was suffering from insanity, which took the form of melancholia and which prevented her from knowing the difference between right or wrong, or else that she did not know at all what she was doing—she had a miscarriage about November 14th, which prevented her being tried at the last Sessions—the foetus was about two or three months old.
Cross-examined. Her general health has been very indifferent—she told me that she had been dosing herself with some purgative medicine for the purpose of producing a miscarriage—she is pretty well nourished herself, but she gave me the impression of having been living very badly—she was physically and mentally reduced—I consider her act was a homicidal impulse, and arose in the course of an attack of acute melancholia—she has been much in the condition that she is in now since I have had anything to do with her—in my opinion she is now suffering from melancholia, and has been for some time—everything in the case predisposes to melancholia.
GUILTY. But insane at the time, and not responsible for her actions. To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, JANUARY 12TH,1903.