Vol. CXLIX.] Part 884.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
HELD MAY 26TH, 1908, AND FOLLOWING DAYS.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORTHAND BY
Shorthand Writer to the Court.
POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE
OF THE INNER TEMPLE.
[Published by Annual Subscription.]
GEO. WALPOLE, 1, NEW COURT, LINCOLN'S INN, W.C.
THE ARGUS PRINTING COMPANY, LIMITED,
CORNER OF TUDOR STREET AND TEMPLE AVENUE,
LONDON, E. C.
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 Tuesday, May 26th, 1908, and following days.
Before the Right Hon. Sir JOHN CHARLES BELL , Knight, Alderman, LORD MAYOR of the city of London; the Hon. Sir WILLIAM GRANTHAM , Knight, one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir JOHN POUND , Bart., Sir JOHN KNILL , Bart., Sir T. VANSITTART BOWATER, Kt., Sir JOSEPH SAVORY , Bart., Sir HORATIO D. DAVIES , K.C.M.G., and Captain W. C. SIMMONS; Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON , Knight, K.C., Recorder of the said City; Sir FREDERICK ALBERT BOSANQUET, K.C., Common Serjeant of the said City; His Honour Judge RENTOUL, K.C., Commissioner, 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
BELL, MAYOR. EIGHTH SESSION.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
BEFORE THE RECORDER.
(Tuesday, May 26.)
MARSHALL, Edward Metham (38, journalist), who pleaded guilty on march 31 of forgery and uttering, and was ordered last Session to find a surety of £100 (see Vol. CXLVIII., page 782, and page 5 of this volume), was again brought up. It was stated that he could not find the surety, but as he had been in custody for ten weeks the Recorder said he would release him on his own recognisances in £50 to come up for judgment if called upon.
CUDDON, George John (71, agent) (see page 43), who pleaded guilty last Session of uttering, and DELLANA, Frank (24, secretary), who pleaded guilty at the same time to forgery, were again Before the Court. It was stated that Dellana had executed an assignment of certain concessions to the prosecutor, John Chipchase Grey, for which purpose sentence had been postponed.
Sentences: Cuddon, 12 months' hard labour; Dellana, 15 months hard labour.
ORCHARD, William Arthur (19, postman), pleaded guilty of stealing one post letter containing one postal order of the value of 2s., the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.
Sentence, Eight months' hard labour.
WRIGHT, Willam Earl (29, no occupation), and HOLLOWAY, William (27, van traveller), both pleaded guilty of forging and uttering well knowing the same to be forged, a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque for the payment of £3 10s., with intent to defraud.
It was stated that Wright had at one time held a license of the "Mitre Tavern," Blackfriars, during which he had an account at the London Joint Stock Bank. When he left the public-house he kept some blank cheques, and a few months ago he got into low water. He then met Holloway, and they went to live together at Kennington. About this time they made the acquaintance of another man, upon whose advice they made up their minds to use the blank cheques. They appeared to have got rid of four of them at least. Their method was to watch houses where tradesmen served, and after the tradesmen had left the house they would go and say that a mistake had been made in his book, and ask the servant for it, so getting his name. They would then write a cheque to the tradesmen, and take it to him with the book, in payment of his account, getting change out of the cheque.
Wright had been convicted for assaulting a man on a railway.
Sentence: Both, Nine months' hard labour.
Mr. Sheridan prosecuted.
Police-constable FREDERICK EDMONDS , 597 City. On April 24, at about five to four a.m., I was in Lawrence Lane when I heard a smash of glass and ran into Cheapside, where I saw prisoner standing with his face close to a broken window at No. 105, the Crown Emporium Company, Limited, jewellers. On being observed prisoner ran away. I gave chase aud caught him in Cannon Street. He said, "It's just my luck; all right, I will go quietly." I took him to Cloak Lane Station and charged him; four rings were found on him (produced); they were in his trousers pocket. Prisoner said they were not the property of the Crown Emporium.
To Prisoner: I did not see you steal the rings from the shop.
Police-constable JEREMIAH PLATT , 542 City. On April 24, at 3.55, I was on duty in Wood Street, Cheapside, when I heard a smash of glass, and ran down Cheapside, where I saw the jeweller's shop window broken, inside which I saw the stone produced, and four rings missing from a card which was in the window. All the other cards were full. I did not see prisoner till I went to the station.
GEORGE WALTER PELHAM , manager of the Crown Emporium Company, Limited, Cheapside. On the morning of April 24, when I arrived at the shop, between eight and quarter-past, I found a policeman on duty. I had left it all safe on the night before. One of the trays was slightly eased on one side as though it had been pressed from the front. There was a hole in the window and rings missing from a card directly opposite. These are the rings produced; they are made of 9-carat gold. The damage to the window would be about £4 15s.; it was insured. We sell the rings at 5s. each.
To Prisoner. There were four clear holes in the card, which ought to have been filled; they are supposed to be full. I identify three of the rings; I am not sure of the other.
HARRY EVANS (prisoner, not on oath). I was walking by the Crown Emporium shop on the night when this happened. I see some rings on the pavement, picked them up, and put them in my pocket. I walked away; the constable saw me and ran after me. As soon as I saw him running I ran too. If I had stood by the shop where the window was broken he would have sworn it was me. Two of the rings I claim to be my own property, and the other two I picked off the ground.
FREDERICK EDMONDS , recalled. There was no one else, as far as I could see, in Cheapside within at least 50 yards. Prisoner was not more than 2 ft. away from the window. At that time there is hardly anyone about in Cheapside.
Prisoner. I was on the other side of the road when the policeman saw me.
Verdict, Guilty. Prisoner confessed to a previous conviction at North London on May 28, 1907, for shopbreaking.
Sentence, 18 months' hard labour.
Mr. J. Wells Thatcher prosecuted.
PATRICK LYNSKY , 42, Wellesley Street, Stepney, ship's fireman. On Wednesday, May 20, I was paid off from my ship, and in the evening I became intoxicated, walking up next morning in Thames Police Court. The police had taken my money away. I had put most of it in my inside breast pocket, which is rather an intricate pocket to get at. There was not as much money left as there ought to have been. Prisoner is a perfect stranger to me. My neck felt in the morning as if I had been strangled, and my left hip as if it had been kicked.
HENRY MALDEN , 94, Stepney Green, baker's barrowman, 16 years old. On May 20 I was in Cressy Place with Albert Edwards (Lynsky was brought into Court). I saw that man on Tuesday night at 9.30 in Cressy Place sitting on the pavement drunk. Four other men were also there; prisoner was one. They all had hold of prisoner, and when they got to the kerb they all fell down. Two then got up and walked away, but two remained, and when they got up Lynsky had his pockets turned inside out. The men went into the "Pelican." I waited there until they went in, then the other lad told a "copper." Prisoner was one of the men who went into the "Pelican," and he was taken into custody there by the policeman.
other men, who came down Cressy Place; they all fell on the kerb, and prosecutor was lying on the ground. When they got up the letters pockets were turned inside out. The others walked away, but prosecutor lay there; he could not get up. My friend followed the others, and I stopped with this man. Then the constable came up and took prosecutor to the station. I went with them and told the constable that I had seen it. I saw prisoner at the station on the next day. I am sure it was he. I had not seen him before this affair. Two of the four men went one way and two the other. Prisoner went in the direction of the "Pelican." It is about 10 minutes walk from where prosecutor was to the "Pelican."
THOMAS BEECHEY , carman. On the evening of May 20 I was at the corner of Gold Street, when I saw four men coming along; one was the prisoner. I had never seen him before. He said, "Look out, there comes a copper." With that all four made a run and knocked me in the road. I heard a boy call out, in consequence of which I followed the men. Two went one way and two the other. I saw prisoner go into the "Pelican" with another. I then left two boys there and went to Arbour Square for a constable. I came back with one and he called prisoner out of the "Pelican" after I had pointed him out, and he was taken into custody.
Police-constable FREDERICK GOSBY , 35 H. R. On May 20 I went to Stepney Green and arrested two other men. I took them to Cressy Place, where I saw the prosecutor lying on the ground with his pockets turned inside out. He was very drunk. I had sent for assistance, and on the arrival of another officer I directed him to take prosecutor to the station, where he was charged with being drunk and incapable. I was present when he was searched. In the inside jacket pocket there was £ 9 in gold, 15s. 6d. in silver, and some bronze. I arrested two men, who were pointed out to me by a Jewish women, but the charge was not proceeded with. I saw prisoner in custody on the way to the station.
To Prisoner. Beechey did not say when you were at the station for identification that the cnap in the bowler hat was one of them.
Police-constable JOHN FINDLAY , 355 H. At 9.15 p.m. last Wednesday I was called by Beechey to the "Pelican" and prisoner was pointed out to me by him. I called prisoner outside and told him I would arrest him for being concerned with three other men in knocking a man down and robbing him. He said, "What did I dot?" In the station he said, "Is this justice?" I found on him 6d. in silver and 5d. in bronze.
Prisoner's statement before the magistrate: I went into the public-house to get a glass of ale, when the policeman took me out and charged me.
JOHN FINDLAY , recalled. Prisoner was put up for identification by Malden at the station on the same night. (Witness now made a correction.) Prisoner was recognised by the witnesses there and then. I could not say that Malden identified prisoner from among others. When Malden identified him prisoner was in the charge room waiting to be charged.
RICHARD COUGHLIN (prisoner, not on oath). I went into the "Pelican" to have a glass of ale, and was not there one minute when my attention, was called by the barmaid to the policeman, who, she said, was calling me. I looked out, and when I came out he said, "I am going to charge you." I said, "What for? What have I done?" He says, "You have robbed a man down in the street." I was taken to the station, and two other fellows went with me. We sat on a form, and the inspector says, "Do yon know these men?" Beechey said, "I know that one there and I know that one with the bowler hat." The other two chaps were let free and I was charged.
Detective ALBERT BOREHAM, H. Division (called by the Court). When I went into the station, about 10 P.m., prisoner was in the charge room with the three witnesses, Maiden, Edwards and Beechey. There were two other men in charge in the passage. They were given into custody by a woman, but it was proved beyond doubt that they were innocent. The inspector heard what. the three witnesses had to say, and then prisoner was charged. There was no putting up for identification.
The Recorder said that it would have been more satisfactory if prisoner had been put up for identification by Malden in the usual way.
Verdict, Not guilty.
BURRY, Timothy (19, labourer), and BRADY, John (20, labourer) ; both robbery with violence upon Willis Needham, and stealing from him two knives and one tobacco box, and the sum of 4s. 6d., his goods and moneys.
WILLIS NEEDHAM , Chapeltown, near Sheffield. On April 25 I came up to London. I had some drink that day, and at about midnight I was in Whitechapel. I talked to a female and walked with, her some distance. I do not know the names of the streets. Then three chaps came up behind me. The prisoners are two of the men. One slipped his hand in my pocket and I put my hand on his wrist. I do not know what the other did; he ran away. I called for the police, and as soon as I did that they yapped away from me. I found that, 4s. 6d., some tobacco, tobacco box, and two pocket-knives had been taken. The tobacco box and knives are those produced.
Cross-examined by prisoner Burry. I did not say when the detective knocked you down that there was nothing the matter, that I had lost nothing. I did not see you knocked down. When the detective came up, being in plain clothes I thought perhaps he might not be a police officer, so I thought it would be best for me to shift. My friend and I went to the station with them. My friend did not give evidence there.
Cross-examined by Brady. I had my arm round the woman's waist. I never saw anybody knocked down.
friend with two females. He was not drunk, but under the influence of drink. I saw them pick up the prostitutes just by the "Wheat-sheaf." They went down Commercial Road. I also saw the, prisoners and another man close by, and they followed them down Com mercial Road. When outside the fire station the female with prosecutor was sick, and the prisoners went close up to them and looked round them, then crossed the road. They went on then till they got opposite Backchurch Lane, when prisoners and the other man crossed again. They went on till they got to Fairclough Street, and prisoners went quietly behind prosecutor. Then Brady and the man who got away got hold of Needham from behind, and I saw Burry rifling his trousers pockets. I and Finsong, a private witness, were then on the opposite side of the road. I was in plain clothes. Prosecutor shouted out for help and police, and we ran over. Prisoners and the other man attempted to run away; Burry and the other man went towards Commercial Road, while Brady went another way, followed by Finsong. I hit Burry down as he was passing me and made a grab at the other man, but missed. Burry fell on the pavement, and at he was rising we both went to the ground together. As his right hand slid along the pavement, which was wet. he released the tobacco-box and half a crown. I picked the latter up and said, "Is this yours?" He said "No," and he also said that the tobacco box did not belong to him. A short time afterwards Brady was brought back by Finsong and a constable. We then all went to the station. At the station Brady said, "Ah well, it is our luck, we must put up with it. I ran for something." When I arrested Burry on the footway he said, "All right, I know who you are, it is a fair cop, I will give in." At the station the prosecutor identified the tobacco box and tobacco.
Cross-examined by Burry. Prosecutor was about five or six yards from where I knocked you down. The scuffle did not last a minute hardly. I did not put the prosecutor up to say what he has. Prosecutor did say when I came up that there was nothing the matter and he had lost nothing. (To the Judge.) I should not have charged prosecutor with being drunk. (To Prisoner.) At the police court prosecutor said that he did not know who put their hands in his pockets, but he knew it was not the woman.
Cross-examined by Brady. The reason prosecutor gave for saying to me that there was nothing the matter was that he thought I might be one of your pals. You were brought along after I went with Burry. I believe there was a uniformed man with you. There were two in the end.
HENRY FINSONG , 66, Clark Street, cabinet maker. On April 25, about midnight, I was outside the "Wheatsheaf" talking to the last witness, when I saw both prisoners and another man, also Needham and his friend, with two females. (Witness corroborated Stevens as to what happened.) I was hiding in a doorway opposite when the affair occurred. I called out "All right, there is a policeman here," in response to prosecutor's cry of "Police!" I ran after Brady, blowing my whistle. A policeman stopped him at Backchurch Lane.
I then found Burry in the custody of Stevens and they were taken to the station. Prosecutor was not drunk, but he had had enough.
Cross-examined by Burry. I was about 12 yards away, right opposite you, when the affair happened. I was in front of you in Commercial Road, and in Berner Street I was behind you. I might have said to Stevens, "Where, is the 'pros'?" I asked prosecutor what he had lost. He said, "I have lost my bacca and some silver." Police officers came up from Commercial Road when they heard the whistle blow. When we got to the station the Inspector sent me and the other witnesses out of the charge room. I do not know what prosecutor said to the Inspector.
Cross-examined by Brady. I was the first one to come across the road to you. Stevens was close behind me. The women stood at the corner of Fairelough Street; they were dumbfounded. Stevens said nothing about "Go for him." I only had my whistle in my hand. You tried to dodge the constable when he caught you.
TIMOTHY BURRY (prisoner, not on oath). On this night I was walking towards home through Berner Street, when all of a sudden I was knocked down, and a man says, "Come on, get up." I said, "What is the matter?" He says, "All right, you will do," and picked me up, taking me to Commercial Road, where he said to prosecutor, "Have you lost anything?" Prosecutor says, "No, I have lost nothing." When we were taken to the station he said, "I have lost nothing; what am I here for?" Stevens says, "Oh, it's all right, you will see." When charged at Arbour Square the magistrate asked prosecutor, "Can you identify the man that put his hand in your pocket?" He said, "No." What Stevens says about the scuffle is a lot of lies.
JOHN BRADY (prisoner, not on oath). On a Saturday night I was walking along Aldgate. I had just left a friend and was going towards home when I met this man whom I know. He was talking to another man outside the "Wheatsheaf." We walked towards Commercial Road and towards the fire station. When there we saw prosecutor and a friend with two women. Prosecutor was very drunk and we were all looking at him. They walked along and we never took any more notice of them. Afterwards we walked past them. I saw a half-crown dropped on the ground, which Burry picked up, and as soon as he did so he was knocked over by someone. Then prosecutor and the others ran away, and the witness Finsong rushed at me with something. I ran off, and then I was stopped by a constable. First of all prosecutor said he had lost nothing; then at the station that somebody came behind him and put his hand in his trousers pocket, and took out some pieces of silver; then he said it was his 'bacca pouch and two knives.
Verdict: Both, Guilty. Brady confessed to a previous conviction on November 20, 1906. Other convictions were proved against both men.
Sentences: Each prisoner, 20 months' hard labour.
BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.
(Tuesday, May 26.)
FANNY GOWER . I am the daughter of Frank Leveson Gower, who keeps the "Duke of Wellington" Hotel at Hounslow. On Monday, May 11, about noon, prisoner entered the bar rather hurriedly and asked for a glass of stout and mild, the price of which is 11/2 d., and he tendered in payment what appeared to be a five-shilling piece. My father was coming into the bar at the time and I handed it to him. My father first cut the edge with a knife and then broke the coin in the tester. He asked prisoner where he got it, and prisoner replied that he got it at Hurst Park. My father then asked him if he had any pals outside. Prisoner put twopence on the counter to pay for his drink and turned to leave the bar, but my father had him detained by calling to a customer in the bar to bolt the door. I then went for a constable, to whom my father gave the five-shilling piece. FRANK LEVESON GOWER . I asked prisoner where he got the five-shilling piece from, and he said, "From Hurst Park Races on Saturday." I held it in front of him, and asked if he had any more of them. He put out his hand for it, but I said, "No." He mentioned the name of a bookmaker I did not recognise. It was some such name as Poluski Brothers. I said to him, "Where is your pal?" He answered, "I do not know what you mean. You are asking a saucy question." I said, "I do not think so. When you come with these games you never come single-handed." He then said, "You have made a mistake this time, governor. I am going to North Hyde Schools. I used to be there at school myself and I am going to see "—I would not be certain whether he said "my nephew" or "my cousin." I said, "Why do you come this way if you are going to North Hyde Schools?" He said, "I suppose I can go which way I like." Hounslow is not on the way from London to North Hyde Schools. I turned round then, put the coin in the tester, and broke it. He said, "Is that the way you test your coins?" I said "Yes." He said, "It wants a tidy one to stand that." I said, "It appears yours won't." He said, "I will pay for what I have had," and put down 2d. He finished his drink and turned towards the door. I called out to a man in the bar to bolt the door.
Prisoner, asked if he wished to put any question to the witness, denied that he said he got the coin from a bookmaker, but from a bookstall, and, with regard to his going to North Hyde School, said he had two nephews there, but not having been there for twenty years, he had forgotten the way.
Police-constable PATRICK FLYNN , 219, T, stated that he searched prisoner and found on him £1/2 d. Prisoner said to him, "You are exceeding your duty. The police in London do not search us for this." After I had finished searching him he said, "You are satisfied
now. Let me go away." On the way to the station he said he bought two papers at a bookstall in Hurst Park, tendering half a sovereign, and must have got the five-shilling piece in change. He gave the name of O'Rourke, with an address at Rowton House, Fieldgate Street, Whitechapel.
Detective-sergeant WILLIAM HAILSTONE , T Division, spoke to making inquiries concerning prisoner at Rowton House, Fieldgate Street, where prisoner was unknown. The record book was searched for several weeks, but there was no such name in it.
The following evidence was given with reference to an attempt of prisoner to pass a bad coin on a previous occasion.
ELIZABETH RICHARDS , assistant to Mr. Jones, dairyman, 98, Shoe Lane, E.C. Prisoner came into the shop at about nine o'clock in the evening of March 17 and asked for three penny scones and tendered a five-shilling piece, which I took to Mr. Jones at the back of the shop. Mr. Jones asked him where he got it from and a policeman was sent for.
EVANS HOPKINS JONES . When I asked prisoner where he got the five-shilling piece he said, "I got it from where I was working. I changed soms coppers in a public-house in London Wall and got the five-shilling piece in exchange." I sent for the police. I am sure prisoner is the man. I saw him at the Mansion House.
Police-constable ARTHUR DODDS , 200, City. I received prisoner into custody on March 17. He stated that he had been out selling shamrock and had got a lot of coppers which he exchanged at a public-house in London Wall, the name of which he did not know, for the five-shilling piece. He made a similar statement at the station. He was brought before the magistrate at the Mansion House, remanded, and finally discharged.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , an officer of His Majesty's Mint, said both the coins were counterfeit and not from the same mould. They were very well made, but very much lighter than genuine coin, the difference in weight being as much as 100 gr.
Police-constable THOMAS WHITING , 917, City, said he was present at the Mansion House on September 10, when prisoner was sentenced to three months' hard labour for larceny from the person (snatching). There were then seven previous convictions against him.
Sentence, Nine months' imprisonment.
Mr. Sands prosecuted.
Detective-inspector ALFRED BALL , K Division. At eight o'clock on the morning of May 7, accompanied by Detective-inspector Divall and Detective-sergeant Pride, J Division, I went to 17, Tee Street, Poplar. We obtained admission, and in the first floor front bedroom found prisoner in bed with his wife. I said, "Is your name Charles Haley?" He said, "Yes." I said, "We are police officers, and have reason to believe you are making counterfeit coin on these
premises, and we are going to search the same. You will have to get up." Prisoner said, "You have come too late or too early," and proceeded to get up and dress. He said the room he was then occupying belonged to him, and also two other rooms, a kitchen and a kind of scullery to which access was obtained by passing through the kitchen, all on the same floor. He pointed the rooms out to me. The premises were searched, and in the top of a cupboard in the kitchen was found a bottle, which has unfortunately since been broken, containing nitrate of silver and cyanide of potassium in a liquid state. The bottle is said to have been broken through someone pushing against the officer carrying it. I had previously shown it to Mr. Webster, of the of Mint. There was also found a tin containing nitrate of silver and cyanide of potassium in solid form; a bag containing silver sand, a spoon which had evidently been used with burning metal, a knife, two pieces of copper wire, and the revolving shelf in the oven was marked with plaster of Paris where the mould had rested when drying. Sergeant Pride afterwards brought to the station 28 counterfeit two-shilling pieces and 13 half-sovereigns, a ladle containing molten metal, two polishers used for brightening up the metal, two grease rags used for blackening it, a packet of rouge, a piece of sandpaper, two files which had evidently been used with metal, and two pieces of glass used in making the plaster of Paris moulds. I told prisoner that the whole of the things had been found in the room he occupied, and that I should charge him with making and being in the possession of counterfeit coin.
Detective-inspector THOMAS DIVALL , J Division. I told him I was going to search his rooms. He said, "It is no use; you won't find anything here. There is a man comes here to make and he pays me five shillings a time for the use of the rooms, and when he comes my missus and me leave the room." I said, "Who is the man?" He said, "I do not know. I do not know him or where he lives." Then Inspector Ball placed the bottle of cyanide on the table and said, "Who does it belong to?" Prisoner replied, "Him." I told prisoner I would take him to the station pending inquiries, when he said, "you know with your experience they never let you know where they live. I only know him by the name of George. Of course, I saw what he was making but I shut my eyes."
Sergeant GEORGE PRIDE , J Division. I followed prisoner to the station and then returned to the house to make a further search. In the cupboard I found the ladle of molten metal. The battle was hanging up inside the cupboard, which was rather a dark cupboard. In the dresser drawer I found the two polishers and the two grease rags, the packet of rouge, piece of sandpaper, two files, piece of grease slate, and the two pieces of glass. I then went into the back kitchen, and I saw Sergeant Baker put his hand behind a piece of sheet iron which was fixed to the wall behind the gas-stove and pull out two small packets. He handed them to me and I opened them. One contained 28 counterfeit florins dated 1901 and the other 13 half-sovereigns dated 1902. I took all the property to the station, where it was shown to prisoner.
To the Court, at request of prisoner. A man used to come nearly every day to see prisoner, but I did not take notice how long he stayed.
WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , an officer of H. M. Mint, said with regard to the half-sovereigns that gilding was the only thing required to make them ready for circulation. With regard to the counterfeit florins, 10 were unfinished, the edges not having been filed nor the coins plated; 14 had been plated, and looked as if they had just left the bath and only required polishing and rubbing off; the other four were ready for uttering. The articles produced by the police were such as were used in the making of counterfeit coin. The solution of nitrate of silver and cyanide of potassium was a plating mixture. The copper wire was used in plating.
Verdict, Guilty, and the jury expressed the opinion that the police were highly deserving of commendation for the way they had acted.
Detective-sergeant GEORGE THOMPSON, Gravesend Borough Police, proved a conviction in 1906, when prisoner was sentenced to 15 months' hard labour for uttering. At that time he pleaded guilty to a conviction at North London Sessions in December, 1903, for being found in possession of housebreaking implements.
Sergeant PRIDE reminded the Court that at the March Sessions his Lordship had before him a man named Crawford, whom he sentenced to 12 months' hard labour, for possessing 24 counterfeit half-crowns (see Volume CXLVIII., page 803). Remarks were then passed as to the excellent make of the coins, and it was through that case that the police had been able to arrest prisoner, who was looked upon as a very expert maker of all kinds of counterfeit coins.
Sentence, Five years' penal servitude.
Mr. Sands asked if his Lordship would endorse the commendation of the jury of the conduct of the police.
The Common Serjeant said it was unnecessary in the case of Inspectors Ball and Divall and Sergeant Pride to endorse the commendation, with which, however, he quite agreed.
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE GRANTHAM.
(Thursday, May 28.)
Mr. J. Wells Thatcher prosecuted.
ROSINA HEFFERON . Rosina Simmonds, wife of prisoner, is my daughter. About four o'clock on April 21 I was with her in Colyer's Rents, Southwark. As we left a general shop there prisoner followed up behind us and hit his wife three times on the head with the chopper produced, saying, "You b—mare, I will do you in." He dropped the chopper and ran away.
FREDERICK TOMBS , a boy of 14, said he heard prisoner call out "Rose" three times; the woman appeared not to hear; then pri soner's face went red, and he went up and hit the woman three or four times on the head with the chopper.
Medical evidence was given to the effect that prisoner's wife had practically recovered from her injuries.
ROSINA SIMMONDS . On April 21 I was standing in Colyer's Rents talking to two young women. Prisoner came up and asked me for money for drink; I told him he had had enough, and refused him money. I saw my mother going into a shop and I followed her in. As we came out prisoner came behind me and hit me with something; I put my two hands up, and says, "Oh, my God!" I remember nothing else.
To Prisoner. I deny that on the previous Sunday night I accused you of giving me a bad disorder and being the cause of baby's death. I also deny that I have sent letters threatening you and your parent.
Inspector ALFRED NICHOLLS , N Division. On April 21 I saw prisoner detained at Southwark Police Station. I told him I should charge him with the attempted murder of his wife by striking her on the head with a chopper at Colyer's Rents about four o'clock that afternoon. He said "Oh, don't say that, sir; is she hurt very much." After I had cautioned him he said, "Let me go and see my wife; send two policemen with me; I don't care what you do with me afterwards, but let me see my wife and kiss her." I told him that was impossible, as his wife was seriously ill in Guy's Hospital. He was then charged, and immediately fell down in a faint in the dock.
Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: I am sorry for what I have done. We have not been happy since we have lived at her father's place. I asked her three weeks ago if she should move away; she said no. Last Sunday fortnight she came in drunk and was sick in a pail; she accused me of bringing a bad disorder and causing my child's death. It so upset me I went on the drink. On Monday I went to work till 10.30 and came over bad. I went and told her and she did not believe me, and said I had got the sack. I sent her round for herself. I asked her to make me some bread and milk; she said, "Make it yourself." I went and had more beer, and came home in the afternoon and found my door locked. I went into the yard and could not find her. I found the chopper, and put it in my pocket to frighten her. I went to Colyer's Rents and met my wife and called to her, and got no answer. I went up, and being
drunk. I lost my temper and struck her on the head with the chopper. I am sorry for what I have done, and hope you will forgive me.
Prisoner was called on, and said he had nothing further to say.
Verdict, Guilty of feloniously wounding, with intent to do grievous bodily harm.
Sentence, Twelve months' hard labour.
Mr. Joseph Ricardo prosecuted; Mr. G.L. Hardy defended.
JULIA WHITEHEAD . About 10 past 11 at night on May 3 I (with a baby in my arms) was walking with my husband, Arthur White-head, along Staple Street, Bermondsey. Just at Pinks's gateway, prisoner was reducing himself in the road, towards me, though there was a little recess there, and he might have turned the other way. My husband said to him, "Have a little bit of sense, old man." Prisoner said, "What's the master with you?" My husband said, "Have a bit of common sense." Upon that prisoner struck a blow at my husband right over my shoulder, as my husband was at the back of me. My husband fell to the ground and never spoke again. At the time there was nobody at all about.
Cross-examined. It is not true that prisoner was fastening his trousers when I first saw him. There was no quarrel between him and my husband. The latter did not call prisoner a rotten bastard; prisoner did not reply, "If you call me that name again I will punch you"; my husband did not repeat it and go up to prisoner as if to strike him. After my husband fell to the ground and became unconscious, prisoner said he was sorry for what he had done, and assisted in trying to revive him. I am quite certain there were I no loud words spoken between the two men.
CATHERINE ELLEN PARSONS . On May 3, between 10 and quarter past 11 p.m., I was standing at the door of my house. 18, Staple Street, and saw the man fall. The only people in the street at the time were prisoner, the deceased man, and his wife.
Cross-examined. I did not see the blow struck; I was taking no particular notice of anything.
Police-constable ALFRED SQUIRES . 68 M. On this night as I was turning into Staple Street I saw prisoner deliver a blow which hit the deceased in the face near the left ear. Mrs. Whitehead was standing between the two men. I saw no one else in the street. I ran after prisoner and brought him back to where deceased was lying on the footway. Prisoner had been drinking, but was sober. He assisted me in trying to revive Whitehead.
Cross-examined. As I was turning into Staple Street I heard shouting of a quarrelsome nature, angry men's voice. The pavement there is of a slippery nature, and there is a rather slight slant at this spot. Prisoner did not run away; he walked about 15 yards
before I got to him; he at once came back with me and did his best to assist. This is a bad neighbourhood, especially at night. Mrs. Whitehead made no statement to me about prisoner having exposed his person.
Police-constable CHRISTOPHER LUCAS , 4 M. I was informed that a man had been assaulted in Staple Street, and on going there I saw Whitehead lying on the ground on his back; prisoner was there, detained by last witness. Mrs. Whitehead made this statement to me, in prisoner's hearing: "Me and my husband were walking down Staple Street, when this man was exposing himself; my husband said to him, 'You might have a bit of sense, old man'; when he said, 'What's the matter with you?' and struck my husband, and he fell down." Prisoner said nothing.
Dr. G. F. STUBBING , of Guy's Hospital. Arthur Whitehead was brought to the hospital at 11.50 p.m. on May 3; he was then dead. On making a post mortem examination I came to the conclusion that he died from concussion of the brain caused by a violent blow on his head. There was a bruise on the left side of the back of the head; any blow might have produced that. I should say the concussion of the brain was probably caused by the blow on the pavecussion cussion The bruise was a round one, 11/2 in. across; one would hardly expect a fist to leave a mark like that.
Cross-examined. There was no mark by the ear. It is possible that the injury was caused by the man's head striking the pavement; I cannot say more than that; the injury was consistent with either that or the original blow.
Detective Inspector ALFRED NICHOLLS , M Division. At 1 a.m. on May 4 I saw prisoner at the police station. I told him he would be charged with the murder of Arthur Whitehead about 11.15 p.m. on May 3, at Staple Street, by striking him in the face. He said, "Good God; you don't say so; is he dead." I cautioned him, and he said, "His wife got her fingers in my face and he struck at me and missed me, and I hit him and he fell." On the charge being read to him, he said "Good God; you don't say so."
Cross-examined. I have made inquiries about prisoner. He is 23 years of age, and married. He is an engineer, and has been employed in one firm since he left school. I have learned nothing whatever against his character. This is, generally speaking, a rather rowdy neighbourhood, especially at night.
Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "...On May 3, about 11 p.m., I went through Staple Street; I was quite sober. Near Pinks's I was taken short; I looked up and down, and seeing nobody, I made water. After I had adjusted my trousers a woman accused me of flashing my person. I denied it. The husband called me a rotten bastard, and I said I would punch his nose if he repeated it. He repeated it, and struck at me; the woman was next him; I made a hit at him; the woman was then between us, and when I hit him he fell and struck some part of his head. I struck him in the front, and when he fell I walked away. A constable caught hold of me. I went back with him and saw the man on the
ground, and tried to revive him. The woman said her husband was dead. The ambulance came, and he was taken to the hospital and I to the station. Inspector Nicholls afterwards told me the man was dead. Deceased struck at me first, and I then struck him over his wife's shoulder.
Cross-examined. I have said all I remember. The wife put her finger in my face. She was carrying a baby. I have no doubt I hit deceased. It was dark. I did not know what sort of man it was. I had not time to speak to Squires. I saw Sergeant Lucas come up. What he says the woman said is true, and I made no reply."
CORNELIUS MCCARTHY (prisoner on oath) repeated the substance of of his statement before the Magistrate, and added: When I walked away after striking the blow I had no idea the man was dead; even when I was taken to the station I thought the charge would be one of common assault.
Cross-examined. The reason that I did not mention to Lucas that deceased had called me a rotten bastard was that I was looking after deceased; me and Squires were trying to assist him to get up. When I said at the police court "What Lucas says the woman said is true," I meant that his account of what she said was correct, not that her story itself was true.
Verdict, Guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy.
Sentence, Three days' imprisonment (entitling to immediate release).
Mr. Clarke Hall and Mr. C.W. Lilley prosecuted.
Verdict, Not guilty.
Mr. Clarke Hall prosecuted; Mr. Hinde appeared for prisoner.
Sentence, Six months' hard labour.
Mr. Clarke Hall prosecuted.
Sentence, Five years' penal servitude.
Mr. Clarke Hall prosecuted.
Mr. Justice Grantham, after hearing the facts, ordered prisoner to receive 20 strokes with the birch.
On the following morning (May 29) Mr. Justice Grantham said that this was a horrible crime, and he felt that the proper punishment
was to order prisoner to be whipped. That was his opinion yesterday, and he believed now that that would be the best punishment. But it became necessary to look into the way in which it could be carried out, and he was sorry to say that he found in the new Criminal Appeal Act what evidently was a "casus omissus." By the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, he had power to give an alternative punishment in the case of a person charged with an offence against a girl under the age of 13—the offender might be sent to penal servitude for life or for any term of penal servitude or imprisonment that the Judge liked to order for so serious a crime, or if the person charged was under the age of 16 he might be sentenced as he intended the prisoner to be sentenced yesterday But it was an alternative punishment and there was no power to give him (Storey) any term of imprisonment besides. In the Criminal Appeal Act there was a section which said that in the case of a person being sentenced to death or to corporal punishment the sentence was not to be carried out during the period within which it was open to appeal. In those circumstances the sentence could not be carried out until the expiration of so many days. What was to be done during those days? He could not find out that after the expiration of this Session he had any power to keep the prisoner in prison. There were technical ways in which he might have got over the difficulty, but he declined to be a party to any technical methods of inflicting corporal punishment. Consequently he proposed to change the sentence. He could not give him corporal punishment and any term of imprisonment, and therefore he must send him to prison for a very considerable time. He had discussed the matter with the Court missionary, Mr. Scott-France—a most useful assistant in the administration of justice—and another difficulty presented itself. He (the Judge's) idea was to send the prisoner to a prison where he would be treated under the Borstal system, where he would be taught a trade and kept away from other prisoners; but then he met with this difficulty. Prisoner was only 15 years of age, and although he would have thought that the Borstal system was for the benefit of all young prisoners, it appeared that the age was 16—there was only provision for prisoners between the ages of 16 and 21. Therefore this prisoner could not be sent to any prison in which he would be specially treated as he would be there. His lordship was, however, glad to know that at Wormwood Scrubs they had a most admirable system of dealing with young prisoners, and he thought he was able to get out of the difficulty by doing what he now proposed to do. It might be said, of course, that he could send him to a reformatory, and he would not be so cruel as to send a boy with his antecedents to a reformatory, where he might leaven the mass. He thought it would be cruel in the extremity for a Judge to send a boy like him to a reformatory, where he would be thrown into contact with a lot of other boys. Therefore he proposed to sentence prisoner to be imprisoned for 18 months with hard labour. He had no power to give any further directions, but he knew that prisoner would be taught a trade at Wormwood Scrubs, and would be thoroughly well looked
after, and at the end of the 18 months he would come out with every opportunity of leading a good, a holy, and a pure life.
BEFORE THE RECORDER.
(Thursday, May 28.)
Mr. A.F.G. Henderson prosecuted.
Prisoner confessed to having been convicted at Mansion House on October 10, 1906. Several short sentences of larceny were proved.
Sentence, Eighteen months' hard labour.
Mr. J.P. Grain prosecuted; Mr. Keith Frith defended.
Prisoner pleaded guilty of having conspired with other persons by false pretences and subtle devices to obtain the said moneys. He was stated to have been associated for the past three months with a gang of cardsharpers.
Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.
Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald prosecuted.
Sentence, Three days' imprisonment.
Sentence, Three days' imprisonment.
Sentence, Three days' imprisonment.
Mr. J.P. Grain prosecuted; Mr. W.G. Hawtin defended Arnold. Johnson pleaded guilty.
Detective FREDERICK BLYTH , City Police. On April 27, 1908, I was on Holborn Viaduct with Detective Trencham. We had been keeping observation on railway vans for several days. On April 27, at 5.30 p.m., looking down into Farringdon Street I saw a Great Western Railway van draw up to a coffee-house, which the driver entered, leaving the van at the corner of Turnagain Lane, in charge of the van boy, who stood at the side of the van on the pavement. I
then saw the two prisoners and another man not in custody hurry from underneath the Viaduct and turn into Farringdon Avenue, opposite where the van was standing. About a minute afterwards all three came out in company and stopped on the footway; the man not in custody walked across the road, passed round the van, and stood in front of the van boy. Johnson climbed on to the offside of the van and took parcel produced from the inside of the van. Arnold was then standing on the footway looking from right to left. Johnson carrying the parcel, followed by the other man, joined Arnold, and all three walked towards the Viaduct. I ran down the steps leading down to Farringdon Street, and when Johnson saw me he threw down the parcel and ran away. Arnold and the man not in custody ran through Plum Tree Court into Shoe Lane. I blew my whistle and stopped Johnson. I, Trencham, and other officers had been watching from the Viaduct on April 15, 16, 21, 22, 23, and 24.
Held that evidence could not be given of the presence of Arnold with Johnson on other days: although he may have been present on other days, non constat that he was prevent on April 27.
Johnson was charged with being concerned with two other men in stealing the parcel. He replied, "There was no two other men." I had not the slightest doubt I saw Arnold on April 27. I recognise him as a man I had seen before on several occasions. On April 29, at 6.15 p.m., I arrested Arnold at King Street, West Smithfield. He was standing with another man named Clark. I told Arnold that I should arrest him for being concerned with a man named Johnson in custody and a man not in custody, in stealing a parcel of cigars from a van in Farringdon Street on the 27th. He said, "What parcel? I know nothing about it." I then took him to the station; the charge was read over—he said, "I know nothing about it."
Cross-examined. The coffee-house is about five to eight yards from the Viaduct—from the foot of the steps—the van was several yards further on. There were not many people about—it was raining fast at the time. The theft took about three minutes from the time they ran towards the van till Johnson returned with the parcel to Arnold. The third man was shielding the boy's view of the van. I do not think I have made any mistake in this case. A man was arrested who answered the description of the third man. I was called to identify him, and saw at once he was not the man I had seen with Johnson and Arnold on April 27. He was apprehended on a description given by me. I had not found out Arnold's address. I arrested him because I recognised him.
Detective CHARLES TRENCHAM , City Police. I was with Blyth on April 27. I am certain Arnold was the man with Johnson and the other man—I have seen him on several other dates. I saw Arnold with the two other men follow the van down Farringdon Street.
Cross-examined. The van was about 50 yards from the Viaduct when the theft was committed—I have not measured it. The van stood near the corner of Turnagain Lane. The three men were following the van—I only saw their backs from the Viaduct—I did not see Arnold's face properly until I came up to Johnson to apprehend him.
I saw his face at a distance at the bottom of Farringdon Avenue and recognised him. Directly they saw us Johnson dropped the parcel and all three ran in different directions.
JHON JAMES COLLINGWOOD , Imperial Tobacco Company, Holborn Viaduct. On April 27 I packed box produced with 500 cigars, value £2 15s., and handed it to another clerk to be sent off by the Great Western Railway to Milford Haven.
TIMOTHY LYONS , carman, Great Western Eailway. On April 27 I received box produced, put it in my van, drew up in Farringdon Street, and went into a coffee shop, leaving the van in charge of my van guard. When I came out the police spoke to me, and I found the parcel had been taken.
Prisoner's statement before magistrate: "I have never been in Johnson's company, at the time of his arrest or at any other time. I only came from Wales three weeks ago from my last employment. I have a reference."
ALBERT ARNOLD (prisoner, on oath). My correct name is Arnoldi. I live at 3, Vineyard Walk, Farringdon Road, which is about 20 minutes' walk from Holborn Viaduct. On April 27 I left the "Queen's Head" public-house, 23, Great Bath Street, at 5.30 p.m. that is about two minutes' walk from my home. I went straight home and my mother made tea for me. At about 6.20 to 6.30 Mr. Oram, whom I called before the magistrate, called for the rent. I know nothing whatever about this robbery. I know Johnson by sight. I was not with him on the day of the robbery and know nothing about it.
Cross-examined. I was not in Johnson's company near the Viaduct on April 15—I have never been in his company whatever. I swear I was not with him on April 16, 21, 22, 23, or 24. I know Clark—he is a betting commission agent. I was with him when arrested on April 29. I have been now and again in his company. I an in the habit of frequently the "Queen's Head" and have seen Johnson there. I came from Abertilly, in Wales, about three weeks before I was arrested—I was employed there in a refreshment bar. I was talking to Clark when I was arrested. I do not know whether Clark is a free man now or where he is. I went to my mother's at 5.30, and was there when Oram came and applied for the rent. My mother did not say had just come in. I was in my shirt sleeves, and had been out all day and was fairly wet. I had been at the "Queen's Head" about an hour before I went home.
Mrs. ARNOLDI , 3, Vineyard Walk, Clerken well, mother of the prisoner. My son lives with me. He was away in the country for about five weeks, and returned about a month before April 27. On that day he came home before five o'clock. He sat down and waited while I got the tea ready, and was having hit fast cup of tea when the land-lord, Mr. Oram, came; that was quarter-past six; he had his coat off. Oram asked for the rent. I said my son had not got any money,
he had got nothing to do yet, that he had not long been home. My son came home just before five.
Cross-examined. I said my son was wet and he had been out all day.
Prisoner (recalled). On April 27, at 9 a.m., I went to the Free Library to seek for work, came out at 9.30, and travelled through the City till 12 to try for work, went to the "Queen's Head" for lunch, stayed there till 1.30, went to Highbury at about 3.30, returned to the "Queen's Head" at 4.30, and remained there till 5.30, when I went home, and stayed there till 7 p.m. On April 30 I wrote a letter (produced) to the police authorities, stating what I had been doing on April 27.
(Evidence in rebuttal.)
THOMAS ORAM , 5, Guildford Place, Russell Square, rent collector. I collect the rent of 3, Vineyard Walk, and usually call on Monday. On April 27 I called on Mrs. Arnoldi at about 6.40 p.m. She occupies one room. I found Mrs. Arnoldi and the prisoner having tea. I asked for the rent, which was 14 weeks owing. Prisoner was seated at the table in his shirt sleeves. Mrs. Arnoldi said, "There is my son✗ he has just come in. He has been out all day and got sopping wet, and I have got nothing for you." I was called by prisoner at the Guildhall and gave evidence on his behalf.
Verdict, Guilty. Johnson confessed to being convicted at Clerkenwell on December 19, 1905, when he was sentenced to 18 months' hard labour for shop-breaking and stealing boots. In 1904 he had 15 months' hard labour for van-stealing. Arnold had been sentenced to six weeks' hard labour for attempting to pick pockets on April 13, 1901. He was convicted at Guildhall in reference to a robbery committed with Clark, sentence being postponed with reference to the present charge. Both prisoners were stated to be habitual thieves.
Sentence. Johnson, four years' penal servitude; Arnold, three years' penal servitude.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Thursday, May 28.)
Sentence: One month's imprisonment in the Second Division.
Mr. Travers Humphreys and Mr. Boyd prosecuted.
called Mary Ann Verity. His nickname is "Johnny Carter." I have seen the two prisoners about three times. I knew them before April 25. In the early morning of that day about half-past 12 I was in the Waterloo Road in company with Mary Ann Verity and a little girl where I saw the two prisoners. William and Harry Jones came running up to me and Harry struck me on the cheek, saying, "I will give you f—g 'Johnny Carter.' " I fell to the ground. Both prisoners caught me by the throat and very nearly strangled me. Prisoner Harry said, "Kick him, Billy," and prisoner William kicked me in the mouth, breaking two of my teeth, and about the body. Harry also kicked me on the nose and broke it. They ran away, and I was helped up by the woman Verity. I was on my way home at the time walking towards the Borough Road. In the Borough Road I again saw prisoners, each with an open knife in his hand. I slipped off both my coats for greater case in running, and threw them to the side of the road, and ran towards the "Elephant and Castle." A policeman saw me home. The same day I went to Guy's Hospital and had my injuies attended to. On the night of April 24 prisoners had come to 27, Kipling Street, my brother's place, where they broke the windows, a door, and a quantity of furniture.
A number of questions were put by prisoners with a view to showing that there had been an occurrence on Easter Monday, when their father's shop was wrecked, but the learned judge pointed out that no previous occurrence would justify the outrage now alleged against prisoners.
MARY ANNVERITY , 27, Kipling Street, Bermondsey. I am the wife of Henry Verity and now live with John Wood, the brother of William Wood. John Wood goes by the name of "Johnny Carter." I have known the two prisoners since I was a child. There has been bad feeling between them and John Wood and myself. On the night of April 24, about 11 o'clock, the two prisoners came to 27, Kipling Street. I had taken my supper when they knocked at the door, and my little niece Rosie opened it. Billy said, "Is anybody at home?" A man living there replied, "Yes, we are all at home." He ran to the fireplace and got the poker and kept the door shut as well as he could. the lot of them then started beating the door with iron bars and some of my furniture was broken. That was at 11 o'clock on the Friday night. Early on the following (Saturday) morning I was in Waterloo Road with the prosecutor, William Wood, a little girl and another woman. I should think that would be at about half-past one, at all events in the early morning. I was standing talking to the young woman and Billy and the girl was standing on the kerb. I heard Harry Jones say, "Punch him, Billy," and Billy punched prosecutor in the jaw, "knocking him down." When he was down on the ground Harry Jones said to his brother, "Kick him, Billy," and the two of them started kicking him about the body and in the face. I went to pick prosecutor up and prisoners ran away. I then helped him up, and was helping him home along the Borough Road when I saw prisoners running towards him, each with a knife in his hand, and I said to prosecutor, "Run, Billy." Wood accordingly ran away and
prisoner William Jones ran after him. Prisoner Harry Jones turned round to me and said, "I will rip your f—g guts out for this," and I ran home. I next saw Harry Jones on the 28th (the following Tuesday) in the Borough Road. He asked me if I was going to give evidence against his brother Billy. I said I was, and he said, "If you do, I am going to gouge your f—g eye out with this," showing a knife. I ran away and he ran after me till I met a policeman, who arrested him.
To William Jones. You hit prosecutor on the cheek.
To Harry Jones. This assault occurred at the Obelisk. I went there to give you in charge for breaking up my place. Afterwards when the policeman interfered you were holding me by the throat and I screamed, but the policeman would not take you in charge. He was frightened because you are such a terrible lot. Both you and Billy had pieces of iron in your hands. As to why the police did not take you in charge for having murderous weapons in your hands, I do not say the police are a lot of cowards, but you nearly killed one policeman and got nine months for it. (Witness was also cross-examined as to what had taken place on the previous Monday night, when prisoners alleged their father's shop was wrecked.)
Dr. PERCEVAL JOYNT , Guy's Hospital. I saw Wood on Sunday, April 26. He was bleeding from the left side of the nose—the left nostril. The nose itself was a little bit bent over. On feeling the nose it was distinctly felt that it was broken. There was a large number of contusions on the right forehead and temple. Two front teeth were broken off. The injuries were recent and such at would be caused by kicks. He did not complain of his body and I did not examine it.
Police-constable JAMES COOKHAM , 374 L. At 11.50 on the morning of April 28 I was in Waterloo Road and saw the woman Verity running away from Harry Jones. I asked him what was wrong and he said, "Nothing." I told him there was a warrant issued for his arrest on a charge of assault. He said, "No, not me, governor. I cannot help what the others did." On searching him I found a knife in his jacket pocket.
To Henry Jones. I did not hear you pass any remark about gouging the woman's f—g eye out. You seemed to be arguing with her. Going to the station the woman followed tantalising you, and passing remarks about "Jubilee" Jones.
Detective-sergeant GEORGE CORNISH , L Division. On April 27 in the afternoon, I arrested prisoner, William Jones, in the London Road, on another charge. I told him the charge. He said, "Has the bleeder come it on him. I wish I had kicked his head off now. If my brother Harry was here we would serve you the same as we served him. We would kick your f—g head off, and if Harry had a knife he would stab you dead. People cannot do as they like with Harry and me." He was quite sober when he said that.
month. I read to him the warrant, charging him with this assault. He said, "I know nothing about it. I was not there. I know I have got a bad name, being one of 'Jubilee' Jones's sons. If we had not done it on him he would have done it on us. I cannot stand that. I like to be first."
Mrs. ELLEN GROOVER , with whom prisoner Harry has been living, stated that she heard the witness Verity threaten prisoners. Verity told witness she was a prostitute and kept Harry Jones, but witness denied that she was, stating that she was a married woman and had her own money.
Verdict: Both prisoners guilty. 14 convictions were proved against Harry Jones and eight against William.
Detective-sergeant CORNISH stated that he had known the prisoners about two years, and could say without fear of contradiction that they were the terror of South London and everybody was frightened of them. It was a very bad family, and the father was now in prison.
Sentences: Harry Jones, four years' penal servitude; William, 21 months.
Judge Rentoul said he had never seen any record as bad for violence and assaults, and referred with satisfaction to the movement on foot to lock up such men for life.
MILLWARD, William (28, greengrocer); HILDITCH, Edward William (32, carman); and REEVES, Thomas (20, printer). Hilditch, and Reeves breaking and entering a warehouse of the Midland Railway Company and stealing therein 14 pairs of boots, their property; Millward receiving 12 pairs of the said boots well knowing them to have been stolen. Hilditch and Reeves pleaded guilty.
Mr. Bodkin prosecuted; Mr. Huntly Jenkins defended Millward.
GEORGE CLARKE , office porter at Midland Railway receiving office, 57, Primrose Street, E.C. The office was shut up on the evening of May 8. We then had a large quantity of boots consigned from Messrs. Darnell, to Messrs. Frankland. Next morning when I went to the premises they had been broken open and the boots were missing, entrance having apparently been gained through the fanlight.
JOHN YOUNG , in the employ of Messrs. Darnell, boot factors, Kings-land Road, stated that 33 parcels of boots were packed under his superintendence and consigned by the Midland Railway to a customer. Of the 12 pairs of boots in a sack produced he identified 11 as the property of his employers, and their value was £4 7s.
Sergeant GEORGE BAILEY , 10, City. On the early morning of Saturday, May 9, I found that a fanlight over 37, Primrose Street, had been disturbed and entrance to the premises had apparently been gained by that means.
Detective-sergeant HANDLEY, J Division. At about quarter before midnight on the 9th I saw prisoner Hilditch in Cambridge Road. He was wearing a pair of boots which were afterwards identified by a clerk at Darnell's. About one o'clock on the Sunday morning I saw Reeves in bed, and under the bed was a pair of boots which were also identified at the property of the prosecutors. Two hours afterwards, with other officers, I went to a stable occupied by Millward, in Redman's Row, Stepney. Prisoner is a greengrocer and uses the stable to stable a donkey. Outside the stable there were several vans. I looked into the stable through the fanlight, and saw a sack hanging to one of the beams. I could not see that there was anything else in the stable. After that I went to Doveton Street, where Millward lives, and sent a message to Millward by another officer. Shortly afterwards Millward came out and a detective followed him, and some little time later Millward returned, having been away about 15 minutes. The distance from Doveton Street to the stable is about a quarter of a mile. By the time he came back to his house I was inside it, and opened the door to him. I told him we were police officers and were making inquiries respecting some boots that were stolen on Friday night or Saturday morning, and I said I had reason to believe that he had been dealing with those boots. He said, "I know nothing about any boots." I told him he would have to accompany me to the stables in Redman's Road, which he did. On the way he said, "A man I know as Reeves asked me if I would buy any boots, and I told him no, I was a greengrocer." He opened the stable door with a key which he took from his trousers pocket, and I observed that the sack which I had previously seen hanging from a beam was gone. I turned to the prisoner and said: "There was a sack hanging to that beam a short time ago." He said, "Handley, I see you are in the 'know.' I put it in the van (pointing to a van outside the stables) when I was here a short time ago. I was a fool to have anything to do with them. Do not be too hard on me, Handley. Get me bail if you can." He was taken to Bishops-gate Police Station and there charged.
Cross-examined. He did get bail—£10, or something very small. To my knowledge there has neven been any charge made against him before. The message I gave the officer to take was not that his place had been broken into. I made it clear to him when I first saw him that I had reason to believe he had been dealing with the boots. After I sent the officer to him he did put the boots off his premises. I was present at the police-court when the other two prisoners were asked if they had anything to say in answer to the charge.
Mr. Bodkin objected to a statement made by somebody other than the prisoner in answer to the statutory caution being given in evidence for this defendant before the jury, on the ground that the person who made that statement if the statement were relevant to this trial, could be called to prove it.
Mr. Huntly Jenkins submitted that anything said in presence of prisoner Millward by a fellow prisoner, whether before or after the statutory caution, was admissible.
Mr. Bodkin. Prisoner says what he has to say in answer to the charge; that is not a statement made in the presence of this prisoner in the sense in which statements made in the presence of accused persons are given in evidence, because it is
that which is said in a court of justice, any more than would be what is said in this Court.
Judge Rentoul. He could not contradict it.
Mr. Bodkin. Furthermore, the Court must receive the best evidence of facts and the best evidence of facts comes from the lipe of persons who have sworn to depose to those facts, and not through the ears of a police-constable who may have heard somebody make a statement which involves those facts.
Mr. Huntly Jenkins said in that case what one prisoner said about another could never be given unless that particular person was called. Supposing there should be controversy between some of the prisoners and the police officer who hears what one prisoner says about another, you could not call the police officer nor anybody else who heard that said because he would not be the best witness.
Judge Rentoul said: The rule was that the best evidence should be called. Supposing one witness was standing thirty yards away and another was standing five yards away, the best evidence would be the witness who was standing five yards away. Where a man could be called, and the only reason for not calling him was to avoid calling a witness for the prisoner, he thought that could not be allowed. The objection must be sustained.
Cross-examination continued. I heard Hilditch make a statement in answer to the statutory caution and also Reeves, and afterwards I heard Millward make a statement on oath in the witness-box.
Re-examined. Nobody had been to the stable when I went to it the first time. Millward opened the door with a key which he took from his pocket.
Detective SAMUEL CROCKER , City. I went with Sergeant Handley to prisoner's stable early on the morning of the 10th and saw a sack hanging up inside. I went afterwards to 14, Doveton Street, where I saw a uniformed constable. After the uniformed constable had gone I saw Millward come out of the house, apparently towards me, but he turned away as if he had seen somebody, and I lost sight of him. I met him again coming away from the stables, which are distant, I should say, 120 yards. He went back to No. 14, Doveton Street, and I was there when Handley spoke to him. Afterwards I accompanied Handley and the prisoner back to the stables. I heard him make a statement to the effect that men of the name of Reeves and Hilditch had brought some boots to him and wanted him to buy them. Millward stated also that Reeves slept there sometimes, but was not doing so then. The sack of boots had been thrown inside a van.
WILLIAM MILLWARD (prisoner, on oath). I am now a greengrocer, but was formerly a boot operator for 12 years with a firm whom I left because they went bankrupt. I started in the greengrocery business finding I could not get employment. I have known Reeves two of three years. I kept a small donkey at the stable in Redmond's Road and I used to allow Reeves to sleep there when he had not got any lodging to save him walking about. On the particular night he wanted to sleep there I used to leave the key on the ledge. On Friday, May 8. about six or seven in the evening he asked me if he could sleep there and I told him I would leave the key where I always leave it. I did not see him on Saturday morning when I took the donkey out, but I did see him in the evening in Doveton Street, between
seven and eight o'clock when I had finished work. He then said to me, "Will you buy 12 pairs of boots?" I turned to him and said, "I do not buy boots." I did not suppose for a moment he had honestly come by them. He told me they were in a bag hanging to a beam in the stable and I said to him, "Take them away as soon as you can, because I do not want to get into no trouble." In reply to that he said, "All right. I will be back later." At that time the key was was on the ledge, where I had left it on the Saturday morning. I went to my stable between nine and half-past on Saturday evening to put the donkey away, and seeing the boots there I did not remove them as Reeves had said he was going to take them away himself, and I did not want to handle them. The next thing was that I met Hilditch. I told him about the boots and he said he was waiting for Tom (Reeves) to come back. I asked him if he was going to take the boots away. This was about half-past 10. I went to the corner public-house and stayed till about half-past eleven. No one returned and so I went to bed, and I did not hear any more before Sunday morning, when I was aroused by a police-constable in uniform. He asked if I had a stable in Redman's Row. I said, "Yes." Then he said, "There are constables in possession. Somebody has broken into it." I told him to go to Charles, the landlord, and he went away. I then dressed and went down to the stable. As to the suggestion that I did not go the most direct way I first went to Charles that I sent the constable to. I was told the police were in possession, but when I got there I saw no one whatever. In a fright I took hold of the bag of boots and slung them into a van. I suspected Reeves had not come by them honestly because I knew he had no money, and I did not see which way he could purchase them. I knew he had been in trouble once; that is why I told him to take them away.
Cross-examined. I did not consent to Reeves putting boots which I knew had been stolen on to my premises. Allowing a man to sleep in my stable is not the same as consenting to receive stolen property. When he offered me the boots I suspected they were stolen, but I did not consent to keep them in my stable I saw the sack at nine o'clock on Saturday night, but Reeves had then said he was going to take them away, and so I left them there.
THOMAS REEVES (prisoner, on oath.) I have pleaded guilty to this charge, and have been in trouble before. On the Saturday night after this burglary I saw Millward about half-past seven, and asked him if he would like to buy 12 pairs of boots. He said, "No; I do not deal in anything like that. For God Almighty's sake take them away from my place, as I do not want to get into no trouble. I never had anything like that in my place before, and I don't want anything like it now." I said, "All right. I will come back and take them away later on." I did not turn up, because the police came and arrested be at one o'clock on the Sunday morning. I had slept on these premises on several occasions.
Cross-examined. I have had to do with the boot line. Knowing Millward to be a greengrocer I offered them to him because I did not know anyone who would buy them. I took the boots to the stable in
a sack and tied them to a beam before before I offered them to Millward. They were there for one day.
Verdict (Millward), Not guilty.
Two previous convictions were proved against Reeves, who was sentenced to four months' hard labour. Hilditch, against whom nothing is known, was permitted to enter into recognisances in the sum of £5 to come up for judgment if called upon.
Mr. Bowen Davies prosecuted; Mr. Sidney Williams defended.
Inspector ARTHUR SIMS produced a plan of the top floor of No. 1, Drummond Crescent, Somers Town.
LOUIS CLARA CANN . I live at No. 1, Drummond Crescent, Somers Town. The family include my mother, sister, two little brothers, and the prisoner. At half-past eight on the evening of April 23 I was in the kitchen on the top floor with prisoner, my mother, my sister, and my brother Herbert Victor. I had a few words with prisoner about the rent. My father is the tenant of the house, but we have had to pay the rent since he left us. My father left us money for that purpose. The landlord wrote saying that he was going to put the brokers in, and I brought the letter up to my brother in the kitchen, and asked him what he intended to do about it. He said, "I cannot help it," and I said, "No; you don't care." I said to my sister, "If I could borrow some money I could pay the rent." Prisoner said if I did not leave off nagging him he would do me an injury. I turned to leave the room and said, "Yes, you will." As I was going out of the room I heard the report of a revolver, and my little brother Herbert Victor came running to me crying out, "Oh, my head! Oh, my head!" I picked him up and heard my mother say, "He is shot." I put my hand on the child's head and it was smothered in blood. My mother and little brother went down into the street, and prisoner afterwards went out of the house.
Cross-examined. Between the fireplace where prisoner was standing and the door where I was my brother Herbert was sitting at the corner of the table, almost in a direct line. I was leaving the room because I was wanted in the shop.
ALICE HELENA CANN . As my sister was about to leave the room prisoner took the revolver from his pocket and fired it. He was standing by the fireplace at the time. My brother Herbert Victor was sitting at the table, and was between the prisoner and my sister Louisa, and called out, "Oh, my head!" and I noticed that his head was bleeding. He ran out of the room, and prisoner called to him to come back, but he did not do so. Prisoner fired the revolver at my sister.
my head. I have known prisoner and my sister Louisa sometimes to have wordy quarrels, but not fight and strike one another. They scolded one another.
CHARLES GRAHAM KNIGHT , assistant resident medical officer at the Children's Temperance Hospital. Victor Cann was brought to the hospital on April 23 at about nine o'clock. I examined his head and found on the right side a small punctured wound extending down to the bone, with a good deal of swelling around the wound. The wound might have been caused by the bullet produced, which did not penetrate the bone.
Police-sergeant CHARLES GOODCHILD . I went to No. 1, Drummond Crescent at 10 minutes to 12 on April 23 and examined the top floor room, where I found the six-chambered revolver (produced) under the table. It contained five cartridges and one had been fired. I have seen a bullet similar to that in the cartridges.
Inspector SIMS, recalled. Accompanied by another officer, I arrested prisoner at 29, Eburton Street in consequence of information received. I said to him, "We are police officers, and I am going to arrest you for shooting at your sister with intent to murder her, further with causing grievous bodily harm to your brother, Herbert Victor." He said, "It was an accident. I am very sorry. I took the revolver from the shelf and put it in my pocket, and as I took it out again it went off. It is only a little toy thing. I was coming to the station to give myself up." I took him to the station, where he was charged. He made no reply. He seemed very much upset.
JAMES CANN (prisoner, on oath). On the night in question my sister came and asked me about the rent. I told her I was not going to pay it. We had a jangle over it, which is not an unusual thing. I found the pistol about two months before this affair took place. I put it away in a box which I keep underneath my bed. I had taken it out because my sister was going to clean the room. As I took the revolver from my pocket it went off. I took it out because I was going to put it away again. My sister, my brother, and myself were not exactly in a straight line. If I had pointed it at my sister I should certainly have hit her. I could have hit her easily without touching my young brother. I heard mother scream and run out, and I ran after her to see what I had done. I holloa'd to my brother to come back. I was very much upset and I went away. My mother was not called before the magistrate because she is not right in her mind. She has been ill about 18 months. When I was arrested I was just about going to the station to inquire how much damage I had done. I think the trigger must have caught my pocket as I pulled the pistol out
Cross-examined. When I found the revolver it had five bullets in it. We are dealers in old clothes, and I found the revolver in an old coat. I have never touched the bullets since I found it.
Verdict, Not guilty.
WHITE, John (30, labourer), pleaded guilty to stealing two boxes of blouses, the property of Faudels, limited; feloniously wounding Walter Hickson, a Metropolitan police officer, with intent to resist the apprehension of himself; attempting to wound George Tucker, a Metropolitan police officer, with intent to resist the apprehension of himself.
The articles were stolen from a traveller's brougham in Commercial Street, Spitalfields. When Tucker, who witnessed the robbery, attempted to arrest prisoner, the latter attacked him with a shoemaker's knife and cut his tunic. Tucker closed with him and they fell to the ground together. Prisoner, however, got away. Hickson attempted to stop him and was wounded in the face with the knife, fortunately without inflicting permanent injury.
Several previous convictions were proved.
Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.
BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.
(Thursday, May 28.)
Mr. W. H. Sands prosecuted; Mr. Greene defended.
FLORENCE LEWIS , cashier at the Temple Exhibition, Whitechapel Road. On Saturday, April 18, prisoner came into the exhibition and asked for two tickets, coating 3d., for which he put down a 5s. piece (produced). I thought it was bad, and asked if he had any other money; he said no. A friend who was with prisoner then walked out. Prisoner stood there, but said nothing. Presently he gave me 3d. in coppers and took the 5s. back.
Cross-examined. The Passover holidays had not come off on Saturday, the 18th. Prisoner made no attempt to get away. I saw him search his pockets before producing the 3d., but I do not know from what pocket he brought it.
Police-constable MICHAEL O'SULLIVAN , 272 H. On April 18 I was in Brick Lane about 7.15 p.m., where I saw a boy, who spoke to me, after which I saw prisoner and followed him in consequence of what the boy said. After doing so for about 500 or 600 yards I saw him speak to a man (Goldberg) who was afterwards charged with prisoner. The latter showed this man something which he took from his trousers pocket. They stood at the entrance to the Gayland Exhibition. They then went away and returned to the entrance. From there they went to the Temple Exhibition. I then spoke to the attendant at the door, and saw prisoner put down a 5s. piece (produced). The man with prisoner then came out. I followed prisoner into the exhibition; after speaking to him, I searched him and found the coin in his waistcoat pocket. I also found £1 in gold, 1s. silver, and 7d. bronze. He said, "I know I wanted to change it; I do not make them. I
got it from my guv'nor, Mr. Levy, 41, Fashion Street." When charged at the station he made no reply.
Cross-examined. Prisoner was wearing the same suit as now. (After referring to a notebook). When he was taken to the station he said, "I am a fool; I do not make them. Yes, I know I wanted to change it; I got it from Mr. Levy." It was his governor's brother who lived at 41, Fashion Street. Two keys were found on prisoner. I do not know that anyone searched his premises. I find that he bears the highest character.
Re-examined. The other man was discharged by the magistrate. Mr. Levy came to the station on the night prisoner was taken there.
DAVID DURNOSKI , costermonger. I was with my barrow in Brick Lane at 7.15 p. m. on April 18, where I saw prisoner, who asked me for half a pound of grapes, price 11/2 d., for which he gave me a crown (produced). I tried it three times, and told him it was no good. I asked him if he had any smaller money; he said no. He then left the grapes and went away. I spoke to him in Jewish.
Cross-examined. I bounced the coin three times on the ground. This was the last day of the Passover holidays.
Cross-examined. It would be likely to deceive anybody who had no experience.
Prisoner's statement. I reserve my defence and call no witnesses here.
ISAAC VOLKERVITCH (prisoner, on oath). Evidence interpreted. I work for my brother-in-law, Millward Levy. On the Friday before this Saturday I saw my governor's brother and asked him to give me some money, because my governor would be away on the Sunday. He gave me 25s., being a sovereign and 5s. piece. I was wearing a frock coat on the Saturday. In the evening I changed my coat. I cannot remember in which pocket I put my money. I went down Brick Lane and asked for some grapes from Durnoski. I wanted to change the sovereign, but he said he had no change. I did not know at the time that I had any small change. I offered Durnoski the 5s. piece, which he gave me back, saying it looked like a bad one, but he was not sure. I went straight to the Temple Exhibition and offered the same 5s. piece, not believing it was bad. When the lady gave it me back I searched for the sovereign and found some pennies. I did not know that I had them. I had changed all my suit that evening. I have never been in trouble before.
Cross-examined. The 25s. wages were in my little pocket. I wanted the grapes when I bought them. My master owed me £2 14s. for that week's work. I heard Durnoski ring the coin. I was not sure that it was bad. I have been in London between five and six
years. When I saw Goldberg I Showed him some jewellery of my wife's. I said to Florence Lewis that I would see whether I had some other money.
JACOB LEVY , 41, Fashion Street. Prisoner works for my brother. On the day before prisoner was locked up I saw him. My brother was then away for a holiday. Prisoner asked me to give him 25s. on account of his wages, and I gave him a sovereign and a 5s. piece. When I heard he had been locked up I went to the station and told them that I had given the 5s. piece to prisoner.
Cross-examined. I know where I got the 5s. from; it was got with £20 in silver.
The Common Serjeant said that he did not think it was necessary to call the witnesses to character.
Verdict, Not guilty.
Mr. Beaumont Morice prosecuted; Mr. S. W. Lambert defended.
ANNIE RODER , 35, Woolwich Road, Greenwich. On April 8, prisoner came into out shop between 5.30 and 6, and asked for a packet of Player's cigarettes (21/2 d.), for which he tendered a 5s. piece, which was rather smooth and similar to the one produced, but not quite so dark. I gave it to my husband, who took it into Mr. Higgs next door to get change. He brought it back and gave it to prisoner saying, "Do you know what you have got here? It is a bad one." Prisoner looked at it, and said, "Bad!" and put it back in his pocket. He then gave me half a sovereign, which I changed.
Cross-examined. I gave prisoner 9s. 91/2 d. After tendering the coin he waited for some time. I could not swear to this being the same coin. My husband was absent with the coin for about four minutes; he was also away for about that time when he went to change the half-sovereign.
THOMAS RODER , 35, Woolwich Road, tobacconist, husband of last witness, gave evidence corroborating her account. When prisoner gave me the half-sovereign I went out again on pretence of getting change, and asked Mr. Higgs to look for a policeman. Prisoner went out of the shop and I followed him, but lost sight of him. I saw him about ten minutes later in company of another man on the road to Woolwich. Then they separated, one going down a side turning, and I fancy they saw I was watching them, so I drew back, and they disappeared. I saw prisoner with a man, but I could not say he was the same one, at eight o'clock on the same evening, as I was standing at the shop door. Prisoner went into Mr. Higgs's shop next door. A few minutes later I was serving a customer when Mr. Higgs came in, and from what he said my customer went after prisoner. The 5s. piece produced is in a different state from when I saw it. It had a suspicious appearance, and I bit it. I made no actual mark on it. I found prisoner detained at A. J. Hunt's shop.
Cross-examined. I had taken a counterfeit crown about a month previously. I believe I can tell a bad coin by putting it between my teeth. I did not apply any other test. Prisoner when he separated
from the other man went up Coombedale Road; that is about 600 yards from my shop, I should imagine. When told that the coin was bad prisoner said to my wife, "Isn't it funny? I got it in change." I have a slight doubt as to the exact remark he made. I think I told the magistrate that prisoner said to me, "That's funny; I got it in change." Possibly I repeated the words the wife had told me.
ALFRED JAMES MUNDAY , 277, Woolwich Road, shoemaker. On April 18, between 6.30 and 7 p.m., prisoner came into my shop for a pair of indiarubber heels, which came to 61/2 d. He tendered a bad 5s. piece, which I tested on the slate. I handed it back to prisoner and said it was no good. He then gave me a sovereign, and asked if I could change that, which I did. On April 27 I went to the police station and picked prisoner out from about 18. I saw him directly he entered the room.
Cross-examined. I do not know the exact time that prisoner came into the shop. I had nothing to help me to fix the time; there is no clock in the shop. I had a good many customers in and out between five and seven, but not while prisoner was there. I do not think there were any like prisoner. I do not identify the coin. Prisoner had two or three sovereigns with him. Coombedale Road is about a minute and a half from my shop. It would take about 10 minutes to walk to Roder's shop. You would pass Coombedale Road going from my shop to Roder's. Prisoner was quite a stranger to me. The constable called on me about this matter on the following Thursday. I had not complained at the police station. I cannot tell how the constable found out about the affair at all. He asked me if I had had a bad 5s. piece tendered on Saturday; he did not say the 18th. I told the officer prisoner looked like a gentleman's servant, and I should know him again. He did not describe him to me. When I picked prisoner out at the station from the others they were standing in a semi-circle. Prisoner was immediately opposite the door. The coin made a lead mark when rubbed on the slate. It would have been likely to deceive anybody.
Re-examined. Nobody went with me when I picked out prisoner. I walked across, touched him, and said, "This is the man."
JOSEPH HIGGS , 37, Woolwich Road, leatherseller. On April 18, at about 7 p.m., Mr. Roder came and showed me a 5s. piece. It did not look like a good one. I could not say whether it is the one produced. About an hour afterwards prisoner came in for a pair of rubber heels, 61/2 d., for which he tendered a 5s. piece, which looked a very bad one; it looked very black. I went into Mr. Roder, and from something he said, I took it back to the shop and asked prisoner whether he had a halfpenny or smaller change. He said he had a halfpenny. I said I could not take the 5s. piece. He then gave me back the rubber heels and said, "Do you mind my calling later on?" About a quarter of an hour later I saw him at the police station.
Cross-examined. I have no clock in the shop. I said it was about 6.30 when Roder came to me first. I heard Mrs. Roder give her evidence at the police court, but I could not say whether I heard her
say that the time was between 5.30 and six. There was a light mark on the coin produced at the police court, similar to the one I had taken in the shop. It is not on this one now. I should not be prepared to say it was the same coin. I was standing at my door and saw prisoner come out of Roder's shop. I could walk to Coombedale Road in two or three minutes. I could not say whether Roder is right in putting the distance as 1, 500 yards.
ARCHIBALD JAMES HUNT , 105, Woolwich Road, chemist. On April 18, at about eight p.m., prisoner came into my shop and asked for a tin of tooth powder, price 4d., for which he tendered the 5s. piece produced. I tested it with nitrate of silver and found it was bad, so I broke it in two, and handed it back to prisoner, who said that he did not know he had it. He hesitated a little and then gave the tooth powder back and walked out. I went to the door, and a constable passed, to whom I spoke and returned to the shop. Shortly afterwards the officer returned with prisoner. I said to the former, "This is the man who tried to pass off a bad 5s. piece." Prisoner said, "Are you sure of that?" Then afterwards, "Well, it is very hard on me," and I said, "Yes, and it is very hard on some of us who have wives and families to keep." Then I told him that it would be better if he said nothing at all. I went to the station and charged prisoner.
Cross-examined. The coin did not look quite proper; otherwise it would very likely have deceived me. Even a wary person might be deceived by it. When tested the coin went quite black.
JAMES EDWARD HUNT , Glenforth Road, E. Greenwich, general dealer. On April 18, at about five to eight, I saw prisoner come out of Higgs's shop. I had been in Roder's shop and heard Higgs say something to Roder, in consequence of which I followed prisoner, who went up the road. I crossed on the other side and saw him go into Mr. Hunt's, the chemist. There was a young lady there also. A few seconds elapsed, then I saw a policeman, to whom I made a statement. I passed Hunt's shop again, and, as prisoner came out, I pointed him out to the constable, who took him back to the chemist's shop. When there prisoner said, "This is the first shop I have tried to pass it on to." I said, "With the exception of two others to my knowledge." I did not hear him say anything more. I brought Mr. Roder in, and prisoner was taken to the station.
Cross-examined. I should think the officer could have heard prisoner's statement, because I was further away than he. When I said, "With the exception of two others," I alluded to Mr. Higgs and Mr. Roder. I did not, that I am aware of, say to the magistrate that prisoner said, "I did not know it was bad." I expect I did say so.
Police-constable WILLIAM PLUMMER , 609 R. On April 18, about eight p.m., after the last witness had spoken to me, I saw prisoner come out of Mr. A.J. Hunt's shop. When he had got about six yards away I said to him, "I have a complaint against you for offering counterfeit coin." He said, "I asked for some tooth powder and handed him this, which I got shoved into me last night when in drink."
At the same time he gave me the broken 5s. piece. I took him back to the chemist's. Mr. Hunt said that prisoner had asked for some tooth powder, and when told the coin was bad, the latter said, "I did not know I had got it." I told prisoner I should take him into custody. He said, "To tell you the truth, I have only been out of the army a fortnight; it is hard on me." I searched him in the shop and found 11/2 d. and a key. When charged at the station he made no reply.
Cross-examined. I did not hear prisoner say in the shop that that was the first shop in which he had tried to pass the coin, nor J. E. Hunt say, "And another two to my knowledge." I might have been deceived with the coin myself.
Re-examined. The coin is lighter than a genuine one.
(To Mr. Lambert.) I did not find any indiarubber heels on prisoner.
Detective-sergeant JOHN MACPHERSON , R Division. On the morning of April 27 prisoner was put up for identification with 18 others, many others similar to him. I heard prisoner say that he was satisfied with the number and character of the men. Witness Munday picked prisoner out after he had had a look round. Prisoner made no reply. There was no description given to Munday before he identified prisoner.
Cross-examined. I went to Munday and took a statement from him. I took down his description of the man he had seen, as follows: "Age about 27, height 5 ft. 6 in., appearance of a gentleman's servant." The men at the identification stood in a semi-circle. It may be correct that prisoner was right in front of Munday when the latter went in. Munday gave me the date on which he had seen prisoner as Saturday, the 18th.
WILLIAM ALLEN (prisoner, on oath), 4, Cheshire Street, Bethnal Green. I used to be a painter by trade. I have been in the Army in South Africa, whence I came back on March 30. I brought £8 with me. I first went to Gosport for a day, and then came to London. I am not in the Army now. On April 17, during the morning and afternoon, I was walking about the City and was in a good many public-houses. I received the 5s. piece on the night before in a public-house in Shoreditch in change for a sovereign, which was the last of the £8 I had brought from the ship. On the 18th, Saturday, I went to Woolwich with the intention of seeing an ex-soldier from Africa, whom I had met on the previous Wednesday, when I borrowed half a sovereign from him. About 6 p. m. I went into Roder's shop for a packet of cigarettes. At that time I had half a sovereign, a 5s. piece, and 11/2 d. I gave Mrs. Roder 5s. for the cigarettes. She went into a back
room, then her husband came out with the coin, and said he was going to get change. When he came back he told me it was bad, and I gave him half a sovereign, getting 9s. 91/2 d. change. I went out of the shop and met my friend, Richard Barrow. I paid him the 9s. 91/2 d. and the cigarettes, in satisfaction of my debt. I was with him for some time, and we had a drink. Then I went into Higgs's shop, about seven, I should say. I did not go into Munday's shop at all. I asked Higgs for a pair of rubber rings. I tendered the 5s. piece, and a few minutes afterwards he came and told me he did not like it. Then I gave him back the robber rings and left the shop. I looked at the coin again, and still thought that it was good. My friend had left me and promised to meet me at nine o'clock at the corner of Trafalgar Road and Woolwich Road. He had told me on the Wednesday that if I came over to see him on the Saturday very likely I could get some work. At about sight o'clock I went into Hunt's shop for some tooth powder and gave him the 5s. piece. I had no more money then. Hunt tested the coin, gave it me back, and I returned the tooth powder. I had gone about 30 paces from the shop when a constable and another man came up. The former asked me what I had been doing, and I gave him the coin. He asked me to go back and be searched, which I did. Mr. Hunt recognised me. I said that I had just come from Africa and it was hard on me. I did not hear J. E. Hunt say that I had tried to pass the coin at two other shops. I was picked out at the police station by Munday, but I had never seen him before. I had never seen the coin tested, and I believed it to be genuine when I went into Hunt's shop.
Cross-examined. I had 16s. when I left home, on the Saturday. I did not know my friend's address. I expected to see him near the corner of Trafalgar Road and Woolwich Road. I told the magistrate that I paid my friend 10s. I took the 9s. 91/2 d. and the cigarettes to be the equivalent. Mr. Higgs did not say that the coin was bad;. he told me he did not like it. Barrow and I were together between six and seven. I do not know Coombedale Road. It was about 6.30 when I met Barrow. What Mr. Munday has sworn about my going to his shop must be a mistake. He looked very hard at two or three other men before he identified me. In Mr. Hunt's shop I did not say it was the first shop where I had tried to pass the coin. I do not remember saying anything when Mr. Hunt said that I was the man who gave him a bad 5s. piece. I did not hear Mr. Hunt say, "It is very hard on us who have wives and children to look after"; be might have said it.
To the Common Serjeant. My friend Barrow is not here; I do not suppose he knows I am in trouble. I had met him in Africa about 18 months ago. He used to be a friend of mine in the army. I should say it was by chance that I met him in Shoreditch. I very often meet old soldiers. He told me that he was living in Greenwich. He did not stop with me five minutes on the Wednesday. I just borrowed half a sovereign, and he told me where to see him. I did not go into a shop while he was with me. I do not know why he left me;
perhaps he had private business of his own. Where he is or what he is doing I cannot tell you.
Verdict: Guilty of uttering to A. J. Hunt. As to the other utterings the Jury were not agreed.
Mr. Beaumont Morice accepted the verdict.
It was stated that prisoner joined the third battalion Royal Fusiliers on December 21, 1900; on September 21, 1901, he deserted, and on February 4, 1902, he was convicted at the North London Sessions of being found loitering by night with housebreaking implements, and attempted housebreaking, and sentenced to four months' hard labour. On October 28, 1902, he joined the Royal Field Artillery, and shortly afterwards it was discovered that he was a deserter. On April 9, 1903, he was tried by a military tribunal, and sentenced to 72 days' imprisonment for fraudulent enlistment. After that he went to Pretoria with the Fusiliers, where he again deserted. On April 6, 1907, he was arrested for housebreaking in South Africa, and sentenced to 28 days' imprisonment. Before that had expired he was sent to England, and on arrival was discharged from the army with ignominy. Prisoner denied having deserted in Africa.
Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.
Mr. S.A. Kyffin prosecuted; Mr. Burnie and Mr. R. P. Mahaffy defended.
WILLIAM JAMES MARSH , 38, Liverpool Road, miner. On the afternoon of May 4 I was in the "Angel," Islington, and at about 4.15 I went to the urinal at the back, which is in a mews. As I was getting ready to leave prisoner Lee struck me on the face and in the mouth, and knocked a piece of a tooth out. Moore caught hold of my arms and they both pummelled into me. I got away from them and they ran towards the "Angel." I ran after them, and a third man put his foot between my legs and shot me over. I got up and found my chain in the road at the corner of Angel Mews. This mews is 50 or 60 ft. long and it runs into Pentonville Road. A policeman came up, and Moore stopped, but Lee struggled to get away. When I picked my chain up I noticed that my watch was gone. Another constable came up and took Moore, and I followed them to the station with a third constable. On the way a woman handed me my hat with my watch in it. The chain was not broken. I do not know how the watch came apart.
Cross-examined. I had been in the "Angel" from 21/2 to three hours. I had had a few drinks, and I gave a few friends who were not at work a luncheon, as I wanted some myself. I had only one drink after lunch. I had not been at work that day. I was only for a second or two in the urinal. I had never seen prisoners before. There is a public road leading to the urinal; it is practically in the road. When prisoners were pummelling me I did not feel my watch
being taken. The woman who gave me my watch was short and had a shawl, and was wearing a little cap. I was too excited to give her in charge.
Police-constable WILLIAM WEST , 87 G. On May 4, at about 4.15 p.m., I was in High Street, Islington, when I prisoners running towards me. The prosecutor called out, "Stop them; they have stolen my watch," and I stopped both of them. (Prosecutor was bleeding from the mouth. Constable Raven then came up and I turned Moore over to him. Prosecutor produced his watch at the station.
Cross-examined. I never heard Moore say anything when arrested. Yes, he did say, "I never took his watch. You will not find anything on me." I mistook him for Lee just now. He said that on the way to the station. I did not see a woman come up to prosecutor; I went on ahead with Moore.
Police-constable JAMES RAVEN , 44 G. On May 4, at 4.15, I was in High Street, Islington, when I saw West with the two prisoners. I took Lee into custody. He said, "I went to the urinal and half a dozen men set about me." A third officer came along with prosecutor.
Cross-examined. Lee said nothing to me about the watch and I saw no woman come up.
Detective FRANK TROTT , G Division. On May 4 I was at King's Cross Road Police Station when the prisoners were brought there. They were first charged with attempted robbery and assault on prosecutor. Then the latter produced his watch, which he said had been given back to him by a woman. Prisoners were then charged with robbery of the watch. Prosecutor said that the third man who had assaulted him was in the crowd and ran away. Prosecutor was very excited, but was not drunk. He was bleeding from the mouth and his trousers were torn.
Cross-examined. I asked prosecutor about the woman who handed him his watch. He said she was outside, and I asked him to go out and see if he could point her out. He did not describe her. I did not ask the officers about the woman. There were several women outside that had come down with the crowd, but Marsh did not point her out. I think the prisoners were also excited, but they were quite sober. I have made inquiries as to prisoner Lee, who has been employed at Christmas time, for several years past, as an auxiliary postman at Euston Station, for the Post Office. Moore has been employed up to about two months ago at potman at a public-house for about six months.
Re-examined. I have generally seen Lee at race meetings, and as far as I know, when not at his Christmas employment he gets his living by mixing with betting men.
Police-constable WILLIAM WEST , recalled. Mr. Blackmore, mail officer at Euston Station, spoke to me this morning, and said that Lee had been, employed by the postal authorities at Euston Station at Christmas time, and he (Mr. Blackmore) had always found him to be an honest and respectable person.
WILLIAM LEE (prisoner, on oath). In the summer I am a porter at Covent Garden Market, under a master porter named Johnson. I have been at this for about five years. In winter I work as auxiliary postman at Euston. For this you have to have a character right away through the year, and every year. I have been there, I believe, since 1902. I have also been employed by Mr. Ball, carman, 33, Cloudesley Road, Liverpool Road. As regards race meetings, I must admit that at holiday times I go out for a jaunt. On May 4 I was in the "Peacock" having a drink with Moore; that is two doors from the "Angel." I went out to the urinal, and while coming away I was stopped by two men, and the prosecutor says to me, "Good afternoon." They seemed to be going towards the urinal. I believe the other man is called Goodwin; I have been trying to find him, but cannot. I said, "Good afternoon," and Marsh got hold of my arm, saying, "I want a word with you. Aren't you one of the mob that has been following me about since 10 o'clock this morning?" He was going to set about me, when I said, "No, sir." He says, "Well, I believe you are, and if I thought you were I would kick your——" (using a filthy expression). The other gentleman with him said, "You have made a mistake, Jim." Marsh said, "I have made no mistake; any road, if I have I am going to punch somebody, so I will punch him." With that he struck at me and staggered me, and I struck at him. As I did, the other man hit me and knocks me to the ground. Up rushed two or three more navvies who were friends of prosecutor, and started kicking me. I managed to catch the railings and struggled to my feet. I then ran to a policeman at the "Angel." As I got to my feet a man whom I recognised punched me in the eye and split it open. I did not know Moore was there at the time; I thought I had left him in the public-house. There were no other friends of mine about there. I know nothing about the watch.
(Friday, May 29.)
Cross-examined. I told my story about the prosecutor assaulting me at the police court. I told my solicitor, and he said, "My clients will reserve their defence." The policeman must be mistaken in saying that I ran past him. When being taken to the station I did not see prosecutor pick up a chain, nor see a woman hand him a cap and watch. Prosecutor was just beside us all the way to the station. I have heard since from one of his friends that Moore was with five men and four females. I have one of the men here.
JOHN MOORE (prisoner, on oath). I have been employed as potman at the "Prince of Wales," King's Cross, which I left just after Christmas. Since then I have been doing odd jobs. On the day in question I was with Lee in the "Peacock." He left quite 10 minutes before I did, saying he would not be a minute, that he was going to
the urinal. After 10 minute I thought be was a long time, and went out after him. I walked to the corner of Pentonville Road, where I saw some 20 or 30 people at the mews looking on. I saw Lee getting off the ground. I said, "What's up?" Before he could answer I was struck and knocked to the ground. When I got up a man had hold of the back of my coat. "I will show you," he said, "if you are one of them." I turned and saw a man whom I knew amongst five or six labouring chaps. I asked him to stop the man insulting me. He said, "I didn't know it was you," and put his arm up between me and the man who struck me, saying, "Don't touch him, he has nothing to do with it." No notice was taken; I was struck again. In the struggle to get away my coat was torn. When I found myself free I ran up to Police-constable West, saying to him, "I have run to yon for protection, as a mob of men set about me round the corner; will you blow your whistle?" The prosecutor then came up and said, "Hold that man; I charge him with stealing my watch and chain." I said, "I haven't stole no watch and chain; I haven't got a thing on me." The policeman said, "I shall have to take you to the station." I was taken and charged. Lee and I were by ourselves for quite 21/2 hours before this happened. The man who was in prosecutor's company is named Charles Barber. I have been employed by the wife of a Mr. Player, of Thornhill Square, for a considerable time. There is a letter from him. (The letter was read, which spoke to prisoner's character.)
Cross-examined. I was some 10 to 15 yards in front of prosecutor on the way to the station. It is not true that I pummelled prosecutor. The man who hit me was a tall, labouring chap. I had no complaint to make against prosecutor. I did not see him assault anyone. I ran up to the policeman for protection, and told him so. I did not run past him.
Verdict, Not guilty.
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE GRANTHAM.
(Friday, May 29.)
Mr. Leycester and Mr. Oddy prosecuted; Mr. Huntly Jenkins defended.
DOROTHY FOX . I am 14 years old, a daughter of prisoner. In April I was living at home at 187, Sterndale Road, Fulham; I was the eldest of seven children at home; Percy was the youngest, aged 3 1/2. Father was employed as a postman; he was dismissed 21/2 years ago, and has since had no regular work. There was occasional quarrelling between father and mother about his not getting work. He was very fond of us children, especially of Percy. On April 24 I
went to bed about half-past, nine; I slept in the same bed with Percy and my two young sisters. Soon after five in the morning I was awakened by my sister Rosina crying out, and I found Percy was lying in the bed covered with blood.
Cross-examined. After father was dismissed from the Post Office I noticed a change in his manner; he was quiet and morose, and would sit silent and nursing his head. There was no quarrelling between father and mother on the night Percy died.
ROSINA FOX , aged 10. I woke up about half-past four in the morning, "hearing a funny noise, as if some one was spitting water out of their mouth." I sat up in bed; it was daylight; I saw Percy covered with brood. I went and awoke mother. By the side of the bed where Percy was there was a towel and a knife; both these must have been fetched from the kitchen.
EMMA HAYWARD . I live at 189, Sterndale Road, next door to 187. On the night of April 24, about 11 o'clock, I heard voices in the next house, which I took to be a quarrel between prisoner and his wife.
Cross-examined. I only heard one voice—that of a man; it only lasted a few minutes; it might have been a man talking to himself.
Police-constable JOHN DRAKE , 898 T. I was called to 187, Sterndale Road, about half-past five on the morning of April 25. I saw the child, Percy, lying in bed covered with blood, with a wound in the throat; he was dead. The towel and knife produced I found on the bed.
Dr. SYDNEY SMITH . I went to the house about 5.30 in the morning and saw Percy lying on the bad, on his back; his throat was cut; he was dead. The wound could have been inflicted with the knife produced; very considerable force must have been employed.
THOMAS HARRY BRYSON , 7, Great Chapel Street, Westminster. On the morning of April 25, about ten to nine, I saw prisoner walk by my shop. I knew him and his mother. He generally called in when he was that way, and this morning I thought it strange that he just looked over the screen and walked straight on. I noticed that he was rather pale.
Police-constable GEORGE ENGLISH , 635 T. At 1.50 on April 25 I was on point duty outside Walham Green Station. Prisoner came up to me and said, "Take me to the station." I recognised him as a man who was wanted and I arretted him. Before I had time to caution him he said, "I lost my little boy this morning; my name is Fox; I live at Sterndale Road." I took him to the station; he there said, "I did the deed."
Inspector CHARLES EMERICX said he was on duty at South Fulham Police Station on April 25 when prisoner was brought in by last witness. English, in prisoner's hearing, told witness what prisoner had stated to him; prisoner said, "That's right; I did the deed." After being cautioned he said, "I will speak the truth and I know I am going to my doom; I could say a lot as to what it is caused
through, but I will leave that for the judge and jury." On the charge being read over to him he said, "Yes." He appeared to be quite sober and rational.
Cross-examined. His eyes seemed rather prominent and wild or glaring.
Inspector FRANK KNELL , T Division. I took prisoner to the police court on the afternoon of April 25. On the way he said, "I should like to say something in front of the proper persons and explain why the deed was done. It would (or should) have been the wife, but I wanted her to live and remember. He was the flower of the flock. Nobody knows how it was done. When I did the deed I never got a drop of blood on my hands. I am not afraid to die. The world will forget the deed, but I want my wife to remember, and she will remember."
Cross-examined. Prisoner was quite sober. He had a glaring look about his eyes, which were somewhat bloodshot.
LOUISA GROOMBRIDGE , aunt of prisoner's wife. I saw prisoner on April 18; he appeared to me very strange; I remarked to my husband at the time that he looked "balmy"—mad; his eyes were very projecting and glaring; he was very excited when talking. His manner underwent a complete change after his dismissal from the Post Office.
Mrs. MILDRED Fox , prisoner's mother. Prisoner has been in the habit of calling to see me, and I have given him occasionally a little food or a few coppers. He has been very hard up and very dejected. He called on me on April 22. He complained of pains in his head and said he could not sleep at night. I noticed a considerable change in his appearance; he seemed to worried at times that he did not know what he was doing.
Mrs. ELEANOR M. SHEPPARD , prisoner's eldest daughter. My father was always most kind to his children, and we were all very fond of him. A great change took place in him after he left the Post Office; he seemed very peculiar, very depressed; he used to sit and think, with his hands on his forehead; he would shake his head and walk about for a rare long while and would not speak to anybody. I have seen him bang his head upon the wall, and when I said, "Don't do that, dad," he has replied, "Oh, that doesn't hurt me."
Cross-examined. I have never heard of anyone in his family being mad.
Dr. JAMES SCOTT , of Brixton Prison. I have had prisoner under observation since May 2. He has told me about his long series of troubles, and how they depressed him and made him very dejected and miserable. As to this crime, he knows what he has done, but I do not think he has fully grasped the seriousness of the offence
he has committed. I think he is suffering from melancholia. I consider that he is now fit to plead, although his mind is not yet quite clear, and that when he committed this crime he was insane and not in a condition to appreciate properly the quality of the act he was committing.
Verdict, Guilty, but that prisoner was insane at the time of committing the crime, so as not to be responsible for his act. Ordered to be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.
BEFORE THE RECORDER.
Friday, May 29.
Mr. J. Wells Thatcher prosecuted.
Detective-sergeant HUGH MACLEAN , City Police. On May 1, 1908, at about 1.30 p.m., I was riding on a 'bus in Bishopsgate Street Without, when I saw prisoner carrying a parcel in a newspaper, in company with another man not in custody. I got off the 'bus, followed them into Brushfield Street, and said to Collyer, whom I knew, "Hullo, Collyer, what have you got there?" The other man immediately ran away. Prisoner said, "It does not belong to me—it belongs to this man." He then threw the parcel on to the footway and became very violent. I obtained assistance and took prisoner to Bishopsgate Street Police Station, where he was charged with unlawful possession of the parcel, which contained the five feather boas (produced). He said, "They do not belong to me, they belong to that other man that ran away." The owner was found, and Collyer was subsequently charged with stealing the five boas. He said, "I do not see how you can charge me with stealing them." He had already told me that he was carrying them for the other man. He said before the magistrate, "I was carrying them for the other man."
Cross-examined. I did not say, "If the other man had had the parcel I should have arrested him." Immediately I spoke to prisoner the other man ran away. I did not call him back—it was no use.
EDWARD EVE , porter to Edwin London Moule, textile agent, 22, Bow Lane, City. On May 1, at one p.m., I was delivering goods at 101, Wood Street, from a truck. I put a parcel containing six boxes, each containing one feather boa, behind the doorway while I carried other goods up to the second floor. When I came down the boss had gone. Their value is 7s. 6d. each. I afterwards identified five of the boas at the station—they were wrapped in newspaper without the boxes.
Cross-examined. I left the goods in the doorway about 10 minutes. I never saw prisoner.
Prisoner's statement before magistrate: "The parcel was, given to me to carry to Commercial Road by a man I do not know."
Prisoner (not on oath). I was going up Fore Street about 10 minutes past one when a gentleman came up to me and asked if I would carry a parcel to Commercial Road. As I lived that way I said I would. As I was going along Brushfield Street the officer said. "What have you got there?" I told him I had a parcel which I was carrying for that man. The man turned round and ran away, and I was left with the parcel which I am charged with stealing. I am innocent of stealing that parcel.
Verdict, Guilty on both counts.
Prisoner confessed to having been convicted on June 7, 1905, at Worship Street, receiving six weeks hard labour for stealing a barrow and contents. Convictions proved: June 24, 1901, nine months at this Court for stealing and receiving; several convictions for neglecting his wife and family; said to be known as an habitual street thief.
Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.
Mr. S. Joyce Thomas prosecuted; Mr. Fenton defended.
RUDOLPH KEEP , 166, St. George's Street East, skin dresser. (Evidence interpreted.) On Friday, May 1, 1908, at 11.30 p.m., I was in St. George's-in-the-East when prisoner got hold of me by the shoulders and throat, pulled me to the ground and took 21s. from my pocket, which he threw away. Three other men were with him. I go hold of prisoner, struggled with him, and screamed "Police!" An officer came and arrested the prisoner. I had pain in the throat for two days and had my fingers torn by prisoner's nails.
Cross-examined. Prisoner was on top of me until the police arrived and pulled him off. I earn about 18s. a week—when busy 24s. or 25s. I was paid on Saturday. I do piecework. This happened on Saturday at 11.30—the day I received my wages—24s. in silver. I had it in my jacket pocket. Prisoner took everything away. There were only the four men there—there were some children. The assault took place while the children were there. I had not spent any money on drink—I was sober. The children did not pick up any of the money. The three other men picked it up and ran away with the money. I did not look round to see if there was any money there because the policemen told me there was none.
Police-constable WILLIAM BEAVER , 296 H. On Saturday, May 2, at 11.30 p.m., I was on fixed point duty in St. George's Street, when I heard shouts of "Police!" I went in the direction of the cry and found prisoner and prosecutor struggling on the ground. The prosecutor was on the top. There was a small crowd of children and women. One boy said, "Here is 2d., sir," and handed me two pennies. I separated the prisoner and prosecutor, when the prosecutor said in broken English, "That man take 21s.," pointing to the small top pocket of his jacket. Prisoner said, "The man is mad. Does he
look as if he had 21s.?" I took prisoner to the station, where he was charged with assault and robbery. He made no reply. Prosecutor complained of his throat, and his hands were skinned as if nails had been used. He appeared sober, but very excited.
Cross-examined. Prisoner appeared sober. He said nothing in reply to the charge at the station. When I arrested him he said, "The man is mad. Does he look as if he had 21s. on him?" I looked on the ground, but could not find any money. The first time prosecutor mentioned three other men was at the police court on Monday morning. In St. George's Street prosecutor said prisoner had taken 21s. out of his pocket—nothing else. He did not say he had thrown it away, or that three other men had picked it up and gone off. I searched prisoner and found no money whatever on him. When I came up I did not know which was the aggressor until the prosecutor accused the prisoner of stealing 21s. from him.
THOMAS COKELEY (prisoner, on oath). I am ship's fireman and live with my wife and children at 325, Craven Street, St. George's-in-the-East. On Saturday, May 2, at 11.30 p.m., I was walking along St. George's Street towards Craven Street where I live, when I met a small crowd of children standing round the prosecutor, who was standing between the road and the pavement. The children were laughing and giggling and did not seem to understand what prosecutor was saying—he was very excited. Thinking I was doing him a good turn, I advised him to go home. With that he caught hold of me, threw me on the ground, and held me there until the policeman came up. He was on the top of me and I could not get him off me. I was alone. I saw nothing of three men—if there had been three men there I should have taken no notice and gone on home. The police-constable came up, took the prosecutor off me, and he then charged me with assaulting him and robbing him of 21s. I had made no attempt to touch him or take money from him. I deny the charge. (To the Judge.) I have been ashore about two months.
Cross-examined. When I met prosecutor I had just left a shipmate named Jones two minutes before at the corner of Wells Street. I believe he was staying at the Sailors' Home—I think he has gone away. I did not give his name at the station as he did not know anything about this affair. I had no object in interfering with the prosecutor. I simply thought I was doing him a good turn, as he did not seem to understand English—he was very excited. I never put my hands on him—he might have been drunk—I did not know what was the matter with him. I do not know what motive he had in saying I had robbed him. I said the man must be mad to say anything like it—"Does he look as if he was a man who had 21s. on him?" I denied it at the police station, and I denied it there and then. Prosecutor said his throat and his knuckles were hurt. I did not touch him—I had not the chance.
Police-constable WILLIAM BEAVER , recalled. There were about half a dozen women and some children of about eight to 12 years old standing around. I asked the crowd at the time if there were any witnesses—none came to the station. I did not take the names and addresses of the persons there. Prisoner went quietly to the station, gave his correct name and address, and it living there with his wife and children.
Verdict, Not guilty.
SMITH, Ernest (43, agent) ; obtaining by false pretences from William Cresswell the sum of 20s., from James Edward Haynes the sum of 6s., from Charles Sawyer the sum of 6s. 6d., from Walter Attfield Lister the sum of 3s., from Percival Joseph Hill the sum of 4s. 6d., and from Samuel Gemini the sum of 6s., in each case with intent to defraud.
Mr. Travers Humphreys and Mr. Boyd prosecuted; Mr. G. W. H. Jones defended.
WILLIAM GRESSWELL , 66, Laura Road, Hammersmith, wardrobe dealer. On February 24, 1908, prisoner called on me and asked me to insure my plate-glass windows; he said that three of my neighbours—Smith, Manning, and Hill—had insured with him. Alter some persuasion I agreed to do so. He produced a printed prospectus of some insurance company, the name of which I did not notice. We discussed the premium; he at first said it would be 36s., then 25s., and eventually said he would do it for £1 for the year. I paid him £1; he gave me receipt (produced), which he said would cover me for 15 days, and after that I should receive a policy. The receipt is the printed form of the London and North British Plate Glass Insurance Company, limited, and was signed by prisoner, "E. Smith, agent," in my presence. As he left he said, "Do not get then broken before I am out of the shop," giving me to understand I was insured at once. I next saw prisoner in custody. I received no policy. I found out the prisoners address, wrote to him, and received letter (produced) enclosing a receipt of the Employers' Mutual Insurance Association of Scotland, limited, for £1 2s. I only paid a premium of £1. I had not signed any proposal of insurance.
ERNEST HENRY INGLEDON , clerk to the London Plate Glass Insurance Company, 49, Queen Victoria Street. I do not know prisoner at all. We have no agent in our company named Ernest Smith. In December, 1907, we appointed an agent named Frederick Dawson—our company have never seen him. We terminated the appointment by a letter of February 27, 1908, which came back marked "Gone away." We have received two proposal forms signed by P. J. Hill, one from Lister, and one from Gemini—they are either signed by F. Dawson or E. Smith. We have received no money at all in respect of them, but we have since been communicated with by those persons to say they have paid the money
Cross-examined. We did not receive a letter from E. Smith saying he had taken over Dawson's business. I have seen no proposals from E. Smith received in the early part of this year. In March, 1902, we
had proposals from "Ford Smith." On appointing an agent we should supply him with stationery—on his application we might send him a prospectus, but nothing further until he was appointed.
Re-examined. I cannot trace any letters from Dawson with reference to his transferring his agency to E. Smith.
WILLIAM GRESSWELL , recalled. When prisoner called on February 24 he never mentioned the Mutual Insurance Association of Scotland. After receiving the form of receipt and covering note of that company within the seven days I got notice of cancellation. I am not insured in any way through the prisoner, but I have insured in the North British by paying another premium. Prisoner has not repaid me the £1 I paid him.
Cross-examined. Prisoner did not give me his name and address—he simply represented himself to be the legitimate agent of an insurance company—he did not give me his card. I did not trouble whether it was one company or another so long as I was insured. After I paid the £1 he gave me a receipt in the name of the North British. When I wrote to the prisoner he answered me quite promptly.
Re-examined. It was a month before I wrote to prisoner—at that time I had received no policy from the company.
ERNEST WILLIAM MAWER , managing director, London and North British Plate Glass Insurance Company, Limited, 1, Finsbury Pavement. I have never seen prisoner except in the police court. He has never applied for an agency in the name of E. Smith—we have had an application from F. Dawson, which has been declined. We have had no application from prisoner to issue a policy to Gresswell, nor have we received £1 from him. Gresswell has since insured with us Exhibit 1 purports to be a form of receipt given by our company—prisoner cannot have got it legitimately—he has no right whatever to it.
Cross-examined. I am absolutely certain prisoner never applied for an agency in the name of Smith in March, 1908. (To the Judge.) We should very much like to know how prisoner got this printed form—they are not issued to an agent until he has been appointed and after making inquiries into his bona fides.
CHARLES SAWYER , 11, Charleville Road, West Kensington, green-grocer. On February 27, 1908, prisoner called on me and asked if I wanted to insure my windows from breakage. I asked what company he represented—he said the National—I said, "Do you mean the National Provincial, Ludgate Hill?" and he said, "Yes." I had previously insured with them. I agreed to insure my windows and lamps for 6s. 6d. which I paid prisoner. He gave me a receipt produced in the name of the National Provincial, which I believed genuine. He said I would get a policy in about a week. I saw no more of the prisoner. I waited a fortnight, applied to the company, and they said he was not their agent, and they could not acknowledge the receipt.
Cross-examined. Prisoner did not give me his card. I saw his name was Smith from the receipt. I particularly wished to insure in the National Provincial as I had been insured with them for eight
years, and they had treated me very well. Prisoner gave me the receipt immediately in the shop.
PHILIP JAMES HODGE , inspector of agents for the National Provincial Plate Glass Insurance Company, limited, Ludgate Hill. I only know the prisoner from seeing him at the police court. He is not our agent. We had an application from Albert Smith—we sent the usual application form, which was sent back—he was not appointed to the agency. We did not appoint him our regular agent, but we wrote to say we would treat him as a broker, and sent a few proposal and prospectus forms—I take it receipt roduced is detached from one of the proposal forms we sent to Albert Smith. This is not our offcial receipt nor one of our receipt forms at all—the receipt is added to the proposal form.
Cross-examined. One of prisoner's letters is signed "E. Smith," acknowledging the receipt of the prospectus and proposal forms.
EDWARD HAYNES , 504, Fulham Road, greengrocer. On March 10, 1908, prisoner called on me, said he was agent for the Mutual Insurance Company, and offered to insure my plate glass and my premises against fire in £100, for 3s., which I paid him. He gave me receipt produced. There is no name of any company upon it—I did not notice that till afterwards. He said several of my neighbours had insured with him; it was necessary to pay the money before they forwarded the policy. He then asked me if I had got my men insured—I employ a man and a boy. I told him I had not; he said I was a silly not to have, and arranged to insure me with the Mutual Employers' Liability Association against accident to them for 6s. I paid a deposit of 3s., and he gave me receipt produced. I have received no policies. I applied to the Mutual Insurance Company; they told me they had cancelled prisoner's agency, and returned me the 3s., but I have not received the 3s. back in respect of the Employers' Liability.
Cross-examined. I have two side windows which I can insure for 1s., and prisoner told me the insurance against fire would be 2s. He did not give me his address card—only these receipts.
CECIL ARTHUR LAST , London secretary, Employers' Mutual Association of Scotland, 31, Palmerston House. Prisoner became an agent of my company on March 17, 1908; the agency was cancelled on March 30. On March 23 I received an unsigned proposal form in respect of Haynes for plate glass only. No money was sent. The form was returned, as the amount was not enough. It was returned to us altered to 4s. 6d., which was the proper premium for the plate glass, and we sent a covering note to E. Smith. We received no proposal with respect to Haynes's workmen nor any money in respect of it. We have repaid 3s. to Haynes. We sent receipt forms to prisoner. Exhibit 3 is a provisional cover note respecting Gresswell received from prisoner. He sent us no money in respect of it. We have repudiated liability for it.
Cross-examined. Agents are expected to settle up their accounts monthly. Prisoner did send us proposals.
WALTER ATTFIELD LISTER , Commercial Road, agent. On February 13 prisoner called on me, gave the name of E. Smith, said he was agent for the London Plate Glass Insurance Company, and asked me to insure my plate glass, which I arranged to do for 3s., and paid him that amount, for which he gave me receipt produced. I received no policy and have not had my 3s. back.
PERCIVAL JOSEPH HILL , Chelsea, stationer. On February 24 prisoner called on me and asked me to insure my plate glass, which I agreed to do, for 4s. 6d., which I paid him, receiving from him receipt produced in the name of the London Plate Glass Insurance Company, signed "F. Dawson." He told me the policy would come in a few days. I have not received it, have never seen prisoner since, and have not received my money back.
Cross-examined. I afterwards saw prisoner as he was passing my shop and asked when I should receive my policy. He said in a week or 10 days.
SAMUEL GEMINI , King's Road, Chelsea, restaurant keeper. On February 13 prisoner called on me, said he represented the London Plate Glass Insurance Company, and asked me to insure my plate glass, which I agreed to do, and paid him 4s. 6d. He said the policy would be sent in a week. I have not received it.
Cross-examined. Prisoner did not leave a card.
ALICE E. CHRISTMAS , 44. Marlborough Road, Holloway. I know prisoner by the names of Smith and Dawson as an insurance agent. I gave him a reference in the name of Dawson to the London Plate Glass Insurance Company, unfortunately. I had insured with him some time before. That was ail I knew of him.
Cross-examined. I did not know anyone named Dawson with whom prisoner was associated in business. He said he had got a business and he was working it in the name of Dawson.
Detective ALBERT KIRCHNOW , T Division. I arrested prisoner on April 2 in respect of Gresswell's case. I told him the charge. He said, "I do not understand." I read the warrant to him. He said, "All right." I said, "You gave him a receipt for a company you did no✗ represent." He said, "That does not matter, I have insured him all right." At the police court prisoner said he bought the business from Dawson.
ERNEST SMITH (prisoner, on oath). My name is Ernest Smith. I called on Greeswell in the ordinary way of business, arranged to insure his plate glass, he paid me £1, and I gave him the covering note. About a week or 10 days afterwards—I cannot give dates because the police have got my papers and also the policies of the companies I represent, but I received this £1, and during that time I was appointed agent to the Scottish company and they sent me the covering note directly, which I sent on to Gresswell. I did not receive that money intending to defraud. The
North British Company was in connection with the business of Dawson. I advertised offering to take over a commission and insurance agency. Dawson came to me and introduced me to several of his customers, and I took over his business. Amongst his papers were a tremendous lot of insurance papers of different kinds and also commission notes of different people whom I have not represented, and amongst them were the North British Company. Gresswell was quite satisfied to receive this covering note of the Scottish company. I went to see Sawyer and produced my printed card as an agent for insuring against accidents, plate glass, and burglary. I insured his plate glass in the company by whom I was employed as a broker. I saw Haynes and gave him a covering note in the Scottish company, for which I was properly appointed agent. I received 3s. for insuring his plate glass. Some time afterwards I saw him at his door and offered to insure his men for 6s., on account of which he paid me 3s. I did not insure him from fire—I arranged to give him a price for that. I received the money from Gemini to insure in the National Provincial, not being a properly appointed agent, I ought no doubt as broker to have handed them the money, but during that time I was not very well, having been robbed. On April 1 and 2 I appeared at this court, charging three persons with highway robbery with violence. I received the money on March 29, and directly I got back from this Court I was arrested before I had time to pay this, money. I was robbed of about £4 15s. I did not owe £5. I was robbed by three women of the money and my watch and chain. They were convicted and all sentenced to six months' imprisonment. The detective who arrested me has got my pocket books, and to my knowledge he has been to several of my customers and asked them to come forward and prosecute me. He said there were more charges against me. The magistrate said he had not enough evidence to convict the prisoner and the detective said he could bring other charges. He has not brought those other people. (To the Judge.) I have known Mrs. Christmas as "Dawson" and "Smith" and have transacted business with her. I insured her son's life and her own in the Industrial and everything was satisfactory with her business.
Cross-examined. Mrs. Christmas's sister lived with me as my housekeeper at Tollington Park, where I lived in the name of Dawson. My right name is Ernest Smith, but I was taking over the business of Dawson. I also lived there in the name of Smith. When I went to see Gresswell on February 24 it was immaterial to me in what company he insured. I was representing several. I was representing the London and North British as part of Dawson's business and I had been in correspondence with them. I had not been appointed agent for them as Ernest Smith. I do not know if Dawson had or not. I got the receipt form amongst Dawson's papers and gave a receipt in the name of "E. Smith" on behalf of that company. I had not authority as "Smith" to bind that company. I cannot say if I had in Dawson's name. I thought I had the right to take over that as part of his business. Before Gresswell wrote to me I sent him
the covering note of the Scottish company. He was not covered by me in the name of E. Smith with the North British. I told Sawyer that I repaid the National Provincial, of Ludgate Hill. I have explained I received that on March 29, and on the 31st I was up here at the Old Bailey. It escaped my memory that I received that money on February 27. It was about that time that I was laid up through having been molested when I was robbed by three women. I did not send the three sums I received from the London Plate Glass Company because I had not rendered the account.
Verdict, Guilty on all counts. Prisoner admitted being convicted at Winchester Assizes on November 19, 1902, in the name of Herbert Smith, when he was bound over in £150 to come up for judgment if called upon. Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.
BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.
(Friday, May 29.)
GARNER, Stanley (42, stockbroker), and ANWERA, Louis (48, clerk), pleaded guilty of conspiring and agreeing together to obtain by false pretences from such of His Majesty's liege subjects as should be induced to reply to their circulars for sale of shares, certain of their moneys and valuable securities, with intent to defraud them of the same. Garner also pleaded guilty of obtaining several cheques by false pretences from Constance Isabel Hall, amounting in all to £1, 012 4s. 6d. Garner confessed to a conviction at Liverpool in 1894 for forgery and misappropriation, when he received eight years' penal servitude. Anwera confessed to having been convicted at this Court in April, 1906, receiving 12 months' hard labour.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Graham-Campbell prosecuted; Mr. George Elliott appeared for Garner; Mr. Huntly Jenkins appeared for Anwera.
With regard to Garner, Mr. Bodkin stated that his career had been a very bad one. He had been a solicitor in Liverpool before his conviction there, and on the expiration of his sentence of eight years he came to London and set up a business in Chancery Lane in the name of Allison, Garner and Co. He then went into bankruptcy, in the course of which transactions were brought to light which were the subject of charges at this Court, where he received 18 months' hard labour in January, 1906. Directly that sentence had expired he commenced the same course of business at a place called Coalville, in Leicestershire, and he was prosecuted for obtaining a cheque for £112 in connection with shares in the Whitwick Colliery Company. He then received three months' imprisonment. He was released on August 16, 1907, and on September 9 opened an account in the name of Ashurst, Meadows, and Co. In this name he had carried on a systematic circularisation of people who already held shares in dividend-paying companies, representing that they had instructions
to dispose of a certain number of shares in such companies, and suggesting that the shareholder would like to increase his or her holding. In this way sums amounting to over £2, 000 were obtained, but no shares were forthcoming to the clients. A number of persons had put considerable pressure on the firm, and under that pressure £793 had been paid back. Garner stated that Anwera had merely been a clerk in the business at £2 a week, and had received no benefit from the transaction.
Sentences: Garner, Five years' penal servitude; Anwera, 12 months' hard labour, with recommendation for deportation at expiry.
Mr. Bodkin prosecuted; Mr. Curtis-Bennett defended McKenzie.
At the close of Mr. Bodkin's opening the Common Serjeant said that it would not be safe to convict on the evidence to be produced, and a formal verdict of Not guilty was returned.
Mr. Warburton defended Richardson.
JOHN HARDING , 21, Wordsworth Road, Wealdstone, Harrow, dealer. I deal in anything, horses, etc. I have premises also at Bushey. On April 22 I let out a horse and cart to a man named George Steers, who is a cripple. I next saw the horse and cart on April 28 at Hunter Street Police Station. The cart has cost me £14 or £15, and the harness £4. Everything was in a good state when I saw it on April 22. I gave £3 10s. for the horse.
Cross-examined by Mr. Warburton. I have lived at 21, Wordsworth Road for two months. I have always been in Wealdstone, but had not stopped at nights. I lived at Bushey before that. I could hardly tell you when I bought the cart; I have had it about 12, months. I bought it from a Mr. Martin; he lived at Harrow. I gave him £4 and another cart for it, which I had had for two or three months, and for which I gave £5. I gave Mr. Sims, of Watford, £3 10s. to have the cart done up and the wheels put on. They are cab wheels; it is a two-wheeled cart. The wheels coat a lot more than £3. I do not know the name of the man I bought the wheels from. I have looked for Steers, but have not seen him. I deal in iron, metal, and anything of that sort. I am not licensed to deal in metal. I have not got a shop, nor any name up. I am in lodgings, for which I pay 5s. and keep myself. I have a s✗able in Harrow where I store my carts. I pay 3s. a week rent. I can store 12 or 14 there, and ponies also. There are two big cart sheds. I turn my ponies out to graze in a building field. I have a stable for them when I want to work them; that all goes in with the 3s. rent.
I have no banking account. £3 10s. is not a fair price for the cart and harness. I bought the harness from a man at Chesham; I have no receipt for it. I bought it five or six months ago. It was not broken, but it might have been covered with mud.
Re-examined. The rents in Harrow are a good deal cheaper than in London; 3s. a week for a stable is an ordinary price in Harrow. The ground where I turn my horses on to is sometimes occupied by gipsies; you see horses grazing there every day. (To the Judge.) The cart was a spring one.
Police-constable CHRISTOPHER BEASLEY , 290 E. On April 27 I was in Wakefield Mews, St. Pancras, at 7.30 p.m., when I saw Richardson, who said, "What are the 'tecs' doing down here to-night?" I said I did not know, and he went on, "I feel a bit frightened; I bought a cart and harness for £3." He told me he bought it from a lame man and had a receipt. He took me to his coachhouse and showed me the cart. I took the name and address on the cart and said that I should report it. The name and address was, "J. Harding, Bushey, Herts." If anyone wanted the cart it might be bought for £20; if a man wanted to sell it perhaps it would fetch half. I saw the harness, which was in fair condition. I did not notice any string on it. The cart was newly painted and thoroughly done up; it may have been a new one.
JOHN HARDING , recalled, Cross-examined by Staggs. The pony had a lump on his knee, but he was none the worse for it; he went sound. I do not know which knee it was. It was not in a shocking condition. I have driven the pony for 13 miles, and he is at work every day now. I drove him from Clerkenwell Police Court to Bushey. The man I lent the pony to said he wanted it to take him to London to get £300. I never told you that Steers had done five years. (To the Judge.) I did have a drink with the prisoners across the road, but I said nothing like that to them.
CHRISTOPHER BEASLEY , recalled, Cross-examined by Mr. Warburton. I know Richardson very well. When he spoke to me was five days after the pony was stolen. The cart was pushed right at the back of the coachhouse. When I told Richardson I should report it he said, "Thank you." The cart was taken possession of the same night. Richardson showed me the receipt produced, which is for £3 for a cart received from Jack Harding. He told me he had bought some harness, and said that he had given £3 for the lot. I asked him where the pony was, and he said it was down the mews somewhere.
Cross-examined by Staggs. You were in the station talking to the inspector when I arrived there. I could hear you were talking about the pony; that is all. This was between 7.30 and eight o'clock.
Police-constable GEORGE STEVENS , G Division. On April 27 I went to 16, Wakefield Mews, which is Richardson's stable, shortly after eight p.m. I told him I was making inquiries about a horse and cart which was stolen on the 22nd inst., and that I believed he had it. He said, "It is no good for me to deny it because the constable has seen it. I bought it from a man I do not know on Thursday for £3. I heard you were making inquiries down about here. I got
nervous so I spoke to a policeman." I then took him into custody, and found the cart and harness in his stable. On the way to the station he said, "This chap," pointing to prisoner Staggs, "has got the horse"; so I arrested Staggs. He was just at the top of the mews. When told the charge he said, "I bought it from a man I do not know for 5s. I have a receipt on me all right. I heard you were down the mews so I went to the police station." When charged, Richardson made no reply. Staggs said, "It was brought down our mews on Tuesday." Both prisoners handed me receipts (produced). I should think the cart and harness is worth from £20 to £25; the cart, pony, and harness together, £27. The cart, in my opinion, is worth £15, and the horse £5 or £6; it is in good condition; also the harness, which is worth about £4; there is no string about it. Richardson said that he bought the cart from a man he did not know.
Cross-examined by Staggs. While I was at Richardson's house Staggs went round to the police station. I did not get hold of you when I arrested you; I knew you very well, and had no fear of your running away. I have known you for years.
Mr. Warburton suggested that there was no case. The Common Serjeant said that he would not stop it.
SAMUEL JOHN TARLING , 71, Camden Street, Camden Town. I am a horsekeeper, employed partly by Richardson. The latter is a general dealer and butcher. On April 23 I saw a cripple whom I know, but not by name. In consequence of what he said I went to Richardson and asked if he could do with an old cart and an old set of harness. I have known this cripple by sight for four or five years. I always thought he was respectable. He showed me the cart and harness and I took it to Richardson. The cart and harness were very dirty. The man said he wanted £4 for the cart and 15s. for the harness. Richardson, I believe, gave him £3 for the cart and 10s. for the harness. They made the bargain in the stable; I was outside. Before he paid him Richardson said, "Is this cart your own property?" The man said yes, and that he would ring up his father on the telephone if Richardson thought it was not straightforward. I went away then. I got a stamp for Richardson for the receipt. I know nothing about the value of traps and harness.
Cross-examined. I have been walking all round trying to find this man whom I introduced to Richardson, but I cannot discover him. I should know him again in a thousand. I have never introduced anyone else to Richardson. When we went to see the cart it was standing at the end of the mews in the road; there was no pony with it when I saw it.
day. I was with a friend, Albert Brown, standing next door to Richardson's coachhouse. Richardson was about two yards away talking to a stranger—a cripple. The last witness, Tarling, came down the mews with the cripple, and I heard him call Richardson out and ask him if the would buy a cart belonging to the other man. Richardson said, "Where is the cart?" Tarling said, "Down at the other end of the mews." Richardson said, "Fetch it up here and I will have a look at it." Tarling brought it up. It was built something like a Whitechapel cart, but not so big. Richardson said to Tarling, "Do you know this man?" Tarling said, "Yes, I have known him some time." Richardson also asked whose cart it was, and the cripple said it was his own, and that if Richardson did not believe him he would get on the telephone to his father. The man wanted £4 at first, but Richardson would not give more than £3. The other man said he had got into trouble the night before and had lost money. He said he had two horses and a van in the Edgware Road repository for to-morrow's sale. Finally he accepted £3. Richardson said he wanted a receipt and the other man agreed. I heard Richardson ask Tarling to go for a stamp. I was formerly with Wolfe's jobmasters, for 35 years, and during the last six years I have been working on my own account, often buying carts and harness similar to the subject of this charge. I think Richardson gave a fair price for this cart; I made the remark to Brown at the time. If put up at a horse sale it would not fetch more than £3 10s. to £4. I would not have given £3 for it. That sort of a cart is at a discount now.
Cross-examined. I am not a particular friend of Richardson's; I have known him as a business man. I live in the same mews. The reason I left Wolfe's was because I could not keep away from the drink. I was never sentenced nor arrested for stealing a horse.
The Common Serjeant asked whether the Jury had heard enough to show that Richardson might have been an honest dealer. The Jury acquiesced and returned a verdict of " Not guilty."
Staggs was then about to give evidence on his own behalf, when the Jury said that the verdict of not guilty applied to both.
CHARLIE ROBERTS , 13, Stibbington Street, Somers Town, licensee of the "Lord Somers' Arms." On the evening of Easter Monday last I was on the public side of my saloon bar. About 10.30 I saw the time by my watch, which I put back in my pocket. About 11.30 I looked for the time again and saw my watch was missing and the chain hanging down. I do not know the prisoner.
To Prisoner. I did not see you in the bar that night. We were very busy. I sat by the fireplace, but there was no fire. There was
a very large mat in front of the fireplace. I had no occasion to stoop while I was there.
ARTHUR DAVENPORT , assistant to William Battersby, pawnbroker, 80, Newgate Street. On April 21 prisoner came and pawned the gold watch produced. He told me he was bringing it for his employer, Mr. Herbert Thomas, of 78, Bartholomew Close, and produced a card which Mr. Thomas had given him. (Produced.) I advanced prisoner 23. (Pawnticket produced.)
HERBERT THOMAS , 78, Bartholomew Close, secretary to the Legal Aid Society. On May 4 prisoner came to my office and said he wanted to apologise for having pawned a watch in my name. I asked, "What watch?" He said, "I found a watch in a public-house in Somers Town on Easter Monday." He said he pawned it in Newgate Street for £3 and showed me the ticket. He said, "I want to get some money to-night, the ticket is worth a sovereign." I said that if he would let me have the ticket I would inspect the watch next day, and if it suited I would give him a sovereign. I gave him 1s. then, but he wanted 2s., so I gave him 2s. I immediately went to the pawnbroker's and asked them how it was the watch was pawned in my name. I had given prisoner no authority to do so. From what they said I went to the police. Prisoner worked for me two years ago. I have known him from a boy. (To the Judge.) For honesty I have nothing whatever against him, but, unfortunately, he has given way to drink and brought himself down to the position he has, ✗ I have known him when he could earn his £10 or £12 a week. I have known the time when he has earned £20 or £30 before breakfast in the morning and squandered it in drink. I think he has been a tool of somebody else.
Police-constable THOMAS BETTERIDGE , City. On May 5, about five p.m., I went to the office of Mr. Thomas at 78, Bartholomew Close, where I saw him and prisoner. I told them I was making inquiries respecting a gold watch that had been pawned with Mr. Battersby, in Newgate Street, on April 21, in the name of H. J. Thomas, 78, Bartholomew Close. Thomas said, "I did not pawn the watch, the ticket was brought to me yesterday by this man Curtis, who said he found the watch and pawned it. He wanted to sell me the ticket. Prisoner said that was so. "I bought the ticket from a man I do not know in a public-house in Tottenham court Road. I gave him 5s. for it. I do not know the sign of the house." I then said, "I have reason to doubt that," and he said, "I will tell you the truth. I found the watch in a public-house in Somers Town on Easter Monday evening. I do not know the name of the house or the street it is in. I pawned it the next day; I made no inquiries." He then said, "I will take you to the public-house." I took him to Snow Hill Police Station.
Sergeant CHARLES GOODCHILD , Y Division. At midday, on May 11, I took prisoner into custody from the City Police. I told him the watch had been identified as having been stolen from Charlie Roberts, of the "Lord Somers' Arms," on April 26 last. Prisoner said, "I did not steal it; I kicked against it when I entered the public-house and put it in my pocket. I know I have done wrong in not going
to the police, but I was hard up at the time." When charged prisoner said nothing.
Prisoner's statement. I am not guilty of stealing the watch.
ARTHUR CURTIS (prisoner, not on oath) said that he went into the saloon bar of the public-house in question, the name of which he did not know; that he went in with the idea of canvassing for a legal aid society, not the one Mr. Thomas represented, but that he could do no business there, and that someone in authority tapped him and said, "Not this side, old map, with vour bills." He then left, and in doing so kicked against something that was lying on the mat in front of the fire, which was alight. He stooped and picked up the thing, which was a watch, and walked out. At that time he had only 3d. in his pocket and had to raise another 3d. for a night's lodging. He took no more notice of the watch because he thought it was of no value, as it looked to him like a brass one. The next day he was absolutely penniless, with nothing to eat, and he thought the best way would be to try and realise on the watch. This was the first time he had been in trouble and he had had a lot of private worries. He had to admit he had given way to drink, but had been a teetotaller during the time he bad been in Mr. Thomas's employ.
CHARLIE ROBERTS , recalled. The watch was attached to the chain in the same way as this one is. It must have been taken off the chain. We have not had a fire in the saloon bar for about two months. (To the prisoner.) I was in the bar in my shirt sleeves from about six p.m., because we were very busy. I went to the police Station at about quarter to 12.
Verdict, Guilty of theft, but not from the person. Sentence, Three months' hard labour.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Friday, May 29.)
GIBBONS, Robert (27, labourer), pleaded guilty of stealing one gold watch and chain, one sovereign purse, and the sum of £4, the property of Adolphus Jones, from his person. There were several previous convictions, dating from 1898.
Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.
Mr. Clarke Hall prosecuted.
Verdict, Guilty. Judgment respited.
Mr. Forrest Fulton prosecuted; Mr. Purcell defended.
Detective EDWARD MARRIOTT , City. On May 13 I accompanied prosecutor to No. 5, Angel Lane, Stratford, premises occupied by Mr. Alexander Franklin. There were there produced four lengths of dark cloth, now in Court. I afterwards went to prisoner's address in Fort Street, Spitalfields, in company with Mr. Wacholder and Mr. Thompson. I said we were police officers investigating a case of warehouse breaking, in which a large quantity of cloth had been stolen, some of which had been traced to Mr. Franklin and Mr. Wacholder, who said they had got it from prisoner. Prisoner replied, "I know nothing about the cloth." I told him I did not believe the statement, and was going to search his place. In a bedroom on the second floor I saw Sergeant Stewart find three lengths of grey cloth covered up with some wearing apparel. I asked him where he got it from, and he said that three young men brought the lengths to him to make up into overcoats. I asked him who they were. He said he did not know their names as he never took the names and addresses of customers when they left material. I told him I did not believe his statement, and he must consider himself in custody. I took him to Moor Lane Station, where he was charged with breaking and entering prosecutor's warehouse, and stealing 14 rolls of cloth of the value of £180, and he replied, "Is that all?" The light cloth produced is marked with the number, "57."
Cross-examined. Prosecutor's warehouse was broken into some time between six at night of May 8 and eight in the morning of May 9. Fourteen rolls were stolen, and I think there are 60 yards in each roll. At the house of prisoner Wacholder said, "This is the man I bought the cloth of." Prisoner replied, "What cloth? Are you mad?" I did not hear Wacholder say anything in reply to that. Prisoner said to Wacholder that he had never sold him any cloth. There was not more than enough of the pieces of grey cloth to make an overcoat each. Cohen was carrying on business as a tailor at this address. It is a private house, and the workshop is at the back of the house.
Re-examined. There was no other cloth in the bedroom. The cloth was covered with four or five pieces of clothing, and was not sufficient to conceal the existence of the clothing from any person casually entering the room.
MEYER WACHOLDER , 254, Commercial Road. I carry on the business of a job buyer, and deal in job lines of goods. I have known Cohen eight or nine years. On Monday, May 11, he brought down four remnants of cloth between nine and 10 in the morning. He asked me whether I could do with these four lines, and I said, "Yes." I asked him what was the price, and he said 10s. a piece. I asked him where he had got it from, and he said, "I think you know me long enough. You need not ask me where I got that from." I offered him 9s. a piece. I took him down to a customer of mine in Stratford, Alexander Franklin, 5, Angel Lane, to whom I sold them for 10s. 6d. a piece. In the regular way they were worth
about 13s. a piece. On May 13 I was visited by Detective Marriott in company with Mr. Franklin, and in consequence of what was told me then I visited prisoner's premises at Fort Street, Spitalfields. I said to Marriott, "This is the man I had those remnants from." Prisoner replied that I was mad. I saw some light-coloured cloth on his premises.
Cross-examined. I first knew that the police were making inquiries about the cloth on Wednesday, the 13th. Job buyers do not usually keep stock long on their premises. I have never had any quarrel with Mr. Cohen, and have never been on unfriendly terms with him. If it appears on the depositions that I said, "The quarrel three years ago was about my brother. We have have not been on friendly terms since." I may possibly have misunderstood what was said to me. As to the statement in the depositions that I knew the police were making inquiries about this cloth, I did not know it until they came on the afternoon of the 13th. If prisoner is going to swear that he did not sell me the cloth I shall say that is a lie, and the jury will have to decide between us. Marriott said to prisoner at his house, "I am a police officer, and am making inquiries about a case of warehouse breaking, where a large quantity of cloth was stolen. Four pieces have been traced to this gentleman (pointing to me) and he says he got them from you. Now where did you get them from?" I do not remember that Cohen replied, "I have never sold this man any cloth." I have been in England 16 years.
ABRAHAM BAUM , 284, Commercial Road. Wacholder is my son-in-law. I had never seen prisoner till he came down to my son-in-law's place on the Monday. I was downstairs when I heard a knock. I looked up and saw this young fellow walking up the steps, following my son-in-law. I am sure prisoner is the man. This occurred between half-past nine and 10.
Cross-examined. I was looking to see if my workpeople were coming in when I saw prisoner. I was anxious to see them come in. They come and ask me whether there is work. It is of no use for me to go to the workshop if they are not there. I did not see the police and Mr. Franklin when they came and saw my son-in-law. I have known Wacholder six years. I do not know that Harry Wacholder was working for prisoner at one time. I heard Mr. Margetts, Cohens solicitor, ask Wacholder at the Guildhall whether there had been a quarrel with Cohen three years ago about Wacholder's brother.
JULIUS MARCUS THOMPSON , wholesale woollen merchant, 2, New Zealand Avenue, E.C. I occupy the ground floor and basement. On going to the premises on Saturday, May 9, I found they had been broken open, and a quantity of cloth, nine pieces of the value of £120, had been stolen. On May 13 I received certain information, and made a communication to the police. I afterwards went with the police to the premises of Mr. Franklin, Angel Lane, Stratford. I there saw the four pieces of dark cloth produced. I identify it by certain markings. It costs from 13 to 14s., and it is absolutely
impossible that it should be sold at such a price as 10s. 6d. I afterwards went with Wacholder and the police to Cohen's premises, and was shown some other cloth of a light colour, which I also identify. It is of very good quality, and the price is from 16s. to 18s. per length. It is a suiting, and is not suitable for overcoats.
Cross-examined. It is impossible to obtain this material from anybody but myself, as this pattern is mine. I pay as much as a small purchaser in order to preserve that pattern, or within 21/2 per cent. No one with any experience of cloth would buy that cloth for 9s. a length. It could not be bought honestly for that money by anybody who knew anything of cloth.
Cross-examined. The cloth could not be honestly sold for 9s. per piece of that length.
DAVIS COHEN (prisoner, on oath). I am a master tailor, carrying on business at 2, Fort Street, Bishopsgate, and have been established there some 31/2 years. Previously to that I was at No. 14 for seven years. I regularly employ seven hands and sometimes more. I have been in England 21 years and have never had a charge of any kind brought against me. There are gentlemen here who have known me and are prepared to give me the highest character. I have known Wacholder nine or ten years. He is a rag sorter and job buyer. I had a quarrel with him about four years ago. His brother worked for me at the time. I turned him off and Wacholder and I have never spoken since. I have never in my life sold any cloth to Wacholder. Some years ago I need to sell him cuttings, but nothing since the quarrel. When the police-sergeant stated that Wacholder had said that he got the four pieces of cloth from me, I said, "I do not know anything about it. You must be mad. I have not seen you now for three years." There is not a word of truth in what Wacholder has sworn that on the Monday morning I went round to his place with these four lengths of cloth and asked him 10s. for it, finally taking 9s. I have never been on his premises. The three pieces of light cloth found by the police were in one of the children's bedrooms. I did not go upstairs with the police. I myself placed the cloth on a chair. On that Wednesday, about half-past four, one of the girls sent three fellows up into the workshop on the top floor. I have not any shop or board downstairs. The customers generally recommend one another. I had never seen either of these men before. They said they had been sent there and asked could I make up three overcoats by Saturday. Each had a parcel containing a piece of stuff. I said it was impossible to get them done at the end of the week, as I was rather busy; but, anyhow, I would go down to the tailor who made coats for me and see if he could make them, and if he
could not they must take the stuff away or leave the order till next week. They waited while I went to the tailors in Boundary Passage, but he could not get them done. I then returned to the workshop and asked the three men to call again on Sunday, as I had not time to measure them then, which would take at least half an hour. They each left, me 5s. for the trimmings, which I bought the same afternoon. The police asked Thompson if the trimmings were his property and he said he did not sell trimming. I myself put the cloth in the bedroom as I thought it would get dirty in the workshop. There were two workmen in the shop at the time, Julius Cohen and Sam Schoful, the girls having gone down to tea. On the morning of Monday, 11th, at the time Wacholder says I was in Commercial Road, I saw Joseph Levy in the "Ship and Blue Ball," and his employer. Mr. Gilberg, was also there. I have waistcoats from Gilberg to make up, and he generally makes my coats. I remained at the public-house until half-past, 11. It would take me, I should say, just half an hour to go from there to Commercial Road.
Cross-examined. Wacholder's statement as to my having visited him on the Monday morning is an absolute fabrication. The name of the girl who showed the three men up is Annie Lussman. I believe she is here. I should say their ages were between 25 and 32. They were of rather nice appearance and smartly dressed, not by me, and looked to be quite respectable people. They paid 5s. each for the trimmings. I have never seen them since. I did not mention at the police court the presence of these witnesses. The question was not brought up at all.
Re-examined. By the advice of my solicitor I said at the Guild-hall that I reserved my defence. My witnesses were present and ready to be called.
DANIEL GILBERG , tailor, No. 1, Boundary Passage. Cohen has been making waistcoats for me for five or six years. For some 13 years before that he had been working for my father. He has always borne the character of an honest and honourable man. When he has overcoats to make he brings them to me to make. On the morning of Monday, May 11, I saw prisoner at my place. As near as possible he would be there at half-past nine. He came for work in the usual way. I told him there was no work, but he could come back about dinner time, and he then went away. I afterwards saw him in the "Ship and Blue Ball" with a man who works for me, just on 11 o'clock, I should think it was. Cohen calls to see me three times a day. On the afternoon of Wednesday, May 13, he came to see me about some overcoat work. I told him I could not make them that week; I was too busy. Next day I heard he had been arrested.
Cross-examined. There was nothing unusual in him calling on the Monday morning or the Wednesday afternoon.
afternoon three men had called to see him. It was about half-past four. I was downstairs having tea at the time. They asked to see the governor. I sent them up to the workshop. Each of them was carrying a brown paper parcel.
Cross-examined. They were all young men and smartly dressed. I had never seen them before and have not seen them since. I made a statement to Mr. Margett's clerk.
JULIUS COHEN . I am a workman in prisoners employ but no relation. I recollect Cohen being taken away by the police on May 13. I was in the workshop that afternoon and a man named Schoful was there, too. Three men came up and wanted three overcoats made. Prisoner said he did not know whether he could do them, but would go and ask. When he came back he said he could not do them for that week, but would put them away till the next week. The men brought the stuff with them. They were to come on Sunday to be measured. I do not think anything else was said. They gave prisoner money for trimmings, but I do not know how much. They left the cloth when they went away.
Cross-examined. Each of the men opened his own parcel. They were all young men.
SAM SCHOFUL . I am employed by Cohen, and remember the day the police took him away. I was working upstairs in the workroom that afternoon. Julius Cohen was also working there. Three men came in and ordered three overcoats, bringing the cloth with them. (Witness gave other corroborative evidence.)
Verdict, Not guilty.
No evidence was offered in this case, it being stated that prosecutor had left the country.
Mr. St. John McDonald, who appeared to prosecute, said it had been ascertained that prisoner bore an unblemished record, and there being great doubt in the case he proposed, with the permission of the Court, not to offer any evidence. Prosecutor is believed to have been the victim of a gang of robbers working between Paris, Newhaven, Dieppe, and London.
The jury accordingly returned a verdict of Not guilty.
BEFORE THE RECORDER. (Saturday, May 30.)
BECK, Alfred George (23, servant), and GATHERCOLE, Robert ; both conspiring and agreeing together to obtain by false pretences from the owner of a certain dwelling-house—to wit, 59, Rusthall Avenue—an agreement for letting the said dwelling-house, and inducing the said owner to execute the said valuable security with intent to defraud; Gathercole, obtaining by false pretences from Emma Driscoll an agreement for letting a house with intent to defraud the said Emma Driscoll.
Mr. Mahaffy prosecuted; Mr. Purcell defended Gathercole.
TIMOTHY DRISCOLL , 43, Rusthall Avenue, Bedford Park, builder. My wife, Emma Driscoll, is the owner of No. 59, Rusthall Avenue. In February I instructed Messrs. Barnard and Co., house agents, to let that house. On March 10 I learned from them that a man named Robert Leonard was applying to take the house and they sent me the two letters produced purporting to be references. I believed the references to be genuine, and eventually a three years' agreement was entered into, the agreement being signed by "Robert Leonard" and his mother, "Margaret Leonard." On March 13 the two prisoners took possession, Gathercole representing himself as Leonard. He said he was a teacher of stage dancing. I never saw a woman in the house, but Gathercole I have seen masquerading in woman's clothes. I know Beck's writing; in my presence he has admitted that he wrote the references and signed the agreement. On April 7 (before any rent was actually due) prisoners left the house and took away their furniture.
Cross-examined by Mr. Purcell. Gathercole first of all saw my wife about taking the house; she is not here to-day. Gathercole said he was a teacher of dancing at Percy Hall, Tottenham Court Road. I do not know that that is not the fact; there is no one here from Percy Hall. Before the magistrate I did not mention that Beck had admitted signing the letters and the agreement; I was not asked.
To Beck. You made the admission to Gathercole's sister in my presence.
BECK. I deny that. I did sign the agreement and did write the letters; I admit it now, but I never admitted it before.
At this point both prisoners withdrew their pleas and pleaded Guilty on both indictments. A further indictment, relating to similar offences in connection with another house, was not proceeded with. The police gave both prisoners a bad character.
Sentences, Each prisoner 20 months' hard labour (concurrent in case of Gathercole).
Mr. H.D. Harben prosecuted.
ARTHUR POWIS , newsvendor. On May 2, about two p.m., prisoner came to me as I was selling papers outside Victoria Station and asked me for 3d. I refused, whereupon he called me all sorts of names and threatened me; I think he was drunk; the police sent him away. Later that day I was in Vincent Square, when prisoner attacked me, making two or three slashes at me with a belt; he threw me down, breaking my collar-bone, and while I was on the ground bit a lump out of my ear. I think prisoner is mad.
LANCELOT ARCHER , divisional surgeon. I saw prosecutor at the police station on May 2. He had a broken collar-bone, the edge of his ear was bleeding, for about 1 1/4 in. the skin was torn off, exposing the cartilage, and in the edges of the torn ear were the marks of teeth.
Police-constable PERCIVAL CONEY , 391 A. On May 2, about four p.m., complaint was made at Rochester Row Police Station that a disturbance was going on in Vincent Square. I went there and saw a crowd, with prisoner and prosecutor in the centre; prosecutor described the assault to me, and I arrested prisoner.
Prisoner's statement before the magistrate. "The row between me and prisoner has been going on for two years. I had got locked up, and on coming out found that prosecutor had taken my paper stand at Victoria Station. On May 2 prosecutor and his brother attacked me in Vincent Square; they tried to bore my eyes out; his brother booted me; I tried to catch hold of his ear, but not to bite it off."
Prisoner (not on oath) now repeated his statement, adding a long rambling account of the quarrels between himself and prosecutor and his brother.
ARTHUR POWIS , recalled. When I was assaulted by prisoner my brother was not there. Prisoner made complaint at the station about his eyes having been nearly gouged out, but there was no injury on him, and the doctor examined him.
Verdict, Guilty. Prisoner confessed to a conviction on January 3, 1899, at North London Sessions. There were something like 20 previous convictions against him, nearly all for assaults on the police.
Sentence, Five years' penal servitude.
Mr. Thatcher prosecuted.
ELLEN ROSS , 17, Betterton Street, wife of prisoner, who is a copper-plate printer. On May 10, just after midnight, I was upstairs when my husband came in. He had been away for three weeks. We had had a quarrel. I told him to go out and go where he had been living. He said he would not and pushed by me; then he stabbed me. I thought it was a razor, but it was a knife (produced) with which he does his work. He struck me twice—in the left shoulder and in the side. My little boy went for the police. There was a lot of blood on me. I have been married for 13 years. I gave my husband in charge; he was drunk. I was taken to King's College Hospital, and was there till two in the morning, I believe.
Cross-examined by prisoner. I walked to the hospital, then to the station and then home. You had been to the house with your money, 12s., on the previous Saturday. I was not there; I would not come in the place where you were. I may have done something to you after you stabbed me. I had no chance to get at you. Many a year
ago I stabbed you with a broken glass. I have never been convicted for assaulting a detective.
Police-constable WALTER LIGHT , 24 E R. On May 10, at one a.m., I was on duty in Betterton Street, Drury Lane, when I heard shouts of "Murder!" and "Police!" I went to the top floor of No. 17 and saw prisoner sitting on a chair and the last witness in the middle of the room held by a woman. She was bleeding from a wound on the left shoulder. I asked her who did it. She said, "My husband," pointing to prisoner. I told him I should take him into custody for maliciously wounding his wife. He said, "All right." He had been drinking; the wife was sober. I took him to the station, and after he was charged he replied, "I wish to draw your attention to this," pointing to his head. "This is supposed to be done with nothing." I looked at his head and found two little scratches on the top. I searched prisoner, and found the pocket-knife (produced) closed in his left pocket. On examination we saw wet blood on the notch. A little boy came in after I did. He had been for a constable.
Cross-examined by prisoner. The cut on your head was bleeding a little; that was at one o'clock.
JOHN FAULKNER MCQUEEN , house surgeon, King's College Hospital. In the early morning of May 10 prosecutrix was brought in. She was sober. There was a lot of blood about her clothes. She had two stab wounds, one behind and just above the shoulder, the other just above the hip bone. The first one was an inch long and an inch deep, and the second an inch long and two inches deep. I think a good deal of violence would have been used to make the second wound. Neither were really dangerous. If the lower wound had been deeper it might have reached the peritoneal cavity.
To Prisoner. I could not say whether there is any blood on the knife produced. (The prisoner said that he did not with his son, James Ross, a little boy, to give evidence.)
FRANK ROSS (prisoner, not on oath). I know it is no use contesting the case. The real facts are these: Owing to the woman's drunkenness and violence I had gone to lodgings the last three weeks. Each Saturday as I was paid I gave it to her. On the Saturday night in question I went into the room, and had my collar dragged off, my head cut in two places by a jug which was half broken at the time. I picked a knife off the table and stabbed the woman, as I thought, in self-defence. When I found out what I had done I was seized with remorse, and sat on the chair making no efforts to escape. I never went up with any intentions whatever of beating the woman, and am very sorry about what has been done.
Verdict, Guilty of unlawful wounding.
It was stated that prisoner had been in employment for a number of years as a copper plate printer, and was a good workman, who earned good money, but after doing so he would go drinking.
Mrs. Ross, recalled, said that before this affair she had been in hospital for three weeks with a fractured jaw which prisoner had caused when in drink
Sentence, 15 months' hard labour.
JAMES MULLIGAN . On May 2, about 1.20 a.m., I was going along West Ferry Road with a friend, James Mackenzie, when we saw prisoner and another man coming towards us. When they had got opposite us prisoner cannoned against me and spoke in a foreign language. I asked him what was the matter; than he went towards my back. I was going to catch my friend up as he had got a few yards in front, when he turned and said "Look out, Jim, he has got a knife." I turned round to close with him when he jumped backwards, and as I got within about 8 ft. of him he had something in his hand, which I found was a firearm, which he fired. I went to close with him, and as I got hold of him and tried to get behind him I remember something clicked and I thought he fired again, so I hung round his neck and held him till the police came. I had never seen him before. I was not hit by the shot. I had not spoken to the man.
Police-constable JOHN LAMBIE, 327 K. On the early morning of Key 2 I was in West Ferry Road when I heard shots and saw a flash. I went to arrest prisoner, who was held by prosecutor. I searched prisoner, but found no revolver. Later on I was shown a spot where a revolver had been found by 491K. That was about 15 yards away from where I arrested prisoner, in a straight line. Prisoner was sober, but he may have had a drink.
Prisoner (not on oath) said: What is the good of saying anything; I was drunk; I do not remember anything. I fell to the floor after that.
Verdict, Guilty of discharging firearms in a public thoroughfare.
The Recorder said that amounted to a verdict of Not guilty.
Prisoner was then tried for a common assault. Mulligan repeated his evidence.
Police-constable GEORGE BEECHAM, 491K. At ten past one on the morning of May 2 I was on duty in West Ferry Road, and in consequence of what Police-constable 327 K said I instituted a search and found a revolver in an adjoining yard; it was loaded in four chambers, and one other had been discharged recently. I found it about 15 yards from where the assault had taken place
Verdict, Guilty. Prisoner had been fined once for being drunk and in possession of a loaded revolver.
Sentence, six months' hard labour, and to be deported at end of sentence.
BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.
(Saturday, May 30.)
Mr. R.D. Muir, Mr. W.H. Leycester, and Mr. Oddy prosecuted; Mr. Walter Lloyd defended.
Detective ALBERT SQUIRES , B Division. I prepared plan of Fulham Road, Redcliffe Road, and surroundings, drawn to scale (produced). There is no turning to the left out of Redcliffe Road till you get to the top. Coming up Fulham Road, the direct route to Weatherby Mews would be to continue up Fulham Road—yon could go via Reicliffe Road, it would be just as near—it would be a roundabout route.
Cross-examined. Motor drivers, when they have not their master with them, are apt to take a roundabout route. The distance from Seymour Place to Redcliffe Road is 56 yards—to the nearest corner it would be 44 yards. A motor-car going 25 miles to 30 miles an hour could only stop in 44 yards with difficulty. If it attempted to turn the corner in that distance I should think something might happen.
Police-constable FREDERICK BATTERSBY , 41 B R. At 12.15 a.m. on December 4 I was on duty in Fulham Road, opposite Seymour Place. The road was up on the south side from there to Drayton Gardens, leaving room for only one line of traffic. Standing in the middle of the road, I held up my hand to stop the traffic from the west and passed the signal on to the officer at the other end, who let in the traffic coming from east to west. A motor car with a very bright light then passed me very rapidly, at a rate which I put down at 25 miles per hour. I had just time to jump out of its way. There were three or four men in it, one standing up. I shouted and ran towards it as fast as other traffic would allow. It pulled up sharply at the corner of Redcliffe Road to the off side, turned the steering gear to the left, and dashed down on the right-hand side of Redcliffe Road—its front off wheel went on the footway and checked its speed so that I was able to get the number, which was "T 1162." The car dashed quickly out of sight. I reported the matter. On February 21 I gave evidence on the hearing of a summons against Mr. Quick, to the same effect as I have given to-day. Prisoner was in Court the whole time and was afterwards called as a witness for the prosecution.
Cross-examined. I had a very narrow escape and was anxious that the offender should be brought to book according to law. I reported the matter the same morning. I was on the same duty several nights previously, but not the next night. I have been 25 years in the force and, from my experience, estimate the speed of the car at 25 to 30 miles an hour. There was no traffic between me and the car to prevent the driver seeing my hand up. The next constable
to me would be at the corner of Park Walk, about 60 yards from me, Redcliffe Road being about halfway between us. He would probably have seen the car and what happened. The car did not pass Redcliffe Road, stop and turn back; it possibly slackened speed, then turned sharp round—it did not reverse as far as I could see.
EDWIN OWEN QUICK , Tiverton, Devonshire, landowner. In December, 1907, I owned motor car registered No. T 1162. Prisoner had been my chauffeur for about three months. On Monday, December 2, I drove with the prisoner from Southsea to Cocks's Hotel in Jermyn Street, arriving at 5.30 p.m., when I directed prisoner to take the car to Granaway Motor Garage, Brompton Road. I saw no more of the car that night. On Tuesdey, December 3, prisoner brought the car round to Cooks's Hotel at 11.15 a.m., and we drove to Brooklands Motor Track, via St. James's, Buckingham Palace, Passing along the Fulham Road at about 12 noon. Prisoner was driving. We returned to Cocks's Hotel at 2 or 2.30 p.m., and he was to take the car to Granaway's Garage. He bad been up to London before with me and he knew the place perfectly well; it was where I generally went. I had the car out no more that day. I was most certainly not in it at midnight on December 3 or in the early morning of the 4th. I think on December 4 I went to one or two people to try and sell the car; I had it out on the 5th and on December 6 sold it to Mr. Padden, of Padden and Copley. Prisoner left my service three or four days afterwards. I afterwards got a letter from the police asking me to fill up form (produced) giving information as to the driver of the car, etc., which I did to the best of my knowledge. I was afterwards summoned for not giving all the information in my power. I received letter of January 10 (produced) from the prisoner. On the day my summons came on I saw prisoner at the Berkeley Hotel, where I was staying, at 11 a.m., the summons being fixed for two p.m. that day. I explained exactly the case to him, that they were summoning me for being out in the middle of the night. Prisoner gave me the impression that the police had made a mistake in the time. He said he had known cases where the wrong time had been given and the accused had got off. I made it absolutely clear to him that we were being summoned for being out in the middle of the night. He assured me that he had never had the car out and he could prove where he was that night. He did not say where he was. He impressed upon me, and I did believe, that the police had made a mistake in the time. He said that on December 5 Mr. Padden had tried the car, and that he had taken it back from the Automobile Club at about nine p.m. I am not quite sure whether he mentioned the time. That was the only occasion he mentioned having the car out at night. I am not absolutely certain of what he said. My case came on, prisoner gave evidence against me, I gave evidence, was convicted and fined £5 and £15 costs; that was the last communication I had with prisoner. I afterwards made inquiries and communicated with the police.
Cross-examined. I am not quite certain about what happened on December 3 and 4. I know from the hotel book that I came up from
Southsea on December 2. My recollection is a little vague as to when I went to Brooklands. On December 5 prisoner was out by my instructions with Mr. Padden. If the summons had been for 12.15 noon on December 4 that would have agreed with my visit to Brooklands. On January 10 I got a letter from the prisoner—it was quite clear that the police were inquiring about 12.15 at night—prisoner wrote, "I assure you, sir, I was not driving the car at that time. I do not think the car was out at 12.15 at night unless you went to the garage and fetched the car out." I had not known that prisoner had a bad memory. I have sent him up to London to get things, and he has done it all right. I think he told the police he had a bad memory.
Re-examined. I did not ask prisoner to look out for a customer for the car. He knew I wanted to sell it.
ARTHUR MORRISON , second clerk at Westminster Police Court. On February 21 I took down evidence on a summons against Mr. Quick under the Motor Car Act, Sec. 1 (3), heard before Mr. Curtis Bennett. Prisoner was sworn and gave evidence for the prosecution. (Evidence read in which prisoner stated he had not had the car out after five p.m., on December 3.)
Cross-examined. I have bad six years' experience at the police court—prisoner was an average witness—not a good witness—I do not recollect his saying he had a bad memory or his being asked to try and fix his memory at to a date. I believe no summons has been taken out against anyone for driving to the public danger on this night. Mr. Quick was in some confusion as to whether the time charged was a.m. or p.m.—it was made clear, and he perfectly understood it at the trial.
GEORGE LLOYD , 12, Elm Park Gardens Mews, coachman. I have known prisoner about 18 months or two years. He lived at 13, Elm Park Gardens Mews, opposite me. He drove Mr. Quick's motor-car. I have often been out with him at night in the Fulham Road—more than once. I remember one night, early in December, when Fulham Road was up, prisoner told me he had to fetch the car from the Automobile Club; we walked up together from the mews with Francis and Horace Price, prisoner's brother, and got the car. We all got into it and took it to the Granaway Garage in Sussex Place, Old Brompton Road—that was about nine p.m.—prisoner then drove us to Hampton Court or Esher; we had a drink; prisoner called at his father's place, and came back through Putney and the Fulham Road, prisoner driving all the time; we were not going very fast. When we got to the part of Fulham Road where the road was up I heard somebody shouting. I did not look to see who it was that shouted—no one stood up in the car to my knowledge. As we went down the Fulham Road we met the traffic coming the reverse way, and so had to reverse and go round a road to tht left—that was about five minutes walk from the garage—I do not remember the name of the road. I know some of the roads there, but I did not notice which one we turned round. No one said anything about the shouting—I heard nothing said about it when we got to the mews. I do not remember
anything being said about the number of the car. (Deposition referred to. The Judge permitted Mr. Leycester to cross-examine witness.) I was called at the police court after making a statement to a police constable. I may have said, "The defendant said something about he did not think they had got the number"—I did say it. Prisoner, his brother, Francis, and myself were at the mews together. I think prisoner said, "If that shouting was after me I do not think they got the number"—or something to that effect. I had said, "I wonder who that was shouting." Nothing was said about a policeman. I have a bad memory—we were all sober that night. I could not say if I told Detective Ward that I saw a constable with his hand up, shouting. I did not see the constable. After Christmas prisoner had told me the police were after him—after his Panhard—that he thought it was about the Farnham affair. I said, "Oh, perhaps it is about the Fulham Road affair, the shouting business." Prisoner said, "No, I do not think so." I remember the summons against Quick. I went with prisoner to the police court and heard the evidence. After the case was over I said to prisoner, "It is funny Mr. Quick did not speak to you." He said, "Oh, he will write in the morning." I do not remember saying, "Why do not you own up and tell him?" I forget whether I said it, and I forget whether I told Ward that I had said it. About the middle of March prisoner's wife and children went to live with their relations, and I stored his furniture. I remember prisoner's arrest—he told me he had dropped in for it—I do not know if he said Bullen at the garage had put him away.
Cross-examined by Mr. Lloyd. All I remember is that I went for a drive after fetching the car from the Automobile Club with the prisoner one night, and we came through the Fulham Road when the road was up. We had several drives not only in that car but in another car. I understood prisoner was asked to try and sell the car. There are plenty of drivers who take friends out in their masters' cars. I am quite sure prisoner stopped the car at Redcliffe Road and had to reverse.
Re-examined. Two or three nights before this occurrence we were out late in the Fulham Road—we were out nearly every night for a week in prisoners car—we generally were in the Fulham Road—there was shouting only on one night. There are about three turnings near where the road is up. (To the Judge.) Almost every night for a week prisoner, his brother, myself and Francis were out together—we always met in the mews; prisoner, his brother, and I lived there; Francis used to come round every night. It was only on one night that there was shouting, and that we had to pull up sharp and turn to the left.
JIGGERY FRANCIS . My temporary address is 49, Dakin Avenue, Harrogate; I live at Esher. I have known prisoner nearly since childhood. In December last I was living at Ensall Mews, Cranleigh Gardens, Fulham Road, and I used to meet prisoner, his brother, and Price at Elm Park Gardens Mews. Prisoner was driving Mr. Quick's car. One night he suggested we should go up to the Automobile
Club and fetch the car, which we did, returned to Granaway Garage. and went on to Hampton Court. We stopped at a little inn there for about 20 minutes, went round towards Esher, returned up Fulham Road, and reached the part where the road was up at about 12 or a little after. We probably left Hampton Court about 10.15 or 10.30 and drove back at about 20 miles an hour. I was seated in the back of the car on the near side. I did not see anything of the police incident—the only thing I remember was that prisoner stopped the car just where the road was up somewhere near Redcliffe Gardens. I have driven as a chauffeur—I do not know much about the Fulham Road. Prisoner reversed the car and turned to the left. We were going at a moderate pace—about 15 miles an hour.
Mr. Lloyd submitted that the perjury suggested was not material to the issue before the Magistrate on the summons against Quick for refusing to give information. Quick having stated that he had no knowledge who was driving that night, whether prisoner was driving or not was not materiel to the issue.
Held: Directly material to the issue: anything that makes the story of the prosecution or the defence more likely to be true or untrue is material.
Prisoner dropped me at Ensall Mews. I did not see prisoner again until after the summons against Quick. He seemed upset about it; I advised him to make a clean breast about it to Mr. Quick. Price was driving the car on the night of the incident.
Cross-examined. The night I am referring to was when we fetched the car from the Automobile Club—I do not know the date. We went out about four times within a week in the same car and came home about midnight by the Fulham Road—it was the same four people. Nothing attracted my attention except the stopping and reversing of the car. I heard no shouting on any other occasion.
RICHARD GOOLE . 1, Weatherby Mews, chauffeur. I first knew prisoner when he came into the mews with Mr. Quick's car one night in early December, about 12.30, or a little later. Price, his brother, and Lloyd had just backed the car into the garage. Prisoner told us that going down the Fulham Road he had had a narrow squeaknearly knocked a man over with the car—it was a policeman, I think; that he had refused to stop, and he did not think they had got his number. A week or two afterwards I met prisoner in Earl's Court Road; he said, "If you know anything about the case," referring to this matter, "keep your mouth shut."
Cross-examined. Prisoner advised me to say nothing of what I knew about the Fulham Road affair; he did not ask me to say anything untrue. Drivers often talk about it if they have a narrow shave. I only just remember what he told me; I am not sure he said a policeman; I think he said he nearly knocked a man over, he had not stopped, and he did not think he had got his number. I could not say whether it was Thursday, Friday, or Tuesday—it was early in December.
(Monday, June 1.)
heard that he suffered from enteric fever. I went out with prisoner in the car before he went to Portsmouth—in the end of November; there was an interval between that and the times I went with him in December.
GEORGE THOMAS BARTLETT , 14, Weatherby Mews, chauffeur. One night early in December, between 12 and one a.m., I was in the mews with Gould when I saw prisoner, his brother, and another friend of his named Lloyd. Prisoner brought in Mr. Quick's Panhard car which he had been driving. Prisoner told me he had nearly knocked a man over and a policeman; that the policeman put his arm out for him to stop—or called upon him to stop—and he came on home. I said it was a silly thing to do—they would take his number. He said he did not think they would get that. I had seen the same people out with the same car about four times in that week they came home between 10 and 12—once it was later than that—in the morning. I had been asleep some time. I cannot be sure that every night there were the same people. Only once was there anything said about a policeman. Three or four weeks afterwards prisoner saw me in the mews where I keep my car, opposite where Quick's car was kept. He asked me if I remembered the night when he came in with the car and had spoken to me. I said, "Yes." He asked me not to say anything about it. I do not remember if he gave a reason; it is some time ago.
Cross-examined. I am not quite certain whether this incident was late in November or early in December. When prisoner saw me afterwards he did not ask me to tell lies for him—simply to say nothing about it. My attention was first recalled to this when Mr. Quick and Mr. Bowen came to see me after the summons, towards the end of February. Chauffeurs often have narrow escapes. When my memory was brought back to the occasion I was quite sure that he had told me he had nearly knocked down a man and a policemen.
Re-examined. I was living over this garage at the time this happened and was there at night and in the morning. I never saw a stranger take this car out. I have seen the men in the garage wash it down.
Detective JOHN GARNER , P Division. On April 13, at 10.45 a.m., I saw prisoner in Regent Street and said, "I am a police officer; I am going to arrest you for perjury." He said, "If I have told any lies I cannot remember; I have got such a bad memory. I really do not know what I did say, but if they say I was out on that night I shall deny it. If I have done wrong I shall be punished for it. I took the car out one day. but I do not know what day it was. I have never been drunk in my life."
Cross-exammed. I had nothing to do with the case previous to the arrest of the prisoner.
Inspector ALFRED WARDLAW , B Division. On April 13, at 11 a.m., I saw prisoner at Marlborough Street Police Station. I told him I was a police officer and held a warrant for his arrest for committing wilful perjury in connection with a summons that was heard at
Westminster Police Court against Mr. Quick on February 21. I read the warrant to him, and in reply he said, "I had the car out one night. I do not know which night it was, my memory is so bad. If I told lies I cannot remember it, you must prove I did not tell the truth. I only took the car to Esher once when I took my little boy home to my father's." I took him then to Walton Street Police Station. He was charged and in reply he said, "You must prove it." The warrant was issued on March 12. I did not find prisoner until April 13. He was not at his address at the garage.
Cross-examined. I found he had gone away from his address after he gave evidence. He went a few days afterwards. I heard after his arrest that his furniture was stored. Mr. Quick gave me information which led to the arrest. He gave me the address where he would be likely to call. I made inquiry there and I found he did call there. Prisoner did not say to me he did not remember where ✗he was on particular dates. He said his memory was bad. He always admitted being out on one night.
Prisoner's statement. "I wish to say nothing now."
Verdict, Guilty, with a recommendation to mercy on the ground that the prisoner did not appreciate the gravity of the offence that he committed and also that his motive was to provide for his wife and family.
Sentence, Six months' hard labour.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Saturday, May 30.)
BRAY, John (43, meter inspector, in the employ of the corporation of West Ham) ; indicted for on or about February 25, 1907, forging and uttering, well knowing the tame to be forged, a certain accountable receipt for money, to wit, the sum of £1 4s., and on or about March 4, 1907, a like accountable receipt for money, to wit, the sum of £1 4s., with intent to defraud the National Deposit Friendly Society; on or about June 1, 1906, forging and uttering, well knowing the same to be forged, six accountable receipts for money, to wit, £7 4s., and on or about March 31, 1907, two accountable receipts for money, to wit, the sum of £3 with intent to defraud the National Deposit Friendly Society; pleaded guilty to certain indictments. The charges were very numerous.
Mr. Morris prosecuted; Mr. Austin Metcalfe defended.
Prisoner was district secretary of the society, and obtained money by forging the names of members, covering the defalcation by falsifying the accounts. Mr. Metcalfe stated that notice had been given of further evidence, which made it absolutely impossible to defend.
Judge Rentoul said there was no sentence which it was more pleasant to him to give than to let a man out on hit own recognisances, as he had not very much belief in imprisonment as a universal medicine, especially for a first offence; but this was a serious case. Workmen were less thoughtful and less careful of their interests than people of higher position and it they trusted one of themselves and that person made away with the money with which he had been entrusted, it was an offence with which the Court had always dealt severely.
Mr. Metcalfe submitted that this was exactly one of those cases in which no good could be done by sending the man to prison, and suggested that he should be released on probation, as the new Act provided. If such a man were sent to prison he would be absolutely ruined; his employment would go, and his wife and children must come upon the parish.
Judge Rentoul said that he had to contemplate the effect upon other secretaries, who would probably think to themselves, "If we make a good haul out of the funds we may perhaps escape."
A member of the West Ham Corporation, speaking from the body of the Court, expressed the opinion that the corporation would reinstate prisoner should he be released.
Finally Judge Rentoul postponed sentence to next Sessions in order that an authoritative declaration of the willingness of the corporation to reinstate prisoner might be obtained, remarking that with this matter hanging over prisoner's head the corporation would probably have in him a safer servant than they had before.
Mr. J. Wells Thatcher prosecuted; Mr. St. John Macdonald defended.
GEORGE WILLIAM LODGE . I am a fireman on the steamship "Pearl" and live at South Shields. On the night of April 22 I left my ship at Rotherhithe to go to the Seamen's Home for my letters. At about half-past nine o'clock I went up to Leman Street Station to get a train to Rotherhithe. I had to change at Shadwell, and on the platform a young man asked me to go and have a glass of beer. I walked through several streets with him and suddenly a whistle was given by way of signal and I was attacked by four men. One man put his knee in my back and hit, arms round my neck and the others got round me. I tried to shout, but found I could not. Prisoner was right in front of me, and I saw him quite plainly. He had a red muffler on and a coat with a velvet collar, both of which he is now wearing. I am certain prisoner is the man I saw. He was right in front of me and I could not get off seeing him. He put his hand into my left-hand pocket and took out a purse containing 13s. 8d. and two pawntickets and a scarf pin. Having robbed me, they all ran away. I went and told a constable a couple of blocks away and he came back with me, and this fellow was standing at the corner as if
he had never done nothing. I recognised him right away and pointed him out to the constable. I said to prisoner, "You are the man that took my money." He said, "I never done it." I said, "You did—you know you have done it." He mentioned the names of two men who he said had committed the robbery, but I did not know them. I have not the slightest doubt prisoner is the man.
Cross-examined. I had had three or four glasses of beer. I can drink 12 without being intoxicated. I could not scream or yell out because I was held tight round the throat. It was about four or five minutes after the occurrence that I again saw prisoner about 60 or 100 yards from where the theft took place. I did not notice whether he was out of breath. I was quite sober. It is not an uncommon thing for men in the neighbourhood of the docks to wear red bandans handkerchiefs. They are worn all round England. I do not know that prisoner lives near where the theft took place. I do not know the locality. The constable said to me, "Is that the man?" and I said, "Yes, that is the man." He said, "Be sure. Have a good look. Do not make a mistake." So then I hesitated a moment and then I said, "Yes, that is the man." That made me sure. Prisoner said at the police station that two men named McCarthy and Donovan had done it.
Police-constable FREDERICK LITTLE , 436 H. At about quarter-past seven, on the evening of April 22, I was on duty in Cable Street, when prosecutor informed me he had been assaulted by four or five men and robbed. I walked with him about 50 yards and told him if he saw anybody he recognised to point him out to me. At the corner of Cannon Street Road prisoner was leaning against the shutters of a baker's shop. Prosecutor looked at him a few minutes and said, "That is one of them." I said, "Take a good look and make sure." He said, "Yes, that is one. I know him well." I then took prisoner into custody. Prosecutor was perfectly sober. Prisoner said, "You have made a mistake. I know who has done it. I am not going to fall through it." At the station prisoner made that remark again in answer to the charge. Prosecutor said at the station that he knew prisoner by his handkerchief and his face, as he was in front of him. Prisoner lives in Mayfield's Buildings and I know him pretty well. When I asked prosecutor to identify prisoner he took great care and looked at him intently. I told him to be very careful. He was facing prisoner when talking to him.
Cross-examined. There is no light where this theft occurred. There is a coal wharf on one side and the corner of Cable Street is dark, Cable Street itself being lighted by electric arcs. If prosecutor was close to prisoner I think he could see him. In this locality a velvet collar to the coat is a very common thing and the bandana handkerchief is also common to people of this kind. The coats are common, shoddy things. Prisoner walked quietly past us before we reached the corner. He would have nothing to gain by running away. He would have more to lose if he was actually concerned. I should say it was about 10 minutes after the theft that we went up to prisoner. He did not look as if he had been running and was
not breathing hard. Where the robbery took place it 15 or 20 yards form Meyfield's Buildings, where it is very easy to evade pursuit. I know "Long" Jack McCarthy, but I do not know Donovan. I know they are well-known thieves in this locality. When prisoner said the robbery was committed by these men I did not investigate the matter at all, because prosecutor was so certain about Martin.
HENRY MARTIN (prisoner on oath). I live at 23, Mayfield's Buildings, which is near where prosecutor says he was robbed. Between nine p.m. and 10 p.m. I was with my mother upstairs. I left my mother and came downstairs into the court of the buildings, and as I was walking up the court five or six chaps came running down. I recognised two of them, one named McCarthy and the other Donovan. I thought there might have been something up when I saw them running. They did not say anything to me. I was standing up against some shutters when prosecutor and the policeman came up to me. I walked past the prosecutor and two constables. Nothing was said to me then. I then went and stood at the corner of Cannon Street, about 50 yards away. I was not with these five or six men on this occasion. I did not recognise any of the others. I had not been out of the house five minutes when I was arrested. At the spot where the robbery took place there is no light at all. I at once told the police officers and inspector at the station that the robbery was committed by McCarthy and Donovan.
Cross-examined. I am a London Dock labourer and have a "B" ticket. I should have been at work all the time I have been in custody because there has been a big wool case. Thefts sometimes happen in the neighbourhood of Mayfield's Buildings. When I saw McCarthy and Donovan running down the court with three others I assumed it was they who had done it, because I know they get their living by thieving. I have given these men away to prove my own innocence. I go hawking on Saturday and Sunday, and earn about 12s. On the other days I go to the docks, where the foreman calls out the numbers. If my number is not reached I go away; if it is reached I go to work.
MARGARET MARTIN , prisoner's mother, stated that he was at home until five minutes past 10 on the night, April 22. Shortly afterwards a neighbour called in and said, "Your son has been locked up." Witness went to the station and told the inspector that her son had not done the robbery, but it had been done by Donovan and McCarthy, two men living in the buildings.
The police inspector in charge of the case was called to corroborate this statement. The allegation against the two men was not investigated, inasmuch as there was nobody who could identify them. The detectives had made every possible inquiry, but there was nothing to implicate them. They were well known, and could easily have been found if they could have been identified.
Judge Rentoul said it might relieve the minds of the jury to know that prisoner had already been convicted nine times for, robbery.
Prisoner. I have nothing to say about my convictions, but I appeal against my case. I am an innocent man. I wish to appeal against it.
Judge Rentoul. Very well, appeal against it.
Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.
JONAS, Julius, on bail; in incurring a certain liability to pay Feltham's Bank, Limited, the sum of £295 12s., did unlawfully obtain credit from the said bank under false pretences and by means of fraud other than false pretences; obtaining by false pretences from Edmund Goudridge Dakin and Feltham's Bank, Limited, £295 12s., with intent to defraud, and unlawfully making, forging and counterfeiting certain writings and uttering the said forget writings, in each case with intent to defraud.
Prisoner was committed for trial to the last Sessions; but on the doctor's evidence the Judge held that he was not in a fit state owing to heart disease to stand his trial. Evidence to the same effect being now again produced, the prosecution decided (his Lordship thought wisely) to offer no evidence rather than that prisoner should be brought up Sessions after Sessions without prospect of being in a fit state for trial, and with the prospect of him dying under the ordeal of cross-examination.
The jury accordingly returned a formal verdict of Not guilty and prisoner was discharged.
ECOBICHON, Alfred William (35, no occupation); stealing one overcoat, the property of Cecil Mervyn Latimer; obtaining by false pretences from Lydia Annie Barnard the sum of 12s. 4d., with intem to defraud; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged an order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque for £4 10s., with intent to defraud.
Mr. J. Wells Thatcher prosecuted.
The charge of obtaining by false pretences was proceeded with.
LYDIA ANNIE BARNARD , 72, Harleyford Road. I let apartment I recognise prisoner, who came to lodge with me on January 25. On April 12 he owed me £3 17s. 8d. for lodging. On that Sunday night prisoner brought me the cheque produced for £4 10s. It purports to be drawn by a Mr. Leonard Hall, and is endorsed "Alfred William Ecobiohon." He said he had borrowed 10s. to go down to Hanwell to get the money to pay me, and on his producing the cheque I gave him the 10s., for which he said the person he had borrowed the money of was waiting. Next day I got the cheque cashed by a Mrs. Palmer and I gave prisoner 2s. 4d. out of the proceeds, which with the 10s. was exactly the balance due to him out of the cheque. Prisoner left my house on Tuesday, April 14.
To Prisoner. You left on April 10, leaving everything packed up, and were away until the Sunday evening. Mr. Latimer, who was lodging with me, went upstairs to get the 10s., which he lent me till the Monday morning, because I had only a sovereign.
Judge Rentoul pointed out that if prisoner in return for the 12s. 4d. gave Mrs. Barnard a worthless cheque knowing that it was worthless, that was done with intent to defraud.
Prisoner said he did not deny having given the cheque to Mrs. Barnard, but he had no intent to defraud her, though he knew when he gave her the cheque it was not a good one. On the Monday he was to receive £25.
Judge Rentoul. If at the time you obtained this money from her you knew the cheque was bad, that would be obtaining money by false pretences, no matter how good your intentions were, the pretence being that this was a good cheque.
After further explanation by the Judge of prisoner's position, prisoner pleaded guilty to obtaining money by false pretences, and counsel for the prosecution intimated that he was prepared to accept that plea without going further into the case. Prisoner also confessed to a previous conviction at this Court, on October 22, 1906, for forgery.
Detective-sergeant JOHN MACINTYRE proved that prisoner was sentenced to four years' penal servitude at Hants Assizes on November 19, 1900, also for forgery. He had been charged on other occasions with obtaining money by false pretences and was a member of a notorious gang frequenting the West End. He had good abilities and had received a good education and might, had he chosen, have earned a good living as a tutor. He was married, but his wife would have nothing to do with him. He was born in Jersey in 1874, so was not an alien.
Sentence; Two years' hard labour.
SMITH, Edward, 59, joiner; feloniously receiving a certain valuable security—to wit, a banker's cheque for the sum of £5 2s. 8d., the moneys of Louis Boulasse, well knowing the same to have been stolen.
Mr. T. Close prosecuted.
FRANK POUTZ , Court dressmaker, 27, Dover Street, W. The cheque produced is my cheque. It was drawn on May 11 in favour of Louis Boulasse for £5 2s. 8d. and posted the same night. An attempt has been made to take out the creasing and the "and Co.," but it has come out more clearly since prisoner was arrested.
three and half-past as in the ordinary course of business by prisoner. He said nothing whatever, but put it down on the counter. I noticed at once that the crossing had been taken out, particularly at the bottom of the cheque. I noticed also that the endorsement was not that of our customer, though it might have been that of some other Louis Boulaase. I immediately informed our chief clerk, who asked prisoner to step round to the manager's room and he was shown into the manager's waiting room and detained while the police were sent for.
To Prisoner. You did not ask when you presented the cheque whether it was any good. You were opposite the front entrance, but you could not have walked out as there was a man posted at the door.
Police-constable BENJAMIN WILMOT , 279 C. On May 12, about a quarter to four, I was called to the London and County Bank. Hanover Square, where I found prisoner in the waiting room. The manager said prisoner had been trying to pass a cheque which had been tampered with, and I told the manager I must take prisoner to the station. The manager said he did not wish to charge him. I then took prisoner to the station. On the way he said he had found the cheque in Brook Street, took it to the bank, and found out it was of no value. He said his name was William Isaacs.
Detective-sergeant GEORGE MERCER, C. I saw prisoner at the Marlborough Street Police Station about half-past five on May 12. I told him I was a police officer, showed him the cheque, and said, "You took this cheque to the London and County Bank a short time ago?" He said, "Yes, I picked it up in Hanover Square." I said, "I shall have to make some inquiries into the matter. What is your name and where do you live?" He said, "My name is William Isaacs. I live at 35, New Wood Street." I said, "The crossing has been taken out of this cheque and the endorsement is forged." He then gave names and addresses where he said he had worked. I said, "I do not believe those statements," and he said, "No, it is not true." My name is Edward Smith and I live at a common lodging house in Percy Street. It is of no good for you to go to these addresses, it would be only waste of time." I then said to him, "This cheque has no doubt been stolen from a letter box at 29, Maddox Street and you will be charged with stealing and receiving it." He said, "I did not steal it." On the following morning before he went before the magistrate he said to me, "I might as well tell you the truth. Two men asked me in the 'Horse Shoes' public-house if I wanted to earn a sovereign. I believe the men are racing men. I said, 'Yes,' and they then told me to take the cheque and get it cashed at the bank. I did not know it was stolen, but, of course, I did not expect it was theirs." I said, "Who are the men? Do you know them?" He said, "No, only I believe they are racing men."
Verdict, Guilty. Seventeen previous convictions were proved. Sentence, 12 months' imprisonment.
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE GRANTHAM.
(Monday, June 1.)
Mr. Parcell prosecuted; Mr. Eustace Fulton and Mr. Horace Fenton defended.
JOSEPH TICKLE , Deputy-Clerk of Arraigns, Central Criminal Court, produced the indictment of the trial of Marks Goodman (see Vol. CXLVI., page 453) on January 30 and 31, 1907, also the original depositions.
ABRAHAM GOODMAN , 15, Duke Street, Spitalfields, brother of Marks Goodman. I returned from South Africa about 12 months ago, having gone there about nine years ago. I first saw prisoner at the end of April as I came out of the Cambridge Music-Hall about 11 p. m. My brother Solly and a gentleman friend of his introduced me to her. She told me that my brother was doing time innocently through her. She said she was sorry, but it was her parents' fault—her stepmother and father—and that Detective Buxton had promised them £10 to go on with the case, so that they could go away to America. She also said that her father and mother had told her to tell these lies to frighten my people so that they could get money from them. She said she knew she was telling lies and was afraid; she was awfully sorry, but was young at the time and did not know that there would be so much trouble. I met her on May 5 and went with her to my sister's house—14, Lamb Street—where she wrote out the statement produced. She wrote it herself and addressed it to my brother at Wormwood Scrubs. She gave me a copy and kept one herself. She said that she knew she was going to get imprisonment, but she was willing to go through her punishment as she knew she was guilty of a had sin. (To the Judge.) She wrote all the letter at one time.
Cross-examined. I had heard that prisoner had made a statement about my brother a couple of months back. Several neighbours round our way told me. A young lady in the Lane was told by prisoner that she had given Marks two years and that he was innocent. I believe the lady's name was Mrs. Green. She told my brother Solly about it, also my brother Gershon. I asked Solly where prisoner was living and made inquiries, but could not find her. Solly found her by tracing her to a house, when she was with a gentleman. I did not communicate with the police to find prisoner; they would not assist me. I communicated with my solicitor. Prisoner gave a wrong address to my brothers. Before our meeting on. May 5 I went to prisoner's address with her, and the landlady told me she lived there. That must have been a little over a weak before May 5. I
did not exactly suggest that she should go to the police; she said she wanted to make a confession to the magistrate. I saw her on May 4 and she said she would see me on the next day. I saw her for the first time in my life about a week before May 5. I took her to a solicitor on the day she first met me, at the end of April. I was going to take her to this solicitor, and he wrote out a little statement that she had made. I took her round to see if I could see this gentleman friend of mine to take me to a solictor. That would be the day after the first meeting, a week before May 5. I do not know the solicitor's name, but could soon find out. He took a small statement similar to the one in this letter. I did not take her to him again because the gentleman who took me there wanted some money and I thought it was rather funny wanting it in such a hurry, so I took no notice of him. Prisoner came round to me, asking if I should go to a solicitor. I said, "No; I am not going to the solicitor; I am going to engage one. This solicitor was somewhere in Finsbury Pavement, or Finsbury Park, whatever it is. The gentleman who took me to him was an elderly man; he has been a solicitor him-self, I believe. My brother Gershon introduced me to him. He is here; he will he able to tell you.
(Mr. Purcell said he was told that Gershon was in Court, but he was not there for the purpose of being a witness. Mr. Justice Grantham said he had better be called.)
Witness. Gershon did not go with me to the solicitor. He is a tailor, and was helping me with the inquiries. He has been in England since Marks was convicted.
GERSHON GOODMAN , tailor. I introduced my brother to a gentleman named Michael Foley, solicitor's clerk. I could not tell where he lives; I met him at the "Tower" Tavern, Bishopsgate Street. I went with him to a solicitor, Herbert Hazelwood, who I believe has been struck off the rolls. He was going to refer me to another solicitor. I had an appointment with prisoner to take her to the solicitor, but she did not keep it. That was to have been at the "Princess Alice," Commercial Street. I met her again and made another appointment, and she asked me to put my name and address down, but I thought then that it was a police trap for me, and I would have nothing to do with her. That was two months before my brother ever saw the girl. On that occasion I insulted her. She kept the second appointment, but I did not. She confessed to me and told me everything in the presence of a man who went with her.
Cross-examined. I could not fix the date when prisoner first confessed to me; it was about two months ago. I did not go to the police about the confession; they would not have helped me.
Mr. Fulton was proceeding to ask the witness about his character when Mr. Justice Grantham said that as he had directed the witness to be called he thought it would not be right to question him as to character.
home and was there convicted for loitering, receiving one month's hard labour. (The witness declined at first to answer whether he had been convicted in South Africa.) I was convicted in South Africa in 1902 for robbery with violence; it was a trumped-up charge and a detective got the sack through it. I got three years. I had another small conviction for assault. I was also convicted at Hastings in 1893 for larceny, receiving three months' hard labour; also at Chelmsford in the same year three months. I do not remember receiving three months' hard labour in 1896. I was convicted for larceny at North London, getting 18 months' hard labour. Another conviction I had in 1899—two months' hard labour. I believe I met prisoner twice before I took her to my sister's house. Gershon told me that he met prisoner and that she told him his brother was innocent, so he felt rather cross with her and told her to clear away. He told me that she had said she wished to confess; he did not say anything about a solicitor. Gerehon, Solly, and I live in the same house. Gershon told me about meeting the girl and about her not keeping the appointment; that was several weeks before I met her. The going to a solicitor was my idea; I thought I could trust him better than I could the police. I could soon find the solicitor to whom I went and the gentleman who took me. I asked prisoner if she would like to go to my sister's house, as there was an office there. My sister's husband is a merchant in the market. I asked prisoner if she would like to write in her own place, but she said no, there was no convenience there. My sister, a lady friend, a servant girl, and my sister's husband were present when prisoner wrote the letter. I told my sister that prisoner wanted to write a confession and would she allow her to come in? I do not know who the lady friend was. I used to call her Mrs. Green. My sister introduced her to me as Annie Green. She lives somewhere in Shoreditch Buildings. I said nothing to prisoner when she was writing the statement; simply, "Go on, write down what you have got to write, what is the truth, and nothing else." I read it after she had written it. My brother-in-law came upstairs while she was writing it and said to her, "Well, what made you do a thing like this?" She said, "Well. I am sorry I done it, because it was not my fault." I did not assist her to write it. I told her to give me a copy. She posted the letter in Bishopsgate Street, and I took the copy to my solicitor, Mr. Margetts, and left it in his hands. I think I took it the same day or next. Mr. Margetts went to the police court and made an application and was told to go before the Lord Mayor. I gave prisoner no money and never promised her anything. I have been supplying her with food and newspapers while she hat been in prison. They were from a gentleman friend of here, who gave me the money to look after her.
To the Judge. The gentleman friend knew I had the matter in hand, and, being a married man, he does not want me to tell who he is. I did not know prisoner's parents were out of the country when these proceedings were commenced. My brother Solly is a diamond setter. I have not made any inquiries of Mrs. Jacobs, the landlady in Brushfield Street. Gershon has never threatened prisoner with
what would happen when Marks came out of prison; he has more sense than that. I was introduced to prisoner in my own name by Solly and another friend. I did not tell her that if she would retract her story no harm would come to her, and that I would protect her; nor did I say that Marks would probably marry her when he came out of prison; I would sooner see him dead than marry her. Solly took prisoner to the Mansion House; she volunteered to go. I saw prisoner several times between May 5 and her surrender; I met her accidentally when she was walking the streets with another lady, and I told her she would be wanted next day. She said, "All right." The landlady went to see her in prison, and prisoner sent a messsge for me to go and see her, but I would not. I did not send a message that I was surprised to hear she had pleaded guilty. The landlady gave me a letter, which was sent to prisoner by some gentleman, which I gave to the solicitor, and she is cross about that. I did not tell her that she was to ask no questions of any witness and to say nothing at the police court. I am pleased she pleaded not guilty, so that we can get everything out. I did not tell her to plead guilty and that they would probably do nothing to her, nor that my brother would get large compensation. Nellie Last came to the Court on the solicitor's instructions; I had never seen her before in my life. It must have been five or six.days after prisoner wrote the confession that I saw Mr. Margetts. I swear that neither I nor my brother knew where Nellie Last lived. I never saw Solomon Freeman before. The witnesses are all strangers to me.
Re-examined. Mr. Margetts went to Marlborough Street and the magistrate told him he must go to the City as the case had been tried at the Old Bailey. I went to the Mansion House with Mr. Margate and swore an information, then a warrant was granted. Prisoner had finished a column of her confession when my brother-in-law came into the room. My sister was there the whole time. The landlady has a letter which she got from prisoner while the latter was in prison. The landlady told me that prisoner had been living with her for about six weeks. She is not a friend of mine. (To the Judge.) I have been in the landlady's kitchen since prisoner has been in prison, but not in prisoner's room. I went to tell the landlady how the case was going on, as she asked me to.
Detective-inspector ARTHUR PENTIN , City. This matter was first brought to my notice on May 15, when I saw Mr. Margetts. I was sent to the Mansion House to get a warrant for prisoner's arrest, which I did. I found prisoner at the Mansion House, and asked her to come outside. She was with the last witness. I told her I had a warrant for her arrest for committing perjury, and took her to Bridewell. When the warrant was read to her she said, "I deal know anything about wilful at all."
Cross-examined. I have made a few inquiries. Abraham and Gereshon Goodman told me that several people were present when prisoner made the statement about how sorry she was. I found two or three people who said that they heard that statement. I saw Harry Clements and Solosky, but I did not invite them to come
here. Prisoner and Abraham Goodman appeared to be on friendly terms when I saw them at the Mansion House. I have an idea that I heard the man say that he had given the girl a shilling. When arrested prisoner had 3s. on her, and she said that Goodman had given her some money.
Re-examined. There were one or two other people mentioned by Abraham as hearing prisoner's statement, but I could not find them. Harry Clements said that about two months ago he heard Polly Davis say that she was sorry for what she had done for Marksy. Solosky said that seven or eight weeks ago he was outside the "Tower" public-house when he heard a woman, who he was told afterwards was Polly Davis, say to Gershon that she had given false evidence against Marks Goodman, and that it was all through Buxton and her parents, and that she was willing to go with Gershon to a magistrate to confess. I met these people at this public-house. I also made inquiries of Mrs. Muskovitch, the landlady, who said that Polly Davis was a lodger with her for about six weeks, and that a man brought her to the house and visited her. She sometimes stayed out very late, and sometimes did not come home. She said that prisoner told her about four days before she was looked up that she must not be surprised if she was, and that she would be tried for giving a man two years, that it was her parents' fault, as they thought that the man's people were rich, and they could get money out of them. She had asked prisoner how she could be to cruel as to give a poor boy two years; prisoner said she was sorry, but the detective had promised her £10 to go on with the case. She was often visited by men.
Mrs. DINAH GREEN . My husband is a fruit salesman and commission agent at Spitalfields Market. I remember one day my brother and prisoner came to my husband's office. My brother asked me would I allow this girl to come upstairs because she was the girl that got my brother two years, and could she write out the confession. I said "Yes." So she came up to the office and was writing. Then I went downstairs, came up again, and stayed with her till she had finished; my brother was there, too, also a friend of mine. She is not here. During this time nothing was said to the prisoner to induce her to write the letter. When she had finished she said she was hungry, and I gave her something to eat; then she went home. Before that my husband came up, and when I told him the girl who got Marks two years was there he said he would like to see her. So I went up with him and he said to her, "Why did you do all this?" She said, "It was not my fault, it was my parents' fault and Inspector Buxton's."
Cross-examined. When she left I think she went first, then my brother went about 10 minutes later. I could not say whether she took the confession with her. This was about 11 in the morning. I knew prisoner wanted to see my brothers about Marks; she was telling people about it. My brothers do not tell me everything, because I am at business. They did tell me about this; I forget when; it was two or three weeks or a month before. The friend who was present
at the confession was Mrs. Green; that is her single name; her married name is Mrs. Stein. I think she lives at Clifton Buildings, Shoreditch. She was there by chance; she knew about the case, but did not know prisoner was coming. When my husband came up prisoner was still writing.
NELLIE LAST , Park Road, Regent's Park. I am an unfortunate. I was previously a barmaid at the "Admiral Duncan," Old Compton Street. At that house I knew Marks Goodman as a customer. I left there at the beginning of 1906. I first met Polly Davis about the beginning of 1906, in Lisle Street, Piccadilly, one afternoon; we were in a little tea shop. She told me about her mother, and that she was going to leave home because she was not taking enough money home, and that she was going to live with Frank Wild. I used to see her every evening; she accosted gentlemen. I used to see her with Frank Wild; he came in the tea shop and took money from her. She went to live with him, and I went to visit her in Paris Street, Lambeth, at the house of Mrs. Peroni. She was there for about a week. She was turned out for taking gentlemen there. Then she went to Whitfield Street. That would be about the beginning of October. After that she went to Brushfield Street. I went there twice. Then she came to live with me in King's Cross Road, where she stopped till she was arrested as a disorderly prostitute in King's Cross Road. That was about Christmas time. She had seven days' imprisonment in lies of fine, and then she came to me about her clothes. During all the time I knew her she was earning her living by going with men. She told me that her father turned her out and was the first man to ruin her. (To the Judge.) Prisoner told me that it was her stepmother with whom she had been living. I saw the father and mother at the other trial at the Old Bailey.
Cross-examined. I used to live at Gloucester Street. I think I went from there to King's Cross Road. I should say it was about December 18 when prisoner was arrested. She had been living with me about five weeks. She was about a week at Brushfield Street. I saw Mrs. Jacobs, the landlady at Brushfield Street, once. Prisoner left home a long time before December 18. It was some time about the beginning of November that she was in Paris Street. I was wrong when I said it was the beginning of October. I was at King's Cross Road for about five weeks, and for a fortnight before Polly Davis came, so she would only be there for about three weeks. It was the beginning of October when prisoner went with Frank Wild. She must be committing perjury if she says she never went with anyone before November 3. I have known Abraham Goodman about two months, seeing him about. I knew Gershon first when the case was on at the Old Bailey. I have not seen him about. No one told me to come and give evidence. I was told in the street by two fellows that Marks Goodman was locked up. Abraham told me I was wanted to give evidence here; he came to my house. If he swore that he never spoke to me until we were at the Mansion House that would not be true. I was living in Baker Street when he came to see me.
I do not know how he knew my address. He came about a week. I did not know Gershon's reputation. I had known him for some time. Abraham did not ask me to make a statement. I went to the solicitor with him. I could not say how long I lived in Gloucester Street. When I first met Polly Davis I was living with some friends. I see Frank Wild nearly every night round by the Hippodrome. He does not speak to me now. He is not in work. I knew Marks Good-man when I used to be at work, but not well. I used to see him about Charing Cross Road at night.
CHARLOTTE PERONI , 29, Paris Street, said that prisoner and Frank Wild occupied a room at her house as man and wife; she could not say whether in October or November, 1906. They stayed a week, and she turned them out, because she did not approve of their conduct.
AARON FREEMAN , 20, Old Compton Street, tailor's manager. I knew prisoner's father; he was a carpenter and did some work for my father five years ago. Prisoner one day came to the shop, and that is how I knew her. She was sent to a Home in 1904. Before that I had seen her hanging about Compton Street, Charing Cross Road, Piccadilly, Regent Street, Oxford Street, etc., accosting men. (Witness gave evidence to show that he knew prisoner as living the life of a prostitute from 1904, before she went to the Home.) When Marks Goodman was tried in January, 1907, I was sentenced to two months' imprisonment so could not attend to give evidence.
Cross-examined. I know Nellie Last; have done so since the case of Goodman first came on. I have known her well, but I have not lived on her prostitution. Solomon Freeman is my brother. I have known prisoner since 1903.
MARKS GOODMAN . I am now undergoing a sentence of two years imprisonment. I first met prisoner outside Abraham's shop when I was talking to Solly Freeman. I could not remember the date; it was Saturday afternoon. She told us about her parents ill-treating her and turning her out of her home. She said her stepmother demanded, I think, 28s. a week from her, and she did not care how she got it as long as she got it. A customer came up and Solly Freeman left us. Prisoner told me how her father had misbehaved. She asked me which way I was going. I said Bloomsbury, so she said she was going that way, and we walked together. She asked me to do her a favour by knocking at a door and asking for Nellie Last, but the landlady, Mrs. O'Brien, said she was not in. When I told prisoner she said that Nellie Last had told her she would get a lodging there. Then prisoner asked me to get a lodging for her. and I went to Mrs. O'Brien and asked for a lodging. I did that because she had told me that her parents had turned her out. Mrs. O'Brien had not a room for her. Then prisoner started crying, and begged me not to leave her. I said, "I have nothing to do with you." Afterwards I took her to a Mrs. Jacobs whom I knew, and she took her at once. I then went home. I gave prisoner 2s. on condition that I met her next week. I think it was between seven and eight when I
left prisoner. I saw her again next Sunday morning outside a shop as I came out of the market. I asked her if she was contented with the place and she said "Yes." I did not see her any more. The land-lady told me she had gone away with some chap four days afterwards. About three weeks after that I met her and Nellie Last in Liverpool Street Station. She did not speak to me, but Nellie Last did. I never had intimacy with prisoner. I never told her she must go up the Strand and get money by accosting men. I never took money from her. What she said at my trial was all made up, nothing but lies all the way through. I did not know Nellie Last before I saw her with prisoner next to Freeman's shop. I knew her before by sight. She was at a public-house for 18 months. I was at the Mansion House with two warders when prisoner came there. She said to me, "Oh, Marks, forgive me," and started crying.
Cross-examined. I could not say in what month I first saw prisoner. I think Mrs. Jacobs said at my trial that prisoner was three weeks with her. I was not in the habit of visiting prisoner the whole of that time. I made no inquiries when I heard that she had left. I made no statement when I was arrested. I said, "I cannot understand the charge—what is the idea of it?" I was surprised at the charge against me; it was quite untrue. I make my living in Spitalfields Market. I think Nellie Last was called as a witness on my behalf at the trial. I cannot recollect what she said.
Re-examined. Before my conviction I had been charged for betting, but not for any crime. I worked for 18 months for John Smith, of Spitalfields Market, 18 months with the father, and 18 months with the son. I was charged with stealing a watch, but I proved that I had picked it up. When I saw Detective Buxton, on my arrest, he asked me if I knew Polly Davis. I said, "Yes, I got a lodging for her three or four months ago and have not seen anything of her since." Detective Buxton's statement of what I said is true, except the last part about having intimacy with prisoner. What I did for her was out of pure charity.
Prisoner's statement to the Lord Mayor. "I beg you to read the broken heart of a repented girl. I am repenting very bitterly for my sin, which I did not see before, through my folly. I was younger than I am now, and I did not know what sin I was committing and what trouble I was causing poor Marks Goodman and everybody. Now the sin is on my conscience for the wrong I have done to him. Oh, please, sir, do, please, forgive me, as I have not the courage to speak. I am praying day and night to the Almighty God to forgive me. My parents turned me out of home because they were not satisfied with my earnings, so I went away with these intentions. When I returned home my mother told me to take a case up against Marks Goodman, thinking his people would give them (my parents) money to stop the case, and as they did not offer them any Detective Buxton told my parents not to take any money if his people offer to give my parents, which they did not, and at Great Marlborough Street Police Court Detective Buxton told me to explain to my parents that we
win the case, and after it is finished he will give my parents £10. I don't know whether he did give it to them or not. My parents are now in Montreal, Canada. My parents took the case up with the intention of getting money out of his people. I beg you once more to please forgive me. P. s.—I did not run away from the home I went to. I stayed there till I was 16 years of age, and then I came home to my parents. Mother told the Jewish ladies that she is a poor woman, and that my father is away in America, and that I am beyond her control, so that is why I was put in a home till I was 16 years old, where I stayed my time. (This is the truth.) I am truly repenting.—Polly Davis. May Heaven forgive me for what I have done."
(Tuesday, June 2.)
Mr. Fulton submitted that, after what had passed yesterday, the Jury ought to be placed in full possession of Gershon Goodman's character.
Mr. Justice Grantham said that the position was a difficult one, as the man had not been called by the prosecution but by himself, in consequence of what Abraham had said.
After discussion, Mr. Purcell agreed to recall Gershon Goodman as a witness for the prosecution in the ordinary way, so that he could be cross-examined as to character.
GERSHON GOODMAN , recalled. I first met Polly Davis with a man named Joe Lyons about two months ago. The man is outside the Court. I met her outside the "Tower" Tavern. I saw her before that, about a week, I think, with another man, in Commercial Street at about a quarter to 12. The fellow with her said that I was Marks's brother, and she came to me and wanted to make a confession. I made an appointment with her for the next night at the "Princess. Alice," but she did not turn up. I waited for her with Mr. Hazelwood, the solicitor, who was struck off the rolls. When I saw her a weak afterwards I insulted her and told her to get away. She confessed again in front of Joe Lyons and the other witnesses that Inspector Pentin has interviewed. There was Harry Clements, Solosky, and Muskovitch. I have been convicted seven years back, when I had no sense, like this girl here. I got three years' penal servitude. I had another conviction four years before that, when I got 18 months' hard labour. In 1895 I got 10 months, when I was a mere boy.
Cross-examined. In the 18 months' conviction I had my life sworn away, and the policeman was charged afterwards for stealing. I got all my time through associating with criminals, and they could never fetch anything home to me. When I saw prisoner outside the public-house, Solosky and Clements were there, and the Inspector interviewed them. There were about eight or nine people altogether. Some of them would not tell the Inspector anything. Clements did
not tell the whole truth; he was afraid of being dragged into it. I could find Mr. Hazelwood in a public-house in Shoreditch. I believe he it working for a counsel and gets his advice from him, and this counsel uses that very public-house. I suppose Mr. Hazelwood was going to take me to this counsel. I do not know where Hazelwood lives—somewhere in Finsbury Park. As to my having threatened prisoner that Marks would half kill her when he came out, you ought to know better. Would I say that? That girl is ready to swear another man's life away. I think, with the experience I have had, I ought to know better. I did not see prisoner after the second meeting at the "Tower" tavern, until here. I live with my brothers in Duke Street. I know that my brother saw her and I cautioned him to be very careful; that there was a trap set. He said, "You leave me alone; I will see there is no trap set." I could not tell you whether Solly constantly saw prisoner. I keep a tailor's shop and me travelling all day. I can call you 20 people that she has confessed to; they cannot all be telling lies. I never heard of Mr. Martin, a solicitor.
Re-examined. I certainly did not threaten the girl, nor offer her a reward if she made a confession. I have had a tailor's shop for about six months. I do not think Joe Lyons is here to-day; he was told yesterday he would not be wanted as the prosecution was closed.
POLLY DAVIS (prisoner on oath). My name has been Polly Davis since I was a little baby. My father's name was Abraham Hildovitch Davis; he twisted it round each time. I was three when I came to this country. I was living during the last few months at 9, Newcastle Street, as an unfortunate; that is after I was a servant at 22, Settles Street. I first met Gersbon Goodman between February and March, on a Sunday night. I was walking with some, chap, and Gershon looked at me very hard and turned back, saying, "Here, I have just recognised you. Aren't you the girl who has given my brother two years?" I said, "Yes, I am." Then he said, "Look here, my brother will half murder you when he comes out, and if he does not we will send a strange gang of men and boys and swear that Marks was somewhere else; and they will lay me down senseless with a lump of iron in my head in some dark, quiet street." Then I told him my father and mother were not in London, and that I had suffered just as much as his brother; in fact, more, and if he was any sort of man he would let me alone. Then he told me I should go with him to a solicitor; he would make an appointment, and I should say that Marks was innocent and that I swore falsely against him. He made me promise to turn up at "Dirty Dick's" in Bishopsgate Street. I told him I was in service, but I was not at the time. I did not turn up, but saw him next about a week or two weeks afterwards. I saw him standing outside a public-house, and he caught hold of me as I was passing, saying,
"Why didn't you turn up?" I said that I could not; I forgot all about it; so he says to me, "Will you turn up to-morrow if I make an appointment?" I said I could not, but I would turn up on Monday. He said "Very well." I did not go on the Monday. I did not see him again. (Gershon was called into Court, and identified.) When I saw him the second time I asked him to put the address down where I was to meet him, so he put it down, and I also asked him for his name and address. He told me he lived somewhere about Stratford. I next saw Solly, although I had seen him before in February, but he never interfered with me. I used to meet him nearly every night. He said, "You are the girl who gave my brother two years," and he wanted to hit me, but thought better of it. I saw Abraham about the end of April or beginning of May. I was with Solly, who took me for a walk. He had asked me for my address the night before, but I gave a false one. We went down Wentworth Street, near Middlesex Street, when suddenly this Abraham came up. I did not know him, but he was pointed out by Solly. We had passed him about a week before, and Solly said then: "If you were to get off with this man you would be all right; he is very rich." On this occasion Abraham said to Solly, "Hullo, where are you going to?" Solly said, "We are going for a stroll round." Then he introduced me to his brother as a friend of his. He did not tell me he was his brother. Then we spoke together, and he asked me to have coffee at the stall, but I would not. Then Solly left us, and as we were going along I said to Abraham, "You do look familiar, like Gershon Goodman. Your chin is turned up and your nose is round and the bone is broken." "Yes," he said, "that is from boxing." I thought to myself, hullo, something is coming out. He went on, "My mother must have a large family if you think that I am Gershon's brother, considering I came from the States and he is a Cockney." I took him home, and when we got upstairs he said, "You mentioned that I looked like Gershon Goodman's brother. Well, if you want to know, I am Dick Goodman; you ask anybody for me and they will tell you who I am." I answered, "You see I am not a bit frightened knowing who you are now." Then he said that if I wanted to do Marks a good turn I should meet him to-morrow and go to a solicitor and say my evidence was false, a pack of lies. I said, "Very well, I will meet you." I was frightened, he knowing where I lived, so I gave way. He said that I need not be frightened as he would take care of me. I said that I should get charged with perjury; he said, "No, you won't; I will see to that." I was to meet him at "Dirty Dick's," at 1.30, I think, next day. He took me into a public-house called the "Woodin Shades," and there was an old gentleman there, and a little ragged one, who gave me some ginger-beer and something to eat. After that we went to a solicitor; I do not know the street; somewhere up Shoreditch way. The other two men came with us. The ragged gentleman stayed outside. Abraham spoke the most part, and I said yes, but what he said was not true. Then we left and had another drink in the same street, and Abraham gave me some money and left me. About a week before that I went to his sister's
house. After that he came every day to my house. Some days my landlady said I was not in as she did not want to be bothered with him. Abraham used to give me half a crown when he came because I said I was hungry. I went to his sister's house about a week after the visit to the solicitor, and when I got there he said I was to write a letter. There was no one else in the room, but every now and then hit sister would come up, and there was this friend Green, or something. She looked in, but was not inside the door. His brother-in-law came up when I had nearly finished the letter, and he read it. Abraham stayed with me nearly all the time, and told me every word to put down. When I had finished he told me to make a copy of it. I left the house first, and he told me to wait for him down the stairs. I posted the letter. I told him I was hungry, and he gave me 2s. or 3s.; then I left him. He called on me that same afternoon, and said it would be all right, that if anybody called for me I should go with them. He said it might be an officer or detective. I said that I would get charged with perjury. He said, "No, you won't, everybody will say you are a good girl, and think good of you, and respect you." He said Marks would come out and get money from some Home Secretary or Government. He told me the most they would give me would be three months, and he would take care of me and make it all right when I came out. He came every day then, and at night time I used to see him about 12 o'clock at the fruit stall. He told me one day that I was going to the Mansion House, and he would send his brother for me, and get Nellie Last and Freeman. He said that would be called "surrendered," and it would be good for me. Solly came for me next day, and I went with him. When we got to the Mansion House we waited a long time, then I saw Abraham, and went inside. Abraham told me that if any gentleman called me I was to go with him; he might want me to go for a walk with him. I did not know I was going to a police station; then the detective told me he had a warrant for me, and I went with him to Bridewell. In the detective's presence Abraham gave me 2s. He said he would send me food and papers, and he has done so. He told me that I was to say just the same as I had done in the letter, and told me not to ask any questions, but to plead guilty, and I was to say nothing. He said he would come to see me in prison, but he never did. He sent a friend who gave his name as Davis, but it was not. That was last Friday. On the 19th I wrote to prisoner because I was afraid and wanted to keep my promise. I wrote the statement in prison and handed it to the magistrate. I was sent to a home when I was 13. I am now 18 and about two or three months. It is not true that I was on the streets before I went to the home. After that I stayed at home for a few months and we moved to Lexington Street. I was then at work, and I went later on to 31, Old Compton Street, where I worked up to the time I met Marks Goodman. The evidence which I gave at Goodman's trial, which has been read, is true. He took me to Brushfield Street on November 3, and took money on most occasions. My father is a carpenter and my mother a dressmaker; they are respectable people. I was at Brushfield Street for about three weeks. Marks introduced me to
Nellie Last and she introduced me to Frank Wild, who said he would look for a room for me, and took me to Paris Street. I was there just a week. What Mrs. Peroni says is true. I went to Whitfield Street, but never slept one night there. Then I went to King's Cross Road with Nellie Last, and lived with her for two or three weeks, till I was arrested and fined 7s. My father was cross with me and would not pay the fine, so I went to prison. When I came out I went to King's Cross Road for my clothes, but they were not there, and I communicated with the police; then the whole story came out. After January, 1907, I was at home about a month. Some lady wanted me to go to a missionary home, and I would not go. My mother does not want me to be a missionary. They sent me to a convalescent home, where I was for five or six months. My mother came to see me and wanted me back. She told me they were going away, but they did not know whether they should go till I was better. I said, "Go away before, and send me money for a ticket and I will come." She said, "All right." Then she went away with my father. I was in the workhouse about four months; then I worked in the West scrubbing floors, but could not get enough money or sleep, so I went to the East as servant at 22, Settles Street. Then I left, and went to work at a flour merchant's, but it was too hard. I only got 3d. for a whole day's work cleaning four rooms, so I would not stay there. I was going to look for another place, but I thought as I had done this other kind of life before, and this was such hard work, I would do the other again.
Cross-examined. I saw Mr. Margetts at Marlborough Street and heard him tell the magistrate that I had made a confession. He told me before that that I was likely to be severely punished. I said, "I expect I deserve it." That is what Abraham Goodman told me to say. I did not hear Inspector Pentin say when, he saw me at the Mansion House that he was a police officer; he did afterwards. When I said, in reply to the charge, "I do not know about wilful at all," I meant that I did not know what "wilful" meant. Nobody visited me in Holloway between my first and second appearances at the Mansion House, and I received no letters. The letter I wrote to the Lord Mayor is not the truth, but I wrote it because every time they saw me they kept telling me that I had done such a wrong, and I thought it was such a great sin. I saw no one at Holloway except the Jewish Rabbi, and he never told me anything; he only said he was sorry, and asked where my father and mother were. When I told my landlady about Marks Goodman getting two years for taking me away from my father and mother, she said, "Serves him right; all that kind of men ought to be done away with." I told her I was sorry, because these Goodmans kept following me wherever I went, and telling me I had done such a great wrong. I began to believe I had, but I did not begin to believe it was true that Marks had not put me on the streets. I saw his brothers dressed up so nice that they looked as if they came from respectable people. I was not praying day and night to be forgiven, as I say in the latter. I prayed to God, but not for that sin. I did want the Lord Mayor to forgive me. I thought it was a sin as they brought this case against me.
The part about not running away from the home and staying there till 16 is true. I think Mr. Margetts said that I ran away from home. I thought I had done a great wrong in telling the truth about Marks Goodman. "May heaven forgive me for what I have done," meant for writing that letter. Before I went with Marks Goodman I was respectable. I went on the streets because Marks told me to go out and earn something, and that I could get money easy. I was frightened to go back to my parents. My mother gave my photo to the police, and said that I had run away. I met a little girl who told me my father and mother were going up and down the Strand, and that my father would kill me with a knife, and all that. I could not agree with my mother always, because some weeks I only earned half a week's money. She would tell me to do work when I got home which I did not want to do. My parents were told that I walked in the Strand, but I never met them. My father has been married twice, and I do not know whether my mother is really my mother or not; I have heard different tales from her own lips. My father was not unkind to me, nor my mother; she meant it for the best Marks Goodman used to come to see me every day at Brushfield Street. I left him because he quarrelled with me, I was still frightened to go back to my parents. I never said anything to a man called Harry Clements about "what I had done for Marksy." I do not know who Clements is. I only mentioned the matter to the brothers. What Mr. Pentin says Solosky and Clements said about me was told them by Gershon, not by me. When I saw Marks at the Mansion House I did not go down on my knees. He called me, and when I saw him I burst out crying, thinking I would keep my promise as in the letter, and Abraham told me when I saw Marks to throw a kiss to him and ask him to forgive me. I never thought of that about throwing the kiss till now. When I said I had suffered as much as Marks, I meant that I was ill; I became a mother. I got somehow to know that I should be convicted for writing that letter. I heard that I might be sent back to Warsaw as an undesirable alien, but I have no friends there. I heard that on the day I was arrested. It did not frighten me. I used to speak Russian, Polish, and German; I speak Yiddish.
Mr. Justice Grantham, in his summing-up, said it was evident that none of the witnesses in this case could be relied on, and therefore he did not think it would be possible to convict the prisoner.
Verdict, Not guilty.
The prisoner asked for protection from the people on the other side.
Mr. Justice Grantham said that if any of the Goodman family or their friends were guilty of any oppression or threat towards prisoner they would be very carefully looked after.
Detective-sergeant BUXTON went into the box to say that the statement about his having promised prisoner's parents £10 for her to give evidence against Goodman at his trial was not true.
BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.
(Monday, June 1.)
BUTCHER, Leopold Ernest ; unlawfully selling certain goods, to wit, one box of cigars, to which a false trade description had been given; unlawfully selling certain other goods, to wit, another box of cigars, to which a false trade description had been given.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Symmons prosecuted; Mr. Hume Williams, K.C., and Mr. St. John Morrow defended.
ARTHUR WILLIAM TEE , 33, Dangerfield Road, Denmark Hill, clerk, On May 1, 1908, I went to prisoner's shop, 79, Gracechurch Street, and bought three cigars at 6d. each, one called De Creanzo, one Alegato, and one Crepusculo. I asked for "6d. cigars." About an hour afterwards I went again, saw the prisoner, and said, "I wish to take two boxes of 25 each one of Flor de Creanzo and one of Flor de Alegato," for which I paid 10s. each box, and received the boxes produced.
Cross-examined. I am a clerk to Beddome and Baker, tobacconists. I was sent to buy these cigars in order to make evidence for this prosecution. I had seen Mr. Fordham before going. When I first went to the shop I asked to see samples of 6d. cigars. Prisoner showed me the samples in boxes, from which I chose three cigars. I then bought the two boxes on instructions, and took them to Fordham. Prisoner did not say they were Havana cigars. I asked him if he recommended the tobacco, and he said that it was matured tobacco in perfect condition for smoking. I asked that from my own idea. Re-examined. Prisoner said nothing whatever as to their origin—simply handed me the boxes, which I paid for.
FRANCIS HERBERT LOVELAND , clerk to Mckenna and Co., 30, Basinghall Street, solicitors. On February 21 I went to prisoner's shop, 79, Gracechurch Street, and bought box of cigars produced. (Evidence was proposed to be given by this witness of a warning given. Mr. Hume Williams objected: Held, not admissible, as not proof of the offence charged.)
ALFRED FORDHAM . I am secretary of the Havana Cigar Protection Association, consisting of Havana cigar manufacturers and their importing agents in Great Britain. I learned of the purchase by the last witness, and on March 27 I wrote to prisoner drawing prisoner's attention to the fact that he was exhibiting in his window certain boxes of cigars, and, on behalf of my association, requested him to immediately remove those boxes from his window. He replied, "I am not exhibiting boxes of cigars in my window, but was showing only three empty boxes which were not offered for sale. At your request I immediately removed them from my window in hopes that no further difficulty will arise." For some months before and after that letter proceedings had been taken against various cigar retailers in
London in respect to boxes of cigars, reports of which had been published in the trade papers. They were in respect of boxes on which the word "Havana" both did and did not appear.
Cross-examined. The first series of prosecutions was started by the Trade Mark Owners' Association, of which I am also secretary. That association decided not to continue those prosecutions—it consisted very largely of members of the tobacco trade, both of the Imperial Company and others. The Trade Mark Association has a large membership in connection with other trades; it conducted two prosecutions, and considered that it had sufficiently demonstrated its position, and desired the Havana merchants to look after themselves. I was instrumental in forming the Havana Cigar Protection Association, and am its secretary. Box of cigars produced to me bears the name of Lambert and Butler, a very well-known English firm, a branch of the Imperial Tobacco Company, and a member of the Trade Mark Owners' Protection Association, which conducted the earlier prosecutions. It bears the words "La Flor de Hermanos," with something resembling the arms of Spain, a pink label similar to the blue label on the prisoner's box, and the word "garantizado," which may mean "guaranteed." It has other Spanish words which are sometimes applied to Havana cigars—I do not know if they are also applied to English cigars. My association has not taken proceedings against the firm issuing that box. I did not ask prisoner the name of complain of. We have proceeded against several big firms of manufacturer—we could only proceed against the retailer. I did not try and get any proof. We were aware that the manufacturers would defend these cases. There are many British cigars sold under Spanish size marks and names; also the get-up of the box similar to the boxes the subject of this prosecution—that is exactly what we complain of. We have proceeded against several big firms of manufacturers, including Mr. Raphael, of the Havana Cigar Company. You are not able to buy from a manufacturer; therefore it is necessary to take proceedings against the retailer in the first instance. On the Alegato box I see "A. E. and Co."—that conveys nothing to me. The Spanish language has been used in connection with English cigars before the passing of the Merchandise Marks Act, 1887. We have had the cigars analysed—another witness will give the figures.
Re-examined. In connection with the Creanzo box, Partridge and Sons registered the trade mark and label of "El Creanzo" on August 20, 1906. The two associations of which I am secretary are entirely unconnected. The Havana Association have sent out a general warning to everyone in the trade, including Partridge. There are about 15 members of the Havana Association.
LEONARD WILLIAM BEDDOME , of Beddome and Baker, 147, Leadenhall Street, cigar importers and merchants. I have had 30 years' experience. What is understood by an "Havana cigar" is a cigar made of tobacco grown in Cuba and manufactured in Havana or its environs. Such cigars are imported in boxes like those produced, labelled with distinctive devices, a band on each cigar, and, occasionally,
representations of medals or orders obtained by the trader; a lock label is put on the front; the colour or strength of the cigar is shown by the Spanish words "Colorado," "Colorado claro," "claro," "maduro"; a picture of the harbour of Havana, with castles, which are a part of the arms of Cuba, is often used; also a picture of a tobacco field; enclosed is a printed leaflet in three languages cautioning against imitations. All these features occur on the Creanzo box. I never knew a true Havana cigar to be made of a blend of the products of different countries. A band containing the words, "Flor de Cuba" is put on each cigar in the true Havana, similar in appearance to that on the Creanzo. I have never heard of a firm of Havana cigar merchants of the name of "Creanzo y Cia." The Creanzo cigar is not wholly composed of Havana tobacco—the wrapper is not Havana leaf. Exhibit No. 2 (Alegato) has similarities with the Havana box of the same kind. The price charged (10s. for 25) might easily be the price of a Havana cigar—perhaps not quite so large.
Cross-examined. There are no cigars to my knowledge imported from Havana manufactured of tobacco imported into Cuba. I believe Havana tobacco is sent over here and cigars are made here of what are called Havana fillings, the outside leaf being Borneo or Indian tobacco. I have no doubt that for 30 or 40 years cigars have been made and sold here under designations similar to Exhibits 1 and 2, the subject of this prosecution. I strongly doubt that the Creanzo cigar contains 70 per cent. of Havana tobacco. I should be surprised to hear it proved. The purchaser would not be deceived by the similarity of the blue lock label if he had the benefit of my explanation. My opinion is that anybody in the habit of buying Havana cigars would take that blue label at a short distance off to be the guarantee label of Havana manufacture; I agree that nine out of 10 people would look closer at the box. I cannot say whether people for the last 30 or 40 years have been buying sixpenny British manufactured cigars from boxes with Spanish representations on them. There is no indication in Exhibits 1 and 2 of the cigars being sold under names of well-known Havana cigar manufacturers. I think a great many British cigars have for the last 30 or 40 years been sold with a description similar to the Creanzo and with fictitious names attached to them. Many cheap cigars are sold with a ring round each cigar. As a rule Cabinet cigars do not have bands because they are sold in bundles. A great many of the best brands do have rings If I had seen the Creanzo at a little distance I should have thought it was a Flor de Cuba, a genuine Havana. Probably Havana cigars originally came to this country without bands, but that was before my time. I do not know if bands were first used in connection with British manufactured cigars. "Flor de Rosebery" is a Spanish band which with my knowledge and sanction has been applied to British-made cigars.
Re-examined. I do not know any "Rosebery" in Cuba. From the appearance of the Creanzo and Alegato cigars I should say decidedly I should think it was an Havana cigar—that is, if seen at a distance, but if I took it in my hand probably it would be different.
PERCY HENRY LOUIS PHILLIPS , trading as Melbourne. Hart, and Co., 19, Basinghall Street, cigar importers. I have had 14 years' experience. I have examined Exhibits 1 and 2—neither are Havana cigars—the outside leaf is some Oriental tobacco. They do not smoke like Havana cigars. I have never known in the trade an Havana cigar to be made of tobaccos grown in different parts of the world. The Havana cigar is a cigar imported from Havana made of tobacco grown in Cuba. The general get-up of the Creanzo and Alegato cigars is similar to the Havana get-up—the guarantee label, the band, the picture of Cuba, etc. I have never heard of the firm of Creanzo y Cia until this case. The importation of tobacco into Cuba is practically prohibited owing to the duty, which is £5 a pound.
Cross-examined. I do not known that, in fact, the import of tobacco into Cuba from the United States was in 1903-4 more than 58, 000 lb., in 1904-5 more than 91, 000 lb., and in 1905-6 more than 69, 000 lb. I do not know that since the war there has been a preferential duty in favour of the United States—I made inquiries and was informed the tariff was £5 a lb. Cuban tobacco is only worth 15s. a lb., so that a duty of £5 it prohibitive. I have not dissected these cigars. I am a Havana cigar importer and a member of the association conducting this prosecution. I know they are not Havana cigars, and I do not think it a point of interest to dissect them. If thev contain 70 per cent. of Havana tobacco I do not think it reasonable that a Spanish description should be applied to them. There are a good many cheap cigars about with gold bands on them and Spanish flag and pictures all over the box. I think the purchaser pays attention to the box. I think that the general get up would lead a person of average intelligence to think that these cigars (Exhibits 1 and 2) came from Havana.
Re-examined. There is nothing to indicate the cigars are made in England. I believe the Havana labels are produced in Germany and told by he German traveller to the British manufacturer, who puts them on to his British cigars to obtain more money than their intrinsic value. The Havana cigar in the trade is four or five times the price of the British. (To the Judge.) Even good British cigars made in great part of Havana tobacco could be bought at a third of the price of Havana. A Havana cigar of the size of the Creanzo would cost about 1s. retail—ever so much more than the best English make. It is a different trade altogether. (To the jury.) I know what "A. E. and Co." means—it is the name of an English seller. The name is not generally put on Havana cigars in that way—it is printed, right across as a rule. (To Mr. Hume Williams.) To an ordinary purchaser that might mean a cheap Havana cigar—a Havana cigar of that size for 6d. would be very cheap. Having partially smoked one of each of these cigars, I do not think a man of ordinary intelligence knowing anything about cigars would think he was getting a Havana-made cigar of that quality for 6d.
have been to Cuba 19 times. The castle on the defendant's cigar box is a representation of the Morro at the Eastern entrance of Havana Harbour. I have never heard of the firm of Creanzo and Company. The Creanzo box looks very much as if it had been sent over from Havana containing cigars—at the first look. The figure with the mantilla is distinctly Spanish; the Morro castle is a suggestion of Havana—it is not a photographic representation; the centre label, with the Spanish arms, is similar in appearance to a well-known brand of Havana cigars called "Punch"; the edging round the box carries out the same idea, representing medals such as a great many Havana importers have; the guarantee label is very similar to that used by a great many Havana manufacturers, with the supposed firm's signature across it; the flap label also would tend to deceive smokers; it represents a view, which is very commonly employed by Havana manufacturers, of a plantation, and is almost exactly the view in the "Flor de Lopes"; it is a very common form of label, with palm trees, which they have in Cuba; I have never seen a scene like that in England; the band is very similar to that of "Flor de Cuba"—practically indistinguishable; the Spanish arms and the red ground colour is like the band frequently employed by Havana makers. The Alegato box is very much like a box that comes from Havana; this bluish coloured label is more or less similar to a label employed by the Union of Manufacturers in Havana; the edging is also that used by Havana manufacturers; the label inside and the map of Cuba are frequently used on Havana cigars. I tried to smoke one from each of the boxes; they are extremely poor cigars. An Havana cigar is a cigar which is made in Havana of Cuban tobacco that is entirely of Cuban growth; the beat come from the western district of Cuba; there are different grades of Cuban leaf, some more valuable than others. It is practically impossible for cigars to be made in Cuba of imported tobacco, as the duty is so heavy. In former years it was actually prohibited to import leaf from other countries, but latterly a practically prohibitive tax has been put on imported tobacco, with the result that, however cheap it might be, with the addition of the duty it would come out higher in price than very fine quality actually grown in the island.
Cross-examined. I should say these cigars contain a very small proportion of Cuban tobacco—I should say not 70 per cent. I am a member of the association conducting and paying the costs of this prosecution. For a great number of years British-made cigars containing Cuban tobacco have been sold in boxes got up very much as these are—is is only the last two or three years they have gone as for as they have gone in these. I should say it has not been done for 40 years, and for this reason, that 40 years ago Havana cigars were not so expensive. With regard to the picture of the plantation, although three-parts of the tobacco in the cigar is grown in that plantation it would not be a Havana cigar. I am not surprised to hear that the label has been used since 1887 by a firm of British cigar manufacturers. Where similar representations have been used I consider that a fraud has been done. I could not say if it is the fact.
I could not say if medals have been used on cigar boxes by people who have no medals—I have not any, and do not use them, as far as I remember. I use labels, including representations of medals, because I bought a brand of cigars from people who used them, and they were imbedded in their Libel. It is commonly used by Havana merchants because they commonly have won medals. If the Creanzo were a very fine cigar of a reputable mark it would be a 1s. cigar retail; we have real imported Havana cigars of very nearly this size which we sell at 37s. a hundred, and which a retailer could sell at 6d. Looking at box of British-made cigars produced by defendant, with similar get-up to Exhibits 1 and 2. bearing the name of a very reputable firm, that may have been on the market 20 years. I think the manufacturer of that box ought to have been prosecuted long ago. I do not know if that class of get-up has been used for 30 years—if it is so, it is time it was stopped. (To the Judge.) I think it is what the Act is intended to stop. I say the get-up of Exhibits 1 and 2 is calculated to create the impression that the cigar emanates from Havana, and an unscrupulous dealer would take advantage of it
(Tuesday, June 2.)
ROBERT REGINALD ARKELL , 10, Long Lane, wholesale tobacconist I have 46 years' experience, 25 years in the wholesale trade, and am familiar with all brands of cigars, Havana imported, Havana cigar made in England, and Continental cigars, and I deal largely in all three classes. For many years past cigars not made in Havana have been sold in boxes got up like the Creanzo; I have been selling them in a similar get up for 35 years; there are hundreds of them of similar get-up all over the country—boxes of British-made cigar with similar brands, marks, pictures, and all the rest of it—Spanish words, pictures of tobacco fields, ladies with mantillas, and maps or pictures purporting to represent the Isle of Cuba; it is a common description of ordinary British cigars, and has been so ever since they were invented. I have been in the business for 46 years, and when I first came into it there were no boxes at all, either in Havana goods or British-made goods; after a time these boxes began to come about, they were rude and rough at first, and they gradually have got more gold labels upon them and that sort of thing. equally in Havana and British. Havana cigars were originally sold in cedar cases holding 500, 600, or 800. I have bought them with as many as 1, 400 in a box; they had no ring or band at all. Labels of this class have been made in Germany and have been sent to Havana, over here, to Holland, Belgium, and everywhere where cigars are made; the get-up gradually grew. That also applies to the box and the varnish—10 or 15 years ago there were no varnished boxes, they were all plain—and also to the coloured labels round the side. A cigar of the size of the Creanzo, imported from Havana, would fetch 1s. or 1s. 6d.; the Alegato would fetch a little less. Anyone used to buying 6d. cigars would know that a great big thing like this
would not be an Havana cigar; nobody could be deceived into thinking it was a Havana. Until this series of prosecutions began in last December or January, I never heard any complaints made with reference to the Spanish get-up of such cigars.
Cross-examined. I have seen this practice grow and have grown up in it. Until 1887 any words were used; after that we had notice from the Chamber of Commerce that we were to do away with the word "Havana"; beyond that no restriction was placed upon us whatever. We had a fight over a German cigar that was called an Havana; those cigars as well as Havana cigars were sold by weight. The German cigar was called an "Havana" on the Continent. The meaning of the word "Havana," as I understand, in England was a cigar made in that particular shape; up to that time cigars were made cut off at both ends and were called cheroots; they came mostly from Manila. Germans called their cigars Havanas because that particular shape originated in Havana. Havana was the first maker of cigars, and so that word was used all over the Continent, England, and all over the world. I do not know whether it was to get a better price, but they called everything Havana that was that shape. Nothing was imported into this country as "Havana cigars" except what came from Havana—they were imported as German cigars with the name of "Havana." In those days you could pass the Customs with those names, you cannot now; the boxes have been marked "Made in Germany" or "Belgium" since the Act. Before the Act there was no restriction. Since the Act cigars from the Continent are marked with the country of origin—that is, of manufacture. Before the Act, wherever they were made they might be called Havana cigars and sold in England by retail as Havana cigars; but I never knew a case where they were in all my experience—some rogue might do that sort of thing. After the Act of 1887 the word "Havana" was only to be used in connection with cigars actually produced in Havana. I presume such cigars would be made only of Cuban tobacco, but I do not know that they would be, you can buy other tobaccos in Cuba besides Cuban; any quantity of Mexican tobacco is sent in there. I have not been to Cuba, but I know the tobacco, and I have found Mexican tobacco inside cigars which have come from Havana and which I have bought as Havana cigars in bond. We buy them with the stereotyped and well-known Havana marks, numbers, names, etc., and we accept that. In the end of the 60's I should say boxes were first used, and it began with Havana cigars made in Cuba being imported in boxes of 50; subsequently the cigars were laid out in layers instead of bundles; the first I saw in that way was in 1867; the bands came later. A number of Cuban firms have each their own mark and manner of dressing up their boxes and their medals appear on the boxes; a lock label with the signature of the firm is often used; the leaflet in two or three languages is not usual—it is only done by two or three out of 200. Flor de Cuba and J. S. Murias have it—there may be some others. Looking at the six or seven labels handed me, two or three of these are the same people's goods—they are old firms. The leaflet has been in use for about 10 years or more. Occasionally there is a similar
notice in different languages inside the flap. The Spanish Royal Arms have been used to embellish cigar boxes all over the world. At first they were very rude, poorly printed, and not coloured, or they were burnt into the boxes. I cannot say if that began with Havans cigars, but I recollect coats-of-arms burnt into boxes of Havanas that I received. Some Havana firms adopted English names: "Punch" is a well-known brand; "High Life" another. "Henry Clay" was the first English name, but it was first used in America; then there was "New Town" and two or three others. A pink or blue guarantee label has been in use 10 or 15 years. I do not know that the Union of Manufacturers have now adopted the blue label. I thought a particular man was running a label of a particular colour. Various Spanish words are used to indicate colour, quality, size, and shape. "Flor fina" simply means first quality. British cigars are rolled much in the same way as Havana cigars. In the true Havana the inside of the cigar is bound round by the outer leaf, while the British has a bundle inside which is bound round by a leaf, and then there is an outer binding leaf; it has two wrappers, one known as the bunch and the other as the wrapper. I do not know when the manufacture of cigars in England began. When I came into the trade there were quantities of British cigars; they were not boxed. The boxing of Havana and British commenced about the same time, in the same sort of rough boxes, without any names or anything on them, with a little blue binding on the boxes. I used to put either Havana or British cigars in them. They originated about the same time—I recollect getting British cigars and imported Havana cigars in boxes both about the same time—that was about 1865 to 1868. The first idea of putting cigars in boxes originated in America; they were boxed for America, and ultimately boxed over here and boxed all over the world; it possibly began in connection with Havana cigars. I should say they were boxed in Havana for America and for the English trade, and after that the English makers adopted boxes and sold their British-made cigars in them. I do not know any specified mark or portion of the get-up of a Havana cigar that did not originate in Havana—it is a long time to go back to. I do not think it is right to say that as each kind of label or design was adopted in Havana it came to be imitated by British cigar makers—the labels are made in Germany and always have been, as far as I know, and they are sent to Havana, Holland, Belgium, all over the world where cigars are made; and you find in every country a similar idea, a similar get-up. They are certainly not imitated by the English manufacturer. I have never seen such a thing as a direct imitation of an Havans label put on a British box. With regard to the tri-lingual leaflet I have never bought a box of cigars made in England with that on—I have never seen that kind of thing in a British box. I could not from my recollection mention one English manufacturer who adopted the lock label with the signature of the firm before it was adopted in Havans; the same with regard to the representations of medals on the boxes, the map of the Isle of Cuba, and the blue guarantee label—out of the thousands of these things one cannot recollect what is on every box—
I have forgotten it—you cannot recollect everything that comes out. Exhibit 10 is a box of British-manufactured cigars by Lambert and Butler. The word "Garantisado" in Spanish is used for the simple reason that Spanish words are used with regard to all the tobacco trade. Spanish words are used on every box of cigars I have ever seen with that class of label. Holding it at some distance off I could not tell the difference from the Havana guarantee label. This is the worst specimen I ever saw. Looking at the Alegato box I can distinguish it—that is a fair label; that is only the British or German get-up. One does not take much notice of these labels. I do not know of any cigars sold in England without a word of Spanish connected with them. The one produced to me with "Darvel Bay" on it I should say is a British cigar—I know the brand—they are made of Borneo tobacco, and there is a representation of Darvel Bay in Borneo, where the tobacco comes from. In the Creanzo and Alegato the fillings are mixtures of Havana, Sumatra, and Java, and anything that will burn—the outside is Borneo tobacco. Any fairly good tobacco is used for filling such cigars as these; that is what we know as a mixed filler—that is the ordinary meaning of the word. I am not a practical maker—I could not tell you what this (Creanzo) is wrapped in. The leaf outside is Borneo. I cannot say what the cigar is made of. I have not opened one of the Creanzo or Alegato cigars. There is nothing on the boxes to indicate that it is a mixture or that it is or is not a Havana-made cigar. The absence of the word "Havana" or any word of origin shows that it is a British-made cigar. There is no indication of any sort or kind of where the cigar is made or what it is made of. Boxes of Continental, British, or foreign cigars all resemble boxes of Havana cigars. A man who knows nothing at all about it could not tell the difference. This box is marked "A. E. and Co."—anybody who knows the trade knows what it means. Creanzo and Co. may be a fictitious name, or it may be a play upon a man's own name—there are a multitude of names used that do not mean anything. "Creanzo y Cia" indicates the mark that is used. Many Havana manufacturers put their signature in that form. Using a fancy name is a system which has grown into the trade and you cannot move it.
Re-examined. (Certificate of registration of the name El Creanzo by Partridge and Sons put in.) It is open to anyone to see at the Patent Office who the name belongs to. My evidence was directed to the use of Spanish words and get up for 35 years. The fact of that shape of cigar coming from Havana caused it to be known as a Havana shape cigar. Cigars were called "Manila cheroots" and "Havana cigars." Then when the Act of 1887 was passed a warning was sent to the trade not to use the word "Havana" on a British-made cigar—that warning has been obeyed as far as I know. When that warning was sent out the Spanish language, pictures of Cuba, names of supposititious Spanish firms, and representations of plantations and Spanish ladies were all used in connection with British-made cigars. I have found Mexican tobacco in imported Havana cigars. Spanish Arms have been used on British-made cigars ever
since labels were used—from 1867 or 1868; that applies also to Spanish words indicating size or colour—that has grown up from the 70's; "Flor fina" is of the same date. The labels are nearly all made in Germany, and were supplied to Havana and England simultaneously; it has always been so. Boxing and labelling began about the same time in England and Havana—in 1867 or 1868—the two countries have gone step by step together. The Marcella cigar is a British cigar largely sold at 14s. 3d. a hundred, or five a shilling retail, manufactured by Lambert and Butler, a firm of high standing. That has the name of a Spanish firm and all the Spanish indications; it has been 20 to 25 years on the market with this get-up. "Flor de San Juan" is a similar British cigar. (To the Jury.) If the Creanzo cigars were sold as British cigars in the name of a firm of good repute I think they would sell as well. There is no object gained by the get-up. If marked as made by an English maker with none of this Spanish get-up they would sell as readily and for as good a price. The Alegato is not so good a cigar and would not fetch the same money.
JAMES NEVIN , manager to Dexter and Sons, Nottingham, tobacco manufacturers. I have had 13 years' experience in the manufacturing trade, and am acquainted with the leading brands of cigars made both in Havana and England. My firm is one of the largest manufacturers in the country, if not the largest—outside the Imperial Tobacco Company. I have seen the Exhibits 1 and 2. No two firms of manufacturers get up the boxes exactly the same—it is impossible. All the time I have been in the trade there has been practically a very similar general get-up, both in England and on the Continent ordinary cedar boxes, the end label, the label under the lid, and so on, like these. I have hardly ever seen a box of British cigars without "Flor fina" on it—the box-makers put it on without instructions. The words "Colorado," "Colorado Claro," etc., are indications of colour or strength, and are put on to British or foreign cigars generally. The view of the plantation is certainly common, and the Mexican lady. The map of Cuba is used to a certain extent—I cannot say that it is absolutely common. It is not unusual for British manufacturers to use it. The use of the word "Flor de" as in "Flor de Creanzo" is common—there are a number of such marks on the register. The tri-lingual leaflet is used by several well-known firms. I do not see anything that is misleading in the tri-lingual inset headed "Creanzo Y Cia." It is a mere advertisement. If read, it states what is the fact. Taking the blue hinge label and the buff, to the best of my memory, some time after the Cuban war the Havana manufacturers used a bluish label. At that time English manufacturers had a label of a similar shape in a number of colours. I have seen them in buff, blue, and various other colours, put sometimes on the back and sometimes on the front. It was used by British manufacturers at the time of the Cuban war and has been continued since. I have seen the Havana label in a rather paler buff colour. I see nothing in it which would lead to the supposition that the cigars were made in Havana, either on
close examination or looked at at a distance. I have never seen the Havana label put on in a similar place—they usually wrap them round the box in the form of a lock label. Speaking generally, the get-up of Exhibits 1 and 2 is such as has obtained in England for a long time. I have smoked several "Creanzo" cigars, and cut up one or two of them. I have my scales here and am prepared to dissect and give the contents of those cigars now. Dissecting cigars is part of my regular duty. (Witness cut up and weighed a cigar.) I have here the wrapper or cover, the bunch wrapper, and the bunch. The wrapper is Sumatra tobacco, which is practically the same quality as Borneo. They are similar tobaccos grown in different parts of the world. The "bunch" wrapper is American seed tobacco, a tobacco grown in the United States from seed, and sometimes called Havana seed. The bunch or filler is undoubtedly Havana tobacco. (To the Jury.) I took the first cigar out of the top row. The weights are 0.25 grammes of wrapper, 1.25 grammes of bunch wrapper, and 8 50 grammes of filler. That is, approximately, 4 per cent. of wrapper, 13 per cent. of bunch, and 85 per cent. of filler. The 85 per cent. is Havana tobacco. (The parts of a cigar were placed in separate envelopes and put in.)
RICHARD WILLIAM COPPOCK , of W. B. Coppock and Sons, Nottingham, cigar manufacturers. We deal also in cigars imported from Havana and Mexico—we have what it called a mixed parcel trade and are wholesale tobacconists. I have had 30 years' experience in the trade, 19 years as manufacturer. All my life I have known Spanish wording used on all classes of boxes of cigars—English, Continental, Mexican, and Havana. Such words as "Flor de" and "Fabrica de Tobacos" I have seen on many brands. Edgings of this description are used generally. I should not say edging of this description was used 25 years ago. The site of the box is general to the trade. "Colorado" means the colour. The general label 25 or 30 years ago was nothing like so elaborate as it is to-day. I believe that this style of printing originated in Germany and was followed by England and Havana. Until this series of prosecutions I have never heard of complaint being made of the get-up of such boxes as these. Pictures of plantations have become general during the last 20 years. I cannot remember when they were first used. Coloured labels have been used for 20 years, but they have grown more elaborate. In 1889 my firm purchased the business of underwoods, which had been sold to a firm named A. Edwards and Co. Underwoods were established half a century ago. I produce labels which we took over in 1889, which were used by Underwoods prior to 1880. I can swear that all of them have been in use for 19 years. ✗ produce certificate of membership of Messrs. Underwoods in the Havana Cigar Merchants' Association. Thirty years ago we bought Havana cigars in boxes of 100 each tied up in ribbons—no rings and very plain boxes indeed. There was a very plain white label inside. Boxes of English-made cigars were got up rather more elaborately, but nothing like as elaborately as to-day.
Cross-examined. Boxes from Havana 30 years ago were plain, and without any of these pictorial labels upon them. The Havana manufacturers
from time to time adopted various pictorial labels—I should say they adopted them after the Germans. I do not think the English imitated any Havana labels. I know what the guarantee label is—it was first pink and then blue. The Havana merchants started first the blue one and then the pink. The English manufacturers have adopted labels of similar design. It has become a custom of the trade. We use it because it makes the box look better; it is not for deceptive purposes. We did it for decorative purposes. I do not think ours have ever been quite the same as the Havana. These labels are brought round to you by travellers and they say, "So and so is using them, and you adopt them without any idea of fraud. I have never inquired whether the Havana cigar merchants have used them. The German traveller might tell one that the Havana cigar merchants have been recently using them I seem to have taken printed labels and used them after the Havana merchants have adopted them. I do not seek to justify it. I do not see much wrong in it—I do not see anything legally wrong—well, morally, I admit it—I am not laughing. I think it is wrong, perhaps, now, I cannot say why I would rather go back to Nottingham.
Re-examined. I adopted these labels eight to ten years ago. I do not think I have ever used the blue one at all. I am not quite sure that it is this pink label—it is nearer the pink than the blue. I have used it on two or three out of, perhaps, fifty brands. The Creanzo cigars are composed of a Borneo wrapper and an ordinary blended mixed filling of Havana. I could not tell you in what languages the labels are printed.
JAMES NEVIN , recalled. I have made experiments with the Alegato cigars. I have smoked one and dissected two. The first one I cut up weighed 3, 025 grammes, equivalent to 11/2 oz. I find 5.3 per cent. of fine Sumatra tobacca used as the outside wrapper; 20.6 per cent, of what I take to be American seed tobacco as the bunch wrapper and 63.3 per cent, of bunch. I should estimate that 40 per cent. of the cigar is composed of pure Havana tobacco. That is the Alegato. The Creanzo was 83 per cent. of Havana tobacco.
Cross-examined. The examination of the filler of the cigar is a very difficult thing. It is difficult to distinguish the tobaccos when there is a mixture. In the Creanzo cigar it is a pure Havana filler, showing no admixture that I can trace. Many tobaccos are like Havana tobacco, which are used as fillers. I have examined the Creanzo. I have smoked two or three cigars and have examined them after smoking and, in my opinion, the Creanzo cigar is filled with Havana tobacco of good quality. I take it the filler is all Havana tobacco, or tobacco resembling the Havana. I agree that the Alegato is a mixed filler. Neither is a "Havana cigar"—that is absolutely clear, and they ought not properly to be sold as Havana cigars or as cigars which came from Cuba. It would not be correct to sell either of these cigars as Havana cigars, in my opinion. They are not Havana cigars—they are undoubtedly a combination. I see no objection to describing them on the box as mixed tobaccos. I see no necessity or reason for describing an article like a cigar—it is
not customary. I think a cigar it sold on its merits; the Creanzo is a good sixpenny cigar sold on its merits as a British cigar. I think a Havana cigar of that size and weight would be sold at about 1s. This is not a Havana box. I cannot say what a retailer would do. I have never sold a cigar retail in my life. I do not see any advantage in describing exactly what a cigar is made of; it is sold on its merits, I presume. I have no data from which to judge whether it would sell as readily if described at a combination. I do not know that any cigar has ever been sold with a description of its contents, and I do not think that the description of the contents would mean anything to a member of the public who practically knows nothing whatever about tobacco.
Re-examined. On the "Darvel Bay" box there is English throughout, but I see no description of what the cigar is Composed of. I should be very much surprised if I found this contained nothing but Darvel Bay tobacco—they are Borneo cigars. I suggest Darvel Bay merely means the wrapper. I know it is customary for cigars to be called by the name of their wrapper. A cigar covered in Borneo tobacco is very often called a Borneo cigar. My firm manufactures 350 brands of cigars—we make cigars to be sent all over the world. We have only one brand in which the name of the firm appears. We have a trading name which is our registered mark, "Flor de Vases y Cia"; it is our telegraphic address and is identified with the name of Dexter. We do not use the guarantee label. Possibly we have made at our factory a cigar with a Havana filler, a bunch wrapper of Borneo, and an outer wrapper of Sumatra. That would be a British-made cigar. I should not consider it calculated to deceive to put on such a cigar a blue label such as is on the Alegato box; because, in the first place, that label is not similar in my opinion to any Havana label which I have seen and, as a matter of fact, it has been used quite as long as, possibly considerably longer in that colour than, the Havana guarantee label. I do not use any label similar to either. I do not think that these labels were first adopted by the Havana firms and afterwards by the English. The labels are somewhat similar, and at a distance one might be mistaken for the other. We have one label with a description in two languages—Spanish and English. I do not recollect an English cigar with a trilingual inset except the Alegato—it is certainly not common. I do not see any reason for it except that they wish to make a statement about the purity of the cigar in three languages. I do not know whether the Flor de Alegato is imported into Spain. I know we make English cigars which are exported into the Spanish markets. I have seen the trilingual leaflet on one or two of the Havana boxes. The Creanzo cigars may be exported to Germany. I have had inquiries for British cigars from Germany. The tobacco trade for years has adopted Spanish words to denote colour, size, and shspe—that is universal. I think the blue label was adopted by the Havana people after the war between Spain and the States—a year subsequent to the year 1893. I believe the blue colour was used on British cigars before it was used on Havana cigars. It was certainly used on British cigars contemporaneously
with the use of the buff-coloured label on Havana cigars. All these labels are very much the same size and shape. I have seen that style of label on British cigars some time before I saw it on Havana cigars. Stripped Havana tobacco comes largely into this country to be made into cigars. Latterly it comes in unstripped. Havana tobacco is made up into cigars very largely in England and is put into boxes similar to Exhibits 1 and 2—that has been done during the whole of my thirteen years experience.
ARTHUR DEXTER , trading as Dexter and Sons, cigar manufacturers, Nottingham. My business is very large, and I have had thirty years' experience in the sale and manufacture of British cigars. I have been three times president of the Tobacco Federation. During my entire experience of the trade British cigars have always been sold in boxes bearing Havana wording—that is, Spanish wording; there is a distinction between Havana and Spanish, I take it. It has been always the custom to describe the colour by the Spanish words "claro," "Colorado claro," "Colorado," "Maduro." "Flor fina" does not convey any meaning to me. The Spanish size marks are constantly used, and have been ever since I have known anything of the trade. Looking at the Creanio box, it is usual to put outside the box such marks as are here. There is the portrait of a lady and what might be a view of Cuba or might be a view of anywhere—it might be the Mediterranean as well as anything else. The red label contains an ornamental device which might be the arms of any country. It it quite usual to put such ornaments on—it is more for ornament than anything else. The portrait of a lady, the name "Flor de Creanzo y Cia," etc., is not unusual; the representation of a plantation is quite usual. The trilingual advertisement, signed "Creanzo y Cia," with the English translation staing that the cigars are made from choice tobacco from Havana and other countries is perhaps not quite so usual, but it is sometimes done. The cigars are as stated on the label, and are a very nice cigar indeed. I should not think a purchaser likely to be deceived by that into thinking that the cigar was made in Havana. The ring with gilding and arms is very common—the public like it. With regard to the "Flor de Alegato," the blue label at the back is a very ordinary label. I do not know how long it has been in use; I have seen various labels purporting to belong to the Havana Association. Looking at the exhibit. I know this label as a Havana label, and have seen it on boxes of Havana cigars from time to time. The one with the initials "A. E. and Co." is different from it. I have had scores of such labels offered to me. I have seen them on boxes, but I have not used it myself. No one has a monopoly of a blue label like that. I have seen them on English cigars for a long time. The Havana protection label has not been long in the field. The other has been in the field, I believe, much longer. I do not think that anyone would be deceived by it into thinking that he was buying a Havana cigar. People generally ask for a Havana by the brand, and, if they want a Havana cigar, they always look to see if the word
"Havana" is on the box. On the "Alegato" the figure representing Fame and the map of Cuba are not unusual. Before 1887 Spanish trade descriptions were applied to British-made cigars—Spanish wording, Spanish stencil marks, Spanish words like "Flor fina" were used long Wore 1887 on all kinds of cigars. My father was the Mr. Dexter concerned in the case before Mr. Justice Wright in 1903 with reference to an application to remove our trade mark. It was not granted.
Cross-examined. The German travellers come round and offer labels which they have designed both for the Havana and the British trade. It is rather difficult to define what is a Havana cigar label. They art very much alike. It it a very difficult thing to get much variety in cigar labels. We are always looking for it, and seldom find it. Labels used for the British cigar contain pictures of ladies, scenery, ladies surrounded by flowers, and other embellishments. The one produced to me is a Havana cigar label. I do not know that it has upon it the labour of Havana. I have not been there. Those which were offered to me were very much like the one I have in my hand. They are used for the simple reason that every manufacturer in every part of the world always has the same—not to try to get the Havana trade, but to embellish the box. I do not know how many years Messrs. Lopes have used this particular get-up. I do not hold myself out to be an expert in Havana cigar get-up. I consider myself a good judge of tobacco. I do not quite know what the description is of a Havana get-up. I have plenty of cigars bearing pictures of tobacco plantations, pictures of ladies, all sorts of things. foreign scenes with palm trees, and that kind of thing. I do not know that I have ever been offered the blue guarantee label. I have used the buff label, but not the blue, to my knowledge; I have seen them on boxes, plenty of them; they are used to ornament the box and improve the get-up. I know Mr. Coppock as a member of the trade of high standing and an honourable, upright man. I do not see anything morally wrong in using the blue label on his cigars. The blue label it not adopted to imitate the blue label of Havana firms. I believe that it was adopted by the English firms before the Havana firms adopted it; if there it any imitation, winch I do not consider there is, it is on the part of the Havana people. I do not see anything wrong in using the word, "Garantisado." I suppose that it means "Guaranteed." I cannot say why it is put in Spanish. I do not see any objection to the British manufacturer using that label if he chooses; I do not take it to be an imitation; I cannot concede to the Havana manufacturers the exclusive use of buff labels. It is common to both Havana and English cigars. It has been common ever since I have known anything of the trade. It has been the absolute custom of the trade from the time that it commenced to be a trade; it is the custom of this country and every country where cigars are made. Spanish is the language of the cigar trade. I have seen the Darvel Bay cigar. It has a large trade, and is a thorough good business. It has the buff label on. There is no Spanish wording. I do not say Spanish wording is essential, but I say that it is
old-established and customary. I do not recollect seeing the trilingual inset; I do not use it myself; I rather think that I have seen it on English boxes. I have used bilingual insets myself. I have seen trilingual insets on British cigars. I do not know that Havana firms have recently adopted it in order to prevent fraudulent imitation of their goods. There can be no fraudulent imitation if the English manufacturer states fairly what his article is in the three languages. The Alegato box is the box of the ordinary British got-up cigar. The cigar itself is its own indication of what cigar it is.
—KLENNEN-HAHEN, trading as Scheuch and Co., 103, Fenchurch Street, cigar importer and merchant. I have been carrying on the trade for the last 33 years in every one of its branches, and import and deal in cigars of all kinds—Havana, Indian, Manilla, Mexican, German, Continental, and also in English cigars; a great part of our business is Havana cigars. Since I have been in the cigar trade I have scarcely known any other than the Spanish language to be used on a cigar box, whether German, Mexican, or Havana. In the case of Indian cigars, I think that I have seen the English language used, and occasionally on German cigars, but very occasionally. Spanish words and Spanish trade terms have been nearly always used on English cigars. Looking at Exhibits 1 and 2, the box appears to me to be very tastily got up, but singularly unlike a Havana box. I have never seen a box of Havana cigars with a great thing like that put on the centre. The label in the Spanish language makes it more British-looking than anything else. At the back the word "Colorado" is a very ordinary expression. The label is, undoubtedly, commonly used in the cigar trade generally. Looking at the inside, I see nothing at all which suggests it to be anything like a Havana cigar. The inset headed "Creanzo y Cia" has been used at times to my knowledge, but it has not been used frequently in any kind of box, whether Havana or not Havana. It is a somewhat unusual thing. I remember distinctly a very well-known brand of Belgian-made cigars, where it has been frequently used. It is frequently met with in other than Havana cigars. Looking at the bluish-coloured label on the Alegato box, I consider that a perfectly neutral label. It has the initials "A. E. and Co." I do not think that an ordinary purchaser for one moment would notice that or any other detail. Undoubtedly I should not be deceived by it. The Union Guarantee label I see every day. It is not used by all Havana firms—either in blue or any other colour; it is used by a certain number of traders in Havana, who have banded themselves together and used that particular label. There are numbers of Havana cigar boxes that do not contain it at all. All the firms who use it legitimately are Havana firms. Looking at the Creanzo cigar, an imported Havana cigar of that size could not be sold for 6d. It has the shape of a very fine Havana cigar; it is a beautifully-made cigar.
Cross-examined. Charging 6d. for a cigar is no indication as to the place of origin. I do not look closely at the boxes; there is no necessity, as I know what I am buying. I can only say, as a reason why these things are got up tastefully, that it is a characteristic
feature of our time and with our high civilisation to get up any article extremely tastefully and well. Havana or the Island of Cuba, to the best of my knowledge, is historically the ground from which the tobacco and cigar industry originally emanated, and, therefore, they have originated most features of the get-up.
Re-examined. About 22 years ago I noticed a change come about in the getting up of Havana cigars. There was a change rather for the worse so far as quality was concerned; the Havana cigar became rather more expensive, and lower grades of cigars were introduced. English manufacturers then conceived that there was a chance for them, and they properly and honestly got hold of the trade and developed it, and made British cigars of Havana tobacco, which are sold, but not very largely.
CHARLES GILBERT JOURDAN , of Charles Jourdan and Co., 37, Walbrook, printers' merchant. I supplied Messrs. A. Edwards and Co. with the greenish-blue guarantee label. The first order was received about November, 1895. They were delivered on December 14, 1895. It was already printed. We had not got this up specially for them. I brought over a similar label and got the order to print them in this form from Messrs. Edwards. These labels were supplied to other countries besides England—Belgium, Holland, United States, Canada, and South America, and also to Havana. I have not supplied them to other countries than England and to other firms besides Edwards and Co. I have sold rings such as are on the Creanzo cigar to British merchants—almost identically similarly got-up, with the Spanish arms. Last year I supplied about seven millions of rings like that, with the same arms and the same red and gold background. At the present moment I have 1, 600, 000 in stock in London. On June 1 my stock of labels amounted to 18, 530, 000. I supply similar labels to those on Exhibits 1 and 2 to British manufacturers to upwards of 500, 000 a year. I have done that for 14 years.
Cross-examined. I am a printers' merchant, and am the agent of various German printers. William Dreyfus, of Crefeld, prints the rings. There are several others who print the labels. Some of them send me over designs and I sell them. I am in touch with the English cigar-making trade. I do not print the labels to order exactly; the label, as a rule, is printed already, having been designed by a German artist, and I get orders for that design. I occasionally get orders from Havana manufacturers. There is a certain similarity in get-up between Havana and English labels. I have never communicated with the German printers to the effect that what they were sending over were resemblances to marks put on by Havana firms; it never occurred to me to do so. Of course, there is a natural likeness between the rings; I never knew it otherwise. This it known, and has been known, in the English trade ever since I have done business as the Rothschild ring. It is the ring of which we sell most; all the time that I have been in the trade it has been sold in large quantities. I have not supplied the plantation picture.
It has been the practice that most of our labels have Spanish wording. Out of 296 designs which I have for sale 276 have Spanish words. I have not got my specimen book here, but I will bring it to-morrow morning. I have a copy of the invoice for the order which I received in 1895, and will bring it to-morrow. I know that it refers to this label, because it is number 1, 260, which is the number in small figures on the label.
(Wednesday, June 3.)
CHARLES GILBERT JOURDAN , recalled. I produce samples of cigar labels which I have sold and have for sale, also invoice book showing that flap label No. 1, 260 was sold to A. Edwards and Co., Aldersgate Buildings, on December 14, 1895. That is the label on Creanzo cigars produced.
HERMANN JULIUS SIEMSSEN , tobacco and cigar importer, Fenchurch Buildings. I have dealt in Havana and British cigars for 20 years. The Spanish get-up, Spanish words, etc., on Exhibits 1 and 2, are similar to those in use for many years in the cigar trade. From reference to United States, Cuban, and Mexican Government returns, I find that there was in 1903 8, 981 lb. of unmanufactured domestic leaf tobacco imported from the United States into Cuba; in 1904, 58, 417 lb.; in 1905, 91, 211 lb.; and in 1906, 69, 612 lb. From the same book I find that in 1906 there was imported into Cuba via the United States foreign leaf suitable for cigar wrappers, 33, 960 lb.; all other foreign leaf (i. e., all other leaf than that suitable for cigar wrappers), in 1906, 504, 555 lb. In the fiscal year 1905-06 there was imported from Mexico to Cuba 4, 298 kilos. (9, 456 lb.) of unmanufactured tobacco. Exhibits 1 and 2 are cigars of very good quality. A real Havana cigar of the Creanzo shape, size and quality would be sold at 1s. or more.
Cross-examined. The total exports of tobacco from Cuba, unmanufactured and manufactured, is 28, 898, 474 kilos. (To the Judge.) English-made cigars are sometimes, but not always, made by machinery; sometimes by handwork; at other times, mould work. (To Mr. Bodkin.) It appears from the book I have referred to that besides the 28, 898, 474 kilos, there is 224, 000, 000 lb. of manufactured tobacco exported from Cuba. That would be 252, 000, 000 lb. of tobacco exported in 1904-05. For the fiscal year 1905-06 it is 273, 000, 000 lb., including manufactured and unmanufactured. The tobacco imported would include pipe tobacco, chewing tobacco, and tobacco for cigarettes. It is unmanufatured tobacco only which is imported into Cuba. The two figures for 1906 are 33, 000 lb. of leaf suitable for wrappers and 504, 555 lb. of unmanufactured leaf. That will include tobacco suitable for chewing, pipes, and cigarettes if imported—I do not know that they are imported. A separate figure is given, as regards plug tobacco, which, I believe, is largely used by Americans. The imports would be about 1-550th part of the exports.
ARTHUR THOMAS HUNTER , managing director of John Hunter, Wiltshire, and Co., Limited, 55, St. Mary Axe, Havana cigar importers and British cigar manufacturers. My firm does a large business in both English and imported Havana cigars. I have had 27 years' experience. The use of the blue label on the imported Havana cigar box began in the year 1905. Prior to 1905 a buff label was used, absolutely dissimilar in colour to the blue. Exhibit 7 has the buff label which was invariably used in 1905 on Havana boxes. Looking at the Creanzo box, the lettering and general get-up is such as has been used by British cigar manufacturers in England for more years than I can remember, certainly prior to my 27 years' experience. I have seen the inset in three languages used occasionally, but not frequently. Arms of different kinds are common designations. I do not know that the arms of Spain in particular are common, but arms of some sort are very frequently used, both on the box and on the ring. I should think that 6d. would be a very proper price to pay for a British cigar of the size of the Creanzo; if it were a genuine imported Havana of a brand of any reputation the price would be anywhere from 1s. to 1s. 6d. It is a well-made cigar. My remarks also apply to the "Flor de Alegato." It is not a bad cigar. Cross-examined. I do not sell British cigars except to the trade. We have no connection with the retail sale. Generally, I do not think that a larger profit is made on the British cigar than on the Havana. It all depends on the idea of the seller as to what profit he wants and can get. I do not think that the get-up of these boxes assists the sale of British-made cigars. The get-up, in my mind, is simply putting a finishing touch to the package—it is put there to cover the bareness of the wood. The ring is an embellishment and customers like it. It is doubtful if British cigars would sell as well without the embellishment. I do not think the buyer looks so much to the marks. No doubt the retailer prefers boxes embellished in this way because it puts the goods before his customers in a more effective fashion. I cannot tell you why a get-up description which suggests Cuba and Havana tobacco is adopted—it was adopted so many years ago. I do not know if British cigars labelled as British-made without foreign marks or description would sell as well, because that has not been put to the test. I know the Darvel Bay cigar has a large sale and has not a word of Spanish on it from beginning to end.
Re-examined. People get up goods generally as attractive as they can. The get-up of cigars has improved and has become more elaborate. The improvement in the decoration of Havana and British cigars has gone on side by side; most of the labels come from the Continent. The buff label on the "Bock" box (produced) was in use at the end of 1904. I believe early in 1905 that firm adopted a blue label.
my firm. All the time I can remember Spanish wording and lettering has been used on English cigar boxes. About 25 years ago as objection was put forward to the word "Havana." I produce boxes in use in 1875. I do not understand about Havana cigars.
EBENEZER SAMUEL GOODES , trading as E. S. Goodes and Co., 96, Newgate Street, cigar merchants. I have had 56 years' experience in the trade, and during that period have dealt largely in imported and English-made cigars; for a very considerable time I have seen English-made cigars put up in boxes similar to the Creanzo box—for 30 years. Labels with a lady, Spanish words, and similar pictures, have been used for upwards of 40 or 45 years. Of late the embellishment of both Havana and British cigars has been improved and made more attractive.
Cross-examined. Havana cigars were first introduced in bundles, then in plain boxes, then in flat boxes with the cigars laid in rows with an increasing amount of embellishment on the boxes. Boxing cigars began in England, and afterwards the Havana manufacturers adopted it. I am sorry if Mr. Arkell has expressed a directly opposite opinion; that is my experience. I have seen the trilingual label on boxes of British-made cigars within the last few years. I do not think it is general; I have also seen it on Havana cigars of several firms. I have not seen the flap label before on Havana cigar boxes. A showy thing will always sell better than a plain thing. I believe our trade has never had any other model than the Havana and foreign trade for decoration. The labels all come from one place—Germany. The object of the trade is not to imitate the Havana box, but to produce as smart a character of box as the foreigner.
Re-examined. The English cigars were first put into boxes and Havana cigars afterwards. When we began we used English labels; the Germans got them out, and as the boxes became more decorated the English and Havana people went alongside each other in putting on more and more pictorial decoration. I believe, speaking generally, it had reference to the Isle of Cuba until that was stopped by the Merchandise Marks Act. Since then the word "Havana" has never been put on a British cigar.
HENRY HATT HUNTER , of Carter and Hodges, Havana cigar importers. The guarantee label adopted by the Association of Havana exporters was first started in 1904, but it did not come into general use till 1905. The old buff or brown label preceded it.
ARTHUR MORRIS , recalled. I last went to Cuba in November, 1907, and had been there annually for two or three years before. There is a much larger American population than before the revolution. I think it extremely unlikly that 34, 000 lb. of foreign leaf tobacco suitable for wrappers was imported into Cuba during 1906. No cigars are made in Havana of other than Cuban tobacco. Of course, they could be made. I am quite certain they are not made for consumption in the island. Blending of any other tobacco with Havana tobacco practically neutralises the exquisite flavour of the Havana tobacco.
Cross-examined. I seriously say that the putting an outside wrap, per of Borneo tobacco on a cigar containing 85 per cent, of Havana tobacco would spoil its flavour. It would be quite impossible to mistake it for a Havana cigar as far as flavour is concerned. If Mr. Arkell says that he has cut up cigars coming from Havana and found they contained Mexican tobacco I should say that he made a mistake. I have not taken the trouble to inquire, but I know for a fact that there is no importation of Mexican tobacco into Cuba. Havana manufacturers tell me that no foreign leaf is used, and I believe it. During the war a certain quantity of Mexican tobacco found its way into the island—it was smuggled in. (To the Judge.) I have not studied any (books, but I speak to the best of my belief from such knowledge as I have. All Havana cigars are hand-made—they wrap them by the hand on a table.
After discussion the Common Serjeant ruled that Section 18 of the Act of 1887 does not apply to the general use of Spanish words in connection with all other cigars; that there was no evidence of a particular description applied to goods of a particular class or manufactured by a particular method to indicate such class of manufacture; that the evidence in connection with English, German, Belgian, and other cigars, including Havana, at the time of the Act was not within Section 18; the general fact of there being a general get-up in use at the time of the Act for all cigars was not a "particular description describing a particular class of goods made in a particular method."
Verdict, Guilty. Sentence, Fine of £50, or in defaultone month's imprisonment. The prisoner, desiring to appeal, was released on one surety of £50 and his own recognisance in £50.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL. (Monday, June 1.)
HEMMING, William (43, carpenter) ; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain request for the payment of money, with intent to defraud; attempting to obtain by false pretences from Florence Kathleen Ellissen the sum of 17s. 6d., with intent to defraud; steeling one letter and one cheque for the sum of 17s. 6d., the property of Margaret Manton.
Mr. Sidney Williams prosecuted.
FLORENCE KATHLEEN ELLISSEN , Ulster Place. On April 3, owing a small account of 17s. 6d. to Mrs. Manton's Domestic Agency, I enclosed her the cheque produced and posted it to her, at the same time putting some writing on her bill. It had previously come to my knowledge that the letter box of Mrs. Manton had been pilfered. On April 4 my servant came to me with a letter purporting to come from Mrs. Manton stating that Mrs. Manton had received my letter but failed to find the cheque and asking was it possible that I had mislaid it or enclosed it in another letter. The letter also stated that Mrs. Manton was short of ready cash and would be much obliged if I would settle the account to bearer. I told my servant to show the counterfoil of the cheque to Mrs. Manton's messenger. With the
letter was enclosed Mrs. Manton's bill, which I had enclosed with the cheque to Mrs. Manton, showing that the bearer of the letter which was brought to me by my maid was in possession of the bill I had sent the day before to Mrs. Manton.
Mrs. MILTON. I am in the employ of Mrs. Ellissen. I have a distinct recollection that on April 4 prisoner handed me a letter saying, "From Mrs. Manton. Reply please." I took it to Mrs. Ellissen, who opened it, and read it aloud in my presence. She took out the counterfoil of her bank book, so that prisoner could take it back to Mrs. Manton. I showed prisoner the counterfoil, and he took down the figures but not the letters. I said, "You have not got it all down." He replied, "It does not matter. It is not necessary." I said, "Mrs. Ellissen does not usually pay an account twice." He said, "Mrs. Manton thought Mrs. Ellissen had put the cheque in the wrong letter." He did not tell me how he came to know that. I identified him on April 13 at Marylebone Lane Police Station from amongst 10 or 12 others. When Mrs. Ellissen opened the letter it contained the bill produced.
To Prisoner. After you gave me the letter I did not tell you my mistress said the cheque was missing. I told you that Mrs. Ellissen said that she had posted the cheque and therefore she would not pay it again until she heard from Mrs. Manton. You appeared to me to know the contents of the letter you handed to me. You did not seem upset or flurried as if you wanted to get away.
MARGARET MANTON . On April 3 Mrs. Ellissen was owing me a small amount, and I was expecting it on the 4th, but did not receive it in course of post. All my letters were taken from my letter box on March 21, April 1, 2, and 4. I arrived at the idea that they had been taken because a gentleman wrote to me a week after March 20 stating that he had posted a cheque to me on that day which I had not received. I warned Mrs. Ellissen on March 3 that that was so. The letter sent to Mrs. Ellissen in my name on April 4 is a forgery.
Detective FRANK EVELEY , D Division. I was in the vicinity of Ulster Place on April 4 about half-past 11 and saw prisoner walking up and down outside Ulster Place. I watched him till noon. I have an entry in my diary to that effect. As the result of information received, I arrested the prisoner on April 13 in Newnham Street, Edgware Road. I said to him, "You answer the description of a man who presented a forged letter at 24, Ulster Place on April 4. I shall arrest you on suspicion." I took him to the station, where he was placed with others for identification. Before I took him to the station he said, "I do not know anything about it. You have made a mistake. I had not been in Marylebone Road on that day and do not know Ulster Place." On leaving the house he said to his wife, "I do not suppose I shall be back." He made no reply to the charge. On the way to the cells he said, "I did not go to Ulster Place on the 4th. I remember it quite well. It was a race day. I can bring not only one but a dozen people to say where I was." At the request of prisoner I made inquiries at a lodging-house to find a man named
Ellis, and I found that he died the day following the date of this offence. I have compared the handwriting of the letter delivered to Mrs. Ellissen with handwriting which is admittedly the handwriting of the prisoner and, in my opinion, they correspond.
Prisoner (on oath) stated that he had been asked to deliver the letter to Mrs. Ellissen by a man named Ellis, whom he had not seen from that day to this.
Verdict, Guilty. In June, 1905, prisoner was convicted and sentenced to hard labour for stealing a cheque, and there are other convictions.
Sentence, 18 months' hard labour.
BEFORE THE RECORDER.
(Tuesday, June 2.)
WOOD, William (43, secretary) ; being servant to the Incorporated Morley and Alfred Bevan Memorial Convalescent Homes, feloniously stealing a certain valuable security, to wit, a banker's cheque for the payment and value of £40, the property of his said employers, and feloniously receiving the same; making a certain false entry in a certain book belonging to the Incorporated Morley and Alfred Bevan Memorial Convalescent Homes with intent to defraud.
Mr. Curtis Bennett prosecuted; Mr. George Elliott and Mr. Forrest Fulton defended.
ALFRED CHAMPION , electrical engineer, 42, Cranbourne Street. I am chairman of the committee of management of the Incorporated Morley and Alfred Bevan Convalescent Homes, which is a limited company, and was incorporated in 1904, the registered office being in King Street, Cheapside. The company carried on two convalescent homes, one at Sandgate and one at St. Margaret's Bay. Prisoner was secretary of the company, and had been secretary to the managers of the homes for several years before the incorporation. Since the incorporation he has had a fixed salary of £200 a year. As secretary he had sole charge of the accounts and correspondence and other matters appertaining to the work of the institutions and the supervision of the whole thing. Bills owing were brought before the Finance Committee by the secretary, and when cheques were issued to meet them they would be signed by the chairman of the House Committee, the chairman of the Finance Committee, and the secretary. In some cases there were only two signatories, the chairman of the House Committee and the secretary or the chairman of the Finance Committee and the secretary. The secretary signed in all cases. I knew that the company was dealing with the firm of Barr and Edwards, of Newington Causeway, and that an account was due to them in April of last year. The cash book now produced to me is kept by the secretary. Under date of May 9 I see in prisoner's handwriting an entry of £40 purporting to be made to Messrs. Barr and Edwards, and it is brought out in the maintenance column as
for "renewal of furniture." I myself wrote out the cheque for £40 on that day, and it is signed "A. Furness. W. Wood" (prisoner). The cheque is payable to "bearer," but is endorsed "Barr and Edwards." I cannot say by whom it has been endorsed. It has been passed through a bank, and was paid on May 10. It is not the practice to pay with open cheques. It would be the duty of the secretary to cross them and alter "bearer" to "order." Ordinarily committee meetings were held once a week on Friday evenings. The Finance Committee met once a month, but in the later periods they were rather irregular. From May 9 onwards I attended all committee meetings. Prisoner never reported that this sum of money was owing to Barr and Edwards or that they were making application for the payment of it. It purported to have been paid. Prisoner left the service in March of this year. He was first suspended and afterwards dismissed. On March 13 there was an extraordinary meeting appointed by the governors to investigate the accounts, at which he was present, and he was suspended after that meeting. He did not at that meeting mention that he had been served with a writ by Barr and Edwards on March 10. The letter produced is in the handwriting of the prisoner and is addressed to their solicitors, Messrs. J. N. Mason and Co.: "Dear Sirs,—I am very sorry that I have been unable to pay the amount due by us to Messrs. Barr and Edwards. A cheque for £270 was passed in January but has not been paid till certain inquiries were made. It was from this money I had hoped to pay the account.—Yours faithfully, W. Wood." Prisoner had no authority to send the letter, but he had a general discretion to answer business communications.
Cross-examined. I do not know when prisoner was appointed secretary. I am a life governor and have been connected with the institutions six years. I know that in 1900 the second convalescent home, the Alfred Bevan, at Sandgate, was acquired at a cost of £15, 000. The other home cost £7, 000. Since the acquirement of the second home we have not been solvent. The object of the incorporation was to avoid personal liability. In December, 1905, we called a meeting of the creditors, and arrangements were made to pay off the debts by instalments. We had had several writs, but not large quantities, and we were harrassed considerably and judgments were signed against us. It was part of the duties of the secretary to stave off creditors as long as possible, but it was also his duty to bring such matters before the committee. I do not seriously suggest that whenever he wrote a letter to a pressing creditor he would bring it before the Finance Committee. I do not think his duties were more than he could properly discharge. We have had annual reports from Messrs. Schultz and Comins, our auditors. In 1905 they recommended that as the duties of secretary involved both indoor and out-door work some official assistance should be provided to keep the books, as the secretary could not be expected to do it properly. I am an ex-officio member of the Finance Committee, which should have met once a month. I do not accept the suggestion that the committee only met five times a year. I recollect the chairman saying at
the police court that the Finance Committee was supposed to check and verify the accounts, but in fact it was never done, at we paid a secretary £200 a year to do it. Most certainly the accounts were checked. The homes were supported by voluntary contributions. Applications for assistance were made from time to time, and we had annual subscriptions from other societies. The convalescents had also to make payments themselves. It was frequently the case that cheques were drawn to pay creditors, and it was then discovered that there was no money to meet them, and they were cancelled or kept back until we had the money. It is not within my knowledge that cheques drawn to particular persons were afterwards used for petty cash and cashed over the counter. That is a thing the committee would not sanction for one moment. I have a recollection of a cheque for £7 5s. 10d. being drawn in favour of J. Wood in July, 1907. J. Wood is a butcher at Dover. That cheque was held over until there was cash in the bank, but it is not the fact that it was cashed by prisoner and used for petty cash. He had discretionary power to do all kinds of things. He was the paid secretary and the committee was purely voluntary. Besides him there was a collector and the office boy. The collector was paid once a month and the office boy once a week. Then there was rent to be paid, but I think the rates were included in that. As secretary prisoner would not have discretion to apply money drawn to particular persons for office disbursements, or for the purpose of keeping other people quiet. His duties included the whole of the management of the institutions, subject to reporting to us once a week. He had to act as he thought best under the circumstances. If money was needed to stave off the brokers he would appeal for subscriptions, of course, to the outside public. There were certain people who were annual subscribers and certain people who gave donations to whom he could appeal for money when we were pressed. The petty cash book from January 1 to end of May, 1907, shows a great number of payments out. The receipts to April 29 were £51 5s. 9d. and the payments to May 10 were £102. He had 'therefore disbursed in that period £51 more than he had received. At the time of the audit, at the end of 1906, there was a payment in of £163 3s. 8d., and cheques were drawn to Wood for £118 for petty cash, £33 6s. 8d. arrears of salary, and matters were squared up. A petition for winding-up the company was presented last April, and the company's affairs are now in the hands of the Official Receiver. I find by the cheque book produced that the majority of the cheques are open, and have not been altered from "bearer" to "order." Cheques have been drawn when there were no funds to meet them. I see in the minute book answers to a series of questions addressed to the committee by the Hospital Saturday Fund, who declined to make any further contribution to the homes until certain things had been done. They stated, amongst other things, that Wood had signed my name to cheques. Last November certain sums of money were due to prisoner for his salary, and without my sanction he put my name on two cheques. My attention was called to it by the bank manager, and I was asked whether
he had my authority. I said, "Certainly not," and wrote the manager a letter to that effect, so that there should be no mistake or misunderstanding about it. That was overlooked by the Fund, and so far as we were concerned we were satisfied that the money was due to Wood. Prisoner was not discharged, only censured. The hospital authorities declined to make a grant on the ground that there were serious financial irregularities.
Re-examined. The petty cashbook is entirely in the handwriting of prisoner. The institution was not insolvent at the end of 1907. We are not insolvent now. The statement of affairs which is about to be lodged shows a good surplus. It has been put to me that cheques drawn to people to whom we owed money have been some-times used for petty cash, but that is not within my knowledge. If that had been done it should not have appeared in the cash book that the money had been paid to people to whom we owed money. The credit balance at the bank on May 9 was £78 0s. 5d. On May 10 £27 11s. was paid in and on the cheque to Messrs. Barr and Edwards being paid the balance left was £65 11s. 5d. Certainly on May 10 there was plenty of money in the bank to meet the cheque. I did not know before May 11 that prisoner was receiving money which he did not enter in the cash book at all.
The Recorder said there appeared to have been a great many irregularities in the conduct of the accounts of this home, due apparently to its unfortunate financial position, but of course the question was whether what was done was done with intent to defraud.
Mr. Elliott. He had so much to do of one kind and another it was impossible for him to keep his books.
The Recorder remarked that falsification of accounts was a very serious crime where it was done with intent to defraud, but where, as in this case, such very wide discretion was given to the accused person, even to the extent of signing the names of the directors without being dismissed for it, but merely censured, it was difficult to say that he intended to defraud. The brokers were in the office from time to time, and he had to get the landlord out and pay out executions and writs and all the rest of it. They had now heard what was the substance of this case, and he did not know what the jury would think about it. It was clear that there were great irregularities and that the homes were in great financial straits and had been for some years. Prisoner appeared to have practically had power to keep the things going as long as he possibly could in the hope that more subscriptions would be obtained, and had very wide discretion as to false entry made, but having regard to all the circumstances of the case could the jury come to the conclusion that what was done was done with intent to defraud?
Verdict, Not guilty. The Jury wished to record their disapproval of the very slovenly way ths accounts had been kept and the way the public had been treated.
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE GRANTHAM.
(Thursday, May 28.)
On Mr. Symmons's statement that the accused woman died in the Essex County Asylum on May 11 the recognisances of the witnesses in the case were discharged.
BEFORE THE RECORDER.
(Thursday, May 28.)
Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted
Prisoner confessed to having been convicted at West Ham on October 13, 1905, receiving three years' penal servitude, for stealing a lady's skirt; she had been four months out of prison on ticket of leave; 12 convictions for felony and 27 summary convictions for drunkenness, running back to 1892, were proved.
Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE GRANTHAM.
(Friday, May 29.)
Mr. W. W. Grantham, who appeared to prosecute, said that the Grand Jury had thrown out the bill, presumably on the ground that the medical evidence did not establish that the deceased child had an independent separate existence from its mother. He offered no evidence in support of the charge on the coroner's inquisition.
A Jury was sworn, and on the direction of his Lordship returned a verdict of Not guilty.
BEFORE THE RECORDER
(Saturday, May 30.)
TAYLOR, Edward (20, carman), pleaded guilty of stealing one pair of boots and three odd boots, the goods of Frank Walton; feloniously causing certain grievous bodily harm to George Friend with intent to resist his own lawful apprehension; feloniously causing certain grievous bodily harm to William Roy with intent to resist his own lawful apprehension. Prisoner also confessed to a conviction of felony at Stratford Petty Sessions, on November 11, 1907. Roy and Friend are police officers who were savagely assaulted by prisoner when they were arresting him.
Sentence, on the indictment for larceny nine months' hard labour; on each of the other indictments three years' penal servitude; to run concurrently.
COLEBOURN, George (49, clerk) ; unlawfully and maliciously selling and uttering to Jonathan Lawrence 37 obscene photographs; unlawfully and maliciously procuring with intent to sell 31 obscene photographs.
Mr. Travers Humphreys prosecuted.
Sentence, 18 months' imprisonment without hard labour. The pictures were given into the custody of Detective-inspector Lawrence, to be destroyed after the necessary period for notice of appeal had elapsed.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Monday, June 1.)
WATTS, James (48, agent) ; obtaining by false pretences from Frederick Ansell the sum of £25, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from Robert Blundell the sum of £10, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from Thomas Newton the sum of £15, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from Martin Francis Hurley the sum of £20, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from William Edgley the sum of £60, with intent to defraud.
Mr. Austin Metcalfe prosecuted; Mr. Warburton defended.
FREDERICK ANSELL . I am a car driver, and live at Penge. In October of last year I saw an advertisement in the "Daily Chronicle" to this effect: "Man, young, wanted at once by wholesale manufacturer to call on customers and collect. Must deposit £25." I wrote in consequence to 1A, Sheringham Avenue, Manor Park, and on receiving a reply I wrote to 57, Pelly Road, Plaistow, which, as far as I could see on a subsequent visit, is a workshop where a mat manufacturer's business is supposed to be carried on. I saw two men working there, one of whom is named Wright. I told prisoner I had come in answer to his advertisement. He told me I should have to canvass and collect money, and he wanted a deposit of £25. I said I was agreeable to that provided I found the business all right. He told me my salary would be 25s. a week and 10 per cent. commission on all orders and money I collected. I paid £3 there and then in
the belief that this was a prosperous and genuine business and that there was a necessity for a collector and canvasser. On the next day I paid the balance of £22. A receipt was given me, but I have either lost it or burnt it with my letters. It provided that on my leaving the business the deposit should be returnable after six weeks' notice on either side. I continued in the businees for three weeks, during which time I got one order, for 22 dozen mats coating £4 or £5. Watts gave me a list of persons to call upon. In the same peried. I collected £3. At the end of three weeks he gave me a week's notice, and with regard to the deposit he told me that of course I should have to wait the six weeks. At the end of that time I called again, I think in January. He told me he had not sufficient money by him at the time unless I changed a cheque for £10 8s. 6d. drawn in his favour. I tried to get the cheque cashed, and brought it back to him. He took it up, and said, "I will cash it," and I never saw him again until the end of April. I never got back a shilling of my £25. There is no truth in the statement made fey prisoner at the police-court that he had paid me back in two sums of £15 and £10.
Cross-examined. I had previously been an electric car driver. I had had no experience of canvassing in any other situation. The shops I went to had been already supplied with the article I had to dispose of. The factory was 30 yards long and eight yards wide, and I saw lour or five looms. I do not know that last year the factory was doing a flourishing business. I had samples given me to take round. A week after I left prisoner I commenced business in the East Road. Prisoner gave me a loom for the purpose which, I should say, might be worth half a crown. I should say my place was five or ten minutes' walk from the prisoner's. He said he would give me orders as I was out of work. I had salary for four weeks—£5. As to the looms being worth £7 apiece, I should be sorry to give £7 apiece for them. The loom I had was a workable loom, and I should think might have cost a sovereign at the outside. Prisoner gave me one order for 18 or 20 dozen mats, winch, I suppose, would come to about £9. The loom was not taken in part settlement of the deposit.
Re-examined. In order to execute the order I got I had to lay out money in material. The profit on a dozen mats would be about 9d., or 15s. on 20 dozen.
ROBERT BLINDELL , 244, Monica Road, Manor Park. Before January 16 I was a photographer. On that day I saw an advertisemeat in the "Daily Chronicle" and answered it and received a reply on February 1, and called at 57, Pelly Road and I saw prisoner. He asked me what I had been before and I told him a photographer and showed him my references, which were very good. He said he wanted a man to travel for him, call on customers, and collect, and he would want a deposit of £10. as I should have to collect so much money. He said if I could give him £10 that day he would take me on. He did not say whether experience was necessary. I paid him £10 the same day and he gave me a receipt for it, and the deposit was to be returnable on the expiration of six weeks' notice. I worked
for him a fortnight. I went on the following Monday week and he gave me four samples of mats and matting and told me to work round my district, calling in at all the oil shops and drapers. He did not give me any addresses to call at. I was to use my own discretion. I failed to get any orders and collected no accounts. At the end of the first week he said if I could not get £20 or £30 worth of orders next week I must take a week's notice from that day as he could not afford to keep me on. He paid me £1 for the first week. At the end of the following week he told me I must send in six weeks' notice for the deposit, as I had agreed. I have never received a farthing of the £10. I went for it the day before my time was up and he told me to come at three o'clock the next day and I should have it. When I went the next day the place was closed. I went on the Monday morning and saw prisoner. He asked me to give him four days' grace because he had had one or two bad debts since Christmas. I wanted to get another situation which I lost through that, but I went on the Thursday and he asked me to come again on Saturday. When I went on Saturday he was gone and the place was again closed. I have never had one shilling back.
Cross-examined. I have not had experience in this kind of travelling. Prisoner told me the districts to work and gave me a free hand to go where I thought proper. Some told me they did not know the name of Watts and others that they were full up. Prisoner had mats for sale to people who wanted to buy them, and there were two men working when I first went. Business seemed to be carried on. I suppose there are fluctuations in the mat making business as in all others. It happens in plenty of respectable, honest businesses that people have to wait and are unfortunate. I might, perhaps, have got orders if I had known people in that line of trade. I agree that if I could not get orders it was not worth while for prisoner to go on paying me £1 a week.
THOMAS NEWTON , 16, Lampeter Street, Islington. I am a box cutter and on one occasion have been a traveller. In the middle of February I saw an advertisement in the "Daily Chronicle." I wrote in answer and received a reply from 57, Pelly Road. Subsequently I saw prisoner at that address. He said he wanted a man to travel for him and collect accounts. He showed me some mats and said I ought to do well. He said he would give me £1 a week and I ought to get plenty of orders in this line. I said I would think it over. In the first place he said he wanted a deposit of £25. I told him it was too much and went away. I afterwards returned and told him I could not afford to give £25. I went to see him again and he said he would accept £15. I paid him £1 on account and on the 24th I gave him the remaining £14. I got receipts for both amounts. The deposit was repayable after six weeks' notice. He promised me 25s. a week, and a week's notice on either side. I got no orders, as all the people I went to said they were full up. He gave me the names of some firms, but said I could call on anybody. I did not collect any money for him. I worked for him two weeks and got my salary. At the end of the two weeks he gave me notice. I asked for my
£15 back, and he said I would have to give him notice, according to the agreement. I gave notice, but never had the money.
Cross-examined. I know the business it going on still at the same address. I understand prisoner is civilly liable for the return of the money. I took out a summons, and went to a solicitor, but did not go on. Prisoner did not tell me he was selling the business. When I went at the end of the six weeks I saw strange people there. Some firms I went to promised me orders, but, of course, I could not say that I should get any. I did not know that prisoner had been doing well the year before, and had had five men working for him.
MARTIN FRANCIS HURLEY , 2, Churchyard Row, Newington, provision dealers' assistant. On March 6 I saw an advertisement in the "Daily Chronicle." I answered it, and received a reply on the 9th, and the same day saw prisoner at 57, Pelly Road. He said he had had 150 replies, and asked to see my references. He asked me what I could do by way of deposit, and I said I could deposit £20 on the following Friday. On March 11 I deposited £10 and the balance on the 13th. I asked him what my work would be, and he showed me samples of mats with which I was to call on shopkeepers. He told me he had six men working for him night and day. I thought from that it was a pretty good business. I asked to see the factory and the men working, and he told me they had gone to dinner. My remuneration was to be 25s. a week. I remained three weeks. I tried my best to get orders but failed. At the end of the second week I gave him notice, and six weeks' notice for the return of the £20, but have never received a shilling of it. On the one occasion I went into the factory I saw one man working. I gave notice because I could not get orders, and saw no men working there; I thought it was not a genuine thing, and I wanted to get my money back.
Cross-examined. There were four or five looms at the factory and some mats. I had no connection in this class of business, and I knew nothing of mat-making.
WILLIAM EDGLEY , 16, Belcham Street, Hackney, electrician. I saw this advertisement in the "Daily Chronicle" on April 7: "Partner wanted at once, half-share £60, in established manufacturing business. Plenty of orders. Can draw £2 weekly and profits. No agents. Address Principal, Deacon's, Leadenhall Street." I answered it, and got a letter from Watts dated from Pelly Road. I went to see him. He said he wanted £30 for self and £30 for the business. I asked him what kind of business it was, an he said it was matting manufacture, and he asked me if I had ever been in the line before. I told him no. He told me he was doing a flourishing business. He asked me if I had been in trade before. I said, "No," and he said that did not matter. He told me he had £60 of orders due at the time, and showed me an order book. The orders were not cancelled when he showed them to me; that has since been done. I paid him £1 deposit and closed the bargain to become a partner and pay the balance. I asked him if he was in debt. He told me that he did not owe anybody a farthing; he had to pay for all his stuff before he
bought it. I asked him what profits he made. He said £6 or £7 a week; never less than £4. He also said he paid 9s. a week rent, and had the landlord's permission to extend the premises. He told me he valued the stock in the place at £130, and took me round the workshop and showed me the looms. There were two men working, and he said the others had gone to dinner. If there was any stock it was covered with matting. I paid him the balance of the deposit £59, on April 10. He said I had dropped into a sweet thing. I am of the same opinion, but in another sense. He did not say anything about having sold the other part of the business. I thought he and I were to go into partnership together. He did not say anything about Mr. James. He told me he had had two men call in the morning. One wanted to do the la-di-da in the office, but I was a worker, and told him I had been at work all my life. I went to the business on April 13. Prisoner did not tell me he had had a selection of collectors who had been dismissed because they could not get any orders. When I got to the place a man came to me and handed me the keys and three letters. One of them was from Watts, dated April 10: "Dear Sir,—Having sold all my rights, title and interest in the business of mat and matting manufacturer at 57, Pelly Road, Plaistow, to Mr. John James that gentleman will hand over to you the sum of £7, which I have paid him this day." I have no idea what that £7 was for, and could not get to know. I saw Mr. James at three o'clock that afternoon, and he paid me £5. He said he was rather short that day, but he would give me the other £2. I wrote to one of the firms' in the order book, and the reply I received was that there was nothing on order. I did not know this man James was a solicitor's clerk, but he said he was in the law. I did not know as that time that Mr. James was really Mr. Wormald. On the 13th the landlord came in and asked to see Mr. Watts. I did not pay the back rent, but he told us he should put a distress in, and that he wanted the £3 that was owing to him. One of the workmen told me where prisoner was, and I brought him to the place from Manor Park, telling him that if he did not come I should give him in charge of a policeman. I said to him, "I have caught you; what have you to say for yourself?" He started crying and pleading, and asking me to forgive him for the sake of his wife and family. I told him he did not think of mine. He said, "No, I have done wrong, but do not have me up." I asked him then, "What is this about Mr. James?" He said he had arranged with Mr. James to carry on the business till I got out of it, and then he was coming back again to work the business on the same lines as before. I brought prisoner to Pelly Road, and sent for James, but was not able to find him at 45, Broadway, Stratford, or at the sign of the "Swan," his usual place. I have had nothing beyond the £7. I do not know whether that was intended to be on account of my £60.
Cross-examined. I checked the order book with the file of the firms. They did not correspond. I did not find that the book contained £60 worth of unexecuted orders. A firm at Liverpool to whom I wrote, wrote back, "Nothing on order." I am now carrying on this business at a loss because I am out of work. I am doing fairly,
but not making anything out of it yet. It is not the fact that I wanted prisoner put away because I wanted to get all the profits for myself. There are no profits to get. I am keeping it on because I think if I do an honest business and work the business up again, which has been allowed to go to the dogs, there will be a profit at some time. I should not myself have employed travellers, but should have gone round myself when I was slack. I am positive that as travellers they were out of their bearings altogether. There is a number of firms prisoner had been doing business with, but not for some considerable time, and I do not think he got any profit, or very little. I should be very much surprised to hear that the looms cost £7 piece. I should think a good offer would be £3 10s. for the lot. I have begun to get a fair number of orders from people I believe who formerly dealt with Mr. Watts.
Re-examined. It was represented to me that there was £130 of stock. All I found was the five looms, 15s. worth of fibre, a pair of shears, two chairs, a table, and a press, which was of no use at all. I should say that £10 would be the value of the whole. I should not have parted with any money if I had not believed there was £130 of stock. I have made no profit at all in the business as yet, and have lost about £6. I found that some, of the orders given me as orders to be worked out had been worked out six months before. some of the orders were on the file, not all; none of them were unexecuted.
JAMES WORMALD , 9, Bryant Street, Stratford, clerk of Mr. Davell, 45, Stratford, Broadway. I have known prisoner eight or nine months. About a week before April 10 I met him at the "Swan" public-house. On the following day he said he had got a little business to talk to me about. He said he had taken in a partner and he had now got a good appointment abroad. He said he had two or three outstanding creditors, and he wanted me to come to some arrangement. He gave me the names of Hurley, Newton, and Blundell, and suggested that I should take over the other half of the business, which he said was a good going concern, that I had a lot of spare time, and if I went round and saw the best firms and looked after the business we could make a good do of it. On April 12 I saw him at his house in Ragley Road, Leytonstone. He asked me if I had considered the matter. I asked him if it was a good business, and he said certainly it was. I eventually agreed to give him a contract that I would meet his creditors and settle with them, and he was to give me a receipt for £60, and I was to take over his share in the business. I have a duplicate of the contract and the receipt for £60 which I was to pay to the creditors. I got the business before I met the creditors because he was going away that night. I saw Edgeley, but he had already been to the police then. Edgeley and I managed the business as partners for some time.
Cross-examined. I have a brass plate with the name of "James" on in Great Eastern Road, Stratford, and the name is painted across my, windows. There is no secrecy about this. Everybody in Stratford
knows my real name. It is all done with the consent of my employers. I am holding back from the partnership in view of this prosecution, but if I go on with the partnership I shall consider my-self liable to pay debts up to the amount of £60.
RICHARD OLDREEVE , 31, Canhall Road, Leytonstone. I am land-lord of the premises, 57, Pelly Road. Prisoner held the premises as weekly tenant for the last twelve months at 9s. a week, subject to a week's notice. About six or eight months ago I gave him per mission to extend the premises. As to whether I looked upon his as a substantial servant, I thought he was good enough for 9s. a week anyhow. On April 13 he owed me seven weeks' rent. I call every week, but I have not tried to get it out of the ordinary way because he has always paid up.
SAMUEL WRIGHT , 101, Laurence Avenue, Manor Park. I have worked for prisoner off and on for about 25 years. In the early part of 1907 all the five looms were at work, and continued until about a fortnight alter last Christmas. There were no orders and no material, and I was away about 10 weeks. I was there on April 10, having been sent for, and I went to work making mats, and was a work when Mr. Edgeley was there. I left at dinner-time directly after he went. As soon as Mr. Edgeley's back was turned I was told to stop. Two men were at work that day. It would not be true to say that three other men were at dinner. I have been at work for prisoner since. On Monday, the 13th, he gave me the keys and the letters, telling me they were to be given to Mr. Edgeley. I did not see prisoner again until a fortnight after. He came to my house at half past 11 at night and said he was too late to get a lodging. I asked him inside, and said, "Do you know there is a warrant out for you?" He said, "I have heard something about it." He stayed all night at my place, and next morning he said, "You take this message to Mr. Edgeley, that if he will withdraw the warrant everything has been passed over to him, and Mr. James has nothing to do with it." I took the message to Edgeley, for whom I was working at the time.
Cross-examined. I could not say what was the gross amount of the orders given. Five men were working at the looms for four or five months last year, and sometimes working overtime early in the year. All the mats made were sent away, and as far as I could see a very considerable business was being done. I could not say why it fell off in the winter. I always had my wages. Prisoner was then every day superintending the work.
Detective-sergeant JOHN MARSHALL, K. A warrant for the arrest of prisoner was put into my hands on May 7. I saw him at the West Ham Police Station, and said, "Is your name James Watts?" He said, "Yes." I told him I had a warrant for his arrest, and read it to him. He said, "I never had it." Afterwards he said, "May I read the warrant?" I read it to him again. He said, "Is that the charge?" I said, "Yes." He was subsequently charged and made no reply. The person mentioned in the warrant was Ansell.
JAMES WATTS (prisoner, on oath). With regard to my relations with Ansell, first of all I advertised for a traveller and he came in. He was with me about three weeks altogether. I paid him £1 per week, and then at the expiration of his time I paid him £15. After that I paid him £5 in gold, and the other £5 was for the loom which he had, and has got now in working order. The receipt for the £15 was handed to me in my office and torn up by me. I never saw the man any more till he had got the loom, and then he began to bother my life out of me, and I told him to keep away from my place; he was a perfect pest. There are five looms in the factory, and their cost new would be £7. I got them somewhat cheaper, and their cost to me would be about £5 apiece fixed up. The looms are in no way used or worn. It is difficult to say what the fair market price of the looms is now, because buying and selling are different things, but they are certainly worth £2 apiece if anybody wanted to buy one. I can only say about Blundell's case that the money is due. I was short of money for two or three weeks, and that is why I did not pay him off. With regard to Newton, he summoned me before the money was due. It was not due at the time the warrant was issued. I was forestalled, and in that way prevented from paying him. In the case of Hurley, again, the time, was not up when the warrant was issued. I hoped to pay him out of the agency abroad, but I could not get the agency because they wanted me to speak German. My arrangement with James was that he was to stand in my shoes and pay these people what was owing. I was in Austria a little over a fortnight and that cost me about £17; I consider it a good thing for Edgeley that he has got the business alone. At the time I took his £60 I honestly believed he was going to do well out of it and that things were going back to what they were in the spring of last year. Ansell, when he took this place, took several of my good customers away, but every trade has been slack since Christmas. Before I had these travellers I used to go round myself. When I engaged Ansell I thought it better that I should remain in the factory and look after the technical part of the work.
Cross-examined. I made no inquiries as to Ansell's capabilities for canvassing, but he said he could get along all right. My object in putting in the provision about the six weeks' notice for the return of the deposit was that I might see if they had collected any money before I returned it. As I have said, I did not pay Blundell back because I could not do it just at that time. I only inserted two advertisements. Newton answered an advertisement which he saw in the middle of February. I did not tell him I had had two canvassers before and had stuck to their money. There was no money to be collected, because, at it happened, the boy always brought the money back when we sent out the things. I think I sent Newton to one or two places for accounts. Newton used to come to my place shouting outside and annoying me and I wrote to him, "If you still come about my place annoying me and asking my
men questions I shall certainly claim damages. If you want to see me call on Monday, 12 or one o'clock." I have not paid him because he summoned me. I should probably have paid him otherwise. I took Hurley's £20, although I had repaid none of the others. I think I gave him one or two accounts to collect. I asked him to call at Turner's, in Commercial Street. It is true that I advertised for a partner. With regard to the order book, it is not true that I scratched out some of the orders before Edgeley came on the Monday and that some I represented as unexecuted were orders I had executed twelve months before. I may have represented the stock as being worth £130. I consider the stock and plant with the connection was worth the money. Apart from the connection, the stock and plant are worth £50. I did not represent that I was making £6 or £7 a week profit. I said with all the looms at work we could make £4 a week. I did not know Mr. James had another name until I was told it the other day. I look upon him as owner of half the business now. He was to take over the debts for it. (To the Jury.) I kept no cash book or ledger. I had only the order book.
Detective-sergeant MARSHALL stated that prisoner was convicted in 1903 and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for long firm frauds carried on at Leyton. Considerable doubt had been expressed as to Whether Wormald should not have been charged with conspiracy in this matter—(several jurors: Hear, hear)—and it was by no means certain that that course would not be adopted. Prisoner after his release was for eight or nine months out of employment, and then became agent for a firm of Belgian matmakers, subsequently commencing business in Pelly Road.
Sentence, 18 months' hard labour.
BEFORE THE RECORDER.
(Thursday, May 28.)
Mr. Lawless prosecuted.
CHARLES WISE POWELL , manager Singer Sewing Machine Company, Richmond. I took charge of the Richmond branch in October, 1907; prisoner was then managing a shop at Shene Lane, under my control. He accounted to me weekly for his takings and the machines hired out down to the third week in March, 1908, when he absconded, taking the keys of the shop. I had the door opened by a locksmith and found a number of machines missing, including one numbered
81, 570, 532, to which the hiring agreement to Cooper of September 5, 1907 (produced), refers. After inquiries I found the machine had been pawned at Borer's, Turnham Green. Borer showed me the two documents produced, Exhibits 8 and 9. Exhibit 8 is our lithographed form of final receipt given to a hirer on payment of the last instalment. No.9 is an agreement. Both are filled up in prisoner's hand-writing. Prisoner had no authority to pawn the machine, which I supposed to be in Cooper's possession.
Cross-examined. Since the pledging of the machine a few shillings had been paid on it.
In reply to the Recorder prisoner admitted pledging the machine, presenting the false receipt to the pawnbroker to certify that it was his property, and getting £3 upon it.
JAMES BETTLES . I was manager at the Richmond branch of the Singer Company before Powell, and engaged the prisoner to manage a small shop at Shene Lane under me. He brought me hiring agreement produced with Cooper. Exhibits 8 and 9 signed in my name are in prisoner's handwriting. They were not signed by me or by my authority.
WILLIAM HEATON , assistant to F. Borer, pawnbroker, Turnham Green. On December 10, 1907, machine S1,570,532 was brought to me by a man whom I do not identify, who produced final receipt, Exhibit 8. I pointed out that the number on the receipt was not the same as that on the machine. He then went away and returned with Exhibit 9. I then advanced £3 on the machine.
Verdict, Guilty. Prisoner was stated to have been employed by the Singer Company at Acton from 1900 to 1906 in the name of Arthur Davis when he was dismissed for forging hiring agreements. He then obtained a situation at Richmond in the name of Arthur Swindon by false references, from where he afterwards absconded with the takings of the shop; 14 machines were missing, only five of which had been traced.
Sentence, 18 months' hard labour.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Thursday, May 28.)
Prisoner swallowed some spirits of salts which he uses in his trade. He told his lordship that disagreement with his wife had induced him to the rash act, but his wife told a story of drunkenness and unkindness, and of how she had had to work to keep the children, expressing a desire for a separation. His employers wrote of him that his weakness was drinking, and Judge Rentoul thought that in prisoner's own interest he should be sentenced to six months' imprisonment.
Sentence: Six months in the second division.
BEFORE THE RECORDER.
(Friday, May 29.)
Mr. G. St. John McDonald prosecuted.
Cross-examined. I did not tell the magistrate that if prisoner had brought back half the money I would not have minded. Prisoner gave himself up at Southwark Police Station. Prisoner might have come back and worked the money out. He worked for me about eighteen years ago, and a few weeks since came and asked me to help him. I set him to work, and said, "I will help you, I will find you in food and let you have a little pocket money to pay your lodgings." I gave him a fresh start. I did not owe him any money. I gave him Emery's invoice and told him to go and pay the bill.
Detective EDWARD HUNT, V. Division. Prisoner was handed to me at Southwark Police Station, where he had given himself up. I told him he would be charged on his own confession with stealing 15s. 6d., the moneys of Mr. Dyer, his employer. He replied, "Quite right, I must put up with it." I took him to Barnes, where he was formally charged. He made no reply.
H. R. C. EMERY , 71, Randolph Gardens, Fulham, nickel-plater and enameller. On May 9 prosecutor owed me 15s. 6d. Prisoner never paid it. On May 11 prosecutor sent to me to know if prisoner had been to me and paid my bill.
Police-constable GEORGE DUBBIN , 255 M. On May 12 I was on duty at Southwark Police Station when prisoner came and said, "I wish to give myself up. I have stolen 15s. 6d., the property of my employer, William Dyer, of White Hart Lane, Barnes." I searched prisoner and found nothing on him. I detained him and handed him over to Detective Hunt.
PRISONER (not on oath). I had worked for the prosecutor for about a month. For the last 14 days he had not given me any money—he had promised to do so several times. On May 9 he gave me the money in question. I therefore thought it was for my own use, put it in my pocket, and went up to London.
Verdict, Guilty. Prisoner admitted having been convicted on June 14, 1905, at South London Sessions and sentenced to six months' hard labour for stealing a bicycle; he had also had three months as a suspected person at Guildhall in March, 1905. Sentence, Nine months' hard labour.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Friday, May 29.)
SOLOMON, Percy (33, shop assistant), pleaded guilty of stealing a letter containing a cheque, the property of Arthur Ernest Edward Mercer, and feloniously receiving a letter containing a cheque, well knowing them to have been stolen; forging and uttering a certain order purporting to be from Arthur Ernest Edward Mercer for the payment of money, to wit, the sum of £7 17s. 6d., with intent to defraud. A previous conviction was proved. Prisoner's statement was that the cheque was brought to him by two boys, who said they had found it. He forged the signature and a publican at Mitcham passed the cheque through his bank.
Sentence, Six months' hard labour.