CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
THIRD SESSION, HELD JANUARY 12TH, 1903.
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, January 12th, and following days.
Before the Right Hon. SIR MARCUS SAMUEL , Knight, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir CHAS. JOHN DARLING , one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir HENRY EDMUND KNIGHT , Knt.; Sir JOSEPH RENALS , Bart., and Sir ALFRED JAMES NEWTON , Bart., Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON , Knight, K.C., Recorder of the said City; WALTER VAUGHAN MORGAN , Esq., Sir JOHN KNILL , Bart., and HOWARD CARLILE MORRIS , Esq., other of the Aldermen of the said City; FREDERICK ALBERT BOSANQUET , Esq., K.C., Common Serjeant of the said City; 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. THIRD SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—a dagger (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, June 12th, 1903.
Before Mr. Recorder.
NOT GUILTY .
132. CORNELIUS MARINUS VAN-DER-VOORDE , Being a director of the Union Preserving Company, fraudulently applying to his own use £16 1s. 3d. their money (See page 167). MR. ELLIOTT, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
133. CHARLES STEWART (18), PLEADED GUILTY to breaking and entering the warehouse of Walter Crosbie and another and stealing an eye piece and other articles, their property, having been convicted of felony at the Middlesex Sessions on October 20th, 1900.† Fifteen months' hard labour —
(134) THOMAS LAING (28) , to stealing thirteen dozen fountain pens. Also to, within six months, stealing eighteen dozen fountain pens, and within six months stealing ninety, dozen fountain pens. Also to stealing sixteen dozen fountain pens, 2 oz. of gold, and a quantity of platinum waste, platinum dust, alloy waste, alloy dust, and platinum scraps, the property of George Edward Shand his master Twenty months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(135) WILLIAM ALLEN (27) , to stealing, whilst employed under the Post Office, two post letters containing a postal order for 4s. 6d. and a cheque for £1, and seven postal orders, the property of the Postmaster-General. Nine months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(136) WALTER BENJAMIN HORN (33) , to stealing, whilst employed under the Post Office, a postal packet containing two florins, 1s., a wooden box, and other articles, the property of the Postmaster-General. Nine months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
Nine months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(138) CHARLES HENRY THWAITES (27), (A police constable), to stealing, whilst employed under the Post Office, a post letter containing a hat-pin, the property of the Postmaster-General. Also, a post letter containing a silk handkerchief and a Christmas card. Also to stealing a letter containing a pocket Bible, the property of the Postmaster-General. Eighteen months' hard labour. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(139) CHARLES GREEN (28) and ARTHUR JONES (35) , to assaulting William Weinrich and stealing 1s. from his person. Green having been convicted of felony at the North London Sessions on September 6th, 1898, as Charles Tanner, and Jones at this Court on October 24th, 1898. Three previous convictions were proved against Green†and five against Jones.* Four years' penal servitude each. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(140) WILLIAM CALDER (33) , to obtaining £2 from Arthur Buirchett, £3 from William Edward Weller, a hat from Thomas Ibbotson, twelve shirts from Davis and Currzer, and six jackets and two pairs of trousers from Akers and Co., he having been convicted of felony at Marylebone on September 26th, 1901. Twelve months' hard labour — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
(141) ALBERT WILLIAMS (18) , to stealing, and EMILY HYLAND (52) to receiving, knowing them to have been stolen, two pieces of veiling and two pieces of cretonne, the goods of Frederick Fitt. WILLIAMS also to stealing and HYLAND to receiving five cards of lace, the property of Henry Reissmann, and 96 1/2 yards of de-laine the property of Edwin Hitchin, and another. (See next case.) [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. BURNIE Prosecuted.
WILLIAM HUNT . I am errand-boy to Frederick Fitt, a lace agent, of 36, Bread Street—on December 29th, about 5 p.m., I was given a parcel by Mr. Fitt, Jun., to give to Saunderson, who carries parcels for Mr. Fitt—my practice is to wait in Angel Court, Friday Street, until I see Saunderson's truck—I saw the truck and put the parcel on it—Williams came up to me—I knew him as having been in Saunderson's employment—I did not know that he was not employed by Saunderson then—I gave him my book to sign in the usual way, which he did—as I turned to go away I saw the prisoner in Friday Street—I knew him as having been in Saunderson's employ—I said to him, "I gave a parcel to a chap up the court, does he work for your place?"—he said "Yes"—I went away then—this (Produced) is the parcel.
GEORGE QUANTRILL . I am a porter at Saunderson's, carriers of Silver Street—on December 29th I was in charge of a truck of parcels in Angel Court—I left it there unattended while I collected parcels—while I was away this parcel was put on the truck—I saw the prisoner there—he told me that Williams had gone up to Reachman's to see if they had got anything—neither Williams nor the prisoner was in our employ then, but they both
had been—I saw the prisoner go away with Fitt's parcel—I was in charge of the truck—it is my duty to receive parcels and give receipts for them—I gave no receipt for this parcel because I was not there when the parcel was put on the truck—I had seen it on the truck—the prisoner told me it had been signed for by Williams—the receipt was in Fitt's book—I saw Williams in Whitecross Street—he gave me 4d—I suppose that was my share out of the parcel. (MR. BURNIE submitted that he was entitled to show that the men had acted in concert before. The RECORDER ruled that there was no authority for that, as if there had been larcenies within six months it could have been charged in the indictment.)
ELIZABETH MOYES . I am the wife of Thomas Moyes of 246, City Road—Hyland kept a tobacconist's shop opposite my house—on January 1st she brought some parcels' to me—amongst them was this one—I put it into the safe to mind for her—she did not say where she got it from—the police afterwards came and took possession of it.
ALFRED ANDERTON (City Detective.) On January 5th I went with Constable Wise to Medhurst Row, where I saw the prisoner—I told him I was a police officer, and said, "Your name in Harry Angel"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "I want you for being concerned with' a youth named Williams in stealing parcels from Messrs. Fitt on December 29th"—he said, "I was there, but I did not sign for them, Williams did it."
WILLIAM CHAPMAN . I am foreman to Saunderson and Co., carriers, of Silver Street—Williams was in our service—he left on November 8th because he lost a parcel—the prisoner was with us—he left on December 20th because he was too slow—at one time he was on the same round as Quantrill.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate, "I agree with what Williams has said."
Williams says, "Quantrill was there and told us where to get the parcels. He shared everything with us."
Prisoner's defence. "I never done no stealing and no forgery, I was concerned with Williams, but I did not steal"
GUILTY .— Six months' hard labour.
WILLIAMS— Six months' hard labour.
HYLAND, who received a good character, Twelve months' hard labour.
NEW COURT.—Monday, January 12th, 1903.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted.
MARIA HOOPER . I am the wife of Reginald Hooper, the landlord of 47, Maplin Street, Bow—on April 28th the prisoners came together and took rooms at 4s. a week, but Frost was not going to live there—I gave Rouse a key not the front room and another of the front door—I did not See Front for some time afterwards, but but she came to clean the room, and
lately she came every day—she came to cook the breakfast, and left in the morning—she used to go in and out in the day time and come back in the evening—as far as I know she did not pass the day there.
Cross-examined by Rouse. You left the place in the afternoon of the same day that the police came—you had not taken all your things away—nobody else came to take the rooms or put anything in.
By the COURT. Frost had been there several times that day, but that was the first time she slept there.
Re-examined. Rouse had given notice to leave, a fortnight before, but he still stayed on—Frost slept there without my knowledge.
WILLIAM WILLIAMSON (Detective-Sergeant.) From information I received I went with Sergeants Fowler and Eustace to 47, Maplin Street, Mile End—the first floor front room was locked—I knocked, and the prisoner Frost,. who was in her nightdress, opened it—I told her we were police officers,. and had heard that she was engaged in the manufacture of counterfeit coin—she said, "It is too late, my brother took them away this morning"—I said, "What do you mean?"—she said, "This is his room, but he took all the things away with him, and some furniture"—we searched the room, and in the fire-place found a ladle with some metal quite warm, and some copper and silver sand in a cupboard and various parts of the room—here is some copper wire and a clamp, a solution in a bottle, and a board—I found an iron bucket under the bed, with dirty water in it—I put my hand in and found this mould with the impression of a shilling on it—I submitted all those articles to Mr. Webster—Frost was taken to the station, and on the next day Eustace brought Rouse in, who said, "The things are not mine, but I will take the responsibility."
HENRY FOWLER (Police Sergeant.) I was with the other officers—I found between the bed and the mattress where Frost had been lying, a counterfeit shilling dated 1884—another shilling was found outside the house.
WILLIAM EUSTACE (Police Sergeant K.) On the night of December 19th I was in Maplin Street, and saw Rouse go to No. 47—he walked along the passage, and was just going upstairs—I said to him, "What is your name?"—he said, "Smith"—I said, "I am a policeman; do you live here?"—he said, "No"—I said, "I think your name is Rouse"—he said,. "No, it is Smith"—I said, "What do you want here"?—he said, "I am going downstairs to see Mr. Hooper"—I called Mr. Hooper, and said, "Do you know this man?"—he said, "Yes, that is Rouse; he lives upstairs"—Rouse said, "Yes, that is quite right"—I said, "Part of a mould and some implements for the manufacture of base coin were found last night"—he said, "All right"—I took him in custody—he asked me to let him go downstairs, and we had a struggle—on the way to the station he said, "Who gave the information?"—I said, "The sergeant"—they were charged at the station.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to H.M. Mint—this, mould is for the obverse and reverse sides of a shilling—this clasp is for holding the mould—this shilling is counterfeit—this file is used for filing the coin after the get has been taken off—all these things are part of the
stock of a coiner—I cannot say for certain whether the shilling corresponds with the mould—I have examined another shilling, they are both from one mould.
GUILTY . ROUSE, who was convicted of coining, twenty years ago, Three years' penal servitude. FROST, Nine months' hard labour.
144. VALENTINE ROTH (25), PLEADED GUILTY to stealing three clocks, the property of the Universal Art Trading Company, also to obtaining two clocks by false pretences, having been convicted at Clerkenwell on November 5th, 1901. Another conviction was proved against him. Fifteen months' hard labour.
MR. BLACKWELL Prosecuted.
THOMAS GIBBONS . I am a hawker—I have no permanent abode—on January 5th I was in Thrall Street, Spitalfields, at 7.30 a.m.—I had slept at a Salvation Army shelter—four chaps stopped me—Fraser put his arm round my neck and Williams put his hand over my mouth—they carried me into a house by my neck, put their hands in my pockets and took 4s. 4d. out, in silver and copper from my waistcoat pocket—they were all four in the house, and went and got another one—they ransacked me—I could not make much noise but I made some, and a policeman burst the door in and seized the two prisoners—they did not damage me—they gave me a great fright, and I had to go to the infirmary.
Cross-examined by Williams. When I got to the station I had 4s. 1d. and 3d. would make the 4s. 4d.
Cross-examined by Fraser. I said at the station that I had had 4s. 4d.
HENRY BARBER (96 H.) On January 5th, about 8 o'clock, I was on duty in Wentworth Street, and heard a scuffle inside the door of a house—I burst the door open and saw Gibbons with Fraser's hand over his mouth, and Williams rifling his pockets—they ran away—I ran out after Fraser—he said, "I must get some money to buy bread with"—I searched him but found nothing—Wentworth Street is 100 yards from Thrall Street—I only saw two men—Williams ran down stairs—another constable came to my assistance—when Williams came up I detained him—he made, no reply, but he said in Court, "I admit that this man put his hand over his mouth."
Cross-examined by Fraser. The door was jammed, but not fastened tight.
HENRY STUDD (29 H. R.) On January 5th, about 8 a.m., I went to Barber's assistance—he was detaining the two prisoners—I took Williams; another constable searched him, and found 5d. in copper—I charged him with robbery with violence—Gibbons took his money out at the station—I believe it was 3s. in silver and 4d. in bronze—this is only my belief—I saw, the silver, but did not see the bronze.
Williams Defence. He had 3s. 4d. at the station, not 4s. 1d.
GUILTY of assault with intent to rob. Twelve months' hard labour each.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
GUILTY , but the Jury thought he had great provocation from his wife. Three months' hard labour.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, January 13th, 1903.
Before Mr. Recorder.
(148) ALFRED GEORGE (26) , to stealing three mouth organs, and other articles, the property of the Civil Service Supply Association, also to forging an order for the delivery of six bottles of whiskey, and six bottles of port wine, with intent to defraud; also to forging an order for the delivery of a dressing-case, with intent to defraud; also to forging and uttering an order for the delivery of six plum puddings and a box of cigars, also to forging an order for the delivery of two turkeys and two hams, with intent to defraud. Three years' penal servitude. — [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
(149) CISSY PRICE (21) , to uttering an order for the payment of £14 11s., knowing it to be forged. A previous conviction was proved against her. Six months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
MR. HURRELL Prosecuted.
FREDERICK JOSEPH HAWES .—I am a grocer of 48, Pimlico Road, S.W.—on November 19th, about 7 p.m., the prisoner came to my shop—I did not know him before—he said, "I come from 21, Chelsea Gardens; could you oblige me with the change of a small cheque; we have not dealt with you above a month"—this (Produced) is the cheque—I changed it for him—it is for £6, purporting to be signed by Richard Topping—I had no such customer—I did not know the name of Smith, which is the endorsement—I paid it into my bank next morning—it was returned marked, "No account"—I next saw the prisoner at Westminster police-court on December 10th, and I picked him out from some others—I have no doubt about his identity—the cheque was endorsed "C. Smith," as it is now, when he brought it to me.
WIGHTMAN CAUTHER COOPER . I am secretary to the London Trading Bank, 12, Coleman Street, E.C.—we have no customer named Topping on our books—I do not know the prisoner—this is one of our cheques—I cannot say what book it came from, because it is ten years old, and the records have been destroyed—the signature, "C Smith," and the writing on this piece of paper is very similar—I have had considerable experience in handwriting.
ALBERT CHADD (Police Inspector.) About 7 o'clock on December 9th I arrested the prisoner at 51, Elizabeth Street—I searched him and found this letter in his pocket, a pocket-book, and several other articles—the letter only had "C. Smith "written across it several times—it was torn as it is now—he had previously inserted his hand into his pocket—there was also a letter addressed to Mr. C. Harvey, 15, Sutherland Place, Pimlico"—that is a lodging-house—the prisoner's real name is Robert Douglas Harvey—he gave the name of John Judge, of no fixed abode—he had been at Sutherland Place about three weeks—he was lodging there at the time of his arrest—he was known there as Harvey—next morning he was placed among six other men and identified by Hawes—I first charged him with attempting to obtain the £6—he said he had no cheque, so he could not have obtained the money—he also said, "Had I got the money I was going back to get the cheque"—I did not then know that he was the man who had obtained the money; I knew it had been obtained—when I said attempting to obtain £6 I referred to another charge—when charged with this offence he said it was a mistake, that he had never been to 48, Pimlico Road in his life, and did not know Mr. Hawes—I showed him the cheque—he said, "I have never seen that cheque before."
The prisoners statement before the Magistrate. "I would like to say that that piece of paper, I found on the table of a free library in Great Smith Street, Westminster. It is not my writing, nor is it an attempt to disguise my writing. Practice writing in any way. When I found the paper on the table I placed it in my overcoat pocket, and subsequently transferred it to the pocket of my trousers, where it was found by the detective. It is purely circumstantial evidence, and if there is any similarity in the writing on the paper which was shown to me by the detective this morning and the writing on the cheque, that is also."
The prisoner in his defence said that he was at Richmond Theatre at the time that he was supposed to have changed the cheque at Mr. Hawes, and that the piece of paper he found in a newspaper at a free library. GUILTY of uttering. He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of obtaining theatre tickets by false pretences, at Marlborough Street Police Court on October 18th, 1901. Nine months' hard labour.
MR. RAVEN Prosecuted.
GEORGE WILLIAM PRESTON . I am a sculleryman at Harrod's Stores, Brompton Road—I live at Chelsea—I was in Cheyne Walk on December 20th, about 1.30 a.m., with Agnes Bragg—the prisoner came across to us and tried to snatch Miss Bragg's purse from her hand—he then sprang behind my back and put his arm round my neck so that I could not move—he then placed his hand into my right-hand trousers pocket and took 10s. in silver out of it—he dropped some of it and I picked up 4s.—I was only bruised under my right arm—I saw him at Rochester Row next morning, and identified him in the dock.
Soho Square—on December 20th I was walking out with the last witness about 1.30 a.m.—I was carrying my purse in my hand—the prisoner came up and used very bad language—I told him to go away—I did not know him—I saw his face—he clenched hold of my hand and tried to take my purse away—he found he could not get it, and he went down my young man—I ran away—I did not see him doing anything to my young man—I went to the station the same night—I saw the prisoner there, and recognised him as the man who had attempted to take my purse.
GEORGE SWANSON . I am a dock labourer of 42, Avydale Road—I was in Cheyne Walk in the early morning of December 20th—the prisoner came up to me and said, "If you will give me two draws of that fag I will give you a sovereign"—he showed me this coin (Produced), which has two balloons on one side and a Queen's head on the other—I told him to go away—he would not, and I passed by on the other side—he came up to me again and said, "If I don't have your cigarette I will have someone else's"—I went to the other side of the road—the prisoner went along by the railings until he got to the prosecutor and the lady with him—he bounced on the gentleman's back and went down his pocket—I went across and tried to pull him off—a brewer's dray came along—I stopped it, and the prisoner ran away—he threw the money down—I ran after him and held him until the police came.
CHARLES LUCAS (235 B). I was on duty in Cheyne Walk on the morning of December 20th—I saw the prisoner stopped by Swanson at the corner of Danvers Street. Swanson said, "This man has stolen some money from a man up the Embankment"—the prosecutor came up and said the prisoner had stolen 10s. from him—he picked up two two-shilling pieces and showed them to me—I took the prisoner into custody—on the way to the station he said he had made a bloomer and was not on that side of the road at all—I searched him and found a half-crown, a sixpence, a penny, and a coin on him—he was then charged.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I have never been up for a thing like this before. I was not the man. I will have it settled here."
GUILTY . Eight months' hard labour.
MR. BOYD Prosecuted.
HARRY HUMBERT (286 City.) I was on duty in Fenchurch Street at 3 a.m. on January 7th—I saw the prisoner kicking the shutters in front of a shop window—the shutters fell, and he kicked the window four times—I arrested him—he said, "This window has dropped"—I said, "Yes, after you have kicked it"—on the way to the station he said he had done it for starvation.
EDWIN PRITCHARD . I am manager of the Abyssinian Gold Co., at 41, Fenchurch Street—on January 6th the shutters were put up across the window about 7.15 p.m.—when I arrived there next morning I found a constable there—the window was cracked, and also the name facia—it is a thick plate-glass window—the shutters do not come down, we put them up—we are not insured—it will cost about £25 to replace the window.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not say at the Mansion House that we had the shutters barred.
Prisoner's defence. "I was walking about that night; I was in the horrors of drink. I do not know it I done it or not done it. If I had done it I would say I had done it like a man, and be done with it."
H. HUMBERT (Re-examined.) The prisoner was sober.
GUILTY . Twelve previous convictions were proved against him. Eighteen months' hard labour.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, January 13th; and
THIRD COURT, Wednesday, January 14th, 1903.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
154. RAY HAMMOND (25), PLEADED GUILTY to uttering a cheque for £14 18s., knowing it to be forged, having been convicted at Wells on June 7 1902, of stealing a bicycle. Three other convictions were proved against him. Three years' penal servitude —
(155) WILLIAM HENRY FLOOD (22) , to forging and uttering a transfer of seventyfive shares in the Boksburg Gold Mine, Limited, with intent to defraud. Recommended to mercy by the prosecutors, and MR. HUMPHREYS for the defence stated that the forged transfer was given to a money lender as collateral security for a debt which the prisoner expected to be able to pay off and get the transfer back. He received a good character, and his wife's father promised to take him into his business in the country and look after him. Discharged on recognisances. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. LAWLESS Prosecuted.
HARRY TURNER . I am a clerk, of 42, Wentworth Street—on the night of December 26th I came out of a public-house in Brick Lane, and while I was standing outside the prisoner came up to me, put his fingers into my waistcoat pocket, and took out a shilling—I tried to get hold of him, but he put his hand against me and I fell on my back—he went into a public-house at the corner of Brick Lane—I waited a few minutes and he came out with several others, but I recognised him by his red scarf—a policeman came and I gave him in charge—he offered me a-shilling, and said, "I will give you your shilling"—I charged him at the station—he had a red scarf at the station.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not say at the station that a tall, fair chap robbed me—I had not been to two or three public-houses—I went out in the morning with a florin and I had 1s. 5 1/2 d. left—I was not fuddled with drink—you went back to the same public-house, but went in by another door—I recognise you by your features as well as your red scarf—I am sure you are the man to the best of my ability.
WILLIAM STONE (265 X) I was in Brick Lane at 7.30 on Boxing Day—Turner complained to me, pointed to the prisoner, and said that he had knocked him down and robbed him of a shilling—going to the station he
said that he had been playing at draughts for two hours—the prisoner said, "I never had the shilling," but offered him one—I searched him at the station and found £1 12s. 6d.—there "was a sovereign and some silver.
Cross-examined. You took me back into the public-house, and the landlord said that you had been playing at draughts for half an hour.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I borrowed £1, and the 8s. were my own money."
Evidence for the Defence.
JACOB SILVER . I am a boot laster—on Boxing night me and the prisoner went into the Black Bull public-house between 7.15 and 7.30—I said, "We will play a game of draughts," and we were there half an hour—just as we were coming out I said to the prisoner, "Come into the German house and lave a drink?"—that is only just across the road—there was a crowd, and just as we were going in the prosecutor identified him by his red scarf—when he was being charged the prosecutor said, "If you will give me a shilling I will not charge you"—I said, "Don't you give him any shilling you go to the station—someone called out, "Heigh, boy, you have got the wrong man; the right man is in the public-house"—you borrowed a sovereign because you were going selling violets—I think you had between 31s. and 32s.
By the COURT. We were playing at draughts in the Black Bull half an hour, and he never went out till he was arrested.
Cross-examined. I was selling violets with him—I am a boot laster, but my chest is very bad, and I had to give it up—when he was given in custody I followed to the station—I did not hear him say that he had been two hours in the Black Bull.
By the COURT. The constable did not take him back into the public-house because there-was a crowd—I got a swollen face that night—Alfred Smith was with me and the prisoner at the German house for ten minutes or a quarter of an hour just before the arrest—we left Alfred Smith at the German house, and went to the other house—I say that at the time the robbery was committed the prisoner was not in the German house but in the Black Bull—we had one game of draughts and then went to German house again—I think it was between 7 and 7.30 that we left German house and went to the Black Bull.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. ROACH Prosecuted.
HENRY DOUGLAS GRAY . I am in the employ of Mr. Gamage, and live at 42, Cleveland Street, W.—on January 3rd, between 5 and 5.30 p.m., I was in Warner Street, Clerkenwell, carrying a dress-suit case—the lamps were alight—four young men pounced on me, hit me, knocked me about, and snatched the bag out of my hand—I ran after them to Bath Court, a
turning out of Warner Street, where Williams threw the box at me while I was running after them—then King stood at the end of Bath Court and said, "If you come up we will murder you"—I followed them, but lost sight of them—they all went down the court—I do not know which of them was carrying the dress-suit case—I went to the station and picked out Williams and Brook—I saw King on the Thursday night, and picked him out from others—I have no doubt that they are three of the men who attacked me.
Cross-examined by Williams. You threw the box at me.
Cross-examined by Brook. I did not say at the station that you threw he box at me and took the bag out of my hand—I did not know your names then—I did not point to you and say, "That is the one who threw the box."
Cross-examined by King. I am positive it was you who stood at the end of the court.
By the COURT. There was a fourth man—I saw the faces of all four—when Williams threw the box at me he was about half-a-dozen yards from me—I had never seen them before—the fourth was a fair man.
ALBERT WALTER GAMAGE . I am an outfitter, of 125, High Holborn—Gray is in my employ—on January 3rd he was carrying a dress bag containing clothing in brown paper parcels and some boots, hair brushes, and this box (Produced.)
JAMES GREGORY . I am 13 1/2 years old, and live at 2, Providence Place, Farringdon Street—on Saturday evening, January 3rd, about 5 or 5.30, I saw the prisoners walk away from Bath Court, carrying several parcels wrapped in brown paper—I knew Williams and Brook before—they went past a fish shop and ran down Warner Street—I spoke to another boy, Glasgow, and saw them go into Fuller's Yard and put the parcels" on a barrow—they each undid the parcels, and when they saw me they said, "Look out, there is a policeman" and left off and ran away—on January 5th I went to the police station and picked out Williams and Brook—I knew their names before—I saw King before they came away from Bath Court—he remained at Baker's Road, which is another turning out of Warner Street—I knew him before and knew his name—I picked him out at the station.
By the COURT. King passed two or three minutes before the other boys came up, but after I saw them carrying the parcels—I saw Gray before the robbery, carrying the bag in Cold Bath Fields just crossing the street—there was a fourth man there, but I do not know him.
THOMAS GLASGOW . I am thirteen years old, and live at 43, Warner Street—I go to school—on Saturday afternoon, January 3rd, I was in. Warner Street—Gregory called me, and I saw Williams and King—Williams had something under his coat, and said to me, "If you don't go back I will smack you in the eye"—I had seen Williams before—after that I saw King go up Baker's Row with a large brown parcel—I went to see where King had gone, but saw nothing of either of them—King was walking quick, I knew him before—I know Brook but I did not see him—I went
to the station and picked out Williams and King—I heard Williams say something about a pin when they were in Rose Lane—there is a stable there.
Cross-examined by King. You were alone in Baker's Row—I did not see you in down Four Rose Yard.
WILLIAM HAYLING (Detective E.) On January 5th, about 11 a.m., I took Williams and Brook on a charge of robbery and assault on January 3rd, in Warner Street—they said, "All right"—I took them to the station, placed them with six others, and Gray picked them out.
ALFRED LOVELOCK (471 E.) On January 7th, about 8.15 p.m., I was in Exmouth Street in plain clothes and saw King—I said, "I am a police officer, is your name King?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "I want you for robbing a man in Warner Street on Saturday last"—he said, "I have heard all about it, but I don't want to suffer for other people; where is the warrant?"—going to the station he said, "This means three years' bashing, and if I drop for nothing I shall be put away"—that was before he was charged.
WILLIAM HAYLING (Re-examined.) I was at the station when King was charged—he wrote this statement himself and signed it, "Sir, I was arrested on Wednesday on the charge of being concerned with two other chaps in a robbery which took place on Saturday, and I am innocent, for which the other two know; and I was identified by two witnesses which knows me well, and they have always seen me with prisoners; and that is the reason they came down upon me for it. They were said to be four of them in the case which I do not want to suffer for other people's doing. The other two are Leonardi and Cherrabetti.—C. King."
King's statement before the Magistrate: "The two boys are prosecuting the other two prisoners, which they know nothing about. The two boys with me were Charles Traylen and Harry Lane. The boys saw me carrying a paper parcel, and they accused me of carrying a waistcoat and trousers in the parcel; if you will send to a public-house and ask for a chap who took the coat and trousers to mind; the prosecutor is only going by what they say about me carrying the parcel."
King's defence. "The prosecutor only identified me because as I was put amongst others the policemen were looking at me, and the—detectives were witnesses. "
GUILTY . Williams then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Clerkenwell Police Court on December 12th, 1902. Williams and Brook were stated to be associates of thieves.
WILLIAMS— Twelve months' hard labour and fifteen strokes with the birch rod;
BROCK— Thirteen months' hard labour;
KING— Nine months' hard labour. Gregory and Glasgow were commended by the Court, and £1 each was awarded to them.
THIRD COURT.—Tuesday, January 13th, 1903.
Before J. A. Rentoul, Esq., K.C.
158. WILLIAM SYMONDS (44) PLEADED GUILTY to fraudulently obtaining from Esther Bird and two others, 1s. each by false pretences, having been convicted of a like offence at Westminster Police Court on November 29, 1901, in the name of William Symonds. Two years' hard labour. —
MR. ORMSBY Prosecuted.
EDWARD LEWIS . I am barman at the Sun public-house, Long Acre—on Saturday, December 13th, the prisoner came in, he appeared to be drunk and was not served—he went to a corner of a seat and went to sleep—I woke him up and I said, "You must not sleep here"—I thought he was going out and left him—about twenty minutes afterwards I went back again and saw him asleep—I said, "Come on, you had better go out"—he said, "All right, governor, I will got out"—he got up, walked to the door, put his foot against it, and snatched my watch and chain and gave me. a punch in the face—I caught hold of him and shouted to two customers in the next bar, whom I knew—they rushed to my assistance, a policeman was fetched and the prisoner was given in charge—I went to the station—my watch was worth 35s.—I gave 1s. for the chain; it was a brown leather strap—it snapped.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. We did not struggle till you had my watch—I asked you to go out—I never turned you out—I did not ask the customers to come and give evidence—there were three people in the bar—the barmaid refused to serve you because she said you were drunk—you gave a blow at my face, but missed it as I slipped aside.
EDITH HARRIS . I live at the Sun public-house, Long Acre—on Saturday, December 13th, the prisoner came in the house and asked for a drink—I objected to serve him because he appeared drunk—Mr. Lewis came and said, "Do not go to sleep here, this is not a sleeping house"—the prisoner got up and went to the door, but instead of going out he hit Lewis on the stomach, but whether he hit him on the face I cannot say.
WILLIAM STEPHENS . (Detective E.) On the evening of December 13th—I was called to the Sun public-house—I told the prisoner I was a police officer, and should arrest him for stealing a watch from a gentleman—he said, "I was not drunk"—when charged he said, "I did not assault him, I only took the watch out of his pocket"—he had been drinking, but was not drunk.
going by—I told him he would be charged with stealing a watch and assaulting the barman—he said, "I did not hit him or steal his watch."
The prisoner put in a written defence, denying that he struck the prosecutor or that he had any intention to steal the watch, and stating that he was too drunk to remember much about it, and thought he was going to be charged with being drunk; but that he had a good character, and that he was employed at a gold and silversmith's, and the prosecutor ought to have sent for a constable to eject him if he was an undesirable customer.
GUILTY of assault with intent to rob. He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Marlborough Street Police Court on October 17th, 1900, in the name of Henry Oliver. Another conviction was proved against him. Six months' hard labour.
MR. PETER GRAIN Prosecuted.
FREDERICK HERVE . I am a cigar manufacturer of 309, Green Lanes, Finsbury Park—about one a.m. on December 14th, I was in Jerusalem Court, a narrow passage leading from St. John's Square to St. John Street—a man sprang from a doorway just behind me and punched me on my mouth, tripped me over, held my head down, and with two or three others rifled my pockets, in which I had about £3; £2 in gold and the rest in silver—they made off; I got up and heard a constable blowing a whistle—I saw 129 G, and told him what had happened—I next saw the four prisoners in the court with the constables.
Cross-examined by Pearce. I stated a different amount at the police-court, but I remembered I had not counted my change—the total I had was about £3—I was sober.
Cross-examined by Lewis. I do not remember seeing any woman till afterwards.
Cross-examined by Fox. I knew there was a thoroughfare—I have several times gone that way home; it is a near cut through St. John Street.
JESSE FAIRFAX (129 G.) About 1.15 a.m. on December 14th, I was in Jerusalem Passage—I saw the four prisoners, with two more, and two young women, walking out of Jerusalem Court—I next saw the prosecutor coming out of the court—his hat was covered with mud—I asked him if anything was the matter—he made a complaint and pointed to the prisoners who were then running away in different directions—I blew my' whistle and followed Welsh and Fox, who were stopped by Ross—I ran after Pearce and Lewis, who ran in the direction of St. John's Lane—when they saw Ross and Wells coming in the opposite direction they commenced walking—I caught Pearce and told him I should arrest him for being concerned in robbing a man in Jerusalem Court; he said, "I was
going home to my wife and family"—I took him into custody—another constable stopped Lewis—the prisoners were brought to the station—none of them made any answer to the charge—3s. in silver was found on Lewis and 4d. bronze; on Welsh, 18s. 6d. silver; on Fox, 1s. silver and 2d. bronze; and on Pearce, 6d. silver, and 5 1/2 d. bronze—they were all sober.
BERTIE WELLS (173 G.) About 1.15 a.m. on December 14th, I was in St. John's Lane—I heard a police whistle blown—I ran in the direction of Jerusalem Court, St. John's Square—I saw Pearce and Lewis running round the corner—when they saw me they went by me, walking—when Fairfax came round he pointed them out—Fairfax arrested Pearce and I pursued Lewis—I chased him about 200 yards and into an empty building—he said, "I did not have anything to do with it"—I brought Lewis out of the building and he was taken to the station with the others.
Cross-examined by Lewis. You climbed on to the window of the second floor of the building.
FRANK ROSS (319 C.) About 1.15 on December 14th I was in St.John Street—I heard a whistle and went in the direction of Albermarle Street, near Jerusalem Court—I saw Fairfax following Fox and Welsh—where the road widens they started walking, and I grabbed them—Fox said, "You are not going to charge me, governor, are you? you know me"—then the prosecutor and the constable came up—they were all taken to the station and charged—they said nothing.
Cross-examined by Welsh. You asked me what I wanted you for, and I said I did not know—that was before the constable came up—you did not say, "You have got the wrong two."
Cross-examined by Lewis. I do not recollect your saying, "You have got my two innocent mates."
Pearce, in his defence on oath, said that he was going home from work and stopped to have several drinks, when he met two strangers, and then the prosecutor, who said lie had lost £2 in gold, and then other sums till it got to £3: £2 10s. being in gold; but that he was innocent, and knew nothing about the charge.
Lewis, in his defence on oath, said that he went to hear the waits with his two mates; that he pointed out the two men; and that he went into an empty building after the constable, who took him to the station; but that he did not know Pearce.
Welsh, in his defence on oath, said that he went with Fox to hear the waits, when the constable caught hold of them.
Fox made the same defence as Welsh, but not on oath.
GUILTY . Judgment respited.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, January 14th, 1903.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
MR. MATHEWS and MR. STEPHENSON Prosecuted; and MR. SYMMONS
EMILY HESTOR ELLIOT . I am a widow living at 25, Eaton's Buildings, Brentford—the prisoner was living at my house in December last, and slept in the same bed with me—I never noticed anything about her—on December 2nd, about 10.30 p.m., we both went to bed together—at 4.30 a.m. she said she was in dreadful pain—I offered to get up and make her a cup of tea—she said she would not have any, but that she was going down to the w.c. which is in the yard—she put some petticoats and a blouse on, went down, and was away about ten or fifteen minutes—when she came back she laid outside the bed beside me—I asked her if she felt better—she said that she felt no better, and would have to go downstairs again, and she went down a second time, and took a candle with her—I went to sleep and cannot say how long she was away, but I remember her coming back as I woke up—I asked her if she felt better—she said she felt a little better—I said, "Where have you been all this long while, downstairs"—she said he had been lying outside the bed along with me—she said she felt a little better and got into bed—she was very cold when she got into bed—I did not notice anything about her manner—she was quite reasonable—I got up about seven o'clock, which was soon after she came back, and left her asleep—about 8 a.m. she came downstairs—I again asked her how she felt—she aid, "a little better '"—I then went out to work, leaving her in the house—I returned home from work at 9.30 p.m.—I did not see her again till then—I said to her. "I heard there is a little baby been picked up; what a dreadful thing '"—she said, "Yes, it is a dreadful thing"—she slept with me that night—in the morning she said she felt better—on December 4th came home from work in the evening—she slept with me—I had no conversation with her—on the 5th, in the morning, I got up, and she was getting ready for work—that was the last time I saw her until I saw he at the police court.
Cross-examined. I have one child—I slept with the prisoner four nights altogether—I should not see her in the day time, I go to work in the morning and do not go home before night—we usually had supper together—I had noticed nothing whatever about her condition—when she said she was in pain, and went downstairs, and was away for some time I had no suspicion whatever that anything had happened—I did not know she was in the family way—when she went downstairs the second time I went to sleep and did not know how long she was away—I was not alarmed at her having been downstairs some time, because I did not think there was anything the matter with her.
HARRIET BOWLES . I live at 25, Eaton's Buildings, Brentford, and am the wife of Frederick Bowles—the prisoner came to lodge there in September last—she worked at a laundry—I never saw her husband, and knew nothing about her having been married—Mrs. Elliot and the prisoner used to sleep together—I never noticed anything unusual about the prisoner's condition—on December 3rd Mrs. Elliot came to my bed-room
at 7.15 a.m. and said something to me—I then went and saw the prisoner—she was asleep—I went out at 7.45 a.m. and heard something about a baby, and I went back home and said to the prisoner: "Louie! what do you think I hear"—she said, "I don't know"—I said, "A new born baby has been picked up in the Running Horse Yard"—she said, Where?"—I said, "Round the corner, on Mrs. Jones' step"—she said "Oh dear! I wonder who put it there"—I did not notice her appearance—she went to work at about 8.15 a.m. and returned home about 11 a.m.—she said to me that she had to come home, she could not stop longer, and that she had earned sixpence that morning—she stayed indoors all that day before the fire, and went to bed about 8.30 p.m.—on the 4th she walked downstairs just before 8 a.m., and came back about 9 p.m.—some detectives came that day and made some enquiries—on the night of the 3rd I had seen a mess in her room, and she said she had been sick—I did not form any opinion about it—it looked like sick—on the 5th she went to work at 8.15 a.m.—I said to her, "Louie, are you going to work?"—she said, "Yes, I must go; I shall be done soon"—I said, "Louie, I should not go to-day if I were you; will you have a doctor?"—she said, "No, I don't want a doctor"—I said, "Will you come with me and my husband to the police station?"—she said, "No, I will go when I come home"—people were talking about her, and I said to her, "Will you come and clear yourself at the station, and stop people's talk?"—she said, "No, I will do that when I come home"—she then went out and I saw no more of her—she never came back—I never saw any preparations for the birth of the baby—she had no boxes of any sort.
Cross-examined. She had no boxes for her clothes—besides the clothes she worked in she had only a couple of jackets—she had been at the house about four months, and was working at the laundry the whole of that time—I noticed nothing about her condition—when Mrs. Elliot spoke to me I noticed when the prisoner came down in the morning that she was looking rather pale—that was the same morning that I had heard about the child being found—I did not connect those two things in my—I did not suspect anything until the detectives came on the 4th, and on the 5th I suggested her going to the police station, as I did not like the idea of people talking about our house—I did not think even then that she had given birth to a child—I did not know she was in that condition.
MARY ANN O'BRIEN . I am the wife of Michael O'Brien, of 32, Eaton's Buildings, Brentford—the prisoner is my sister—she is 24 years of age, and is married—she parted from her husband twelve months ago last October—she had had a child by him—it died when it was two and a half years old—I saw her late in November, and noticed that she was looking rather stout—I thought she was gaining flesh—I called her attention to it, but she tossed her head and laughed—on December 3rd, about 8 a.m., she came to my bedroom—I was in bed, with my back towards her—she said there had been a baby found—I said "Where?"—she said, "On Mrs. Jones'doorstep"—I said, "Oh, my (God"—she stood still a minute or two and then went out of the house.
Cross-examined. She said nothing after I said, "Oh, my God"—I did not turn round to see her—I laid with my back toward her—it occurs to me now that had I turned round to her I might have got to know everything that had happened—I did not know anything serious had happened and I did not happen to turn round.
JAMES CHELTON . I live at 16, Running Horse Yard, Brentford—on December 3rd, at G.45 a.m., I was woken up by my dog barking—I go up and dressed, and spoke to a neighbour, Mrs. Noakes, who got a light—opposite the front of the house there are a number of water-closets—I went towards them and saw a newly born female child on the paving stones—it was screaming—the after birth and cord were attached to it—there was no clothing on it—it was a bitterly cold morning—I went for a policeman—there was blood and other matter on the closet doorstep.
Cross-examined. I come out of that yard every day to go to business, and go back at night—there are other houses in the yard, Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18—the water-closets would be used by the other people living in the yard—the child was lying flat on its back.
JAMES WILLIE (303 T.) I went to Running Horse Yard with a rug and opposite No. 15 I found a newly born female child, crying—I held out the rug, and the last witness put the baby in it and I took it to the station—it was partly covered with blood and excrement, and there was blood on the pavement—I noticed a cut over its right ear, about two inches long, and bruises on the right side of the head and shoulder—it was a bitterly cold morning—it continued to cry, and I sent for the matron and doctor.
Cross-examined. When I arrived, the child was lying flat on its back—to the best of my recollection the yard is paved with asphalt.
MARY ANN COX . I am matron at the Brentford Police Station—on December 3rd. about 7 a.m., I was called to the station, and saw a female child in the office—it was crying—I took away the after birth, cut the cord which was still attached to it, and washed it—I afterwards took it to the Union.
HENRY NICHOLLS (Police Sergeant 11 T.) No. 25, Eaton's Buildings lias a garden opposite, in which there is a water-closet—the distance from there to the Running Horse Yard is 108 yards—Running Horse Yard is a cul-de-sac, and would probably be used only by the people residing in it.
Cross-examined. The garden of No. 25. Eaton's Buildings, is in the front—there is no back—the pavement in Running Horse Yard has brickwork let into it where it has been broken—the water-closet has a step to it almost level with the yard.
HENRY MULLINS (Detective T.) At 7.30 a.m. on December 3rd, I went to Running Horse Yard, and opposite No. 15, I saw a pool of blood and human excrement, about 2 feet 9 inches from the water-closet, and splashes of human excrement on the outside of the door—I went into the watercloset—I found no trace of blood or excrement there—I also examined the water-closet at 25, Eaton's Buildings—I found no blood there.
with me for five or six weeks before December 3rd—I noticed her appearance, and she told me she was seven months gone in the family-way—she said her husband was dead—on December 4th, when she came to work, I noticed a change in her appearance, she was much thinner—I asked her if she felt better, and she said "Yes"—on her way home from work she said she went to a doctor and paid him 1s. 6d. to have the baby turned.
Cross-examined. She said that after I had asked her about her altered condition—I said at the police court, "I turned and said to her, your baby has dropped a lot this morning," and it was in answer to that, that she said she had been to a doctor—it was between a week and a fortnight before December 4th that she told me she was seven months gone.
ALICE GEE . I am the wife of William Gee, of 18, Shaftesbury Road, Acton—we keep a lodging-house—on December 5th the prisoner called and asked for a bed—she said she had come from Stepney and that it was too far for her to go home that night—I let her have a bed for 4d. for the night, and she slept with a Miss Allen, and remained on in the house, and slept in the same bed with Miss Allen till December 10th.
WALTER DEW (Detective Inspector T.) On December 10th, about 11 a.m., I went to 12 Palmerston Road, Acton, and saw the prisoner at a laundry there—I said to her, "lama police officer; your name, I believe, is Louisa Beaumont"—she said, "My name is not Beaumont"—I said, "I think it is, and that you come from Brentford"—she said, "You are wrong; I have not been to Brentford for twelve months"—I showed her a photograph of herself and said, "You have a hat with H.M.S. Galatea on the band, and so had Louisa Beaumont"—she said, "My name is Beaumont"—I said, "I am making inquiries about a newly-born child found in Running Horse Yard, Brentford, last Wednesday morning, and as you disappeared and people said you looked as if you were in the family-way I wanted to see you, but you are not bound to tell me anything, but anything you say may be used for or against you"—she said, "I came away from Brentford because my husband should not know where I was, and people were talking about me"—lifting up her apron she said, "Do I look as if I am in the family-way"—I said, "That can be cleared up by your seeing a doctor," and I asked her to go to my office—there, I said to her, "Further inquiries will have to be made, have you any objection to seeing a doctor?"—she said, "It's no use having a doctor, I am not in the family-way now; I had a child on Wednesday morning, and that was it at Brentford; I did not know what to do in my agony, but I suppose I shall have to go through it"—on December 30th, at 1.10 p.m., I told her I should arrest her for the murder of her newly-born child at Brentford, on December 3rd—she said, "It's all lies what those women said about the instruments, and how could a woman say she saw me on Wednesday morning; I was fast asleep in bed at 7 o'clock"—on December 10th, knowing she must have been in a bad state, I sent her to the Infirmary—she made no reply when the charge was read over to her.
Cross-examined. She was kept in the Infirmary till December 30th—she was suffering from fever when she got there—I actually showed her the photograph.
CHRISTOPHER THACKARAY PARSONS , M.D. I am Superintendent of the Isleworth Infirmary—on December 10th, at 1.20 p.m., I examined the prisoner, and came to the conclusion that she had recently been delivered of a child—I could not form a definite date, but it would be within ten days—after her admission she developed symptoms of puerperal fever—that is a common occurrence within four or five days of confinement.
Cross-examined. I did not see the child—at the time of confinement a woman is often incapable of forming a sound judgment—it also sometimes occurs that women make mistakes as to the time of their confinements, and the labour pains are mistaken sometimes for a mere desire to evacuate, and a woman may think that she needs to go to a water-closet, when as a matter of fact labour pains are actually upon her.
THOMAS EVERARD WATTS SILVESTER , M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P. I am Assistant Medical Superintendent of the Isleworth Infirmary—on December 3rd a female child was brought to me by Mrs. Cox, the matron of the Infirmary—it had been washed and the umbilical cord had been cut—it was a fulltime child and still alive—I examined it and found a cut two inches long above the right ear, a swelling on the right side of the head and oozing—at the post mortem examination I found beneath the cut a zigzag fracture of the skull three inches acoss the side of the skull—beneath the fracture the brain was practically pulp—a portion of the skull was depressed and there was a certain amount of brain substance external to it at the base of the skull in front of the attachment of the spine—that was a second fracture—in my opinion those fractures could not 'have been caused by the child falling from the body of its mother in the act of delivery, because the first-named fracture was at the side of the head instead of on of where the skull would naturally have come in contact with the ground—there was extensive laceration of the brain beneath the fracture—I came to the conclusion that the injuries had been caused by a blow with some blunt edged instrument—the injury above the ear was the cause of death—beyond the injuries described there was a fracture of the upper ribs on the left side of the body close to their attachment to the spine—in my opinion that was caused by external violence, the child probably had been trodden upon as there was some bruising—when it was first brought in it was very cold from exposure—it got quite warm, but at 3.30 p.m. that day I was called urgently and found it dying, as the result of that first injury.
Cross-examined. The child recovered from the exposure—the cause of death was the injury to the head, which might have been caused by a kick not accidentally, but deliberately—I could not say from looking at a fracture whether it was done by an accidental or a deliberate kick—a newly-born child's ribs are cartilage, and a slight pressure would cause them to bend out of shape, and the head would be very soft—I have seen the yard, but I do not think that if the child had fallen on the step of the water-closet it would have caused the injuries—it is possible they might have been caused by the child falling on the edge of the step and the mother, from weakness, falling upon it.—.
given by Dr. Silvester of the child's injuries, and agree with him—the cause of death was pressure on the vital centre—the fractures must have been caused by direct violence—I saw the yard, but found nothing which was likely to cause the injuries by the child falling.
Cross-examined. I do not agree with Dr. Silvester that the injuries could have been caused by a fall on the step, or upon any brickwork that I saw in the yard—there must have been a definite end to the instrument, whatever it was, in order to cause the fracture—I looked very carefully over the yard and found nothing to account for it—if the woman fell full force on to the child that would be sufficient to drive the bone right into the skull.
GUILTY of manslaughter. Five years' penal servitude.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, January 14th, 1903.
Before Mr. Recorder.
164. ELEANOR SUSANNAH GALE (36) PLEADED GUILTY to abandoning and exposing John Gale Newland, Eric Watson, and an unnamed child under the age of two years, whereby their lives were endangered. Two years hard labour —
(165) ARTHUR GOLDING CAREY (49), to conspiring with GRAHAM BEERE (59) , by false pretences, to obtain large sums of money from such persons as should be induced to make advances on pawnbrokers' contract notes and tickets. Carey having been convicted at this Court on May 18th. 1896, of obtaining money by false pretences as Arthur Jameson.
BEERE PLEADED GUILTY to conspiracy only.
He received a good character. Eighteen months' hard labour.
CAREY— Five years' penal servitude , [Carey pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] and
(166) WILLIAM SAMUEL WOOTTEN (49) , to forging and uttering endorsements to two orders for the payment of £2 and £2 2s. Also to stealing £25, £ 12 10s., £25, £12 10s., £25 and £25, the moneys of Sir Charles Ryan and others, his masters. Also to making false entries in certain books with intent to defraud. Eighteen months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. B. SMITH and MR. SLADE BUTLER Prosecuted.
HENRY JOHN ANDREWS . I am manager to Walter Saville, a piano dealer, of 24, High Street, Stoke Newington—on August loth, between 7 and 8 p.m., the prisoner came to the shop with a woman—they asked for the supply of a piano on the hire purchase system—they were shown several instruments, they selected a rosewood piano, price 24 guineas—I tried the pianos for them—this agreement form was placed before them and the prisoner filled it up in the name of Henry Holland, 85, Leighland Road, South Tottenham—he did not say that the woman was his wife—the form says that he is a householder, that the furniture is his personal property, and that the tenancy is a weekly one—the woman asked that the piano should be delivered the next day as they had some friends coming in—I asked them if their rent was paid up—they said "Yes," and produced
the rent book—the piano was sent next day—the carman's book is signed by Henry Holland—on August 25th I went to 85, Leighland Road, and found that the piano and all the furniture was gone, except a table and two beds—the prisoner was not there—I saw a man named Henry Holland there—I communicated with the police and went again to the house with a detective—we saw Henry Holland and the rent book the prisoner had produced—on November 25th I went with Detective Chandler to 24, Rotherville Road—I saw the prisoner there—I said, "He is the man who obtained the piano"—he said, "Some one has given me away"—I gave him into custody.
JAMES CHANDLER (Detective N.) I received some information and on November 15th went to 85, Leighland Road, with Andrews—there was a carpet and a bed there, the piano was not there—the house was nearly empty—a man named Holland was in charge of it—he is not the prisoner—I took possession of the rent book which I found there—Holland was the doorkeeper—the house is let out in tenancies—it was a brothel kept by a man named Home, who is now doing eighteen months hard labour—on November 25th I went with Andrews to 24, Rotherville Road—I saw the prisoner—Andrews recognised him as the man who had obtained the piano—I said "I am going to arrest you for forging a request whereby you obtained a piano"—I took him to the station and showed him the agreement and application forms—'he said "Yes, that is right, I signed them"—I placed him with six others, and a man named Miller identified him as the man who had sold him the piano.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not hear Miller say anything when he picked you out—the inspector and I might have smiled because he seemed rather nervous.
Re-examined. I got the receipt from Miller which bore the signature of Henry Holland—when the prisoner saw that he said "That is right."
HENRY HOLLAND . In August I was lodging at 85, Leighland Road—there was nobody else there named Holland—I was the porter there—the prisoner lived there—I did not give him authority or permission to sign my name—I did not ask him to order a piano for me—I remember a piano coming—I did not sign the receipt book for it—I paid the rent of the house—I paid it for the other people living there—only the prisoner and the woman lived there—the woman gave me the money for the rent—she is 28 years old—I did not see the piano go away—it was in the house nearly a week—nobody told me why it was taken away so soon—I am a labourer.
Cross-examined. I knew you were supposed to be the woman's husband—I did not know you were getting the piano in my name.
By the COURT. The house was used for immoral purposes—since Miller gave evidence at the police court he has gone out of his mind—he attempted to commit suicide and is now in an asylum.
The prisoner, in a written defence, said that he went to the shop to get the piano with every honest intention, with the exception of signing his name; that he afterwards had a quarrel with the woman and went to live at Manchester; that he heard that the woman had left her address; that he had never sold the piano, and did not know where it had gone.
HENRY HOLLAND (Re-examined by the Prisoner.) You left the house soon after the piano came—you wrote to me and asked me to meet you at Broad Street Station—then you went to Southampton and Manchester—I did not write to you and say that the woman had given up the house and sold the furniture—I have not met her since you have been in prison.
GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Clerkenwell police Court on August 16th, 1900, as George Ross. Six other convictions were proved against him. Three years penal servitude.
168. JOHN NUGENT was again indicted (see page 263) for feloniously wounding Andrew Lunde with intent to resist his lawful apprehension. Second Count, with intent to disable him; Third Count, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.
MR. ROACH Prosecuted.
ANDREW LUNDE . I am a builder, of 5, Ratcliff Street, St. George's—on October 17th, about 8 p.m., I was passing along Russel Court with a friend named Andrew Anderson, a sailor—he is now at sea—two men came up to cuddle us—my friend said "My watch has gone"—the prisoner was one of the men—I saw the chain hanging out of the other man's trousers, he ran away down Gravel Lane—I ran after him—the prisoner came alongside of me—I got a blow on my nose—I took no notice and ran on—the other man ran into Lavender Court—I ran after him and got him out—the crowd was so horrible I could not stand it and I let him go—I went after him again—I caught him and put my hand into his pocket but the watch was not there—the crowd was knocking and kicking me—my nose was broken and I had sixteen marks on my body—I went to the police surgeon—I had two marks on my nose for a fortnight—the prisoner is one of the men who was hitting me and breaking my nose—he was arrested on December 17th—I picked him out from other men—I have known him since he was a boy.
CHARLES GRAHAM GRANT (Divisional Surgeon H.) On October 17th I saw the prosecutor at the station about 8 p.m.—he had a broken nose, two blackened eyes, and complained of pains in his back and various other parts of his body, from kicks and blows—I did not see them, but no doubt the bruises came out afterwards—the broken nose was a recent injury.
WILLIAM QUIDLAND (Detective H.) On October 17th I received information, and on January 14th I saw the prisoner in custody on another charge—he made no reply to this charge—he was put among twelve others and Lundal came and pickedhim out.
GUILTY on all the Counts. He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at the Thames Police Court on November 11th, 1891. Two other convictions were proved against him Six years' penal servitude for the assault , and Twelve months' hard labour for the stealing, to run concurrently.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, January 14th, 1003.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. S. JONES Prosecuted.
THOMAS JAMES WHITTLE . I live at 53, Church Street, Warrington—I was present on June 9th, 1890, at the Parish Church, Warrington, when the prisoner was married to Alice Hutton—lie afterwards lived with his wife near the barracks and the station—he was a colour-sergeant in the King's Liverpool Regiment, and during the following August was put under arrest for a military offence and reduced to the rank of corporal—he came to London, leaving his wife at Warrington, I think during 1891—a boy was born in 1801 and died a few weeks after Lyons'arrival in London—his wife joined him in London, but returned to her mother at Warrington in 1891 or 1892, and he rejoined her there—he was employed as a barman by Peter Walker and Sons for some time, and lived with his wife and mother-in-law—after he left Walker's he was employed by the Castle; Rubber Company at Warrington, as time keeper, during 1892—he lived with his wife till about 1893—two children were born at Warrington—a week or so after he was discharged from the Rubber Company, he came to London, and that is the last we have seen of him—I produce the certificate of his marriage—he is described as a bachelor, of 28 years, and Alice Hutton as a spinster, 23 years of age.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. She went back to Warrington first and you afterwards, because she packed the furniture—you were left to forward it, and when it arrived at Warrington, some valuable articles were missing—this is a doctor's certificate that she is now suffering from enteric fever.
MINNIE EAST NAYLOR . I live at Bath Road, Hounslow—on January 26th, 1001, I went through the form of marriage with Daniel Lyons at the parish church of St. Paul's, Hounslow Heath—this is the certificate—I heard he was a widower—he had not told me so; he did not tell me anything—this child is by him.
ROBERT JOHN SMITH . I am a sergeant in the 6th Battalion of the Middlesex Regiment—I was present on Januray 26th, 1901, at St. Paul's, Hounslow Heath, when the prisoner was married to Minnie East Naylor—I was one of the witnesses who signed the register—this is the certificate.
THOMAS TAYLOR (Detective Sergeant T.) I produced these marriage certificates at the police court—I have compared them with the registers at the various churches—they are correct—I arrested the prisoner about 9 a.m. on December 19th at Manchester—when I told him the charge he said. "I thought my wife was dead, I heard she had died, and also one of the children "I never heard of his inquiring about her.
The prisoner statement before the Magistrate: "I reserve my defence, but it is nearly eight years since I heard my wife. I was told by a friend she was dead. I wrote to her mother for contradiction or confirmation of the report, but received no answer."
The Court directed the jury, as there was no evidence that the prisoner knew or heard anything of his wife's existence for seven years, there was no case.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. ARMSTRONG Prosecuted.
CELESTE CELASCHI (Interpreted.) I live at 2, Eyre Place, Eyre Street Hill—I am an asphalte worker—on the night of Christmas Day, about 12.15 I was with a friend in Clerkenwell—four men came behind us—the prisoners were two of them—they held me—Lyons took my watch—they ran away.
Cross-examined by Lyons. I cannot tell the street in Clerkenwell—I do not know Clerkenwell—I have not lived there—I was about ten metres from the police when I lost my watch and chain.
Cross-examined by Mitchell. You were in front of me and Lyons on my left—you took my arm.
THOMAS SYRATT (109 G.) I was on duty in Clerkenwell Close on Christmas night—I saw the prosecutor with four men round him—they ran away when they saw me—I went towards the prosecutor—he showed me a broken piece of a watch chain—I gave chase after the four men—Constable 42 joined me a little lower down, and afterwards Shearman—Constable 42 and I caught Mitchell, and 400 E. caught Lyons—I took Mitchell to the station after Lyons was arrested.
Cross-examined by Lyons. I was ten to fifteen yards off when—I turned the corner and saw the prosecutor—you had had drink, but you were not drunk.
Cross-examined by Mitchell. You were running when you were stopped—you had had something to drink, but you were not drunk—I did not Jose sight of you—I crossed the road within 200 yards of you, and chased you along the straight road.
SIDNEY SHEARMAN (400 E.) I was on duty on Christmas night at Back Hill, Clerkenwell, with Pearce—I heard a whistle blowing, and saw Lyons running closely followed by Syratt—I gave chase—Lyons ran through Crawford Passage, where I arrested him—on the way to the station he became very-violent—he put his leg between mine and threw me to the ground—before I could regain my feet he gave me a violent blow on my stomach and on my right shin—another constable came and blew his whistle for assistance—we had to put him down and send for the ambulance, he was so violent—it required six constables to take him to the station on the ambulance.
Cross-examined by Lyons. When the whistle was blown I was standing at the corner of Back Hill and Ray Street with 275 and 400 E.—you kicked me in the Farringdon Road on the way to the station—two had hold of you when you knocked me down.
Lyons: defence: I was drunk and heard a whistle blown; I turned to see
what was the matter and the policeman caught hold of me, as I thought, for being drunk; I had a black eye; nothing was found on me; I have served three years in South Africa.
Mitchell's defence: I went on Christmas night from my home in Clap ham to see a friend at Clerkenwell, and was drinking; but I know nothing about the robbery, though I heard a whistle blown; I was too drunk to run.
LYONS— GUILTY (See next case).
MITCHELL— NOT GUILTY .
MR. ARMSTRONG Prosecuted.
ROBERT JOHNSTONE . I live at 13, Emanuel Road, South Hackney—about 1.30 a.m. on December 23rd, I was in Pentonville Road, walking home—Jarman, with three men, hustled me against some shops—they were coming the opposite way—they pushed me against shops—Jarman put one hand over my mouth and the other hand down my right-hand trousers' pocket—he took out between 7s. and 8s., which he handed over to some of the other men—I heard a police whistle, and saw Jarman tussle with a policeman—the other three made off—I went to the police station with the policeman and Jarman—I do not recognise Lyons, but I was right in front of Jarman.
Cross-examined by Jarman. I was not walking with a constable when I first saw you—when I saw the constable with you I said, "That is one of them"—I was going towards the Angel—you were taken close to me.
CHARLES CAPES (331 G.) I was on duty in Pentonville Road on the early morning of December 23rd—I watched the prisoners and two others from 1.15 to 1.30—they were together for about a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes they were loitering about—I saw them stop a woman—she escaped and ran down Pentonville Road—I next saw them strike the prosecutor—I saw money passed by Johnson—I still watched them about half—the width of the road off, only a few yards away—I was in a dark place and they were under a big lamp, an electric light—I saw them hustle the prosecutor against the door of the Belvedere public-house—Lyons held one arm, and a man not in custody held his other arm—Jarman placed his hand over the prosecutor's mouth and his other hand in his right hand trousers' pocket—I ran across the road and knocked Lyons over—then I apprehended Jarman and took him to the station—I identified Lyons on January 30th at Clerkenwell Police Court.
Cross-examined by Jarman. I took you when you had just done the robbery, and were passing money to a very tall man not in custody—you did not run away because I held you.
Cross-examined by Lyons. When I identified you I said, "This is the man, but he is dressed differently to what he was when I last saw him."
Jarman's statement before the Magistrate: "I know nothing at all about this affair. Previous to my being arrested by the constable I was coming along Pentonville Road about one a.m. when I was hustled by
three or four strangers, one knocked my hat off and threw it into the road. As I was stooping to pick it up, the men surrounded me and took all my halfpence, about 14s. or 15s., and tore the pocket out. I turned and struck one of them. I have a mark on my left hand. Soon after coming along I was passing by the Belvedere public-house, "when the prosecutor and the constable came up to me. The prosecutor said, 'Here is one of them.' I protested my innocence to the policeman. He took no notice of me But took me the station." He repeated in substance this defence on Oath
Lyons' defence: I know nothing about it.
Jarman then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Clerkenwell in April, 1897, in the name of O'Sullivan. Two other convictions were proved against him. Both prisoners were stated to be the associates of thieves. Four years' penal servitude each.
FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, January 14th, 15th, and 16th, 1903. Before J. A. Rentoul, Esq., K.C.
172. WILLIAM HAROLD JOHNSON (69) and ANNIE ELIZABETH WEBSTER WILSON (42) , Conspiring and agreeing together to obtain by false pretences from D. H. Evans and Company, Limited, goods value £64 1s. 6d.; from Crisp and Company, Limited, goods value £36 13s. 5d.; and from Satterfield, Bye, and Company, Limited, goods value £9 8s. 2 1/2 d. with intent to defraud.
MR. CHARLES MATHEWS MR. HUMPHREYS, and MR. BOYD conducted the Prosecution;
MR. WILDEY WRIGHT appeared for Johnson, and MR. CRISP, K.C. and MR. SWANTON for Wilson.
PERCY GREEN . I am secretary of Messrs. Satterfield, Bye and Company, silk mercers and drapers, of Manchester—we opened an account with Mrs. Wilson in April, 1901, after having received a satisfactory reference from a Mr. Wisbey, who Wilson said was her solicitor—between April 15th and 24th, goods were supplied to the amount of £9 8s. 2 1/2 d.—on the 25th we received a large order from Mrs. Wilson, and instructed our solicitors to make further inquiries, after which we did not execute the order—amongst the goods supplied were several articles of men's clothing—we applied for payment of the account, but did not succeed in getting it, and a writ was issued—we obtained judgment and execution was issued at the address of Mrs. Wilson, 78, Hamlet Gardens. Ravenscourt Park, W.—the goods were then claimed by Johnson, and on the advice of our solicitors we did not contest the claim—we have never received any part of our account or any of the costs incurred.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. Mrs. Wilson's first letter to us has been lost—she returned goods to the value of 17s. 6d.—some goods were sent on approbation—we did not think of taking criminal proceedings until Messrs. Evans wrote to us about November last—I cannot prove that execution was put in for the debt.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. "I cannot swear that the order we refused to execute was not merely an estimate for a tea gown and a poplin dress.
Re-examined. I did not know that the two prisoners were living to gether at the same address.
FRANK WILLIAM STOREY . I am clerk to Messrs. Chester, Broome, and Griffithes, of 36, Bedford Row, the London agents of Messrs. Crofton, Craven, and Worthington, of Manchester—on April 25th, 1901, we received a communication from them, in consequence of which I went to 456, Mansion House Chambers—I took Exhibit 21 with me—the name of Wisbey was on the door—I saw Johnson—I asked to see Mr. Wisbey, and was told that he was not in—I showed Exhibit 21 to Johnson, and asked him if Mr. Wisbey knew about it—he said he did, and that I need not trouble him; but that he had written it himself as managing clerk—I said I preferred to see Mr. Wisbey himself, and I made an appointment for the next day—Johnson wanted me to leave the reference with him, and said that he would get it countersigned by Mr. Wisbey, but I did not—I kept the appointment for the next day, but was not able to see Mr. Wisbey, a and made a further appointment for the following day, April 27th—I was then introduced to him—I spoke to him on the matter, but he seemed dazed and not to understand me—I asked him to sign the reference, but Johnson suggested that a copy should be made, and Mr. Wisbey wrote a copy—I took the two papers away with me—I telegraphed at once to the Manchester solicitors, and wrote the same night.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I can only give the effect of my interview with Johnson, I do not pretend to remember the exact words.
GEORGE WESTON . I am caretaker at Hamlet Gardens Mansions, Ravens-court Park—I remember Johnson taking No. 78 in July, 1900—I remember Mrs. Wilson coming to reside at the flat some time after Johnson took it—she remained there till February last—about that time Johnson got behind in his rent, and the bailiffs were put in—Mrs. Wilson then removed some of the furniture saying that it belonged to her—the distress was paid out.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I did not know that Johnson had given notice to quit the flat—I remember Mr. Johnson being very ill while at the flat.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. I am about the flats every day—I should know of any furniture going in or out—I should think Johnson had £200 worth of furniture—I do not know if Mrs. Wilson took any furniture to the flat—she went there about six months after Johnson took possession.
GEORGE FOWLER . I am secretary to Mansion House Chambers, Limited—13, Sise Lane and 11, Queen Victoria Street are both entrances to the building—in March, 1898, Johnson became tenant of offices 453 and 456—from September, 1889 he had been tenant of offices 412 and 413, and on the door were the names of W. H. Johnson, the Commercial Assets Purchase Trust. Limited, the London Press Bureau, the Ladies' Business Agency, and Chas. Bassett—on the door of 453 and 456 were the names of H. C. Wisbey and John Pater.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. The rent of 412 and 413 was £70, and of 453 and 45G, £80 a year—I do not recollect the name of Wisbey
being on the door of 412 and 413—we do not object to a tenant sub-letting unless we have any special reason—Nos. 453 and 456 do not communicate—there is a pigeon-hole communication, but no doorway—the windows of 456 look on to the corridor—I do not recollect seeing the name of the Commercial Assets Purchase Trust, Limited, on them—I do not recollect seeing "Private. W. H. Johnson "on the door of No. 453.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. I have repeatedly had occasion to go into Johnson's offices—he seemed to me to be carrying on a perfectly respectable business.
Re-examined. We were never applied to by Johnson for permission to sub-let.
JOHN LAING HALES . I am a clerk in the accountant's department of Messrs. D. H. Evans and Company, Limited, drapers and silk mercers, of Oxford Street—in May, 1901, we received a letter from Mrs. Webster Wilson asking to open an account, and giving as a reference a Mr. Wisbey, a solicitor of Mansion House Chambers—the letter was handed to me for the purpose of taking up the reference—a day or so after I went to Mansion House Chambers to see Mr. Wisbey—I saw the name of Wisbey on the door—a youth showed me into an inner room where I saw Johnson—I asked him if he was Mr. Wisbey; he said yes; I told him I had called in reference to Mrs. Wilson's letter to know if she was good for £50 credit; he said that she had an income of £100 a year, besides a salary of £120 a year as manageress of the Ladies Business Agency, 61, Regent Street, and that she was safe for £50—I" reported the conversation to my employers, and an account was opened—I, personally, had no authority to give credit—in September, 1901, I called at the offices of the Ladies' Business Agency to try and get some money—I saw Mrs. Wilson, but did. Not succeed in getting any—I have called three or four times since, but have never received any money—the account was afterwards put into the hands of Mr. Gery, the solicitor.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. It is not my usual business to take up references—I took up this one because I happened to be going to the City at the time—I am positive I was shown into an inner room at Mansion House Chambers—I did not notice "Private. Mr. W. H. Johnson "on the door of the office—I am positive that I asked Johnson if he was Mr. Wisbey, and he said, "Yes"—if I had known he was not I should not have accepted his statements—I was present before Master Lawford on December 2nd, 1901, when Mrs. Wilson was examined as to her means—Johnson then acted for her—that was the first time I learned Johnson's right name—I saw the name of Wisbey on the door at Mansion House Chambers, but I cannot remember the initials—I believe the statements made to me by Johnson to be false.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. In my interview with Johnson he did not say anything to me about Mrs. Wilson's divorce matters—I first learned that she received £100 a year alimony at the examination before Master. Lawford—I also heard then that she was bringing an action for libel against Mr. Wilson—she has paid £10 off her account—criminal proceedings were not commenced till last November; I do not know why.
Re-examined. Mrs. Wilson I think afterwards abandoned her libel action—I have no power to institute a prosecution on behalf of Messrs. Evans.
JOHN LLOYD . I am an accountant in the employ of Messrs. Evans and Company—in May, 1901, we received a letter from Mrs. Wilson asking for permission to open an account, and giving as a reference the name of Mr. Wisbey, a solicitor—the letter has been lost—I handed it to Mr. Hales to make enquiries—in consequence we wrote to Mrs. Wilson saying that a monthly account might be opened—goods to the value of £74 1s. 6d. were supplied between May 14th and September 30th—£10 has been paid off—several articles of gentleman's clothing were supplied.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I have power to authorise accounts to be opened—this account was opened on the strength of Mr. Hales' inquiries—I think his report was written, but I cannot be certain—the gentleman's things supplied to Mrs. Wilson amounted to about £5—an account was delivered the first week of every month—I do not think Messrs. Evans, Limited, agreed with Mrs. Wilson to take instalments of £10 a month.
Cross-examined by MR. SWANTON. I was censured by the managing director for allowing the account to run to such a high figure—the directors are responsible for instituting criminal proceedings, not me—Mr. Gery has been solicitor to the firm for some years.
GEORGE BERTIE BROOKS . I am a solicitor, and managing clerk to Mr. A.R. Gery at his West End office—he also has an office in the City—he was appointed solicitor to Messrs. Evans and Company when the company was formed in 1894—I had charge of the civil proceedings of Messrs. Evans against Mrs. Wilson—I produce the writ dated October 21st, 1901—we got judgment on November 26th—on December 2nd Mrs. Wilson was examined before Master Lawford as to her means, and we then came to the conclusion that we could get nothing out of her—Johnson attended on her behalf—I produce an office copy of her depositions—an attempt was made the same day to garnishee her salary, but we have never got anything.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. Mrs. Wilson was not re-examined before the Master—it is not true that I objected to Johnson re-examining her on the ground that he was not a solicitor—I have searched the roll of solicitors as far back as 1876, but have been unable to find William Harold Johnson as a solicitor—I did not hear of Mrs. Wilson's libel action until the examination—she then told me that she had withdrawn the proceedings and that Messrs. Law and Worssam, the solicitors for Mr. Wilson, were going to pay her a considerable sum of money—I went to them to see if it was true.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. I knew Mr. Wisbey was a solicitor on the record, and I knew that Johnson was representing him at the examination—I do not think Mrs. Wilson was ill when before the Master—there was an application for an adjournment, but that was on the ground that she was a witness in a divorce action, and not that she was ill.
Re-examined. I had no reason for objecting to Johnson re-examining Mrs. Wilson if he had wished to.
ARTHUR HENRY JOHN WALKER . I am a clerk in the employ of the Economic Bank, Limited, 18, Bishopsgate Street Within—on July 24th, 1900, Johnson opened an account with us in his own name—I produce the application form—on September 7th of the same year he opened another account in the name of the Ladies' Business Agency, Limited, of 11, Queen Victoria Street—I also produce the application form for the opening of that account—nobody had authority to draw on that account except Johnson, till January 26th, 1901, when we received instructions to allow Mrs. Wilson to draw—the last cheque drawn upon the account was on February 4th, 1901—in January, 1901, Johnson opened a third account with us in the name of Wisbey and Company, of 456, Mansion House Chambers—only Johnson had power to draw upon that account—I never saw Mr. Wisbey—that account is now practically closed.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. Johnson had no account with us before July, 1900—I think the fact of a man having three banking accounts at the same bank is a proof of bona fides.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. The account in the name of the Ladies' Business Agency was opened with a payment of £132 2s. 9d. we have no means of knowing to whom that money belonged—it was paid in by a cheque drawn on the London and South Western Bank, by Wainwright and Whitehead, stockbrokers.
EBENEZER CHAPMAN . I am a clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies—I produce the file of the Ladies' Business Agency, Limited, showing that the company was registered in April, 1892—its address was 413 Mansion House Chambers—in the return for 1894 W. H. Johnson is described as the secretary, pro tem, and is so described in the next six returns—on March 29th, 1901, the registered office was changed to 61, Regent Street—the notice of change of address is signed "Annie Elizabeth Webster Wilson, manageress"—the total number of shares issued was 242, of which 120 were held by W. H. Johnson—I also produce the file of the Commercial Assets Purchase Trust, Limited—it was incorporated in 1889, the address being 60, Chancery Lane—in November, 1889, it was changed to 412, Mansion House Chambers—the notice of change of address is signed "W. H. Johnson, manager"—every return except for the year 1890 is signed "W. H. Johnson."
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. The returns of the Ladies' Business Agency have all been in proper form.
EDWARD DREW (Detective Inspector C.) On November 29th I called at 27, Chancery Lane, and there-saw Johnson—I told him I was a police officer and held a warrant for his arrest—I read it to him, he replied "I never defrauded anyone"—I asked him where Mrs. Wilson was, and he denied all knowledge of her—he was then sent to Vine Street—in consequence of information I received, I went to 40, Canonbury Square, Islington, and there saw Wilson—she was being detained by another officer whom I had sent in advance—I told her I was a police officer and held a warrant for her arrest as well as Johnson 's, who, I told her, was in custody—I cautioned
her, and she said, "I did not conspire to defraud; I had an income of £100 a year from my husband; I only met Johnson about two years ago last January, through an advertisement, and thinking he was a solicitor gave him my affairs in connection with my divorce and libel matters to look after and arrange for me; at that time he was at Mansion House Chambers; I afterwards found that he was not a solicitor, but paid a Mr. Wisbey for the use of his name, and now he pays another solicitor for the use of his name, a Mr. Pater, but he told me the other day that he was going to dispense with Mr. Pater, and have a Mr. Ranger; I always understood he was able to manage my affairs; the reason I got the goods from Evans was that I was going into the Ladies' Business Agency in Regent Street, and wanted suitable clothes to wear; just as I got some light things my sister died, and then I had to get some black; my little girl was also ordered out of London for the winter, and I had to get some suitable clothes for her; I gave Wisbey as my reference to Evans, as I looked upon him as my solicitor; I cannot remember who the other reference was"—I asked her what had become of the property, and she said that Johnson had had some of it, and that some of it was worn out—when I arrested the prisoners the only charge was that of defrauding Messrs. Evans—at 27, Chancery Lane, I found four receipts for rent at 61, Regent Street—the dates range from August 31st, 1901, to April 24th, 1902.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I arrested Johnson about 2 p.m., and Mrs. Wilson between 5 and 6 the same evening—Sergeant Burton was with her about two hours before I saw her.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. I believe Mrs. Wilson thought she was speaking the truth when she made the statement to me.
ELIZABETH WILSON TOMM . I live with my husband, James Tomm, at 16a, Grand Parade, Highgate—on February 28th, 1902, I let the upper part of my house to the two prisoners, after receiving satisfactory references—Wilson told me that her name was Gurney, and that she had a business In Regent street—they came in the afternoon, but the furniture did not Come till 3 o'clock next morning—when it came I asked Mr. Gurney where Mrs. Gurney was—he said, "My wife is very ill and cannot come down"—They remained in the flat till August 25th—during that time several letters Came addressed to Mr. Johnson—I asked Mr. Gurney if they were for him, and he said, "Yes," and took them—letters also came addressed to Mrs. Webster Wilson, and Mrs. Gurney told me that that was a friend of hers who had letters addressed there—later on she told me that that was the name she carried on business in at Regent Street—she also told me that Mr. Gurney was her second husband—they left the flat owing a month's rent, and Mrs. Gurney told me she would send it on to me, but she never has done so—prior to leaving, the furniture had been taken by the Sheriff.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I only had one conversation with Mr. Gurney—this is the first time I have said that Mrs. Gurney told me that Mrs. Webster Wilson was a friend of hers who had letters addressed at her place—I was not asked the question at the police court.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. Mrs. Gurney once or twice spoke—to me about her divorce affairs—I know that the furniture was seized by the Sheriff in the action by Messrs. Crisp—I always addressed the male prisoner as Mr. Gurney—Mrs. Gurney's sister frequently called upon her and stayed from Saturday to Monday.
JOHN LESLIE . I am a clerk in the employ of Messrs. Crisp and Co. Limited, general drapers and furnishers, of Seven Sisters Road, Holloway—they also have a provision market—on April 9th we received from Mrs. Wilson an application in the name of Gurney to open an account, and giving as a reference a Mr. Pater, solicitor, of 456, Mansion House Chambers—the reference was satisfactory, and an account was opened upon the 12th—the total amount of the account is £36 13s. 5d.—it was only running five weeks—most of the goods were ordered personally by Mrs. Gurney in the shop—I recognise the female prisoner as Mrs. Gurney—we applied several times for payment, but never got anything, and eventually put the matter into Mr. Gery's hands; he is solicitor to the firm.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I do not think any men's wearing apparel was supplied—they are chiefly household goods.
JAMES ROBERT SMITH . I am a solicitor and managing clerk to Mr. A. R. Gery, of 37, Walbrook—Mr. Brooks is his managing clerk at his West End office—in the beginning of June, 1902, Messrs. Crisp and Co. put the matter of Mrs. Gurney's debt of £36 13s. 5d. into Mr. Gery's hands—I had the conduct of the proceedings—a writ was issued on June 6th and judgment obtained on July 9 th—the costs were taxed at £19 5s. 4d.—execution was issued on July 22nd at Mrs. Gurney's address, 16a, Grand Parade, Highgate—the goods were then claimed by Johnson—Messrs. Crisp contested the claim, and an interpleader issue was taken—it came on for trial on October 20th—Johnson then withdrew his claim to the goods, and Messrs. Crisp became entitled to them—they were sold by the Sheriff, and realised £48 19s. 6d., and after deducting the costs, £3 16s. 4d. was paid to Messrs. Crisp and Co.—the taxed costs of the interpleader issue amounted to £52 17s. 5d. which Johnson ought to have paid, but which Messrs. Crisp have had to pay—I know Johnson's writing—Exhibits 8, 10, 12, 21, 23, 37, and the three applications to the Economic Bank for the opening of the three accounts are all in his writing—I do not know Mrs. Wilson's writing—I know Elkin's writing—I told him to be here, but I-have not seen him.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. You appeared for Johnson at the trial of the interpleader issue—I think you stated then that you thought he had a perfectly good claim to the furniture, but that you had advised him to withdraw it to avoid bringing in third parties' names—I did not subpoena Elkin to be here.
Cross-examined by MR. CRISP. If there had been no interpleader issue proceedings by Johnson, Messrs. Crisp would have received £12.
Cross-examined by MR. WRIGHT. I was at Chancery Lane when Johnson was arrested—I then went to Canonbury Square and detained Mrs. Wilson till Inspector Drew arrived—there was only one warrant for the two prisoners.
Wilson, in her defence, on oath, said that she had been educated abroad; that when she was eighteen years of age she went through a form of marriage with a Mr. Gurney, but on learning that the licence for marriage had been obtained by a false declaration she separated from him at the church door, and had not lived with him; that she made the acquaintance of Mr. Wilson and married him, after being advised by Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., that her marriage with Mr. Gurney was null and void, and that she was free; that she lived with Wilson sixteen years; that she believed her father, who was a nautical expert in receipt of an income of £8,000 or £9,000 a year, was very wealthy, but on his death she found that he was insolvent; that Mr. Wilson knew of her marriage with Mr. Gurney; that he then instituted divorce proceedings and obtained a decree of nullity, and allowed her £50 a year, and £50 a year for the child of the marriage; that Mr. Gurney had then gone to India, and, believing himself free, had married again; that she was then thinking of instituting a nullity suit against him, and saw an article on divorce in a newspaper; that she sent in a statement of her case to the address given, and thereby came into contact with Johnson; that through him she was appointed manageress of the Ladies Business Agency; that she paid £130 into the business; that she was to get a salary of £120 per annum, but had not received a penny; and that when she obtained the goods in question she had her income, and prospects of heavy damages in a libel action she was bringing against Mr. Wilson.
GUILTY . The Jury strongly recommended Wilson to mercy. One conviction was proved against Johnson. JOHNSON, two years imprisonment in the second division; WILSON, five days' imprisonment.
173. LESLIE TRAVERS (36) PLEADED GUILTY to obtaining credit from various persons by fraud. He was again indicted for obtaining by false pretences from various persons several sums of 10s. 6d., with intent to defraud.
MR. A. GILL, for the prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY . One year's hard labour on the first indictment.
OLD COURT.—Thursday and Friday, January 10th and 16th, 1903. Before Mr. Justice Darling.
MR. MATHEWS and MR. BODKIN Prosecuted,MR. GUY STEPHENSON appeared for Walters, and MR. LEYCESTER for Sach.
as Mrs. Laming—she lodged with me at Church Road—she came about the end of August and stayed till about the end of September—the general topic of conversation when she was talking to me was the nursing and adoption of children—she wrote two letters while with me—one was posted and one was not—the one which was posted was addressed to Mrs. Sach at Finchley.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. Shortly after she came to me I knew that she was married and living apart from her husband—I do not know that she took the name of Laming in order to avoid the molestations of her husband—I am still under the impression that her real name is Laming.
ELIZABETH LOWE . I live at 7, Crossley Street, Islington—I used to let rooms sometimes—I know Walters as Mrs. Merith—she lodged with me from October 2nd to October 29th—she said she was a midwife and nurse—she said she had been stung in her foot by a mosquito, and that the doctor at Claymore House, Finchley, had ordered her to lay up for a month—she gave me a card (Read) "Mrs. J. Sach, certificated midwife and nurse, Claymore House, Hertford Road, East Finchley. Private nursing home"—after she had been with me a little time she said she expected a baby to be brought to her, and that she was going to take it to a lady to be adopted, and would I mind it being in the house one night, if it came at night time—she said Mrs. Sach was to bring the baby—she told me that ladies went to Claymore House to be confined, and that the babies were taken away to be adopted by ladies—I went as far as Highgate one day in a tram with her, at her request—I left her at Highgate—on her return home she said she had been to Claymore House, and had attended a very bad case while she was there—she asked me if I would put a card "Monthly nurse" in my window—she said she would not go back to Claymore House if she could get nursing cases outside—she seemed displeased with it—she said she had to do all the dirty work and the other one reaped all the benefit—she had an ulcerated throat while with me—she left me rather unexpectedly on October 29th.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. She said she had to do all the hard work and Mrs. Sach reaped all the benefit—I did not see Walters' husband. Frederick Lowe. I am the son of the last witness—I remember Walters lodging at our house as Mrs. Merith—she left on October 29th and I went to Claymore House to make inquiries—I saw Sach there—I asked her if she knew Mrs. Merith or Meritt—she said she did not know such a person—I described Walters as best I could—she said she did not know her—I showed her a card—Walters had written some letters while she was with us—I posted one of them—I told Sach that I had posted a letter to Mrs. Sach at Claymore House—she said she had not received a letter from Crossley Street—I said someone must be telling a lie—when I showed her the card she said anyone could get hold of that as she sent them all over the world—there were two other women present, and Sach asked them if they knew anybody staying at Crossley Street in that name—they said "No."
Finchley—I knew Sach as a customer—at first her address was 4, Stanley Road, Finchley, and last summer she went to Claymore House, Hertford oad—an indicating number is given to each customer's washing—Sach's number was F236—I always mark the things myself—this child's nightgown (Produced) is marked F236 in my handwriting.
ADA CHARLOTTE GALLEY . I am a servant and live at Stanley Villa, Finchley—last year I became pregnant, and in August I saw an advertisement in Dalton's Newspaper—it was like this one only that the address was Hertford Road—(Read) "Accouchement, before and during. Skilled nursing. Home comforts. Baby can remain. Nurse 4, Stanley Road, East Finchley"—I wrote to the advertiser and got an answer—I went to Claymore House and saw Sach—I had some conversation with her—I asked what were the fees—the terms agreed upon were £1 1s. a week, and £3 3s. a week during confinement—I went to stay there on September 24th—there were some other women in the house, amongst them was a Miss Pardoe—after I had been there a short time Sach asked me if I would like the child I was to bear, adopted—I said I should, and asked her how much it would cost—she said £25 or £30—I said I did not think I could afford that—Sach said she would write to the lady who was going to take it, and see if she could get it done for less—she did not tell me the lady's name or address—she said she was a lady of good position—one morning Sach came in and said that the lady would take the child for £25—I said I would try and get it—I wrote to the child's father, and when I heard from him I told Sach I would pay the £25—whilst I was waiting for my confinement I made some baby clothes—none of them were marked with my initials—on Saturday, November 15th, my child was born, about 8 a.m.—it was a difficult labour and Dr. Wylie was called in—Sach attended me—I only saw the baby for a moment before it was washed—Sach said it was a boy—it was taken out of the room and in the afternoon I heard a child crying in the next room—the day before that I had given Sach a telegram addressed to the child's father, and about 7.30 p.m. he came to Claymore House—on Sunday morning Dr. Wylie came and saw me—Sach was present—the baby was not there—Dr. Wylie asked where it was—Sach said that my sister had it at Holloway—I did not say anything—after the doctor had gone I asked Sach if the child had gone—she said it had gone that morning I stayed in the house until the police came—I had no more conservation with Sach about the child—I do not recognise Walters—I do not think I saw her at the house—this bundle of baby's clothing and this square (Produced) are mine—the square is marked "A. G. G."—the other things I made for my baby—this (Produced) is my book in which the payments I made were entered.
Cross-examined by MR. LEYCESTER. When I saw the advertisement. I was influenced by the words "Baby can remain"—I had already thought of getting the child adopted—I do not remember telling Sach that whatever happened I must get rid of the baby—I wanted to have it adopted—I did not say I must get a home for it even if it cost me £50 or £60—I was conscious during the afternoon of the day that I was confined—Sach was looking after me and was in and out the whole of the afternoon.
Mr.----. I swear that my correct name and address are on this card (Produced)—I have known Miss Galley for some time and in consequence of our intimacy last year she became pregnant—it was with my knowledge that she went to Claymore House to be confined—on November 15th I received a telegram, and in consequence went to Claymore House about 7.30 p.m.—in consequence of something I had heard from Miss Galley I took with me £25 in bank notes, Nos. 09978 to 09982, dated September 3rd, 1902—I saw Sach there and handed her the notes—I got this receipt—the body of it is in my writing—Sach signed it in my presence—she asked me if I would like to see the baby—I said "Yes," and went into the kitchen and saw it—I did not ask Sach when the baby would leave the house, but she told me it would be taken away the following morning—I saw Miss Galley and then left the house.
ROSINA PARDOE . I am single, and a domestic servant, of Stanley Villa, Finchley—last year I found myself pregnant—I saw an advertisement in The People, and in consequence I wrote to Claymore House—I subsequently called there and saw Sach—the terms arranged were £1 1s. a week, and £3 3s. a week for a fortnight during the confinement—when I got to Claymore House, Sach asked me what I was going to do with the baby—I said I was going to have it put out to nurse—she said she knew ladies who would adopt it if I would agree—I had seen the words "Baby can remain "in the advertisement—I considered the matter of the adoption—subsequently Sach said she still had ladies who would adopt it if I would agree to it—I afterwards agreed—she said she knew a lady who would adopt it for £30—I asked who the ladies were—she said they did not like the mothers to know their names or where they lived in case at any time the mothers wanted to take them from the ladies who had adopted them, and that I should have to sign a paper giving up all claim to the child—she said they were well-to-do ladies who had no families and wanted children to adopt—I asked her what, the money was for; I thought if the ladies were wealthy ladies £30 would not be wanted and she said the ladies liked to buy presents for the babies—I agreed to pay £30 and asked Sach what clothes I should require—she said I should want a full set, and I made a full set—she said it was not the quantity which was wanted but that they must be very good—she said she kept sets in the house at £3 3s. a set—I said I preferred to make them, and I made them while I was at Claymore House—on Wednesday, November 12th, about 8.30 a.m. my baby was born—Sach attended to me—I had no doctor—the baby was a girl—Sach took it straight away—she just lifted it up for me to see and then took it downstairs to wash it—she brought it back and told me to kiss it good-bye—I did so—it was taken downstairs and I never saw it again—in the afternoon Sach came up and asked me for the paper which I had written out, to give to the lady when she came to take the baby away—I gave it to her and asked her to ask the lady for a receipt, but I never got one—I had written to the father of the child, and by the 14th I had the £30—there were two £10 notes and two £5 notes—I gave them to Sach—I told her that I hoped, the baby would be good and that they would be kind to it—she assured me that they would be very kind—I did not ask
if the child was in the house then because Sach had told me about five o'clock on the Wednesday that the lady had been down to fetch the child—on Sunday, November 16th I was not so well and asked Sach if I might see a doctor—Dr. Wylie came and saw me—Sach came in with him—he asked what was the matter and examined me—he then turned to Sach and asked where the baby was—she said at once, "Oh, her mother has taken it"—I did not contradict her because I thought she did not let the doctor know all about it—I remember Miss Galley coining and the baby being born on Saturday, November 15th—I heard it crying—on the 16th I heard a knock at the door, and later on I saw Sach when she brought up my breakfast—I said, "You have had an early visitor," and she said, "Yes, the lady has been to take away Miss Galley's baby"—on the Saturday I had asked her if Miss Galley's baby had gone, and she said it was much too cold and damp for the baby to go out, and she said she had sent a telegram to tell the lady to come on the Sunday morning to fetch it—these clothes (Produced) are some of those I made—this shawl and this flannel gown are what I provided for the child—this is my rent book—I have seen Walters in Sach's kitchen.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. I have only seen Walters once.
Cross-examined by MR. LEYCESTER. I gave the shawl to Sach to wrap the baby in—I did not mind whether it went away with the baby or not—when I went to Sach's I had already made up my mind that it would be necessary to find a home for the child—I could not keep it with me—the conversation about it began by my asking Sach what "Baby can be left meant, then she told me that she knew ladies who would adopt children—I was still in bed when Miss Galley's child was born—Sach was not in and out of my room during the afternoon of the day when Miss Galley's child was born—she brought up my tea, but I did not see her from dinner time till tea time—she came in about six o'clock, and between seven and eight—she told me that the father of Miss Galley's child had been—she stayed in my room while he was with Miss Galley.
Mr.—. My name and address are on this piece of paper—I swear they are correct—I know Miss Pardoe—I knew of her going to Claymore House and her object in going there—I was in communication with her by letter while she was there, and on November 14th I sent her £30 in Bank of England notes—two £10 notes, numbers 49172 and 49173, dated May 12, 1902, and two £5 notes, 33192 and 33193, dated August 25th, 1902.
By the COURT. I am married.
ALEXANDER WYLIE . I am a medical practitioner of Fortice Green Road, Finchley—I know Sach—I attended Miss Galley on November 15th—it was a difficult delivery; I used forceps, the use of which almost always causes some bruising to the child's head—the child was a healthy boy—next day I saw Miss Galley again—Sach was present—I asked where the baby was—Sach replied, "Her sister has it at Holloway"—I saw Miss Pardoe in another room—Sach came with me—Miss Pardoe had recently had a baby—I asked where it was—Sach replied, "Her mother has got it"—about November 18th I was shown the dead body of a male child
in the mortuary—it resembled the child I had delivered Miss Galley of—it had a bruise on its head which was likely to be caused by forceps.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. There was a bruise on each side of the child's head—sometimes considerable pressure has to be used when using forceps.
Cross-examined by MR. LEYCESTER. I am not the nearest doctor to Claymore House—I do not know that I am the regular medical attendant at the house—I went there for difficult cases, and if they left their fee before I started—this case was a difficult one.
Re-examined. I have been to Claymore House thirteen or fourteen times to deliver women, besides Miss Galley, within about eighteen months or perhaps less—I went to 4, Stanley Road, before I went to Claymore House—I believe the same business was carried on by Sach at Stanley Road as that at Claymore House—I think I have seen some of the children at Claymore House after I have delivered them—I cannot say how long they stayed in the house or at Stanley Road—some stayed a fortnight some a week, and some probably less.
By the COURT. I am perfectly certain I did not injure the child's head the use of the forceps.
THOMAS WILLIAM HOOD . I lived at 149, Queen's Road, Plaistow—I now live at 27, Upper Road, Plaistow—I used to call at 20, Glasgow Road—I saw Walters there—she went by the name of Laming—as far as I can remember she was there from May, 1901, to June, 1902.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. I saw her husband there—they lived there as Mr. and Mrs. Laming—they separated while living there.
MINNIE SPENCER . I am wife of William Spencer, of 11, Danbury Street, Islington—that house is kept by Mr. and Mrs. Seal, a police-constable and his wife, who take in lodgers, of whom I am one—on October 29th Walters came to lodge there—she told me she had a pension of 15s. a week, and had been a nurse at St. Thomas's Hospital, and that she was going to have baby, which she was going to transfer to a lady—she said the baby was to come from her friend Maude, and she was going to transfer it to a lady at Piccadilly, who was going to give £100 for it, that she was to have 30s. for transferring it, and that the mother of the baby was to get the £100 less the 30s.—she told me that she herself was a widow—she stayed in the house till November 12th, and on that day, between 10 and 11 a.m., she showed me a telegram—this is the original (Read): "Walters, 11, Danbury Street, Islington, London. To-night, at five o'clock"—the place of dispatch is East Finchley, and on the back there is no name of sender, but 'Claymore House'—Walters said she was going to fetch the baby that she had spoken to me about—she did not say where she was going to get it from—I was at home about 6.30 p.m. the same day—when Walters came home she was carrying a baby (Rosina Pardoe's child)—she said, "I have got my baby, you see"—I took it in my arms and asked what it was—she said, "It is a boy"—I asked where its bottle was—she said, "They don't give me bottles where that comes from"—she said it would become an heir—I asked how old it was—she said, "About a week"—I remarked to her how healthy it looked—I have a child of my own—its face looked very red,
and it looked to me as if it had not been born very long—she asked me if I would fetch it a bottle, a small tin of Nestle's, and a baby's teat, which I did—she gave me £1 to pay for them—she then asked me to fetch her a bottle of chlorodyne and a pennyworth of carbolic fluid—I fetched them, and paid for them out of the money she gave me—I handed them to her—as far as I know, the baby slept that night in her bedroom—next day I went into her room—I see the baby on the bed covered over—I could not see the baby itself; I saw there was something there; I asked Walters for the baby—she said, "It is asleep"—I went into the room again later on—Walters was in the room—there was still something covered over with the clothes—I asked her if I could nurse the baby—she said, "It is asleep, and I want you to post a letter for me"—she gave me a letter to take to the post—I noticed it was addressed to Mrs. Sach, Claymore House, Hertford Road, East Finchley—I did not succeed in seeing the child on the Thursday—I asked her when she was going to take the baby away—she said, "I do not know; it may be Friday; but Friday being unlucky, I do not think I will take it on a Friday"—next day, Friday, I was in the kitchen with Mrs. Seal—whilst we were talking about Walters she came in—she had no boots on—she was carrying a few clothes which she had aired for Mrs. Seal—she may have heard what we were saying when she came in—about 10 a.m. Walters asked me to go and buy her some flannelette, and gave me a florin to pay for it—I went out and got it, and returned about eleven—I did not find Walters there then, she had left the house—I went to her bedroom—I did not see the baby—the something which had been lying on the bed the day before had gone—I saw the flannel wrapping there which the baby had worn on the Wednesday, and a baby's hat—I did not see Walters again that day—I had not heard the baby crying or giving any sound of life after Wednesday—on Saturday, November 15th, another telegram came for Walters, and a short time afterwards I went to her bedroom—I gave her 9 1/2 d. change, and asked her if she had got the flannelette downtsairs—she said "Yes; you should see the little baby with its laces and muslin"—seeing the telegram on the table, I said, "Is that about it?"—she said, "No, it is something else"—I did not see that telegram—I did not see Walters again that night till about 9.30 p.m., when she returned to the house, and she called to me to come downstairs and see the new baby—I went down to her room—she had a different baby lying on her bed—she said it was a girl—she said the other one had suffered from diarrhoea—then she said, "This one is going to a coastguard's at South Kensington; the mother gets £10 for the child, and I get 10s. for taking it to the lady"—she said the cause of the diarrhoea in the other child was double rupture, in consequence of which she had flown to the doctor's with it—the clothes were turned back from the second baby when it was on the bed, so that I could see it—it seemed very healthy, and had not been born many hours—I left the room then, but returned the next day, when I saw something lying under the bedclothes, much in the same way as I had seen the first baby—I did not hear the second baby making any sound on the Sunday—I went to Walters' room about 10 a.m. on the Monday, and saw the same something under
the clothes on the bed, and soon after I got into the room Walters asked me to fetch her some calico, and gave me the money to fetch it—I got it, and returned to her room with it about 11 a.m.—the little heap was still on the bed—while I was there I heard a kind of croaking like this coming from the direction of the heap on the bed—Walters said, "Do you hear it?"—I said, "Yes"—she said, "The mother must have been frightened by a dog, the way it coughs so"—I went towards the bed to take the clothes off to look at the child—Walters got up and threw up her hands and said, "it is all right, I can see to it"—she did not uncover the baby then, but made a motion for me to go out—I then left the room—I returned to the room several times during the day—the heap was still on the bed—I heard no sound coming from it—I did not see her on the Tuesday.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. Walters was very excited in her manner—if there was a knock at the door she became very excited—when I first saw the first baby Walters put it into my arms, and then put it on the bed and gave it some bottle—she lit a fire in the room—she did not say Eastbourne when speaking about the coast guard, she said Kensington—she said the next child she had was going to the Isle of Man—she might have used the word "Eastbourne."
ALICE SEAL . I am the wife of Henry Seal, a police constable, of 11, Danbury Street, Islington—on October 29th Walters engaged my back parlour at 5s. a week, and paid 5s. in advance—she came into occupation—that day—she said she had been in St. Thomas's Hospital suffering from her throat, that her husband was dead, and that after his death she had worked for Mrs. Sach, of Finchley, and that she had learnt nursing there—she said she was expecting a telegram from Sach respecting a baby—that she was to fetch it and take it to a titled lady in Piccadilly to be adopted, that the lady was going to pay £100 for the baby, and that she herself was to have 30s. for her trouble from Sach, that the mother of the child was to have the £100; and that the child would become heir to the titled lady—she said she had left Sach because she was too hard worked, and because of her bad throat—she remained in my house till November 12th—she did not go out at all—on November 12th a telegram came for her—she showed it to me—it was with reference to an appointment she had to keep somewhere at five o'clock that night—about 3.15 she left the house, and returned in a cab about 6.30, bringing a baby with her—I opened the door to her and said, "You have got it, then"—she said, "es," and gave me the baby—I looked at it—I have children of my own—it appeared to be newly born—Mrs. Spencer was sent on some errands for Walters, one of them to purchase a bottle of chlorodyne, for which Walters paid—the child slept in Walters' room that night—Walters came down early next morning to see me—I had heard no sound coming from the baby in the night—I said to Walters that the baby was very quiet—she said her babies were always quiet—I told her she would not keep one of mine quiet like that—she said she would if she had them, and that she was going to give the baby one or two drops of chlorodyne in its bottle—I said, "Oh, be careful, you-cannot give a baby as young as that chlorodyne"—she said she could drink a whole bottleful 'and it would not hurt
her—I did not see or hear the baby that day—on the Friday, whilst I was talking to Mrs. Spencer in the kitchen about 9 a.m., Walters came in suddenly—she gave me some sheets which she had been airing for me—when she was about to leave the kitchen I asked her to sit down, she said "No, not now"—she said she was going to finish dressing—she had not her bodice or boots on—she went out of the kitchen and I next saw her going out of the house carrying a bundle—I then went to her bedroom—there was no child there—Walters did not return till about 8 p.m.—I saw her directly after she came in—she was intoxicated—she came down from her room to the kitchen—my husband was there—Walters looked across the table, and threw some baby linen at me and said, "These are for you"—I said, "Poor little thing; you have taken it, then"—she said, "Yes, you ought to have seen it in its laces and muslin"—I said, "Poor little thing"—she said. "oor, indeed: if one of yours was as well off"—I asked her if they were pleased with the baby, and she said, "Yes, delighted with it"—I then said something about not having seen the baby before it left the house in the morning—she said she had overheard a conversation between Mrs. Spencer and I in the morning, and that she hated liars and deceit, and that Mrs. Spencer would have to pay for it if it cost her a few shillings—I never heard any cry or sound from the child from the Wednesday night up to Friday morning, and I did not see it except when it arrived—on Saturday morning Walters came down as usual for her newspaper—she took in Dalton's Newspaper, and about eleven o'clock that morning a telegram arrived which one of my sons took in and took up to Walters—she had old me when she had received the first baby that she expected another and that she would have a telegram about it—she said the second baby was to go to a coast guard at Kensington—on the Saturday, having received the telegram, she left the house about 6 p.m., and returned shortly before 10 p.m., bringing another baby—when she showed it to me, I should think it was then a few hours old—she said it was a girl, and was going to the wife of a coast guard at Kensington, that £10 was to be given to Mrs. Sach for it, and that she was to receive 10s. for it from Mrs. Sach.—she then went out for about an hour, leaving the baby with me—I have a neighbour named Mrs. White—I sent for her and we examined the child—we found that it was a boy—when Walters returned I was warming the child in front of the fire—she appeared agitated and said, "You have not undone the baby, have you?"—I said, "No"—she took it from me and I saw it no more that night—on Saturday night or Sunday morning I heard a child's cry—on Sunday morning I passed Walters' door, and she asked me if I had heard the baby crying in the night, and if it had disturbed me—I said it had not—I did not see the child on the Sunday—the last time I heard it cry was at 4 a.m. on Monday—it cried loudly then—in the morning Walters asked me if I had heard it cry in the night, and I said I had heard it cry at 4 a.m.—she said the child had a cold, and she should not take it away that day—I did not see the child on the Monday, but about 9 a.m. on Tuesday I saw Walters leave the house carrying a bundle wrapped up in a shawl—I immediately afterwards went to her
room with my husband, and saw that the baby had gone—I never saw it again.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. Walters told me that she had worked for Sach, and expected a telegram, without my asking her any questions—I was not examined at the police-court—when I said to her, "our baby is good," she said, "It has got to be"—I said. "You would not get one of mine to be good by fair means"—she said, "By fair means, what do you mean"—and I said, "Unless you give it gin, like a friend of mine does"—I think she said, "The idea of giving a baby gin"—Inspector Kyd took a statement from me—I do not know if I told him anything about Walters saying she would put two drops of chlorodyne in the baby's milk.
Re-examined. I have been very ill, and it was for that reason that I did not give evidence at the police-court.
ISABEL SEAL .—I am the daughter of the last witness, and live with her—I remember Walters coming, and I used to talk to her—she told me she was expecting a baby from Mrs. Sach, of East Finchley, to look after—I asked her what Sach had them for, and Walters said Sach had them from young girls who could not afford to keep them, and then got ladies to look after them, and that she herself transferred them—a baby was brought to our house on November 12th—I went into Walters' room on the 13th—the baby was on the bed—I went to look at it, and Walters said, "Don't touch it, it is asleep"—on the evening of the 12th I was in the kitchen with my mother—Walters was there—I took the baby when I came home from business—Walters said she was going to take it to a titled lady to adopt—she said she wanted some chlorodyne—my mother asked what for—Walters said, "To give to the baby, it is a cross baby"—my mother said, "I would not give a baby chlorodyne"—Walters said, "One drop won't hurt it, I could take. a bottleful"—on the Saturday another baby was brought—I—went into Walters' room on Sunday morning—the baby was on the bed—I picked it up—Walters said it was a girl—I saw it again on Monday, but Walters would not let me touch it—she said, "Where is your father?"—I said, "Downstairs"—she said, "Why does not he go out and take your mother out?"—I said, "She is not well."
ALBERT SEAL . I am the son of constable Seal, and live with him—on Saturday, November 15th, I took a telegram-to Walters—she said there was no answer—I afterwards followed her up Duncan Street—she took a tram to Archway Tavern, Highgate—she got out and met a stylishly dressed young person—they went into the Archway Tavern—they then got into a cab and drove up the right-hand side of the Archway Tavern—went home then—about 9.30 Walters returned home with a baby—on Monday, the 17th, I went into her room—she gave me an errand—I did not see a baby then—I saw something on the bed—Walters said, "Don't touch the dear, it is asleep"—I saw her leave the house on the Monday, carrying a bundle.
By the COURT. I had been told by my father to try and see the baby on the 17th when I went into Walters' room.
at Lockhart's coffee rooms, Whitechapel—I was there on Friday, November 14th—there is a coffee room with a lavatory for women upon the second floor—I was employed on the first floor—about 3 p.m. Walters came up to the first floor—she was carrying a bundle—she sat down at one of the tables, and had some refreshment—part of the outer wrapping of the bundle was a shawl, which fell off and I saw a child—out of curiosity I said to Walters, "hat is that you have there, a doll?"—she said, "No, it is a baby under chloroform," and that it would be out about 5.30—I said I should like to see it come to—she said it would come to screaming, that she was a nurse, and had brought it from a hospital where it had had an operation for double rupture—she said she was a widow, and her husband had been dead twenty years; that the child was a boy; and she was going to take it to an accouchement home at Finsbury—the child's face was pale, and it was not making any sound or movement—if I judged by its appearance and not by what was told me, I should say it was dead then, but it did not strike me so at the time—Walters remained in the house about an hour—I did not hear any sound from the child during that time—the shawl was put over its face again—Walters asked me if there was an old man on the second floor—on the ground floor there is a notice up that the lavatories are on the second floor—there was only a young lady customer on the second floor—Walters had been talking to her for some time.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. As far as I could make out, Walters wanted to find out if there was anybody upstairs—I am quite sure she did not say the baby was asleep—I was not quite close to her all the time.
THOMAS HENRY GURRIN . I am an expert in handwriting, of 59, Holborn Viaduct—this letter which has just been proved and these two original telegrams are, to the best of my belief, written by the same person.
GEORGE WRIGHT (Detective G.) On November 17th I got instructions from Inspector Kyd, and in consequence on the 18th I watched outside 11, Danbury Street—about 9 a.m. I saw Walters leave the house carrying a bundle—she went through Knowles Street, and looked round several times—she spoke to somebody at the corner of Duncan Terrace, and then went down Rosebery Avenue and took an omnibus—I got on the same one—she got off at South Kensington Station on the Metropolitan Railway, still carrying the bundle—I got off too—she walked up and down outside for a little while and then went inside—she went into the ladies' lavatory of the station—I communicated with the station master—Walters came out of the lavatory still with the bundle—she stopped outside for a little while, and then I went up to her and said, "I am a police officer; I want to see that baby"—she said, "Why?"—I said, "I have reason to believe it is not as it should be"—I took her to the ladies' lavatory—she sat down in a chair, and before unwrapping the bundle she said, "I suppose you will take me to the station"—I said, "I want to see the baby first"—she unwrapped the bundle—there was the dead body of a male child in it—its hands were tightly clenched—its lips were partly blue—the right side
of the face was partly discoloured—I said, "It is dead"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "I shall now take you into custody on suspicion of murdering it"—she said, "I never murdered the dear"—I told her anything she might say might be used in evidence against her—she said, "I won't say anything, then I cannot say wrong"—I took her to King's Cross Road police station, with the body of the child—about 11 a.m. that morning Dr. Gaunter saw the body—Walters was detained at the station during the day, and about 10 p.m., when Sach was at the station, they were both charged with the murder of the child—Walters said, "I never killed the baby, I only gave it two little drops in its bottle, the same as I take myself; I took the other baby back to her," pointing to Sach—Walters was then put back in the cells—she sent for me and said, "Mrs. Sach knows where the other baby is, I took it back to her on Friday; I never murdered this one; I was going to give it back to her"—the child was wearing this garment (Produced); it is marked F236.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. She at once denied murdering the child when I charged her, and has done so throughout—I live close to Danbury Street—it is a very respectable neighbourhood—several police-men live close by there.
ANDREW KYD (Inspector G.) I gave instructions to Wright, and on November 18th I went to 11, Danbury Street—I searched Walters' room—I found a feeding bottle and a small bottle of chlorodyne there, and a bottle with some carbolic in it—the bottle of chlorodyne is about three parts full, and is the form known as Collis Browne's—I then went to Claymore House, where I saw Sach—Wright was with me—I said, "We are police officers; a woman giving the name of Walters is detained at King's Cross Road police station on suspicion of murdering an infant; I have reason to believe you have given her the baby"—she said, "I do not know Mrs. Walters of 11, Danbury Street, Islington, and I have never given her any babies; I take in ladies to be confined; there is one in my house at present; she was confined last Saturday morning of a baby, a girl, it is with its mother now; Dr. Wylie, of Fortice Green Road, attended her"—I said, "I should like to see the baby"—she said. "The mother is too ill"—I sent for a doctor, and when Dr. Russell arrived, I asked him to go and look at the mother—as he was leaving the room Sach said, "It is not there, it has been taken away"—while the doctor was away she said, "Do you mean to say this person has been doing away with babies?"—on the return of the doctor Sach said, "There was another lady confined on Wednesday, and both were taken away"—she did not say "both babies"—I said, "I shall take you into custody for being an accessory to the murder"—she said, "Murder, never, do you really mean to say that these babies are dead, and that she has murdered them?"—I then conveyed her to King's Cross Road police station, where she was charged with Walters with the murder of the child—when Sach saw Walters she said, "I know the woman, as she worked for me, but I have never given her any babies"—on November 24th I went to Claymore House, and made a search there—Miss Pardoe and Miss Galley pointed out Sach's bedroom—I found about 300 articles of baby clothing there, and amongst other things I found the bundles shown to
Miss Galley and Miss Pardoe today, also this flannel gown, a number of papers and documents, including a Post Office bank book—on August 30th there was a credit in that book of £20—in a memorandum book I found, "Mrs. Merith, 7, Crossley Street, Liverpool Road, London; Mrs. Mann, 20, Church, Manor Park"—Manor Park and Upton Park are in the same neighbourhood—I also found in the book a paper with "20, Glasgow Road, North Street, Plaistow," on it, apparently the heading of a letter—I found a number of letters, including one from Miss Pardoe, some business cards like the one produced—I received from Mr. Cowdell, who acted as Sach's solicitor at the police court, a £5 note, No. 09979, dated September 3rd, 1902, and from Sach's husband I received two other £5 notes, Nos. 09980 and 09981, dated September 3rd, 1902; also a £10 note, No. 49172.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. I see no notice on this bottle that the contents should not be given to children.
Cross-examined by MR. LEYCESTER. I produced at the police court a letter from a woman at Woking, dated November 22nd—I found it in the kitchen at Claymore House—it had not been opened—(This was from a woman at Woking Village, saying that if the ladies at Claymore House had a baby which she could adopt, she would be glad, as she was a young married woman, but—was not likely to have any children.)—At the time that letter was posted Sach was in custody—I have not made inquiries at Woking—as far as I know that letter is perfectly genuine—when I first spoke of Walters to Sach I did not know of the name of Laming.
JANE KINSHOTT .—I am a female searcher at King's Cross Road Police Station—on November 18th I searched Walters—she said, "I did not poison the baby, I intended to drown myself to-night, all through a man;" she had about 5s. 6d. on her and two letters.
JOSEPH NESPA (179 G.) I was on duty at King's Cross Road Police Station on November 18th—I was in the corridor outside Walters' cell—she called me—I cautioned her that what she said might be used in evidence against her—she made a statement to me—I took notes of it—she said "Where I was, if they had Jet me come out I wouldn't be here now"—I was called away then—I went back again and wrote down what she said further—"The child, was so cross I put two drops in its milk, and when I woke up in the night I found the child dead; as for killing that baby, I never did, and if I had got away I would of drowned myself; a lady asked me to mind the child till she got someone else to mind it; Mrs. Seal saw me take the baby out this morning, and it barked like a dog; the man stopped me; I intended with what bit of money I had to wander about till it was dark, and end myself; wherever I go to-day or to-morrow I will shake till I drop; they have opened my letters by this time, and if I had got away, I intended to do away with myself; I never killed
the baby, I only gave it two little drops of chlorodyne; I take a lot myself; I lived twenty-four years in Peabody's Buildings, Drury Lane, with my first husband; if they open my letter they will find I have made a confession"—at 10 o'clock she called me again, after she had been charged with Sach—she then made another statement to me which I took down—(Read) "If you go to East Finchley Post Office, you will find telegrams addressed 'East Finchley, to Plaistow, Sach '—she has sent me telegrams to meet her at Finchley Station, where I took the baby from her, and on occasions other babies, and took them back after three days; I can see now I have been a foolish woman."
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. She did not make a statement to me with reference to her relations with her husband.
CONRAD JASPER LAMBART . I am a clerk in the advertisement department of the People—in May, 1901, we received an advertisement in reference to a house at Wood Green—it continued to appear in the paper till November 9th, 1902.
THERESA EDWARDS . I live at the White Bear, Berwick Street, Oxford Street—I was at 4, Stanley Road, Finchley, for nearly a year—during that time I became well acquainted with Sach—this letter which has a newspaper cutting attached to it is in my writing—Sach asked me to write it—the cutting was on it when I wrote it—Sach told me what to say—the letter was posted—(Read) "Claymore House, Hertford Road, East Finchley, 23rd June, 1902. "Gentlemen, I have just left 4, Stanley Road, and am living at the above address. Kindly continue my advertisement as usual five times, for which I have enclosed postal order for £1. Yours truly, Nurse Thorne"—the cutting is, "Doctor recommends comfortable home, skilled nursing, every care, terms moderate Nurse"—"4, Stanley Road "is crossed through, and line is put round "Claymore House."
Cross-examined by MR. LEYCESTER. There was not a Miss Thorne staying in the house—Sach told me that that was her name when she was in the hospital—I have never heard that Nurse Thorne was her sister-in-law.
C. J. LAMBART (Re-examined). This letter was received at the People office—the advertisement at the top of it had appeared in the paper previous to the date of the letter, and after that date the address was altered from 4, Stanley Road, to Claymore House, Hertford Road.
Cross-examined by MR. LEYCESTER. I never had any idea that there was anything wrong with the place—it did not strike me that there was anything peculiar in the advertisement.
MISS HARRIS. My real name and address are correctly written, upon this piece of paper—I am single—in July, 1902, I saw an advertisement in the People—at that time I was pregnant—in consequence of the advertisement I went to Claymore House and saw Sach—I was accompanied by a gentleman, and I made an arrangement with Sach that I should go and live at Claymore House—the terms arranged were one guinea a week, and three guineas a
week for a fortnight at the time of my confinement—I went into residence there on July 30th and remained there until October 23rd.—(MR. LEYCESTER submitted that the prosecution was not entitled to offer evidence to show all the transactions carried on by the prisoners, as it was simply suggesting that there was something suspicious about the adoption of the children, when no definite evidence could be called and MR. STEPHENSON appealed to Mr. Mathews not to give the evidence, as it would be safer and fairer not to give it. MR. MATHEWS submitted that he was entitled to give the evidence, as intention was the very essence of the offence. MR. JUSTICE DARLING ruled that the evidence was admissible, and that Mr. Mathews could offer it if he wished.)—my child was born on August 28th, but after I had been at the house three or four days Sach asked me what I was going to do with the baby—I said I did not know—she said, "Why don't you get it adopted"—I said, "an you get them adopted?"—she said, "Yes, I often have ladies requiring children to bring up as their own"—she said she had one lady who lived in a flat at Kensington Gore waiting then, who would adopt a baby for £25—I told her I would talk to my friend about it—the night before my baby was born I said I would have it adopted—Sach said that the lady at Kensington Gore had got one, but she had another lady who would take it for £30—I agreed to that, and on August 30th my friend came to the house and the money was paid over and this receipt taken, "Claymore House, East Finchley, received of Mrs. Harris, August 29th, 1902, the sum of £30, Amelia Sach"—I thought the baby had gone the same night that it was born—Sach told me before I went to sleep that it had gone, but I have been told differently since—Sach told me it had gone to Sevenoaks in Kent, but gave no address—I asked her how it was getting on and she said it was getting on fine and growing a big boy, and that she often heard of him, but she did not say how—I made a portion of the clothing for it myself and the rest I bought—this (Produced) is some of mine—Sach took the clothing down when she took the baby,' and I never saw either the one or the other again—I saw Miss Galley and Miss Pardoe while I was there—they were there for some weeks—I never saw Walters there.
Cross-examined by MR. LEYCESTER. A complete baby's outfit would be about 54 articles—I had not thought about finding a home for my child before I went to Sach's—I live at the place where I earn my living, so it would be impossible for me to have a baby with me—I had not arranged whether I should go home to my people and keep the baby with me—I considered it best for the child to have a good home—Sach told me it would have a good home, that the people were very rich, and that the child would have a nurse—I have not got the numbers of the bank notes I paid to Sach—I made a lot of clothes besides these.
Re-examined. I paid the notes to Sach the day after my child was born.
be confined, and Sach asked me to remain on there as I done the work for her—she did not pay me—I stayed there to have a-home for myself and my baby—I know Walters as Mrs. Laming—she used to come to Stanley Road—I have seen her there about six times—we moved to Claymore House in June, 1902—I was there when Miss Harris came there—I remember the birth of her child, and on August 29th Walters came and fetched the child—I see Sach give it to her—Walters brought a parcel with her and she said it was clothes to go on Mrs. Harris's baby to go away in—I did not see it being dressed but it was wrapped in a shawl which Walters had brought with her when she took it away—I went as far as the Bald Faced Stag with Walters because Sach asked me to—Walters went by the 'bus then—I see Sach pass Walters some money to pay her expenses in taking the baby—I do not know how much it was—when Walters got on the 'bus I returned home—I saw Sach, I told her I had seen Walters go by the 'bus, and she told me not to tell her other patients that I had been to convey Walters to the 'bus—I did not say anything about it to the other patients—I remember seeing Miss Pardoe there—I do not remember seeing Miss Galley there—I left on September 23rd—I remember going to 30, Glasgow Road about the last week in February, 1902—Walters was living there then—Sach sent me there—I did not see Walters at any other lodgings.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. I was known as Theresa McCarthy—I was called "Auntie "at Sach's, but that was not my name—they also called me Mrs. Gordon, but that is not my name—I call myself Theresa Edwards now, but my real name is Theresa McCarthy—I was at Sach's fifteen months—I left because I had a row with Sach—she told me to leave her house—afterwards she asked me to forgive her, and said she would kill herself if I did not—I said I would and thought no more of what she had said to me.
AUGUSTUS JOSEPH PEPPER , F.R.C.S. I am a Master in Surgery—on November 21st I made a post-mortem examination on the body of a male child in the presence of Dr. Caunter, the acting divisional police surgeon—I came to the conclusion that the child was only a few days old; the body was well nourished and free from disease—there were no marks externally, except some swelling of the right cheek and temple, which was most likely due to the use of forceps at the time of delivery—the child was full time; its hands were tightly clenched; that suggested an asphyxial death; the larynx was considerably congested, and there was congestion of all the organs of the body; the membranes of the brain were congested—those indications suggest death from asphyxia—there were some small spots of hemorrhage on the surface of the lung, which was still more conclusive—the toes were turned down in a similar condition to the hands—there was no doubt the child died from asphyxia and suffocation—the possible cause of the asphyxia was the taking of any narcotic drug which had opium or morphia as a constituent—morphia is derived from opium—the primary effect of a narcotic drug on a child of very tender days of life would be to send it to sleep—that might be the only effect according to the dose; the further
effect would be continued insensibility, from which the child could not be awakened—the next would be the action of the poison upon the nerve centre in the brain and also directly upon the circulation of blood to the heart and lungs, and it would cause the lungs to become choked and so impede the respiratory organs, when death would result—sometimes narcotics produce convulsions, and are very likely to do so in young children—convulsions might kill the child at once by asphyxia, of which the narcotic would be the occasioning cause—I heard the noise made by Mrs. Spencer in Court; assuming that she correctly represented the sound, I should say that they were the child's dying gasps, and that is consistent with the administration of a narcotic—I am familiar with chlorodyne—one of its constituents is chloroform, and it smells strongly of it; morphia is also one of its constituents—I should say that two drops of chlorodyne would be fatal to a child of this age—it is a patent medicine—I am judging from the dose which is recommended to adults, the maximum dose being thirty drops—it states on the bottle ten to thirty drops—I have never prescribed it—people take it for diarrhoea—the proportion of the drugs in it is not stated—I should say it ought not to be given to a child of this age except under medical advice, and then in infinitesimal quantities—if the child was suffering intense pain it might be advisable to give it a dose of some form, but not that form of chloroform, because it is a patent medicine—if a child was crying, and, therefore, thought to be a nuisance, it might be given in a way as other sedatives are—I did not form any precise opinion as to how long the child had been dead, it was a question of a few days at the most—Dr. Caunter had previously made an examination, but the body was perfectly fresh for examination, there was nothing to prevent my making a reliable examination—there was no food in the stomach or small intestines—I should say the child had not been fed for many hours before its death—unless the child had taken food and vomited it, I don't think it had been fed within twelve hours, and there were no signs of its having vomited—there was a large bruise in and under, the back of the scalp—I think that might have been caused by the forceps in delivering the child—there are two blades to the forceps, and one would grasp it in front and the other behind—it may have been caused by some other pressure, or by a blow; but more likely by pressure on account of the width of the bruise—there had been no operation for hernia rupture—a surgeon would not operate on a baby a few days old for hernia unless it was strangulated—a patient who had been operated on for hernia would not be allowed to move after it, he would be confined to bed for a fortnight or three weeks—a very small quantity of chloroform would be required to make a child of this age insensible—it would probably go off in less than a minute—if a child had been put under chloroform for an operation it would not be allowed to be moved while still under the anaesthetic: it would be exceedingly unwise and even dangerous for the child—it would be dangerous to take it out while under the influence of an anaesthetic, whether it had had an operation or not—if a child as young as this one, was required for a long operation, and had to be kept under chloroform for some time, it would be allowed to come round a little and then go off again, and in that
way it might be kept sufficiently insensible for an operation for one and a-half hours, or even longer—it is nonsensical to say that this child would awake at 5.30 if it had undergone an operation before three o'clock.
Cross-examined by MR. STEPHENSON. The child might be sleepy or drowsy after an anaesthetic, but it would depend on how it was given—my opinion that two drops of chlorodyne would be fatal to a child of this age is not based on my experience, but upon what I read upon the bottle; but I know what the general effect of it is—if the two drops were dilute it would take longer to absorb; if it was put in a baby's bottle the effect might be less, as the child would probably not take the whole bottle, and so would not get the whole of the drug—in those circumstances it might not be fatal—chlorodyne is a very powerful sedative—I do not think the mark on the head had anything to do with the cause of death, because there was a considerable amount of blood extravasated under the scalp—there was none inside the skull, and that is why I thought the mark was due to pressure and not to a blow.
By the COURT. If the two drops of chlorodyne had been given to the baby in a bottle of milk and had proved fatal, I should have expected to find milk or the remains of it in the stomach and the small intestines; but they were both quite empty—it is quite possible that death may have been caused by other means than a narcotic, such as the direct interference with the passage of air into the lungs.
RICHARD LAWRENCE CAUNTER . On November 18th, I was acting divisional surgeon of police, and was called to the station to see the body of the deceased—I agree with Mr. Pepper in all particulars except one, and that is that I think the injury to the back of the head was not due to forceps, unless they were put on and taken off again and then put on again; but was assured that was not the case—I agree with Mr. Pepper that that had nothing to do with the death—I think the injury to the head was due to severe pressure, if it had been done by a blow I think there would have been marks externally as well as between the scalp and the skull—I saw the body at 11 a.m. on the 18th—I should say it had then been dead from eight to twelve hours, and I should think it was nearer the twelve than the eight—the body was still warm—I think it could not have been dead much longer than twelve hours.
The prisoners statements before the Magistrate. Sach says: "I am not guilty."
Walters says: "I am not guilty. I wish the statement I made to go before the Judge."
ANDREW KYD (Re-examined.) I was at the police court on December 17th, when Walters handed a statement to the Magistrate, and said she wished it to be used. (Read) "Your Worship,—I cannot give you other Telegram, Dated 12th November, as I gave it to Mrs. Sach the night I fetch the baby I received two telegrams from her to fetch the baby girl at five and the other Telegram was meet me at eight same place, that is on Satday night the first one I had to take to Aldgate Staishin to meet a lady at ten minets to four I was to soon so I went to Lockhart's to get some Refreshment I got that and left at four I ment the lady, she
was in a Brougham she said you have come. I said yes I am could get in give me the baby I gave it to her she said untye the parcell I untied it then she in Dress the baby and gave me the closes and drest it in fine lase Robes and a boutful colke and Lace Vale she said it will be a lovly baby I said it is good little sole it never cry had it at hall she said I am going to Ireland or Scotland, I don't know wich but I am going to Pickidlley I will Drop you at St. James Street the baby was Dress and still asleep she said to me I have a bottle of Shampain in my bag poor me out a glass she Drank that and then she gave me one I said only a little I am not house to that she said it wont hurt you then I got out she gave me ten shilling I said let me know how you get home goodnight a title lady was going to adopt it I met the lady at Mrs. Sach when I went there one day Mrs. Sach said there is Mrs. Rogers a Lady Friend of mine that is all I know of this one the little baby as the Telegram said meet me at 8 was to be taken to Kensington Stashn I meet the same lady at Archway Tavern the road to Higagt Stathn she said to me the baby goy get to-night you bring it to Kensington Statshn Monday or Tuesday be there by 10 I am going to take it to a cost Gards wife, Eastboworn I will give you ten shilling for you trouble I said, very well she had a hansom cab I walk from Higate Statithn to East Finchley I alwayes thought Mrs. Sach name was Maud she sind her name Maud alway to me an she told me she Reseve no money for the baby the mothers was hartless thing leving them in her hands I can't tell you anymoor as I don't know any think else I was greatly surprise to hear she Reseve no such money from the mothers and you know the rest the baby was only covered as farr as there waist it is a untrth what the 3 witnesses said I coved the woolen shall over the little Face and that had howles in it I did not say I did not want Mr. Seal to come in I said I did not want to disturye him as he was asleep in the next room the baby cried all night on Saturday night Miss Seal said in the morning you had a bad night, Mrs. Walters I said yes I gave the baby two drops of Chlordine, not intenthin to arm it only to mak it sleep I have taken a bottleful and it don't hurt me I gave it nothing but that Yours obediently Annie Walters "
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the jury mainly, because they were women.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, January 10th, 1903
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. ROACH Prosecuted; MR. HEDDON Defended.
Tomlin's window—they got alongside of a gentleman and took hold of his watch chain—they then went to the corner of Wood Street, where Thomas took hold of a gentleman's watch chain, but got nothing—they, then went to another shop—Thomas stood before William, who placed; himself by the side of a gentleman, and Thomas took this watch from Mr. Harding's left-hand pocket—I seized them both—Wise took hold of Thomas—they both struggled—I know them as brothers.
Cross-examined. One stands in front and one behind, and the victim between more usually than not.
FREDERICK WISE (City Detective.) I was with Anderson, and kept, observation on the prisoners—William went to a gentleman, and Thomas made an attempt on the gentleman's pocket—they got nothing, and went to Wood Street, where another attempt was made, and not getting anything there they went on, and Thomas placed himself behind Mr. Harding and William took a watch from his pocket—Anderson took both prisoners round their necks, and William threw the watch into the road—they were taken to the station, and on William was found 6s. and a metal watch and chain and two or three other articles, and on Thomas 3s. 2d. and a metal watch and chain—they were charged, and made no reply—I knew them before.
Cross-examined. Thomas stood behind Mr. Harding and William in front of him, pushing him.
GEORGE HARDING . I am a clerk at 11, Copthall Court—on January 7th I was in Cheapside—the prisoner's pushed between me and my brother, my watch chain hit my leg, and I found that my watch was gone and the prisoners were in custody—this is it (Produced)—when I felt the push I looked round and saw that it was William who was pushing me.
Cross-examined. There was a crowd round me.
GUILTY . They then >PLEADED GUILTY to previous convictions, Thomas at Aylesbury on October 4th, 1900, and William at Nottingham on December 1st, 1902, and several other convictions were proved against each.
WILLIAM Three years' penal servitude; THOMAS Eighteen months' hard labour.
The prisoner stated in the hearing of the jury that he was guilty of unlawfully wounding, upon which they found that verdict. Nine months' hard labour.
MR. SEYMOUR Prosecuted.
NATHANIEL HOOPER . I am a news agent, of 67, Great Ormond—on December 6th I was in the Mechanic public-house, and Pipe came in and spoke to me—he was a stranger, but I treated him and several others—he went out, and came back and beckoned me to the door saying,
"ome on, old boy"—when I got outside he said, "Come to my place; I live just here in Sidmouth Street"—he put his arm round my neck and attempted to pick my pocket—Hicks came up and knocked me down, and put his hand over my mouth while Pipe tore my trousers pocket and took my purse containing £1 8s.—Hicks made several kicks at me—I got his hand away from my mouth and shouted for help—he hit me and kicked me on my jaw and fractured it—I was a little deaf before the assault—I had not seen Hicks in the public-house—the police took me to the Royal Free Hospital—I picked the prisoners out at the station from several others, and am quite sure they are the men.
Cross-examined, by Pipe. I was there about 1.30, when the barman turned us out, but I did not see you—I was not turned out the first time I met you in the Mechanics' Larder—I treated you there—I did not ask you whether there was a w.c. there, nor did you say, "Go over to my house and I will meet you."
Cross-examined by Hicks. I was in the Princes Restaurant—I picked you out on the 12th, there were eight or nine men in a row—the officer did not point you out to me.
By the COURT. I was about twenty minutes in Pipe's company—it is not true that I wanted to relieve myself, nor did he suggest that I could go to his house.
ARTHUR BATSFORD (29 E.R). On December 6th, about 8.30 p.m., I saw Pipe in Gray's Inn Road, and told him I should take him in custody for knocking a man down in Bray Street and robbing him—he was drunk.
NATHANIEL HOOPER (Re-examined.) I remained in the hospital from Saturday, the 6th, till Thursday afternoon as an in-patient for a fractured jaw, and for kicks, and attended four or five days afterwards as an outpatient—I was in bed ten days—I work at a small shop.
Hicks' statement before the Magistrate. "I did not strike the man." Pipe, in his defence upon oath, stated that he drank with Hooper, and pointed out his house to him, but was not there when he was assaulted, and that a policeman told him that if he would swear that Hicks did it he would get off light. He admitted that he had been three times convicted.
Hicks, in his defence on oath, stated that he heard a scream, and saw a man on the ground and another on top of him, and saw the man taken to the hospital, and that he had known Pipe for a fortnight, but was not with him on this evening.
GUILTY . Pipe then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Clerkenwell on August 27, 1892, and several other convictions were proved against, both prisoners. PIKE— Two years hard labour; HICKS— Eighteen months' hard labour.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, January 10th, 16th, and 17th, and
NEW COURT, Monday, January 19th, 1903.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
179. EDWIN PAYNE (48) and JOHN ABBOTT (43) Conspiring to obtain money and valuable securities from divers persons as should be induced by them to take shares in certain Companies which they were promoting, by false pretences. Other counts, for obtaining £49 from James William Mustill. £80 from Lancelot Smith, and from other persons valuable securities, by false pretences.
MR. MUIR, MR. BODKIN, MR. SYMMONS, and MR. MURPHY Prosecuted; MR. LEVER appeared for Payne, and MR. HUTTON and MR. JENKINS for Abbott.
JAMES WILLIAM MUSTILL , I live at 96, Browning Road, East Ham, and am now a draper's assistant—in October, 1899,1 saw an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph for a man and wife to manage a milk business—I answered it and got a reply, and came up to London from Walthamstow—I went to the office of Messrs. Abbott and Co., 79, New Oxford Street, and saw both defendants there—I said I had come in reference to their letter, and asked what my duties would be—Payne said, "My milk business which I shall want you to manage is at 4, City Road, Birmingham"—he said there were six rounds, and he was doing a fair business there—he also said he had two other businesses in Birmingham—Abbott said he had known Payne for a number of years as an honourable man who had a large dairy farm at Dowles Farm, Budeley, and a lovely looking place overlooking the Severn—Abbott said he had been there for rabbit shooting—Payne asked me if I was prepared to invest £100 in shares in the Farmers' United, Limited—I said I was prepared to do so—I went down to Birmingham where Payne promised to meet me, but he did not turn up—I saw the premises at 4, City Road, Birmingham, but I did not see any books, and I came away—after I returned to London I wrote to Payne, and received this answer (Read): "October 27th, 1899, Dowles Farm, Budeley: Dear Sir, Messrs. Abbott and Co. will post your agreement to-night and you will receive it to-morrow morning. Kindly let me know by early post if it is satisfactory, and what time you will be prepared to meet me on Monday, and oblige.—Yours truly, E. M. Payne"—I went to Abbott and Co.'s office on the Monday and signed this agree-ment—(This was dated October 30th, 1899, between the Farmers' United, Limited, and James William Mustill, whereby the said James William Mustill agreed to manage a branch of the Farmers' United, Limited, at a salary of 30s. per week with a house, gas, and 2 cwt. of coal free.)—on the following Wednesday I paid Abbott £50 by cheque, and he gave me a sovereign for current expenses, and the balance of £511 I paid the next day to Payne at Birmingham—Abbott would not give me a receipt, he said it was to do with Payne, who would give a receipt in full—I gave Payne six £10 notes, and he gave me £9 change and two certificates each for fifty £1 shares—I started business at Birmingham—some business was being done—the men stopped their own wages out of their takings—there were three men delivering milk—Payne told us to stop our wages out of the takings—Payne said there were six rounds—I found only three—everything was all right the first week—after that the supply of milk got less, and they sent me one or two lots of peculiar milk—I had to go round and allow the customers for it because it was bad—the stock of milk kept decreasing, and after three weeks the business was closed, through the supply of milk stopping—we were supplied by Mr. Payne, "junior—he was the manager of the other
businesses in Birmingham—the milk came to me in churns from the station, but it went through their hands first, and they had the opportunity of taking the labels off—some of it came from the Chetwynd Mills and Creamery Co.—before I went to Birmingham Payne told me his son was managing the business there—I gave notice to leave before the supply of milk stopped, because I saw the thing was a complete fraud and was losing money from the first day I went there—there was nothing to pay the three men and myself with—we started selling about 35 gallons a day at 3d. a quart, and it dropped down to 17 or 18 gallons a day, and in December it stopped altogether—after the business stopped I met Payne at Birmingham railway station and told him I was wasting my time, and asked him if he was going to pay me my wages—he said, "I am going to see if I can open up the business again; you shall have your salary all right if you will only wait"—in January I went with my wife and saw Payne at the Colonade Hotel, Birmingham—my wife charged him with being a thief, swindler and fraud, and she said she would go to Budeley with him as she was not going to starve—he aid, "Will you have any money to be going on with?"—she said, "Yes." and he gave her a £10 note and gave us some acknowledgment that he still owed us £90, to be paid on March 8th—in the meantime I was to go on trying to work up the business in the City Road, and he gave me this document, "olonade Hotel, New Street, Birmingham, January 23rd, 1899, I hereby agree to give Mr. Mustill 30s. per week wages, provided he does his best to improve the City Road business, and having this day given him £10, I agree to give him £90 on March 8th next, or at any previous time if the business is sold"—I then made another attempt at the City Road—he sent about 12 gallons of milk a day and some eggs and butter—that supply continued for a week or ten days and then ceased—in March the churns, trucks, &c., on the premises were all taken away and sold at public auction—they were taken by some men from the Main Street business—that was another shop of Payne's—no notice was served upon me—I knew the men and thought they were justified in taking the—thing's away—after that I consulted my solicitor—I got back another £10, making £20 altogether, out of which I had to pay my solicitor—I did not try to sell my shares—the company was afterwards wound up—I returned to London on April 1st and called on Abbott in New Oxford Street—I there saw a similar placard to that at Birmingham announcing the sale of utensils, &c, of the Farmers' United. Limited—I asked him if he knew what sort of man Payne was, and said he was nothing more than a swindler and a fraud—he said, "I have not found him altogether straight with me," and he opened a drawer and showed me a cheque with which he had tried to save Payne's furniture—I said, "If I had a £10 note or two I would go for you; you knew very well the position he was in, and the business at the time I took it was on the verge of bankruptcy"—he said it was an undesirable thing for him to touch upon, and I said, "You have even got the bill stuck up for the sale of the things; you know the thing is a complete swindle and fraud, and you bought the utensils within two or three days of my parting with my money"—ho then said he had an appointment to keep—that was the last I saw of him till this case came on—I called several times after that, but
could not find him—I went back into the drapery business of Messrs. Hunt and Co., Hammersmith, and Payne came in one day as a customer—I called him a thief again and accused him of stealing my money—he asked me to be quiet and not shout so much—I said, "Such men as you ought to be shown up"—he bought what he wanted and departed, and has not been in since—when I left the business £24 was due to me for wages—I borrowed the money which I invested in Payne's business—at the time I parted with it I believed the business to be genuine—I did not know Payne was an undischarged bankrupt.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. The last time I saw Payne was when, he came into the shop at Hammersmith in October, 1901—I have never met him at Shepherd's Bush, nor had a friendly drink with him there—with that exception I had not seen him from March, 1900, till the institution of this prosecution—I had not instituted proceedings of any kind, nor intended to do so—I had said good-bye to the whole affair—I was not in a position to prosecute—the detectives and the Treasury first approached me about this prosecution—unless they had done that I should have taken no steps whatever—I had had no experience in the retail milk business, but I am a farmer's son—I left the farm at the age of fifteen—I knew what price we got for milk—after I was fifteen I followed the occupation of a draper—when I first saw Payne I quite understood the business belonged to the Farmers' United, Limited, which was a company—my agreement was with the company, and signed "E. Marshall Payne," not under seal—there were two other businesses in Birmingham, one in Main Street and one in Ethel Street, the headquarters—they were substantial businesses—Payne said the City Road business required working up—he did not say it was not paying—at Payne's suggestion I went to Birmingham to see the business before parting with my money—I found the books were not up to date, and they had not a secretary—I took Payne's son's word that the business was financially sound—after that I paid the first £49—I went to Birmingham again on November 6th, and stayed there about a week before I took over the business—I did not go to the business during that time—I was told not to interfere, and I did nothing at all that week—I do not think it was a bogus business—we were selling the milk at the market price—I had to account to Mr. Payne, junr., for the takings, and sent in a daily report—I never refused to do so—I never kept the men waiting for their supplies—Mr. Payne never complained to me that I was—not running the business properly—he did live at Dowles Farm—this (Produced) is a catalogue of the sale of utensils and produce there on January 12th, 1900—Payne complained of my paying a woman 2s. 6d. a day to clean up, and of my allowing the customers for the bad milk—he did not complain that I was not sending in the takings; I sent in all the money I took, and explained that I had to make allowances for bad milk—when. I wanted to go the rounds with the men they threw down the churns and refused to go round or to give me the customers' names and addresses—they left, and I had fresh men and went round, but the rounds got lost to the business, and there was less demand for milk—I believed the business could have been worked up—when I agreed to it being sold it was in a.
much worse condition than when I put my £100 into it—I do not consider myself a thief and swindler—the business was to be sold if I could have worked it up—before I parted with my money I made enquiries about Payne through Stubbs', and got a satisfactory reply—when I took over the business I found it owed hundreds of pounds, and that there were writs out against it. Payne had said that the business was sound.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I have not been to Stubbs since I returned from Birmingham—they gave me the same information as Mr. Abbott did—I went to Stubbs' because I was not satisfied with Abbott's information—I do not think Abbott had anything to do with the businesses at Birmingham—I had four interviews with Abbott altogether—the first was when I made inquiries about Payne; the second when I signed the agreement, the third when I paid the money, and the fourth when I returned to London—the offices in New Oxford Street consisted of one room and Abbott's private office—when I went there and asked for Payne he was in Abbott's room—when I went there on October 20th I did not expect to find anyone but Payne—all the conversation I had was with Payne except when Abbott told me he had been to Budeley to shoot rabbits—when I paid the £50 Abbott said he would forward it to Payne, who would give me a receipt in full, and refused to give me a receipt—in the agreement, Abbott's name is only there as a witness.
Re-examined. It is quite possible if I had made more careful inquiries I might have found that the business was no good, but I thought I was dealing with a straightforward man—Mr. Payne, junr., told me that the books were not up to date, and that I could not see them—I did not buy the business—I deposited the £100, and got the shares in the company—if the company had been solvent I still think the business could have been worked up—I did not take proceedings against them because I had no money, and my friends would not part with any more—when I went to Birmingham I understood I was to go straight into the management but I found someone else there and had to wait a week before I went in—some of the milk came from the Chetwynd' Mills Company, Newport, and some from local farmers—they had a big stock of churns with the Newport name on.
LANCELOT SMITH . I am an accountant, of 94, Bathurst Gardens, Kensal Rise—in February, 1902, I saw this advertisement in the Daily Telegraph: "Partner wanted to supervise five country receiving depots experience not necessary, but must be energetic and willing; to reside in the country; good salary and share of profits; premium £200; address, Produce, 2, Han way Street, W."—I replied to that and received this answer; "Welsh Creameries, Limited, Chief Office, 113, Uxbridge Road. W., March 3rd, 1902. Dear Sir,—Re your reply to Produce; I shall be at Abbott's offices, 79, New Oxford Street, on Tuesday, from 11 a.m to 12 p.m., it you would give me a call we could talk the matter over; yours truly, W. Payne"—that is in Payne's writing—on March 4th I called and saw Payne—I told him I had come in reference to his letter—he produced a handful of letters and said he had so many applications,—and asked me to pick mine out, which I did—he then said, "I have five
creameries in South Wales and I want a partner to go down there to take the supervision of them"—he showed me a balance sheet and said that they worked out at a profit of 40 per cent.—I asked him if the business was a solid concern; he said, "It is a very good concern, seeing that I have sold out my farm in Oxfordshire and invested £1,000 in it"—he then said that the selected manager would be required to invest £200 in a company which he had formed to run the creameries which he owned previous to the company's formation, and that Mr. Gurrin was the chairman and had 100 shares in it—Gurrin or Abbott often passed in and out "during that conversation—it was possible for him to hear it—I was to have a salary of £3 a week, and the profit on the 200 shares I was to take up would make it about £5 or £6 a week—I saw Payne again on March 7th, and said I would take up the post and should want time to realise before putting my money in—on March 12th I paid Payne £80, and gave an I.O.U. for £20—in return he gave me these two share certificates (Produced) for £50 each; he went into Abbott's room during the transaction—I called again on March 14th and Payne handed me this agreement, which signed—he said that it was not possible to get Gurrin's signature as chairman then, as he might not see him—Abbott was passing in and out during that time—I then paid Payne £20 to release the I.O.U., and on March 18th I paid him another £50 by cheque, and gave him an I.O.U. for the remaining £50—he then gave me these two further share certificates (Produced)—I have never received any dividend on them nor have they any market value—on March 20th I proceeded to Narberth, South Wales—I met Payne at Paddington Station—he said he had been unable to see the chairman to get him to sign the counterpart agreement, and would forward it to me in Wales, which he did, and I subsequently handed it back to him in exchange for a bill of exchange—Payne's son met me at Narberth, and I went to the St. Clears Creamery, the head-quarters, twelve miles off—I saw some books there, but I had no chance to examine them, they were immediately removed and sent to London—I did look at them, and they appeared to have been kept very badly—I stayed there five days—I found the business had been conducted in a reckless manner—the accounts were in arrear, and things were altogether wrong—I found they owed money for milk to the farmers—I returned to London on March 26th and wrote to Payne saving I wanted to see him urgently—he had removed to 109, Great Russell Street—I saw him there—he said "Good morning," and ushered me out into the street to talk—I said, "Things are not what you represented them to be in Wales"—he said, In what way?"—I said, "Your credit does not seem to be very good there"—he said, "You have been listening to idle stories"—I said, "You have stopped one of the creameries unknown to me and the farmers there have not been settled with, and you owe the rent of the premises"—he said he did not owe anything, and would return me my money in full, in a month—a fortnight after that I returned to St. Clears after having had an interview with him at Mr. Morse's office, the accountant—he then said he would appoint another manager, and asked me to sign an authority to him to sell my shares to the incoming manager—I declined to sign anything
—when I returned to St. Clears I found business still declining—I then wrote this letter to him (Dated May 16th, 1902, and stating that he had been advised to file a petition for winding up the company, unless his money was returned forthwith.)—I received a letter from Mr. Morse in consequence of which I agreed to hand over my 200 share certificates for £10 cash, and this bill of exchange for £150 and the return of my I.O.U. for £50—I presented that bill but it was dishonoured, and I have never recovered anything beyond the £10.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. My complaint is based upon the account he gave to me of the business at the first interview—when I put the matter into my solicitor's hands it was with a view of taking civil proceedings—if Payne had paid the bill he gave me I should not have taken criminal proceedings—Payne said he had sold his farm in Oxfordshire, and had invested £1,000 in the business—he did not say, "Both I and my son have put in all the money we could spare, and I and my family have 1,000 shares in the business"—he distinctly said £1,000—there were five creameries, Narberth, St. Clears, Langharne, Letterstone, and Llanbody, covering a radius of thirty miles, practically the whole of the milk producing district—I only saw two creameries—they were properly fitted up—when I saw the advertisement I thought it was a provision business, of which I had had experience—if I had thought it was a milk business I should have had nothing to do with it—that was not my reason for wanting to get out of it—the place was pleasant enough to live in if the business had been good—at the first interview he arranged that my salary could be £3 10s. a week, but he put £3 in the agreement—the St. Clears premises had the name up of St. Clears Butter Factory Company—there was no mention of the Welsh creameries—Payne did not own the premises; he told me he did, but he had them on an agreement, and the rent was in arrear—I heard it discussed by the proprietors—I understood him to say that the balance sheet showed a net profit of 40 per cent., not gross—after the bill matured he asked for a renewal, and said he was trying to reconstruct the company, and would give me a first charge on it—I got judgment on the bill, but agreed not to enforce it if he paid £5 a month.
Cross-examined by Mr. HUTTON. I have had twenty years' experience in the provision trade—I had heard of Stubbs'—I did not make any inquiries there about Payne or Abbott—I had no transactions with Abbott—I did not know he was Gurrin and never had any conversation with him beyond saying good morning.
Re-examined. I returned from Wales after five days, because I found the business was insolvent—I really never took possession of the management. (On account of the illness of John Hugh Alborough his depositions and the exhibits referred to therein relating to the purchase of a half share of a creamery at Leighton Buzzard, which had previously been ordered by the local sanitary authority to be put in repair, were put in and read.)
ARTHUR EDWARD KENT . I now live at St. Clears, South Wales, and am a butter factor—previous to that I was in business at Knocklong, count Limerick—on April loth, 1902, I saw an advertisement in the Dairy newspaper and answered it—in reply I received a letter in Payne's
writing—(Dated, May 19th, 1902, and inquiring if he was still open for the appointment, and stating that the Creameries were situated in South Wales; salary 50s. weekly, and that he would be required to take up the late manager's shares, say £200, signed, W. Payne.)—then there were some further letters between us—(Another letter from Payne stated that the terms were much higher than they had been paying, but offering £3 per week, and 10s. in line of house, and that he would have no difficulty in getting apartments; that they hoped to pay 30 per cent, dividends on their shares, all of which were held by themselves and their managers, and that there was unlimited scope for the butler trade and splendid machinery.)—I received this letter addressed to me at Knocklong, Limerick: "May 30th, 1902, postal order duly to hand; will send formal receipt and write you fully to-morrow"—I had sent a Money Order for £25, being 2s. 6d. per share on 200 shares, to Payne, 109, Great Russell Street—I gave up my position at Knocklong and came to London on June 30th—I went to 109, Great Russell Street, and saw the name of Payne up on a plate, and the name of Abbott and Co., both on the second floor—as I turned into the office I met Payne, who asked me if I was Mr. Kent—I said yes, and he took me into his office, and said that they had a good connection in cream; that they had also a shop at 113. Uxbridge Road, which was the Company's registered office; that they had two cream vans on the road in London, which were the means of bringing in a considerable amount of business, and that his son was managing the business in South Wales—the result was that I parted with the balance of £175, by a cheque for £160, and the rest in notes, in exchange for which he gave me these four share certificates (Produced) for £50 each, made out in favour of Mr. Lancelot Smith—he said the secretary of the company was away on his holidays, but at the nest Board meeting the certificates would be made out in my name—we then went out to see a Mr. Harrison, a solicitor, and when we returned I saw Abbott; Payne introduced him to me as Gurrin, the Chairman of the Welsh Creameries, Limited—Gurrin read over to me this agreement, and they "both signed it (This was dated June 30th, 1902, between the Welsh Creameries, Limited, and A. E. Kent, for Kent's employment as manager of the five Creameries in South Wales, at a salary of £3 10s. per week)—I also got this receipt: "Received from A. E. Kent the sum of £175, being together with £25 paid previously, £200, for 200 £1 ordinary shares in the Welsh Creameries, Limited, Win. Payne, managing director. June 30th, 1902"—the next day I went to Narberth—Payne's son was living there—St. Clears was the head quarters—I found there were only four creameries working instead of five; one was closed because the farmers had not been paid for their milk, and refused to supply any more—on the second day of my arrival the Narberth Creamery was closed for the same reason—I wrote to Payne, and on July 20th he came down—I told him it was a rotten concern, and I should refuse to have anything to do with it—he said I should be quite satisfied when he had explained everything; that the secretary, Mr. Stevens, was going to put £200 more into the company, and that after he had paid a few debts, which did not amount to more than £100, everything would go on flourishing—Payne stayed there two or three days, and the
Llanbody place was shut up—I grew to like it less, and told him that the business was not as he had represented—he said if I was not satisfied I could leave in a month, and he would return my £200 and get another manager, and he signed this agreement (Produced) to that effect—after he had signed that I kept the St. Clears place working for two weeks, when the farmers refused to supply any more milk, and at the end of July the whole five were shut up—I took my salary for two months out of the takings—that was at Payne's suggestion—on August 11th I wrote and told him I should hold him to his agreement, and he sent me £20 in September to buy milk with, but I kept the money—I eventually got another month's salary from the liquidators of the company—I lost altogether £180—when I parted with my money I believed what he said, that the business was a good one.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. I believed what he said in his letter to me of May 23rd, and in other letters, and what he told me at the first interview—I sent the £25 and signed the agreement before seeing him, because he said the agreement was not considered settled until I had paid that amount—I knew then that I had become liable under that agreement to take the 200 shares, and to fulfil the terms of it—I agree that if there had been a capital of £5,000 or £6,000 the business might have been a successful one—the debts were about £2,000 when the company was wound up—I do not know whether that amount included £500 due to Payne—there was a good market for the milk if there had been sufficient money to pay the farmers and inspire them with confidence—I do not know that they supplied the leading firms in London—I saw the name of the Cream Dairy Company in the books—I do not recollect about Horner's, Rothwell's, and Welford's—Payne did pay some accounts when he came down—he paid R. Davis £10 17s. 7d., and the rent of St. Clears £15 7s. 6d.—at Narberth he paid D. Morris £9 17s. to redeem a cheque which was dishonoured—he also gave me £5 for current expenses, and £2 10s. for railway fares, and sent £6 for four weeks' wages—I do not know that he paid out considerably over £100—I only saw him pay two accounts—I say his motive in paying those accounts was to inspire confidence—I do not agree that if £200 more had been put in by Stevens it would have had any weight, because I had found out that £2,000 was owing—it was not difficult for Payne to know the exact state of affairs—I only saw one book there—I received a letter from him dated July 19th, asking me to send any important letters and cheques to him at 109, Great Russell Street, as Mr. Stevens, the Secretary of the Company, was so seldom at the office—there were several accounts outstanding and difficult to get in—I did not know that it was so much as £400—he wrote saying that there was three times the amount owing to the Company than what was due from the Company, but I found out that that was incorrect—I do not dispute that Horner's and Rothwell's had been paying as much as £70 a week, because I did not see the books—he mentioned about a reconstructtion of the Company, but I did not discuss it at any length—I agree if the company had been reconstructed and all the back debts had been paid off there was a good chance of it succeeding—there was an arrangement that
in the event of a reconstruction I should take 200 shares and become the managing director, provided he could get the other capital—he Sent me £20 to buy milk for the new business, but I kept that as I was not buying any milk, on account of the collapse—at Payne's suggestion I drew up a circular stating that a new company was going to be formed, entitled "he Western Creameries Company," with £1,000 capital, but that would not have been sufficient to pay the debts of the old company, which were about £2,000, and a further £3,000 would have been required to inspire confidence and pay expenses, which were very heavy—I am still carrying on business myself at St. Clears, as a butter factor, buying butter from Ireland, from people I am acquainted with there, and sending it out all over the country—I have done business with only one customer of the Creameries—there is no particular advantage in having my business premises in St. Clears—I must keep myself going, and I might as well start at St. Clears as anywhere else—I have bought nothing from persons who were supplying the Welsh Creameries—I went to Mr. Stokes, a solicitor there, to see what the price of the leases would be of Langharne, Letterstone, and St. Clears—I did that on behalf of a gentleman in London—I was not thinking of forming a company myself—it is my opinion that if I had had the capital I could have made it pay—I do not consider that Payne was making an energetic effort to establish confidence in the farmers and pull the business round.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I did say at the police court that I had absolutely no negotiations with Abbott beyond the signing and reading over the agreement, and so far as I am concerned I never paid him a far thing of the money.
Re-examined. The farmers did not apply to me for their accounts—they sent them to Uxbridge Road—they were debts incurred before I went there, fully £2,000—when Payne came down and paid the accounts I have mentioned, I had just parted with my £200—if I had had the capital I could have made the business a success, but the debts were contracted before I went there, and it was hopelessly insolvent—Payne said he was going to get some of the leading dairymen in London to take up shares in the new company, but they were never produced to me.
ERNEST HENRY ORCHARD . "I am a dairyman of 113, Uxbridge Road—in September, 1902, I was living at Windsor, and on September 4th I saw an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph, for a partner in a dairy business—I replied to it and received a telegram, in consequence of which I went to 113, Uxbridge Road, where I saw Payne—I asked him about the business and what he wanted for a partnership, and the salary I was to receive—he said the business was doing about £30 a week; that the profits were the usual profits, and that I should have a salary of £2 a week with rooms, milk, and gas, free—(MR. LEVER here submitted that this evidence was not relevant, because the indictment did not charge the prisoners with having obtained money from Orchard. MR. MURPHY contended that the evidence was relevant, because 113, Uxbridge Road was the registered office of the company. The COMMON SERGEANT admitted the evidence, as the Jury had to consider whether Payne's statements to the other witnesses
with reference to 113, Uxbridge Road were made fraudently or by a mere mistake or miscalculation.)—I asked him how much he would require me to invest, and he said. "£100." and that the shop belonged to him, not to a. company—I called again later the same day, and said I had been thoroughly into the matter, and asked him if everything was straight—he said that everything was quite straight—I asked when he would have the partnership deed ready—he said, "In a day or two's time"—I asked if £10 would do as a deposit—he said, "You had better make it £20"—I gave him a cheque for £20 on the London and County Bank, Windsor branch, and got this receipt, "Narberth Dairy Company, Limited, September 6th, 1902, 113, Uxbridge Road. Received from Mr. E. H. Orchard the sum of £20 as deposit in part payment of half share of partnership in dairy business, situate at 113, Uxbridge Road, London. Half share to be £100; a further £20 to be paid into the bank to partnership account, balance to be paid on or before September 10th. Proper agreement to be drawn up and signed by both parties"—he said he should want me to invest £20 besides the £100, and that he would invest the same amount him self—on September 8th I commenced my duties there, signed this three years" partnership agreement (Produced), and gave him a cheque for £80—this is the receipt: 109, Great Russell Street, London, September 8th, 1902. Received from Mr. E. H. Orchard £80 by cheque, which together with cheque for £20 previously paid, equals £100 as per partnership agreement, in dairy situate at 113, Uxbridge Road. W. Payne"—the first week's business came to £12 or £15—I asked him how it was it was not as stated—he said that the business had been neglected—I paid the further £20 into my account at the London and South Western Bank, Shepherd's Bush Branch—Payne did not pay in his £20, as he said he was going to buy a pony and trap for the cream round—he did not buy them—a small profit was made—when I paid my money I thought the business belonged to Payne; I understood he had bought it from a company which I did not know the name of—in September I heard from some liquidators that Payne had no right to sell the business—they have not claimed it yet—on October 1st bailiffs were put in for rent—I saw Payne about it and he said he would try and settle it—I eventually paid £19 to the brokers—soon after Payne said he was willing to sell his share in the business for £50; I offered him £45 with a £10 rebate if paid within a month, and I eventually paid him. £34 10s.—he allowed me 10s. off for paying sooner than was stated.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. I am perfectly satisfied with the business—I have not had an offer of £150 for it—I have no complaint against Payne so long as the business is mine, and there is no trouble over it with the liquidators of the company—they have not taken any steps yet—the lease is now made out in my name, and my father has put £100 into the business—I heard after I was taken into partnership, that Payne had lent £100 through a Mr. Brown, on the business to a company, that there was a mortgage on it, and Payne had taken possession, and that was how he took me into partnership—that was when I told him about the liquidator, and he said he had arranged with the liquidator to pay him anything he got for the business over £100.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. From first to last I never knew or saw Abbott in any way.
Re-examined. I understood that Payne had advanced the money to a company through Brown, and that the company, had mortgaged the premises.
THEODORE STEVENS . I live at 25, Upper Bedford Place, and am engaged at present as joint liquidator with Mr. Morse of the Welsh Creameries, Limited—on February 22nd, 1902, I saw this advertisement in the Daily Telegraph: "Partner.—Energetic and smart man wanted as director and secretary for established and thriving private company; experience not necessary; present profits 33 per cent and rapidly increasing; liberal salary to suitable man; must take £300 in shares, absolutely secured. Address for interview, A., 79, New Oxford Street"—I answered that, and in reply received this letter—(Dated February 22nd, 1902, and stating that he had just formed five creameries in South Wales, his son and himself holding most of the shares; that he required a secretary and director to take the London end, at a salary of £150 a year; and that the present turnover showed over 40 per cent. profit, and he expected to do four times that amount without more expense.—Signed, W. Payne.)—I replied to that and communicated with my brother in London, and soon after I received this letter—(Dated March 3rd, 1902, from Payne, stating that his advertisement was for a partner to supervise five country depots, and take 200 shares, to which advertisement he thought the witness had referred.)—on March 8th I saw Payne at 79, New Oxford Street, and he repeated in effect the contents of his letter to me of February 22nd, and showed me two quarterly revenue accounts of three creameries, showing, gross and net profits of £201 11s. 0 1/2 d. and £85 10s. 4 1/2 d. respectively—he said he had the lease of Narberth Factory, that the other two were in course of preparation, and that the company was a private one in his own family, with the exception of Mr. Gurrin, the chairman—later in that day I went back to payne's office, and he introduced Abbott to me as Gurrin—Payne said that, my duties would be to keep the books, collect the London accounts, and take the general management of the business—I saw the books, consisting of sales day book, ledger of sales, bought ledger, and bought day book—the ledgers were almost six months in arrear, and very imperfectly kept—I said that I should not be able to work them up properly, and suggested my brother doing it, who is a chartered accountant, and Payne agreed—told him there was no cash book, and he said the cash receipts were put in the sales book—he said he paid cash for the milk received from the farmers and received cash weekly with the exception of a few accounts—I decided to take up the post, and called on him again on March 24th at 79, New Oxford Street, and told him I could not pay for the shares for some days—he said the sooner I paid the better, as we could then start more quickly; that he wanted to go to South Wales to hold meetings with the farmers in order to settle fresh contracts for milk, and that he hoped to increase the supply from 500 to 5,000 gallons daily—on April 2nd I met Payne at my brother's office, 34, St. Helen's, and paid him two cheques for £57 and £243—in return he gave me three certificates for 243 £1 shares in the
Welsh Creameries, and a transfer was signed for fifty-seven shares of his own—the cheque for £243 was paid into Payne's private account—on April 8th an account was opened in the name of the company, and £143 was paid in—as soon as my cheque book was printed, I was instructed by Sidney Payne, the manager at St. Clears, to pay two accounts—the first week or two I had several small remittances from St. Clears, and the takings at Uxbridge Road were sent to me by Payne—I also paid some milk accounts which ran back a month and six weeks prior to the date of my agreement, and in July, 1902, the company's account was £75 overdrawn—I spoke to Payne about it, and he said something must be done to improve the business, and suggested selling the business at Uxbridge Road—he said he would see the bank manager about getting an overdraft—he did see him, and the manager said the account must be put in credit before he could make a report for an overdraft, and I put it in credit myself with £80 which I got from my father—I had put the account in credit with £10 once before that—I was never repaid—I received no further remittances from Wales, and I paid out no more cheques, because there was no money in the bank—Payne said he had got about £112 on the business at Uxbridge Road from a Mr. Brown, and he gave me an account of the way it had been spent at St. Clears—on August 22nd, at 109, Great Russell Street, there was a meeting to wind up the company—there were present Payne, his son, myself, and Mr. Morse—Payne said he thought £200 would cover the liabilities, but I found that the company was hopelessly insolvent—I succeeded in getting back about £50 or £60 of my money, chiefly from the takings at Uxbridge Road—I told Payne I was doing that—the rest I have never recovered.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. My connection with the business lasted about five months—I saw a good deal of Payne during that time—he appeared to be making an honest effort to make the thing a success—I agree that the real difficulty in the way of making the business a financial success was the want of working capital—I do not suggest that any books were kept back, but Payne might have had a better idea of the state of the business than the books showed.
By the COURT. If debts were existing which were not in the books it was no use looking in the books to find them.
By Mr. LEVER. I got satisfactory references with regard to Payne's character from a Mr. Harrison, a solicitor, and from the London and South Western Bank—I do not know that the balance sheets he showed me were got out by Mr. Daniels, a chartered accountant—I do not suggest that they were false balance sheets—I do not know that besides the £143 paid into the company's account Payne paid £100 on account of the company's matters—this (Produced) is a cheque for £70 drawn by Payne in favour of his son S. E. Payne on the company's bank—"order "is struck out and it is made payable to "bearer"—I do not know that it was for working expenses in Wales—it did not go through any Wales bank—it appears to have been cashed over the counter at the company's bank in London—I do not suggest that the cheque for £70 was not paid for the purpose of keeping the business going—I got the £80 from my
father because I thought it would assist us in pulling round the business—in spite of the overdraft I had full faith in the company—the discussion about reconstruction was perfectly bona fide as far as I could see on Payne's part—for my part I thought reconstruction was impossible—the company's debts were £679, and the debts due to them £397—during the five months I was there I never complained to Payne of having been defrauded of my money—he never complained of my not attending to the business—I did attend one race meeting and drew a company's cheque for £37 for a bet—that cheque was due to me at the time—a writ was issued upon it against the company—the document giving a charge on the Uxbridge Road business was signed by me and another director, and it was quite open to Payne or anybody else who got the assignment of that document to take possession if the money was not paid, but there was an arrangement that Mr. Brown should hand over all above £100 that he got for the sale of the Uxbridge Road business—as liquidators we have not yet disturbed Mr. Orchard, who purchased that business.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. The only occasion I saw Gurrin was at a meeting of directors, at whith Payne was present—he took no active part in the management of the business.
Re-examined. Brown was an existing person—he was not Payne—I understood Brown was a friend of Abbott's—I knew that Gurrin the chairman was the same man as Abbott.
WILLIAM HENRY TALBOTT . I am Registrar of the Kidderminster County Court—I produced the file in bankruptcy of Edwin Marshall Payne, dated March 30th, 1900—the debs admitted for proof were £992 14s.—the assets were nil.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. He ascribes his bankruptcy to losses in companies—he put down his household expenses for self, wife, and children for one year at £200.
By the COURT. He was not discharged—there was no dividend and he did not surrender to pass his public examination.
FREDERICK LOVERIDGE . I live at Lidcott Grove, East Dulwich—from December, 1896, to December last I was a clerk in the service of Abbot and Co., at 77 and 79, New Oxford Street and Russell Street—Abbott was the sole representative of the firm—I knew him as John Martin Gurrin—I have known Payne four or five years—he first came to the office about five years ago—about three years ago he told me he had taken a desk in my office with the use of Abbott's office when Abbott was not there at £20 a year, to include my services—we went to Great Russell Street in April, 1902, and he came there with us—I have seen Payne hand cheques to Abbott and I copied the Mustill agreement (Produced) for Payne—this notice (Produced) is in Payne's writing, "To all concerned, Take notice that all the furniture and effects at Dowles Farm, Budeley, belong to Mr. John Abbott, and are let to Mr. Payne on hire. Any further information can be obtained from us, Abbott and Co., Auctioneers, 77 and 79., New Oxford Street, W., February 20th, 1900"—I have also written three or four references of Payne by Abbott's direction during the last
three years—Payne has given me advertisements with reference to milk businesses which I have inserted—I never knew he had been bankrupt.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. Gurrin took over the business of Abbott and Co., public house brokers—I inserted a great number of advertisements for him with reference to public houses—beyond a doubt the business was a genuine one—regular books were kept—I got something for the little extra work I did for Payne—he was merely a tenant in the office; he did not act for Abbott in any way—I never saw any money pass from Payne to Abbott in reference to these different companies—so far as I know, beyond being the ornamental chairman Abbott had nothing to do with the companies.
Re-examined. It is not part of the business of a public house broker to become a director of a cream company.
HENRY HICKOX . I manage the Wilts United Dairy, Ltd., 4, Market Street, Paddington—I have known the prisoners for nine or ten years—in 1893 I called on Abbott at 77, New Oxford Street, in reference to an advertisement for the sale of a dairy—I asked him where it was and who it belonged to—he said it belonged to a Mr. Johnson, and was at Style Hall Parade, Chiswick, price £300—I said, "I know that dairy, it isn't worth two pence"—about a month after I saw Payne and told him I had been to Abbott to see about a dairy belonging to a Mr. Johnson, and that I had been told that he, Payne, was Johnson—he said nothing to that—in April, 1902, I went to 113, Uxbridge Road, to inquire about some of our churns that were missing—I saw Payne there and asked him about them—he said he would go and look, but he did not find any—in November, 1902, I went to Abbott's office at 109, Great Russell Street, and I saw the name up of E. Payne beside the name of—I asked Abbott if he had seen anything of our our friend. Payne, other-wise Johnson, and who Payne was, on the door—he said, "He is my outdoor man, I have have him about two years; they are two different people, Johnson has been dead about two years; he was an old man of seventy"—Abbott said he had not seen Payne for some time—just then Payne walked into the room, and I said, "Here's the very man we are talking about"—before Payne came in I asked Abbott if he knew Payne was bankrupt in 1895—he said, "Yes"—I left the office and Payne came after me into the street—I said to him, "I had some conversation with Abbott about that business you had for sale at Style Hall Parade some years ago; you tried to sell it in the name of Johnson"—Payne said, "t did belong to Johnson, I assigned the lease."
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. The business at Style Hall Parade is still in existence.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I did not ask Abbott if he knew that Payne was an undischarged bankrupt—it was knowledge to the trade that Payne had been bankrupt—Abbott said, "He is my outdoor man," not "He is the outdoor man; he does outdoor business"—I had met Payne before at Birmingham—I did not know Johnson.
Stevens, of the Welsh Creameries, Limited—I produce the share certificate book and the transfer register—1,500 shares was the total issue—1,000 were allotted to "W. Payne," the vendor, and his nominees, under agreement for the purchase of the businesses by the Company, in January 1902—"W. Payne" is the defendant Edwin Payne—nothing was paid for those shares fifty-seven of them were transferred to Theodore stevens, at per—the 1,000 include fifty to John Abbott—there were also fifty to John M. Gurrin—Gurrin is the same as Abbott—nothing was paid for them—Lancelot Smith and Theodore Stevens were the registered holders of 200 and 300 shares respectively, which were paid for and represented the working capital—the property consisted of five creameries in South Wales and a shop at 113, Uxbridge Road—in August last I went to the shop and found a man named Brown in possession on an unregistered mortgage by the company to him for £100—I came to a settlement with Brown by entering into an agreement with him—soon after that I found a man named Orchard in possession, who told me he had purchased the business from Payne—I never received a penny out of that for the creditors of the company—the company had a banking account, but the majority of the cheques received from customers of the company were paid into the private accounts of William Payne and Sidney Payne—some has been paid to the company, but the balance Payne has not handed over, or produced any vouchers for—the books were not kept satisfactorily—I have tried to get in the various leases of the Creameries—the St. Clear's lease is held by the solicitor who drew it up, for costs, and the previous accountant of the company has the Narberth" lease—the company never had any legal title to the leases—they were made out in the name of William Payne, and by the agreement he undertook to assign, but he never did—I have sold the goodwill of one of the Creameries for £10—I drew up this balance-sheet (Produced) on August 22nd, 1902—there is a debit balance of £2,095 18s. 2d.
Cress-examined by MR. LEVER. That amount includes the 1,500 shares—the debts due from the company are about £600.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I have never seen or heard of any moneys which should have been paid to the company having been into Abbott's account.
JOHN WILLIAM ROBERTS . I am an Examiner in Bankruptcy of the High Court of Justice—I produce the file of the bankruptcy of Edwin Payne, in 1887, and of S. E. Payne in 1895—that is the prisoner Payne—in 1895 the liabilities were £624 0s. 3d., assets £158 7s. 6d.—the assets realised £19 13s. 7d.—he is described as a dairyman—he has not applied for his discharge.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. In the 1895 bankruptcy his estimated household expenditure for two years was £491 7s. 2d.—he attributed his bankruptcy to losses in trading and bad debts—there was no sign of any rash expenditure.
and Co., solicitors, Stafford—I produce the file of the winding-up of the Chetwynd Mills and Creamery, Limited, in April, 1900—the deficiency was £2,344 1s. 9d., including £1,725 represented by shares—the estate realised £24 14s. 9d. gross—I also produce the transcript of the examination of John Abbott, taken on June 6th, 1901, and of Edwin Marshall payne, on September 12th, 1901—both of them were summoned to attend on May 9th, 1901—neither of them attended, and warrants were issued for their attendance—the two prisoners are the persons named—I was present at their examinations—(The transcript was put in for reference, and passages read, showing both, prisoners' connection with the Chetwynd Mills Company.)
ALBERT EDWARD HOLE . I am a clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies at Somerset House—I produce the file of the Welsh, Creameries, Limited, registered on December 14th, 1901—nominal capital £2,500 in 1,500 ordinary and 1,000 7 per cent, preference shares; Registered office, 113, Uxbridge Road, Shepherd's Bush. Directors: William Payne, farmer; John M. Gurrin, gentleman—Payne held 653 shares—John M. Gurrin, gentleman, 36, Dartmouth Park Road, fifty shares, and John Abbott, house agent, 109, Great Russell Street, W.C., fifty shares—there is nothing to indicate that Gurrin and Abbott are one and the—same person.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. This file of papers was open for public inspection from the date of registration.
SEYMOUR LESLIE MORSE . I am an accountant, of 32, Queen Victoria. Street—the witness Frederick Henry Morse is my brother—I have known Payne and Abbott four or five years—on Payne's instructions I registered the company called the Chetwynd Mills and Creamery, Limited, and the Farmers' United, Limited, which was a subsidiary company—on December 22nd, 1899, I was appointed liquidator of the Farmers' United, Limited—Payne estimated the liabilities at £496 3s. 8d., and assets at £20—the assets realised £5, and the disbursements were £6 1s. 9d.—I also registered the Welsh Creameries for Payne, but had nothing to do with it after that.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. The agreement between Payne, as vendor, and the Farmers' United Company, had not been registered by the secretary, consequently Payne became personally liable as a contributory—I know Payne had a farm called Dowles Farm—he was not sold up through me—I took no action, because on the application of one of the shareholders, Mr. Justice Wright directed the Memorandum to be filed.
Cross-examined by MR. JENKINS. I had no interviews with Abbott in respect of the companies—he took no part in them at all.
ROBERT JOHN PLATTEN . I am clerk to the Linslade, Leighton Buzzard, Urban District Council—in 1902 there was a building there known as "The Creamery," occupied by William Payne—there had been a complaint about the premises, and in November, 1902, Payne called and said he had received a notice from the Council's solicitors asking him to put the Creamery into a sanitary condition, and that he hoped the Council would not put him to more expense than necessary, as he was about to take a partner and that if anyone called to see me he hoped I would not
give the Creamery a bad name—I told him I could have nothing to do with such a transaction.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. I knew the sanitary condition of the place, and if anyone had inquired I should certainly have informed them.
By the COURT. The building was kept in a bad state, and the notice was in consequence of a serious outbreak of typhoid fever—there was no prohibition of milk in the neighbourhood, but the inspector had instructtions to tell the person responsible that unless something was done there would be a prohibition.
JAMES CUNNINGHAM (Police Sergeant.) On November 20th, 1902, I went with Sergeant Carlin and Inspector Bower to 109, Great Russell Street, where I saw Abbott—Bower spoke to him, and I read this warrant to him—(This was for conspiracy by Payne and Abbott.)—Abbott said,. "I do not know anything about Creameries; Payne has had an office here; that is all I know"—on the way to the station he said, "I have known Payne for many years, but I have not in any way benefitted by his profits; he was bankrupt in 1895, and only recently I lent him £30"—at that time Payne was in custody, and the warrant was read to him again in the presence of Payne; he made no reply—he gave a false address—at Payne's house I found a diary containing an entry dated November 4th, 1899; "Received cheque from Abbott re Mustill who paid him £49; Abbott deducted £9 towards cheque for £10; the remainder should be for extra, costs I paid to Harrison re bill."—on November 6th: "John Abbott bought goods at Main Street and City Road of Sheriff for valuation, £53 17s., Sheriff's costs, £9 4s.; solicitor's reduced to £10, remainder paid over, £34 to C. M. and C.; rents ought to have been deducted out of this"—I also found some cheques drawn by Payne in favour of Abbott and Gurrin amounting to £139 odd.
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. I also found cheques drawn by Abbott in favour of Payne corresponding to about the same amount—on the counterfoils of some there were notes showing that the transactions were by way of an exchange of cheques.
FRANCIS CARLIN (Police Sergeant.) I searched Abbott's office at 109, Great Russell Street, and found some letters from Payne to Abbott there relating to the Chetwynd Mills and Farmers' United Companies—amongst them was this letter: "October 31st, Dowles Farm, Budeley, Dear Abbott, Don't forget to wire me Ethel Street, Birmingham, if Mustill pays deposit, and post cheque on at once as I expect execution in at Main Street on. Thursday morning, and shall want £50 to pay them out; give him a receipt as part payment of shares in the Farmers' United; a further £50 to be paid on Monday next, after which salary will commence.—Yours truly, W. Payne."
ELIAS BOWER (Police Inspector.) On November 20th, 1902, I saw Payne in Oxford Street—I said, Is your name Payne?"—he said, "Yes"—I said. "What is your Christian name?"—he said, "William"—I said, "I am a police officer and have a warrant for your arrest, you must go with
me to Bow Street, and I will there read it to you"—he said, "H'm"—I read the warrant to him and he said, "My right name is Edwin Payne; I have adopted the name of 'William' for some years as it was my father's name; I should like to say Kent has had £20 of his money back about a month ago, and he has had several other small sums back amounting—altogether to about £40; he has also had his salary, about £3 10s. a week, and he has the business at St. Clears; he purchased 200 shares in the Welsh Creameries; in fact he had Lancelot Smith's shares, and on the impulse of the moment I gave him an undertaking to repurchase his shares if he would carry out certain conditions which he failed to do; Smith has had back £10, and my son Marshall has guaranteed him £5 a month; I have also given Smith a guarantee to pay it off quicker if I can; I never had a halfpenny of Mustill's money, it went into the Farmers' United, Limited, and, personally, I hadn't a penny of Smith's; that went into the Welsh Creameries, Limited; Kent's also went into the same company which company owes me now £639"—at 2 p.m. the same day I went to Abbott's office and said to him, "What is your name," he said, "Abbott"—I said, "I know you as John Martin Gurrin; Sergeant Cunningham will read the warrant to you"—he did so, and Abbott made some reply—at 5.30 p.m. at Bow Street I read the warrant to them—Abbott made no reply; Payne said, "Does this mean the Public Prosecutor"—I said, "es."
Cross-examined by MR. LEVER. The documents which have been put in all bear on this case—there were other documents found, but they may not bear on the case at all.
Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. Abbott has been carrying on business for about twelve years—I have not been able to discover any cheques payable to him, given by the persons defrauded.
Payne, in his defence on oath, stated that at each of the times when he obtained money from the different people he believed that there was a fortune in the businesses, and that he had no intention to defraud.
Abbott, in his defence on oath, said he had never benefited in any way from the companies named.
GUILTY . PAYNE— Nine months hard labour.
ABBOTT— Six months' hard labour.
NEW COURT.—Friday, January 16th, 1903.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. LAWSON WALTON, K.C., and MR. POLLARD Prosecuted; MR. C. F.
GILL, K.C., and MR. CLEMENT EDWARDS Defended
During the progress of the case, MR. GILL stated that the prisoner would withdraw the plea of justification; upon which MR. WALTON said that as the prosecutor's character was now vindicated, he would withdraw the prosecution.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Saturday, January 17th, 1903.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
MR. ELLIOTT and MR. BEAL Prosecuted; MR. HUTTON and WATSON
ELLEN ELIZABETH PUGH : I am a chambermaid at the Covent Garden Hotel, Southampton Street, Strand—on December 4th, I think, about six p.m., the prisoner and her husband and child arrived there, but I did not see them then—Mr. Chandley rang for a drink about 8.30—they were occupying room 64, which has two beds in it—I went into the room, the child was on the bed and the prisoner was leaning over it, apparently trying to get it asleep—the baby was talking—as far as I could see the prisoner was treating it with kindness and attention—Mr. Chandley was standing by the window; he ordered some whisky, and asked his wife if she would have a drink—she refused—I went away to get the whisky and took it to him—the state of things in the room was the same then—I went away, and about 9 p.m. there was a ring from No. 64; I went at once towards the room; as I was going along the corridor I heard screams—I opened the door—Mr. Chandley had the child in his arms, he put it into my arms and said, "ook what she has done"—the prisoner was standing by the bed—the child's throat was cut—I do not think it was conscious—it was covered with blood, and Mr. Chandley, who was in his night shirt, had blood from the child on him—I did not notice any blood on the prisoner—Mr. Chandley had a razor with blood upon it in his hand—he gave it to me, and later on I took two more out of the room—they were on the dressing table—I gave the child back to Mr. Chandley and said I would go and get a doctor—I went and communicated with the hall porter, and then returned to the room—Dr. Betts arrived—I think he was visiting a friend in the hotel—when I returned to the room the prisoner was still by the bed, she was crying and seemed very much distressed—I spoke to her afterwards, and asked her if her head was bad—she said she intended doing away with herself, or something to that effect—the child was afterwards removed to the hospital.
Cross-examined. The child was at first put to bed in the bed where the husband was going to sleep—when I first went into the room the child was in bed, but not undressed—the prisoner was hushing it to sleep in an affectionate manner.
EDWARD HETLEY BETTS , M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P I live and practice at 3, Forest Place, Great Ormond Street—on December 4th I happened to be at the Covent Garden Hotel—about 9 p.m. the hall porter made a communication to me in consequence of which I went up in the lift to room 64—I saw Miss Brown, the hotel proprietor's daughter, with a little girl in her arms—the prisoner was standing on the left side of the room with her hands over her face—I took the child from Miss Brown and examined her—I discovered an incision on the left side of the neck, below—the lobe of the ear, extending forward—her throat was cut and she
was bleeding freely—a great deal of blood was on her clothes as well as upon Miss Brown's clothes and on the prisoner—the wound was dangerous—the child was very nearly dead—I ordered hot blankets and a hot water bottle, and treated the child—Dr. Hamerton afterwards arrived.
Cross-examined. I cannot say whether the prisoner appreciated what was going on, my attention was taken up with the child—I said at the police court that the prisoner appeared dazed and did not appreciate what was going on—she appeared dazed when I went into the room—the child bled so much that anybody could see it—the prisoner appeared to take no notice.
GEORGE ALBERT HAMERTON , F.R.C.S. I live at 51, Russell Square—on December 4th, about 9.45 p.m., I was summoned to the Covent Garden. Hotel—I went to a double bedded room, No. 64, on the second floor—before going into the room I met Dr. Betts, who told me the circumstances and the child's condition, which was very bad—when I went into the room I found the child in bed with its clothes on there had been considerable bleeding—the prisoner was standing in the opposite corner of the room to where the child was—she seemed dazed and stupid—she did not seem to appreciate anything that was taking place—some information was given to me with regard to her—after a premature confinement puerperal insanity sometimes comes on—in nearly 80 per cent, of such cases the patient recovers—it occurs about six weeks after the confinement—it is generally temporary, unless there is a tendency to insanity—in that state of mental aberration it is possible for a woman to commit an act of this kind, not being conscious of its character—the effect of puerperal insanity is specially directed to those nearest to them, especially their progeny—the prisoner's attack on her child she loved best was consistent with this form of temporary mania—the mania, as a rule, comes on suddenly, but sometimes there is irritability or depression beforehand—it generally comes on without much warning—in those cases that come on early after a confinement they generally recover rapidly.
Cross-examined. The mere effect of the premature delivery is sufficient to bring on puerperal mania—I cannot say whether a sudden shock from, a fall would produce it, but it would make it worse—depression is often an indication of it, accompanied by restlessness—I was not present, but I understood that the child's first cry in the hospital was for its mother—its age is about three.
HARRY CALLAGHAN (Detective E.) In consequence of information received on Thursday, December 4th, at 10.30 p.m., I went to the Covent Garden Hotel with another detective sergeant—in room 64 I saw the prisoner sitting in a corner in a chair, fully dressed—she seemed dazed and lost—I told her we were police officers and should arrest her for attempted murder by cutting the child's throat—she made no reply—I told her she would have to dress and come with me to the station—I took her to the station—prior to that the chambermaid handed me two razors—one had blood on it—the prisoner was subsequently charged—she made no reply—she was quite sober.
Cross-examined. She saw the razors handed to me—the blood on the
razor was dry—during the whole proceedings, even at the police court, she did not seem to understand.
WILLIAM SAVAGE (Police Inspector E.) On Thursday, December 4th having seen the child at the hospital I returned to Bow Street police station, where I found the prisoner detained—she seemed dazed and not able to realise her position—I charged her in the ordinary 'way—she made no reply—she did not seem to appreciate what the charge was—she was quite sober.
Evidence for the Defence.
SETH CHANDLEY . I live at 43, St. Paul's Road, Canonbury—I was married to the prisoner five years ago come April—I am a jockey—a child was born last year—the injured child will be 3 1/2 years old in April—part of last" year I was riding in Belgium—in August my wife joined me—she had been living with her child and relations in the north of England—we lived together in Belgium till we returned to Harwich on Sunday, November 30th—on October 30th my wife met with an accident in getting off a tram—she had a fall—she was then in the family-way—on November 8th she had a premature confinement—the child was born dead—that affected her health a great deal—when we returned to Harwich on November 30th she was very ill and very restless—she wanted to go home to her friends as quickly as she could—I suggested that she should rest at Harwich—we stayed at Dovercourt till the following Thursday for the benefit of her health—on the Thursday we came to London—we arrived about 6.40 p.m.—we had a double-bedded room—after being there a little while I suggested going out to get a cigar at the corner of the street—she asked me not to leave her alone—she said her head was aching a great deal—I did not leave her but ordered a cigar in the hotel—I sat smoking for a time and then went to bed—the child was in bed—the chamber maid brought me some whiskey just before I got into bed—I was awakened by a scream from the baby—I had gone to sleep—my wife sat up by the window—I asked what was the matter, and what the baby was crying for—she was still in the middle of the room—I. got up and went and looked at the baby—I saw there was blood—when I asked what the baby was crying for she said, "My God, what have I done?"—I rang the bell and shrieked out, and assistance came—I think my wife has been one of the best of mothers there is—she was very fond of the child, she never separated from it; she always had it with her—she was very affectionate to it that evening—she had put it to bed in an affectionate manner, she was perfectly sober—she refused the drink I offered her when the servant came in—she was in the family-way and looking forward to the child's birth—I was thrown out of a carriage in Belgium while she was in the family way, and she was very much upset about it—that was just before her miscarriage.
Cross-examined. Her restlessness was quite fresh—she has never been the same since the birth of the first child; she has been depressed and nervous—there was nothing in her conversation which led me to suppose he was going to do anything to the child—there was no personal irritation with me—I had not quarrelled with her—we were on good terms.
ISABELLA MACAULAY . I live at 26, Princes Street, Carlisle, and am the prisoner's mother—prior to going to Belgium she and her husband had a house next door—I saw her every day—the child was with her or between her and me—she seemed too fond of it—the child was very fond of its mother—I have seen her with the child more or less all its life—she has always been an affectionate mother—there was great affection between them.
GUILTY of the act, but not responsible for her actions at the time. To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. METCALFE Prosecuted.
ALFRED HARPIN . I am a plumber of 13, Scots Road, Leyton—on December 23rd, at 4.30 p.m., I was in the Hope beer-house, Maryland Point, Stratford—I saw the prisoners there—Mortimer asked me for a cigarette—I gave them two each—I changed a sovereign at the bar to get a drink—I had some other money but I wanted some change as I was going to make one or two purchases—the prisoners could see the change which was given to me—I left the house alone about ten minutes after I had received the change—I left the prisoners in the bar and went down Windmill Lane towards my home, which is about two minutes' walk from the beer-house—I went into a urinal—the prisoners came in after me and Mortimer struck me in the eye with his fist and cut my eye—he did not say anything—Biterlick struck me in the mouth and knocked me down—I called for help while I was on the ground—Biterlick held me down and Mortimer put his hands into my pocket and took part of my money—I struggled, and Mortimer then held me down and Biterlick took the rest—they then knocked my head against the wall and I became unconscious—they left me in the urinal—when I came to, nobody was there—I went to the officer on point duty and reported it to him—he referred me to the police station, where I made a report—about 6.30 p.m. I went again to the Hope beer-house and saw the prisoners there—I went out and found a policeman and returned with him to the beer-house, but only Mortimer was there—he was taken into custody—he did not say anything—I gave a description of Biterlick to the police, and next saw him on Christmas morning, about 12.30 at the police-station, when I picked him out from nine other men—I am sure he is the man.
Cross-examined by Mortimer. I did not treat you in the bar—I did not go out of the public-house with you.
Cross-examined by Biterlick. I did not ask you to go to the Coach and Horses with me—I did not follow you into the urinal.
JOHN KILLICK (480 K.) At 5 p.m. on December 23rd, I was on duty at Maryland Point Railway Station—the prosecutor came up and made a complaint—I went to look for the men of whom he complained—he gave me descriptions, but I did not find them—I took the prosecutor to the West
Ham Police Station—when he complained to me he had blood on his face and mud on his clothing and hat, as if he had been thrown to the ground.
GEORGE WATKINS (198 K.) At 6.20 p.m. on December 23rd I was on duty at Maryland Point—the prosecutor came to me and in consequence of what he said I went to the Hope beer-house, where I saw Mortimer—in his presence I said to the prosecutor, "Which are the men you accuse of robbing and assaulting you?"—he said, "This one," pointing to Mortimer; "the other one is not here now; he was here a minute ago"—I said to Mortimer "his man charges you with robbing and assaulting him this afternoon, about 4.30, in a urinal"—he said, "We have been drinking together"—took him to the station—when charged he said, "It is the other man you want."
Cross-examined by Mortimer. You did not say that the prosecutor went out with the other man.
WILLIAM HUBBARD (174 E.) At 10.55 p.m. on December 24th I was on duty in Leytonstone Road, and I saw Biterlick—I had had a description of him—I went up to him and said, "I want you to go to the police station with me"—he replied, "What for, governor?"—I said, "I have suspicions of your being concerned with another man named Mortimer in robbing and assaulting a man in the urinal of the Cart and Horses on the afternoon of the 23rd"—he said, "I do not know what you mean, governor; I was not with Mortimer that afternoon, but I will go to the station"—on the way he said, "I was with Mortimer yesterday morning for a little while doing a few jobs for a few different people. I went home at dinner time and did not come out again until the evening"—at the station he was put up with nine other men and at once identified by the prosecutor—on December 26th on the way from the police station to the police court he said, "Who put me away then, I expect it was Bockie"—I know Mortimer well, he goes by that name—Biterlick said, "I will give that bloke something, the dirty sod."
Cross-examined by Biterlick. I did not receive your description from the prosecutor—the description I received—from the police was that you were dressed in a light pair of trousers and had light hair.
Biterlick in his defence said that the prosecutor asked him to have a drink; that they went to the urinal, but that he had not had any money from the prosecutor.
MORTIMER then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at West Ham Police Court on November 28th, 1899, and a conviction was also proved against BITERLICK. MORTIMER— Eighteen months' hard labour against
BITERLICK— Fifteen months' hard labour.
183. MATTHEW SHARPLEY (18) and HENRY COOK (21), PLEADED GUILTY to stealing two boxes of candied peel the property of George Harker and Co., Ltd., Cook having been convicted of felony at West Ham Quarter Sessions on June 13th, 1902. Two other convictions were proved against him. Fifteen months' hard labour. SHARPLEY, Eight months' hard labour.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. WARDE Prosecuted; MR. HEDDON Defended.
WILLIAM THOMAS GRISTWOOD . I live at 26, Blythwood Road, Ilford—I am a clerk in the delivery department of Barr and Co., carriers, of 10, Jewin Street—on November 12th Henry Pearce, a carman to Henry Taylor, contractor, of 184, Upper Thames Street, received from me two delivery orders with instructions to go to the Tilbury Dock depot, Commercial Road, and collect a load of goods according to the delivery orders and deliver them—there were 23 packages for delivery, all from the depot—it was a consignment from Germany—Pearce returned about 6.30 p.m. and made a statement to me—I produce copies of the invoices.
GEORGE HARTLEY . I live at 60, Charles Street, Stepney—I am a goods checker on the London, Tilbury and Southend Railway at the Commercial Road depot—my delivery slips show the carman to be Pearce—he received from me 23 bales and cases on November 12th and took them away on his trolley—I checked the load in my slip (Produced)—the goods came from the Ostend department of the Tilbury Docks on November 11 th.
HENRY PEARCE . I live at 101, Darwin Street, Old Kent Road—I am a carman employed by Mr. Henry Taylor, a carman contractor of 184, Upper Thames Street—on November 12th I received instructions from my firm to go to Barr and Co. for orders—I went there and received these two delivery orders which I took to the Commercial Road depot of the London, Tilbury and Southend Railway—I received and put on my trolley 23 package and bales—I delivered 19—about 6.30 p.m. I was in Fore Street Avenue, where I went up to the second floor of Barr and Co.'s offices, where I had received the delivery orders—since November 12th they have removed from Fore Street Avenue to Jewin Street—at that time I had on my trolley at the door two cases and two bales, one case for Ryland and Sons, marked R.S., and one for Olney and Hampden, marked K.D., and two bales for Vickers and Porson, marked M.S.—on returning after five minutes absence I found that the horse, trolley, and cases had disappeared—I went to Moor Lane police station and gave information—about midnight I was summoned and went to Lime Street police station when I found my horse and trolley, but not the two cases.
JOHN FLETCHER WOOLLEY . I live at 2, Woodstock Terrace, Albert Road, Palace Gates—I am a warehouseman employed by Hampden and Co. in Falcon Square, Aldersgate Street—we had an order invoiced to us in November from Germany, consisting of military braid and lace edgings value £44 15s. 7d.—we have not received the goods, but we received invoices marked K.D. and one case numbered 2130,—on December 11th at West Ham Police Court I saw a quantity of edging and braid, which was like what ought to have come according to the invoice—I also identify them by the number, patterns and finish—they have our own call number that we give the manufacturer, which would not be given to another firm—about £10 of goods were missing, value about £33.
WILLIAM HENRY SUTTON . I Jive at 13, Graf ton Square, Clapham—I am traveller to Eugene Broquet, 74 and 75, Watling Street,—who are agents for a firm in Germany—early in November we had canvas invoiced to Vickers and Porson from that firm value £31 1s. 1d.—we have never received any communication from Vickers and Porson that they had received the goods—on December 11th I went to the west Ham police court and saw some bales of canvas which I identified by the make, the way they were folded, and by the numbers, as the goods consigned to Vickers and Porson from, the German firm, to the value of about £24 out of the £31—seven pieces were missing—they average about £1 a piece of 25 yards and 44 inches wide.
JOHN EZRA STRAKER . I live at 91, Hope Hill Road, Putney—I am a buyer for Vickers and Porson—I ordered goods from a firm in Germany, and received the invoice, but not the goods, which would come to me—I should know of their delivery if they arrived—early in December I saw some canvas goods at the police court which ought to have been delivered to our firm—this check pattern is a part of it.
WILLIAM ROAKE (725 K.) On November 12th, about 9.15 p.m. I was in Rope Makers' Fields, Limehouse—going down a badly lighted street I found a trolley and horse with no one in charge—the name on it was Henry Taylor, Upper Thames Street—after waiting some time I took it to the police station—several empty sacks were in it, but no goods.
ALFRED NICHOLLS (Inspector K.) In consequence of seeing a stolen property police circular I made inquiries, and on December 8th, about 2 p.m., with two of my sergeants I went to 29, Wakelin Street, West Ham—a woman answered the door, and in consequence of a conversation with her I entered the house, and at the kitchen door I saw the prisoner Mormon—Detectives Brown and Walters were with me—I said, "We are police officers, what is your name?"—I made my note directly I got to West Ham Police Station—in the prisoner's presence the woman replied, "Say Garwood"—that is her name—the prisoner said, "My name is Mormon"—I said, "I have reason to believe that you have some stolen leather and other property in the house, I am going to search it"—he said, "I have got no stolen property here, what you want, look for"—I said, "am going to search the bed-rooms"—he accompanied me upstairs to the front bedrooms, where I found ninety-seven boxes of black braid, fortyfive boxes of white lace, twenty-six boxes of black lace, thirty-one boxes of mohair, and twenty-two boxes of white mohair—he said that was his bedroom—the boxes were not opened, and some had been done up in paper as well; and forty-seven boxes of lace edging marked on the outside, and there is a pattern, all of them had something on them showing the contents—I found fifteen rolls of what I took to be quilt material, but which has been identified as the canvas, and one empty sack—I asked the prisoner how he accounted for the possession of the property—he said, "I met a man at whippet racing at Bow Grounds about a fortnight ago on a Monday, and he asked me if I would mind some stuff for him; I said yes, and last Saturday night he brought it round to my place in a barrow: I was not at home at the time, the young woman who minds my children took it in, and I found it when
I came home"—meaning in the bedroom—I said "Who is the man, and where does he live?"—he said, "I had never seen him before. I do not know his name, or where he lives"—I said that I was not satisfied with his statement, and should arrest him—I directed him to be conveyed to the station, where the woman Garwood was also arrested—when the charge was read over the prisoner said, "Clara, cheer up, we must make the best of it"—she said in his hearing, "They had no right to ask me if I was living with you"—just prior to the prisoner being put back into the cell he said to me, "Now you have got the stuff, you can do as you like."
Cross-examined. The prisoner made no attempt to prevent a search—nothing was locked up—there was a considerable bulk of stuff, as much as we could place in a cab—I did not ask the description or appearance of the man the prisoner said he met at the races.
ARTHUR WALTERS (Detective K.) On December 8th, I went with Inspector Nicholls to 29, Wakelin-Street, and went with Garwood into one of the bedrooms—I found ten cases, or small boxes, of white braiding, six cards of white lace, twenty cards of black lace, and two bundles of black braiding, in a chest of drawers—this was immediately beneath where the bulk was found—these goods were a portion of the goods produced at the police station.
WILLIAM BROWN (Detective K.) On December 8th I went with Nicholls to 29, Wakelin Road—Mormon was given into my custody—I took him to the police station—on the way in the cab he said, "Keep it as quiet as you can. Do not show me up, it is my first time"—in the back room on the first floor I had found a roll of quilt material on the bed, unopened—that was in a third room.
The prisoner, in his defence on oath, said that he merely stored the goods for sale for a man whom he met at his occupation as a whippet-slipper at dog racing.
GUILTY on the Second Count. Six months hard labour.
185. FREDERICK JOHNS (60), PLEADED GUILTY to breaking and entering the dwelling house of Charles Chilvers and stealing a hand bag. a ring, and a pair of earrings, having been before convicted at this court. Five other convictions were proved against him. Five years' penal servitude.
Before J. A. Rentoul, Esq., K.C.
MR. METCALFE Prosecuted.
GUILTY . To enter into recognisances.
MR. HUMPHREYS Prosecuted; MR. COHEN Defended Claxson.
about 10.40 p.m. I saw the prisoners together loitering about—I kept them under observation till 11 p.m.—they went within about twelve yards of the automatic machine, standing outside 109, Grove Lane—Lane left Claxson and walked up to the machine, punched it three or four times with some instrument he had in his hand, then went back to Claxson, then back to the machine, striking a blow on the back of it—that broke the iron, which fell to the ground—as he went to the front of the machine I went towards him within three feet—he struck me across my face, and said, "Take that you f----g bastard"—that knocked me down—he ran away—I got up and ran after him for about 160 yards—in Grove Crescent I saw something in his right hand which he threw away towards the church—I caught him about thirty yards further along the Grove—he said, "I did not know it was you, Mr. Mitchell, or I would not have it you like that"—I took him into custody—in another five or six yards he struck me in my mouth—I procured assistance and took him to the station where he said, "I did not know it was Mr. Mitchell, or I would not have hit him like that"—when the charge was read to him he said, "ow can you make it stealing I think it is only attempting to steal"—Claxson made no reply to the charge.
Cross-examined by MR. COHEN. I have not Claxson's discharges.
Cross-examined by Lane. I was about fifteen yards of when you put your hand on the machine—an electric light is almost opposite.
THOMAS PITCHLEY (199 K). I was with Mitchell about 10.40 p.m. on Boxing Day—I saw the prisoners loitering in a suspicious manner—we watched them till 11 o'clock—they went within twelve yards of an automatic machine—Lane left Claxson and went to the machine, worked his hand as if using an intrument, came back to Claxson, then went back to the machine and struck it a violent blow on the back—something fell to the ground—I afterwards found these pieces of iron—then I saw his hand at the back of the machine as if he was taking something out—Mitchell went towards him and he struck Mitchell a blow with something in his hand, felling him, but he got up and gave chase—I went to Claxson and told him I was a police officer, and should take him to the station where he would be charged—he replied, "I did not know he was going to smash it, or else I would have walked away"—we took the prisoners to the station—Claxson made no reply to the charge—I went back, and on the ground near the machine I found two pennies," and in Grove Crescent Road, through which Mitchell ran, I found these other five pennies—they are specially marked—I picked up these three pieces of iron by the machine—put together they form the back of the machine.
Cross-examined by MR. COHEN. Claxson did not attempt to run away—he gave his right address.
Lane, in his defence on oath, said that he went to weigh himself, and when he got off the constable took him; but as he did not know who had caught him he struck him.
Claxson, in his defence on oath, said that he was a ship's fireman, and strolling about met Lane, but did not know he intended to break the machine.
GUILTY . (See below.)
MR. HUMPHREYS Prosecuted.
JAMES MITCHELL (342 K.) About 11 p.m. on Boxing night I saw Lane near the Grove, Stratford—seeing him go to an automatic machine I went towards him—he struck me a blow across my face with something about fifteen inches long, which he had in his hand—the blow knocked me down and caused a bruise on my forehead, a slight cut on my nose, and blackened both my eyes—my face bled very much and covered my coat with blood till I got to the station—I lost a great deal of blood—the same evening I saw the divisional surgeon—by his orders I was oft duty five days—I gave no provocation—when I caught him he said, "I did not know it was you, Mr. Mitchell, or I would not have hit you like that"—when I had got him five or six yards further he struck me a blow on my mouth and loosened a tooth—when the sergeant charged him he said, "I did not know it was Mr. Mitchell, or I would not have hit him like that."
Cross-examined by the prisoner. I was on duty with a black eye five days after, but I was in plain clothes—I should not be allowed on duty in uniform with a black eye—on the remand I had no marks, only a slight cut down my nose—I had two black eyes.
GUILTY of a common assault. CLAXSON then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Maidstone in October, 1894, in the name of Charles Gregory, and LANE to a conviction of felony at West Ham on January 25th, 1899, in the name of Charles Langridge. Five other convictions were proved against Lane, and he was slated to be associated with a gang of theses-.
CLAXSON received a good character.
To enter into recognisances LANE Six months' imprisonment on the first indictment, and three months' hard labour for the assault on the police.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
190. EDWIN JONATHAN BECK , and JANE BECK , Having the custody of Edwin John Beck and Louisa Beck, children under the age of sixteen, did neglect them in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering and injury to their health.
MR. BUTTON Prosecuted.
WILLIAM MUNRO DASENT GALLIE . I am a surgeon of 12. Fore's Market, Canning Town—on December 9th the female prisoner brought a child to me—I found it so nearly dead that I did not like to make a complete examination it was probably suffering from some form of pneumonia—I gave her a letter to take to the District Nurses' Home—on December 11th, by the Coroner's direction. I made a post-mortem examination—bronchial pneumonia was the cause of death—the body was very emaciated, probably caused by bad food
and the want of food—it weighed about 18 lbs.—the normal weight of a child one year and nine months old is about 27 lbs.—its head was exceptionally dirty, containing many hundreds of lice, as also about the neck and armpits, which would cause suffering—ordinary attention, such as soap and water, would have kept it free from vermin—on the scalp I found two small swellings—they were apparently bruises that had suppurated—emaciation had been going on slowly, and would be obvious to anybody—on the 10th I saw the other child, Louisa—she was apparently about five years old—she had bronchial pneumonia and was very dirty.
Cross-examined by Edwin Beck. I did not say "Your child is dying: take it home"—I gave you some medicine and told you to take it to the Nurses Home.
Cross-examined by Jane Beck. I gave you instructions not to feed the child from the breast as you were suffering from boils, which I attributed improper food you had had.
EDWARD WEDDELL (56 K.) On December 10th, at 12 p.m., I went to the prisoners' house, 89, Scott Street, Canning Town, and saw the deceased boy on the bed dead—the bedding was very dirty, also the house—I saw both the prisoners there, and the girl Louisa—I asked Jane Beck what sort of health the deceased child had been having—she said, "Very good since birth, but about two months ago it had chicken pox, and I took it to Dr. Boyle and got some medicine, and it went on pretty well; about a fortnight ago it had whooping cough and I took it to the Seamen's Hospital and got some medicine; it got worse, but I did not call in a doctor; on Tuesday, the 9th, I took it to Dr. Gallie; he told me it was dying, and gave me a letter for the Nurses' Home: I took it there, and the nurse at three o'clock poulticed it and gave it some milk; at 3.50 the child died"—Edwin Beck said that about two months ago he had" been to the relieving officer and got an order for the parish doctor; that he took the child to the parish doctor about 11 a.m., but he bluffed him and told him to come at 6 p.m.;—that he did not go, but his wife and children did—he told me that he drank a little, and that he would not go to the parish again on account of having been bluffed on that first order, and that he had done two days work in five weeks, one day at 17s. and the other at 18s.—Jane Beck was nursing Louisa, and I told her the child looked ill—she said, "Yes, it is; I have just come from Dr. Gallie with it, and have a letter to take to the Nurses' Home"—I said to Edwin, "You ought to get medical attendance for this child"—he said, "I am"—I said, "You are poor; you have not got anything; you ought to go to the relieving officer and get an order for the parish doctor"—he said, "No, that I wont "said, "If anything happens to this child, it appears to be dying, you will get into trouble and probably be charged"—he made no reply to that.
Cross-examined by Edwin Beck. Your wife said she had been ill—she did not say she had been in bed three months.
PLEASANCE ELIZA BECKERTON . I live at 89, Scott Street—I know Louisa Beck and the boy that died—Louisa had chicken-pox and whooping cough—so far as I know she had no medical attendance except when she
took it to Dr. Gallie—the bed and rooms were dirty when the baby died—it had been ill about a month before it died.
Cross-examined by Edwin Beck. I know your wife had been ill in bed—I cannot say your bed was clean when I know it was dirty.
Cross-examined by Jane Beck. I never saw you ill-treat your children, but I cannot say your bed was clean when it was dirty.
By the COURT. I have seen bread and butter in the children's hands—they were clean until the last month, when she was ill—I did not hear the children crying—I never saw any drink on the man—the woman was always sober and seemed to like her children—she slept in the same bed as they did.
EDWARD TUCKER . I am the relieving officer—on December 12th, at 11.30 a.m., I called at the prisoner's house—I saw Louisa lying on a bed made up on a box, in the kitchen—the bedding and kitchen were very dirty—I told Mrs. Beck the place was very dirty—she said, "Yes it is; I have had my hands full in consequence of the sickness of the child"—the man had applied on that day for a medical order; that was the cause of my visit—no application had been made to me before that—we never refuse an application for medical relief on any account.
HENRY WILLIAM JORDAN . I live at 9, Ethel Road, Custom House, and am foreman in the Atlantic Transport Line—the male prisoner has been employed as a casual labourer for the past twelve months—whenever there has been work he has been employed—from October 16th to December 8th he was employed twenty-one days, and he received altogether £9 3s. 10d.—there are other firms in the docks where he would probably get labour when I did not require him.
JOHN RIBBONS . I live at 129, Stratford Road, and am insurance agent to the Royal London Friendly Society—Louisa Beck and Edwin Jonathan Beck were insured in the Society—on December 9th I received a letter, with a postal order for 3s., asking me to call the next day and enter the amount in the book—I called on the 10th—I entered the amount: 8d. the father, 2d. the mother, and 1d. each on three, children—there were arrears—Mr. Beck told me the baby was dead—they would be allowed £5 for Louisa, and 30s. for the baby.
By the COURT. They had been insuring since August—I commenced calling on November 17th—after thirteen weeks, if the baby died, they would get 30s.—the last payment was made to my predecessor on October 6th—2s. was paid then—the object of insuring is to pay the funeral expenses—the child has to die before they get the money—I do not know whether insuring shortens the average life of children in that neighbourhood.
Witness for the defence.
MR. BARRETT. I am house surgeon at the Seamen's Hospital—a week before the baby died it was suffering from whooping cough, Louisa also had whooping cough—I cannot say as to the children's bodily condition as I did not examine them—I ordered them milk from our dispensary, also some medicine.
Edwin Beck's defence: My wife had been very ill and unable to keep place properly—I am not a lazy or a dirty man.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HUTTON, for the prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. SLADE BUTLER Prosecuted;
GEORGE BEALE . I am a coal porter of 77, High Street, Woolwich—on December 15th, between 7 and 8 p.m., I was getting workmen together for Winter's Wharf—I was foreman there—James Brill came up to me in High Street and asked me to give him a job—I told him I had all the men I wanted—I knew him, he had worked for me before—he at once put up his fist and knocked me on my shoulder, and then on my face—I pushed him away—the women came up and hit me on the head with the heels of their boots, which they had in their hands—I knew them before, the younger prisoner is Brill's wife, and the other is his mother-in-law—they struck me three or four times each—it was quite dark—somebody called out, "ook out, he has got a belt"—there was a crowd—I turned round and saw a belt in Brill's hand, which he swung round and caught me on my head and knocked me senseless; when I came to I found myself in the Infirmary where I remained till the following Tuesday.
Cross-examined by James Brill. I did not say, "Why should I give work to a dirty, white-livered sod like you"—I did not strike you in the face—we did not have a fair fight and fall to the ground three or four times.
Cross-examined by Wilbourne. I did not challenge to fight Brill in the bar of a public-house, and we did not fight in the road—I may have hit you after you struck me, but not before—I did not get my wounds by falling on the kerb—your daughter was there—I knew her before.
GEORGE LONGFORD . I am a labourer, of 87, High Street, Woolwich—on December 15th at 7.30 p.m., I was in my house, and hearing a noise went out—I saw a crowd outside the Three Daws—I saw Brill strike the prosecutor, who I knew, several times about the face with his fist, then he kicked him several times in his privates—the two women rushed up—they each had a boot in their-hands—they struck the prosecutor across his head with some boots—I am sure the younger woman was there—I knew her before—I do not know where they got the boots from—they were women's boots—when he was struck the prosecutor was leaning against the wall—the male prisoner then returned with a belt in his and struck the prosecutor across the head and body several times with it—he reeled round and fell—it was not a belt like this one (Produced), it
was much stronger than that—me and George Thorne caught the prosecutor before he reached the ground—we took him home—he could not walk properly—his head was cut open and bleeding very much—a doctor was sent for.
Cross-examined by James Brill. You left the prosecutor and came back with a belt—you did not have a fair fight with him.
Cross-examined by Wilbourne. I did not see the prosecutor strike you—you had a baby in your arms, but you gave it to someone else.
Cross-examined by Ann Brill. You may have had a pair of carpet slippers on your feet.
GEORGE THORNE . I am a labourer of 75, High Street, Woolwich—about 7.30 p.m. on December 15th, I was in High Street—I saw the prisoners there—I am sure Mrs. Brill was there—I knew her before—I see the prosecutor trying to defend himself against the prisoners, who were surrounding him—James was hitting him with his fists and the women were beating him on his head with some boots—James then picked up a stone and threw it at the prosecutor but missed him—he then took off his belt and struck him on the head, and the prosecutor fell—as he was falling I ran into the road and caught him—he was bleeding from the temple—I carried him indoors—he was unconscious.
Cross-examined by James Brill. I did not see any fair fight—the prosecutor was shoving you away—he never offered to fight you.
Cross-examined by Wilbourne. The prosecutor did not fall to the ground; if his head had got to the ground he would not be alive.
By the COURT. I have known James since he was a little boy—he has been married three or four years—Wilbourne is the girl's mother—I have known the young woman since she was a girl, and Wilbourne on and off for eight or nine years.
JAMES TEES . I am a surgeon of 170, Powis Street, Woolwich—on December 15th, about 8 p.m., I was called to a house in High Street to see the prosecutor—I found him in bed—there was a considerable amount of blood on his face and head—he had three or four bumps about as large as pigeon's eggs on his head, a lacerated wound about 2 1/2 inches long on his right temple, going down to the bone—I do not think that wound could have been caused by a blow from a fist—I saw him next day about 10.30 a.m., he had got worse in the night, he had then recovered consciousness, although he could not speak—I thought there was something wrong with the speech centre—he could walk and understand to a certain extent—I sent him to the infirmary.
Cross-examined by James Brill I did not see a silver tube in his throat or anything of the kind.
WILLIAM LAMB (6 R.R) On the evening of December 15th I saw the prosecutor in a back room at-77 High Street, Woolwich—he was in a dazed condition and bleeding from a wound on his forehead—from what he said I arrested James Brill about 9.15 the same evening—I said to
him, "I shall arrest you for assaulting George Beale by striking him on the head with a belt or some other instrument"—he replied, "I struck him with my fist, he struck me in the mouth first, I only defended myself"—at the station, before being charged, he said, "I brought home some sprats for tea, he kicked up a row with me then"—he pointed to this belt and said, "That is the only belt I had"—he was charged and made no reply.
HENRY HOLFORD (Police Sergeant R.) On December 16th I arrested Wilbourne and Ann Brill in High Street, Woolwich—I charged them with causing grievous bodily harm to Beale, and being concerned with Brill—neither of them said anything, but when charged, Wilbourne said, "shall not say anything until I hear what Brill has to say"—Ann Brill said, "I shall not say anything until I am before the Magistrate."
By the COURT. Wilbourne may have said. "I shall wait and see what Beale says."
Ann Brill's statement before the Magistrate. "I am innocent of this, I was not there at all."
James Brill's defence. "The belt was not used. All the lot was mixed up together."
Wilbourne's defence: "If the man was beat about with boots and belts he ought to have had more wounds than he has got. His wounds were caused by his falling on the kerb, with fair fighting."
Ann Brill's defence. "I do not know anything about it. I was not there when the quarrelling was on. I cannot answer for anything. I had a witness but the woman was afraid to come, because George Beale knocked two of her teeth out about two months' ago."
JAMES BRILL GUILTY .—WILBOURNE and ANN BRILL GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. —JAMES BRILL then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at this Court on May 16th, 1898. Ten other convictions were proved against him Six years' penal servitude. WILBOURNE and ANN BRILL— Twelve months' hard labour each.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.
GUILTY . Four months' hard labour.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. HARVEY Prosecuted, and the evidence was interpreted to the prisoner.
Rotherhithe—about 12.15 a.m. on Sunday, December 21st, the prisoner and two of his shipmates wanted to go off to their ship the Harmonia in my boat—they could talk enough English to make me understand—I took them on board a barge which was lying alongside their ship—I took them to the barge so that they could get on to their ship—before we started I said I would take them for 6d. each, and when we got to the barge the prisoner offered me 2d.—I said, "I want 6d."—he walked away—the other two men got on to the barge—I said to them, "Will you pay for your mate, he will repay you when you get on the ship"—one of them tendered me 2s.—I was going to give him the change when the prisoner fired a revolver at me—I saw the flash and heard the report—he missed me—he was about 12 or 16 yards away—I rowed away and saw the Thames Police—I saw the prisoner arrested—he was a stranger to me—he was perfectly sober; all the men seemed sober—I think the prisoner is a German.
Cross-examined by the prisoner. The contract was made before we left the shore.
By the JURY. One of the men spoke so that I could understand—I do not know if it was the prisoner.
HENRY GEORGE WALKER . I am a labourer, of Rotherhithe—on this Sunday morning I was helping the prosecutor with his boat—the prisoner and his friends could all speak broken English—the prisoner tried to persuade the other men not to pay the prosecutor—I could understand a snack or two of the words but not all—when we got to the barge I remained in the boat—the prisoner jumped out first—the bargain was 6d. apiece—the prisoner gave the prosecutor 2d., which he refused—the other men got out and the prosecutor jumped out and said, "This won't do for me, I want my fare"—they were all trying to get away without paying—the prisoner fired a revolver in the direction of the prosecutor—I did not see it, I saw the flash.
WILLIAM HUGHES (Thames Police Inspector.) On Sunday, December 21st I was on duty about midnight—I heard a report of fire arms—I saw the prosecutor and two other men in a boat—I spoke to them, and went with them on board the Harmonia where I arrested the prisoner—J had a conversation with him through the captain, who spoke German—the captain asked him whose trousers these were (Produced)—he said "Mine"—I found this revolver in the pocket—it is six-chambered—it was loaded in four chambers; one had an empty cartridge in it, and the other was empty—the revolver appeared as if it had been recently discharged—I told the prisoner I should take him into custody for shooting at the prosecutor—he said, "Yes"—he was perfectly sober.
The RECORDER considered that there was insufficient evidence to convict the prisoner of shooting with intent to do grievous bodily harm.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HARVEY Prosecuted.
The witnesses, Robbins, Walker, and Hughes were recalled, and the RECORDER read over his note to them.
Prisoner's defence. "I never fired the pistol; it was in the trousers pocket, and the trousers belonged to me, but I did not fire it. My comrades are not here; they should be here."
GUILTY . One month hard labour.
MR. HUGHES Prosecuted.
GUILTY . Nine months' hard labour each.
Before Mr. Justice Darling.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9TH, 1903.