Old Bailey Proceedings, 2nd March 1909.
Reference Number: t19090302
Reference Number: f19090302

1909, MARCH. (1)

Vol. CL.] Part 893.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT

Sessions Paper.

TRUSCOTT, MAYOR.

FIFTH SESSION,

HELD MARCH 2ND, 1909, AND FOLLOWING DAYS.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,

TAKEN IN SHORTHAND BY

GEORGE WALPOLE

Shorthand Writer to the Court.

POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE

EDITED BY

R. F. GRAHAM-CAMPBELL, ESQUIRE,

OF THE INNER TEMPLE.

[Published by Annual Subscription.]

LONDON:

GEO. WALPOLE, PORTUGAL STREET BUILDINGS, LINCOLN'S INN, W. C.

PRINTED BY

THE ARGUS PRINTING COMPANY, LIMITED,

CORNER OF TUDOR STREET AND TEMPLE AVENUE,

LONDON, E. C.

THE

WHOLE PROCEEDINGS

On the King's Commission of

OYER AND TERMINER AND GAOL DELIVERY

FOR

The City of London,

AND GAOL DELIVERY FOR THE

COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX AND THE PARTS OF OTHER COUNTIES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION

OF THE

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,

Held on Tuesday, March 2nd, 1909, and following days.

Before the Right Hon. Sir GEORGE WYATT TRUSCOTT , Knight, Alderman, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir W. G. F. PHILLIMORE, Bart., one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir WALTER H. WILKIN, K. C. M. G., Sir MARCUS SAMUEL , Bart., Sir WM. PURDIE TRELOAR, Bart., Sir J. C. BELL, Bart., Sir THOS. B. CROSBY, and F. HOWSE, Esq., Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON, Knight, K. C., Recorder of the said City; Sir FK. ALBERT BOSANQUET, K. C., Common Serjeant of the said City; and 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.

FRANCIS STANHOPE HANSON , Esq., Alderman

JOHN JAMES BADDELEY , Esq., Deputy

Sheriffs.

ARTHUR D. HANSELL, Esq.,

H. W. CAPPER, Esq.

Under-Sheriffs.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT

TRUSCOTT, MAYOR.

FIFTH SESSION.

LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.

BEFORE THE RECORDER.

(Tuesday, March 2.)

Reference Number: t19090302-1

WILKINS, Frederick (22, hawker) ; being found in a public place under such circumstances as to show that he was about to commit a felony. (Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871.) (Elected to be tried by a Jury.)

Mr. W. W. Grantham prosecuted.

Detective-constable JAMES BROWN , City Police. On February 2, about 20 minutes to six in the evening, I was in Aldgate High Street. I saw prisoner Wilkins in company with a man named Macpherson and two other men pushing amongst a crowd of people getting off and on to motor omnibuses at the places where the omnibuses stop. Wilkins was in front feeling with his left hand in the folds of a lady's dress and the other three men were pushing up behind covering his movements. I was standing in a Shop doorway and was distant from them about the width of the footway. All four men left the crowd hurriedly together and walked along Aldgate Street, the reverse way to that in which the omnibus would go. Having gone about 20 yards they stopped and then returned as another motor omnibus came up. Prisoner jumped on the footboard as if mounting a 'bus. At the same moment an old gentleman attempted to get on the 'bus. Prisoner turned sharply round and placed his left hand on the gentleman's vest pocket. The other three men (prisoner's companions pushed the old gentleman from behind. Prisoner and the other three men left that omnibus and walked along Fenchurch Street to the comer of Rood Lane, where they all stopped and spoke together. Prisoner and Macpherson crossed the road, leaving the other two men on the other side of the road. Prisoner and Macpherson then walked along Fenchurch Street to the picture postcard shop, where Wilkins entered the crowd looking at the picture postcards. Wilkins placed his left hand upon the fastening of a lady's bag and attempted to open it. The other two men had at that time joined up with Macpherson behind prisoner. The lady came out of the

crowd and walked along Fenchurch Street, the four men following her. Near the corner of Fenchurch Street the other two men (unnamed) got in front of the lady. It was getting dark. Wilkins got behind the lady on the left-hand aide and again attempted to open her handbag, repeating the same actions. I saw his hand on her reticule. I was about five yards away when I saw him doing this, Macpherson was behind prisoner trying to cover his movements. There were plenty of people about; it would be about the time people were going to Fenchurch Street, a busy comer. Wilkins after that left hurriedly, walked into Gracechurch Street, stood there awhile, then turned back into Fenchurch Street, and afterwards went into King William Street, where I obtained the assistance of another officer. I arrested Wilkins, and Macpherson was arrested by the police officer; the other two men ran away in the direction of London Bridge. When I arrested Wilkins he said, "You have taken a liberty." Wilkins and Macpherson were taken to the Minories Police Station and charged with attempted larceny from the person and "frequenting." Upon Wilkins were found 2d. and two pawntickets relating to a watch and an overcoat. I was watching; 'him about 20 minutes. I was quite close to him when he was doing the things I have mentioned.

Detective-sergeant THOMAS DAVIS , New Scotland Yard, gave evidence to being present on March 10, 1908, at North London Quarter Sessions when prisoner was sentenced to six months' hard labour for stealing money from a lady's handbag in the name of Frederick Wilkins. Witness added that on that occasion he arrested Wilkins himself. Prisoner was then concerned with six other men and the police managed to secure two out of the seven. There were at that time several previous convictions against Wilkins.

Detective-constable BROWN , recalled at the suggestion of the Recorder, proved that at the hearing before Sir Horatio Davies at the Mansion House prisoner expressed a desire to be tried by a Jury. Mr. Douglas, the magistrates' clerk, informed prisoner that as he would be further charged with previous convictions he was entitled, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871, to be tried by a Jury and he elected to be sent for trial.

(Defence.)

FREDERICK WILKINS (prisoner, on oath.) Detective-constable James Brown knew that I was convicted before and that someone could appear against me; that is why he took me into custody. He knew I had nobody who would come up and speak for me. I am innocent about this case. I have got my mother to look after and two young brothers. (Witness gave a categorical denial of the detective's story.)

Cross-examined. I had known Macpherson. about five minutes, just walking along with him to the corner of Fenchurch Street, near London Bridge. By nationality I am a German and I have been in this country about 12 years. When I was arrested I refused my

address because I did not want to give trouble to my mother. Macpherson, who was with me at the time spoken of by the police officer, pleaded guilty before the magistrate. Verdict, Not guilty.

Reference Number: t19090302-2

LEGGETT, George Henley (30, clerk), pleaded guilty of forging and uttering knowing the same to be forged a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque and order for the payment of £10, with intent to defraud; stealing on November 21, 1906, the sum of £7, on December 5, 1908, the sum of £10, on December 12, 1908, the sum of £10, and on January 25, 1909, the sum of £11 15s. 9d., the moneys of Gallagher, Limited, his employers; embezzling on January 8, 1909, the sum of £10 entrusted to him for and on account of Gallagher, Limited, his employers.

Prisoner confessed to a previous conviction in 1899; his total defalcations are £159 17s. 6d. He refused to give any information concerning himself.

Sentence, Twelve months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-3

EDWARDS, William (24, carman) , indicted for robbery with violence upon Hannah Freethy and stealing one bag containing the sum of 1s. 3d. in money her goods and moneys, from her person, pleaded guilty of robbery without violence and confessed to a previous conviction.

Sentence, Twelve months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-4

WILLIAMS, Gertrude Emmeline Decima (26), pleaded guilty of forging and uttering a Savings Bank deposit book and obtaining the sum of £1, with intent to defraud, and confessed to a previous conviction in 1907.

Mr. Forster Boulton, M. P., prosecuted.

On January 15 prisoner went to the Tottenham Court Road branch of the London and Westminster Bank and, representing herself as a customer, obtained a single cheque which she filled in for £10. She then deposited the cheque at the Hampstead Road Post Office. Not being able to draw on the account for twelve days, prisoner altered the date from January 15 to January 3, so as to bring hereself within the rule, and obtained £1 on demand at the Southampton Street Post Office. The book was returned marked "no account." Dr. Fullerton, under whose observation prisoner has been at Holloway Prison, described her as a moral imbecile, and her friends describe her as refusing to be controlled. Before the death of her father, a medical man in Wales, prisoner was under the charge of the Salvation Army at Walthamstow. When she heard of her father's death she ran away.

A sister of the Salvation Army offering to take charge of her, prisoner was bound over in her own recognisances in £25 to come up for judgment if called upon.

Reference Number: t19090302-5

BULL, Sidney George (34, postman), pleaded guilty of stealing certain money, to wit, two half-crowns from a postal letter and one postal letter containing one ring, the goods in each case of His Majesty's Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office. Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-6

CARTER, Herbert (22, postman), pleaded guilty of stealing one post letter containing four silver pendants and one post letter containing one scent bottle, the goods of His Majesty's Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.

Prisoner had been in the employ of the Post Office for nine years, When arrested £5 in cash was found upon him, a Post Office Savings Bank book showing a credit of £30, and at his house was found £119 10s. in gold. Mr. Huntly Jenkins, for the defence, accounted for the possession by prisoner of so much money by stating that he had been very successful in betting.

Sentence, Twelve months' hard labour and to pay the taxed costs of the prosecution.

Reference Number: t19090302-7

CAMPBELL, Philip (28, clerk), pleaded guilty of stealing one cheque form, the goods of David Mandler, his employer; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain endorsement on a request for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque for the payment of the sum of £5 2s. 4d., with intent to defraud.

Prisoner, who was stated to have hitherto borne a good character, was sentenced to Six months' imprisonment in the second division.

Reference Number: t19090302-8

SMITH, Rupert Burton (35, phrenologist, a man of colour) , indicted for obtaining by false pretences a certain valuable security, to wit, an agreement for kitting the dwelling-house "Aldersteign," Acton Vale, and unlawfully inducing the owner of the said dwelling-house to execute the said valuable security with intent to defraud, and obtaining by false pretences a certain valuable security, to wit, an agreement for letting the dwelling-house, 28, Wellington Square, Chelsea, and unlawfully inducing the owner of the said dwelling-house to execute the said valuable security with intent to defraud, pleaded guilty to the indictment in respect of the house in Wellington Square, and confessed to a previous conviction.

It was stated that prisoner had obtained three houses in this manner, giving references from, persons in Jamaica, vacated them before rent became due, and used them in the interval as brothels. He has been convicted of keeping a brothel and of larceny from the person.

Sentence, Eighteen months' hard labour.

BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.

(Tuesday, March 2.)

Reference Number: t19090302-9

WELFARE, Henry (29, tailor), and POWELL, Thomas (28, coster), both pleaded guilty of unlawfully having in their possession 33 pieces of counterfeit coin, well knowing the same to be counterfeit, with intent to utter the same.

Welfare was proved to have been convicted in 1904, receiving 15 months', and in 1907 receiving 18 months' for possessing counterfeit coin.

Sentences: Welfare, Five years' penal servitude; Powell, eighteen months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-10

RILEY, John (32, steward), pleaded guilty of unlawfully tendering counterfeit coin and having in his possession three pieces of counterfeit coin, knowing the same to be counterfeit, with intent to utter the same.

Seven previous convictions were proved, including sentences of 18 sad 15 months.

Sentence, Twelve months' hard labour.

BEFORE MR. JUSTICE PHILLIMORE.

(Wednesday, March 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-11

SMITH, Charles William (24, labourer), pleaded guilty of committing an unnatural offence with Randolph Hewetson. He confessed to having been convicted of larceny at Willesden Petty Sessions on April 23, 1907.

Sentence, Six years' penal servitude.

Reference Number: t19090302-12

DOLAN, Emily (33, laundress), pleaded not guilty to a charge on coroner's inquisition of wilful murder of F. R. James Friend and to an indictment for the manslaughter of the said Friend.

Mr. Muir and Mr. Leycester prosecuted; Mr. Burnie defended (at the request of the Court).

Before the Jury were put in charge, prisoner, on the advice of her counsel, withdrew her plea upon the indictment and pleaded guilty of manslaughter. The prosecution offered no evidence on the charge of murder, and upon that a verdict of Not guilty was returned.

Prisoner had cohabited with Friend for four or five years, both being of intemperate habits. In the course of a quarrel, prisoner stabbed Friend in the chest with a stocking needle and he died from the injuries. Prisoner had been several times convicted for drunkenness, and once for assault upon a workhouse matron.

Mr. Justice Phillimore said that prisoner might consider herself fortunate that the Grand Jury had thrown out the bill for murder. She, with malice in her heart against the man, had stabbed Friend, not in self-defence and with very slight immediate provocation. The case was one very little short of murder, and prisoner must go to penal servitude for 12 years.

Reference Number: t19090302-13

FIRGIE, Joseph (32, hairdresser) , feloniously sending, knowing the contents thereof, a certain letter threatening to kill Anna Kerner.

Mr. Pickersgill, M. P., prosecuted; Mr. G. St. John Macdonald defended.

ANNA KERNER. I am a cook at 56, New Compton Street. When I first came to England, in 1905, I lived at 52, Tottenham Street, where prisoner also lived. I never lived with him as his wife or mistress. He suggested in 1907 that I could earn easy money by going out on the streets. In April, 1908, I received the letter produced; it is in prisoner's handwriting.

Cross-examined. I have never earned my living by going on the streets. When I first became acquainted with prisoner I thought I might have got to love him, but when I had had an opportunity of learning his character I certainly refused. I am not a married woman. I was engaged to a man in Germany, and I had a child by him. Prisoner asked me many times to marry him; I told him I was already married; I told him that falsehood because I was ashamed he should find out that I had had a child. I deny that I have been friendly with prisoner since I received this letter.

HUGO MEYER , an interpreter, said that the letters produced were in very illiterate German. The letter of April 7, 1908, he translated as follows: "Dear Anna,—I have waited long enough, and I am writing to you; there is not much choice; we two need not live much longer, and if you do not come together with me by Tuesday then you shall see what I will do to you. If I get you into my fingers no Jews will help you out of them." Another letter was, "To-night will I see you at nine o'clock at your lodgings, and if you will not let me see you I will do my best that I can to you"—meaning, "whatever bad I can do to you I will do." Witness was present as interpreter when prisoner was charged. Prisoner said in reply (speaking in German), "That is not true; I have given the girl money; she has always worried me for money; I have been intimate with her; she has altogether had about £100 from me and has promissed to marry me in four weeks, but it is now four years and she has not done so."

Sergeant JOHN PROTHEROE , C Division. On the evening of February 8 I saw prisoner walking up and down New Compton Street; he was looking at No. 56 as if expecting someone from there. I went to him and said, "Is your name Firgie—are you waiting for Anna Kerner?" He said, "No bfear; not that whore." I said, "You must come with me; she has complained to the police that you have endeavoured to bring her on the streets as a prostitute, and because she refused you have threatened to take her life." He said, "She allows all the Jews that she knows to go with her for 2s."

Cross-examined. So far as I know prisoner bears a good character.

(Defence.)

JOSEPH FIRGIE (prisoner, on oath). I am a Roman Catholic. I come from Austria-Hungary. I came to London seven years ago next May. I have known prosecutrix for three years and 10 months. I met her about a fortnight ago after she came here, from Germany. She

was then employed in a restaurant in Tottenham Street, where I always used to go on Sundays for supper, because I was working indoors at that time. She left that place and then went to Finchley Road in service, where she stayed for four weeks. I asked her to marry me, and she consented. Then she went to Meithenheim, and I paid everything for her. She told me if I would not pay she would have to throw herself in the Thames, because she knew nobody in London. She then got a situation at Croydon, and she wrote asking me for money to buy some clothes and linen. I sent her money, and some time later she wrote me again to say that she had been dangerously ill in hospital and that she would not be able to work for a time and that she must have a girl to look after her and that the doctor had ordered her wine every day and that she must have money. I was without work at that time, so I borrowed money from my friends and pawned my overcoat and sent her money. Soon afterwards she wrote me again telling me I must either send her £3 or a revolver, and as I had no money I replied that I would send a revolver. Two months after that she wrote asking me to go to Croydon and see her as she must speak to me. When I met her she said she was going to Germany as her mother had died and left her 30,000 marks. When she came back from Germany she showed me a will, which said that three persons had to have a share out of 64,000 marks and that they were going to take legal steps. Fourteen days later she came to my lodgings and said she wanted £2. I only had five shillings, so she told me I must borrow the money from Mr. Agis or she would lose her inheritance and I would lose all the money I had lent her. I took her to Mr. Agis and he lent me 20s., which I gave to her. The following morning she went to Croydon, and then she disappeared. I then found out that she was living at Willesden Green, that she had had a baby which she had put out to nurse and which had died, and that she was married and that her husband was alive in Germany and that she was about to be divorced and that she had a son nine years old. She was very surprised to see me. I asked her, "Why did not you tell me you were married and had a child?" and she told me that if I had not turned up for another three weeks I would not have found her at all. She told me she had come into her inheritance but had not got the money yet and must have money. I gave her money and it lasted so for four months, and then I told her that it could not go on like that any more. I then found her employment in West Street. During the time she was there she borrowed money from different people. She came to my lodgings at different times and she promised to marry me and pay me back all the money I had lent her when she got her inheritance. I wrote the letter to her in April, 1906, now produced to me. She came to my lodging after that. That letter does not contain any threat to murder. It only means that we should unite together. It means when she goes on like this we cannot lived together and we had better part, but that if we unite together no Jews' help would be wanted. I wrote the second letter to her that has been read. What I meant by the last sentence in that letter was that I wanted to

meet her at nine o'clock, and I asked her when I met her in the evening if I could do something with her in a good way; if not, then I should apply to a solicitor and ask him whether I could do anything, and if he advised me that I could not I would forfeit everything. I never intended to threaten to kill her in either of those two letters. I saw the prosecutrix every Sunday after the date of the first letter in April until she left London in October, 1908, for three months. After she returned I have seen her but have not spoken to her. I never called through the window of her lodgings nasty things to her. I spoke to her through the window once and said, "Anna, if you have not got any money I will give you two shillings for breakfast. "She has never complained of me at all about my letter of April 9, 1908; she never mentioned a word about it. She was always friendly to me and was always demanding money from me. She did say about seven months ago that she was ill and could not marry me. I never asked her or suggested to her that she should go on the streets and become a public prostitute. She told me that she walked out with a Spanish doctor and she asked me to look out for a room for her. I really loved her or I would not have supported her so much, and I really intended to marry her.

Cross-examined. I did not send her a letter in 1907 threatening to shoot her. I was charged at the police station for doing that. I did not ask her to go on the streets about Christmas, 1907. I did not say, "I know of a place; come with me and I will show you." She asked me to find a room for her, and I took her to a place in Charlotte Street. I introduced her to a male friend of mine there and I asked him to try and make it up between us. I did say, "She will come now and again with men." I was not unfriendly to her in February, 1909; the only thing was she went away and never told me anything. I have said to Sergeant Protheroe about that time, "I don't want to speak to that whore." I also said to him, "She allows all the Jews she knows to go with her for 2s." I said, "She owes me nearly £100 that I have paid for her washing and a lot of other things. Sergeant Protheroe did tell me that prosecutrix had complained that I had threatened her life. I have not denied that. I did tell him that she had allowed one Jew to go with her for 50s., and one for 10s., and one for 2s. I did not deny the charge when I was arrested, because at the moment I could not say anything. I was walking up and down New Compton Street on February 8 last, because I wanted to see her and speak with her. I had written her a letter that morning that I wanted to make the best of it I could.

Re-examined. The reason I told my friend that she would bring men to her lodging was because people had told me that she went on in that way, and I could not believe it because she always denied it, and when she asked me to get a room for her I told her that I would take her to the house where my friend lived. I asked him to tell me if she brought men there, and she never brought anybody.

JUGGEN SCHLESINGER. I am an interpreter of German. I have read the letter of April 8, 1908. My translation of it is:" I have

been waiting long enough, and I am not writing much because it seems it would be no use, but we two need not live any more"—this seems to me a bad expression for "cannot live any more"—"and unless you come to me by Tuesday together, then you will see what I do if I get you between my fingers, then no Jews will help you." The words "to you" are not there. It is not the writing of a man who is well up in German; he ought not to have written it at all, because he might not have known what he was writing. It might strike another man very differently to what he intended to convey, therefore it is dangerous to use language if you do not know what you are saying. The word "fingers" might mean "hands. "

PAUL AGIS . I live at 1, Clifton Street, Portland Road. I have known prisoner about four years and a half. I am a barber's assistant; he is also a barber's assistant. I have known prosecutrix smce she came to London. About two years ago she came with prisoner to my place for me to lend money to her because she was about to inherit some 50,000 marks in Germany. I was a little suspicions about that story, and I did not want to give her £2 at once, and I told her I had not got any money then, as it was in the post-office. Prisoner said to me, if you give it to her I will be responsible. Next day she came by herself to my place and I gave her £1 in his name. She told me how happy she would be when she inherited the money from Germany, and that she would take a nice barber's shop for him and marry him. She promised to return me the money with 30s. I said I did not want any interest because I was not a moneylender. She never repaid me, but he repaid me himself in a few months' time. I know prisoner to be a man of good character.

ELIAS RADISCHICH . I have known prisoner for three years. I am a hairdresser. His character is very good. I lived in the same house as prisoner. Prosecutrix has called there to see him.

ROSA SHEARMAN . I have known prisoner three years and a half. His character is very good and honest. I am a restaurant keeper; his young lady was in my employ for two months.

LOUIS FRITZ . I am a wood carver; have known prisoner two years; be is quite a respectable man. I have often seen the girl and him together.

EMMA ANNASON . I have known prisoner three years. I keep a lodging house. The prisoner lodged with me until the day he was arrested. During all the time he has borne a good character. Prosecutrix often visited prisoner. Her last visit was five or six months ago. They were very friendly. She never complained to me about his treatment of her.

ANTON WINDAGE . I have known prisoner for two or three months, and he has borne a good character during that time, always very respectable.

Verdict, Not guilty.

BEFORE THE RECORDER.

(Wednesday, March 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-14

BOOTH, Charley (42, ironmonger's assistant), pleaded guilty of feloniously marrying Emily Jane Hollingshurst, his wife being then alive.

Prisoner was married to Alice Sykes in. 1892, and, after she had had three children, deserted her. He married Hollinghurst in 1902, who also had three children and whom he also deserted.

Sentence, Nine months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-15

CLEVERLEY, Annie (33, waitress) ; embezzling the sum of £8, received by her for and on account of Henry Crane, her employer. Mr. Gregory Fisher prosecuted.

ARTHUR WATSON , manager to Mr. Henry Crane, restaurant keeper, 35, Barbican, and 248, Westminster Bridge Road. On October 15 prisoner was employed as waitress at the shop in the Barbican. She had been there about six months. On that day I gave her the cheque for £8 produced. The bank is distant from the shop about three minutes' walk. The cheque has been paid. She did not return with the money and I have heard nothing from her in respect of her nonattendance. I tried to find her. I last saw her at Lambeth Police Court about three weeks ago.

To Prisoner. On three or four previous occasions you had been entrusted with cheques and had brough back the money.

HENRY THOMAS CRANE proved writing out the cheque and giving it to last witness to get cashed.

HARRY JOHNSON , cashier, Fore Street branch of the London and County Bank, identified prisoner as the person for whom he had cashed the cheque. She had been in the habit of coming with cheques to be cashed.

Detective-constable EDWARD MARRIOTT , City. I arrested prisoner on February 11 at Lambeth Police Court, where she had been discharged. I told her I held a warrant for her arrest and read it to her. It charged her with stealing £8, the proceeds of a cheque, in October last. She replied, "When I came out of the bank someone knocked up against me and it fell into the road." She was carrying an envelope containing two letters, one being from the man Cleverley, now in Brixton prison, with whom she has been living.

Prisoner declined to give evidence on oath and stated that she had not had the money.

WILLIAM ELLIOTT , refreshment contractor, Upper Street, Islington, stated that prisoner had written to him from Holloway asking him to give evidence for her. She was employed by him during three summers at the Kursaal at Southend, where she was in charge of the saloon bar. She conducted herself to the best of his belief with honesty and respectability, and he was perfectly satisfied with her.

Detective MARRIOTT , recalled, said he had inquired of Lyons, the caterers, and found that in 1902 prisoner was employed at the Throgmorton

Restaurant for about 12 months and there were no complaints about her. She was then transferred to the Trocadero, Shaftesbury Avenue. From January to April of last year she was employed by Messrs. Medcalfe and Co., caterers, 32, Aldgate High Street.

Mr. Fisher submitted that prisoner having called witnesses to character, he was now entitled to give evidence as to her antecedents.

The Recorder. Yes, I am afraid we must have it.

Detective TAYLOR , J Division. On November 13, 1907, prisoner was sentenced at North London Police Court for stealing clothing, larceny by a lodger. There were then four charges against her, two of which were proceeded with, and she was sentenced to two consecutive terms of 14 days' imprisonment in the second division. On a subsequent occasion at Lambeth Police Court, for a similar offence she was bound over. Verdict, Guilty, with a recommendation to mercy. Prisoner confessed to the conviction at North London. Sentence, Six months' imprisonment.

Reference Number: t19090302-16

BROWN, William (64, labourer), and CLARKE, Alfred (20, carman) ; both maliciously committing damage, injury and spoil, by night, to and upon certain personal property of a private nature, to wit, a plate glass window, the property of Emmanuel Truefitt and others, such damage being to an amount exceeding £5, to wit, £20.

Brown pleaded guilty.

Mr. W. R. Willson prosecuted.

Police-constable WILLIAM PATNE , 122 City. On the morning of February 15, about 12.30, I was opposite 89, Fleet Street, the premises of Messrs. Lockwood and Bradley, tailors. There were very few people about. I walked on a little way. I then heard the smashing of glass. I ran across the road, at the same time blowing my whistle, and seized both prisoners. Police-constable Hammond arrived immediately afterwards. The shop is without shutters,. and a plate glass window was broken. Prisoner Brown said, "I done it." I found the piece of stone produced lying on the footway. Brown did not say why he had done it. Clarke said, "If he (Brown) had not done it I should. You were too quick. We intended to steal some stuff (cloth)." They were taken to the station, where Clarke produced a piece of brick from his right-hand, coat pocket.

FREDERICK GEORGE MCINTYRE , assistant to Messrs. Lockwood and Bradley, stated the value of the glass broken was about £20. Verdict, Clarke Guilty.

Previous convictions were proved against both prisoners. Sentences: Each, Nine months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-17

CATLING, Frederick (34, engraver) ; conspiring with Joseph Stoddart, Henry John Jones and others, by false pretences to defraud such liege subjects of the King as should compete for prizes advertised by them in certain periodical circulars, called "Football Record," "Racing Record," and "Football Sport"; obtaining by false pretences from Ebenezer Funnell postal orders for the several sums of 9s., 1s. 6d., 2s., 3s., and £1, and from Emily Laura Carter two postal orders for the several sums of 2s. 6d. and 1s. 6d. and three 1d. postage stamps, in each case with intent to defraud.

Mr. Muir reminded the Court that the Jury had disagreed as to Catling at the trial in the previous sessions with reference to the charge of conspiracy, and had acquitted prisoner on the counts charging false pretences (see pages 501—602). That trial lasted 23 days, and the authorities had decided not to proceed further with the prosecution, and, subject to his Lordship's sanction, no evidence would be offered.

A verdict of Not guilty was accordingly returned and prisoner was discharged.

Reference Number: t19090302-18

TAYLOR, John Bacchus (47, medical practitioner), pleaded guilty of forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque for the payment of the sum of £2 10s., with intent to defraud; and attempting to obtain by false pretences from Francis Hackett the sum of £1 10s., with intent to defraud.

On January 30 prisoner went to the demonstrator at the Clergy House, Roman Catholic Division, Westminster, and produced a cheque drawn on Messrs. Gillett, bankers, of Woodstock, payable to J. B. Taylor, and signed with a fictitious signature. He stated that he had received the cheque too late to go to the bank and asked for cash. Prisoner's answers not being satisfactory, the was detained and given into custody. At first he maintained that the cheque was a perfectly good one and had been given him by a client in payment of medical attendance, but afterwards admitted that it was a forgery. Prisoner had an account at Messrs. Gillett's bank, but the account, although not closed, was practically dead. According to the statement of Mr. Roach, the prosecuting counsel, twelve similar charges are hanging over prisoner's head in Oxfordshire. Prisoner stated that he had an American medical diploma. He has been previously convicted.

Sentence, Nine months' imprisonment; the Recorder directed the inspector in the case to inform the authorities that in passing that sentence he had taken into consideration the other charges against prisoner.

BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.

(Wednesday, March 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-19

HAYATO, Sanshiro (37, artist) ; unlawfully wounding Mary Priestley, with intent to do her grievous bodily harm.

Mr. J. R. Sydenham Jones prosecuted; Mr. Walter Frampton defended.

MARY PRIESTLEY . I am an unfortunate and am now serving a month at Holloway for molesting. On February 13, at about one a.m., I met prisoner in Tottenham Court Road. He spoke to

me first as I was walking from Tottenham Court Road and round Grafton Street on my way home and said something in Japanese. He then gave me a blow and I fell on my back. He struck me in the eye and then kicked me. My face was all bleeding. The blow could not have been done with his fist—he either had a ring on his hand or something in his hand. He kicked me while I was on the ground. I became unconscious and do not remember anything till I found myself in the hospital. While I was on the ground prisoner kicked me in the private part and also on the head, and I am deaf in the left ear. At the hospital the surgeon attended to my head. He did not examine my body until afterwards.

Cross-examined. I am serving a month's imprisonment for. accosting—I had not done so. I do accost men sometimes; I did not accost the prisoner. He said something to me in Japanese which I did not understand. I did not touch him. I did not ask him for a drink. Police-constable HARRY VIGOR , 428 D. On February 13, at about 1.30 a.m., I was on duty near Grafton Street, when I heard an altercation—a quarrel. I saw prisoner strike prosecutrix apparently with his hand or fist, knocking her down. I then saw prisoner kick her twice while she was on the pavement. He ran away two or three paces, turned round, and took a running kick at her, kicked her on the head, and then ran away towards Fitzroy Square. I pursued him and shouted, "Stop him." Another officer stopped him in Fitzroy Square and he was taken into custody. The three of us went back to the woman, who was lying on the footway on her back unconscious. She remained so for 15 or 20 minutes; she then recovered and I assisted her to University College Hospital, where Dr. Leighton attended her. I did not notice prisoner's hat. I should have noticed it if he had had it off. I saw no struggle. He appeared to deliberately strike her and she fell. When I got back to the woman I examined her head and found she had a cut over her right eye and two or three bruises on her head. The eye was covered with blood. She had two bruises on her scalp—in the hair. She was sober.

Cross-examined. Grafton Street runs between Tottenham Court Road and Fitzroy Souare and is about 150 yards in length. When I heard the altercation the two were about 15 yards from Tottenham Court Road. I was 20 to 25 yards off. The street is lit by are lamps; it is fairly lighted; it was quiet at that time in the morning. There was nothing like a struggle. I saw him evidently strike her. I saw him strike her. It may be a slip to say I saw him "evidently" strike her. There was no struggle. Prisoner said at the police court that his hat was damaged. I was about 20 to 25 yards off when I saw prisoner kick her—apparently on the head. The running kick was made at the head. I did not see him kick her anywhere else. I saw the bruises when she was unconscious, and when I was doing my best to bring her to. She had her hat on; I took it off. The bruise was on the side of her head. I was not presen when she was examined at the hospital. On the first occasion at the police court I did not say that I had examined her head and found bruises. I was about five or six yards off when prisoner ran away.

Re-examined. I could clearly see what occurred, because they were nearly opposite the electric lamp.

Police-constable GEORGE JEFFS , 338 D. On February 13, at 1.30 a.m., I was on duty near Grafton Street, when I heard a woman scream. Looking in the direction of the sound, I saw prisoner running towards Fitzroy Square followed by the last witness. I noticed that he had his hat off. I took prisoner and returned to where the woman was lying on the pavement. She was unconscious. She was sober. She had a cut over her right eye. I took prisoner to the station. Prosecutrix had a bump on her head when I afterwards saw her at the station.

FRANK LEIGHTON , house surgeon, University College Hospital. On the early morning of February 13 prosecutrix was brought in and I examined her. She seemed perfectly sober, but very excited. I first noticed that she had a wound on the right eye of an irregular character, not very deep, but requiring dressing. That was the chief thing she complained of. She also complained of various bruises. I examined her body and found various red marks about the body—on the chest and abdomen. I could not say exactly where they were because no special note was made of this case. There was no abrasion anywhere except over the eye. I again, saw her on the 19th or 20th, when I found marks of bruising on the abdomen—discoloration. I do not recollect her mentioning other bruises on her head. I gave evidence before the magistrate on the 20th. I had then seen her twice. The wound on the eye might have been caused by any kind of blow.

Cross-examined. If there had been a struggle and the woman had fallen on the pavement that might have caused the wound on the eye. My attention was chiefly directed to that wound.

(Defence.)

SANSHIRO HAYATO (prisoner, on oath). I am a Japanese, have been in this country for 12 months, and am an artist. I have lived at 4, Weymouth Street, Great Portland Street. On February 12 I had spent the evening with a friend about to return to Japan at my rooms. I had escorted him home and was returning by Tottenham Court Road, where, at the corner of Grafton Street, prosecutrix accosted me. She said, "Halloa," and followed me round into Grafton Street. She caught at me and said, "Where are you going?" I said, "I am going home." She said, "Can I come to your house? Are you Chinese or Jap?" I said nothing. She then caught hold of my hand and touched me here. I tried to get away from her, but she held my fingers back and asked for money, touching my pocket, I said, "What do you want to do?" She said, "I want a drink." When I tried to get away from her she pushed my fingers back and took off my hat and said, "Understand, if you don't give me some money, I will scream and call for help." I tried to take my hat back. She then struck me in the face with my hat. I tried to get my hat back and to pull my fingers away, when the woman

fell down. I did not strike her. I had no instrument in my hand. I did not kick her—Japanese never kick. When she fell on the ground she still had my hat. I leant over the body and took it. It is the hat I am now wearing—it is damaged. I had 10s. in the lining of my hat. After getting the hat I hurried towards home, when I was stopped by a policeman, taken to the station, and charged with this offence. I said, "Liar." This was the first time I had ever seen prosecutrix.

(Thursday, March 4.)

Cross-examined. I had taken my friend to his home in New Oxford Street and was coming home through Tottenham Court Road. I left Weymouth Street at 12.30 and left New Oxford Street at a little past one a.m. Of course, I wanted to shake the woman off. I always keep my money in my hat. I put 10s. there two or three months ago—I wrapped it up in an envelope and hid it there. I do not know that the woman knew that I had the money there. I did not see the policeman come up before I parted with the woman. I saw her fall. I did not see she was unconscious. I did not run away, but when I picked up my hat I walked away fast. I had my hat in my hand when arrested. The woman did not fall because of my knocking or hitting her. I say the injury to her face was not caused by my hitting her. I never kicked her.

Verdict, Not guilty.

BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.

(Wednesday, March 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-20

COOPER, Henry (20, brushmaker), pleaded guilty of attempting to carnally know Eva Cresswell, a girl under the age of 13 years, to wit, of the age of eight years.

Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-21

LLOYD, Evelyn (25, ironer), pleaded guilty of having been entrusted by Charlotte Axam with certain property, to wit. the several sums of 6s. 1d. and 6s. 1d. for a certain purpose, unlawfully did fraudulently convert the same property to her own use and benefit.

Prisoner was released on her own recognisances in the sum of £5 to come up for judgment if called upon.

Reference Number: t19090302-22

JORDAN, John (30, carman) ; indecently assaulting Annie Newbold.

Verdict, Not guilty.

Reference Number: t19090302-23

COLLINSON, Arthur Denvil Sasson (26, engineer), pleaded guilty of breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Facey Forward, and stealing therein one gold watch and one chain. 10 gold rings and other articles, his goods; breaking and entering the dwelling-house of George May, and stealing therein two gold watches, three gold rings, six gold brooches and other articles, his goods; breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Jennett Thompson Weston, and stealing therein one gold watch, two silver watches, and other articles, his goods.

WALTER SAVILL , Warder 66, Wormwood Scrubbs. I was present at this Court in October, 1903, when prisoner was sentenced to five years' penal servitude for forgery, house-breaking, and receiving. His first conviction was at Westminster, six months' for stealing a letter. At this Court on November 21, 1896, he was sentenced to four years' penal servitude for arson, attempted arson and housebreaking.

Detective-sergeant JOHN BISSELL , Division. At the time prisoner was arrested he gave us a lot of information, and we arrested a receiver in East London who has absconded from his bail. There are 30 cases this man has admitted. He was employed for four months after the expiration, of his last sentence as electrician at the Battersea Empire.

Sentence, Five years' penal servitude.

Reference Number: t19090302-24

BLACKWELL, Edward Henry (23, painter), BLACKWELL, Joseph Walter (22, baker), and VERNEY, John (28, labourer) ; all breaking and entering St. Mark's Church, Coburg Road, and stealing therein certain silver mountings and divers sums of money, the goods and moneys of Oscar James Smith; all breaking and entering the Oakley Place Wesleyan Chapel, and stealing therein three sheets and other articles, the goods of Edward Young; E. H. Blackwell and J. W. Blackwell, breaking and entering St. Philip's Church, Kennington Road, with intent to commit a felony therein.

E. H. Blackwell and J. W. Blackwell pleaded not guilty to the first and second counts, but guilty to the third count. Verney pleaded guilty.

Sentence: The two Blackwells, Six months' hard labour; Verney, twelve months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-25

SMITH, John (36, labourer) ; unlawfully inciting other persons to commit felony.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Symmons prosecuted.

Inspector JOSEPH SIMMONS , Division. I was on duty on February 16 in Cavendish Square, W., from two o'clock. There were thousands of men, women and children there for the purpose of forming a procession of the wives and children of the unemployed of London. I saw prisoner there. He was talking to various people surrounding him. He was deploring his own conditions of life, saying he might just as well fee locked up as walking the streets of London day and night with nothing to do, and comparing his lot with the lot of others who were passing by in carriages and speaking generally against the wealthy class. The procession formed and proceeded westward along Holies Street. I followed. At about 3.45 I saw prisoner raise his hand and make a running kick at the window of 17, Holies Street, saying, "These are the things we

want." He did not break the window. The commissionaire who was on duty caught his Arm and pushed him back into the crowd. I did not think it advisable to arrest him at that time as prisoner was surrounded by at least 20 people of his own class, and standing against the side of the window were lots of well-dressed people exposing jewellery and other articles of value. The procession then moved into Oxford Street. When I was about 15 yards from 394, Oxford Street, I heard a smash. I heard prisoner say, "Come on, boys, help yourselves." I ran down and caught him simultaneously with Sergeant Hyde and Inspector Bishop. He then turned on me and said, "I told you you would have me for something before the day was out." I saw that the window was smashed and I saw this brick in front of it. The jeweller's assistant came out. I saw him holding up his hands to keep the people back. Prisoner made no reply when charged.

To Prisoner. I have given my reason why I did not arrest you when you tried to smash the window. By the time the procession started it had swelled to numbers altogether unexpected, and the police in the procession were inadequate to cope with the mass of people, and reinforcements were being sent up from all directions.

Sergeant WILLIAM HYDE , Division. On the afternoon of February 16 I was keeping observation on people in this crowd. The last witness gave me some directions. I saw prisoner there. The prisoner went with the procession along Oxford Street in the direction of No. 394. When about 15 yards from No. 394 I heard a smashing of glass and beard prisoner shout, "Come along, boys; now is your chance; help yourselves." Inspector Simmons and I ran forward and arrested prisoner. He turned to Inspector Simmons and said, "I told you you would have me for something before the day was out. "

To Prisoner. When we got hold of you you did not say, "You told me in Cavendish Square you would have me before the afternoon was out. "

THOMAS ALBOROUGH , commissionaire at Lewis's. On February 16 the procession came along. I saw a man run and kick the window. I do not know who he was. I caught him by the neck and back and threw him away from the window before he could make a second kick. He said. "These are the things we want in the window." I was standing against the door of the shop. The street was full of people. There was one gentleman stood alongside of me. I did not notice any ladies and gentlemen on the pavement outside the shop.

To Prisoner. I could not say that you are the man who tried to kick that window.

JOHN WILLIAM BROOK , jeweller's assistant. At 10 past four I stood in the doorway at 394, Oxford Street, watching the procession. I heard a smash; someone said the window was broken. I looked to see what was the matter and saw oar window was broken. You could put your fist through the hole. I had been watching prisoner

beforehand. Before the smash I heard him calling to people to come forward and help themselves. He said that several times. There were men around him but not really close.

To Prisoner. You were seven or eight yards away. You came from the crowd which was on the opposite side of the road and were inviting them to come forward. The crowd was going with you.

(Defence.)

JOHN SMITH (prisoner, on oath). On the afternoon in question, about two o'clock, I was in Cavendish Square. There was a meeting of unemployed. We were arguing the point. I said, "I am sick and tired of walking the streets of London night and day starving." Mr. Simmons said to me, "If you don't mind yourself I will give you a job." I said, "Thank you" He said, "You want a job in Pentonville." I said, "I might just as well be there as starving walking the streets." I followed the procession into Oxford Street. Just passing the jeweller's somebody said, "There is a smash," and everybody hollered out. Three detectives got hold of me. I said to Mr. Simmons, "You told me in Cavendish Square you would have me before the day was out and your words are true. "I know nothing about (breaking a window or inciting that day. I had no more strength than a child unborn. I had walked the streets three nights right off and had not broke my fast for 2 1/2 days.

Cross-examined. Out of that whole multitude I never knew one man. I saw nobody make a running kick at the window. I did not do it. I never uttered a single word there. I was not at the window. I was one of the unemployed in the procession. A clergyman and other people in Cavendish Square exhorted all to follow and expose the poverty up in the West End. The crowd were cheering one of the suffragettes, who was one of the crowd. She might have broken the window for all I know. I did not say or hear anybody say," Come on boys, help yourselves. "I did not hold up my hands and wave them to persons to come along. I did not care what became of me. I would not have cared if I had gone to Westminister Bridge and made a hole in the water that day.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sergeant BUXTON . Criminal Investigation Department. I know prisoner well. He is not in any employment. I have known him since 1902. At that time I saw him frequently in the company of a well-known convict who is undergoing penal servitude. At that time I arrested him for an attempt to steal from the person. He was sentenced at North London Sessions to 16 months' hard labour in the name of James Smith. There are other convictions: 12 months' for stealing a purse; 18 months' for receiving a watch; three years' and two years' supervision at North London Sessions in the name of Thomas Kelly"; 28 days' at Horncastle in August, 1908, for assault and wilful damage.

Sentence, 18 months' imprisonment.

BEFORE MR. JUSTICE PHILLIMORE.

(Thursday, March 4.)

Reference Number: t19090302-26

DARBY, Walter (36, financier), pleaded guilty of conspiring and agreeing with Henry Warwick Gyde and Septimus Marcus, otherwise Marcus Edward Septimus Bernard, to obtain by false pretences divers moneys and valuable securities from such of His Majesty's liege subjects as should be induced to become debenture-holders in certain public companies called the Welsh Slate Quarries, Limited, and the North Wales Quarries, Limited, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences certain valuable securities, to wit, banker's cheques and orders for the payment and of the value of the following respective amounts, to wit: On July 14, 1904, from John Dawson Self, £180; on July 14, 1904, from Joshua Heywood, £18; on October 4, 1904, from Joshua Heywood, £29 5s.; on September 1, 1905, from John Dawson Self, £210; on January 19, 1905, from Joshua Heywood, £45; on July 21, 1905, from George Fentriss, £80; on August 24, 1905, from Jane Price, £42 10s.; and on September 28, 1905, from George Fentriss, £50, in each case with intent to defraud.The charges had relation to frauds in connection with which two men named Gyde and Bernard were convicted at the November Session, 1908. (See p. 32 of this volume, and p. 903 of preceding volume.)

Sentence, Three and ahalf years' penal servitude.

Reference Number: t19090302-27

CURLEY, James (32, navvy) ; indicted and charged on coroner's inquest with the wilful murder of Elizabeth Watts.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Travers Humphreys prosecuted; Mr. Huntly Jenkins defended.

Police-constable FRANK GEORGE WAYLETT , 176 K. I am accustomed to the making of plans. I prepared and now produce plan showing the ground floor and the front and back elevations of 9, Mermaid Court. It is a four-storey building. On the top floor there are two sets of rooms or flats each containing two rooms. The door on the left of the landing was pointed out to me as the one leading into the flat occupied by prisoner and deceased. That door leads direct into the kitchen. In the kitchen there is a door leading into the bedroom. There are no other means of getting into the bedroom except through that door from the kitchen. The kitchen looks to the front of the house and the bedroom to the back, There is a window in the bedroom with the ordinary lift-up sash opening. If the lower part of the window is lifted to its fullest extent the aperture is three feet wide by eighteen inches high. The height of the window from the ground of the courtyard is 32 feet six inches and from the floor of the room two feet ten inches. There is a wooden partition between the kitchen occupied by prisoner and deceased and the sitting-room occupied by Mrs. Taylor. The bedroom is smaller than the sittingroom.

Cross-examined. The window was not broken at all.

ADA BLACKWELL . I live with my husband, George Blackwell, at High Wycombe. The deceased woman was my sister-in-law. She

was a married woman, and her name was Elizabeth Watts. She did not live with her husband. On February 8 last I identified her body. I had not seen her for some years. She was about my height.

ARTHUR FREDERICK ADAMS , labourer, 3, Bluecoat Street, Blackfriars. I have known the prisoner for the past five years and have worked with him at different places. I first saw Elizabets Watts on February 4. On that morning prisoner and I were working together in Camden Town on the tram lines. About nine a.m. we had to stand off work through want of materials, and two hours later we were paid off, getting 14s. 5d. each. Prisoner and I then went to Farringdon Road and had drink at several public-houses. We drank ale. I left him between three and four and arranged to meet him again that evening in the "Duchess" public-house at eight o'clock. We had had nothing to eat since we left off work. I should not say he was drunk but he was not quite sober. I went to the public-house in the evening, but prisoner was not there, so I went to 9, Mermaid Court. I got there about half-past seven. I went up to his rooms and found prisoner sitting in an arm-chair. I then saw Elizabeth Watts for the first time. His little girl Ethel was there as well. I remained there about an hour and a half. Drinks were sent out for twice. Mrs. Curley fetched it. There was no quarrelling while I was there; we were all friendly together and we had a sing-song. Mr. and Mrs. Curley sang. When I left Mrs. Curley and the girl Ethel showed me downstairs with a light. I should not say Curley was quite sober, but there was nothing extraordinary about him. I was about the same. I would not say the woman was sober, but we all knew what we were about.

Cross-examined. When a person is not quite sober it does not mean they have had too much to drink. I was able to find my way home all right.

SUSANNAH TAYLOR . I live with my husband, James Taylor, at 9, Mermaid Court. We occupy the next two rooms to prisoner and deceased. They had lived there about nine months. I was frequently in their rooms. They quarrelled pretty well night and morning. I have been in there when they have been fighting. On February 4 I heard prisoner go to work in the morning. I saw him when he came back about 25 to three that afternoon. He had had a drop of beer. He went into his room. I went in there about half-past three, and Mrs. Curley showed me where Curley was lying asleep on the bed in the bedroom. Everything was quiet until 25 minutes past seven in the evening, when I heard a man come up the stairs and go into the Curleys'. I heard Mrs. Curley go out about three times for beer. I saw her coming in with a quart can. The first time the beer came up I heard them all singing. I heard the man go exactly at nine o'clock. Mrs. Curley went down with him. I heard Curley tell Ethel to call her mother up. She called "Mother" once or twice and came back to the kitchen and said: "Daddy, she won't make no answer," and then the child went indoors. Then I heard Mrs. Curley come up the stairs saying, "F—'em all; f—'em all," and as she came to the door she said, "And

f—you too. "Then I heard the door shut, as if Mrs. Curley went in and shut the door. The next thing that happened was, I heard them commence rowing; that went on for a quarter of an hour; then I heard Mrs. Curley halloa out "Police—murder!" and I heard her bang at the bedroom door with the poker and call out, "Let me out!" (To the Court.) I did her Curley tell her to go to bed; that was before I heard her calling for the police. She was shouting out "Murder" and "Police" as if Curley was knocking her about. I heard her say, "You are murdering me; let me out—let me out!" just as if she was looked in the bedroom, and than I heard the window go up, and I heard Mrs. Curley halloa out at the back, "Mr. Trump, Mr. Trump, do go for the police." That is the man who lives just underneath the Curleys'. I never heard any answer from Mr. Tramp, and then in about a minute I heard a thud in the yard as I was in my bedroom at the time. I woke my husband and said, "Jim, do get up; she's gone." He got up and put his trousers and slippers on and rushed downstairs, and I went out in the passage with my chemise on and called through Curley's door, "Oh, Curley, Curley, what have you done?" and I called out of the window, "Police, murder, murder!" as loud as I could, and then I put my petticoats on and went down into the back yard and found Mrs. Curley lying there quite still on her back on the ground. I went round into the street, the place was full of people, and I saw Ethel there. I did not see Curley until he was brought down by the police. Just before the window went up it sounded as if Curley was in the kitchen. T heard him run in from the kitchen to the bedroom after, and then everything was all silent; I never heard anything more.

By the Court. When I heard the fall I could not say whether Curley was in the kitchen or in the bedroom. I heard him run in from the kitchen to the bedroom just after I heard the window go up, and then I never heard no more until I heard a fall in the yard. After the window was up I heard her call to Trump to go for the police. I could not say whether Curley was in the kitchen or the bedroom then. I saw Ethel when I was in the street. There was a crowd there, and Ethel ran up to me and put her arms round me and said, "Oh, Mrs. Taylor, my mammy!"

Cross-examined. They were always quarrelling, morning and night. I took no notice, being their next-door neighbour. I have been in the room and seen them fighting. I have never seen her kick him. Curley has kicked her with a big boot. She has thrown a cup at him and a jug at him. I have been in the kitchen and seen them. I have seen her try to hit him. I heard her banging on the bedroom door—by that I mean the door leading between the two rooms. It was as though she was trying to get out, and she was then halloaing, "Let me out, let me out. Murder!" as far as I could tell, Curley being in the kitchen. It seemed as if he had locked her in the bedroom by the way she was halloaing. She liked a drop of beer, but she never had money, not even to buy herself food. I have seen her under the influence of drink on a Saturday night. When Curley got home from work on a Saturday they would get drunk and

then he would knock her about. When she came up the stairs, after showing Adams out, she did not seem as if she was angry. She was a very nice woman and a hard-working woman too. When I called through the door, "Curley, what have you done?" I could not see him because the door was shut, hut he answered me. I did not see him after the fall until he was brought down by the police. When I called through the door he immediately answered and said, "She has chucked herself out of the window." I saw him in the afternoon when he came home from work. Later on, when Mrs. Curley took me into the bedroom and showed me Curley lying asleep on the bed he had got his boots on and was fully dressed covered up with two coats. I could see his feet. There was a reason why I should notice that because Mrs. Curley asked me to have a look at him, and she said, "How would you like to 'have a man like that?" I was shown a garment by Mrs. Curley some time before this. It was in a very bad condition, but her courses were just leaving her then; they were going off her then; she was always in my place of a morning and she showed it to me.

Re-examined. That was over a week before February 4. Her periods were leaving her then. Once or twice I heard her call out, "You are murdering me: let me out"; that sound came from the bedroom. I heard no other sounds at that time, but the woman's voice, "Let me out; you are murdering me: you are murdering me!" It seemed to me that Curley had given her a good hiding and then gone back into the kitchen and locked her in, and she was trying hard to get out of that bedroom, hut she could not get out. I heard her banging at the door with something; that was before I heard her saying, "You are murdering me," and the banging was before I heard Curley run from the kitchen into the bedroom; it seemed to me she was shut in and could not get out. I heard him rush from the kitchen into the bedroom after she stopped banging. The lock of the door is broken, but he must have turned the handle. I did not hear anybody open the door, but it seemed to me it would be fastened. Everything seemed to be quiet after I heard Curley run from the one room to the other. It was not a second after I heard her call to Trump to go for the police until I heard the thud in the yard. I do not know which room Curley was in at that time. I was too much upset, and I cannot answer properly as to whether it sounded as if he had his boots on or not. Mr. Trump's bedroom is just underneath the window that Mrs. Curley fell out of. If you looked out of Curley's window and leant out you could see Trump's window just underneath. Elizabeth was a very nice-made woman, a little taller than me, and a lump stouter. She would make two of me.

ARTHUR FREDERICK ADAMS , recalled, further cross-examined. Curley was sitting in the armchair when I went in, and he was in the armchair most of the time. His boots were off; he had no slippers on.

WILLIAM TRUMP . I am a blacksmith and live on the third floor of 9, Mermaid Court. My rooms are just underneath Curley's. I have

been there six or seven months. I have frequently heard quarrels between the Curleys; on one occasion I saw Mrs. Curley with black eyes. I have occasionally seen both of them the worse for drinks That was mostly in Saturday nights. I was in my rooms. on February 4 about half-past seven. Mrs. Curley came in; she had some beer with her in a can; she took it upstairs. They were singing in the room upstairs as she entered and she also joined in. I went out at half-past eight; the singing was still going on. I came back just before half-past nine. I stayed in my front room; I did not go in the bedroom at all. I heard a noise from up above like a rumble, or a slight scuffle; it seemed to come from the front room upstairs, over oar heads; that was about five minutes after I got in. About a quarter to 10 I heard a fellow-lodger named Gooch say something, and I went down into the yard and there found Mrs. Curley lying. I went for a policeman. I did not hear her fall or anything. I was in my sitting room and the bedroom door was closed. There was a light in the bedroom, because my boys sleep there. When Mrs. Curley came into my room she was not the worse for drink at all; she seemed very jolly in spirits; she had had a glass or two, but nothing for anybody to take notice of.

Cross-examined. I was in my room all the evening except between; half-past eight and half-past nine. I heard no banging on the door. I live immediately underneath the Curleys. I heard no cries of murder and no cries of "You are killing me," and no call for me to go for the police. I could not hear anything of what was going on in the back room upstairs if I was in my kitchen and the door of my bedroom was closed. She might have screamed double as loud and I should not have heard it. I have frequently heard quarrelling going on up above; I could hear that quite distinctly. On this particular might I heard nothing out of the way. When they spoke very high words we could hear, but not if they spoke low. We could hear people walking about above. I noticed no rush on that occasion, I had a pot with a lid on it on my bedroom window-sill. I noticed that the lid was down alongside the body in the yard, as though in her fall she had knocked it off. The lid was on an hour before. There was blood on it.

ELIZABETH ALLIN . I live on the first floor of 9, Mermaid Court with my husband. I remember the Curleys coming to live there nine months ago. I have never seen them quarrelling, but I have heard them quarrelling. I saw Curley about half-past two when he come home from work; he was the worse for drink. He went upstairs to his own rooms. I heard them quarrelling for a few minutes, but it was quiet afterwards. I heard nothing else until about half-past nine when I heard quarrelling again and then screaming. It came from Curley's rooms. After the screams I heard a fall in the back yard and I went downstairs and found Mrs. Curley there. I was in my front room, the kitchen, when I heard the screaming. She gave three screams, about a minute in between each.

Cross-examined. I could not distinguish what the cry was.

CHARLES GOOCH . I am a helmet maker and live on the second floor of 9, Mermaid Court. About 20 minutes to 10 I had gone to bed in my back room, which looks over the back yard. I heard two people quarrelling. I could tell the woman's voice because she speaks different to anybody in the place; it was Mrs. Watts's. I heard no other voice at all. She had something in her hand banging at the door. She said, "You f—ing bastard; you have locked me in." She was in the back room corresponding to the one I was lying in. My window looks out over the yard the same as hers. She seemed to be banging with a bit of iron. I could tell that it was her who was banging because I heard her voice; she was shouting at the same time. Before that I heard the window go up. The next thing that occurred was I heard her holloa out, "Mr. Trump, Mr. Trump, Mr. Trump," three times as near as I can recollect, and then I heard something go bang in the yard. I opened the window and saw her lying there, and I went down and picked her up.

Cross-examined. I did hear her shouting about Letting her out She said, "You have locked me in; will you let me out? let me out." I might have said at the police station, "I will get out," but I think her words were, "Let me out, let me out, let me out." She might have said, "I will get out." While she was saying that there was a vigorous banging on the door going on, as though she was trying to get out. Then that ceased and I heard the sash go up and then the ✗hud in the yard.

Police-sergeant WILLIAM BINGHAM , K Division. At 10 o'clock I was in the Borough High Street, and on getting some information went to 9, Mermaid Court. In the back yard there I found the body of the woman since identified as Elizabeth Watts. I formed the impression she was dead. Gooch made a statement to me and I went up to the top floor in search of prisoner. The door of his room was locked. I knocked twice and got no answer. I then shouted, "I am a police officer; open the door." I got no reply, so I burst the door open. I found prisoner sitting in an arm-chair close to the fire. Prisoner said, "We have been having a row; I ran at her to hit her and out she jumped; I did not quite touch her." When he said that I had not said anything to him. I then told him I should take him into custody and I cautioned him. He did not say anything until on the way to the station; he said, "Is she dead? if so I'll break my heart." He was quite sober, He put one boot on and his coat while I was in the room.

Cross-examined. Before I left the room I wrote down what he said. He spoke to me first. He did not give me time to tell him that I should take him into custody; he spoke almost immediately I went in. I cautioned him that anything he said I should put down in my pocket-book; that was at the time he was making the statement in the first place. On the way to the station I said nothing to him about her being dead. When I took him downstairs there was a crowd of people and shouting going on enough to show that something serious had happened. No one appeared for him at the police-court. I remember him putting in cross-examination there that he had said "Come in" to me when I went up to his door.

Detective-sergeant HODGSON , K Division. On the morning of February 5 I made an examination of Curley's rooms. On the lower panels of the door leading to the bedroom I found about five spots of Wood; that was on the kitchen side; they were dry but not regularly dried up; they had not soaked into the door. I could not form any opinion with regard to what direction they had come from; they were spots not splashes. On the left side of the door there were some other spots of blood on the wall in a similar condition; they were low down. The door had been forced from both sides as if a poker or some round instrument had been used; the marks were near the latch where the lock had been forced from the centre where the bar of the handle goes through.; the handle was missing. The marks on the kitchen side appeared to be recent. I then went into the bedroom. The marks on the door on that side also appeared to be recent judging by the newness of the wood where it had got chipped; the marks were similar and appeared to have been made by a round instrument such as a poker. I noticed a patch of blood on the wall in the left-hand corner of the room about four feet six. inches up; it was two patches really, almost adjoining, about the size of one's hand. The blood was quite dry and hard. It might have been caused the night before, because the blood was on the paper and the paper might have soaked it up. I thought it had got there from somebody's head, and that the head against the wall had moved and so made a kind of smear; but I could not say anything positive about it except that it was a mark of blood. I also found marks of blood on the skirting-board beneath the window and also some on the skirting-board beneath the patch on the wall. That was not hard; it appeared to be fresher than that on the paper. I also found some on the sill of the window. They were splashes of blood on the skirting-board as if it had oozed out in a fine stream like a spray of blood; it was dry but not so very hard. On the right-hand comer of the window-sill there was blood, and it appeared as if there had been an open and the blood had spurted out down on the paper beneath and on the skirting-board; that is what it appeared to be judging from the fineness of the spray. The marks on the skirting-board corresponded with the blood on the sill and also on the paper between the skirting-board and the sill. I also examined the outside of the sill outside the window; there was no blood there. I noticed the wall of the building beneath the sill. There were scratches on it as if something had wiped it—about an inch and a half to two inches in width; that was about three or four feet below the sill; the wall was not whitewashed.

Cross-examined. All the blood that I saw was. dry when I examined it the following morning. I was there about half-past 10.

Detective-inspector ALFRED NICHOLLS, K Division. I went to 9, Mermaid Court, about a quarter past 10 on the night of February 4, and went up to the rooms occupied by prisoner and deceased. There was a light in the room. I found the two rooms in a state of confusion; the door between the two bad apparently been forced; there were marks on it corresponding to this short poker which I produce;

they were on the kitchen side of the door; I did not notice any on the inner side. I noticed some plaster broken away in the bedroom just round to the left by the jamb of the door. The bedclothes were strewed about the floor and the bottom sash of the window was opened to its fullest extent. I also found this broom (produced) in the bedroom. The poker was on the floor by the side of the bed and the broom was standing up against the wall. I went into the back yard and there I found a large pool of blood. I then went back to the Southwark Police Station and found the prisoner. I said, "Is your name James Curley?" He said, "Yes." I said, "I want you to pay particular attention to what I am going to say to you. I am a police officer, and shall charge you with the wilful murder of your wife, Elizabeth Curley." He said, "She is not my wife; her name is Watts" I then continued the charge, and said, "By striking her with this poker and broom"—which I showed him at the time—"and afterwards throwing her out of the back room window. Any thing you say I shall take down in writing and give in evidence in court." He said, "I deny it. I flung the poker at her and she went and called Mr. Trunk to fetch a policeman. She said then she would jump out of the window. I said, 'Do as you like. Nothing else was said and she jumped out of the window.' He made no other reply. ARTHUR NORMAN LEAMING , house surgeon at Guy's Hospital. About half-past 10, on February 4, deceased was brought to the hospital. She was then dead. I made a post-mortem examination next day. I found that her skull was fractured on the left side behind the ear; there were also some bruises on the left side of her body. They were consistent with having been caused by the fall. I formed the opinion that she had first fallen on her head and then to the left side. I also found a number of bruises on the right side of the body. The body was covered with bruises, most noticeably on the left thigh and shoulder, the back of the right wrist and hand, the right knee, the bridge of the nose, the right temple, and in the region also of the front of the abdomen, and two slight abrasions on the front of the left thigh. My opinion rather is that those on the left side, I could not swear, were caused other than by the fall, but I could not say they were caused by the fall, except the fractured ribs and the injury to the skull; I do not think the ones on the right side were caused by the fall; those injuries were quite consistent with having been caused by the broom and poker produced. There was not much discolouration, but there was effusion into the tissues, which pointed to their being recent, and I should say they were caused immediately before death on account of the small amount of discolouration. I did not measure the length of the body, but she was a decidedly stout and very strong and powerful woman.

Cross-examined. There is definite discolouration of an orange type in an old bruise, but these bruises were not orange-coloured at all; they were just bluish-green, the colour of recently effused blood, and the blood being fluid was absolutely against their being old. I found no cut on the body from which blood came apart from the head wound, and that, I think, was done at the fall. If the woman

had had such a wound that blood spurted from it in the room I would, of course, have expected to find some signs, of it. I cannot understand the blood in the room having come from the woman unless by chance she bled from the wound to the scalp before she went out of the window, but my honest opinion is that that wound was caused by the fall. She might have cut her skull against the bread pan on Mr. Trump's window-sill as she was falling down; she might have cut her skull and even fractured it on' the road.

Re-examined. The part of the skull corresponding with the fracture was very severely fractured. The appearances that met the eye of the locality where the fracture was were two. vertical cuts over the eye running parallel below and meeting above. They were caused, in my judgment, at the time of the fracture by the concussion with the pavement. It is possible, but not probable, there may have been some injury which would have caused blood to flow from the area which was afterwards accentuated by the fall on the pavement. I do not think any cut or cuts could have existed previously and become obscured by the concussion with the pavement. I think she would require to fall from a greater height than the distance between the window and the bread pan 10 ft. below to have caused the injuries I found, but I should say there was some edged surface which produced the laceration. I do not think the jagged laceration I have described would have been produced by 'falling on a flat pavement, but a juncture in the pavement between two bricks or a couple of flagstones meeting together might have produced it.

CHARLES GOOCH , recalled. When I first went down into the yard her head was lying towards the passage door of the yard, about four or five feet from the wall in which the passage door is, and her legs between the wall of the yard and the washhouse wall. Inspector Nicholls put the pencil mark on the plan; it is correct. The yard is paved with cement, not bricks or paving-stones—like concrete, I should think.

Sergeant HODGSON , recalled. I was present at the inquest on deceased; prisoner was there. I heard him asked by the coroner whether he desired to give evidence. He elected to do so, being first cautioned by the coroner. After he had given evidence his deposition was read over to him and I saw him sign it. These are his signatures on each page of this deposition now produced and handed to me. I saw him write them, and, from my recollection of the evidence he gave, this was the deposition that was read out to him.

Verdict, Not guilty of wilful murder, guilty of manslaughter.

Sentence, Eight years' penal servitude.

Reference Number: t19090302-28

HUGHES, Alfred William (tram driver); manslaughter of Frederick Millard.

Mr. Bodkin prosecuted; Mr. George Elliott defended.

PATRICK WHITE RATTRAY , police divisional surgeon. On January 27, at 8.30 a.m., I saw the dead body of deceased in the police ambulance; a few days later I conducted a post-mortem examination.

The cause of death was compound fracture of the skull. There was

a round hole in the boy's head as if it had been crushed against one of the iron spikes at the back of a brewer's dray.

THERESE MORLEY . I live at Sharplands Lodge, Whittington College, Highbury; my husband is a Clerk in Holy Orders. I was in the tramcar on the morning of January 27, intending to go along the Archway Road northwards. I got in the car about 50 yards north of the terminus. The car did not start immediately; it was defective. I saw them examining it underneath. After a delay of a few minutes it went along for about 100 yards and then fired and stopped and went backwards two or three yards. The door was flung open in front and the driver shouted to the conductor, "Have you got it on?"—that was the emergency brake. The car stopped when that was applied. The driver then came to the rear of the car and the conductor went in front. I expostulated against the car being driven and said that I wished to get out. I do not remember whether I said that to the conductor or to the driver as they were changing places at that moment. I stopped where I was because they shut the door hastily and the car proceeded and I had not time to get out There were five or six other passengers. The car did not stop at the usual stopping place and no money was taken. I watched the driver. He was leaning out sideways and occasionally looking in front as the conductor was signalling to him with his hand and motioning, I suppose, whether the road was clear or not. I should think the car went another 100 yards in that way when a violent collision with a large brewer's dray occurred. I think I had seen it just ahead before the collision. I afterwards saw the boy lying on the ground. I did not notice what the driver was doing at the actual moment of the collision, but a minute before I think I had seen him leaning out on the left side—the side nearer the kerb. I think the conductor was applying sand with his foot for the wheels to bite just before the collision. I did not see him do anything else. He seemed to understand what he was doing.

Cross-examined. So far as I could judge the driver seemed to be exercising care in the way he was controlling the tramcar as far as he could from his position at the rear. The car went barely the usual pace. There was no stop made at the usual stopping places. The conductor appeared to be keeping a constant look-out as he went along, and to be in communication by signs with the driver and the driver seemed to be paying attention and keeping his eye on the conductor and also keeping a look-out at the side. I thought it was the conductor at the time, but afterwards I thought it was the driver who said, when I wanted to get out, "Sit still, lady, it is all right, "and I replied that I had seen, another accident there and I was afraid. There was no injury to anyone in the car.

SYDNEY GEORGE ALEXANDER , clerk in the employment of the London County Council. I do not know whether the Council has running powers over the line of tramways from the Archway northwards along the North Road. The portion of the tramway from the" Archway Tavern" to the Archway is within the County of London. I produce

a sealed copy of the by-laws of the London County Council made under the Municipal Corporations Act, 1902; for the good management of the traffic of the City of London, coming into operation on May 1, 1904. It provides that no driver of a vehicle shall drive unless he has an unobstructed view under a penalty of 40s. That by-law is still in force.

Cross-examined. That is the by-law which applies to the provision of windows in the tilts of hooded vans. I do not know whether the book produced to me contains the rules and regulations relating to the staff of the London County Council with regard to tramcars; I do not know anything about the tramway staff.

Detective-sergeant ALFRED GROSE , Y Division. I have experience in the making of plans. I have prepared and now produce plan of the lines of tramway from the "Archway Tavern" up to the Archway; the distance is 597 yards. On the left-hand side going northwards you come to Bismarck Road. The width of the road at that point from kerb to kerb, excluding the pavement, is 33 ft., and the gradient about one in 33.

GEORGE MEARS . I live at Edmonton. On January 21, 8.30 a.m., I got on a tramcar by the "Archway Tavern." I noticed a flash in front of a car there—10 or 12 yards off where the cars started. It ran hack a little way and I then saw the conductor and the driver change ends and the driver then proceeded to drive the car up the hill from the rear end, the conductor being in front. The conductor rang the bell from time to time. I did not notice what else he was doing until we got within 30 yards of the back of a brewer's dray, which was going up the hill with three boys sitting on the back on the ladder. I was inside the car. I did not look to see what the driver was doing at the rear. The ladder projected out behind the dray. When the accident occurred the dray was direct on the metals, but the horses' heads were turned as though they were beginning to pull back to the side. The conductor was then looking down, putting his heel on a plate to distribute sand on the metals. I should think the car was going six or seven miles an hour, but I am no judge of speed. I saw the conductor put the brake on and turn round and pull the communication cord, but it was too late then; it dashed into the dray. As he was turning the handle he seemed to me to be very frightened. I did not look behind. Before the conductor put his foot on the iron plate I heard him call out something to the driver, but I do not know what he said.

Cross-examined. The conductor did not ring the gong after he began to put the sand on; before that he did. He apparently tried to put the brake on, but it did not seem to have any effect. Perhaps he did not turn it enough; he seemed to move about as if he was frightened.

Re-examined. After turning the wheel of the brake he turned round and pulled the communication cord, but the car dashed into the dray. The car was then being driven.

(Friday, March 5,)

ALBERT PULLINGER , 50, Durham Road, Finsbury Park, scaffolder. On January 21, about half-past eight, I was in the Archway Road walking northwards towards the Archway, on the left-hand side of the road. Near Bismarck Road I saw a brewer's dray with some boys riding on the ladders at the back, going up in the same direction. The dray was just getting off the metals of the tramways. It was on and off, one wheel on and one off, slanting to the near side to get off the line. It looked as if it had pulled out and was pulling back again. I saw a tramcar come up with the driver at the back and the conductor in front. It collided with the dray and crunched the ladder up where one boy was sitting on and crushed his head. I should think the car was going six or seven miles an hour. I did not see it slacken speed at all. I did not hear any bell rung. I heard nothing. I was about 10 yards from the dray as the car came up. I noticed the driver of the car as I was a little lower down the road. He was at the back. The car did not pass me; it hit the dray when I was about 10 yards off. I was about the middle of the car when the collision took place.

SAMUEL THOMAS WHITE , brewer's labourer, 30, Lever Street, Goswell Road. I was driving the dray into which the tramcar ran on January 21, sitting amongst the barrels. It was a pair-horsed dray. We had four barrels. I did not notice the tramcar at all, but I felt the force of the collision. I heard no sound of a gong or bell.

Cross-examined. I examined the ladder. There was some red paint off the tram on the ladder, but no damage done to the dray because it only drove the ladders in further underneath.

Inspector DANIEL TIDYMAN , Y Division. At 9.50, on January 21, I saw defendant at Upper Holloway Police Station. I told him I was going to make inquiries as to the death of the boy, and having made inquiries I saw him again in the afternoon and told him I would charge him with manslaughter. He said, "I quite understand. "Next morning, in the passage of the police court, before coming into court, he said, "The car fired, and I turned the switch off which stopped the firing; I then turned it on and tried the car again, and it fired again. I found then that it was nothing that I could put right. I got down and examined it and switched off. I then put the conductor on the front and worked the car at the back. I did it with the intention of going as far as the Highgate Archway and then reporting the matter to the officer there."

Sub-divisional Inspector ARTHUR BLAYDON , Public Carriage Department, Metropolitan Police. A little after 12 on January 21 I went to Ballard's Lane, Finchley, the tramway depot, and made an inspection of the car in charge of which defendant had been that morning. It was of the double truck type, with a Westinghouse magnetic brake and a hand brake as well. The cars are worked on the overhead system—that is to say, a flexible arm up to the live wire which conveys the current to the motor beneath the car. I noticed some appearance on the front controller as if there had been

flashing or sparking on the bottom spindle. It may have been because of a sooty deposit. I knew there must have been, flashing because that was indicated by smoke and heat on the controller cover, such as would have been caused by a flash. There are several causes which would set it up. The commonest is that the driver may have switched off sharply and he would set up carbonisation of his fingerboard and short circuit. That would create a sooty deposit or some foreign substance that would cause a flash. The current is conducted through what are known as fingers or contact pieces when the flexible arm is connected up with the wire. On the controller in front of the car there is a handle with a number of notches, which notches correspond with the fingers, so that if the handle it moved to the first notch, there will be contact between the driving motor and the first finger and so on; it graduates the current and the resistance of the current; the more notches the less resistance. The carbonisation would have been on the notches under the control of the handle. The driver should have removed the controller cover when it happened and cleaned it, and seen that the finger was in proper contact, first switching the current off under the canopy. The controller cover is quite easily removed; one man could do it; and a piece of wood is the best thing to clean the contact pieces with or some non-conducting material. Such a temporary defect as existed ought not to have taken more than a minute, or a slow man five minutes, to remedy, and it might have remedied itself. A practical test would be to start the car again, and if it started and did not flash it would be all right. I examined the car and caused the controllers at each, end to be used, and they acted well. I failed to discover any defect in the running. I was informed that nothing had been done to the car. It may have righted itself again but it was in perfect order then. The car could have been driven just as well from the front as from the back. I have been connected with the Public Carriage Office for 14 years, and have had considerable experience in examining these and all kinds of cars and mechanical carriages. If a car cannot for any reason be driven from the front the best thing in my opinion would be to leave the car stationary until assistance arrived if the man felt incapable of putting it right himself. That would have been much better than running any risk. I know the place in question quite well. There is very little tramcar traffic going to Finchley at half-past eight on a January morning. If the car had been left stationary it would have caused some delay to the cars behind. Assuming the front controller was defective, the car could have been driven from the rear end slowly down the hill back to the "Archway Tavern" with safety because he would have a powerful magnetic brake and the car would be under control. (To the Court. The first suggestion is to clean the thing, the second is to wait and get assistance, and the third is to go back.) This man was inviting disaster by driving the car as he did from the rear with passengers in the car. The length of the car is 35 feet over all. I should say by driving from the rear he could not see what there was in the road in front of him. The whole length of the car would

obstruct his view. He could not see through the car with due regard to safety; to lean out at the side would be a good attempt but an unsatisfactory one, and it would depend which side he looked out at. If one of the doors was closed that would further hinder his view.

Cross-examined. I have been through several courses of mechanical work, and have technical knowledge, but I am not an engineer by profession. I have had instruction under all the professors of electricity. I have driven cars under all sorts of conditions not on service. I am not aware of the instructions issued by the London County Council to their drivers, which has been read to me: "If a controller be found out of order do not attempt to force it or repair it, but take the car to the depot by using the rear controller. "I have endeavoured unsuccessfully to get a copy of these instructions, but I may say it is the Metropolitan Electric Tramways we are dealing with and not the London County Council here. I am not fully cognisant of the rules for the drivers of the Metropolitan Electric Company, and I do not know the instruction, "It must, of course, be understood that traffic is not to be delayed by attempting to make repairs en route. A defective car should be pushed on to the depot or nearest terminus by a car following the same. "As to whether it is undesirable for a car to stand in the highway awaiting repair, it all depends where the car is. I understand this car was at the terminus—a very appropriate place. The car was some miles from the nearest depot. (To the Court. This car was only two or three hundred yards from the terminus, and it would not have caused much inconvenience to have run it back.) It is 'better to pull a car than push one; if you cannot pull it then the alternative is to push it, but I do not agree at all that if you can neither pull nor push it then you could work it from the rear. I never saw a car that you could not either pull or tow. If the car will not move you have to repair it until you make it fit to be pushed or pulled. I do not think I said at the police-court that pushing was better than working from the rear. What you read to me, "If a car is disabled it must be left to be repaired; sometimes it is pushed; that is more objectionable than this" is a misinterpretation of the word "this"; it does not mean that it would be worse to push it than to drive it from the rear. I agree that a controller is sometimes a complicated piece of mechanism. The diagram produced to me represents the machinery. It is a B. T. H. I understand the drivers are qualified before they are put on a car to remedy such a temporary defect as existed here. I know their instructions are not to attempt to interfere with the equipment beyond very slight matters, and this was a slight matter. (To the Court. There would not have been any necessity to force the controller or to repair it. It is a general instruction to all motor drivers not to force their controller; sometimes it gets stiff. I would not call taking off the cover and cleaning it forcing it, and I would not call it repairing it.) I do not see how the driver could have arrived at the conclusion that it was necessary to force it or repair it. He did not find the controller stiff. He ought to have

tried to remedy the temporary defect, which would have been a most reasonable thing to have done. I do not see any advantage to himself by shirking doing anything that could obviously easily have been done. The driver was licensed in July, 1905, as a driver, end he has an unblemished record.

(Defence.)

ALFRED WILLIAM HUGHES (prisoner, on oath). I have been 3 1/2 years in the service of the Metropolitan Electric Tramways, Limited. Before going into their service I had a course of training as a motor driver and have been driving their tramcars during the time I have been in their service. I had given to me when I entered their employment their regulations and instructions for motormen and conductors and also a copy of the London County Council rules and regulations for the staff. I produce those two books. The section between the" Archway Tavern" and Highgate Archway is in the County Council area and I am within their jurisdiction, and that is why I have their roles. The tram runs from Barnet to "Archway Tavern. "After picking up passengers on the morning of the accident and having the bell to start I commenced my journey towards Highgate Archway. A butcher's cart with a pair of horses and heavily laden suddenly stopped in front of me and started running back. To save the cart colliding with me I let my car run back also about two yards. The cart again started off and I followed it. He then stopped again and ran back as before. Allowing my car to run back and stopping power and releasing brake at the same time it caused the controller to fire. The controller kept firing, so I knocked the switch out above my head, which cut the power off from the controller. Of course, it stopped burning then. Afterwards I replaced the switch and tried to drive again, but I found the controller still fired. I then brought my car to a standstill and put the switch, out again, and examined the controller. I took the cover off and found that the controller was burnt too much for me to interfere with it. I knew I should not be allowed to touch it, even if I could put it right. (To the Court. It would have been useless to have rubbed it with a stick. I knew that the rule was to drive the car from the rear controller when the front one was defective, so I put my conductor on the front and drove the car from the rear and proceeded up the hill towards the Archway. It went all right up till the collision occurred. The conductor was frequently sounding the gong. He did make a report to me of the dray. I suddenly beard the emergency signal from the conductor, and I stopped suddenly. There was nothing by word of mouth. I applied the magnetic brake to the full power, and the car stopped in about two yards.) The man at Highgate Archway is not really a motor inspector, although he is acquainted with all the repairs. He is really called a timekeeper. He was about 200 yards farther on. He can do repairs. I was proceeding to the spot where I knew him to be, in order to report to him and let him decide what should be done with the car. I could not have stayed there with the

car and sent the conductor on to the Inspector on account of obstructing the road. The next tram behind me was due in four minutes. There was other vehicular traffic as well. I thought if I remained where I was I would he creating an obstruction. I think I made a little mistake over the book of rules. I cannot say whether the London County Council book was provided by the company. I have had it by me ever since I have been on the cars, but I was on the County Council and I am acquainted with their rules.

Cross-examined. I am not a servant of the London County Council, nor have been while driving tramcars. No official of my company has ever told me that I was subject to the County Council Regulations, but I have read them and know them. I am in the service of the Metropolitan Tramways, and I have to obey their orders and get instructions from them. I do not know how I came by the Council rules. I might have found it in a car left by some other driver. I cannot say that I considered myself bound by the County Council Regulations. I have never had instructions to obey their regulations when going over the section from the "Tavern" to the Archway. I did know that I was in London up to that point and Middlesex beyond it. I did not consider my duties on the "Tavern" side of the Archway in any sense different from my duties on the Middlesex side of the Archway. I do not know what I should have done on the Middlesex side. I was going to report at the Archway. The Metropolitan directions contain nothing about working from the rear. I had a little motor-driving experience before I was licensed. With regard to flashing and carbonising, an electric car is a different thing from a petrol motor. I have never driven an electric motor. I was not familiar with the repair of motor cars and putting things right that went wrong. I am required, under the Metropolitan Directions No. 2 to carry a number of tools. I carry three tools and three fuses; no cotton waste or rags. I carry a pair of pliers, a screwdriver; and a shifting spanner. These tools are for the use of the Motor Inspector when he gets on the car, but I have never been instructed not to use them myself. Before I was appointed driver I had to make myself familiar with the driving. I am familiar with the firing of contact points, but only what I have learned apart from my usual work. I understood what had happened. Directly it fired I took off the top of the controller and looked inside and saw what was amiss. I knew that the thing to be done was to switch off the current and clean the points, but if I had done that I should have been doing wrong, because if I had tried to put it right and put something else wrong I should have been in fault. I might have put other fingers out which work the magnetic brake. I knew which were the defective ones, but I was not allowed to touch them or to do anything inside the controller. We are instructed by the Motor Inspectors not to do that. I could not say whether there is anything in the regulations to support that view. A Motor Inspector has told me that I was not to do anything inside the controller cover. Although I knew I could do nothing inside it, I took it off to see if the fault was in the controller. I knew enough to know where to look and to find out what was wrong. I can find out what is wrong with a car, but

must not put it right. All the parts mentioned in Clause 24 of our regulations are inside the motor. They are all part of the main switch. I am allowed to switch it off. I do not see how we could clean the inside of the motor, because we have nothing to clean it with. There is no system of signalling between the conductor and the driver if the conductor happens to be in front, but I knew that three bells would mean atop for emergency, and doubtless he would have worked on the same signals as if he had been working at his right end. He did sound three bells just before the collision. It must have been very soon before it. As soon as he did that I applied the magnetic brake, and then the car stopped in two yards. The collision had happened before that. I was not entirely leaving it to the conductor to see what was in front. I did not see the brewer's dray. I had no suspicion it was there; I neither saw it nor any part of it. At the time this collision occurred, or a second before, I was looking round the near side of the car, and there were three muck tipcarts going up the hill. They were one wheel on the track and one wheel off, all behind one another, and as we approached them I shut off power. The conductor sounded his gong, and I allowed them time to shift off. Seeing they were clear, I applied power to pass them, and the brewer's dray which caused the damage must have been to the off-side of the three carts. I did not look to the off-side to see if there was anything ahead. Without getting any intimation from the conductor in front that there was anything else in the road I went on. I did not call out anything to the conductor through the car. I pulled the bell for him to look round. I signalled to him to put down sand, and he turned his head and looked down. That was before the collision. The doors were shut; that is why I pulled the cord. I did not hear Mrs. Morley say she wanted to get out. There is a staircase at each end of the car; the staircase on these cars would not prevent a good view if I looked round if I was at the back. As I was going, the staircase was on the off-side. It would not prevent my view if I was looking out on that side. I would not have to leave the controller in order to get a clear view from the rear of the car. I could still keep hold of it and look round. It was a perfectly straight road. I last looked out to the off-side about 30 yards before the collision. I did not see the brewer's dray at all.

ALFRED HENRY HARRIS . I was conductor of the car on this day. I had been conducting at the rear of the car until I was told to change places. I then went to the front of the car. I had done that on one occasion before, but that was only for a couple of yards. When I got to the front we started up the hill, and I kept the gong repeatedly sounding. On the near-side there were several muck carts. I was constantly looking round to the driver going up the hill. The pace was a little smarter than walking pace. When we had cleared the muck carts I saw the brewer's dray pulling to the near side of the road. It was partly on the metals. By that time we were five or six yards away. It was about 30 yards off when I, first saw it. I do not know whether I gave any direction to the driver. As soon as I saw the immediate danger I gave three bells. That was about five

or six yards off the dray. I also shouted to the boys and rang the gong. I did not communicate with the driver before then. I did not try to apply the brake because I should probably have been impeding the driver. I suppose I did not realise that there was danger until we got within five or six yards. I shouted to the boys and two of them got away.

Cross-examined. I made no arrangement when changing ends as to signalling to the driver. I have never had a similar experience with this driver. I kept turning round and sounding the bell to the driver because he could not see properly. He was keeping as much alert as he could. I kept looking down, to him and could see he was. I could see him through the car. I saw him look out at the off-side of the car on one occasion lower down the hill. The brewer's dray was going in a slanting direction across the track, not from the opposite side of the road. I should say he had pulled out and was pulling back to his right side again. I agree that the speed was about six or seven miles an hour.

ARTHUR HENRY POTT , M. I. E. E., M. I. C. E., chief engineer of the Metropolitan Electric Tramways, Ltd. I am responsible for the general management of the staff and the instructions issued to motormen and so on. The rules produced, dated July, 1904, are those issued to motormen, and they are brought up to date from time to time. We do not issue the London County Council book, but I should think it is very likely it reaches the men. I am familiar with their rules and those of most companies. I know Rule 18 as to working the car from the rear. Breakdowns are very frequent. The rules deal with special cases, but the general instruction which all motormen follow is that, in the case of a bad breakdown, they do their best to get to a motor inspector or a higher officer of the company. I am afraid I cannot fully agree with Mr. Blaydon's evidence. I saw the controller afterwards. It was fused on its segments, and there were marks either due to that particular firing, or it might have been an old mark of short circuit on the main barrel. That is a result that might be produced going up to the Archway any time and switching off suddenly. I think to put that controller in order it would have been necessary to have used a'file, and in my opinion the appearance of the controller was quite sufficient for the motorman to have nothing more to do with it. I think he was perfectly justified. We discourage any motorman who does not thoroughly understand it from in any way meddling with it. The very best thing he could have done would have been to have dropped the car back to the terminus; to have left it where it was would have blocked the road. I think I should have expected him to do what he did. I would not consider the best thing to have stopped where he was and sent for the timekeeper. I have never known any accident from driving from the rear, and I know cases where that has been done, but it is usually the Motor Inspector who drives from the rear, the driver being in front looking out.

Cross-examined. I saw the car the same afternoon. I was not there when Mr. Blaydon was there. We always give instructions

that a car is not to be altered in any way where there has been an accident. I have no doubt the car had not been touched since Mr. Blaydon saw it. When I saw it I could work it from either end just as Mr. Blaydon did, and whatever the defect was it had cleared itself off without anybody touching it. I did not say it was a serious defect; I said the appearance was such as to justify the motorman not taking further action. Flashing and firing is a common thing, especially if cars are stopped suddenly. The inspector at the Archway was capable of dealing with a thing of that kind. There would have been no difficulty in running the car back to the terminus, but the next best thing was to do as he did. I should certainly have supposed until this case that a conductor would know how near it was safe to get to other vehicles before signalling to the motorman to stop. When he gets a certain distance from other vehicles he ought to stop. Our regulations contain nothing about using the Tear end; that is gleaned from the Council book. We have no rule recommending driving from the rear end in case of emergency, and nothing to say that it shall not be done The County Council rule says the man is to drive from the rear to the depot. The depot in this case is three miles off.

AUBREY LLEWELLYN COVENTRY FELL . I am chief officer of the system of tramways of the London County Council, and have 23 years' electrical engineering experience. The book produced contains the Council's Rules and Regulations for the staff. Rule 18 states what is to be done when the controller fires. I think I should have dropped back to the terminus. Generally I agree with Mr. Pott's evidence.

Cross-examined. The rule does not apply to a driver and conductor changing ends. It is only in the case of a driver. If the car was some way from the depot, and could only be driven from the rear, I would expect the driver and conductor to do it without additional assistance. I did not examine the car. We think it would be a very serious matter for our motormen if they felt they were going to be held responsible for a thing of this description. I think the man did his best, but of course we should like to try and avoid such an accident if we possibly could.

Verdict, Not guilty.

BEFORE THE RECORDER. (Thursday, March 4.)

Reference Number: t19090302-29

STANLEY, William (46, surveyor) ; indicted for obtaining by false pretences certain valuable securities—to wit, on December 6, 1907, a banker's cheque for the payment and of the value of £4 4s. from " George Richard Simes; on October 4, 1907, a banker's cheque for the payment and of the value of £4 4s. from Arthur Digby; on September 5, 1907, a banker's cheque for the payment and of the value of £1010s., from Charles Henry Jerrard; on October 18, 1907, a banker's cheque for the payment and of the value of £8 8s. from William Moon; and on August 24, 1908, a banker's cheque for the payment and of the value of £4 4s. from Richard Wadham Baxter, in each case with intent to defraud, and alternately for stealing the various securities, pleaded guilty to the charges of obtaining by false pretences.

Mr. Bodkin stated that the learned magistrate seemed to think that the facts were somewhat on the border line between larceny and false pretences, and prisoner was therefore committed in respect of both offences. The system adopted was that of advertising in the "Daily Telegraph," in the borrowed name of Leith, a considerable sum to lend on mortgage. Answers would be received from persons having house property, and then prisoner would answer in the name of Leith, saying that he would be willing to lend the money subject to a satisfactory report being made by his surveyor, Mr. W. Stanley, 9, Adam Street, Adelphi. In his letters to the borrowers Stanley described himself as surveyor to Farrow's Bank, and there was, said counsel, a small substratum of truth in that description, because prisoner having three or four shares in the bank applied that he might be appointed surveyor, and had acted as the bank's surveyor on a few isolated occasions. A fee for the survey having been obtained by Stanley he would write in the name of Leith to the borrower saying that the report of the surveyor was unsatisfactory and declining to make the loan. In that way a number of persons had been defrauded into parting with a fee for the supposed surveyor in the belief that he was a different person from the person proposing to lend the money.

PERCY ALFRED ALLEN , secretary of Farrow's Bank, said the bank did a great deal of business in connection with lending money on real estate. He had known prisoner about two years, and prisoner had acted as surveyor from time to time, but the practice of the bank was to appoint local surveyors in the various districts where surveying work was wanted. The board had declined on that ground to appoint prisoner surveyor to the bank, though he furnished a number of excellent testimonials.

Witnesses to character were called.

Sentence, Nine months' imprisonment, prisoner having been in custody since December 24.

Reference Number: t19090302-30

HAYLOCK, Alice (22, servant), pleaded guilty of feloniously marrying Ernest Parsons, her husband being then alive.

Prisoner was married on November 6, 1906, to Charles Haylock, who was in the Army Service Corps. He afterwards went to South Africa, and in November, 1908, she married Parsons, who is also a soldier. Prisoner, it was stated for the prosecution, must have known that her husband was alive because she was receiving money from him after the second marriage. In the register prisoner described herself as a single woman. The only account she gave of the matter was that she married Parsons because she did not want to go back to Haylock.

The Recorder observed that in addition to the felony of bigamy prisoner had committed a criminal offence in describing herself as a spinster when in fact she was a married woman. At the same time, bigamy in a woman was quite a different offence from bigamy in a man, because in the case of bigamy by a man the offence was often indistinguishable from rape. There might be some excuse for prisoner if she found it difficult to obtain her maintenance money, and the justice of the case would be met by a sentence of three days' imprisonment, entitling her to immediate discharge.

Reference Number: t19090302-31

BARKER, Robert (25, gardener), and RAWLINGS, Herbert (25, labourer), pleaded, guilty of feloniously setting fire to one stack of straw, the goods of Charles Briers. Both prisoners have convictions, recorded against them.

Sentences: Barker, 18 months' hard labour; Rawlings, Nine months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-32

RUSSELL, William (27, gasfitter), pleaded guilty of feloniously sending to and causing to be received by George Frederick Morgan a letter demanding money, to wit, the sum of £1, with menaces.

Prosecutor is an auctioneer carrying on business in High Street, Peckham, and had known prisoner from a boy, and occasionally given him employment. Recently he received from him a letter in which the following passage occurred: "Certain things have come to my knowledge concerning yourself and some other members of your family. Now, I am coming straight to the point. I want you to send me £1 by return of post. If you do not send me the money I intend to make use of the information and show you up in Peckham and Brixton. I am in desperate straits, and these require desperate measures. If you do not send me the money I ask for it will be all the worse for you. It is no use watching the post-office, as you won't catch me. You may call this blackmail or whatever you like, but I call it asking for my rights. "Prosecutor not sending the money, prisoner wrote him another letter in which he said:" If you do not send me the money I shall not only cause your social downfall, but also your physical downfall. You have made yourself a respectable position in Peckham. Do you want to lose that position?I will make your name stink in Peckham. Do you want a few months in bed?".

It was stated that prisoner's father was a contractor in a large way of business. Prisoner himself had been in the army, and stated that Mr. Morgan's brother had contracted a bigamous marriage with his mother.

Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-33

ROSE, John (19, carman), pleaded guilty of burglary in the dwelling-house of Eleanor Fortumn with intent to steal therein, and being found by night unlawfully having in his possession, without lawful excuse, a certain implement of house-breaking, to wit, one jemmy.

Sentence, Two years' imprisonment, with recommendation for the Borstal treatment.

Reference Number: t19090302-34

BARNET, James Gardiner (42, agent) ; having received the sums of £347 and £25 for and on account of Auguste Richard Breyer, fraudulently converting the same to his own use and benefit.

Mr. Beaumont Morice, for the prosecution, stated that the case being one for civil proceedings, which are now pending, rather than for criminal prosecution, he proposed to offer no evidence.

A verdict of Not guilty was accordingly returned.

Reference Number: t19090302-35

ROBINSON (38, sailor), indicted for feloniously wounding John Everest with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm, pleaded guilty of unlawfully wounding on the advice of Mr. Purcell, who consulted with prisoner at the request of the Court.

Sentence, Three days' imprisonment.

Reference Number: t19090302-36

SMART, Lydia Clara (23, domestic servant), pleaded guilty of breaking out of the Post Office in Vigo Street and stealing therein a cashbox containing upwards of £100.

Prisoner had formerly been employed on the premises as cook and left last Easter. A day or two before Christmas she entered the premises by a sidle door while the shutters of the shop were being put up, and took the cashbox from a cupboard upstairs. Subsequently she was arrested at a flat in Maida Vale, where bills amounting to £60 for dress and jewellery were found. The loss falls on the prosecutrix.

The Recorder, observing that this was a very serious case, sentenced prisoner to " Eighteen months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-37

COX, John (62, labourer), pleaded guilty of attempting to obtain by false pretences from Augustus George Mann divers moneys to the amount of £5, with intent to defraud.

Prisoner went to the "Plough," Lordship Lane, and tendered a forged cheque in payment for a bottle of brandy. He also produced a letter purporting to come from the brother-in-law of Mr. Mann, who at once discovered the trick.

Sentence, Twelve months' imprisonment.

BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.

(Thursday, March 4.)

Reference Number: t19090302-38

HORRIGAN, Francis (32, tailor) ; uttering counterfeit coin twice on same day.

Mr. W. W. Sands prosecuted; Mr. Grantham defended.

KATE VINES , wife of Henry Vines, "Duke of Argyle," Little Pulteney Street, licensed victualler. On February 6, 1909, at about 5.30 p.m., I was in the private bar when prisoner came in and asked for a mild and bitter—I 1/2 d.—and then asked for another for our potman (George Knight). He handed me 5s. piece produced. I gave him 4s. 9d. change and put the coin on the till. At about 7.45 I was again in the bar when my husband spoke to me in the presence of the

prisoner—I do not know if prisoner could hear what was said. I recognise prisoner as the man who gave me the 5s. piece.

Cross-examined. We are not very busy at five or six p.m. on Saturdays—of course, there were a few customers. Prisoner was in the bar perhaps 10 minutes. The potman was in the bar about 5.45. when I asked him to call the barmaid to relieve me. Prisoner had left before she came on duty. I did not notice anything wrong with the crown piece. Then two hours later my husband asked me if I could identify this man. I said I could not be sure until I had thought about it. After about 20 minutes I recalled him to my mind and made up my mind it was the prisoner—after the potman had told me that it was the man who stood him a drink. The barmaid is named Hilda Walk. I think the police stook a statement from her. She was not called before the magistrate.

GEORGE KNIGHT , potman, "Duke of Argyle." On February 6, at about 5.30 p.m., I was in the bar talking to some customers when prisoner came in. He said, "Halloa, George, how are you?"—I have seen him frequently in the bar as a customer. He was served with a mild and bitter and he asked me to have one. He paid for the two drinks with a 5s. piece and received the change—4s. 9d. He was in the bar about seven minutes. I went off for my rest and returned to the bar about 7.30. Prisoner was there. My master, Mr. Vines, sent me for a constable.

Cross-examined. At 5.30 I was in the bar, when prisoner asked me to have a drink. He then asked" if I had any tobacco. I said "No, I am going to call for a pennyworth." Prisoner had already had his change, and he said, "I may as well have a pennyworth too." Mrs. Vines then brought over two pennyworths. I have known the prisoner since I have worked at the house—about five months on and off. Mrs. Vines would have seen him on several occasions. He came in as a casual customer. I was present when he was given into custody. I saw the barmaid come up to the mistress and say, "There is a young man down in the bar who has tried to pass a bad 5s. on me. I think it is the same fellow who tried to pass one on you." The missus came down into the bar. She did not recognise him at first. Then afterwards she said to me, "George, I believe that is the same man that treated you." I said, "It is." It was about eight o'clock when Mrs. Vines said she was quite sure this was the man. I was not asked by the constable or by Mrs. Vines if I could identify the man.

Re-examined. I have spoken to prisoner as a customer. Mrs. Vines said to me, "That is the man that stood you a drink." I had not said anything about it. I recognised him as the man and said, "Yes."

HENRY VINES , "Duke of Argyle," Little Pulteney Street. On February 6, at 7.45 p.m., prisoner came into the bar with a companion and ordered a drop of Irish for his friend and a mild and bitter for himself—4 1/2 d. My barmaid, Hilda Walk, served him. He handed 5s. piece produced, which the barmaid gave to me. I looked at, it and said to prisoner, "I have an idea you are the man that passed

one previously and I am going to send for the police. I will send for my wife, and if she identify you I will send for the police and give you into custody." Meantime, a customer who was behind the prisoner locked the door. My wife came down; I sent for a policeman and I gave the prisoner into custody. Hilda Walk was at the police court, but was not called. She is not here. We have only one barmaid and she was sent for after my wife had gone back.

Cross-examined. I have seen prisoner as a customer in the bar on one or two occasions within any recollection during the last two months. My wife had a little doubt as to the prisoner being the man who had passed the previous coin. When I came back from the police station she said she recollected, because the potman had had a drink with this man out of the same 5s. piece. My wife was too busy to have a chat with the potman. I did not ask whether the barmaid or the potman could identify the man as being the man who was there two hours previously.

Police-constable CHARLES HOLT , 240 C. On February 6, at 7.45, I was called to the "Duke of Argyle," where the prisoner was detained. He was counting some money in his hand and he said, "You will not charge me." Prosecutor said, "I wish to give this man into custody for passing counterfeit coin." Prosecutor gave me two 5s. pieces—one broken. He said one had been passed during the afternoon. Prisoner said, "You cannot prove it." I cautioned him to be careful what he said, and he said nothing more. Prisoner was taken to the station and charged with uttering one coin. He said, "I went in there and had a drink. I gave a 5s. piece. They brought it back to me and said it was bad. I got it from my brother, George. I do not like to give his address, but I will think over it as to what I shall do." I searched him and found on him one shilling, three sixpences, and 7d. in bronze, good money. He was sober.

Cross-examined. I do not know whether prisoner has since given his brother George's address. Inspector Vanner is in charge of the case.

Sergeant CHARLES TANNER , C Division, cross-examined. Prisoner has asked me to go and see his brother, who works at Messrs. Escare and Denelle's, of Wardour Street. My representative went and warned the brother to be here to give evidence on behalf of the prisoner at the prisoner's request. He is here. No inquiry has been made with regard to the brother's position.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , Inspector of Coins, H. M., Mint. The two coins produced are counterfeit; they are made from different moulds. The broken one is well made; the other not so good.

(Defence.)

FRANCIS HORRIOAN (prisoner, on oath). I never entered the "Duke of Argyle" before I tendered the 5s. piece, which is proved to be counterfeit, at 7.45 p.m. I most emphatically deny that I was there at 5.30 p.m. I do not know the potman. I do not recollect ever having spoken to the man before. I do not recollect ever having

been in the house before. I may have been two years ago. At 7.45 I tendered the 5s. piece and the police were sent for. I had had the coin from my brother George that afternoon, and I told the police sergeant (Vanner) where he could see my brother. I am in the habit of seeing my brother between one and two on a Saturday when I had been rather slack, and I saw him that afternoon between one and two and got Ss. off him. Sergeant Vanner recollected on the same day that he saw me waiting within a few yards of where my brother works. He mentioned that to me at the back of the Court on the Monday. I left my brother George after we had had two drinks. The reason he gave me the 5s. piece was so that I should not break into it, as it was for my rent and my Sunday's dinner. George changed a sovereign at Richardson's house in Wardour Street, close 'o where he works, and he received that 5s. piece in change, which he gave to me. It is not the first time by a long way that he has given me money. I certainly did not know the 5s. piece was bad or I should never have tendered it.

Cross-examined. After seeing my brother I was walking round and saw one or two friends. I could not say what I was doing between five and six p.m. I was living at a lodging-house in Percy Street, Tottenham Court Road. I was taken into custody on Saturday and charged on Saturday evening, and was before the magistrate on the Monday and remanded till Thursday. I knew I was charged with passing another coin in the afternoon when Vines mentioned it at the station. I was not charged with uttering two coins then. It was mentioned that I was the man who had passed the first coin on Saturday evening. I had had a drink or two and I could not recollect where I had been. I knew I was not the man who had passed the other coin. Vines said something about another 5s. piece having been passed, but I do not recollect any mention about the time. It was just mentioned privately to the inspector, and I was not accused of it. If I had been I might have recalled it. He said, "I believe you are the man who passed the previous one." I did not know it was detained because I was supposed to have passed the two. I believe it was mentioned at the police court on the following Thursday. I denied it the same as I deny it now. I did not make any statement as to where I had been—I did not think it necessary. I was not at work; it was Saturday afternoon. I have lived at Percy Street for fourteen months. I may have been in the "Duke of Argyle in some months previously, but not often. I do not know the potman—I have never seen him to know the man. I cannot make out why he says he recollects me unless it is to stand well with his governor—you know what a clever chap he is. My brother George is in a very responsible position; that is why I did not want to give his address. When he gave me the 5s. piece he gave me 2d. or 3d. besides—a few coppers over so that I should not break into the 5s. piece. I had two or three drinks afterwards with friends—I did not pay for any—I was not doing anything. I have been rather slack and one man gave me a shilling. People sometimes do if they know you are not doing anything. Harry Bartlett, a painter, gave me two

or three sixpences and stood me a drink. I do not know where he lives, but the used to live at 29, Percy Street—the lodging-house where I am. I daresay I could find him. He gave it to me in the "Rising Sun" in Tottenham Court Road, at about four o'clock. Then I had 8d. or 10d. of my own. A man of the name of whale also gave me 1s. I think he lives in Bolsover Street, but I do not recollect the number.

GEORGE HORRIGAN , Clareville Grove Studios, South Kensington, metal polisher. I am the brother of the prisoner. I have worked for five years for Messrs. Escare and Denelle, metal workers, 129, Wardour Street. My brother was out of work in February. I always help him when he is out of regular employment. I met him by appointment on February 6—I always help him to the best of my ability. I could not do it except that my wife is housekeeper and I am caretaker at the studios, and we earn further money. I met my brother by appointment at 1.30 p.m. I finished work at one o'clock and received my wages. I asked my brother to have a glass—we had two mild and bitters and I tendered a sovereign and got change 19s. 9d.—I had not sufficient to give my brother the 5s. I gave him the 5s. piece and 3d. to have a drink going to his lodgings—I told him not to break into the 5s. piece, as it would get him over Sunday, pay his lodgings and for a bit of food on Sunday, and told him if he was not doing anything to come round and see me as usual the following Saturday. I cannot swear to the 5s. piece produced—I wish I could.

Cross-examined. The detective officer came and asked if I was prepared to attend at the Old Bailey. I said decidedly I would. I made no statement. He asked me if I had given my brother the 5s. piece. I said decidedly so. I knew he was accused, because a fellow workman brought it to my notice in the "Morning Advertiser." We got the 5s. piece in Richardson's public-house in Wardour Street—I forget the name of the house, but I generally have a glass there every Saturday—I told the detective I had got it there. He did not ask me where Richardson's was. Looking at the broken 5s. piece produced, I am; afraid I should be deceived by it if it was not broken. I have been helping my brother off and on for six or seven weeks, as he has been out of regular employment—giving him sometimes 7s., 6s., 5s., or 3s.—what I could spare. I did not know that he was charged with passing a second 5s. piece. I did not know he was in custody till my workmate showed it me in the "Morning Advertiser." I was quite aware I had given him the 5s. piece, and that he had said that he had got it from me. I was expecting the police to come and see me.

Re-examined. I expected I should be called before the magistrate by somebody representing the Crown—I wish I had been called before the magistrate. My brother did not give my address in consequence of the responsible position my wife and I hold—I wish he had—I should have been quite satisfied to have been called before the magistrate.

Verdict, Not guilty.

Reference Number: t19090302-39

JUDELL, Albert Royston (24, seaman), pleaded guilty of stealing one watch, one chain, one purse containing the sum of £3, and other articles, and the sum of 10s. in money, the goods and moneys of Harold Lee Smith; burglary in the " Crown Hotel" and stealing therein one cashbox containing about 7s. in money, stamps to the value of 7s., two crossed cheques, and other articles, the goods and moneys of William Juggard; burglary in the dwelling-house of Margaret Switche, with intent to steal therein; maliciously causing grievous bodily harm to the said Margaret Switche.

Mr. Drummond prosecuted.

Prisoner was proved to have been convicted on August 4, 1908, in South Australia of forging and uttering a cheque and bound over to report himself for 12 months to the police.

Dr. WILLIAM BRAMWELL READ gave evidence that the prosecutrix, Mrs. Switche, who 70 years of age, had 'been very seriously bruised and injured by the prisoner, who had used his fists with very considerable violence.

Sentence, Seven years' penal servitude.

BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL. (Thursday, March 4.)

Reference Number: t19090302-40

JONES, Horace Aston (21, traveller), pleaded guilty of forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, endorsements on certain orders for the payment of money, to wit, the endorsement on certain banker's cheques for £3 1s. 3d., £6 8s. 10d., and £4 16s. 4d. respectively, in each case with intent to defraud.

Previous convictions were proved. Prisoner was bound over in his own recognisances of £20 to come, up for judgment if called upon within three years, to be under the supervision meanwhile of Captain Hunt, of the Church Army.

Reference Number: t19090302-41

BARKER, Albert (23, machinist) ; stealing one leather dressingcase and other articles, the goods of the Great Eastern Railway Company, on February 6, 1909.

Mr. J. P. Grain prosecuted; Mr. Burnie defended.

GEORGE HENRY EDWARDS , merchant, Grays. I frequently travel from Fenchurch Street Station to Grays. On February 16 I went there in a taxi-cab. I had a portmanteau which contained clothing and a variety of Masonic jewels, etc., value about £150. I gave it to guard-porter Lines. Soon after I heard it had gone. The bag was in quite good repair. I communicated with the Great Eastern Company at once. I have seen nothing of the bag or any of its contents since.

Cross-examined. The bag was eight or nine years old, I think. It had my name on. It had a handle lengthwise. The maker says it had three handles. The bag produced is not mine.

HERBERT LINES , guard-porter. I recollect Mr. Edwards coming in a taxi-cab with a dressing-case on February 6. I took it into the

booking-hall and placed it on a small barrow after labelling it. I have seen prisoner at Fenchurch Street prior to February 6. One of the company's police saw a boy named Renwick with prisoner and spoke to him.

Cross-examined. If anyone wanted to go to the Poplar departure platform he could go inside the booking-hall. The newsvendor Renwick stands outside the station.

WILLIAM RENWICK . I sell newspapers in the yard at Fenchurch. Street. I carry parcels if asked by anyone. I saw prisoner there on February 6. He was coming out of the station. He had with him a big dressing case about two feet high, two feet six inches long, and about 10 inches wide, a dark brown one with three handles, in very good condition. It was not the bag produced. He said he wanted it carried to Mark Lane Station. We went there together. He went to the booking-office and I went down the steps to where the ticket collector stands. The ticket collector refused to let me go down and I went away. Prisoner took the bag and went through the barrier. In the afternoon I was spoken to by one of the police officers of the railway company. On February 20 I made a report to the City Police and gave a description of the bag and the man. They took me to the Minories Police Station. I picked prisoner out from some eight or nine men.

Cross-examined. Prisoner came out of the station by the end door—the Blackwall door. The Poplar departure platform is at the other end. The Blackwall platform is the Poplar departure platform. The portmanteau was in very good condition. I said before the magistrate it was a new one.

KNIGHT , ticket collector at Mark Lane Station. I recollect prisoner and last witness coming to my station. I told the boy he could not go down. I noticed the portmanteau. It had a superscription of some description on it—a name. I cannot say what name it was. It was in large letters. I said to the boy, "Put it down there," and I saw a short man pick it up and pay him.

Cross-examined. It was a similar bag to the one produced—I mean in the way it opens. I said before the magistrate, "The bag was similar to the one produced. I would not swear this was the bag. This is about the size of it." I said I would not swear to it one way or the other.

Detective JAMES COLLINS , City Police. I heard about this loss through the Great Eastern Police. I caused the boy, Renwick to come to the Minories Police Station. He made a statement and signed it On the same night, about 11 o'clock, I went to the "Still and Star" public-house in Aldgate High Street. About two minutes afterwards prisoner came in. I recognised him. I said I should arrest him on suspicion and told him he would be detained for identification.

(Defence.)

ALBERT BARKER (prisoner, on oath). On February 6 I went to Fenchurch Street Station to see my young woman off to Poplar., I had my bag with me. In the bag were betting tickets, a satchel,

posters, betting book, hammer, nails and tin-tacks. I attend race meetings. When I came out of Fenchurch Street Station I came down the steps at the end leading to Mark Lane. I never touched or saw prosecutor's bag. The bag in Court is the one I gave the newsvendor.

Cross-examined. There are no race meetings going on at Poplar. I was not going there. The hammer is used to nail up flags, and you have to nail betting slates up and put posters on top of those. I go in the betting stands at certain meetings, but mostly bet outside. I have used Waterloo Station to go to race meetings; Euston, Great Northern—very seldom Liverpool Street. I got this bag from a bookmaker at Christmas time. He lives in the West End.

LILY HARVEY . I live at 8, Clipstone Street. On February 6 I was at Fenchurch Street Station. I met prisoner that day in Aldgate. He went with me to the station. I was going to Poplar to my dressmaker. He had a bag with him—a dressing case. It was the bag now in Court. He had that bag about Christmas time.

Cross-examined. This was the second time I had ever been to Poplar. I had met him at this public-house in Aldgate before that day. Prisoner comes to my house now and again when he is at home. We were taking a walk, and I asked him to come and see me off. I don't remember having been with him to Fenchurch Street Station before this. I have met him there when he has come home from races—about once, I think. I remember he went to Kempton Park with the bag on Boxing Day. I took the racing tickets out and looked it. I saw prisoner at my home on February 6 at about six or half-past. I saw him with some friends he had met at King's Cross.

Re-examined. I have heard of trotting matches at Gravesend and Prittlewell. I do not know anything of them.

Verdict, Guilty.

Detective-inspector FRAK PIKE, X Division, proved numerous previous convictions.

Sentence, Five years' penal servitude.

Reference Number: t19090302-42

YOUNG, Maurice, otherwise Walter John Simmons (27, accountant) ; having received certain property, to wit, the sum of £1 17s. 11d. for and on account of Alfred Moore Sutton, and the several sums of £5, £3, £2, and £2 for and on account of Henry Embleton Smith, and the several sums of £5, £2, £2, and 5s. 3d. for and on account of Alfred Walden, fraudulently converting the same to his own use and benefit.

Mr. Samuel prosecuted; Mr. H. W. Wickham defended.

Sergeant BURNEX, F Division. In September, 1906, I went to 23, Holland Park Avenue. That is the office of the West London Traders' Association. I did not find prisoner there. There was no notice up saying where prisoner had gone. I found the rooms open, deserted, and strewn about the floor were a number of letters, papers, and books relating to this business and the former business. I found the bank pass book (produced) of the London City and Midland Bank, Shepherd's Bush branch. On September 14 I went to 702, Holloway Road. That is a bootmaker's shop. There was a notice board on

the private door, "North London Traders'Association. 'I did not find prisoner there. There was no indication of where he had gone. I found there 178 forms of membership of the West London Traders' Association. Most of them show a subscription of 10s. 6d. (same put in). I also found this pass book of the London City and Midland Bank, Ealing branch, in the name of M. Young and Co. I also found a paying-in book of Farrow’s Bank in the name of W. J. Simmons. I put in a sample of circulars relating to the North London Traders' Association, which I found. The accountants of the association are given as Phillips and Co. On February 2 I was at West Norwood Police Station and read a warrant to the prisoner. I then took him to Kensington. He made no reply when the warrant was read. On the way to Kensington he made a statement which I wrote down on getting to the station. He said, "I shall plead guilty, and then they cannot come on me afterwards. I am glad you have got me. I have been expecting you every day." He was charged at Norwood. I found on him a number of circulars relating to Smith's Mercantile Agency. Prisoner, referring to them, said, "These are mine; I have opened in Brixton"—I think he mentioned the address—"and I am running it straight."

Cross-examined. It is not the fact that prisoner said when arrested he should plead guilty to save the disgrace and exposure. I swear there was no notice up when I went to Holland Park Avenue. At Holland Park Avenue I found a number of papers, and among them were letters complaining of the way the business was carried on. It looked as if the man had run away. I did not caution prisoner before we had conversed together. He was already detained, and reading the warrant to him in my opinion was sufficient caution. I cannot caution a prisoner each tune he opens his mouth.

ALFRED WALDEN , basket manufacturer, 158, Railway Approach, Hammersmith. Prisoner was introduced to me last June by a Mr. Hitchens to collect some accounts. I gave him a list of five or six amounting to about £33. One item was £5 from Mr. Carter. On July 22 I received a letter from prisoner: "Dear Sir,—Re accounts for collecting. Our representative will call upon you within the next day or so with one report of the above-named." Previous to that I called to inquire how my account was going on. He said he had £5 from Mr. Carter and it would be sent on in a day or two when the cheque went through. I have received no money from prisoner.

Cross-examined. I did not pay 10s. 6d. subscription. I expected prisoner to pay over the sums as soon as he got them. That was his promise. He has admitted receiving these sums of money. He has been perfectly open. There was no agreement that if I would wait for these moneys he would give up his commission. He promised to pay and could not pay, and came and said, "Leave it over to next week," and he could manage it then. I took his word, thinking he meant what he said. I swear there was no arrangement as regards weekly payments to me.

JAMES EDWIN CAETBB , 118, Putney Bridge Road. In the middle of June I owed Mr. Walden about £9 5s. A gentleman called on me

representing the West London Traders' Association and asked for this amount. It was not the prisoner. I gave him a cheque for £8. This is the cheque. The same man called on July 25. I paid him £2, On August 7 I paid him the balance. These are the cheques.

Cross-examined. I have never seen prisoner before, except at the West London Police Court.

FREDERICK SHEPHERD , manager of the London City and Midland Bank. Shepherd's Bush branch. Prisoner opened an account on March 18, last year. It remained open until June 16. It was a very unsatisfactory account. There was never any balance. I know prisoner's handwriting very well. Four of the cheques handed to me were paid into our bank. The endorsement in the name of Embleton smith is signed by prisoner undoubtedly. It is drawn on Farrow's and marked "Account closed." Cheque No. 10 is also drawn by prisoner on our Ealing branch. It has "referred to drawer" on it. Cheque No. 13 was paid into Farrow's Bank; 24 cheques were returned altogether. I think.

Cross-examined. Prisoner had an overdraft of £7. When he closed the account he settled it all up with us. We have not lost one penny.

ALFRED WALDEN , recalled. Between July 21 and the interview when prisoner promised to pay, I think there was an interval of about a fortnight.

Cross-examined. It is not the fact that when he promised to pay £5 he also promised not to charge any commission on the account.

(Defence.)

MAUICE YOUNG (prisoner, on oath). I have been connected with debt collecting firms ever since I left school—with two of the biggest in England. When I took the premises at Holland Park Avenue the rent was £50 a year. I wanted two rooms and thought by letting five rooms I should make enough to pay the rent. I started with £30 capital, and with what I eventually borrowed from friends I had £70 or £80. I told Mr. Walden of every penny I had received, told him I could not pay, and asked him to wait, which he agreed to do. I suggested if he would wait I would waive the commission. I do not say he suggested he would, but he did agree to that. He said then if was not a question of commission. I paid the landlord at Holland Park Avenue the first quarter, but I could not pay the second. When I left I left most of the books. I was intending to clear them out any day. When the clerk came to take over possession I would not let him unless he let me put up a notice. Be would not do that. We went underneath to the landlord and I explained that he had sold me up for rent. I had not given up possession of the, office and would not do do. I told Walden my address and where I had gone. When I saw Walden he asked me for a report. I returned everything in that report. I told him if he would wait I would endeavour to send on £5 within a week or two. I told him I would not charge him commission. I will not say he pressed that point, but he agreed to

it. I suggested it. The custom of the trade is to make your own arrangement with the client. Walden gave me the business and asked me when I paid out. I told him I would pay out when I got a respectable sum; it was no good paying small amounts. I did not tell him I had a banking account. I suppose he knew I had. He took it that I was going to pay these moneys into that account.

Cross-examined. The statement I made to the sergeant on the way to Kensington Police Station was not made in the way the sergeant has put it. He asked me if I would plead guilty or not guilty. I said if I pleaded guilty I should do so to avoid publicity and to make sure there would be no other prosecutions. At the police court I was not represented by counsel and I took care to say nothing. I knew a warrant was out two or three days after it was issued. The first cheque of £5 I received from Carter on June 24. It was paid into my banking account. I think it was the London City and Midland Bank. I could not tell you offhand how much I had is Farrow's Bank at that time—perhaps a few pounds. I had no other banking account. I may have had a few pounds loose cash. I bad moneys owing to me. The bank pass book will show what became of the £5. I may have paid it away to firms or for wages. The moneys I received were used for the purposes of the business. I say I was entitled to use the money as I did. I had other hopes. I had moneys owing to me by different people. Mr. Walden did not expect the £5 at once. I think if Mr. Walden thought there was a probability of getting it he would not have objected to my using it for two or three weeks. If he thought there was no chance of getting the money he would have asked for it at once. I do not admit at the interview about July 7 that I told Walden I would let him have the £5 as soon as it was cleared through the bank. I told him I had the £5 and that it was not cleared. I told him on June 24 I had the money. I saw him about a fortnight before I sent him the letter. On July 7 I must have told him the cheque had been cashed. If I told you the cheque had not been cleared on July 7 I made a mistake. The cheque for £2 of July 20 was passed through Barclay's Bank. I had no account there. I often had cheques marked "Account payee"; I find you can pay them through any bank. I may have owed a man something, and he might take a cheque and hand me any balance in cash. I bad no other means of livelihood except what I got in the way of commissions and subscriptions. I was living at home; my parents were keeping me and helping me with cash. My personal expenditure would be 10s. or 15s. a week. On August Bank Holiday I spent 24s. in theatre tickets, two were for myself and the others were a present to somebody doing business with me. I got money for other work—stocktaking and bookkeeping. I attribute my failure to being overstaffed and paying too much in wages, etc. I did not spend the firm's money on my wedding trip; J. was very particular not to do it. The books show about £150 to £200 expenditure, including my personal and office expenses, and £120 received for commissions and subscriptions. I often borrowed money to pay clients I owed money to I paid all moneys received

into the bank. At the time I left Holland Park Avenue I owed perhaps £20 or £30. I only had one banking account at a time. I have had four altogether. When I was at North London I told most of the people I owed money to that I was moving. I did not send round a circular.

(Friday, March 5.)

MAURICE YOUNG , recalled, further cross-examined. I put on the circulars to customers: "All money collected will be paid over immediately on receipt," but it was generally arranged when they joined the association when we should pay them. They generally said they did not want the money the same day or the same week; in some cases they wanted a monthly settlement. I did not arrange with Mr. Walden that they should be paid immediately. I think we arranged to pay him once a month, but I would not swear that. He did not ask me on June 24 or 25 for the cheque; he asked me how I was getting on with the accounts. I did not say he should have The cheque when it was cleared; I said I had received the money, but the cheque had not been cleared. He instructed me to issue some county court summonses, and I was to use the money for that purpose. The summonses were not issued. During the year that Lewis was employed by met paid him about £30. During the month from March 18 to April 20 I drew cheques in his favour to the amount of £10 17s. I would point out that when I was short of cash Lewis would often change a cheque for me. He would hold that cheque over and eventually pay it in. From March to April 21 there are cheques in his favour for £10. I admit drawing £23 in one month against a profit which was at the rate of £270 a year. I had just started business, and the expenses were more than the profit I was making. It takes a year or two to work a business like that up. Lewis would bring me money, and I would pay it into the bank to meet a cheque that was due to be presented. That was very often done. When I paid away money I did not look to see whose money I paid with. I new my financial position, at the bank. I knew I had not much money there. I did not know I owed so much. I had hopes. I was trying to work up the business with the money received. When people called upon me to pay, I had the chance of getting money from friends and making commissions in the meanwhile. Between July 20 and 27, very likely, I had not got a banking Account. I had a banking account in the name of W. J. Simmons; that is my own name. I never sent any circulars out in North London. I used the name of Phillips as accountants with no intent to defraud. I left Holloway after being there a fortnight or three weeks. I had no wish to be arrested.

Re-examined. I was married and had no money. If I had left my wife she would have had no money at all. My wife is in an interesting condition. I thought when I went to Holloway I would start afresh and work up a business, pay people out, and get a good reputation and retrieve my position. I never had more than £1 a

week—many a Saturday I have had less. I have paid as much as 50 per cent, to some people to introduce business. My father has lent me money time atter time. If I had wanted £5 at any time I could have got it. I had no account at Barclay's Bank. I should think they would expect me to keep a balance of £50 at that bank. I had nothing to do with that bank except that I received a cheque payable on them. I thank August Bank Holiday was the most expensive day in my life. I gave three theatre tickets to parties who introduced me. Mr. Walden was a member of the West London Traders' Association, but he did not pay any subscription. He knew that I was the association—the proprietor. He told me to use money out of the £5 for summonses. I received the money by a crossed cheque. It was paid into my bank. Walden knew that. I always told clients when I had their money, even though I could not pay at the time. The March quarter was a very heavy one as regards expenses. I had my books posted up by a chartered accountants clerk from time to time. Every penny received in the business was put into the books of the business. The reason I changed my account from the Shepherd's Bush branch to Farrow's Bank was not that the former charged me 1 1/2 guinea for keeping the account. They asked me to close the account. At that time I had an overdraft of £7. I then took them the £7 and paid their charges. When Lewis cashed cheques for me I gave him a small fee. I had small sums from my wife, £1 now and then, which I put into the business.

Further cross-examined. I said yesterday that I told Sergeant Burney I had been expecting to be arrested every day. I knew the warrant was out.

JOHN WILLIAM LUCAS . I was canvasser in the employ of the prisoner. After he left Holland Park Avenue a notice was written out to the effect that his address was Hillingdon Heath, near Uxbridge.

Cross-examined. I know nothing about a notice relating to Brixton. The notice at Shepherd's Bush was put up on the day he left.

Verdict, Guilty; prisoner recommended to mercy on account of his wife's condition.

(Monday, March 8.)

Prisoner released on his own recognisances in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.

BEFORE MR. JUSTICE PHILLIMORE.

(Friday, March 5.)

Reference Number: t19090302-43

DAVIS, Frederick Charles (45, no occupation) ; committing willful and corrupt perjury, and attempting to Obstruct and prevent the due course of law and justice.

Mr. Muir and Mr. Galbraith prosecuted; Mr. G. W. H. Jones defended.

Detective G. WALTON, City Police. On November 30 I went to the office of Frederick Charles Davis, 90, Cannon Street, and searched the office, and found documents, which I now produce (Exhibits 1 to 11 inclusive).

Cross-examined. I did find other letters relating to a dispute between defendant and W. G. Davies. I do not remember seeing any as to a dispute between him and Mackay.

ALFRED WRIGHT , manager of the London and County Bank, Bromley, produced copy of defendant's account at that bank between January 14, 1901, and December 31, 1903.

Detective-superintendent CONWAT, City Police. I was present at the trial of two men, Gyde and Marcus, at this Court in October last (see preceding volume, page 903). Two of the jurors in that ease were named Garrett and Callender. At the conclusion of the trial, the Jury retired to consider their verdict, and, on returning, James Garrett stood up. The Jury were then discharged. The same day I saw prisoner in Newgate Street, near the Old Bailey, with Harry Garrett, brother of James Garrett, the juryman. I arrested prisoner on a warrant on November 19 and charged him with unlawfully attempting to pervert the course of justice. He said, "You don't mean it." I took him to the Old Jewry Police Office, and, on the way, he said, "I do not know why I should be charged. I have already lost £5,000 over the case." Evidence was given by the prisoner at the trial of Gyde and Marcus as to the value of the quarries, and as to what he had expended upon them. He then produced a similar book to Exhibit 1, now produced to me. I am acquainted with defendant's handwriting. This book is in his handwriting. I procured a copy of defendant's banking account. Prisoner did not rive evidence at the second trial of Gyde and Marcus before the Lord Chief Justice. Gyde and Marcus were then convicted.

Cross-examined. I never saw prisoner in the company of the juryman Garrett. Four or five other gentlemen gave evidence as to the value of the quarries; all of them, except Mr. Jones, regarded the quarries as of the value of some thousands of pounds. I have not ascertained that prisoner and Horry Garrett have been acquainted with each other for many years. I understood that they were brother Masons and that they had met some time previously. I have not heard that they gave each other invitations to their respective Lodges. I did not hear prisoner address Harry Garrett; I do not know whether he called him Bob—a nickname. I do not know whether the Deacon's" public-house, where I saw prisoner and Harry Garrett go to, is where prisoner's Masonic Lodge of Instruction is held. I have not inquired.

WILLIAM GRIFFITHS DAVIES , carrier, Blaenau Festiniog. The account produced is my account. I have not received the balance of it.

Cross-examined. I have done carting for prisoner at the quarries, and two or three other people also. A considerable amount of machinery has been taken up there. I took 14 tons up and J. D

Jones took a lot up. There was a dispute between prisoner and myself as to the weights.

JAMES WISEMAN MACKAY . In 1902 I was conducting an engineering business at Newport, and in September of that year sold a portable engine to prisoner—price £42 10s. I received £20 on account on September 6, but no further payment.

Cross-examined. There was no dispute to my knowledge as to payment of the balance. I called personally at 90, Cannon Street on three occasions for payment. Prisoner did not say he would not pay until the engine was put right. I did not know it was broken.

(Saturday, February 6.)

MICHAEL THOMAS DEVILLE , 56, Carterknowle Road, Sheffield, iron and steel rail merchant. In August, 1902, I supplied goods to prisoner amounting to £11 19s. 9d., received cheque on account for £6 17s. 9d., leaving a balance of £5 2s., which I have not received Account produced is a copy of my invoice. I took proceedings in the County Court of Yorkshire and afterwards received £3 in full settlement.

Cross-examined. I do not know Gorddinan Quarry personally. I had been to the quarry in 1893 and had supplied rails to it twenty years ago; that is the last time I went there. I accepted the £3 in settlement.

WILLIAM MEREDITH OWEN , Blaenau Festiniog, general merchant. From time to time I supplied goods to prisoner at the Gorddinan Slate Quarries. On March 13, 1902, I received a payment on account of £3 19s. 1d. I received no payment of £53 19s. 1d. On August 15, 1902, I received a payment from prisoner of £1 11s. 10d. I received no payment of £91 11s. 10d. On April 11, 1903, I received a payment from prisoner of £6 16s. 2d. I received no payment of £46 13s. 8d. On December 13 I received a payment from him of £12 13s.

Cross-examined. The goods supplied were powder for blasting coal, and other things used by slate quarries. I cannot say if other people supplied a large quantity of similar goods.

JOHN DAVID JONES , son of T. B. Jones, general provision merchant, Blaenau Festiniog. In January, 1902, my father supplied goods to prisoner; also on May 12, 1902, on which date I received a payment of £1 13s. 9d. I never received a sum of £21 13s. 9d. No such sum was due to my firm.

ALFRED WILLIAM EDMUNDS , 40, Chancery Lane, shorthand writer, and GEORGE WALPOLE, Portugal Street Buildings, Lincoln's Inn, shorthand writer to this Court, proved transcripts of the evidence given by the prisoner on November 2, 1908, in the case of Rex v. Gyde and Bernhard, otherwise Marcus, and the remarks made by the Jury and the Judge at the close of the case.

GEORGE ADAM CALLENDER , 19, Richmond Avenue, Merton, clerk. I was a juror in the case of Rex v. Gyde and Bernhard, otherwise Marcus, before Mr. Justice Bigham; a fellow-juror was named James Garrett. He and I on several days during the trial took luncheon

together at "The King of Denmark." On several of those days prisoner spoke to us. On the day that Gyde gave evidence—I think, Friday, October 30—Garrett and I were having our luncheon at "The King of Denmark,' when prisoner came in and sat beside us. I did not know him. Prisoner said that he was a witness; something was said also that we were on the Jury by myself or Garrett. I made a movement to Garrett to keep quiet—not to hold a conversation. Almost immediately after that I came away, leaving prisoner and Garrett seated at the table. On that day at four o'clock Garrett and I went again into "The King of Denmark" and saw the prisoner—I think he followed us in. Prisoner said there was plenty of slate in the quarry that had been worked—that it was there; and he showed me the book that the had and stated that he had spent a lot of money upon it. Black book produced to me I think was the book that prisoner had. I remember seeing these wavy marks upon it. He said those were the moneys he had spent on it. (To the Judge.) I think he said, "I have spent thousands on it."

(To Mr. Muir.) I think prisoner mentioned something to the effect that it could be worked as a commercial success. I think he said he would take us down to see it—all the Jury and Counsel and his Lordship as well. Then a person who, I believe, is a clerk to one of the counsel or the solicitor beckoned prisoner out of the bar. I identified that person at the Guildhall. I do not recollect his name. (Turner stood up.) That is the man I refer to. This was on Friday, the 14th. I think I said to prisoner that I did not doubt his word, hut that what he had said had nothing to do with the case we were trying. On the Monday or Tuesday following I was having luncheon with Garrett at "The King of Denmark" when prisoner entered and sat opposite me. I had just finished and left almost immediately. I think he said "Good morning" before I left. I left Garrett and prisoner together. During the trial, while with James Garrett, I saw a man I now know as Barry Garrett. He was not introduced to me the first time, but later I was told by Mr. Garrett that he was his brother. I saw Harry Garrett twice at "The King of Denmark" with James Garrett. After the trial had terminated and we were discharged from giving a verdict, I saw prisoner at the corner of Newgate Street. He said, "How have you got on?" I said, "Disagreed." He said, "Oh," or something like that.

Cross-examined. I did not see the figures in the black book. Prisoner said he had spent thousands. I may have said at the police court that he said "Hundreds." It may be that he said hundreds. He said it with a wave of the hand. I did not pay much attention to it, At the trial prisoner went into the witness box and stated everything he had said at "The King of Denmark. "He had this book in front of him and he was cross-examined on his dealings with the different agents. The conversation at "The King of Denmark" made no impression on my mind. There may have been 20 or 25 people there; there is a long table and two small ones. We were at one of the smaller tables, I think there was also a little boy there; there were 10 to a dozen people in the luncheon room; there was an

inspector of police in uniform. Prisoner was speaking in an ordinary voice. I should not think everyone in the room could hear him. The inspector might if he had been listening. He was speaking in an ordinary tone. Evidence was also given about the value of the quarry by Washington Davis, Richard Richards, Mr. Roberts, and others, including Mr. Foster, an engineer. When prisoner first came up to luncheon the time of day was passed. He said he was a witness in the slate quarry case. Then either I or Garrett said, "Oh, we are on the Jury." I am certain that was said. I am certain I saw prisoner twice on that day. I was not bribed in any way—no offer of money was made by prisoner or anyone else. Prisoner said he would take us all down and pay all expenses, including Counsel, his Lordship and everybody who was supposed to be in the Court.

Re-examined. I do not think that book was shown to the Jury in Court—it was not admitted. I did not know the inspector I saw at "The King of Denmark" as an officer in the case. I took him to be an inspector from his uniform. (To the Judge.) Eleven jurors were in favour of conviction, and the Judge asked Mr. Garrett to stand up.

JAMES GARRETT , 44, Sherbrook Road, Fulham, coffee house and dining-room keeper. I was one of the Jury in the case of Rex v. Gyde and Marcus, otherwise Bernhard, tried before Mr. Justice Bigham in October and November last. I dissented from my brother jurors and was in favour of acquittal. Every day of that trial I lunched at "The King of Denmark" with Mr. Callender. Up to the commencement of the trial the prisoner was a total stranger to me. A few days before the conclusion of the trial I saw prisoner at "The King of Denmark." I was drinking with a friend—I thank, with Callender—at luncheon time. I was standing up. I am almost sure Callender was there, but he may have gone over to the telephone. I first noticed the prisoner when Callender and myself were sitting at dinner; prisoner was sitting opposite us, and he said he was in some way connected with this quarry. I do not think we said anything. There may have been a casual remark. I think Mr. Callender said, "Are you connected with this case?" and prisoner said "Yes, I am." I think he said he was "the vendor" to this company. I did not pay much attention to what he said. I did not say we were jurymen, nor, I believe, did Mr. Callender. I know Callender gave me a kind of nudge as much as to say, "Do not say anything—he careful, be cautious." Prisoner told us what a valuable quarry this was. He said it was a most valuable concern and contained slate of good quality, and he was prepared to take anybody down there and prove to them that the quarry actually did contain this slate—that he would blast a slab of slate and prove that it was a valuable quarry. He was addressing anybody that was sitting at the table. I think there were five sitting at the table, but there were other tables—other people could hear. One of the police officials was sitting there on one occasion—there are generally police officers over there; I think there was a lad at our table. They were all listening; the policeman seemed interested in the conversation.

(To the Judge.) It never struck me that he was telling us this because we were on the Jury; I do not know that he knew we were on the Jury. I think Callender and I usually left "The King of Denmark" together. Perhaps Callender would leave a minute or two before I did, as he did not take sweets. Prisoner and I were never alone together. There was only half an hour allowed for luncheon. Callender may have left a minute or two before me but we generally waited for one another. I do not recollect seeing prisoner again that day. On one occasion prisoner produced a black memorandum book and opened it at luncheon time. I did not see what the entries in it were. He said it was a record of business he had done in connection with the quarry. I could see there were a lot of items, but I could not tell the amounts; there might have been single or double figures. I did not pay particular attention to it. 1 could not say whether there were hundreds or thousands in the entries. I do not think the black book produced is the one I saw—I do not think it was so thick; looking at the inside, I do not recognise the wavy or cancelling lines. It does not recall anything to my memory. I think Harry Garrett came to see me twice during the progress of the trial; once I saw him in company with the prisoner. That was opposite St. Paul's Station in a public-house at about five o'clock after the Court adjourned. I do not think prisoner had then given his evidence. I had an appointment with my brother, who was employed in Clerkenwell, about some property which he was buying, and prisoner walked into the public house with my brother. It was in the same week as the conversation in "The King of Denmark," but I could not say whether it was before or after. I had very little conversation with prisoner. My brother said, "Wait a minute, Jimmy; I have got some business with a gentleman," and I stood on one side. I understood afterwards it related to some moulding and framing which my brother was going to do for the prisoner. I said it him, "Hurry up, I want to get that train," mentioning the time. My brother had a conversation with prisoner. (To the Judge.) My brother is with a firm of picture frame makers who do mouldings for houses. I think my brother introduced prisoner by name. Up to that time I did not know his name. He said, "This gentleman is connected with your case, Jimmy," or something to that effect. I said, "Oh, indeed." I did not recognise him as the man who had been talking to me in "The King of Denmark" when he first came in. My brother lived at East Dulwich, and he can get down to Peckham Station from London Bridge. We had a drink, which my brother paid for. My brother was netting a customer, so he paid for the drinks. Prisoner gave evidence after both these meetings and I recognised him as the same man. He produced a black book, which was not shown to the Jury—it was not admissible. Cross-examined. I think it was only once I saw prisoner at the "King of Denmark." I said at the police court, "I think I passed the time of day and asked him to have something to drink and he declined. "There was a lot of jocularity going on when he sat down and I really cannot recollect what conversation (had taken place there. It was quite a casual conversation. We had not told him who we

were. I am quite certain of that now on thinking it over. In arriving at my decision in the Gyde and Bernhard case, I came to my conclusion conscientiously; I was not influenced in the slightest degree by anything prisoner told me at "The King of Denmark." We heard his evidence afterwards, besides that of Washington Davis and three or four others. I attached considerable importance to their evidence and it turned out true. (To the Judge.) I am told it has turned out a very valuable concern by some people from Wales who were up here at the trial and were called as witnesses. I believes it is a most valuable concern. I think it was wrong to convict Gyde and Bernhard the second time. (To Mr. Muir.) Neither prisoner nor anyone else offered me money, nor have I been seen by anyone since connected with the trial. I mean neither prisoner nor his solicitor, nor anyone on his behalf, has been to me since this cast has been on. One police official has—he came and dined at my place for about a fortnight. He never mentioned the case—he sat in the shop and had a nice dinner and would sit a little while and have a game of draughts. He did not seem in any particular hurry. He talked about general subjects to me. I think prisoner was called in an a witness from outside the Court. When I saw him in "The King of Denmark" he was a complete stranger. There were two tables there, each of which would accommodate 10 or 12 people. I should think there may have been 16 to 20 people in the room; there were police there every day. Everyone in the room could hear. Prisoner was speaking in a very loud voice. His evidence was stronger in the witness box. We heard him at greater length. The conversation in "The King of Denmark" only lasted a few minutes. No amount was mentioned there. The first time I heard that he had spent between £3,000 and £4,000 on the quarry was when he gave evidence. Callender heard the conversation. He never left more than two minutes before I did. There was nothing said after the dinner. The little boy was rather too busy looking after the money, so that we did not have any time for conversation. After Callender gave me a nudge I was disinclined to enter into any detailed conversation. My brother is a Mason. I think he has met prisoner at Masonic banquets. My brother never tried to influence me. He never mentioned the case to me. There were several reasons which led me to form my conclusion. I thought it was a valuable quarry; then I did not think the Jury was a fair one; I think they were prejudiced. I do not know whether I am right, but I always thought that a jury should consist of 12 Englishmen, and they were not. Washington Davis and the other experts convinced me of the value of the quarry quite part from anything the prisoner said.

Re-examined. In addition to the two reasons I have give I thought the general demeanour of the prisoners was characteristic of innocent men. They seemed to watch the evidence with the greatest interest and every little mistake that was made they called their counsel and it was referred to and the matter was put right I think if the men had been guilty of that crime they would have remained callous and would not have cared—that was another reason

Then, as I mentioned before, I thought there was prejudice. I think one of the Jurymen told me when the prisoners first came into the dock, "I know one of these prisoners—he has done three or five years." I thought he was prejudiced. I cannot tell you the name of that Juryman. The trial lasted a fortnight, I think, and the names of the Jurymen were called over twice a day, but I could not tell you one of the names, with the exception of Mr. Callender, with whom I went to dinner every day. At the close of the case Mr. Justice Bigham said the gathered that there was only one of the jury dissenting and invited the dissentient to give his reasons. No one responded to that. Mr. Justice Bigham repeated the invitation and said, "Can I assist the juror?" Then I passed the word along and I stood up. The forman did net condescend to answer for me so I stood up myself, and any answer was, "No, my Lord," I did not understand Mr. Justice Bigham to say "You are not disposed to tell me what your difficulties are." He said, "Can I assist you?" I said "No," twice over. I did not think he could assist me or I would have told him. If I had adjourned with his Lordship I would have told him that I thought one of the jurymen was prejudiced, but I did not think it prudent to say it in open court. The juryman might not have liked it who had told me about his having done three or five years. I have not said anything about one of my fellow-jurymen telling me that one of the prisoners had been previously convicted. The police officer came to my coffee-shop as a customer after the trial was over. He was not in uniform. I recognised him when I came to the Guildhall. I saw him there, and I said to him, "Good morning, I did not know you were a police officer." He said, "No, I know you did not." He used to sit in my coffee-shop the best part of the afternoon. (To the Judge.) I think I occupied the same position in the jury box during the trial except on one occasion—it was the end seat in the front row, Mr. Callender sitting next to me. When this juror told me about one of the prisoners having done time I said, "Why do you not say that, why don't you put it down in writing and give it to his Lordship. You would get exonerated from serving on this jury?" And he said, "No, I think I shall stick it now." I had to determine whether I thought they were guilty—whether what the juryman said was lair or unfair had nothing to with the matter—I had to decide for myself. I did not say to Mr. Justice Bigham, "My Lord, I am very much, influenced by the evidence of Davis and the other gentlemen who said this quarry was a very valuable one," because I did not think of it. I did not know how to reply to his Lordship. The Jury were out about two hours. His Lordship sent a gentleman in to know whether he could be of any assistance and the foreman of the jury said "No." If his Lordship had suggested that we should have gone into his room I would I have told him, but I did not think I could tell him in open court. It did not occur to me that I should not appear to be so very obstinate if I had given my reasons. (To Mr. Jones.) I did not near prisoner describe Gyde and Bernard when he was in the box. I do not recollect that.

Detective-Sergeant HUGH MCLEAN , City Police. In the afternoon of November 4 I wais in the Old Bailey, where I saw Harry Garrett at

about 5.30 p.m. at the corner of Newgate Street. He was joined shortly afterwards by the prisoner, and they both went into the booking hall of Holborn Viaduct Station, stayed there a few minutes together, then the prisoner went into a telephone office there, apparently made a call on the telephone, come out and rejoined Harry Garrett; both got into a cab and drove to Queen Victoria Street outside Nos. 14 and 18. They both got out of the cab; prisoner directed Harry Garrett in the direction of Walbrook, down Bucklersbury, and he went in that direction. Prisoner went into the building, 14 and 18, Queen Victoria Street, where were the offices of the solicitors, Messrs. Dade and Co., for the defence of Gyde and Marcus Harry Garrett walked down Walbrook and went into the saloon bar of "Deacon's" public-house, remained there about a quarter of an hour alone, and was joined at seven minutes past six by the prisoner. I was joined by Superintendent Ottaway and Detective Parker. They both remained there until 6.40. when they came out and walked to Cannon Street and prisoner went into 90, Cannon Street, where his office is situated, came out and rejoined Garrett, and they both walked arm in arm to London Bridge Railway Station of the London Brighton and South Coast Railway, where prisoner went to the booking office and took tickets and they both went by train to Peckham Rye. Harry Garrett was drunk. I went by the same train, but not in the same compartment. Detective Parker went in the same compartment with them Harry Garrett got out at Peckham Rye and prisoner went further on. On November 5, at 4.25 p.m., I saw prisoner leave 90, Cannon Street in company with another man; they both walked to St. Paul's Station, where prisoner left the other man. He then went along Farringdon Street and Clerkenwell Road and into the saloon bar of the "Coach and Horses." Clerkenwell Square, or St. John's Square, going in at five p.m. He remained there until 6.10 alone, when he was joined 'by Harry Garrett. They remained there until 7.5 p.m., came out from there and went into the shop of D. White, 41, Clerkenwell Green, walking arm in arm there and from there to the "'Sessions House" public-house; they remained there from 7.15 till 8.30 p.m. Harry Garrett was drunk that night also. I was at the Guildhall when the men stood up to be identified by Mrs. McCall. Harry Garrett was one and a man named Durban was another. Durban was the managing clerk of Dade and Co., solicitors for the defence of Gyde and Marcus.

Cross-examined. I know now that Dade and Co. act as solicitors for the prisoner in this case—not before to my knowledge; I have not inquired. The Garrett I have spoken of is Harry Garrett and not the juryman. I have never seen prisoner with the juryman Mr. Garrett. I have not been making inquiries since about Harry Garrett. I do not know that he and prisoner are friends or that they travel on the same line. I do not know that the "Coach and Horses is Harry Garrett's Masonic Lodge of Instructions. When he went t) London Bridge Station he passed the barrier all right and was not stopped. I did not arrest him for being drunk because some one was with him capable of looking after him. He was not so drunk

that he was not capable of self-protection. He was drunk, but he could walk pretty straight. Prisoner was sober.

Detective WILLIAM BARKER , City Police. On November 4 I was at London Bridge Station with Sergeant McLean and travelled to Peckham Rye in the same pompartment with prisoner and Harry Garrett. I heard an appointment made for them to meet at six o'clock the next night at Aldgate or Aldersgate. On November 5 I saw Harry Garrett leave his house in Crystal Palace Road, East Dulwich, and followed him toy train to Hildesheimer and Co., 96, Clerkenwell Road, where he works. I law him leave about 6.10 p.m. and go to the "Coach and Horses where he was joined by prisoner in accordance with the appointment made the night before.

Cross-examined. I do not know that Harry Garrett has been employed at Hildesheimer's for 20 years, nor that the "Coach and Horses" is Harry Garrett's Lodge of Instruction.

Detective HARRY WALTON , City Police. On November 5, at five p.m., I saw prisoner going into the "Coach and Horses." Harry Garrett went in at 6.10 p.m. and they were sitting together in the corner of the bar speaking in a very low tone—I could not hear what they were saying.

Cross-examined. They were together about five minutes. I do not say they were whispering, but I could not hear what they said.

(Defence.)

FREDERICK CHARLES DAVIS (prisoner, on oath). My present address is St. Martin's, Broadstairs. I have been in business for about 30 years. (To the Judge: I am not doing anything just now—I am in prison—I was practically out of business when I went to prison.) I was in a very large way of business. For two years I have been ill and Sir Thomas Barlow and other eminent physicians have been consulted in reference to my case.

Mr. Jones proposed to read the medical certificate.

Mr. Muir stated that there was very great controversy with regard to the question of the prisoner's health. Held that the certificates could not be read without the physieisns being called.

I first saw the jurors Garrett and Callender one day when I was waiting here as a witness and I went across to the "King of Denmark"—it might be October 29. During the trial I remained outside the Court until called in as a witness. I only saw the jurors once on October 29. We were sitting at the table and I said what a beastly nuisance it was a man having to waste has time like this. I had been waiting about three or four days and it looked like waiting another week—and not much for it; so I believe one of them said, "What are you doing?" and I said. "I am on this Welsh Slate Quarry case, I am a witness, but the people whom I am witness for have stolen all my property and all the money I have put into it, and I have not got a penny piece out of it, and what a cheat it is for them to call me. "I was annoyed at them subpoenaing me—I may say the trial was put off two or three times. I said that I had been

done out of my property—swindled out of it by rogues—by Gyde and Bern hard. I said I had just lost an estate of 1,000 acres and all the money I 'had spent on it for three years. I had not the slightest idea they were jurors. I first knew that the night Mr. Garrett's brother introduced me to him. That was the same night. I said nothing more about the trial to them. I had this black book in my pocket, and I said, "Look what they have done me out of—about £3,000 cr £4,000," and then I shut the book up and put it in my pocket. Neither of them took the book in his hand or saw the figures. I opened it when I was sitting on the opposite side of the table. I repeated in the witness-box that I had spent £3,000 or £4,000. During the trial I met Harry Garrett in the road. I have known him for two or three years. I have lived for some considerable time at Sutton and he at East Dulwich, and he used to get into my carriage as I came up to town—that is how I first met him. At first I did not know his name, but I afterwards called him Bob. He and I are brother Masons. I met him in the Old Bailey at the same dinner-time that I met Mr. Garrett, whom I know now to be a juryman, in the "King of Denmark"—I met him at the front entrance gates here, and he said, "Hullo, Davis. "I said, "Hullo, Bob," in the usual way. That afternoon I found I should not be wanted and we went up Holborn, where we had to call on several picture shops, because he is in that line, and we found our way round to the St. John's Ambulance Gate, at Clerkenwell. He has a friend in there, and we spent a very pleasant afternoon. He showed me over the gateway and introduced me to a lot of his friends there. Then we came away, and he said he had an appointment to meet his brother—I did not know who his brother was—we went down to the public-house opposite St. Paul's Station and his brother turned out to be the juryman Garrett; that is the first time I knew they were brothers. I had some tea in that public-house—I do not drink myself, being a teetotaller—and I came out and caught the train to Bickley, where I have an estate—being tied here all day over the trial I used to go down there in the evening to see the men. The two brothers went off by themselves I saw Harry Garrett again that week or the beginning of the next—I think it was the day of the verdict, November 4. I only saw him twice—he had come round to see his brother, and he told me be wanted me to help him as he was trying to buy the house where he lives—it is a house that has got a plot of land on each side, and I being a builder he wanted me to buy it, and he showed me a letter from Edell and Gordon, who are the people who act for me—he had asked them to advance him a thousand pounds on his house—he wanted to buy it and for me to develop it, and build a house on each side of his house, but the whole thing fell through. He was trying to work this arrangement with his brother as well. Edell and Gordon have worked for me on and off for some time. While we were waiting outside here to hear the verdict I saw Mr. Callender, and said to him, "How is the thing going on?" He said, "Oh, we have disagreed. "Harry Garrett was waiting for me, and I went in to the

Holborn Station and called up Mr. Dade, the solicitor for Gyde and Marcus, because I had not had any remuneration after having been here for 10 days—I told them I wented some money and they promised to give me about a guinea a day or something of that kind, but I had not had a penny; we took a cab to Dade's office, and I said to Garrett, "You go and wait for me at Deacon's, in Walbrook," which he did, and I met him there. I may say that is his Lodge of Instruction. I called for him at Deacon's, and we went to my office, 90, Cannon Street, to get my overcoat. We walked across London Bridge, waited half an hour for a train, and went off by train. He got out at Peckham for East Dulwich and I went on to Sutton, where I lived. I think there were five or six people in the carriage. I made an appointment to meet Garrett the next day as they had got a lodge on at the "Coach and Horses," and I was to come over and spend the evening with them". I kept that appointment, and had to wait an hour for him, so I had some tea. Then he came in.; we did not stop long inside—we went out, and he introduced me to several people; I know a man who keeps the public-house at the corner and we went in with him for about an hour. I did not go to the Lodge of Instruction, as I wanted to get back to Sutton; I left him and went to Sutton from Victoria That ended that day. There is not the slightest truth in the suggestion that I tried to influence James Garrett, the juryman, in coming to a decision. I never did so through Harry Garrett in any shape or form. I was very pleased to see the men get convicted who had stolen all my property. Dade and Co. acted for me for some time. Account produced is prepared by my daughter and myself, and relates to the expenditure on the Welsh quarry. These payments were all made at that quarry, but you can add several more thousand pounds to it; these are some items I have picked out, and checked them by copies of my bank account. I have payments in small cheques alone of £2,137 18s. 9d. I had to make large payments in excess of that—I made one payment of £750 that was not made by a cheque but by delivering up debentures to the amount of £750 in the quarries, which I got in the sale of the quarry to Gyde and Marcus. I got no money, and I unfortunately bought these back again from Forshaw, to whom I had paid them. I have got all the debentures at home—£4,000 worth—and anyone can have the lot for 1s. In my black book (produced) I had "machinery, etc., £1,296; railways and offices, £350." That was not included in the £2,100 for cheques. I have bought a large amount of goods for the quarry for cash and paid farmers for cartage and various work for three years on the estate. I have shifted millions of tons of debris for which there is no account in this book. I have spent a tremendous lot of money. My pass book shows I had thousands of pounds at that time. I used to take money down in cash. In my black book I have put a cross against the quarry items. 1 paid all my debts at that time. (To the Judge.). Unfortunately I have been bankrupt—it was a circumstance I could not help—I have paid 20s. in the £. It has cost me 50s. in the £ with all the costs: It is true that I spent between £3,000 and

£4,000 in working the Gorddinan Quarry, and the estate at large—the estate is three miles long and contains 1,000 acres. The Gorddinan Quarry is about a couple of acres; it is not an open quarry, but underground. My black book snows that I have spent £3,386 14s. 10d. in working and developing this quarry up to the time when I sold to Gyde and Darby fcr £500 and £4,000 debentures in the company to be formed., I left all my money in the quarry and took paper for it I would sell the shares now for 1s. The whole thing was a swindle. Gyde and Darby took over my liability to the vendor. I had not paid any money, I had a take note. The contents of my book were not read to the jury. The Judge held it to be inadmissible. The book contains also various entries of expenditure on different building estates. Where I have added £100 to the items it is £100 which I have taken down in notes and bought goods for the quarry account. so that when I sold to Gyde and Marcus I altered the £45 to £145. When I began opening the works it was necessary to have huge baulks of timber running about a quarter of a mile. They were made in London, shipped to Festiniog, and hooked against the quarry. I only gave Mr. DeVille one order for a few rails. I supplied at least 50 or 60 tons of rails. With regard to W. G. Davis, the addition of £20 to the £1 16s. 0d. is because other goods were bought of some body named Davis, and I added it to his item. I altered the £5 into £25, and the £1 16s. into £41 16s. in the presence of Gyde and Darby. The item of £220 to McKay included other machines used for developing the slate quarries during three years. I bought an engine for £42 at Monmouth. I had to have it all repaired and put right. Looking at Owen's account for £3 19s. 1d. I have probably altered it to £53 19s. 1d. In my pass book you will see Owen's name mentioned dozens of times—on April 11, April 15, November 25, December 5, March 8, March 21. It may be there is another Mr. Owen who got the other moneys. The item £3 19s. 1d. is altered into £53 19s. 1d.; £1 11s. 10d. is turned into £91 11s. 10d.; £16 16s. 2d. I have turned into £46 13s., 10d. There was Owen's name on the day book of the quarry, and I naturally thought it was R. E. Owen. On May 12. 1902, J. G. Jones was paid £1 13s. 9d. That has been altered into £21 13s. 9d.; another Jones's account has been added to it. It is a rough estimate, perhaps I wanted to get at the total amount I had spent, and it did not matter what name I put it to in this book, I certainly have not tried to influence the juryman in order to benefit Gyde and Bernhard. If I could have got hold of Gyde in the exercise yard down at Brixton I would have given him a good hiding. I was asked by Mr. Muir about the report I had made to Mr. Fox with regard to Gyde and Darby. My reports were uniformly hostile. I think I was the means of bringing them to book. I wrote to Mr. Fox: "Why do you not bring these people to book—look what they are doing." Evidence was given that the prospectus contained reports by John Williams. Roberts, and others in favour of the quarry. I said that the person who made those reports ought to be locked up In 1906 I was urging Mr. Fox to prosecute Gyde and Darby, and in 1908 I was subpœnaed to give evidence for them. I do not think I did them much good. I would not give a proof to their solicitors.

(passages of his evidence were read and commented upon by the witness.)

Cross-examined. On September 14 an item of £45 has been altered into £145. The hundred is for goods booked to the quarry. There is An item in any banking account on that day of £100 for goods taken down, and"Hole £12," making £112 taken down on August 30. On April 25 Jones £5 3s. 6d. is altered into £65 3s. 6d. The books showed that £60 had been spent there. G. D. Jones has been altered from £1 to £21—that is because £20 has been paid to another Jones. "T. Williams, £111 4s. 0d.," has evidently been altered from £1 4s. 0d. Williams was the contractor who drove a tunnel, and he has been paid the money in wages. I have known Mr. Dade for a considerable time, and he has done work for me as a lawyer. During the trial I visited Dade and Co. two or three times. He asked me to write what I knew about the quarry. I wrote and told him. that I considered it was a good quarry, good land for slate. I say that now. I will not swear that I did not suggest that Hubbard should come as a witness. Forshaw was employed at the quarries for more than a year—I do not think I suggested that he should be a witness for Gyde and Marcus. Forshaw had no interest in my office at 90, Cannon Street. I know Hilt. I will not swear I did not ask him to come as a witness. I did come in and sit in court before giving evidence. I walked in and no one stopped me. I forget whether I was in court for two days. I will not swear I was not. I did not notice the jurymen to recognise them. The Woolwich Equitable Building Society brought an action against myself and Forshaw, which was tried before Mr. Justice A. T. Lawrence. The plaintiffs alleged conspiracy and fraud; they called witnesses. I did not go into the box because my counsel told me it was nothing to do with me, and that I need not come up. I was there for about ten minutes and went away. The Judge decided against me. I appealed, and the Court of Appeal upheld the decision.

Re-examined. In the action by the Woolwich Building Society the houses were sold to Mr. Forshaw. Counsel told me it was the most impudent action he ever heard of—that I need not trouble about it at all. He said, "In fact, you need not go to the court. You have sold these houses for £1,900, and received your money. It has nothing at all to do with you. You have introduced Forshaw to the society for an advance, but you have not guaranteed him in any way, and if be has fallen back in his payments it is nothing at all to do with you." He said it was the most impudent action, and the Judge would put an estoppel on it. The counsel proved to be wrong. I went to the Court of Appeal, and they said as I did not go into the witness-box there was nothing to appeal on. Verdict, Not guilty.

BEFORE THE RECORDER.

(Friday, March 5.)

Reference Number: t19090302-44

SLADE. John (38, carpenter) ; attempted burglary in the dwelling-house of Edwin Arnold Law, with intent to steal therein; being found by night unlawfully having in his possession, without lawful excuse, a certain implement of house-breaking, to wit, one jemmy.

Mr. Rooth prosecuted; Mr. Purcell defended.

Police-constable HORACE HAFFENDEN , 515 N. On November 18, at about five a.m., I was on duty in High Street, Stoke Newington, in company with an officer named Woodard. I observed a man named Dicks examining the revolving shutters of a pawnbroker's shop. Prisoner was keeping watch opposite at the corner of Brooke Road. I was concealed in the doorway of an empty shop about 14 yards from him. For about 10 minutes Dicks was attempting to open the revolving shutters with a jemmy. He moved away when there was a person coming along on the opposite side. At the same time prisoner left his corner and passed me where I was concealed in the shop doorway. After going a short distance he returned and took up his stand at the corner of Brooke Road and Dicks returned to the shop. On his way back Dicks picked up something from the gutter which, I believe, to have been a jemmy. After a time a gentleman came out from Kynaston Passage adjoining the shop Prisoner again left the corner of Brooke Road, passing me a second time, Dicks at the same time moving off in the opposite direction. When Dicks returned to the shop prisoner again returned to the corner of Brooke Road. I then saw that Dicks was again endeavouring to force the revolving shutters with a jemmy. The shutters were subsequently found to have been forced and had the marks of a jemmy upon them. I and the other constable then left our hiding place and proceeded to arrest Dicks, who threw the jemmy at Woodard and ran away, but was caught by another constable, and pleaded guilty at this Court. Prisoner escaped and I did not see him until the 13th of last month at Bethnal Green (Police Station, where I identified him from amongst nine others. I had never seen him before November 18 so far as I know, but I am certain he is the man.

Cross-examined. The second man (Mr. Purcell objecting to the expression" prisoner") was looking across the road towards Dicks. The only time he was not looking at Dicks was when he was on the move. There is a coffee stall at the corner of Brooke Road. On the occasions when I saw the second man I only had a side view of him. I saw a van between the coffee stall and the pawnbroker's shop. I could not say how many customers there were at the coffee stall. When the jemmy was thrown at the other constable I blew my whistle. I went into the room where the identification took place before Woodard did. I heard the officer in charge tell the men to turn side ways. I picked out prisoner before the men were told to turn sideways, although I had only had a side view of the second man. Woodard did not pick out prisoner until after the men had turned sideways; then he picked him out without any hesitation I gave a description of the second man immediately after the arrest of Dicks, "height 5 ft. 6 in. or 5 ft. 7 in., complexion dark, hair and moustache dark, stout build. "I do not know that prisoners height is 5 ft. 3 in.

Police-constable NORTON WOODARD , 452 N. I was on duty with last witness on the morning of November 18 in Stoke Newington Road. I saw a man whom I now know as Albert Dicks, examining the revolving shutters of a pawnbroker's shop. Haffenden and I were concealed in the doorway of a shop. Prisoner appeared to be keeping watch at the corner of Brooke Road. He passed and repassed us twice as persons moved along the street, and, at the same time, Dicks moved from the spot where he had been examining the shutters. In consequence of what we had seen I and the other officer crossed the road and endeavoured to take Dicks into custody, but he got away. Prisoner also escaped, and the next time I saw him was on February 13, when I identified him from amongst a number of other men.

Cross-examined. I had no difficulty in identifying the second man (prisoner). I looked at him and then asked the inspector to turn him sideways. The inspector said, "I will turn them all to the right" and did so. I then picked out prisoner. I had previously described him as a man with a dark moustache. I said at the police court when Dicks was charged it was doubtful if I could identify the man who got away. During the period of observation I was not the whole time with Haffenden; at one time I was standing at the end of the coffee stall. At that time prisoner was at the corner of Brooke Road. Anybody standing at the corner of Brooke Road could see me standing at the end of the coffee stall. Standing at the end of the coffee stall I could see Dicks opposite the pawnbroker's. I saw the second man on two occasions. On each occasion I only saw him side face. At the time Haffenden and I rushed out of our place of concealment Dicks was trying to lift the shutters of the pawnbroker's shop with a jemmy. I was in the middle of the road when Dicks threw the jemmy at me. It was then that Haffenden blew his whistle. I mostly kept observation on the man with the jemmy. I am sure that when Dicks was arrested the second man ran off along Brooke Road. I did not see him get into a van and drive away.

FRANK BURGIS , 2, Mason's Place, High Street, Stoke Newington. I am a coffee-stall keeper and keep a night stall at the corner of Brooke Road. On the morning of Thursday, November 18, between 4.30 and five a.m., several strangers were at my stall. I picked out prisoner at the Bethnal Green Police Station as a man who came up to me at about that time.

To the Recorder. I did not see anything of a man trying to prise open the shutters of a pawnbroker's shop. I noticed that a cart stopped within about 10 yards of my stall, and about that time prisoner came to my stall and had two cups of coffee. After he had been there some five or six minutes I heard the police whistle blown. Prisoner was then standing at my stall. I asked him what that was and he said, "I do not know." After I had served my customers I got out from the stall to see if I could see anything. Prisoner got up into the cart which was drawn across the end of my stall and drove towards Tottehham. I did not see him come in the cart, but as far as I could see he was in charge of it. The cart went in the

direction opposite from that in which it had come. I identified prisoner on February 13 at Bethnal Green Station.

Cross-examined. The van or cart was a four-wheeled van covered with tarpaulin. I did not see the van draw up. When the police whistle went prisoner was at the stall. I said to prisoner, "What is up?" He said, "I do not know. "Then he got into the van, turned his horse, and drove towards Tottenham. I did not know that a policeman in uniform had been standing at the back of the stall; I heard so afterwards. Previously to the identification on February 13 I had been shown some photographs at the Stoke Newington Station. I was then in company with Constables Haffenden and Woodard. From among those photographs I picked out the photograph of the man I had seen at the coffee stall. It was about a month after chat I identified prisoner at the Bethnal Green Station. The police officers both identified the same photograph.

ALBERT REYNOLDS , manager to Edwin Arnold Law, High Street, Stoke Newington, gave evidence that on November 17, at 8.45 p. m, he locked up the shop, and that on being called up at five a.m., on November 18, he found that the revolving shutters had been levered up two or three inches, and had upon them marks corresponding with the jemmy produced.

Detective-sergeant EUGENE COURTNEY , J. On February 13 I arrested prisoner at Cambridge Heath at 10.45 a.m. on suspicion. When told the charge he said, "I know nothing about it." When charged at the police station he said, "I know nothing about it." At ✗on he was identified by the three witnesses without hesitation.

(Defence.)

JOHN SLADE (prisoner, on oath). I have heard the evidence as to my being outside the pawnbroker's shop about five a.m. on November 18. I was not there at all. I do not know where the shop is nor where the coffee stall is. The police officers are mistaken when they say they saw me there that morning. I did not pull up a van at the coffee stall or drive away in a van. My height is 5 ft. 3 in. in stockinged feet. It has been taken since I have been in Brixton Prison and supplied to me by the governor. My moustache is of the same colour now as it was last November and has always been. (Prisoner has a fair moustache.) I cannot say of what colour it would appear to be at five o'clock on a dark morning.

Cross-examined. It would perhaps be correct to say I am of stout build. I was wearing a moustache on November 18. I was not then wearing the clothes I now have on. I then had on a brown overcoat. The reason I am now wearing a black coat and black tie is that since Christmas we have unfortunately buried our mother. I do not know the Stoke Newington Road much. I was not aware before this case that there was a pawnbroker's shop and coffee stall at the corner of Brooke Road. I do not know the "Weaver's Arms" nor the name of any public-house in Stoke Newington Road. From my recollection Cambridge Heath is a tidy distance from Stoke Newington Road

—I should think three miles. I know Dicks who was convicted here. I knew him years ago when he was working at a gas factory. I do not know what he was doing on November 18, not having had conversation with him for some three or four months before he was arrested. On the morning of November 18, at five a.m., I was in bed in Wells Street, where I live. I heard of the arrest of Dicks about eight p.m. on the 18th; that is how I recollect I was in bed at the time of the arrest. Sometimes I get up at half-past six in the morning, but all depends upon what I have to do. I do not work at night; I am not a baker or anything of that kind. I do not know Brooke Road. I have never had a cup of coffee in Stoke Newington Road in my life. Burgis is mistaken in saying I stayed five or six minutes at his stall. He is mistaken in saying I got into a van and drove away. I have known Dicks 17 or 18 years. I know several people he knows. Dicks and I were not bad friends, but we had not spoken together much latterly. Before I was identified Haffenden looked at me for two or three minutes and seemed doubtful. Then he asked if he could have one man turned round. The inspector in charge said he could have all the men turned round, Then Haffenden said, "That is the man." Verdict, Not guilty.

BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.

(Friday, March 5.)

Reference Number: t19090302-45

HANN, William ; feloniously causing grievous bodily harm to Frederick John Smith.

Mr. Leycester prosecuted. Mr. A. J. Lawrie and Mr. G. Tully Christie defended.

ERNEST LANGDON PRIOR , draughtsman. I produce plan of the corner of Beaufoy Road and Queen's Road, Battersea, showing the newsagent's shop, No. 7, Queen's Road, the gas lamps, and the tram terminus at the corner.

FREDERICK JOHN SMITH , lamplighter, South Metropolitan Gas Company. I have been four months in my present employment. I am 27 years of age, and am employed in the Battersea district. I pass along Queen's Road, Battersea, every morning and evening, turning out the lamp marked on the plan in the Queens Road, and then the two lamps further on. I have seen the prisoner, but have never spoken to him. He is employed at the newspaper shop at the corner of Beaufoy Road. He has repeatedly called out to me from outside the shop, saying, "Get up off your knees; turn your toes out; you have your father's round." My father has nothing to do with the gas company. On February 19, at 7 a.m., I was passing the newspaper shop carrying my stick with which I turn the lamps out, holding it by the centre, when someone came behind and tried to pull the stick away from me. I looked round and recognised the prisoner

as one of those who had passed remarks on me. He seemed to be wrenching the stick out of my hand. He had a fire pail in his hand, with fire alight in it. I said, "Why cannot you mind your own business and leave me alone?" He then put his fist up to my face in a threatening manner. I said, "If you interfere with me while I am doing my work you will find yourself in trouble. "He then put his hand on my chest and pushed me backwards. I staggered backwards, and I appealed to three men that were standing at the corner of Queen's Road, and asked if they would be witnesses for me They were two labourers and a tramman. They never answered me. Prisoner then came for me and got my head fixed under his left arm, and punched me in the face several times with his fist. I seemed to lose consciousness then, and when I came to I found myself standing up against the wall and a young woman giving me a glass of water. I kept my stick in my hand as long as I could, but it was knocked out of my hand into the road. I know I had been on the ground by the look of my coat—it was dirty up the back and on one side. I cannot say I remember going down A constable come up and asked me who had done it. I pointed to the prisoner, who was standing by the pavement. He said, "Are you going to Charge me?" I said "Yes." My head was aching, and blood was running down my face. I went to the station with the constable and the prisoner. A doctor was sent for. He plugged my nose, strapped it with plaster, and sent me home in charge of the constable. My head became bad with dizziness, and I was obliged to lay down—I could not stand up. I did not leave ray house till Thursday, the 18th. I am now feeling better My nose is split at the top and cut at the bottom. (Same examined by the jury.) I did not strike the prisoner at all, or do anything with the stick in the way of knocking him with it.

Cross-examined. On many occasions during the past seven weeks prisoner has passed remarks of an insulting nature. I have been constantly insulted whenever he has been at the shop by him and by others. I was annoyed, and my feelings were not of the kindest nature towards the prisoner. I had seen nothing of him before he caught hold of my stick. He held the fire pail in his other hand, I think. His touching my stick caused the altercation. He tried to pass me on the inside close to the shops and pushed by me. I suppose that was why he took hold of my stick. I did not attempt to trip him. (To Mr. Leycester.) I was holding the stick horizontally—it has no light to it—I was turning the lamps out; it is only used to turn the lamps on and off. (To Mr. Lawrie.) I never held the stick in both hands to strike the prisoner. I did not strike at all. When he got my head under his arm I tried to get away. I had done nothing to him whatsoever. Before he attacked me he put down his pail. I did not think he would touch me. I do not recollect him taking his coat off. When he tried to push me backwards I simply called for witnesses. I had had recently a lot said to me, and I was told I could not do anything unless I was interfered with. I did not wish to fight or cause any disturbance.

Re-examined. My stick divides into two parts. I had my overcoat on. I did not take it off. We worked round the corner of Beaufoy Road while we were struggling, and he then got my head under his arm.

ARTHUR HUNTER , carriage painter, 63, Haselrigge Road, Clapham. Before February 10 I did not know prisoner or prosecutor. On that morning, at 6.46, I was in Queen's Road, Battersea, walking towards the river going to my work, and had got as far as Beaufoy Road when I saw the prisoner and prosecutor quarrelling. They were just off the roadway at the corner. The prosecutor was walking past the shops into Beaufoy Road, prisoner in front. The prosecutor's back was towards me; he held his stick at the trail. The prisoner then put himself in fighting attitude, and the prosecutor stepped back to avoid the blows which he aimed at him, and raised his stick horizontally to guard himself. The next moment prisoner put his hand to his waist as if to unbuckle a belt, and a tram man who was standing behind me called out, "No belt, no belt. "Prisoner then took off his coat and threw it on the pavement—the fire pail was then on the pavement—and went for the prosecutor, hitting at him in all directions—on the head, the ribs, and everywhere he could get at him. Prosecutor was terrified and tried to shield his face with his arms or his stick. The stick was thrown down into the middle of the road. Prisoner then got prosecutor's head under his left arm and kept on hitting at his face. Someone who was there called out, "Now you have got him nicely—let him have it." Prosecutor broke away and stood a little way off with his hands to his face which was bleeding and looking at his hands as if looking at the blood coming from his nose and mouth. Prisoner then made another run at him and struck him full in the face, as prosecutor was stooping, making him reel back, and he fell on to his back in the roadway with a loud groan. It was not a fair knock down—he was stooping. That was the only time I saw him go down. He did not fall oh his face. He then got on to his feet again and staggered up against the shop front in Beaufoy Road, blood coming from his nose and mouth to such an extent that the man seemed half choked. I walked towards him and he asked if he might lean on my shoulder as he felt so bad. I spoke to prisoner and said, "Do not strike him again." He said he would not I saw congealed blood on the prisoner's face. I picked up prosecutor's stick to give him, but he was in a delirious condition, throwing his arms about halloaing and raving. He leaned up against the wall, where I left him, and where the constable found him afterwards, I gave my name and address to the constable.

Cross-examined. When I first saw them they were having some words—quarrelling, but not fighting. I did not see prisoner push prosecutor in the chest—he seemed to rush hack to avoid blows. There had been something like a fight going on for a few minutes before the prisoner got prosecutor's head "in chancery." The pail was in the road. Prosecutor held the stick cross-wise—he never used it to strike. I did not think they were having a round—it seemed as if the fight was all on one side and the prosecutor was a punching

machine. I am sure the tram man called out, "No belt." If I said at the police court, "No belts" in the plural, that is wrong. They only broke away for a few feet, and the prosecutor was slightly turned round from the prisoner stooping, when the prisoner ran at him, hit him in the head and knocked him down. He was in a dazed condition—I do not think the prisoner realised that. After I spoke to him he did not hit him any more.

Re-examined. I do not know if prisoner had a belt on. I saw no money bag.

Police-constable JESSE HOLDEN , 123 P. On the morning of February 10 I was on duty in Queen's Road, Battersea, when I saw prosecutor leaning up against the wall at the corner of Queens Road and Beaufoy Road. He seemed very dazed and was bleeding from the mouth and nose. The prisoner came up. I asked the prosecutor who caused the injuries and prisoner replied, "I did. He struck me on the hand with the stick he lights the lamps with." I told him I should take him into custody, and at the station I told him he would be charged with causing injury to the prosecutor. I then noticed prisoner's right hand was bleeding at the knuckles. I washed it and asked how he came by the injury to his hand. He said, "That is where I struck that bloke, I expect." Prosecutor was attended by Dr. Kempster.

Cross-examined. The first words the prisoner spoke were a confession that he had done it, and a statement why he had done it. His right hand was bleeding and he told me prosecutor had struck him on the hand with his stick. The skin was broken in three places and blood oozing through; there was no swelling. One mark was on the knuckle and the other two between the knuckles.

FELIX CHARLES KEMPSTER , divisional surgeon of police, Battersea. On February 10, at 7.30 a.m., I was called to the station and examined prosecutor. He was suffering from a severe fracture of the nasal bones; the bones were broken in more than one place, and, on passing a probe up the nostril, I found that the bone had split through the lining of the nose, causing a compound comminuted fracture—that is, where it is broken into more than one piece, and where it goes through the surface. In this case it was the lining of the nose that was broken; not through the outside skin, but through the inner skin—the cartilage or gristle of the nose here and there was split through. The septum on the right wing of the nose and the gristle in the centre of the nose were split through. The septum had been torn from the nose so that one could easily move it—it was torn from the bones. The inside upper lip was cut and the teeth were loosened—the injury to the lip was caused by the teeth. There was considerable bleeding from the nose, and I could not stop it until I had plugged both nostrils; at the back of the head there was a bruise. At that time prosecutor was just recovering from the effect of concussion; his pupils were dilated and fixed; his features were pallid and covered with cold perspiration, and he kept on retching as if he would be sick, which is a sign of recovery from concussion. I sent him home. I have seen him on two subsequent occasions—the

second time on February 22 when I examined him in my surgery He had symptoms that showed that the brain mischief was still continuing. I examined him last Monday and find that those symptoms have disappeared. There is no permanent injury to the nose, but I think he will have some difficulty in keeping a proper passage through the right side. He cannot breathe through that side; but that may have been there before, as it is natural for people to have one side smaller than the other. Otherwise I do not think there is any permanent mischief. The mischief might have been caused by blows from the fist. I examined the prisoner at the request of the magistrate on February 10, about 12 noon. There was a mark on the right hand, the skin had been split, and there were bruises on the two knuckles. It might have been caused by a severe blow with the fist against some sharp obstruction—either the teeth or by knocking against a wall Hitting a man in the teeth would cause it.

Cross-examined. The three marks on the prisoners knuckles were in a row, beginning at the knuckle and gradually receding—they extended from the knuckle backwards. I do not think they were caused by stick produced, unless there was some sharp edge of the stick that cut him. This stick (produced) might have caused one of the marks, but I do not think it would have caused the three. Had it been caused with the stick I should have expected more bruising; it looked as if the skin had been struck. The bruising might have been caused by striking a man on the teeth—the force of the blow, or even by striking a man very forcibly on the head. I do not think the stick could have caused the marks—I do not put it higher than that. The prosecutor, popularly speaking, had a broken nose, loose a bruise on the back of his head and concussion. The conteeth, cussion may have been caused by the blow at the back of the head. I do not think the wounds were caused by falling—the injuries to the face would not have been so severe in that case. The one on the hack of the head was quite consistent with a fall. I do not think the nose and mouth would have been injured in that way by a fall. There is no cut on the outside of the nose such as he would have got by falling. I do not think it would have broken the nose. The bones were broken in more than one place. I do not say it could not have occurred by striking the pavement—I do not think it did. If the nose had been broken by a fall punching might have made it worse. There is no permanent injury.

(Defence.)

WILLIAM HANN (prisoner, on oath). I live at 7, Wickersley Road, Battersea. On February 10, 1909, I was going out of a little newspaper shop, 7, Queen's Road, where I am employed, with a fire pail in my right hand, when prosecutor came up with the lamp lighting stick. I was trying to pass him on the right, close to the shops, when he deliberately probed the stick through my legs as we we're about five yards from the corner of Beaufoy Road. I said, "What did you do that for?" He said, "Go away you little cur. "I went

on to the corner with the fire pail in my hand; prosecutor followed me round; we started quarrelling about the stick which he struck me with. He lifted the stick up in both hands (vertically) and struck at my head. I put my right hand up and received the blow on my knuckles, which are now marked black and blue. I had never spoken to prosecutor before, nor he to me that I am aware of. I closed with him and tried to get the stick away, and I managed to get round at his back wrestling with him; we both fell to the ground, prosecutor underneath. We got up; prosecutor's face was all bleeding, and he went and stood against the wall and remained there till the police constable came. He attempted to strike me with his stick about five times before I closed with him. I did not hear him speak to anybody. I heard no one call out, "No belt" or "No belt." I had a belt on (produced). I dropped it before I closed with him. I never had his head "in chancery." I took off my coat when I received the blow on the hand; I closed with him with my coat off; I hit him once on the right side of the face—I could not hit him any more as my hand was powerless. I am 18 years of age. I was for six months in the Royal Fusiliers. I have since been at the newspaper shop. I have never been in and sort of trouble before.

Cross-examined. There was no blow in the mouth at all—it was on the side of the face. I got the marks on the hand from prosecutor's stick. I did not tell the constable, "I must have got that when I hit the bloke"—I told him I received the blows from the stick. I have seen the police constable on his beat; I have had no quarrel with him, and do not know why he should tell lies about me. I have never seen Hunter before. I have seen a man's head "in chancery" when in the Royal Fusiliers—I have not learned boxing there—only a tussle now and again. I was employed at the Essex Paper Mills from September, 1905, to November, 1907, when I was discharged for cutting a workman's head open with an iron pot—a man of 40; that was before I was in the Fusiliers. I never got prosecutor's head" in chancery "; I only gave him one blow; he only fell once; I on the top of him—he fell on his face. It is quite untrue to say I hit him and he staggered back and fell on the back of his head. After he struck me with the stick he went back like this (describing), and was making another stroke at me when I pushed him and he fell on the corner of the kerb. He probed me in the legs on purpose. Before we started struggling I went round the corner into Beaufoy Road and came back. I went round with the fire pail to serve a customer and put the fire pail down. Prosecutor followed me up to the corner. Then we started quarrelling and I took up a fighting attitude. I took my overcoat and jacket off together and threw them on the pavement. He must have got his injuries by falling on his face. He got up, went and stood against the wall and remained there till the constable came. I did not knock him down when he was holding his hands up to his face. He did not hit me with his fists. There are always a lot of tram men about there—they do not come into my shop. I know Hardy, and have seen him several times. He usually stands on the other side of the road.

JOHN EDWARD HARDY , 21, Carlton Road, Earlsfield, assistant regulator, London County Council Tramways. My duty is to time the cars. On February 10, at about seven a.m., I was on duty at the tram terminus near the corner of Queen's Road and Beaufoy Road. I was standing on the pavement outside the newspaper shop. The prosecutor brought out a pail containing a coke fire, and put it on the kerb towards Beaufoy Road. Prosecutor had just turned the lamp out on the pavement in Queen's Road and walked up towards Lavender Hill when prisoner came out of the shop, took up the pail, and passed round the corner to Beaufoy Road, passing inside the prosecutor close to the shop. Prosecutor carried his stick at the trail. As prosecutor was going round the corner he put the stick between prisoner's legs. Prisoner passed a remark which I did not hear and went round the corner into Beaufoy Road. Prosecutor followed him and they passed out of my sight. Then they came back to the corner and all of a sudden prosecutor struck prisoner with the stick, aiming at his head. Prisoner put his arm up and got away. Prosecutor followed him and attempted to hit him again. Then prisoner began to wrestle with him. Then he struck at the prosecutor and he took off his coat and the money bag that he had round his waist, or his shoulder, threw it in the gutter, went towards the prosecutor and tried to wrestle the stick away from him, which the prosecutor was striking him with and running backwards. Prisoner got the pole from him and threw it in the road. Prosecutor stood up and prisoner struck at him, caught him in the jaw and knocked him down. I did not see the prisoner with the other man's head in chancery.

Cross-examined. I only saw prosecutor fall once—that was at the end; he fell sideways. The prisoner did not fall to my knowledge. I did not see prosecutor fall down on his face. Prisoner took his coat off after the prosecutor had struck the first blow—then the prisoner went for him. The knock-down blow was the last I saw. I cannot say whether prosecutor hit prisoner on the hand, but I assume prisoner guarded the blow to his head with his hand. That was the first blow to my knowledge. The prosecutor was hitting the prisoner with the stick:, following him up round Beaufoy Road. They did not get out of my sight as I was standing on the corner of Queen's Road. The fight was all over in six or seven minutes. No one tried to stop it—I did not I do not know that I was amused—I like to see justice and fair play. It was not fair play for the prosecutor to strike prisoner with the stick, the man defending himself with his hands. It is a pure invention sto say he got his head "in chancery." I heard no one call out "No belt," or say, "Now you have him nicely; let him have it. "I heard nothing of the sort. I have known the prisoner just over a month since I have been put on duty at that point; his shop is not used as a waiting-room by the tram men. I have been in to the shop. I have been on duty there since the occurrence and have seen the prisoner every day and spoken to him—not about the case—I have only asked him how his hand is going on. On the day it occurred the constable asked

me to come as a witness and I said I could not leave my work. I do not recollect saying to the magistrate, "I have spoken to the prisoner about this"—I have not done so beyond ordinary talk. I will not be certain that the other witnesses did not say, "No belt"—I think that was the case. Prisoner had no belt to my knowledge. It is not true that there were any belts used. I said that the other witnesses said it if it was said. I cannot say whether the prosecutor putting the stick between prisoner's legs was an accident. The prosecutor was in front, prisoner passed him, then he poked him with his stick. Prisoner went round the corner, served a customer, and returned. I did not see prosecutor holding his hand up to his face. He got up and stood as if he was knocked silly for a minute and leaned against the wall. Prisoner did not then come up and hit him and knock him down. I said at the police court," I did not see the prisoner get prosecutor's head in chancery—they did not get near enough. "I did not see them go down together while they were wrestling for the stick—I cannot speak to that. Prosecutor made a blow at prisoner—I could not say if he reached him. After he had got the pole away from him it was nothing but a fight, and the prosecutor got the worst of it at the finish. Whether prosecutor hit the prisoner I cannot say.

Re-examined. At the police court I gave my evidence before Barton came into court. The policeman asked me to come as a witness. I said I could not go as I could not get away from my point. There were a lot of people round as the 6.40 a.m. car was just coming out. I did not see Barton or Hunter there.

CHARLES BARTON , 74, Stain forth Road, Battersea, labourer. On February 10, at 10 to seven a.m., I was going to my work through Queen's Road when, at the corner of Beaufoy Road, I saw prisoner walking towards me with a fire kettle in his hand. He passed the prosecutor who, as he passed, probed his stick between his legs. Prisoner walked on and put the fire kettle on the kerb round the corner, turned round and said, "What is up with you?" Prosecutor said, "I will show you, you little cur," and deliberalely lifted the stick with his two hands and aimed at prisoner. Prisoner put his hand up to guard his head and was hit across the knuckles or the wrist. Prisoner then shoved the lamplighter, who fell on his back on the ground. Prisoner then lock his coat off and put it on the footpath. As he was doing so prosecutor got up and hit him with his stick again. Prisoner closed with him and they wrestled about in the roadway. Prosecutor tried to get the prisoner on his back; instead of that prisoner clung to his back and prosecutor fell flat on his face with the prisoner on his back. Prisoner then went to the footpath towards his coat and prosecutor got up. I saw the blood on his nose and he put the stick up and went and leaned against the wall. I then went away to my work. I did not see the prisoner strike the prosecutor.

Cross-examined. I am positive prisoner never struck him. I stood in the middle of the road four or five yards from the prisoner and prosecutor, and from Hardy. I could see more than Hardy saw

because he stood on the kerb at the corner and I was in the middle of the road. It all began without provocation on the prisoner's part. As far as I could see prosecutor probed him with the stick on purpose. The only blow struck before prisoner took his coat off was by the prosecutor with the stick—prisoner shoved him in the chest and pushed him down before that. When prosecutor got up something was coming from his face—I could not say it was blood; it might have been water from his nose. I could not tell as my eyes are very weak, and it being a cold frosty morning they were running. I could not swear whether it was blood or water coming from his nose at the time. When prosecutor was striking at him with the pole prisoner was not trying to strike him with his fists—he closed with him—tried to get at him. Prosecutor may have been warding off blows with the stick; prisoner was trying to get at him; I expect he was trying to strike him with his fists in self-defence but he could not get near him. I say the prisoner never succeeded in striking him from beginning to end. He never did it. Prosecutor fell twice. The prosecutor was not stooping down with his hands up and blood pouring from his nose on to his hands—prisoner did not strike him while he was in that attitude. I saw all that happened from the beginning. I did not interfere. I did not call out "No belts"—nobody did. Prisoner did not get prosecutor's head in chancery. Prosecutor must have got the injuries through the fall; he fell on his face; it was a frosty morning and the ground was very hard. No one said, "Now you have got him nicely, let him have it."

Re-examined. I could not call it a fight; it was more of a wrestling for the stick before they had the second fall. If a blow had been given I should have seen it. I did not interfere, as I might have got a crack on the head with the pole, I have a wife and children to look after. Verdict, Guilty.

The police gave prisoner a good character.

Sentence, Four months' hard labour, the Judge remarking that if prisoner had not had a good character, he would have had a very different sentence.

Reference Number: t19090302-46

BELL, Thomas (27, chauffeur) ; having the charge of a certain carriage, did, by wilful misconduct, cause to be done bodily harm to Ivo Trevelli.

Mr. Travers Humphreys and Mr. B. C. P. Boyd prosecuted.

Police-sergeant JAMES SMITH , 52 A. I produce plan of Parliament Street, prepared by me to scale of 44 ft. to one inch. The width of the street opposite the Local Government Board Offices is 91 ft. 9 in. There are two refugee at the western end of Parliament Street and similar refuges at the other end of the Local Government Board Offices, the distance between them being 279 ft. 2 in. Opposite the front door of the Local Government Board Offices is a post office.

Ivo TREVELLI , 90, Barkham Terrace, Lambeth Road, waiter. On the afternoon of Boxing Day last I left home shortly after two o'clock—cycling. I passed over Westminster Bridge and was going to Ladbrook

Square to turn up Parliament Street. I had passed the two refuges at the entrance of Parliament Street and was in the middle of the road on the left side proceeding up the street—after that I remember nothing more—I remember a motor-car came over me—that is all. It was getting dark. I do not remember if the lights were lighted. The road was dry.

STEPHEN PORCH , 29, Palmer Street, Kentish Town, omnibus driver. On Boxing Day last, at 4.17 p.m., I was driving my omnibus up Parliament Street and pulled up outside the Local Government Board Offices, where I always stop. There was very little traffic. A few yards before I entered Parliament Street I saw a motor-car approaching me, going in the direction of Westminster. I noticed it coming from the refuges opposite Derby Street, which is nearly opposite Charles Street, passing between the two refuges. When it had travelled about two houses past them it suddenly slanted off to where I was standing outside the Local Government Board Offices, which were on his off-side. I saw no reason for the motor driver coming over there. A cyclist was going north on his right side of the road a few feet from my omnibus, about 10 or 12 ft. from the kerb—between the kerb and the refuge, both refuges being on his and my right side. The cyclist was thrown up as though he was thrown up in the air, by the wing or mudguard that goes over the wheel of the motor-car on the left side of the car striking him; so that the motor-car was actually between the cyclist and the kerb. The front part of the car then hit the cyclist and threw him into the road. The front window of the car struck him as he went up; he then fell on the ground. The motor-car seemed to stop and go on a little and the front wheel went over the man in some way or other—I could not exactly see that; the car seemed to come forward carrying the man with it. The ear was not travelling at any extraordinary speed—I think about 10 miles an hour. I pulled my horses round to go to the off-side of them, not being able to go on the near side. The car was about 10 ft. from me when it stopped with the man underneath it—it had not got past me.

Cross-examined. I saw the cyclist a moment before the accident, about 10 or 12 ft. from the kerb; he must have just passed me as I was standing. I did not see prisoner's face—I saw his back. He was on the other side of Derby Street—Charing Cross way. It was not dark; it was getting dark. It was a beautiful day and the roads were white—it was about dusk. I saw no reason for the prisoner swerving over. I did not see the cyclist before the car was right on top of him. Prisoner went on the Westminster side of the refuges—the near side—in between the kerb and the one on the near side. He came between the two first and then crossed in front of the other refuge. He was in the centre of the road opposite the Board of Trade, and he came through the middle of the road further up Parliament Street opposite the Home Office; then as he came to Derby Street he crossed over within the Charles Street side of that refuge (To the Judge.) I was going up Parliament Street from Bridge Street. I passed two refuges and then there are two other refuges

just apposite Derby Street which the prisoner had passed when I first saw him; I cannot say which side of those he passed. Then when he got to the two refuges between Charles Street and Derby Street which were just in front of me he came between the two on his right side of the centre of the road and came nearly opposite the door of the Local Government Board Offices. II he had not struck the cyclist he would have come further on into my horses—he was about 10 or 12 ft. off me when the accident happened. (To the Prisoner.) I have never tried motoring yet. I do not think I would go for a ride with you if you acted the same as you acted on that day. I should not object to go with a friend if he asked me. I have no prejudice against motoring; in fact, from what I hear of it I shall have to do that or something else presently—if they drive horse onnibuses off the road.

(Saturday, March 6.)

JOHN HENRY GARWOOD . I was conductor on the bus driven by Stephen Porch About a quarter past four on December 21 our bus drew up outside the doors of the Local Government Board offices in Parliament Street, and I got down and went to the horses' heads. I then looked up Parliament Street and noticed a motor-car; it came straight across to our horses' heads across the wrong side of the road. A cyclist passed close by the omnibus, and the motor-car ran straight into the cyclist. The oar tried to pass him on the off side, and he hit him with his near side wing and knocked him up in the air; he then brought the car to a standstill, with his near front wheel on the man. The police then came, and the man was extricated. Before the accident the car did not seem to slacken pace at all; there was not a great deal of traffic. So far as I could see there was no reason why the car should have been driven in this way to the wrong side of the road. The road was very dry, and there was no sign of the oar having skidded. It was daylight.

To the Prisoner. I first saw you by Derby Street. I first saw the cyclist as I was standing by our horses' heads, he passed quite close by the omnibus. I had just done up the pole chain, when I saw the car coming straight into us. I only saw the cyclist and you about a second before you met.

ALFRED BRADDON , painter, 93, Hercules Road, Kennington. I was walking down Parliament Street towards Westminster Bridge on the side opposite the Horse Guards, and when opposite the Local Government Board offices I heard the crash of glass, and on turning round I saw a bicycle lying in the road just past Charles Street smashed up, and then my attention was called to the car. The chaffeur was just slowing up, and then I saw the cyclist drop off the car. I ran across immediately and picked the man up. The wheel of the car had gone over one leg, and then the chaffeur backed the car, and the wheel went over his leg again. Prisoner was the man driving the car. I said to him, "You have done it now." I thought he had killed the man. He did not say anything. I saw the cyclist before the accident. He was

on the near side going up towards Charing Cross; he was on his right side, going at a decent pace, the ordinary pace a cyclist would go, there being no traffic about on that day. He kept quite a steady course.

Cross-examined by Prisoner. I saw the cyclist as he passed me, and then I heard the crash, and looked (round and saw the bicycle lying in the middle of the road. I did not see the car until the accident. I only saw the one cyclist going that way.

Police-constable EDGAR GLASCOTT , 62 A Reserve. I was in Parliament Street on the east side of the refuge on the further side of the Local Government Board when I heard a lot of people shouting. I went in the direction of the Local Government (Board offices, and there I saw a motor-car, and lying underneath the car the cyclist. An ambulance was obtained, and he was taken to the hospital. I saw defendant in chaffeur's uniform. I asked him if he was the driver of the car. He said" I am. "I then asked Police-constable Saunders to take him to the station pending inquiries as to the condition of the man who was lying under the motor-car. The motor-car was not left; it was about seven yards from the kerb on the Local Government Board side.

Police-constable HORACE SAUNDERS , 544 A. I was on duty in Parliament Street outside the Local Government Board Offices. I heard a crash and a smashing of glass, and saw the motor-car pulling up. I ran to it and saw the cyclist lying on his back with his feet underneath the car. I took the defendant to the station. On the way he said. "This is very serious."

By the Prisoner. You seemed to be under the influence of drink.

Inspector OWEN WEBB , A Division. I saw defendant at the station, I asked him if he knew why he was detained. He said, "Yes. "He appeared to be under the influence of drink so I called in Dr. Norton, the divisional surgeon, about 6 p.m., who examined him. Before that I went to the place where the accident happened and examined the road. There was no indication whatever of a car having skidded. I was able to trace the marks where the wheels had been driven. I then went to the Westminster Hospital and ascertained the nature of the cyclist's injuries, and then returned to the station and charged the defendant with wilful misconduct in the driving of his motor-car thereby causing bodily harm to the injured man. He said nothing is reply.

To the Prisoner. I examined the road between twenty-five and half-past four.

JOHN NORTON , divisional surgeon of police. I examined prisoner about six o'clock. His breath smelt of alcohol, and his eyes were suffused and watery. He walked up and down the room all right. He said that all he had had was three whiskies. I think his judgment would have been affected in driving a motor-car.

To the Prisoner. I would not say you were incapably drunk: you could walk all right. I say you were under the influence of drink You did make the remark to me at the time that your eyes were always naturally red.

CHARLES MORA , house surgeon at Westminster Hospital. I examined the injured man. He was bleeding from the face, and had a cut extending from eyebrow to eyebrow. The wound was lacerated and deep, and the frontal bone was smashed. He had a fractured skull, two deep lacerated wounds in his right hand, and his left tibia was fractured. He was also suffering from concussion. He was unconscious, and remained so for about ten days. His life was in great danger. He was an in-patient until February 19; he will get on all right; the only thing he might suffer from will be slight headaches.

To Prisoner. The injured man was certainly not under the influence of drink.

(Defence.)

THOMAS BELL (prisoner, on oath). The accident occurred in this way—I was going down Parliament Street when I caught up a motorbus and two cyclists directly in front of me going in the same direction, and there were two or three cabs on the near side. Before I caught this traffic up I saw a cyclist coming in the opposite direction in the middle of the road. We were both on our proper sides in the centre of the road, but just before he came up to me he turned so if he meant to cut right across in front of me. I saw that there would be an accident. I could not go to the near side because there were the cyclists there, so I tried to get round him on the wrong side of him as quickly as possible. Just as I turned he turned at the same June as if to get back on to his proper side again. If he had cut right across as he intended to do he would have missed me. It was trying to avoid each other that we ran into one another. Directly the accident occurred I got off the car to see what I had done and I found the man underneath the car. The constable came up to and took me to the station. I absolutely deny being drunk or incapable or driving in a dangerous manner. I was going between 14 and 16 miles an hour.

Cross-examined. This is the first time I have offered any explanation of the accident, and suggested that it was the fault or carelessness of the injured man. I did not appreciate that it was dangerous to go to the off-side of the road in the way I did; if I had turned to the near side to avoid the cyclist I should have crashed into the traffic on that side. I do not say the cyclist was on the wrong side of the road. If I had slackened my pace it would not have avoided the accident; in fact, if I had been going faster I should have been able to avoid him. It was not because I wished to keep at the pace I was going that I drew out of my course. I was not drunk. I only had three whiskies all day. The car was a private car belonging to the Buckingham Gate garage. I had repaired it for a friend and I was taking it on test. I was not the regular driver of it.

Verdict, Guiltyof wanton driving and thereby causing the injury.

Inspector WEBB , A Division. (Prisoner has been convicted once of exceeding the speed limit (first offence) at Kingston County Bench on July 16, 1908; he was fined £4 and costs; no other convictions.

He was last employed by the Fiat Motor Company; he was there about six months and was discharged for bad time-keeping, previous to that he was in the employ of the Mitchell Motor-Car Company, Wardour Street, for a few months; he referred also to several people, including his father, at Worthing, but no one would have anything to do with the case. Sentence, Six months' imprisonment.

BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.

(Friday, March 5.)

Reference Number: t19090302-47

WERTHEIMER, Charles Herman (29, manager) ; having received certain property for and on account of other persons, to wit, on May 21, 1908, the sum of £50 for and on account of Charles Arthur Bates; on June 24, 1908, the sum of £140, for and on account of George Henry Shuker; on June 29, 1908, the sum of £160, for and on account of the said George Henry Shuker; on June 12, 1906, the sum of £110, for and on account of Joel Bloor Ford; on July 2, 1908, the sum of £80, for and on account of Frederick George Warwick; on October 19, 1908, the sum of £110, for and on account of Arthur James Harvey; and on October 10, 1906, the sum of £55, for and on account of George Henry Wait, fraudulently converting the said sums of money to his use and benefit, and to the use and benefit of the Albany Automobile Company, Limited; obtaining by false pretences from Arthur James Harvey one motor-car of the value of £130; from George Henry Wait one motor-car of the also of £65; from Charles Arthur Bates one motor-car of the value of £67 10s.; from George Henry Shuker two motor-cars of the value of £180 and £155 respectively from Bloor Ford one motor-car of the value of £210; and from Frederick George Warwick one motorcar of the value of £100, in each case with intent to defraud.

Mr. Muir and Mr. Travers Humphreys prosecuted; Mr. C. Bray defended.

GEORGE HENRY WAIT , manufacturer, Leicester. In August last year I advertised an 8-h. p. Darracq motor-car for sale for £80. On the 19th I received a letter dated 15th from Albany Automobile Company, Limited, signed "F. Harvey, Secretary," saying, "Dear Sir,—In reference to your advertisement in to-day's' Motor' re 8h. p. Darracq we should like to know if we could have the car here for a few days as we have several inquiries and feel sure we can sell her if price is right. "I replied to that and received a reply dated August 20 from the company signed in the same way." Dear Sir,—If you like to send your Darracq car to us we will guarantee to dispose of it within seven days and return you £65 clear, you to pay carriage. "I replied to that. Then they wrote on August 22, "Dear Sir,—We thank you for your letter of the 21st If you send the Darracq car to us we will guarantee to dispose or it

in seven clays and guarantee £75, you to pay carriage. We have always managed our deals on these terms without post-dated cheques. "In my letter I had said if they could guarantee me £75 they could give me a post-dated cheque. The letter is from the Albany Automobile Company, signed" F. Harvey "with initials" C. W. "I had never seen defendants. As far as I know they knew nothing of my car. We had not used it in London at all. I did not send the ear up until I had made inquiries about the company. On October 9 I received a letter with a heading" Albany Automobile Coy. "signed" E. P. Barnes, Secretary. ""We agree this is your car and property until you have received payment. "I then instructed my man Martin to take the car to London. He returned to Leicester and brought document (produced), "Received 1-h. p. ear. Wait, Leicester, terms as arranged, £65, Albany Automobile Coy., H. P. Harvey, Secretary. "I waited until the seven days was up, then I telephoned them and followed it up with a letter. I have not received a penny piece. On October 21 I received a telegram, "Sending cheque to-night. Manager returning to-day." On the next day I got a telegram, "Send receipt for cheque sent on our behalf from Brighton." I telephoned two or three times to the company and the only reply was that the manager was away with the car trying to sell it. At that time I had put the matter in the hands of my solicitor. He said, "You had better give them a trial before issuing a writ. On October 28 they wrote "Yours of the 22nd to hand. We trust you have now received a cheque from our manager, who is away at the present time and promised to see to this. "That is signed, "Secretary p. W. J. "There was no name of the secretary. I do not know where my car has gone. I have not had it back. When I parted with the car I believed the statements in the letters. I made inquiries at to the directors and found the names were substantial. I believed it was a genuine, honest company.

Cross-examined. I did not make up my mind to send the car to London until I had made inquiries. I first saw prisoner at Marylebone. I only knew the company from seeing their advertisements in the papers. When I received the letter of August 20 I did not look upon that as an offer to buy the car for £65 I looked upon it that they would find me a customer for it. I thought at the end of seven days I should get £65 or have the car returned. I did not think I would be entitled to claim £65. I understood they had a customer who would buy it and they would return me that money for it. I have been to the premises of the company in Albany Street. I did not know they had other premises. I did not go inside the premises, the place was closed. I saw one or two old motor-cars there through a glass door. When I sent Martin up with the car I did not ask him to make inquiries about the place. I gave him instructions to leave it and get a receipt as per terms of the letter. I issued a writ claiming the return of the car or the sum of £65. I do not allege that I sold the car for £65.

FREDERICK MARTIN . I am motor driver to Mr. Wait. I took his 8-h. p. Darracq to the Albany Motor Company on October 10. I

handed the car over to somebody who gave me a receipt. I cannot swear to the person who received it, but, as I said before, I thought it was prisoner.

Cross-examined. I should not call it a big garage. I saw two or three cars there, all small ones. I did not see the office. Looking at prisoner now I think he is the man I handed the car to. No one else was there. I got there about mid-day.

ARTHUR JAMES HARVEY , architect, Royal Parade, Muswell Hill. Last October I had an 8-h. p. Rover motor-car for sale. I advertised it in the "Autocar." I received a reply from; the Albany Automobile Company. I replied to that, and received letter dated October 13:" Dear Sir,—Re yours of me 10th. If you could let us have your 8-h. p. Rover for a few days we will guarantee to dispose of it in seven days, and return you £130 clear. Awaiting your reply, yours faithfully"—no signature. I replied to that and got the letter of October 15:"Dear Sir,—If you will let us have the Rover we will guarantee to send you £130 clear within seven days of receipt of the car. Please wire one way or the other and oblige, your faithfully, Albany Automobile Company"—no other signature. So far as I know nobody in the company had ever seen the car. On getting that guarantee I telephoned the company. It was answered by a boy, presumably. I said I could not understand the firm offering me £130 for a car they had never seen. He said the manager was not in. I rang up again in about an hour and the boy said he had put the question to the manager and he said he happened to know my car and therefore would offer that amount. Having been given that explanation I took the car the same evening to the premises of the Albany Automobile Company, 106, Albany Street. I handed it over to a person named Jackson and took his receipt for it. Two days later I saw my car at the Motor Sales Company's place in Euston Road. It was for sale there presumably. I now know that place is kept by a Mr. Taylor. I spoke to Mr. Taylor, I think, on the following day and as far as he was concerned I left the matter in the hands of my solicitors. I afterwards wrote to the Automobile Company. I have never received a penny for my car. I thought when I took my car there that a genuine company was in existence at that address.

Cross-examined. I advertised my car and described it in the advertisement. The Rover is a well-known car and they always fetch a ready sale. I only knew the Albany Automobile Company by seeing their advertisements in the "Autocar. "I think their advertisement appeared weekly. I did not think the offer in the letter of October 15 was a sale outright to the company. I never viewed this transaction as a sale. I did not say at the police court that I sold the car outright. It is a mistake on the depositions. It is not my word. I do not think my recollection was fresher at the police court than it is now. I never made any remark to Johnson about the sale of the oar. I have never been suing the company.

Re-examined. I know nothing of the person named Harvey employed in the company. I knew nothing of the company till I took

my car there except their advertisements. I thought the place was a little ramshackle. I made some remark to the boy about it; he said they had just taken the place. I believed they were carrying on an honest business.

GEORGE TAYLOR . I carried on business at 334, Euston Road, us Motor Sales, Limited, but I live in Belfast now. Between August and October or November last year I bought some motor-cars from defendant. I bought an 8-h. p. Rover for £110, stripped, for the accessories I paid £16 or £17. I paid him by a cheque for £200, which included me price of another oar. It is endorsed, "Per pro Albany Automobile Company, Limited, C. H. Wertheimer, manager." I think he sent it down to my bank and got it cashed. It was an open cheque. The other car was never delivered, but defendant returned the money. On October 10 I purchased from defendant a Darracq car for £65 and took his receipt. I paid him in cash or notes. He redeemed some furniture I had of his for £10 and got 55. I bought five or sir cars of him between August and November. Cross-examined. I am very well known in the motor trade and know most of the people in the trade. I have known prisoner seven or eight years. I have known the company since it started. I always took prisoner to be the principal of the business. I knew it was a limited company. I have had several transactions with the company. They would amount to £1,000 since they started. I have always found prisoner a hardworking, honest man, and have always been satisfied with the deals. He has bought from and sold cars to me. I think he came to my place in July or August last year and said he wanted some money to carry on the business. I believe that was when Mr. Bowring was clearing out. He was the debentureholder we have heard about. I believe Bowring put in a receiver. Prisoner told me Elkin, Groombridge and Bowring wanted to get him out of the business and he intended to carry it on. Groombridge was employed by the company. I do not know whom Elkin was employed by. I knew Bowring had advanced £250 to the company; I think he was employed there. Prisoner told me if he could get the money He could make it a good paying business notwithstanding the fact that it had been ruined while the receiver was there. I knew the Automobile company had been doing a big business. They had a good stock. They had two auctions on the premises, I believe. They had three premises. At one of the sales I should think there were 70 or 80 cars; some were scrap and some very good. Their value would be £3,000 or £4,000. That was in June or July, the first sale. He said Bowring had ruined the business. I arranged to advance him £500 to enable him to work up the business again on condition that I could have the lease of the premises. He was to assign it to me as security. I was prepared to do that until the very last moment, when these proceedings were taken by the police. The debenture-holder was in, and if the lease had been forthcoming I should have advanced the money. I had made inquiries into the business. We all knew what the business was when it was opened. I did not know who first gave information to the police. I have

heard since. Elkin and Groombridge gave evidence to the effect that they went to the police. I knew Elkin was the receiver appointed by Bowring. While Elkin was there in charge I went to the premises. Somebody sent for me on the 'phone. Elkin did not tell me prisoner had been discharged. I know Harvey. I did not know he was secretary to the company for a time. It is usual in motorcar transactions to pay cash. There is nothing unusual in giving an. open cheque and that cheque subsequently being cashed by the person to whom it has been given. During the time the receiver was in a number of cars were sold to me by one of the men there—Elkin or Groombridge, I could not say exactly. They sold me as many as four or five cars in a lump for £50. I gave good value for them. I bought a Vauxhall car for £9, a De Dion landaulette for £7, and some other antiquated scrap stuff which I pulled down for the engines. I should think during the time the company were in existence I trusted them with 20 cars. I had no doubt it was a genuine business. I should like to have the place myself. It was arranged that if I had taken the place prisoner was going to be manager. I did not know prisoner was an undischarged bankrupt. I knew there were bankruptcy proceedings and thought they were all settled. That was 2 1/2 years ago.

Re-examined. It was not my business to inquire whether they paid other people for cars. They always paid me. I never saw the books of the company. I was satisfied by seeing the business going as it was, started from practically nothing. I had got £500 to put in the business, but I could not get any satisfaction about the lease. I asked prisoner for it. He said the place was on a lease. I did not know they never had a lease at all. The negotiations were going on until pretty well the clearing of the Wertheimer Company up, just before the prosecution. I absolutely got tired of them. I sold my business in Euston Road on November 9 and could not negotiate; I am bound over not to open up business. I had seven or eight cars at the auction on the first day. I believe the other cars they had there were on sale or return. I do not know how many cars the company possessed of its own. Elkin and Groombridge had nothing to do with the transaction in October. I last saw Elkin on the company's premises when the trouble was on with Bowring. That was in July. I do not know where Harvey is now. I last saw him when the place was shut up. That would be after the arrest, because he told me of it. I never heard that Elkin was appointed receiver. By "receiver" I meant Elkin was receiver of my money; he was simply there with Mr. Groombridge selling the stuff. I did not know he was appointed receiver on behalf of the debenture-holder. During the time the receiver was there I bought some cars from them at a fair price, but they have not realised near the price I paid for them.

Further cross-examined. I did not know Elkin was acting as manager while the receiver was in. They offered me cars and I paid for them. Elkin was acting as salesman or something of that kind Prisoner was not there then.

WILLIAM JACKSON , 25. Stansted Road, Hoddesdon. I entered the service of the Albany Automobile Company in December, 1907, as

apprentice to learn the motor trade, I was engaged by prisoner and paid him a premium. I was there till November, 1908. I was paid £1 a week all through. Mr. Elkin was secretary, Mr. Groombridge was foreman. There was a lady typist, Miss Schreiber, and Miss Matt. I had nothing to do with the sale of cars, handling the money, or keeping the books. I remember the receiver coming in. I know Mr. Bowring. He was debenture-holder. He worked in the shop. He put in the receiver. I then received a week's notice and left on July 18. All the working chape left then. I did not go to the shop again till I went to work for prisoner. Before the receiver came in prisoner was there every day. He opened letters and dictated replies. to the typists. He was known as the manager. After the receiver was put in prisoner never came to the business. After July 18 I heard from prisoner by letter. (Produced.) I have found it since the police court proceedings. (Letter read.) I wrote to prisoner to the post office at Brighton giving him the information he asked for. I saw prisoner on the Saturday before August Bank Holiday at 33, Margravine Gardens, Hammersmith. I got a message from Staplehurst, who had been there two or three times. Prisoner said he was going to start me on the Wednesday following the Bank Holiday open the shop again. Prisoner did not come there that week. Staplehurst and Harvey were in charge. I got my orders from Harvey. He paid me my wages at the end of the week. The next week Wertheimer did not come to the premises. He paid me my wages that week. We met shim at various places to get our wages after that. He used to 'phone to Harvey where we were to meet him. I sometimes got telegrams from him. Harvey used to meet him the same as we did to get his wages. We used to go together—sometimes it would be the Piccadilly Tube or Hammersmith or Leicester Square—anywhere. Prisoner would come sometimes to the premises all the week, sometimes not above twice a week. He began to come about three weeks or a month after we opened the shop again. He did not tell me why he did not come to the premises and pay our wages there. When we got our wages the only instructions he gave were to go there on Monday and do the work the same as usual, to alter the position of the cars in the window and things like that. During this time some cars came in for sale. The first to come was one from Newton Bennett, of Manchester; there was one from Elisha, of Harrow: for sale on commission. There was another from Docker, of Camberley—a 6 h. p. Rover; one from Mr. Wait, of Leicester; a 8 h. p. Darracq, Mr. Harvey, of Muswell Hill, an 8 h. p. Rover. Mr. Taylor had all those. I did not take any of them to Mr. Taylor or receive any money from him for them. Prisoner would know what cars were coming because Mr. Harvey used to take the letters to him in the morning. He would 'phone to the shop where to meet him. I remember the witness Harvey ringing up on the telephone and speaking to me. He asked why prisoner offered such a price for the car when he had never seen the car. I gave prisoner that message. He told me he had an idea be knew the car and that was the reason. I gave him the message when he telephoned me in the

course of the day. I repeated that to Mr. Harvey. (Several telegrams, postcards, etc., from prisoner to witness were identified.) E. P. Barnes was a clerk to Mr. Taunton, the solicitor. He was there for a fortnight during vacation time. The writing on the letter handed to me, "We agree that this is your car and property until you have received full payment" is prisoner's. Also the second signature purporting to be written by Barnes. I know the lady named Clark McLeod. I have seen her at the shop twice, I think. I have seen her at Princess Road, Regent's Park, and at 33, Margravine Gardens. I know Mr. W. G. Jones. I never got orders from him; I did not know him as a director. The company did not have a banking account after we started in August. Miss McLeod never gave me orders as a director, or took any part in the business as far as I am concerned. I received a letter from prisoner asking me not to tell Harvey about the Rover or Darracq. I did not tell Harvey. He was there to see the car. The Rover had come in on the Saturday night. After about the end of September prisoner never came to the premises.

Cross-examined. The two signatures on the letter handed to me are in different handwritings in my opinion. Mr. Taunton has acted as solicitor to the company for some considerable time. I knew they had a receiver in in July. I knew by certain letters they were in difficulties in August. I did not know prisoner was dismissed. He did not tell mo so. He said he was going to try and pull the company round again. He did not say anything about it being ruined while the receiver was in. He asked me to let him know what cars were removed while the receiver was in. I know he went away when the receiver came in. He wrote me immediately afterwards asking me to keep my eye upon the business and Jet him know what cars had been removed, which I did. He did not express great surprise. He did not say anything about the way in which the business had been conducted while he was away. I saw a sheriff there once after August. Prisoner did not tell me that was in respect of the sale of a car while the receiver was in. He did not tell me if he could get the sheriff out he would pull the business round. He told me if he could get the money he would pull it round. He did not tell me that Mr. Taylor was going to find some money. I did not know Mr. Matthews was going to put money in the business. Prisoner never told me Mr. McDougal was going to put money in the business. He did not tell me why he did not come to the business. He told me to put off with excuses any person who came with writs. When I first went there it was a fine business. They had nine or 10 care there. There was a showroom and workshop at the back with offices in between. My father paid the apprentice fee, £20. Before doing so he made all the investigation be could. They moved into 110, Albany Street about December, 1907. They took the premises in Augusta Street in March, 1906. We did a decent trade in cars, not much in accessaries. We did something in lamps and fittings at auction sales. I cannot say I was perfectly satisfied with my six months' apprenticeship. I was not properly taught the trade. I

complained to prisoner and to Mr. Groombridge after I had been there about four months. I only learnt what I picked up off the other men. There was only a lathe and a bench in the repair department. They had a teaching school. When I first want there prisoner was manager. Heath was foreman. Groombridge took Mr. Heaths place about February. Elkin used to come occasionally at night for about two hours. Elkin was secretary to the company; he used to come all the while I was there. There were 10 or 12 men employed. I think three deft before the receiver was appointed. I remember Bowring being there. He used to be in the shop and give us orders. In the office there were two lady typists, prisoner, and Mr. Elkin the latter part of the time. I only saw Mr. Jones there when he came about a car. I do not know where he came from. I have never seen him sign anything. When prisoner restarted the business he was trying hard as far as I know. (Mr. Jones was called into Court and identified by witness.)

JOHN FORREST PARKER , Companies' Registration Office, Somerset House. I produce the file of the Albany Automobile Company, Limited. It was registered on November 27, 1907, with a nominal capital of £100. There are the usual seven signatories. According to the list we have got, no shares were ever issued. One of the signatories is Clark McLeod, 51, Park Road, N. W. The registered office of the company is 106, Albany Street. The first directors appear as J. W. Heath, and dark McLeod. The name of William G. Jones appears on the statutory report as another director. That purports to be signed by W. G. Jones and Clark McLeod. The first secretary was George Russell. There is no return signed by any-body but Russell, the secretary. C. H. Wertheimer is described as manager. There is a registration of a Mortgage Debenture for £250 in favour of N. H. Bowring dated April 21, 1906. A notice of appointment of a receiver was lodged on July 9, 1906, and states Mr. James Sydney Wedderall was appointed receiver by Mr. Bowring on July 2. He ceased to act as receiver) on July 8. That is signed by Mr. Wedderall.

(Saturday, March 6.)

CHARLES ROBERTS , an official of the London Bankruptcy Court, said that a receiving order was made against prisoner on December 3, 1906, and he was adjudicated bankrupt December 31, 1906; he has never been discharged from that bankruptcy.

E. G. JONES , 16, Knightrider Street, E. C. I have known defendant some years. I saw him frequently in the year 1907. I met him in August that year. He said he was an agent for several manufacturers, that he was not doing very well, and was in need of financial assistance. He asked me to lend him some money. I lent him £2 or £3 to start with. The same thing went on from week to week until the place at Albany Street was taken. I lent him altogether £80. He asked me to take the premises so that friends of his could send in second-hand cars to sell. He said if I would do that he

would be certain to build up a good business. I took the premises 106, Albany Street. As far as I remember it was a 12 months agreement. Afterwards No. 110 was taken. I was to have £10 per annum for holding the lease. The signature on the lease dated December 10, 1907, is mine. I had something to do with the original business carried on there, not the limited company. The limited company were to pay me £10 per annum. Prisoner carried on the business of the Albany Automobile Company. I was to receive from that business the money which I had lent him. That was my object in placing him there. The signature on the return produced from Somerset House is not mine. I have no idea whose writing it is. I never gave anyone authority to sign my name. I had no shares in and took no part in carrying on the business of the limited company. I was asked by Mr. Wertheimer to become a director. I said I would consider the matter. Afterwards I declined to be a director. I never had notice of any board meetings and never attended any. I know nothing whatever of my election as a director. I do not recollect defendant ever telling me I had been elected a director. The signature to the minutes of January 13, 1908, is not mine. I do not know that it purports to be. I got no directors' fees. After the limited company was formed I was repaid about £8 altogether of the money lent.

Cross-examined. I had known prisoner several years. I always knew him as a hard-working, energetic business man. Before these proceedings were taken I had not heard anything said against his reputation. He has always been honest in his dealings with me. I could not say there was a big business being done by the limited company; I had no connection with it. I left London at the beginning of March and did not return until after the holidays in the autumn. During the existence of the limited company I may have passed the premises (but not to go in. I should say there was considerable business (being done. Prisoner told me he was an undischarged bankrupt. It was arranged that he was to be manager of the business at so much a week. There was no agreement in black and white. received a subpoena to produce the alleged written document. I have not searched for it. There was no written agreement. There was a verbal agreement. He was to have so much a week as manager and if there was any profit I was to have it to repay my £80. Prisoner told me he was going to form a company, but I never knew when it was formed or registered. I did not know Mr. Elkin; I saw him here for the first time. Prisoner may have mentioned his name, but I have no recollection of it. I did not suggest that I should be a director. I did not ask for any security for the money I had lent. I was prepared in wipe it off as a bad debt. Wertheimer offered me £50 in shares and something in cash if I would be a director, declined. During the time the company was being formed and floated I was not constantly at Albany Street. I have met Miss Clark McLeod there once or twice. I have not seen her assisting in the clerical work. I agreed to take the lease of 110, Albany Street; there was no lease of the other premises; I think it was a

12 months' agreement. It may be that there was a lease of No. 106 for five years in my name. There was a lease of No. 110 in my name for 14 years. I believe I have met Mr. Heath; I do not recollect what he is like now. I did not know he was a director. My taking the leases had nothing whatever to do with becoming a director. I do not remember any quarrel between prisoner and myself subsequent to January, 1908. I have never quarrelled with him in my life. In 1907 I was not being pressed for money more than usual. People were taking much longer credit at that time. I may have told prisoner this. There never were negotiations in progress as to my becoming a director. Prisoner asked me to become a director but I did not accept. I took time to consider it. I was not being pressed for money then any more than at any other time during that year. Prisoner did not then say I should not be a director. I have seen Mr. Bowring. Until he told me so yesterday I did not know he had advanced £250 to the company. I was not aware of a receiver being appointed. The minute produced is, I should say, not in prisoner's writing. The writing of the entry and the Somerset House file purports to be mine. I could not say it is in the same handwriting as the minute—I do not think it is. There is something a little similar in the "W. G. Jones" in the minute book. I do not know Mr. Elkin's handwriting. I sent my own car to the company to be repaired; it may have been there twice. I think it was property repaired.

Miss LOTTIE SCHREIBER , 8, Nightingale Road, Willesden. I was employed by the Albany Automobile Company, Limited, from the time it started till January, 1908. (Before that I was employed at Princeton Street, Bedford Row. That was a business carried on by the prisoner. I know Miss Clark McLeod. I have never been in her employ. I helped her for a little time when she carried on a tobacconist's business at 242, Holloway Road. Prisoner paid my wages then. During the time I was at Albany Street I helped to keep the books. The accountant and prisoner also kept the books. Prisoner need to open the letters. I wrote some of the replies at prisoner's dictation and signed them I was secretary of the company at that time.

Cross-examined. I was with the company when it was formed. Mr. Elkin formed it. He was not put down as the secretary. I knew he was secretary after me. I knew Miss Clark McLeod was a director of the company. I did not know she put money into the company. I knew Mr. Heath. He was a director. I was not cashier. There was no cashier. While I was there there were about a dozen men employed and another girl besides me. There was not very much business done there then. I think the turnover was about three cars a week—not every week. Repairs were executed there. There was a garage. I have made entries in the minute book handed to me from notes Mr. Elkin gave me. The entry in the minute book which describes Mr. Jones as being elected a director all looks like Mr. Elkin's writing. Mr. Heath was there nearly every day when he was a director. He and I signed the cheques. I know Mr. Jones.

I remember an agreement being made between him and prisoner before the company was formed, but I cannot remember what it was It was written and then I typed it. The business at Albany Street was a genuine business. Prisoner worked very hard. I have always found him an honest man, and upright in all his business dealings. I have been with him about three years.

Re-examined. I thought the limited company was doing a genuine business. It was that of selling cars belonging to other people. Prisoner received the money for the cars that were sold and it was put into the bank. I do not know what became of it after that. I had nothing to do with the bank account. Once I drew cheques and filled in the names and amounts. Prisoner told me to do that. Besides being director, Mr. Heath was foreman over the men. While I was there I saw cash come into the business. It was received by prisoner; it was always taken to him. Mr. Jones had nothing to do with the company while I was there. I do not know what he came there for.

EDGAR ALRIGHT , chief cashier at Parr's Bank, Camden Town branch. The Albany Automobile Company, Limited, had an account at our bank last year. Exhibit 48 is a certified copy of the account. The account was opened on May 25, 1908, with a payment in of £50. The account remained active till July 11. The last payment in was on July 1. The last cheque paid, except the closing cheque, was July 3. The account remained dormant from then till August 14. On that day we paid a cheque for the balance—£1 16s. 10d. It was signed by Mr. Wertheimer and Mr. Harvey, I think. The signatories to the cheques during the currency of the account were Clark McLeod and Mr. Elkin, countersigned by Mr. Elkin as secretary. The cheque for £1 16s. 10d. was countersigned by Mr. Harvey. Perhaps I was wrong in saying the other signature was Mr. Wertheimer's. It was signed by Clark McLeod and Harvey. Being signed in that way, we refused to cash it. We obtained as our authorisation for cashing that cheque something which purported to be an extract from the minutes. (Same produced.) As cashier, I am accustomed to deal with questions of handwriting. The signature of Clark McLeod on the Somerset House file does not agree with the signature we have. Comparing the signature, "C. H. Wertheimer" with the "Clark McLeod" written over it, I should say they are in the same handwriting.

Cross-examined. I have not seen Miss Clark McLeod. The only handwriting I know of hers is what was given at the bank. That handwriting was always the same. During the time the account was running, something like £1,400 passed through the account. With regard to the closing cheque, I believe Mr. Harvey presented it. I did not see him myself. We refused to honour the cheque because we had no evidence that Harvey was secretary.

Sergeant HEXAMEN , 8 Division. I arrested prisoner on November 19 on a warrant in connection with another case. (Minute book handed to witness.) I find two pages have been torn out after the minute of May 25, 1908. (Cashier Advice Book handed to witness.)

There is a piece of paper pasted in this book purporting to be a record of a minute. It is in Wertheimer's handwriting. I should say it is one of the missing pages from the minute book.

Cross-examined. I have been in charge of this case. I was not present at the Marylebone Police Court when application was made to Mr. Plowden for a warrant for prisoner's arrest. I know he refused it. I was present at the same court when a similar application was made to Mr. Paul Taylor. It was granted. I believe something was said to Mr. Paul Taylor about the previous application. On a subsequent hearing, when for the first time Mr. Paul Taylor learnt that an application for a warrant had been refused by Mr. Plowden, he said he ought to have been informed of it. I don't remember that he said he would not have granted the warrant if he had been informed. I said at the police court that When I arrested prisoner he said nothing. He did not say, "Why are you arresting me?" or "Why am I picked out?" He did not mention the names of Elkin or Groombridge. He did not say it was all a plant to get him out of the company. I believe the words he used were, "This is a plant to get me out of the country. "I said nothing about that at the police court.

Re-examined. The application which was made to Mr. Plowden was by a private individual, a solicitor named Warrington, and the complainant was Mr. Warwick. The other warrant was applied for about two months afterwards. The information upon Which the warrant was granted was laid at the instance of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The explanation given in the court as to how it was Mr. Paul Taylor did not know the application had been refused was that the prosecutors had 'phoned to the chief clerk that application was going to be made and they asked the chief clerk to give an explanation to the magistrate. The explanation made by the magistrate was that his clerk had forgotten to do so. Mr. Paul Taylor released prisoner on his own recognisances at one time. Subsequently I opposed bail. There is no previous conviction against prisoner that I am aware of. It was suggested that he had previously been convicted, but not by me.

(Monday, March 8.)

(Defence.)

CHARLES HERMAN WERTHEIMER (prisoner, on oath). Before I went into business I lived at Warwick Street, W., for about six months. I have been in the motor-car business seven or eight years. In 1906 I was adjudicated 'bankrupt. The Albany Automobile Company, Limited, was formed on November 27, 1907. I was manager. I was made director at the last part by Mr. Elkin. That would pro-bably be in June, 1908. As far as I know Mr. Elkin is unemployed now as the result of these proceedings and his own cleverness. He was secretary of a number of motor companies which he had floated and had something like 21 years' experience in company promoting.

Mr. Elkin floated this company. It had been talked over between three or four of us and eventually Mr. Elkin suggested that, for the protection of Mr. Jones and others, it become a limited company. Mr. Jones had already advanced money. Before the agreement was drawn up that Miss Schreiber typed I had had probably £20. By the agreement Mr. Jones was to receive 5 per cent. on the loan account and half the profits. I understood the first directors were to be Miss McLeod, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Heath. The first premises taken were 106, Albany Street, then 110, in December or January. Miss McLeod had for eight or 10 years been in a very comfortable position and had saved money. She had no desire to continue to work longer. She had a tobacco business in Holloway Road and through that she became very ill. I suggested selling the business and letting me use the money in the motor business and that she should interest herself in it. She put about £150 in. With regard to Miss McLeod's own personality and substantiality, she held the lease of Augusta Street, which was Crown property, and she satisfied the Crown solicitors in every way. The lease of 106 and 110, Albany Street was in the name of Mr. Jones; 106, Albany Street was show-rooms. At 110, showrooms on the ground floor and offices; on the first floor was the accessories department. On the next floor was a properly organised teaching school. On the next floor a number of the employees lived: 23, Augusta Street was a large garage, probably one of the largest in London. The method we adopted in trading with motor-cars was this. We did not desire to do a commission trade; we desired to buy the cars outright on the best terms we could. Sometimes we would pay spot cash and sometimes we would get payment deferred for seven days, a month, or two or three months even, on bills. We had negotiated 300 to 350 cars, nearly all on the guarantee system, which was this. We would look through the motor papers and see what cars were advertised for sale. We then wrote for a full description of the car and the lowest price. I was in a position to judge the value of any car if it was a known make to a pound or two from the description. So could anybody else in the trade. There is nothing in that suggestion. Motor-cars are all made to pattern. We judge them by the age, size, and tyre. I refer to the known makes. We always made it clear that if the car did not come up to the description there would be no deal. When the limited liability company started we only had about four hands. They would be Miss Schreiber, the first secretary; Mr. Elkin—he looked after the books—we also had an accountant. There were one or two workmen and Jackson. At that stage the weekly wages bill would be £6 or £7, of which I had £2 10s. The business grew very considerably. In July, 1908, there were over 20 employees. I was manager then. Mr. Elkin was secretary and there were two typists. The weekly wages hill then would be about £20, including myself. Nobody was paid by commission. Mr. Bowring was then in the employ of the company as manager of the works and garage at Augusta Street. Mr. Bowring advanced £250 under an agreement dated February 22. It is signed "George Russell, secretary."

Just previous to the receiver entering on July 2 a balance-sheet was drawn for Mr. Elkin to use for Mr. Bowring to decide on putting in the rest of his £1,000. The company was not in financial difficulties in July. We were not being unduly pressed. In June we had one or two actions brought against us in respect of accidents and some in respect of not carrying out the guarantee. Mr. Taunton was solicitor for the company at that time. Our total liabilities were £991 10s.; assets, £2,147. Mr. Taunton paid away in June and July in respect of the actions brought probably £1,000. At this time Mr. Bowring never pressed or asked for the repayment of his £250. He had no cause to do so. He simply put in a receiver without notice. The debenture provides for this. When the receiver appeared on the premises he refused to recognise me at all. Mr. Bowring agreed to put in the balance of £1,000 only about five days before he actually put the receiver in. This was after he had seen the balance-sheet and carefully considering it. He told me he had appointed a receiver on account of something Mr. Elkin had told him, and he swore to that effect at the police court. Whatever tale it was has been admitted by Mr. Bowring to be untrue. Elkin told me he could make reasonable terms with the receiver to withdraw, and I directed that what money was owing at that time should be banded to the receiver, and that was done—£40 one day and £45 the next. I had no doubt we should be able to pay the £250 within the next 24 hours. Then Elkin became manager for the receiver. That week-end I went down to Brighton. My wife had been there four or five months—she was seriously ill and in charge of a nurse. By the time I got to Brighton I had a wire from Elkin asking me to 'phone up on the Monday, which I did. He told me then not to come back for a day or two as he was making excellent arrangements with Bowring for the receiver to go out. On the 7th I thought "They cannot make terms if I do riot go up. "He persuaded me to wait a day or two. As I did not hear anything the next day I came up to London and saw Elkin, who said the receiver had stated that if I would retire from the company they would give him a month's time to turn round and pull the company together again. We discussed the matter and a letter was dictated which I signed. The Treasury can produce it. On July 21 I returned and went to the company's premises. I found everything gone. When the receiver entered there were at least 35 cars in stock and assets totalling £5,000, and when I came back three weeks after there were not £20 worth of accessories and furniture. Elkin and Groombridge had sold the stock and used the money for the purposes of floating a new company on the Albany Company's premises. In consequence of a wire I got from Elkin saying the police were after me, I went to Bow Street to see if it was right or not. This happened to be the same day that Mr. Plowden had refused to grant a warrant. When I saw the company's business in this condition I went away for a day or two to think it over. I made inquiries where the cars had gone. I traced a large number. I found four cars worth £300 had been sold to one man for £50. I also,

traced cars which had been absolutely given away for anything. After Elkin and Groombridge got out of the place I see about reviving the company. On July 28 I went to see a number of friends, including Mr. Taylor. Taylor promised to advance £500. I could' not get Mr. Jones to assign the lease. I engaged Jackson and one or two more. I had got a Mr. McDonough, who had a little money, to manage and look after the business while I went round to my friends to get this money together. I found all the trade were willing to trust me again and got a fair amount of cars in. We did not change the name of the company when we reopened. The creditors wore told the intention was to pay them. I even met them down there to see for themselves that we were doing our best to pull the company round. The sheriffs came in for cars that had been disposed of during the receiver's time. I told them to go out for the time being until I had got money together to pay them. I paid them money to withdraw and their costs; I was not in a position to pay the claims. I cannot say exactly how many cars I sold after I restarted, perhaps eight. We had contracted to buy 15 or 16, perhaps 20. During the month or six weeks after I restarted I sold my own personal property, furniture, and everything to raise money to pay our way. There was a considerable wages bill, stationery, etc. With regard to Mr. Wait's car, Mr. McDonough saw the advertisement and drew my attention to it. I remember making the offer. I bonafide intended to, pay; we had done it in hundreds of cases. The difference in the price at which we sold was a profit or loss to us. The Darracq car was advertised for £80 or £90, I am not sure which. In describing a car they generally say the power, the year, and the body; we know what model it is at once and what it is worth within £10. The owner of the Darracq also wanted us to take another car, but we were not eager for it and refused it, as that letter shows. There is a mistake about the car being sold to Mr. Taylor for £65; was £65. Mr. Taylor said he deducted £10 for something he lent me. I received the money. It was used in the business in the ordinary way. A day or two after we sold this car the rate people came in, and the lectric light land that sort of thing were paid out. I remember Mr. Harvey's car being advertised. I knew the car; it has been offered to others; one was Mr. Taylor. I knew of our letter offering £120. It was as much as it was worth to us. It had been offered to us for £135, which we had refused to guarantee. I was still in negotiation with Mr. Taylor in October. In November Mr. Taylor was selling his own business and he came to me and wanted to know definitely about the lease. At this time there were only four or five of us employed upon the premises. The wages were being paid regularly, but we principals were not drawing our ordinary wages; we were keeping that down. During the period of these transactions I was out every day going round to see people both for cars and friends for money for the business. I more than anticipated the business would go on properly. It was arranged definitely that money was coming in. I had other sources for money to come in besides Mr. Taylor. I even tried to borrow money to pay these specific sums. Mr. Wait issued a writ for the £65. Mr. Taunton was acting as solictor

to the company at the time, temporarily, and it was arranged that his clerk, Barnes, should come and see everything was done properly, so that there should not be any opening for further trouble like we had had in the past. This was a month or two after I had been to Bow Street. (Somerset House file handed to witness.) The signature of Mr. Jones as director is in Elkin's writing. I signed Miss McLeod's name. I had authority to sign her name, but not for anything outside the business. The way I came to sign this was that Mr. Elkin went down to register the company, and he signed this thing which I signed in the name of Russell, with the result that Somerset House threw the thing out because he was not a director. He told me they would not accept it when we were having lunch one day and said Miss McLeod, the director, must sign, and asked me to sign. Before I signed he told me there was nothing wrong in doing it as it was for no other purpose than the file.

Cross-examined. From the way the Treasury have been messing me about I do not know quite what I am being charged with. You must not forget I have been in custody five months. I understand I am being charged with obtaining two cars in the month of September and using the moneys obtained for them instead of paying it over to the persons from whom I received the cars. It probably is perdicial to my defence that I am not charged with anything previous to the receiver coming in. I have no desire to go into it; it took three months to settle the other cases. Before July 2 probably 10 or 12 writs were served on the company, of which six or seven were at the instance of persons who had sent cars and not received their money; these averaged £126 each. Some of the writs I refer to had been paid. They were paid out of our bank account. We did not pay by selling somebody else's car and using the money. We had some cars without a limit. We got some for cash and some we got long credit for. The average length of our guarantee I should say would be one month. In the six or seven cases mentioned the date had expired. We did not send the money to the person from whom we had the car because at this time we might have had something else a little more pressing. It is honest, as far as honesty goes, to guarantee to pay a person within a certain time and then not pay, but you must take into consideration we had a lot of accidents, and we were paying accident claims as well. Once we gave a guarantee we regarded the car as our own property. There were five or six other cases where people did not issue writs which were in the same category as the six or seven. These were all before the receiver came in. We had a car from a gentleman named Bates. I cannot say whether he was paid anything unless I see the books. I never kept the books. All I know about it was what I heard at the police court. I cannot say whether he sued the company. You should call Elkin to prove these things and not keep him outside the door. I do not remember selling Ford's car. I suggest that was on the premises when the receiver entered. I got two cars from Mr. Shuker, of Shrewsbury, and sold one the same day at a profit The time for paying him was not up when the receiver entered. After

the company started again I should have paid him if I had had the money. The receiver had the benefit of those two cars. That was thrashed out at the police court. Mr. Warwick sent up a car; I believe I got £80 for it. I handed £40 of it to the receiver. Mr. Warwick was never paid that I know of. It was the receiver's place to pay him. I accept the statement that the banking account on July 2 showed a balance of £7 or £8. I suggest that the company had £2,000 assets at that time. Mr. Elkin had to do with the company up to August 1. After that all he did was to go round to the customers and get them to force our hand. Mr. Bowring had nothing to do with the cases now being inquired into. It is their fault indirectly, and no one else's—their depriving the company of its assets in July—that put the company in such a position. I can tell the value of a car to us within £5 without seeing it if it is fully described. Groombridge guaranteed £180 for Mr. Shuker's car at Shrewsbury. It was sold for £140. Mr. Warwick's car was guaranteed £100. It was sold, as explained at the police court, for £80. As to not going to the shop for three weeks after August 4, it is true this way: we did not regard the shop as being open. If you had asked Jackson whether the shop was open you might have got another answer. After the end of September I was there two or three times a week, sometimes a week at a stretch. Newton and Bennett's car was sold either by Mr. Heath or Mr. McDonough. It was an old make. I believe it was sold for £15 or £20. I would not like to say we paid them. They brought an action. We did not guarantee in that case. I believe a car came from Mr. Docker. I never saw it. I never had the money for it whether it was sold or not. There was no manager at this time except Mr. McDonough. My part of the business was to try and get friends to put in money to pull the business together. I did not tell the jury I did not know whether a car was received from Mr. Docker. The money for it might have been handed to me. I cannot say the exact amount; it might be £60 or £65. He started an action. I believe that was a guarantee. I do not remember whether Mr. Elisha's car was sold or not. I cannot say to whom I sold any car after we started in August other than Mr. Taylor. I remember Docker's car being sold, but not who it was sold to. McDonough told me he had got a loan on Elisha's car. It was not on the guarantee system, that I know of; if it had been it would have come under my notice. I kicked up a row about his getting this loan, and to led finally to getting rid of McDonough. I did not write to Elisha saying how grieved I was. I told McDonough to go and fight his own battles. I did not redeem the car. Elisha never got his money. I consider, under the guarantees given to Wait and Harvey, those cars were bought out and out, and we had a right to sell at any price we chose. So long as we paid the money within seven days we had a right to sell the car and use the money in the business. Mr. Wait's car was sold for about £72, The guarantee time was up on August 17. He did not get all the money. The company had no banking account. All this happend hile we were reconstructing the company. We kept cash in a large

cash box at the shop. I cannot say how much was in it at that actual date. There was not £66 to pay for Mr. Wait's car. It was after the seven days expired and we failed to pay Mr. Wait that we sold Mr. Harvey's car. I knew I should make a profit on the latter, and I had Mr. Taylor's money coming into the business, and it was just then that the police proceedings happened. Taylor knew the lease was in the name of Jones. I do not think he swore that he did not know this until the police court proceedings. I not only asked Jones to transfer the lease but offered ham a price, which he refused. There was a book kept showing what cars we received. I told Jackson to take it with others to Mr. Taunton as soon as I saw creditors were pressing, and I would not go on until proper arrangements had been made for getting the money from Mr. Taylor. I do not suggest that Jackson is likely to have suppressed that book. Sometimes I received the cash, once Mr. McDonough, and once Mr. Matthews. The cash box used to be kept locked. Elkin always had the key. After restarting the cash box was kept in the office desk. We used to leave the key in the cash box because the desk was locked. I had one key of the desk and McDonough another. McDonough had no shares in the company; he came to pull the company through and introduce money. He never introduced any; he lent some money temporarily to the company to pay its way. He never had a receipt or security for it. After the reconstruction the books of the old company were not used. We had a special small book to enter up receipts and expenses. At the time I wrote to Jackson not to tell Harvey about the Rover or the Darracq; there was a lot of trouble between Harvey and McDonough, and we were going to get rid of Harvey. Until I saw Harvey I did not want him to know anything about our business. I believe the Rover came in on the Saturday; it was there on the Monday. It may have been sold on the Monday. It was there, and the Darracq too, when Harvey arrived. It was not arranged that it should come in on the Saturday, but as it happened it did. I am not blaming anybody else and have not attempted to do so.

Re-examined. At this time Mr. Taylor was taking an active part in the business in anticipation of putting money into it. Before and after the reconstruction we sold numerous cars to other people besides Mr. Taylor. I kept a proper book and accounted for everything. Two or three people possibly made entries in it. Besides the transactions already mentioned I had a car from a Mr. Wauchope at Croydon. It was in the place about a fortnight. When I saw that the company was likely to be in trouble I sent that car back. It was worth £400. I also sent back other cars. This was when I wired Johnson to put the cars out at the back.

HUGH TAUNTON , solicitor, Great Portland Street. I cannot remember the Albany Automobile Company, limited, being formed. I acted as solicitor for the company for some time. For a period of six months I was often on the premises. I was on legal business and did not take much notice what kind of business was being carried on. From the look of things I thought there was a good deal of business being done. I acted for the company in a number of actions against

the company in June and July. In settling those actions I paid away something like £1,000. Three or four were in respect of personal injuries. I remember Mr. Bowring going into possession. I remember Elkin subsequently managing the business. After August, 1908, prisoner consulted me. He told me he was going to restart the business. He asked me if I could find anyone who would put some money in. It was about the time the receiver was appointed. I had a gentleman who was prepared to put money into a business of that kind. I did not mention his name to prisoner. Prisoner asked if my clerk could go up there and help. It being vacation I said I had no objection. I have always found prisoner perfectly upright and honest. He told me he had heard there was a warrant out for his arrest. I told him it was ridiculous. I do not recollect him saying he had been to Bow Street. He came to me with the books of the company and consulted me as to its position.

Cross-examined. I had the custody of the books on behalf of the company. After the proceedings were started I was asked to attend at the police court and produce the books. I subsequently handed over all I had to the Director of Public Prosecutions. They were handed over just as I received them. The book relating to the subsequent transactions of the company is not in my possession. I did not know my clerk was writing letters as secretary of the company till afterwards. I then told him he should not have done so. There were six to 12 High Court actions brought against the company for cars which were sent up for sale. I reported to prisoner from time to time what steps were being taken. I did not always take my instructions from prisoner. I did not see him personally over the majority of them. I got money by cheques from the company signed by Elkin and other directors. Some of the actions were settled on terms. I think there was only one where judgment was given against the company in this way; that if a certain sum of money was paid within a certain time there would be leave to defend as to the balance. I have not the slightest idea what property the company had at the time the receiver went in; there were always a lot of cars there, but who they belonged to I cannot say. After the receiver came in I had a car in respect of costs. Prisoner had nothing to do with that. It was not a proper transaction as far as I was concerned. The car was sent to me; I sold it and took the money. I had £40 once from prisoner after the receiver came in. I cannot say I had £20 on July 2. The £40 was not handed to me personally; it came from the company's office to my office. I told prisoner I had a client who was prepared to put money into a motor business. I do not think it went further than that.

JAMES MITCHELL , auctioneer. I know prisoner. I did business with the company in May and June last year. I sold by auction at Augusta Street. There were seven cars sold at the first sale and three or four at the second. I did no business at Albany Street.

NOEL BOWRING , 37, Rutland Gate. I first met prisoner in Febuary last year. I then had a little money to invest in a motor business. I invested £250 upon a debenture with the company, and I

was to be employed as works manager at a salary of £2 a week. I was employed till the end of July. At that time there was a very large business being done. For the most part I had perfect confidence in prisoner. In consequence of what Mr. Elkin told me I put a receiver in. I have never got my money. Prisoner never paid me my money. He paid the receiver some. I subsequently joined with Mr. Elkin in forming the Panautos Company. On June 28, 1908, I had promised to advance a further sum of £250 to the Albany Company under certain conditions. Mr. Elkin got out a balance-sheet showing the state of the company. I was not altogether satisfied with the balance-sheet. I was satisfied with the general conduct of the business till Elkin made a communication to me. I found prisoner worked hard in the business. I did not ask for the return of my money before the appointment of the receiver. There might have been more than 20 cars on the premises at the time and £40 worth of accessories. The repair department was not doing very well; they had not enough tools. The driving school was not well furnished. I invested £500 in the new company, which I have lost.

Cross-examined. Prisoner asked me to invest in the Albany Company. He said it was a good little company. He suggested I should put an £1,000. I agreed to put in £250. I paid the money on February 24, 1908. I said at the police court "I was not satisfied with the way cars were taken out after business hours and to race meetings by prisoner." Those were cars which were there for sale. I did not think it was fair to the owners. I thought the amounts of the assets in the balance-sheet were exaggerated. I may have looked at the books. I did not study them. I did not know the regular course of business was to guarantee to pay people a fixed amount for their cars. It was occasionally done. I asked prisoner if it was not a risky thing to offer for a car before it was seen. He said he did not think the guarantee was binding. That would be in May or June. I did not write letters, receive money, or keep books.

Re-examined. I knew prisoner took cars to race meetings; I was there. Trial runs are often arranged at race meetings. While I was at Augusta Street great improvements were made in the premises.

HENRY STOREY , 110, Albany Street. I have known prisoner some years. I knew the Albany Automobile Company. Prisoner was the proprietor. I sent 20 to 30 cars there. I was paid for them; I watched that.

PERCY BARNES , clerk to Mr. Taunton. I know prisoner and the Albany Automobile Company, Limited. I assisted in the clerical work about end September or beginning October. The signature on the letter to Mr. Harvey is not mine. I cannot speak as to the business the company were doing. I was not there all day. I understood prisoner was trying to get fresh capital.

Cross-examined. I was never properly registered secretary of the company. I signed letters as secretary, in most instances "per pro

secretary." Prisoner asked me to slip up and sign the letters and see what was going on. I had no knowledge of the company; all the business I had to do was with prisoner as manager. I saw Heath there and Jackson. I do not think prisoner was carrying it on as his own business.

Re-examined. I never actually saw cars going in and out. There were two men employed there. I should imagine they were not there doing nothing.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sentence, Six months' imprisonment, second division.

BEFORE THE RECORDER.

(Saturday, March 6.)

Reference Number: t19090302-48

SNELL, William Reginald (33, broker) ; obtaining by false pretences from Christopher Turner the several sums of 5s., 2s. 6d., and 2s. 6d. on June 26, 1907, January 2, 1908, and January 31, 1908, respectively; from William Henry Green the several sums of 2s. 6d., 2s. 6d., and 2s. 6d. on July 1, 1907, September 4, 1907, and December 10, 1907, respectively; from Joseph William Sallis the several sums of 2s. 6d., 2s. 6d., and 2s. 6d. on June 1, 1907, December 1, 1907, and July 1, 1908, respectively; from Arthur Smith the several sums of 5s., 2s. 6d., and 2s. 6d. on July 3, 1907, August 23, 1908, and November 1, 1908, respectively; from George Wilton the several sums of 2s. 6d. and 2s. 6d. on July 1, 1907, and February 1, 1908, respectively; from William Vickary the sum of 3s. 6d. on September 29, 1907; from David John Jenkins the several sums of 5s. and 2s. 6d. on June 19, 1907, and December 3, 1907, respectively; from Matilda Steadman, the younger, the several sums of 1s. 3d. and 1s. 3d. on July 2, 1907, and February 1, 1908, respectively; and from Evan Davies the several sums of 2s. 6d., 2s. 6d., and 2s. 6d. on July 1, 1907, December 1, 1907, and March 3, 1908, respectively, in each case with intent to defraud.

Mr. Bodkin, Mr. Travers Humphreys, and Mr. H. D. Harben prosecuted; Mr. Symmons defended.

Mr. Bodkin said the case was an important one, as, if insurances against sickness or accident or fire, or whatever risk might be assured against were absolutely worthless, that fact struck at the root of thrifty habits. Companies holding out inducements to people to be thrifty should be conducted on solid lines by respectable people, and above all should be in a position to guarantee their undertakings to people who entrusted them with premiums. Companies insuring life were bound to deposit no less a sum than £20,000 with the Board of Trade, but in the case of companies insuring against accident, ill-health, or fire no deposit is required, and it would seem to be a most salutary rule to be adopted, whatever the risks insured against, that a substantial sum should be deposited by way of guarantee. Within a short space of time a number of insurance companies had been brought into existence, commencing with the Accident Insurance

Company, Limited, registered in July, 1904, with a nominal capital of £21, issued in £1 shares and no cash, with offices at Kingsgate House, Holborn. That company was wound up on April 22, 1905 the Provincial Accident, Sickness, and Guarantee Corporation, Limited, being then registered with a nominal capital of £40,000 in £1 shares, and that company was converted on April 25, 1905, into the Sovereign Sickness, Accident and Guarantee Corporation, Limited. The company proceeded to purchase from the first-mentioned company the whole of the company's insurance business, goodwill, lease of premises, and other assets for £39,000 in fully-paid shares, leaving a balance of £1,000, which was stated to have been allotted for cash. After occupying premises in different parts of London the company was finally located at Fenchurch Buildings, Fenchurch Street, prisoner being secretary of the company. Associated with him was a Mr. Daniel Morgan, who held two debentures issued upon the assets of the Sovereign Corporation, and at one time seemed to have been the possessor of the whole of the 40,000 shares, which he had acquired for the sum of £85 and disposed of for £167. On October 30, 1908, the Sovereign Corporation resolved that it should be voluntarily wound up, and the various charges of fraud arose between the time the company went to Fenchurch Buildings and that date. In June, 1908, the corporation's balance at the National Provincial Bank, amounting to £3 18s. 10d. was garnished, and from that date the corporation had had absolutely no funds. Of the premiums paid, amounting to £2,691 1s. 5d., £877 12s. was traced to Snell. The fraud was of a very mischievous character.

HENRY GEORGE WILLIAM GARNETT , solicitor, Crewe. In January, 1908, I was consulted by Mr. William Henry Green, barman, of Crewe, in reference to a claim under a policy with the Sovereign Corporation. I wrote to the corporation twice and received no reply to either letter. I then proceeded to appoint an arbitrator to determine the amount payable under the policy, and sent notice of the arbitration to the Sovereign office. I attended the arbitration. The arbitrator awarded five guineas under the policy and three guineas cost. I wrote informing the Sovereign of the award, and receiving; no reply brought an action in the County Court to recover the amount and obtained judgment, the defendants not appearing.

Evidence having been given by WILLIAM HENRY GREEN as to the policy, and by WILLIAM REECE EDMUNDS , solicitor, Merthy Tydvil, in a similar case, prisoner, on the advice of his counsel, pleaded guilty.

Mr. Symmons said this was a case which had caused him considerable anxiety. Up to within a few years, when he was introduced to this insurance business, prisoner was a young man of the utmost respectability, and he went into this affair with the idea of making it a successful insurance business. He (Mr. Symmons) agreed with Mr. Bodkin that it should not be possible to start an insurance business without the guarantee of adequate capital. All that could be said was that the actuarial calculation, on which the prisoner had relied, namely, that a premium of 2s. 6d. a month.

would provide against sickness and accident had proved insufficient.

A number of witnesses to character were called.

The Recorder described the case as one of gross fraud, and expressed the hope that the Legislature would arouse from its lethargy and find time to attend to these social reforms. The law urgently required amendment; companies started for the purpose of insuring against accident, sickness, or fire should be required to deposit a reasonable sum of money as security, so that persons subscribing their money should have a guarantee that they would get something back in case of a company becoming insolvent.

Sentence, Eight months' imprisonment, second division.

BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT. (Monday, March 8.)

Reference Number: t19090302-49

SCHIDKOWSKI, Fred B. (33, merchant), pleaded guilty of obtaining by false pretences from Alfred Feldmann, a valuable security, to wit, a banker's cheque of the value of £750, with intent to defraud.

Detective-inspector WILLIAM NEWELL , City Police. Prisoner was born in Berlin in 1876. He came to this country about 10 years ago. We communicated with the Berlin police, and it appears there is nothing known about him there except that he seems to have left the country in order to evade the Colours Act. His arrest is not sought for on that ground. Prior to May, 1908, he appears to have been London representative of a Mr. Princehorne, a stock and share broker in Hamburg. While he was in that employ £50 was sent over for the purpose of paying the income-tax on the business, and prisoner appears to have appropriated that for his own use, but I believe that is the subject of inquiry by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue at the present time. Prior to being in Mr. Princehorne's service he was engaged with a man named Hugo Lewin who runs a Finance Company in London Wall. There is nothing more known to the police about him.

Sentence, Two months' imprisonment, second division.

Reference Number: t19090302-50

PALLASH, Herbert George Gustavus (27, engineer), PALLASH, Alfred Leopold (25, metal sorter), PALLASH, Arthur Charles (29, merchant), and PALLASH, Harry (39, clerk); all conspiring and agreeing together by false pretences to obtain and acquire to themselves from such of His Majesty's liege subjects as should sell rubber, old metal, rags, and other articles, to the said Alfred Leopold Pallash and Herbert George Gustavus Pallash or either of them or to the Falkland Manufacturing Company, divers large quantities of rubber, old metal, rags, and other articles, the goods of the said liege subjects, with intent to defraud; all obtaining by false pretences from Harris Latner 2 tons 3 cwt. 2 qr, 26 lb. mixed fines and curtains and a large quantity of horsehair and rabbit skins, and from Gerald Percival Baker two pairs of rubber casings, and from David Kenyon 10 cwt. and 9 lb. of rubber goods and bagging, in each case with intent to defraud;A. L. Pallash and H. G. G. Pallash being persons adjudged bankrupt within four months next before the presentation of a bankruptcy petition unlawfully obtaining by fraud other than false pretences certain property on credit which they had not paid for; A. C. Pallash and H. Pallash aiding and abetting the said A. L. Pallash and H. G. G. Pallash in the commission of the said misdemeanours; A. L. Pallash and H. G. G. Pallash being traders adjudged bankrupts within four months next before the presentation of a bankruptcy petition by them unlawfully and with intent to defraud disposing or otherwise than in the ordinary way of trade certain property which they had obtained on credit and not paid for; A. C. Pallash and H. Pallash, unlawfully aiding and abetting the said A. L. Pallash and H. G. G. Pallash in the commission of the aforesaid misdemeanours; A. L. Pallash and H. G. G. Pallash in incurring certain debts and liabilities did unlawfully obtain credit by means of fraud other than false pretences, to wit, on July 31, 1907, credit to the amount of £86 from Harry Latner; on November 30, 1907, credit to the amount of £10 14s. 4d. from Charles Critchley; on November 26, 1907, credit to the amount of £6 13s. 2d. from Arthur Moore; on December 17, 1907, credit to the amount of £80 14s. from Gerald Percival Baker; on December 24, 1907, credit to the amount of £30 from Herbert Ellis; and on January 31, 1908, credit to the amount of £31 5s. 6d. from David Kenyon, in each case with intent to defraud; A. C. Pallash and H. Pallash unlawfully aiding and abetting the said A. L. Pallash and H. H. G. Pallash in the commission of the a fore said misdemeanours.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Simmons presecuted; Mr. Eustace Fulton defended.

WILFRID GEORGE HERBERT , clerk to the registrar, Edmonton Bankruptcy Court. I produce the bankruptcy file of Herbert George Gustavus Pallash and Alfred Leopold Pallash. They are described as carrying on business at 144 and 144A, Falkland Road, Tottenham, under the style of the Falkland Manufacturing Company and lately carrying on business at 39A, Langham Road, Tottenham, general dealers. It was their own petition, and the receiving order was made on the same day, March 18, 1908, and they were both adjudicated bankrupt on that day. Their preliminary examination was taken next day and is signed by both of the debtors. I produce the statement of affairs and transcript of debtors' public examination. The statement of affairs shows liabilities over £900 and assets nil. On May 11 an order for a goods and cash account for the three years prior to the receiving order was made by the registrar. I produce those accounts. An order to prosecute under the Debtors Act of 1869 was made on December 4 against the two bankrupts and the other two defendants for aiding and abetting.

(Tuesday, March 9.)

HARRY LATNER , marine store dealer, 79, Cathedral Road, Cardiff. Prior to 1907 I carried on business at Clare Street, Cardiff. I forwarded

certain goods to the Falkland Manufacturing Company and became a creditor in their bankruptcy for £86 11s. 7d. for goods supplied. Exhibit 27 is a telegram which I received from the Falkland Manufacturing Company dated July 22, 1907, offering to buy fines at 14s., hair at 1s. 2d., skins at 1s. 7d., white ruck, which are goods in which I deal. On the next day I received as letter (Exhibit No. 28 dated July 22 asking me to deliver as per the arrangement entered into by the Falkland Manufacturing Company with Mr. Cohen, my traveller, two tons of fines and curtains at £14 per ton, 2 cwt. straight horse hair at 1s. 2d. per lb., 500 dozen rabbit skins at 1s. 7d. per dozen, and about 5 cwt. pewter at 35s. per cwt., E. and O. E. which means "errors and omissions excepted; f. o. r. Cardiff, G. N. R, Hornsey, London. I sent those goods except the pewter, with an invoice for £86 11s. 7d. I received a postcard dated August 1 from the Falkland Manufacturing Company saying they regretted their inability to complete my account. I had asked for a remittance. I could not say whether it was one of the defendants who spoke to me over the telephone. On the next day I received a letter dated August 2 enclosing a cheque from the Falkland Manufacturing Company for £15. I held back that cheque for about a fortnight and then paid it into the bank. It was honoured. I received a letter dated August 6 from the Falkland Manufacturing Company saying they were not satisfied with the goods which I had sent, that there was too large a percentage of curtain, that the horsehair was largely short and foreign hair worth about 4d. a lb., and that the rabbit skins were more than half suckers, and the remainder rucks. There were only about 12 dozen bests all told. Rucks are small bits, and suckers are young rabbits. The letter went on to say, Would I make some allowance and send corrected invoice. That was the first I heard of any complaint. The goods I sent were of good quality. I either wrote in reply or called them up on the telephone to say that I would rather have the goods back. I received a letter dated August 13 from the Falkland Manufacturing Company asking for a written communication from me with regard to an allowance. I offered to allow them £1 off the price. On August 16 there was sent me a list of the prices at which the Falkland Manufacturing Company purported to sell goods such as they said I had sent them and invoicing mine at those prices, which made the bill come to £46 13s. 9d., leaving a balance in my favour, according to their showing, of £31 13s. 9d. I then instructed my solicitors to take action against the company, and the order produced, dated September 27, was made against them under Order XIV., giving the defendants leave to defend if they paid £31 13s. 9d. into court, otherwise judgment to be for me for the full amount. On November 21 I obtained judgment for the balance of the amount due, with costs, £54 17s. 10d. The whole amount for which I proved in the bankruptcy was £86 11s. 7d. I never got any money at all as dividend in the bankruptcy, I did not present the petition in bankruptcy—it was the prisoners' own petition. The prices prisoners had offered me were about 10 per cent. above the ruling prices at the time for the goods. From the headings of letters

prisoners sent me, I thought that they were people in a big way of business.

Cross-examined. This all happened in 1907, and I treated the matter as a civil debt until the police took the matter up. My business paper is less pretentious than that of prisoners. It does say "H. Latner and Co.," but I am a buyer, and it does not say "manufacturer." I am a dealer and merchant, and there is a great difference between a dealer and a manufacturer. The price I was asking, £86 11s. 7d., for these goods was rather high, taking the market value at the time. I do not charge for the bits when I sell skins. I do not buy them. I do buy suckers and they are sold with the skins as they come in. Bits would have been sent to the Falkland Manufacturing Company, but not charged for. 1s. 7d. per dozen is the price for mixed skins. At the time of my transaction with the defendants fines were more valuable than curtains. The prices of these things vary a great deal sometimes, but not so much as is suggested; they might vary from 7 1/2 to 10 per cent. I saw the goods packed myself. This is a cash trade. I pay cash and expect to receive cash by return of post. Nobody else owes me any money and I owe nobody any. This is the only case in my business where anybody ever has. I did not receive any money under the judgment which I obtained. My solicitors put in an execution. I do not know much about where the defendants have been living since this transaction. I gave my solicitors a lot of trouble in the matter and had to pay about £20 costs. I cannot say when I first began to regard it as a criminal offence. I had a wire from London to go and give evidence against prisoners at the police court; that is all I know about it. That is about the time when it became a criminal matter in my eyes.

FRANK TOWNSEND GARTON , Assistant Official Receiver for the Northern District of Suburban London. I produce the answers of Herbert George Gustavus Pallash and Alfred Leopold Pallash to the statutory questions put to them in their bankruptcy. I also produce the bought book and the ledger of Falkland Manufacturing Company. The former purports to show the goods bought from various persons in detail, the dates when they were received, and the amounts paid on account of them. The ledger purports to show to whom and for how much the goods were disposed of, and also the dates of sales. In the bought book there is a page headed, "H. Latner and Co., 15, Clare Street, Riverside, Cardiff." On July 31, 1907, there is an entry of a quantity of goods received, with details of the goods, amounting to £46 13s. 9d. There is a payment recorded of £15 on August 2, leaving a balance of £31 13s. 9d., and the whole item is struck through in blue pencil and "Remainder settled" is written against it. At page 190 there is an account of Max Isaac, of 65-69, Bermondsey Street, S. E., which purports to show rabbit skins sold to Isaac under date July 31 for £27 13s. 7d. Then there is 211 lb. of horse hair at 1s. 1d., that being the price in the bought book. Ninety-seven dozen bits of rabbit skins were sold to Isaac, also at 1d. a dozen, and 40 dozen bits. The 40 dozen bits are marked" N. C.,". which may mean" No charge. "Rabbit skins are sold to Isaac at 6d., and priced at 4d. in Latner's account. Rucks are sold at 1s. 2d.

to Isaac and priced at 1s. to Latner. Best fines are 2s. to Isaac and 1s. 7d. to Latner. Folio 18 is the account of Austin and Sons, of Barrett's Grove, Stoke Newington. Under date July 31 there is an entry of a sale to them of mixed fines, 43 cwt. 2 qr. 16 lb., at 11s. 6d., making £25 2s. 11d., and Latner's price at 10s. works out to £21 17s. 6d. It is marked in Latner's account, "Nearly all outshots." On that transaction there is a profit of £3 5s. 5d. On July 22 they sold Austin's "In fines" at 12s., while Latner's price is rather high, being 14s., July 10. "In fines 12s. "On August 2 there is an item of 1 qr. 12 lb. of hair to Austin and Sons—it is foreign, raw hair—at 5d., which works out at 16s. 8d. That was priced to Latner at 4d., which works out at 13s. 4d., giving a small profit of 3s. 4d. Summarising the whole thing, Latner's price is £86 15s. 7d., and I find that all his goods were disposed of by August 2 for a total of £53 13s. 2d. I have the cash account filed in the bankruptcy from August, 1906, to March, 1908. On the receipt side are these words: "Date. From August, 1906, to March, 1908. Cash. From whom received. Various firms as shown in goods account. To whom sold. All sales being for spot cash on delivery. "The amount they received is carried out at £3, 086 17s. 9d. (Exhibit 6.) The goods account shows goods purchased, and the amount is £2, 342 11s. If they had paid for the goods which they sold for cash for £3, 086 17s. 9d. they would have paid £2, 342 11s., showing a gross profit of £744 6s. 9d., but, in fact, I find by the cash account they paid on various accounts and other things £1, 786 8s. 3d., of which about £50 is for advertisements. They received in cash over what they had to pay out £1, 300 9s. 6d. I have here the record of the public examination of Herbert George Gustavus Pallash. At that time the various items had not been identified, as I have identified them to-day.

Cross-examined. All the figures I have given have been extracted from the books of the prisoners or taken from statements made by them. Although books have been kept of this trading, I am of opinion that the whole of the trading is not shown in them. The transactions which have been dealt with in this case are disclosed in the books. The period covered is about from August, 1906, to March, 1908, and the profit, if all the goods bought had been paid for, would have been £744 6s. 9d., according to the books. About £560 worth of goods appearing in my estimate appear to have been paid for. Altogether there are about £900 worth of goods not paid for. My estimate of gross profits is £1, 600. That amount does not include such expenses as rent, rates, advertisement, and wages.

To Mr. Bodkin. No cash book was kept.

Mr. Fulton intimated that having considered the evidence which had been given, he had come to the conclusion, and so advised his clients, that they could not resist the charges under the Debtors' Act of conspiracy in carrying on this business, and that they would, therefore, withdraw their plea of not guilty to the whole indictment, and plead guilty to the counts in the indictment under the Debtors Act.

Mr. Bodkin said he was willing to accept that plea. Prisoners pleaded guilty to all the counts in the indictment except Nos. 2, 11, and 24.

Inspector ARTHUR NEIL said that none of the prisoners had ever been convicted before. The family consists of the father and six sons, who were all living at 36, Belmont Road. They first came under the notice of the police in 1898, but there was reason to believe that the business then carried on was carried on by the father and has since got in the hands of Arthur Charles. The business was connected with the cycle and tyre trade. Arthur Charles is the one who has come most prominently under the notice of the police. He appears to have been the shining light and the manager of each of the concerns. As to Harry, the police only knew of him quite recently in connection with the Falkland Manufacturing Company, but he was doing some of the correspondence as far back at 1895. The complaints received by the police began in 1889 and extended down to the present time. There are altogether 110 complaints, referring to a great number of different names under which prisoners have traded. There was a C. Pallash, of Hainault Road, Leytonstone, in August, 1898, and they seem to have traded in that name till February, 1899. Arthur Charles would only be about 18 years old then, and they were then trading in connection with the father. The police first discovered Arthur Charles trading in May, 1901, when he was trading in the name of A. Charles, and also in the name of Vincent at Bay Tree Cottage, The Green, Southgate. There was a long list of complaints continuing down to September, 1901. The next complaint was from the same people about the Leyton Rubber Company, Leyton Road, in March, 1902; but, at the same time, Arthur Charles was trading as Charles and Co. at Southgate. In July, 1902, he was trading as the Faygate Rubber Company at Harringay, and there were a number of complaints. The complaints of the Falkland Manufacturing Company are more numerous than all the others. None of the prisoners was ever made bankrupt before. Information was had against them at Highgate Police Court on two occasions, but there was difficulty about getting the witnesses up from the country, and the evidence was not sufficiently strong to proceed. It was prisoners' practice to send a small amount on account for goods received, and unless they were very closely pressed, the firm supplying the goods never heard of them again. Sometimes they obtained goods and sometimes money. Arthur Charles appeared to have been the worst. Harry came into the matter only by dealing with the correspondence, and was known in the neighbourhood as"The Solicitor." There were many cases in which goods were advertised for sale by prisoners and the money forwarded, but the goods were never sent. Since their bankruptcy the younger two were trading right up to the day of their arrest.

To Mr. Fulton. In 1890 Alfred was 14 and Herbert was 16 years of age, and I do not say that they took a prominent part at that time. I did not say that I knew nothing of Harry; I said he did not appear prominently in the matter except that he conducted the

correspondence. From inquiries that I have made I believe that he has had other employment. He is half-brother to the others. The father was concerned in the business of which complaints was made in 1898. I should say that Alfred entered into this business in about 1904 or 1905. I cannot say that he took any prominent part between 1898 and 1905. I should think Herbert commenced in about 1902. Arthur seems to have commenced in about 1901, and he was with his father before that, and what I have said occurred in 1898 has no reference to either of those prisoners. I cannot say absolutely that no genuine business was done by the Falkland Manufacturing Company, but there was very little genuine business carried on after May, 1901, although no prosecution was instituted until the present one. It is difficult to get at the amount of money of which prisoners have defrauded the public, but I have a list of various amounts here, the largest of which is £160 in 1905. The amounts were small before the starting of the Falkland Manufacturing Company. The £160 was for tyres supplied by the Continental Tyre Company. In that case we laid the facts before counsel, but were advised to take no action in consequence of the loose way in which the Continental Tyre Company did their business.

Sentences: Arthur Charles Pallash, Eight months'; Herbert George Augustus Pallash, Six months'; Harry Pallash, Five months'; and Alfred Leopold Pallash, Three months' imprisonment, all in the second division.

BEFORE MR. JUSTICE PHILLIMORE. (Monday, March 8.)

Reference Number: t19090302-51

CLEAVER, Alice (20, laundress) ; murder of Reginald William Cleaver.

Mr. Muir, Mr. Graham-Campbell, and Mr. Trevor Bigham prosecuted; Mr. Burnie and Mr. Horace Samuel defended.

MARIA DAVIS , widow. Down to February 22, 1909, I had a room at 101, Gladesmore Road, Stamford Hill. I have known the prisoner for 16 years and eight months, since she was 3 1/2 years old. She has lived with me as my daughter until the day she was arrested. At the age of 16 I told her that she was not my daughter. About August I noticed her condition. She denied it at first, but when I came home from work that night she had a young man on the doorstep and then she owned to it. I took her to the Tottenham Infirmary and saw Mr. Rampton, who gave me a letter to Miss Manning, who keeps a Rescue Home at Edmonton. I took prisoner there and Miss Manning agreed to take her in; she went there a day or two afterwards and remained there for two or three weeks, when she returned to me. I went to see Miss Manning, who told me to take prisoner back to the Edmonton Union. She gave me note produced stating that as prisoner was subject to fits she was unable to keep her. I took prisoner to the Edmonton Workhouse on September 30 and

she remained there for her confinement. Three weeks after that I saw her at my room in Gladesmore Road. I was then in service at Inkermann Terrace, Kensington. My landlady, Mrs. Platt, wrote to me, and I came to Gladesmore Road, where I saw the prisoner with her child. I told her She would have to go back to Edmonton Workhouse as I could not afford to keep her and the baby. She was very much upset at that and had a very bad fit; so I left her to stay at my room and returned to Inkermann Terrace. I think I saw her after that at her mother's house, and after that she came to me at Inkermann Terrace—that was the day after she came out of Kensington Workhouse—she had the baby with her, and she said she was going to take it to a Kilburn home by paying 5s. Her mother, Mrs. Reeves, said she would give her the 5s., and the prisoner went off with the child—that was about 10 a.m. I asked prisoner what she was going to do herself, and she told me not to worry, she would get on all right. I saw her the next day again at her mother's house—I did not see the baby with her. I asked her if she had left it at the Kilburn home and she said, "Yes." I asked her if she had any papers to show that she had left it there, and she said, "No"—she said she would never be allowed to see it again. I gave her the key of my room. On January 29 I went there and remained with her until she was arrested on the Sunday morning.

Cross-examined. Silver Street Station is about 2 1/2 miles from my room. Prisoner was subject to fits and would sometimes have two in a day. South Tottenham Station is about 10 minutes walk from my room.

ALICE FRANKLIN , superintendent nurse, Edmonton Workhouse Infirmary. On September 30, 1908, prisoner entered the infirmary, and on November 7 was confined of a male child registered as Reginald William Cleaver. She left the infirmary on November 28. The child was apparently healthy when born. The child was fed at the breast entirely until she left the workhouse.

FLORENCE LEARY , superintendent in charge of the Infants' Nursery, Kensington Workhouse. Prisoner was admitted into my workhouse on December 17 with a baby boy known as Reginald William, about six weeks old. She remained until January 20. I noticed she seemed indifferent to her child and I had to reprimand her for it. The baby had the breast during the day and had two bottles at night. It was a very thin baby, but it appeared bright, and when she left there on January 20, at eight a.m., it was beginning to improve. I said to her as she was leaving, "You have not fed your baby." She said, "I am going to my mother in Allen Street. It is only a few minutes' walk." When she came into the workhouse I asked her how long she was going to stay, and she said she was waiting for a lady to find a foster mother for her baby and then she was going home. On February 10 I went to the East London Cemetery and saw the body of a child in a coffin. Photograph produced resembles the features of prisoner's child. The body which I saw resembled it—the mouth, the nose, the thin condition of the body, and the apparent age.

EMILY REEVES , wife of Albert Reeves, coachman, 4, Inkermann Terrace. I am the mother of the prisoner; she is 20 years of age; she has been living with Mrs. Davis. Until June, 1908, I had not seen prisoner since her childhood. I next saw her a month after the baby was born, before Christmas, when she came to my house with a young lady, who asked me if I could take her in. We talked things over, and she went to see if she could get into the infirmary, taking the baby. That was about five p.m. Prisoner returned at 11.45 p.m. with the baby and remained with me that night. She explained she could not get into the infirmary and wanted me to take her for the night. The next morning I took her to Kensington Workhouse, where she remained till January 20. On that day at nine a.m. she came to see me with the baby and said she was going to take it to a home at Kilburn, asked me for 5s., which she had to pay, and left at 11 a.m. She proposed, after getting the child into a home, to get some work. She had the brown jacket on produced, a blue skirt, and a brown hat. The child had a white shawl, something like that produced. I think it was a little larger than this. The child had a little milk and water and sugar before prisoner left. I next saw the prisoner on Thursday, January 21, at about five p.m. She came to my house without the child. I asked if the baby was all right. She told me she had left the baby at the home—it was all right. I asked her if she was going to see the baby and she said "No"—she could write. Her mental condition appeared the same as usual, both when she left me and when she came back. The day the young lady from Miss Manning brought her she spoke about Miss Manning, but not afterwards. I have a brother at Plaistow. On January 21 prisoner said that she had taken the baby to my brother's—or that I was to say that she had taken it there—to say that to Miss Manning or anyone that called. She did not take it there.

Cross-examined. My husband did not know about prisoner being my daughter—that was why I could not have her home and why she lived with Mrs. Davis. When she came to me on December 16, at 11.45, she said she had tried to get the baby taken in somewhere. While in the Kensington Infirmary she wrote a letter to Mrs. Davis, which was brought to me and which I have destroyed, saying that she was going to take the baby to a home at Kilburn and that she wanted 5s., which I wrote and promised her. Mrs. Davis is in service very near my home.

THOMAS WILLIAM COXALL , booking clerk at Silver Street Station, Great Eastern Railway. On January 20, 1909, I was on duty from two p.m. until one a.m. Railway ticket produced is a ticket from Silver Street to Dalston Junction, No. 1, 097, issued on January 20 from my office either by me or the clerk. No other such ticket was issued that day—we issue very few and the last one before was on January 7—only two were issued in six weeks. The passenger would change at Hackney Downs, pass the exchange office, and to get to Camden Town would have to change also at Dalston; he could not go direct from Hackney Downs to Camden Town. Silver Street Station is 2 1/2 miles from Gladesmore Road. A person going from

Gladesmore Road to the City from Silver Street would be going out into the country and coming back again.

JOHN SMITH , fireman, London and North-Western Railway. On January 20 I was on the engine of a train which left Earl's Court at 7.4 p.m. for Broad Street, passing through Camden Town Station at 7.42, where I saw a woman on the platform with a child in her arms. While I was looking for the signal to start she went along the second-class compartments, apparently looking for an empty one or looking for someone. Just as the train started two porters assisted her in while the train was in motion. My train stopped at Highbury, Dalston Junction, and then went on to Broad Street. At Broad Street I saw the woman talking to a porter named Madder by the bookstall against a red lamp—she had the child. Madder looked at her ticket; she got into a train leaving Broad Street at 8.10 and making its first stop at Dalston Junction. I did not go by that I am not able to identify the woman Cross-examined. The fast down line is constantly used. Several trains an hour pass over it—I think the 10.55 p.m. is the last. The first in the morning is 6.40 a.m. from Broad Street.

HENRY MADDER , porter, Broad Street Station, North London Railway. On January 20 last I saw the train come into Broad Street which leaves Earl's Court at 7.4 and arrives at Broad Street at 7.51 p.m. I noticed a young man alight from a second-class compartment as the train was stopping, then I noticed a young woman with a baby in her arms get out of the same compartment. I think she wore a three-quarter grey coat, very dark. The baby was wrapped in. a dirty white or grey shawl and wore a little round hat. The shawl was similar to that produced; it was wrapped round the neck and doubled over. I could not swear to the jacket produced. When I saw her she was standing under the shade of a red lamp. When she got out of the train she walked towards the barrier, then returned and stood under a red lamp. As she did not seem to be moving off the platform, I asked her where she wanted to go to. She said "Dalston." I identified the woman at Hackney Police Station as the prisoner in the dock. I picked her out from 12 or 15 other women. I said to her, "You have just come from there (Dalston)." She made no answer. As she seemed confused, I asked her to show me her ticket. She held out in her left hand a third-class single ticket similar to that produced from Silver Street to Dalston Junction, via Hackney Downs. I said, "You have been to Dalston?" "She made no answer. So I said, "You changed at Hackney Downs?" She said, "Yes." I said, "You had to change at Dalston to get into this train?" As she still made no answer I said, "You had better get into this train and go back again," and that Dalston would be the first station she stopped at. She then got into a second-class empty compartment and I gave her back her ticket. The train left at 8.10. No one else was in the compartment. As she left Smith had a conversation with me. (To the Judge.) The ticket produced would not take her to Camden Town at all.

Cross-examined. It was the evening of Sunday, January 31, when I identified her. I did not notice that the other women had prayer-books in their hands. (To the Judge.) All the women were dressed with shawls, hats, and coats on, including the prisoner. (To Mr. Burnie.) I had not heard that she had been in the cells all day—I did not notice she had been crying.

WILLIAM JAMES SALMON , ticket collector, Dalston Junction. On January 20, between seven and 8.30 p.m., I received ticket from Silver Street to Dalston Junction (produced), cancelled it, and put it in the rack. It was collected the following morning and sent to the audit office, Broad Street. I could not say whether I took it from a man or a woman.

ANNIE LAVENDER , widow, 4, Booth by Road, Upper Holloway, sister to Mrs. Davis. I have know prisoner 15 or 16 years. On Wednesday, January 20, at about 11 p.m., she came to my house. I asked her why she called so late. She said she had broken her journey from South Kensington: I said it was rather peculiar breaking her journey from there. She did not make any reply. I asked her where she was going and she said she was going to the landlady's at, South Tottenham, which I knew meant Mrs. Platt—it was where Mrs. Davis had a room. Prisoner remained about 10 minutes. She looked very sad, as if she had been in a fit—I knew she was subject to fits. She did not stay to eat anything and I gave her some sandwiches to take with her. She had no baby with her. I did not know she had had a baby. She did not ask to stay with me—I do not think I could have taken her in that night as I had some friends there.

FREDERICK HUMPHRYS , artist. I produce plan made by me of the railway between Dalston and Broad Street. I had pointed out to me the spot upon the line where the child was found, which is marked; it is roughly 30 yards from Richmond Road Bridge. On the western side of the line there is a wall 8 ft. from the pavement outside and graduated from the level of the railway from 10 ft to 24 ft. 6 in. at the bridge. It is about 18 ft. 6 in. at the spot mentioned, which is 13 1/2 ft. from the wall. Haggerston Bridge is between Richmond Road and Broad Street, 270 yards from the place pointed out to me.

FELIX WALTER NEWMAN , foreman plater, North London Railway. On January 20 I was in charge of a gang working at the Haggerston Road Bridge between Broad Street and Dalston Junction. I left at about 4.53 p.m. and walked up the line to the engine shed at Dalston Junction passing from Haggerston Bridge to Richmond Road Bridge. I noticed nothing whatever on the line. I returned the next morning between 7 and 7.15 a.m.

WILLIAM SKETCHER , platelayer, N. L. Ry. On January 21st I went to my work at Richmond Road Bridge at 6.55 a.m. When I reached within a short distance of the south side of Richmond Road Bridge I found the body of a child dressed in a small white flannel petticoat; it was lying at about the centre of the big 6-ft. way, between the No. 2 down line and the No. 2 up line. The previous evening I had passed

the same spot at 4.30 to five p.m.—nothing of the kind was there then. I went to the station and informed the inspector. I afterwards pointed out the spot where the child was lying to Humphrys.

Cross-examined. A great many trains pass over the No. 2 up and down lines in an hour.

Police-constable ALBERT SNELGROVE , 330 J. On, January 21, at seven a.m., I received information, went to the North London Railway, and found the body of a male child lying in the 6-ft. way. It had on the small flannel petticoat (produced). The legs were drawn up and the hands clenched when I found it, lying on its left side I examined the spot and could not find any other clothing or any paper to indicate what it had been wrapped it. I took the body to the police station; an inquest was held, and I identified the body.

JOSEPH BROWN , mortuary keeper, Hackney. On January 22 Harman hade a photograph of the body of the deceased, which had been brought from the North London Railway on the previous day. ALBERT HARMAN produced and identified photograph.

THOMAS CAREY BARLOW , divisional police surgeon, J Division. On January 21, at eight a.m., I was called to Dalston Police Station and saw the body of a male child. It had been dead some hours—10 or 12 hours perhaps. There was an abrasion under the right eye and on the nose; the left eyelid was swollen. On the left arm were four vaccination marks made by a special instrument known as the Cooper Rose; the marks were in a square—two above and two below. The weight was 7 lb. 15 oz. Its length 2 ft.; it was badly nourished and thin. I took it to be a child of about two months old. The child was taken to Hackney Mortuary and I made a further examination. I removed the scalp and separated it from the skull, There were several points of hemorrhage—exudation of blood—several patches indicating that it had struck some surface during life. If it was thrown out of a train I think it was alive when thrown out—it might strike prominent stones. On opening the skull I found a quantity of fluid blood. There was a small fracture of the parietal bone. The brain was not injured at all. There was a clot of blood at the right side at the base of the brain. I opened the stomach and found no food; the small intestine was empty. The child would have been fed 10 or 12 hours before death. Supposing the child had had a little milk and water between nine and 11 a.m. on January 20 and had died at eight to 8.30 p.m. that day, that would be consistent with what I saw. The cause of death, in my opinion, was the fracture of the skull and partly exposure—it would not have died so soon if it had not been exposed. The fracture of the skull was on the same side as the points of hæmorrhage. I had pointed out to me the place where the child was found; the fracture could have been caused by its striking against some surface, whether thrown out from the train or from anywhere else—it was quite probable that was how it was done. On February 10 I attended the East London Mortuary and saw the body of the child in the presence of Inspector Dyvall.

Cross-examined. The child might have lived an hour or two after the fall. Before teething the estimate of age is uncertain between

two and four months. Dentition begins as a role at about seven months. One could not say with certainty what the age of a child is before teething begins. I could not say for certain that the child was not six months old—it would have been a very small child—it is improbable but possible that it might have been six months old; there is the greatest difference in the rapidity of growth.

Re-examined. It was such a child as might have been born on November 7, 1908.

HANS CONRAD SWERTZ , deputy medical officer, Edmonton Infirmary. On November 14, 1906, I vaccinated the child, Reginald William Cleaver, which was born on November 6 or 7, on the left arm, with a Cooper Rose instrument, making four marks in a diamond shape—generally I make them in diamond shape, but I cannot remember that with certainty.

Cross-examined. I generally make the marks diamond square shape. I vaccinate about 100 children a year, using the Cooper Rose instrument. (Witness sketched on paper the form of the marks which was handed in.) A great many practitioners used the same instrument. The shape of the marks might be very much modified by the way the nurse held the arm and by the tension of the skin.

THOMAS CAREY BARLOW , recalled. The marks I saw on the deceased's arm might have been done in the way stated by the last witness.

ALICE GERTRUDE PLATT , 101, Gladesmore Road, South Tottenham, wife of Albert Platt. I have known prisoner 15 months. Mrs. Davis had a room at my house down to February, 1909; she lived there off and on; she was in service and kept the room on. Prisoner went to Edmonton Workhouse, came back with her baby, and stayed in Mrs. Davis's room. She was there about three weeks with the baby. A lady sent by Miss Manning came to see her. Prisoner said she was going to take her baby to Mrs. Reeves at Kensington, and the prisoner left. I next saw her on January 21, at about 12 noon, without the baby. I asked her where the baby was. She said, "I have taken it to a Catholic home at Kilburn. Mrs. Reeves gave me 5s. to pay for it and I shall not see it any more. "I asked her what she was going to do. She said she was going to stop at Mrs. Davis's room. I said she must go to Kensington to Mrs. Davis to fetch the key, as Mrs. Davis had told me not to allow her in the room. She said, "All right, I will go," and left. About six or seven p.m. she returned with the key and went into Mrs. Davis's room. She remained at my house until she was arrested. I did not see the prisoner on Wednesday, January 20. Looking at petticoat produced I believe it was the petticoat her child wore because I saw prisoner sewing the top on to it. The shawl is the one worn by the baby. On January 21 prisoner had it round her neck. She asked me to wash it, and said I could have it if I liked. It was thrown on my washing line and remained there till the police called for it. On January 21 she was wearing the jacket produced. The

baby wore a round white woollen hat. On the petticoat you will find two different kinds of flannel—there is an extra length put to it and one is coarser than the other. I saw the prisoner put the piece on to make it fit the child—she was sewing it.

Cross-examined. I did not work on the petticoat myself—I saw prisoner working on it—the piece was put on to the top. I have often done that to my own children's petticoats—there is nothing unusual in it. I occupy the whole house. I usually open the door and hear anyone who knocks. I was at home all day on January 20. Prisoner had the address of "The Haven," near London Bridge—a gentleman wrote it out for her.

Re-examined. On January 20, between two and three p.m., I was doing the washing. Prisoner did not come to my house at that time.

Detective-inspector THOMAS DYVALL , J Division. On January 31, at 9.30 a.m., I went with three other officers to 101, Gladesmore Road, and saw the prisoner. I said, "Is your name Miss Cleaver?" She said, "Yes." I said, "I am inquiring about a child found on the North London Railway. I have heard you have a child about three months old. Will you tell me where your child is?" She said, "Oh, yes, I left Kensington Infirmary on the 20th inst. with my baby and took it to my mother's house, and she sent it by a friend of hers to my uncle at Plaistow. "I said, "Where does your mother live?" She said, "No. 4, Inkermann Terrace, Allen Street, Kensington. Of course, I am anxious about my baby." I said, "I have a part of a baby's clothing. Would you come with me to see it?" She said, "Oh, yes." We went together to Hackney Police Station, where I showed her the flannel petticoat produced. She said, "Oh, that is not mine. Mine was a blue flannel made from a hood." I then asked her if she would mind being detained for a time and I made further inquiries. Later on I said to her, "Your mother says she had nothing to do with your baby." She said, "Does she? Very well, I will tell you the truth. I gave my baby to Mrs. Gray, a Catholic lady, between 11 and 12 o'clock on the 20th inst. outside Charing Cross Railway Station, and she took it to Kilburn Park Catholic Home, where it now is. The reason I told you my mother took it was because the Catholic lady told me not to tell anyone where it is and no visitors are allowed in the home." Then she said, "I will make a full statement, and it will take me a long time to make it." I said, "Do you wish me to take it down in writing." She said, "Yes." I said then, "I am a police inspector, and if you make a voluntary statement I caution you that anything you say to incriminate yourself may at some time be used in evidence against you." She said, "I perfectly understand." Then I made her comfortable, and I called Sergeant Taylor in and told him to take her statement if she wished to make it voluntarily, which she did, and to take it down in writing. It was read over to her and signed by her. I produce it. (Same was read.) At 6.30 p.m. I told her I was going to put her up for identification. I said, "I suspect you to be the woman seen with a baby at Broad Street Railway Station on the 20th inst." She said, "Yes. "That did not

mean that she was at Broad Street Station, but merely that she was willing to be identified. She placed herself amongst a number of other women and was picked out by Madder. She was then charged with the wilful murder of Reginadd William Cleaver. She said, "Yes, sir," When the charge was read over she repeated the words, "Yes, sir" and was going to say something. I thought she might say something incriminating herself, and I said, "If it is in the form of questions I shall have to be careful how I answer you"; and she said, "Oh, very well." I was present when the body of the child was seen by Dr. Barlow at the East London Mortuary. Police-constable Snelgrove and the mortuary keeper were there.

Cross-examined. When I first saw prisoner at Gladesmore Road I did not tell her I was a police officer. When I told her I was a police officer after inquiries had been made, she said she would tell me the truth.

ELEANOR MANNING , superintendent Edmonton Rescue Home, spinster. On September 12, 1908, prisoner came to my Home with Mrs. Davis, who asked if I could help the prisoner so as to avoid her going to the workhouse. I promised to do so. On September 19 prisoner again came, and I sent her to St. Mary's Maternity Home, Wellington Square, Chelsea, where I got her admitted. On September 25 I had a communication made to me and sent for prisoner—She was taken back to Gladesmore Road. I wrote a letter produced to the Relieving Officer of Tottenham, Mr. Rampling. I afterwards saw the prisoner in the workhouse before the child was born, and after. I asked her to stay there, and promised to try and get the child into a home if she was unable to maintain it, and I asked her to stay in the workhouse until I could make arrangements. On December 2 she came to see me. I asked her why she had left the workhouse when she had promised me to stay there; I think she said she wanted to try and get work—I think she mentioned Mrs. Reeves; she said she was going to Kensington to live with Mrs. Reeves as her servant, and that she was then staying at Gladesmore Road. I sent her food three times between December 9 and 16. She told me at one time that she was going to try and get some friends at Plaistow to take charge of the child. She afterwards wrote to me and said she had been to Stratford and had been unsuccessful. I saw her on December 2 and also December 9, and again on January 26. Miss Scofer assists me in my work, and I gave her instructions to see prisoner from the 9th to the 16th. I saw prisoner at the Home on January 26. She told me she bad been staying at Gladesmore Road, that she had left Kensington Workhouse on January 20, and had come to Gladesmore Road on the 21st. I asked her about the baby. She said Mrs. Reeves had sent it to a married uncle at Plaistow and she said, "Those are the people I was telling you about before." I said, "You told me that they lived at Stratford." She said, "Oh, well, it is all the same, is it not?" I asked her how she had been able to arrange it when she had been refused before. She said Mrs. Reeves arranged it. I asked her if she was sure the baby was quite well. She said, "Yes, quite well, excepting a little cold." I asked

her where he had gone. She said, "High Road, Plaistow. "She did not give the number of the house. I think I said, "I must go and lee it. "I asked her what she was going to do. She said that Mrs. Davis was going to leave her room on the following Saturday week and they were both going to Kensington to get a room there, and that she was going out to daily work.

Cross-examined. She was only refused at the Chelsea Home because she had fits—not because of any misconduct.

ADA FRANCES SCOFEER On December 10 I saw prisoner at 101, Gladesmore Road, at the request of Miss Manning, whom I assist in her charitable work. I took the prisoner some food on December 10, 12, and 14. I saw Mrs. Reeves three times—she told me she was prisoner's mother. On December 16 I took the prisoner and the baby to Mrs. Reeves, at 4, Inkermann Terrace; I got there at 2 p.m. Mrs. Reeves told me that a messenger from Dr. Barnardo's Home had been to see her, and that the baby might be taken in there. She did not mention The Haven or any other home for children.

Cross-examined. She did say that she had heard of "The Haven" from Dr. Barnardo's Home—I am sorry I forgot it. (To the Judge.) She did not tell me anything further.

Sergeant ALFRED JOHN HILL , 56, S. On December 16, 1906, at 9.35 p.m., I was called in to a restaurant in the Euston Road where I saw the prisoner with a baby; she was sitting on a chair and complained of just having had a fit. I took her to University College Hospital, where she was attended to. I then took her to Gower Street Station and paid her fare to High Street, Kensington. The doctor stated in prisoner's presence that she was suffering from hysteria, but that he could find no trace of fits.

JESSIE GRAY , spinster, clerk at the Haven Incorporated Society for Homeless Little Ones, 18, Railway Approach, London Bridge. I do not remember having seen prisoner. I remember in the week containing December 16 someone coming to see me about a child.

CAROLINE MART HAWES , secretary to the Incorporated Society for Homeless Little Ones. I with the last witness form the staff of "The Haven," at 18, Railway Approach, London Bridge, the founder being Mrs. Wallis. I do not recognise prisoner, but I think in all probability I have seen her—I think she has been at "The Haven" from the way she describes the room. The office is open from 9.30 a.m. to 5 p.m., or a little later. We never received any child from the prisoner. SOPHIA WALLIS, Rose Lea, Parkhall Road, South Croydon, founder of "The Haven. "I have never seen prisoner except at the police court, and have not received a child from her. I believe prisoner came to my office and was told to come on Friday; a person called on Wednesday, December 16, and was told to come on Friday, but she did not come.

ROSA CHILD , Sister of Mercy, attached to the Orphanage of Mercy, Randolph Gardens, Kilburn. The orphanage is in connection with the Church of England. I am known there as Sister Rosa. One of the objects of the institution is to take in young children and to reclaim the mothers. I receive all the children admitted. No child

was admitted of the name of Cleaver on January 20. On that day only one child was admitted—named Alfred Thomas, five months old whose father I know, and who was admitted after inquiries.

JANE GRAY , wife of William Gray, Ickleford Manor, near Hitchin. From time to time I have received children from the Orphanage of Mercy, Randolph Gardens, Kilburn, the last one having been received in May, 1907. I was not in London on December 16, 1908. or January 20, 1909—I have not been in London since June. I never saw the prisoner, except at the police-court.

REBECCA GRAY , wife of Walter Gray, Rickmansworth. I sometimes take children in connection with the Orphanage of Mercy, Randolph Gardens. The last I received was a boy about two years old on August 20, 1908, who is still with me. I was last in London before this trial on July 25, 1908. I have never been to London Bridge Approach—I know nothing of a charitable institution called "The Haven." I have never seen the prisoner before to-day, and have never taken any child from anyone except from the Orphanage of Mercy.

(Defence.)

ALICE CLEAVER (prisoner, on oath). I am 20 years of age and have helped Mrs. Davis, whom I call my aunt, in a laundry—I have lived with her since I was a baby. I never saw my mother to remember her till last July. I was seduced by a man who has been mentioned, and I only knew that he was married just as the baby was coming. On December 16 last I was taken with the baby to my mother at Inkermann Terrace. My stepfather knew nothing about me. Before that I had been told of a place called "The Haven" by a gentleman from Dr. Barnardo's, who came to see me at Gladesmore Road—he gave me the address of "The Haven" and wrote it down on a piece of paper—I think Mrs. Davis has it—it was left at her house. On Wednesday, December 16, I left my mother between 3.30 and four p.m. and went to the Kensington Infirmary, which is a few minutes' walk from my mother's, to inquire if I could get in with the baby. They told me I should have to stay in the parish for a night and that I could be taken in in the morning. I returned to my mother's at about five p.m. I told her I was going to "The Haven" at Railway Approach; she gave me 8d. for my fare, and I got to "The Haven" between 5.30 and six p.m. It is on the second floor. I saw Mass Hawes there and told her I had come to try to get the baby into the home. She asked me about the father of the child and I told her. She said it was past office hours as they closed at five and that the head lady had gone and would I call again on Friday. I stayed there about 15 minutes. Miss Hawes gave me a chair to sit down as she said I looked tired. Before going up into the office I saw a tall lady, aged between 26 and 30, dressed in a dark grey costume, with a black hat, and asked her where "The Haven" was. She told me where the office was and asked me if I was going to try to get the child into the home. When I came downstairs I met this lady in the road. She asked me if I had been

successful in getting the baby into the home. I said, "No it was past office hours "; that I was to call again on Friday. She asked me what I was going to do. I said I should have to go into the infirmary; I could not stay out till Friday. Then she asked me if I would like to go to a Catholic home. I said I was not a Catholic woman, but I would not mind him going so long as he could be all right. She said she was a person of the home and that she knew the sisters of the home, and asked me if I would like him to go, and said that it would be 5s.—I understood weekly; that the home was in Kilburn Park Road; that there would be a vacancy about January 20—about a fortnight after Christmas. I said I could not afford to pay much as I was not able to go out to work, and she said she would see if she could get anything lower. She said her name was Mrs. Gray at the Kilburn Park Road Catholic Home—I had it on a piece of paper, "Catholic Home, Kilburn Park Road." The piece of paper was amongst the letters I took into the infirmary. I then got to King's Cross at 7.30 p.m., going from the Monument Station with this lady. I had taken a return ticket to King's Cross from High Street, Kensington. Mrs. Gray asked me who told me of "The Haven," and I said I had heard of it from one of the gentlemen from Dr. Barnardo's Home. She asked me if any ladies were helping me. I said "Yes. I had some Church lady—Miss Manning—and a friend of hers. She said, "Are they going to get a home for the baby?" I said, "They might do, but I do not think they will now." She asked me if they were connected with the Church and I said, "Yes." She said, "Be careful not to mention this Catholic borne, because the sisters do not care for the Church ladies to call at their Catholic home—it is against the rule. So," she said, "if they ask you anything about it could you not say that it has gone to a relation of your mother's?" I promised her I would say so. She said I could see her on January 20, and if the arrangements were not made then she would see if there was a vacancy; I was to meet her on January 20 outside Charing Cross Station—there is a monument there, and if it had not been arranged, and they had not got a vacancy, then she would let me know when there would be a vacancy. I was to meet her between 11 and 12 on January 20. I left this lady in the train at King's Cross and got out at that station. (To the Judge.) I told her I was going into Kensington Infirmary and gave her my name and the address at Gladesmore Road. (To Mr. Burnie.) I got out into the Euston Road because I had taken a return ticket from King's Cross to the Monument. I broke my journey at King's Cross on the way to "The Haven," because I was going to try and see if I could get the baby into the Foundling Hospital, so I got out at King's Cross and went towards the Foundling. I did not go to the Foundling, but returned and took a return ticket from King's Cross to the Monument. When I got out at King's Cross coming back I had not any money left so I walked down Euston Road and went into this restaurant, near Portland Road, where the policeman found me, and the officer paid my fare to Kensington; and as I could not get into the infirmary that night my mother let

me sleep in her house. I did not hear from Mrs. Gray or see her before January 20. A day or two before January 20 I wrote to Mrs. Davis, enclosing a letter to my mother and mentioning the 5s. When I came out of the infirmary on January 20 the baby had a white woollen round hat, a white shawl, a cream lama frock, his top petticoat was made from a baby's head flannel, cream colour, and the top of it was made of calico. That petticoat I made at Mrs. Piatt's; it had on a bluish grey flannel petticoat also; it had on two flannel hinders and a flannel shirt. The petticoat produced is not mine. The shawl produced is mine. I took it to my mother's when she gave me the 5s. and the child's birth certificate—she had been keeping that while I was in the infirmary; she gave me 1s. also and I had 1s. 4d. for myself—that was in stamps—Mrs. Reeves sent them to me. I went to Charing Cross Station from High Street Kensington Station, arriving there at about 11.45, when I met Mrs. Gray there. She asked me if I had come to her arrangement. I said, "Yes," and asked her if there was a vacancy then. She said yes there was a vacancy. I gave her the money and the birth certificate—the 5s.—and the baby. She said I should hear later on from her—she expected it would be in a fortnight. She gave me the white shawl back. She said it was very dirty, and put the baby in a grey shawl that she was carrying on her arm. That was the shawl that I took back and gave to Mrs. Platt. Mrs. Gray said that she dared say the Church ladies would be inquiring about the baby or someone from the infirmary, and she asked me if I would ask my mother to say, should the Church ladies call, that he had been taken to my mother's brother at Plaistow. (To the Judge.) She asked if I had any relations and I said my mother had a brother at Plaistow. She said if I were to tell the Church ladies I should have the baby back again. Mrs. Gray left me with the baby at 12.15. I went back by the Inner Circle from Charing Cross to King's Cross and walked to Finsbury Park up the Caledonian Road and Seven Sisters' Road. I was going to call on Mrs. Platt at Gladesmore Road to try and stay at Mrs. Davis's room. When I got to Finsbury Park I took the electric tram to Seven Sisters' Corner, which cost a penny, and got to Mrs. Piatt's at about 2.30. I knocked three times and got no answer, so I went back down the High Road and had a cup of tea and went back to Kensington by Dalston way. I walked to Dalston Junction from the bottom of Stamford Hill. Then I took a green car to Islington Green by Ball's Pond Road and the electric car from the "Angel" to King's Cross Railway Station, over Pentonville Hill for 1/2 d., and took the train from King's Cross to High Street Kensington—I was going to see if I could see mother again. I got to Kensington between five and 5.30 p.m. I waited about to see if I could see my mother or my stepsister till a quarter past seven. I did not go up to the door because of my stepfather. I did not know whether he would be at home or not, so I waited about in the neighbourhood. It was then about eight o'clock and I went to High Street Kensington Station. I never went to Silver Street and never took a ticket from Silver Street to Dalston Junction. I did not get out at Camden Road

Station or go to Broad Street. From High Street Kensington at eight o'clock I took a ticket to King's Cross, got there at half-past eight—I wanted to try and see Mrs. Lavender, Mrs. Davis's sister, to see if she would take me in for the night and I walked to Upper Holloway, getting there at 10.45. I had walked very slowly, because I am rather lame. I did not ask to stay there because she had a party and I stayed at a house in the Junction Road, where I paid 1s. When Inspector Dyvall came to me on January 31 I did not know he was a police officer until I was in the police station. When I was put up for identification I noticed that one or two of the women put up with me had prayer-books in their hands—as if they were going to a place of worship. When Madder came in I had been upset and been crying—I had been detained some hours. I know nothing at all about any baby being thrown on the line between Broad Street and Dalston Junction. I never did it. I have not heard from Mrs. Gray since.

Cross-examined. On December 16 I left my mother's house about five p.m. the second time; it is a quarter of an hour's walk to High Street Kensington Station; I then took a return ticket to King's Cross by the Inner Circle, and got out there as I intended to apply at the Foundling Hospital. I tried to find out where it was. I walked up Gray's Inn Road a little way—that took about 20 minutes. I then returned to King's Cross, took a return ticket to the Monument Station, and walked across London' Bridge to "The Haven. "I did not ask Mrs. Gray to whom the 5s. was to be paid—that was for entrance—she said I was to write to the Catholic Home, Kilburn Park Road, and send there—and that I should hear. She said if I inquired in the infirmary she dared say that some of the girls there would know about getting into the Catholic Home; she said she was a sister there—she knew all the sisters there. When I got into the infirmary I spoke to one of the inmates there; she said she knew a home at Kilburn for children—she said it was very High Church—she did not exactly know if it was a Catholic Home. Before I went into the infirmary I addressed envelopes at my mother's to "The Sister, Catholio Home, Kilburn Park Road. "On January 20 I came out of the infirmary, went to my mother's, and stayed there till about 11, and went from High Street, Kensington, to Charing Cross, and saw the lady I had seen on December 16 (Mrs. Gray) by the monument under the archway, where the cabs are. I gave her the 5s. with the baby—she said she would send a receipt for the 5s. to 101, Gladesmore Road. I have not had any news since from her. She said I could come and see her at the home. I gave her no authority to take charge of the child—only the 5s., the birth certificate, and one or two envelopes I had addressed—one to Mrs. Reeves, my mother, and one to me at 101, Gladesmore Road. I said in my statement that I had come to 101, Gladesmore Road, between two and three p.m., on January 20, and been there ever since. I did not say I had been to Finsbury Park on the 20th. I know Silver Street is two to 2 1/2 miles from Gladesmore Road. I was not in Dalston Station that afternoon. I left South Tottenham about 3.30

or 3.45 p.m. I slept on the 20th at a wardrobe shop at the corner of Vawley Road—I do not know the name of the occupier. On January 21 I went to my mother's place in the afternoon. I said the lady had told me to say should they call from the infirmary that the baby had gone to a relation of ours. I told the same untruth to Miss Manning—she asked me the address, and I said, "High Road, Plais tow. "I stated the same thing to Dyvall—that was before I knew he was a police officer, and before I knew he had gone to Inkermann Terrace. (To the Judge.) If Mrs. Gray had not taken the baby on January 20 I should have had to go back to the Kensington Infirmary. I have not seen the father of my child since August 12, 1908. I have not tried to find him. He lives somewhere in Helloway. On January 20 I went to Holloway—up the Holloway Road. I wrote to him once while in the infirmary for money and got no answer. I said in my statement to Dyvall that Mrs. Gray had a child of six with her—that is true. She went by the Inner Tube or the Inner Circle—I think she said she had come from Baker Street.

Mrs. DAVIS , recalled. Prisoner left a piece of paper with "18, Railway Approach" on it. I will bring it with any other papers that I can find to-morrow morning.

THOMAS DYVALL , recalled. I was present at the identification of the prisoner by Madder. The women among whom the prisoner was placed were ordinary passers-by of a similar description to the prisoner—I noticed no prayer-books—some of them were working girls. I have had 27 years' experience, and consider that the identification was carefully arranged and properly conducted. Madder was called in, he walked quietly along and touched the prisoner, who smiled at him. As to the prisoner crying, she was under the charge of the matron the whole day. I sent out for meat and vegetables for her dinner, and she ate it, and also her tea, which she took. She was kept in comfort by a fire in my office.

ALIOS GERTRUDE PLATT , recalled. The baby had two petticoats. One had a little scolloping round it, was of cream colour, the top part being calico. The one she was making was the other petticoat. This is the petticoat produced.

(Tuesday, March 9.)

Mrs. DAVIS, recalled. I produce paper bearing the address of "The Haven, 18, Railway Approach," also one containing the address of Mrs. Reynolds—I do not know whose writing they are—also paper, "St. Augustine's Church, Kilburn Park Road," in pencil.

ALICE CLEAVER (prisoner, on oath), recalled. The pencilled slip of paper produced was given me by Mrs. Gray on December 16. I had it with me when in the infirmary. I do not know anything about St. Augustine's Church, Kilburn—I do not know Kilburn. (To the Judge.) I am quite sure this pencilled memorandum was not written by a girl in the infirmary.

JOHN O'ROURKE , Catholic priest, Quex Road, Kilburn. I have lived in Kilburn on and off since 1892. There has been no Catholic

Home in Kilburn Park Road to my knowledge. There was a home established by Miss Boyd in Percy Road, Kiiburn, in connection with the Church of England. Miss Boyd subsequently joined the Catholic Church and the Home became a Catholic Orphanage. Miss Boyd has subsequently died, and the Home was nominally carried on—I think there are three or four children there. Since Miss Boyd died the Home has fallen into litigation, and no children have been taken in. Miss Bartlett is the superintendent. We have a Catholic Home for reclaiming women, who are taken in with their children—there is one establishment in Carlton Vale and another in Victoria Road—they are not orphanages.

WINIFRED MARY BARTLETT , secretary to Miss Boyd's Catholic Orphanage, Percy Road, Kilburn. I have been secretary since April 10, 1906. Miss Boyd died on April 3, 1906. No children have been admitted to the Home since. No lady named Gray is connected with the Home.

WILLIAM TAYLOR ATKINSON , Clerk in Holy Orders, attached to St. Augustine's Church, Kilburn. There is no orphanage attached to my church. The Orphanage of Mercy, in Kilburn Park Road, is carried on by the Kilburn Sisters. There is no Mrs. Gray working in connection with St. Augustine's Church.

JOHN BERTRAM D'ARCY , Clerk in Holy Orders, subwarden of St. Peter's Sisterhood. There is no orphanage in connection with St. Peter's Sisterhood, which is in Mortimer Road, St. Augustine's parish. Children are admitted to the Sisterhood. There is none of the name of Cleaver; no children are there under two years old. There was no admission on January 20. On the 19th there were. admissions, but not of children. All admissions are preceded by various inquiries.

Verdict, " Guilty; but, knowing that the prisoner was deserted and neglected by the man who had wronged her, and had been forced into utter distraction, we very very strongly recommend her to mercy."

Sentence of Death was passed, Mr. Justice Phillimore stating that the recommendation would be considered.

BEFORE THE RECORDER.

(Monday, March 8.)

Reference Number: t19090302-52

VICKERY, Charles Henry ; having been entrusted with the sum of £6 for and on account of the members of the Princess of Wales Sick Benefit Society, fraudulently converting the same to his own use and benefit.

Mr. Sydney Williams prosecuted; Mr. M. Morgan defended.

FRANK BECKER , 66, Seven Sisters Road. I was one of the trustees of the Princess of Wales Sick and Benefit Fund. I have been a member of it four years and a trustee for two years. Prisoner was secretary until December 22 last year. At the last general meeting, which was held on that date, a question was asked as to where the

reserve fund was. The reserve fund amounted to £6. The money of the society is collected at the rate of 7d. per week, and a member whose subscriptions are four weeks in arrear is fined 1d. There is also an entrance fee. At the end of the year the money is shared out The number of members is 36. Any working man under the age of 45 can join. In the event of a member being ill he receives 10s. a week. The reserve fund was of old standing and was in the custody of the secretary. It originated about ten years ago, before I belonged to the club. I believe the club has been in existence for 14 years. It was no part of my duty as trustee to see what was done with the reserve fund. The secretary had absolute control of the £6. Nobody took the trouble to ascertain where it was or what was done with it. Two auditors were appointed every year, whose duty it was to draw up balance-sheets. At the end of 1908 the secretary was supposed to have in hand £24 8s. 11d., after paying members their sick allowance. Then there was paid out to members £24 6s., leaving a credit balance of 2s. 11d. The printed balance-sheet produced for the year 1907 was drawn up by prisoner. It purports to have been audited by Messrs. Miller and Myford, the duly appointed auditors, and contains the item "Cash in reserve fund, £6. "I suppose it would be the duty of the secretary to produce the £6 for the inspection of the auditors. When prisoner was asked by William James Miller, one of the auditors, where the reserve fund was he said, "I hold it. "Of course if all the money was shared out with the exception of the 2s. 11d., a poor sick man would not get anything unless there was something in reserve. The money of the society was kepi in the Penny Bank. On December 22 there is the following entry in the minute book: "Proposed by Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Miller, that the reserve fund be banked; carried." Defendant then resigned. He was proposed again as secretary, but refused to act. Mr. Walter Miller was elected secretary, and was directed to write to the accused asking him to hand over the reserve fund, and the following reply was received: "January 1, 1909.—Mr. Miller.—Sir,—In answer to yours, in reference to the reserve fund, I must inform you I have not got it either in my possession or in the bank. I do not know where it is, as I have not seen it for over six years.—I am, yours, C. H. Vickery. "The secretary has always held the reserve fund since I have been a member of the club.

Cross-examined. This is, an unregistered society. There is nothing about a reserve fund in the book of rules.

Mr. Morgan. My point will be that the £6 was done away with eight or nine years ago.

The Recorder. The prosecution have to prove that he was ever entrusted with it.

Cross-examination continued. I never saw the £6 from start to finish. If the £6 did exist I do not think it was my duty as trustee to see that it was in proper and safe keeping. The prosecution was authorised by the committee. I was advised to go to the police court and ask for a summons, before which I had to swear an information. I reported to the committee what I had done, but no entry

was made in the minute book. I had previously been to a firm of solicitors, Messrs. Elliott and Crawley, of Gray's Inn, and instructed them to write to prisoner for the money. When prisoner left the society a number of members went with him and they started a new club. I do not know that the senior members of the club objected to prisoner being troubled with regard to the reserve fund. It is not true that the reserve fund was entered in the accounts with the view of getting new members, to inspire confidence.

Re-examined. In the balance-sheet of 1906 there is a reference to the reserve fund of £6. That balance-sheet was certified by the auditors, W. J. Miller and T. W. Eastlake. Each member would have a copy of the balance-sheet.

The Foreman. Is it possible for us to have the evidence of the person who handed over this money to the secretary? That would settle the matter.

The Recorder. I hope so, but at present we have not got to that stage.

WALTER JACKSON MILLER . I have been auditor of the Princess of Wales Sick and Benefit Society since 1906. The manuscript balance-sheet of 1908 is signed as correct by me. No money was ever produced at the audit; the auditors only guaranteed the arithmetic part of it. The balance-sheet of 1907 was printed a week or two after the audit. I cannot say whether the item "Cash in reserve, £6" was on the draft balance-sheet. We always understood that the secretary had got the £6. Perhaps we were rather lax in not seeing that he had it. The item of £6 also appears in the 1906 printed balance-sheet. After the sharing out, if a member was taken ill he would not be able to get any benefit unless there was the £6, until funds had again accumulated. We always believed the £6 was there. Prisoner told us he had used some of it at the commencement of the year for the purpose of paying sick members. It was started some ten or 11 years ago by members paying 3d. per quarter each, and when the amount reached £6 it was stopped and no more money was paid towards it. Nobody ever ascertained whether the fund was in existence or not. I suggested once that it should be placed in the bank, but there was some objection to the money being banked in the name of a trustee as the members changed year by year. I suggested to the secretary some years ago that tie money should be banked, but he said it would be inconvenient, and nothing was done.

Cross-examined. I do not recollect whether I was at the annual meeting in 1901; probably I was, I do not remember that the fund, to be then shared out was smaller than usual. I do not know whether the old minute books are in existence.

CHARLES ROBERT IZZARD , Church Street, Edgware Road. On December 22 last I was in the chair at the club meeting. Prisoner then asked about the reserve fund said, "I hold it; it is in my possession. "The sum of £6 was mentioned. It appears by the minute bock that the balance-sheet was passed, and that Mr. Miller was appointed secretary for the year 1909, and Mr. Smith and Mr. Becker were appointed trustees. There was no resolution about the reserve

fund. The minute of the committee meeting, when it was resolved to take legal proceedings is dated January 18. The minutes were read over and signed by me. A further meeting was held on February 8, at which I was not present.

Cross-examined. I know that prisoner has been secretary for 14 years. I seriously believed there was a reserve fund. Beyond the fact that it appeared on the balance-sheet for years previously, I made no further inquiry. I cannot say whether it would be the duty of the trustees to see about the reserve fund. I was elected chairman soon after I joined, and have remained in that position. I am not aware that a majority of members objected to proceedings being taken against prisoner. I do not know that 20 members left with prisoner in December. I was surprised at him leaving, because we had asked him to continue in his official position.

WILLIAM JOHN MILLER . At the meeting of December 22 I asked where the reserve fund was. He replied, "I hold it. It is in my possession. How would the club get on from the end of the year to the beginning of the next year if I never held it to pay sick members?" There was nothing about the reserve fund on the balance-sheet. I was satisfied, and asked no further questions.

Cross-examined. I had no occasion to ask about the reserve fund before, tats I had always seen it on the balance-sheet. I understood the reserve fund was to be called on in case of need.

Detective GEORGE RUMBOLD , X. I served prisoner with a summons on February 14, and told him the particulars of it. He said, "I know all about it."

The Recorder said he was not sure there was any criminal offence here, but prisoner had better be called.

(Defence.)

CHARLES HENRY VICKERY (prisoner on oath). I am a carman, and live at 31, Goldeney Road, Paddington. I was secretary of the club from its commencement, being re-elected every year. I contributed like everybody else. As secretary I had to receive the entrance fees and subscriptions. Not a single word was said to me about my conduct during the whole time I was secretary. I have never been in trouble before. The reserve fund came into existence in 1899. Members paid 1s. per quarter, but it never reached £6. We collected £2 8s. for two years, £4 16s. in all. It was suggested by Mr. Miller that we should put £6 in the balance-sheet, as we were moving from one house to another, to induce new members to join. In 1901 the amount to be shared out was very small, something like 16s. or 17s. each, and it was suggested that members should receive 1s. back out of the reserve. There were then 48 members. That was done, and that left 48s. in my hands. As to the expenditure of the balance, the club always closed in the second week in December, and did not reopen till the first week in January. I always had three weeks in which to pay out to sick members. After the sharing out there never was any balance left, or only a very small one, and therefore I was compelled to use what was left of the reserve fund. The reserve fund

has been exhausted for several years. When I said at the meeting on December 22, "I hold the reserve fund," I meant the balance of 2s. 11d. Last year the society owed me money as appears by the book, "Deficiency from last quarter, 3s. 8d., leaving the deficiency for the half year 19s." That is money that was due to me. The 48s. remaining from the reserve fund had been expended seven years ago, and the fund was never reimbursed when the money came in. I received the 19s. in the next quarter as the members paid it, and the club became a little stronger. There never was any reserve fond after 1902, but the £6 was put in the balance-sheet to entice members to join.

The Recorder. In other words, it was a gross fraud; that is what you mean to say?

Witness. Yes, by members' suggestions. The old members knew that the reserve fund was exhausted; the new ones did not. I had never been asked for it for seven or eight years. With the exception of Miller, none of the witnesses have been members for more than seven or eight years.

Cross-examined. I admit that the reserve fund of £6 was put in the balance-sheet fraudulently, but it was at the members' suggestion. When I paid out the £2 8s. I entered it in the book, but that has been destroyed years ago.

The Recorder asked Mr. Williams if he really thought this was a case in which he ought to ask the jury to convict of a criminal offence. It was a most unsatisfactory case, but in his opinion it would be highly dangerous to convict. It might be that prisoner was civilly liable, in which case the matter could be tried in the County Court.

Mr. Williams accepted his Lordship's suggestion.

The Recorder expressed the opinion that the case should have gone to the County Court. A jury ought not to convict of crime except on the clearest possible evidence, and this case was anything but clear.

Verdict, Not guilty.

Reference Number: t19090302-53

CRICKMORE, Alfred (27, coster), and SAVAGE, Thomas (25, labourer); Savage, robbery with violence upon Minnie Mack, and stealing one glove, one purse, and one half-sovereign, her goods and moneys; both demanding with menaces from Samuel Devanish the sum of 1s., with intent to steal the same; both assaulting and beating the said Samuel Devanish.

The charge of assault upon Minnie Mack was first tried.

Mr. Fox Davies prosecuted.

SAMUEL DEVANISH , pedlar, 23, Caledonian Crescent. On February 25, about one o'clock at night, I was in Pentonville Road, near King's Cross Station, in company with Mabel Young. Crickmore came up to me. He was in company with Savage and three other men. Crickmore asked me to give him 1s. I said I have no shilling for you. He said, "I will make you give me 1s. to buy me some coffee or pay for my kip "(lodging). I then turned away from him. When I got to the corner to go to Caledonian Road prisoner Savage

knocked me down, and after I was on the ground was continually kicking me. After he left off I went across the road to where there was a heap of stones and picked up two, one in each hand, and ran after them. They all five ran away. After I had thrown the last stone they started at me again, so I took my knife out of my pocket and opened it, hut I did not use it on anybody. I met the woman Mack, and as I passed her she told me to get out of the way. Prissoners were not near enough to hear. As I was lying on the ground I saw the short prisoner (Savage) strike her. I had never seen her before. She screamed out, "Police! police! police!" Savage then said, "I will give you police." A week afterwards I identified prisoners at the police station. I am certain they are the two men I saw that night. I had previously known Savage by sight, and the night before I was assaulted had asked him for a match.

Crickmore denied asking witness for 1s. for his "kip," and stated that he had never been in a lodging-house in his life.

MABEL YOUNG , 23, Caledonian Crescent. On the night of February 20 I was with last witness between Caledonian Road and York Road. I saw prisoners, Crickmore and Savage, with three other men. I had seen Savage twice before. He said to Devanish, "Halloa, darkey, how are you getting on?" or some words to that effect. Devanish replied, "I have no say to you." Crickmore was standing by, and then asked Devanish for 1s. I told Crickmore that Devanish had no money to give him, and what money he had he wanted for me. Savage then said to one of the other men, "Silence her; dot her one and keep her quiet." I then said to Devanish, "Wait here, I am going somewhere." Of course, I did not say I was going for a policeman, but that was what I intended to do. I had gone a little way along King's Cross Road when I heard a scream. I looked round and saw Devanish holding his stomach. The five men were running away. I said to him, "What is the matter?" He said they had kicked him.

To Crickmore. I am not mistaken in saying you asked for 1s.

MINNIE MACK , charwoman, 11, Risinghill Street, Pentonville Road. On February 20, about 12.45 a.m., I was going along Pentonville Road, having been to see some friends off to Hampstead Heath, when I saw prisoners arguing the point with a black man (Devanish). I afterwards saw Savage kick him. When I had gone as far as Cumming Street Savage asked me where I was going to. I said, "Only to Risinghill Street." He said, "Have you got any money?" I said, "No." He said, "Oh! yes, you have," and took something out of his pocket and cut me on the head with it. It looked like a penknife. I am still suffering from the injury. After he struck me I put my money down my neck. I had a half a sovereign inside a small purse inside a white cotton glove. Savage put his hand down my neck and took it away from me. I did not notice Crickmore at the moment, and do not think he had anything to do with my business. He was at the corner of Collier Street. I could not say exactly how far off. When I called "Police" Savage said, "You call 'copper' on me; I will give you 'copper.' "Then he gave me

a punch in the eye and said, "You have asked far all you have got." I was knocked down and lost my hat and my blouse was torn. Savage ran away. I ran up Pentonville Hill calling out, "Police. "Savage followed me and gave me another punch in the face and knocked a tooth out. This was at the corner where the church is. I complained to a policeman that I had been assaulted and robbed. I afterwards went to the police station and made a statement. On the following Monday I identified Savage and Crickmore at the police station, have no doubt as to their being the two men.

Police-constable FREDERICK KNAPPETT , 473 G. On the morning of February 20 I saw prisoners about 12 o'clock proceeding down Pentonville Hill towards King's Cross with three other men. About one o'clock I saw four of the men at the corner of Rodney Street. I heard a woman scream, and I saw the men, including the two prisoners, running down Weston Street. Running down Pentonville Hill I met the prosecutrix, Mack, who made a statement to me. I continued the chase and saw the two prisoners with two other men standing in a group in the middle of Weston Street. Immediately they saw me they ran away again. At the junction of Weston Street with King's Cross Road they went in different directions. I blew my whistle and continued to chase Savage, who was met in Wicklow Street by another constable. Savage then turned and started walking towards me. I stopped him and took him into custody on the charge of robbing and stabbing a woman in Pentonville Road. He said, "Thank you for the compliment." I then took him to the station. I was present when prisoners were identified on February 26. They were identified without any hesitation at all.

Police-constable THOMAS NEWSTEAD , 225 G. On the morning of February 20 I was in Pentonville Road when I heard a woman's voice shrieking "Police." Proceeding in the direction of the sound I saw prosecutrix at the corner of Cumming Street bleeding from a cut over the left eye. In consequence of what she said I went down Penton Place, where I saw Crickmore running. I came up with him and said, "What are you running for?" he said, "I do not know; I was going home." I said, "I shall arrest you on suspicion of being concerned in assaulting and robbing a woman in Pentonville Road." He said, "I know nothing about it." On the way to the station he said, "I was running away from a black man with a knife. "I was present at the identification, which was made without any hesitation.

Sergeant GARRARD , G Division, stated that when the charge was read to prisoners at the station, Savage said, "This is a put up job by you." Each of the three witnesses identified prisoners without any hesitation whatever.

CHARLES THOMPSON BISHOP , acting divisional surgeon. I examined Minnie Mack on February 21 about 36 hours after the time of the injury. I found her to be suffering from a contused wound on the left eyebrow. There was an abrasion below the left eye and a very severe contusion affecting the upper and lower lids upon the left side, the left temple, and the left cheek as far down as the teeth. The lids were so swollen that it was impossible to separate them and examine

the eye. The greater part of the injuries I should say had been caused by the fist, but the cut on the brow had been caused by something sharp, I should say a penknife. One of the teeth of the upper jaw was broken.

Crickmore before the magistrates denied having asked Devanish for a shilling and having assaulted him. Savage admitted the assault on the black man, but said he knew nothing about the woman who was supposed to have been robbed.

(Defence.)

Prisoners called DANIEL THORPE , printer, GEORGE BINGHAM , motor engineer, and SIDNEY KEELING , labourer, the three men in whose company they were on the night in question. The witnesses stated that Savage struck the black man when he drew his knife, but said they did not see the assault on the woman Mack. Crickmore was standing by at the time, but took no part in the assault.

Verdict. Savage, guilty of assaulting Minnie Mack; Crickmore not guilty.

(Tuesday, March 9.)

Crickmore and Savage were now tried for the assault upon Samuel Devanish, the evidence of Devanish, Mabel Young, Minnie Mack, Police-constable Knappett, Police-constable Newstead, and Sergeant Garrard being only a repetition of that given in the previous case. The witnesses Thorpe, Bingham, and Keeling were again called for the defence.

Verdict. Both prisoners guilty. Both have been previously convicted.

Sentences. Savage, 18 months' hard labour; Crickmore (who did not appear to have used any actual violence), seven days' imprisonment, entitling him to immediate discharge.

BEFORE MR.JUSTICE PHILLIMORE.

(Tuesday, March 9.)

Reference Number: t19090302-54

DAVIS, Frederick Charles (45, no occupation), RIDLEY, Frank (46, solicitor), and DAVIS, Thomas James (47, dispenser); F.C. Davis and T. J. Davis conspiring together to prevent and defeat the due course of law and justice; all forging and uttering certain deeds purporting to be indentures of settlement respecting certain property of him the said F. C. Davis, with intent to defraud.

Mr. Muir, Mr. Travers Humphreys, and Mr. GrahamCampbell prosecuted; Mr. G. W. H. Jones, Mr. G. St. John McDonald, and Mr. Ernest Walsh defended F. C. Davis; Mr. H. T. Kemp, K.C., and Mr. P. B. Morle defended Ridley; Mr. F. E. Smith, K.C., M.P., and Mr. Eustace Fulton defended T. J. Davis.

Counsel for the prosecution opened the case.

(Wednesday, March 10.)

In the course of the opening speech Mr. Kemp (for Ridley), and Mr. G. W. H. Jones (for F. C. Davis) admitted that the indentures of settlement were, in fact, executed in 1907 and 1908 and not on the dates they purport to bear.

EDWARD PARKE , examiner in the Official Receiver's Department, Bankruptcy Court. I produce file in the bankruptcy of F. C. Davis, described as builder, 90, Cannon Street, City, living at 292, Halle Road, Manor Park. The bankruptcy notice is dated November 11, 1907, filed November 29, 1907, the petitioning creditor being the Mayor, etc., of the Borough of Bromley. Receiving order was made January 28, 1908. The statement of affairs is filed February 24, 1908: Unsecured creditor, £292 12s. 11d.; assets, nil. Schedule A shows the unsecured creditor as the Mayor, etc., of Bromley for costs of abortive action at law contracted October, 1907. Household property at Broadstairs is returned as "Nil—bill of sale for £150; no value beyond. "Life policies, "Nil—under a deed of settlement made in 1901. "Books are stated to be lost in a fire in November last. The amended statement of affairs is sworn October 21 and filed October 27, 1908. At the meeting of creditors on March 31 and April 7, a composition of 7s. 6d. in the £ was submitted and refused. In the amended statement of affairs the creditors amount to £1,094 12s.; assets, nil—the creditors being "the Bromley Corporation, £319; and the Woolwich Equitable Building Society, £346 16s. 1d. for balance due on mortgage by Forshaw and £406 6s. 7d. lawyers' costs in action, and £21 9s. 4d. ditto in appeal, less deposit by me." Schedule D shows creditors fully secured £3,000, being Temperanc Building Society, £2,000, contracted in 1906, advanced on mortgage of 89, 91, 93, and 95, Manor Road, Bromley; and the London and County Bank, Bromley, £1,000, guarantee for advance to T. J. Davis on security of "Rosslands," Gordon Road, Bromley—the value of the corpus being £5,800. There is a note, "No surplus from securities is brought into the statement as so far as regards No. 1, the property belongs to T. J. Davis, surviving trustee of an indenture of settlement dated September 19, 1901. So far as regards No. 2, the property belongs to the said T. J. Davis, surviving trustee of an indenture of settlement of July 1, 1905. The deficiency account filed October 7, 1908, shows on January 28, 1905, an excess of assets over liabilities of £29,517 11s. 10d. It sets out on the liabilities side, house expenses, £1,200; cost of action with the Corporation of Bromley, £292 12s. 1d.; and losses, as per attached account, £31,855 13s. 7d.; among the items being value of the cottage at Cheam settled on my children, July 21, 1905, £600; leaseholds, Bromley, settled on my children, £1,200. "The preliminary examination of the debtor was taken February 4, 1908, and May, 22, 1908, and following dates.(Passages from the same were read.)

Cross-examined by Mr. Jones. F. C. Davis has dealt in a good many properties according to the account he furnished me; he has been in a considerable way of business. At his private examination I should not have said he was in extremely bad health. There were two or three adjournments on that account. I believe there was a certificate from Sir Thomas Barlow. I do not know if the offer of 7s. 6d. in the was the result of an intimation from someone connected with the Bromley County Council.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kemp. The Bromley Corporation were the petitioners in the bankruptcy—they and the Woolwich Building Society being the only unsecured creditors; there are two small claims which have been since paid.

SAMUEL GEORGE FLAXMAN , managing clerk to Hores, Pattison and Bathurst, 52, Lincoln's Inn Fields: My firm hold the following deeds on behalf of T. J. Davis: Exhibit 1—Settlement purporting to be made by F. C. Davis, witnessed by Frank Ridley, conveying to T. J. Davis and J. Nesbit property in London Road, Bromley, and a policy of insurance dated December 19, 1901; Exhibit 2—Settlement by F. C. Davis, witnessed by A. Hilt, to T. J. Davis and J. Nesbit, of property in Burnt Ash Lane, dated July 2, 1902; Exhibit 3—Settlement by F. C. Davis to T. J. Davis and J. Nesbit, in trust for the children of F.C. Davis, of land near Burnt Ash Lane and Hill View Cottages, dated December 18, 1902, the signature of F. C. Davis being witnessed by Ridley; Exhibit 4—Dated June 20, 1903, settlement by the same parties of land near Burnt Ash Lane, eight nouses and one shop in trust for the children of F. C. Davis; Exhibit 5—Similar deed dated July 21, 1903, conveying land and houses in Hilldrop Road; Exhibit 6—Similar deed of July 27, 1905, settling houses 1 to 14, Hill View Cottages, and 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road; Exhibit 7, dated July 1, 1905—Similar deed conveying property in Mulgrave Road, Cheam; Exhibit 8—Dated July 21, 1905, similar deed settling "Rosslands,' Gordon Road, Bromley; Exhibit 9—Similar settlement of September 6, 1905, of houses 38 to 48, Freelands Road, Bromley. I received all those documents on August 11, 1908, from Messrs. Webb and Co., with the exception of Exhibit 2, which I believe came from the bank. I produce also Exhibit 59, bill of sale of May 22, 1907, between F.C. Davis and T. J. Davis, conveying in conversion of £150 household property at Broadstairs. It is witnessed by Mr. Bagot Hart, solicitor.

Cross-examined by Mr. F. E. Smith. My firm are solicitors for T. J. Davis. The deeds alleged not to be genuine came to as separately from the solicitors. T. J. Davis consulted us as to his position after what had happened in the bankruptcy of F. C. Davis. We advised him that it was necessary he should have these deeds so that we could tell him exactly what his position was. We communicated with Webb and Co., who held them as solicitors for F.C. Davis. After two or three appointments we succeeded in getting hold of them. They all came from Webb and Co. with the exception of Exhibit 2.

Re-examined. T. J. Davis consulted us in July or August, 1908—two or three days after T. J. Davis's private examination.

ROBERT HARVEY WEBB , of G. and W. Webb, 3, Devonshire. Square solicitors. We received Exhibits 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 on instruction received at a joint interview with F. C. and T. J. Davis on July 27 or 28, '08—my senior partner attended the interview and I believe one of our clerks received the deeds. I have had Exhibit 5 in my possession. Exhibits 10, 11 and 12 were in our possession and were produced by me at the police court.

Cross-examined by Mr. Jones. I have known F. C. Davis 10 or more years as a respectable and honest man. I have latterly noticed he is subject to great mental excitability.

WILLIAM JERMYN HAMPSON , solicitor, Deputy Town Clerk for the Corporation of Bromley, Kent. An action was brought by F.C. Davis against the Corporation of Bromley, and judgment given for the defendants on May 13, 1907, on the ground that there was no case to go to the jury. Costs, amounting to £291 13s. 6d., taxed July 31, 1907. The plaintiff appealed, lost, and was ordered to pay £111 costs less £100 deposited by him. On November 11, 1907, I served bankruptcy notice on F. C. Davis, the Corporation of Bromley being the unsecured creditor. I think on October 3, 1908, I received payment of the debt—it was on one of the days the debtor was up for public examination.

Cross-examined by Mr. Jones. There was an offer made of the money the day before payment. Some months before that T.J. Davis signed an undertaking to pay our debt and that of the Woolwich Building Society. F. C. Davis has brought a great number of actions against the Bromley Corporation. He was constantly writing letters of complaint and threatening letters to me personally. The action in 1906 was for damages caused by the refusal of the corporation to pass certain plans not in accordance with the byelaws. It was postponed on may occasions—once on account of the state of his health. I sent Dr. Toogood, medical officer of Lewisham Infirmary, to examine him; he stated on affidavit that F. C. Davis was not fit to plead then—I do not remember his saying, "And never would be."

Cross-examined by Mr. Kemp. I only had a copy of T. J. Davis' undertaking. I never saw the original.(Same read, dated July 27, 1908, undertaking to pay debts and taxed costs; and cost of bankruptcy between solicitor and client.) In the action against the Bromley Corporation, Mr. Gregory was solicitor for F. C. Davis.

Re-examined. No payment was made until October 3, 1908.

JOHN BUTLER , solicitors' clerk. I have known F. C. Davis 12 years. At the end of January, 1908, I saw him at 90, Cannon Street. He asked me if I did law writing, showed me a "bookway" parchment deed, and asked if I could make the engrossment of a parchment deed. I said if he wanted a deed engrossed the draft must be prepared by a solicitor. He said, "I will get you the draft if you can come to-morrow at two p.m. I called the next day and he gave me two draft deeds drawn in the usual way on draft paper and two sheets of

stamped foolscap. The two drafts are Exhibits 14 and 15. He told me to engross them on the two stamped sheets, and forward them to Broadstairs. I noticed plans were referred to, but were not set out on the drafts. I engrossed the deeds, leaving a space for the plans. They are Exhibits 5 and 6. The year is entered in my writing; the day and the month in another hand. Te engrossments were not signed. I sent them to Broadstairs by the Saturday's post. The following week I received a note asking me to call on Tuesday at 90, Cannon Street, which I did. F.C. Davis then produced to me two skins of parchment. I said I could not engross anything without a draft. He said he would go and fetch the draft from his solicitor. We went to a restaurant in Aldgate, where I waited about 10 minutes while he went and returned with two drafts, Exhibits 16 and 17. I took them away, engrossed them on the two skins, and took them to his office. They are Exhibits 1 and 9. That was the first week in February. I told him I had not put the seals on them, it being usual to put the seals on in the solicitor's office. He said, "You had better take them back and put the seals on. Send them to my solicitor, Frank Ridley, 4 and 5, Aldgate. "I put the seals on and sent them there by post to Ridley. I filled in the year, but not the day or the month. With that exception those two documents are in my writing. F. C. Davis at that interview said, "What do I owe you?"I handed him a little slip of paper produced showing an account of £1 13s., less 10s. received; and he gave me crossed cheque for £1 3s., which I cashed at the Marquess of Salisbury public-house, Balls Pond Road.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kemp. There was the date of the year on drafts Exhibits 14 and 15, and also on Exhibits 16 and 17.(Deeds examined by the Jury.) I posted Exhibits 1 and 9 to Ridley at the Kingsland P.O.; I handed all the drafts back to F.C, Davis.

HERMANN AVERY , licensee, Marquess of Salisbury. Early in February, 1908, I cashed cheque of 22s., or 23s. for the last witness, whom I know as a customer.

HENRY RICHARD FOWLER BAXTER , clerk, London and County Bank, Kingsland. The last witness paid into his account at my bank on February 5, 1908, various cheques amounting to £17 13s., which included a cheque for £1 3s., drawn on the London and County Bank, Bromley.

ALFRED WRIGHT , manager, London and County Bank, Bromley. The Bickley Land Company, Limited, have an account at my bank; F.C. Davis had authority to draw cheques. On February 7, 1908, there is debited a cheque in the name of (Butler for £1 3s.F.C. Davis had no account at that time. He had one, which was closed in 1907, and from time to time he borrowed money by way of overdraft on security. On November 11, 1905, and July 28, 1906, there were loans amounting to £1,600, which were afterwards repaid. The amount was secured by deeds for freehold ground rent in Freelands Road, Bromley, property in London Road, and other property in Bromley. T. J. Davis had also an account at my bank. I produce loan account showing that on December 15, 1908, he borrowed £175; on October 25, 1907, a loan of £1,000 guaranteed by F. C. Davis, and secured

on "Rosslands." On May 22, 1907, there is a credit in T. J. Davis' account of £150, "H.O." (Head Office), "per Simpson." The slip produced referring to that credit is in F. C. Davis' writing. On the other side there is a debit of £150 by cheque produced in favour of and endorsed by F. C. Davis. I do not know who the Simpson was.

Cross-examined by Mr. McDonald. I have known F. C. Davis personally about 16 years. He had an account in my bank for 20 years until it was closed. He has had many transactions, some amounting to £2,000 or £3,000. So far as the bank was concerned his character was good; he has always paid his overdraft punctually. None of his cheques have been returned during the past 16 years.

Cross-examined by Mr. Fulton. Both the guarantee and the charge for the £1,000 were by F. C. Davis—he had no account in June, 1907. I have known Bromley upwards of 40 years. I have been manager of the bank there for 16 years and had previously been a junior clerk at that branch. I have known T. J. Davis a great many years—he has been a customer 13 years. He bears the reputation of an honourable and upright man and has been connected with church work for many years.

THEODORE MERLEY STANCOMBE , manager, Martin's Bank, High Street, Bromley. F. C. Davis had an account at my bank, and from time to time borrowed money on the security of real property. I produce certified extract from the loan ledger and from the register of securities. We had no information from F. C. Davis of any settlement affecting his properties. On November 1, 1902, he had a loan on property in High Road, Bromley. On January 15, 1903, there is a loan, the security for which is not shown. On February 25, 1906, a loan on deeds relating to houses in Gordon Road and Rosslyn House—there is no notice of any settlement affecting them. October 27, 1905, loan on Nos. 1 to 14, Hill View Cottages. Letter of November 25, 1905, is written by me agreeing to an advance of £2,500 on Bromley property, providing the security is in order. At that time I had no notice of a settlement on that property. I produce copy account with my bank of the Bickley Land Company showing on May 22, 1907, cheque of £150 which was paid to the London and County Bank; £150 is credited to F. C. Davis by cheque of T.J. Davis (produced), which purports to be endorsed by F. C. Davis.

Cross-examined by Mr. McDonald. F. C. Davis has repaid all advances made by us. None of his cheques have been returned.

ALFRED WRIGHT , recalled. Cross-examined by Mr. F. E. Smith. In the transaction of £1,000, it was reported to me by my clerk who attended to the matter, that T. J. Davis attended merely as a messenger for his brother, F. C. Davis.

Mr. McDonald objected to the statement as affecting F. C. Davis.

Held that, as hearsay evidence, it must be ruled out if objected to.

WILLIAM BOWLES , shorthand clerk to Webb and Co., 3, Devonshire Square, solicitors. I produce press copy letter book containing letter of July 28, 1908, to Ridley, which I wrote and sent by Latham with instructions to await an answer. He brought back a bundle of deeds, of which I made list (produced).(Same read, being Exhibits 1 and 3 to 12.)

Cross-examined by Mr. Kemp. I received the deeds on the instructions of my principals—I do not know who instructed them. I was present at a part of one day at the private examination of T.J. Davis. I do not know if an application was made for adjournment, as an arrangement was being made to pay the creditors.

FRANK LATHAM , office boy to Webb and Co. On July 28, 1908, I received deeds from the office of Ridley, which I handed to the last witness.

JAMES FORESTER PARKE , clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies. I produce file of Bickley Land Company, Limited, registered September 7, 1906. Among the signatories are F.C. Davis, M. Hibbert, John Fenton, and Frank Ridley. The capital is £2,000 in £1 shares; first directors, F. C. Davis and E.M. Davis. On October 5, 1908, F. C. Davis resigned and the four new directors were Emma Mabel Davis, Frank Ridley, Montagu Hibbert, and John Fenton. The last return of shareholders is dated January 8, 1908. E. M. Davis holds 1,500 shares, J. Fenton 1, S. M. Davis 150, F.C. Davis 1, Frank Ridley I.F.C. Davis signed as "secretary" on September 29, 1908. The offices are 90, Cannon Street. There is a mortgage registered on September 25, 1908, for £1,250 on freehold ground rents, the mortgagee being Charles Turner, Cricklewood.

Cross-examined. There is no separate return showing a change in the directors, but the last annual return of January 5, 1909, shows only two directors, F. C. Davis and Emily M. Davis. I have no notice of the resignation of directorship by Ridley on September 30, 1908.

HENRY NORMAN BLISS , member of Edell and Co., 4, King Street, Cheapside, solicitors. My firm arranged mortgage from the Bickley Land Company to our client, Charles Turner, of Cricklewood. Cheque (produced) £1,200 19s. 6d., signed by Edell and Gordon, is my firm's cheque. Mr. Gordon retired from the firm at the end of 1908, and I took his place. The cheque is endorsed by F. C. Davis. It was handed over and duly exchanged for the mortgage on September 25, 1908.

CHARLES EDWARD MACE , managing clerk to Edell and Co., solicitors, formerly Edell and Gordon. I attended at the public examination of F. C. Davis on his behalf to make an application to the Registrar for an adjournment. It was not granted. Open cheque (produced) payable to F. C. Davis or bearer for £1,300, dated October 2, 1908, drawn by my firm, was cashed. I paid £940 to the solicitors for the Woolwich Equitable Building Society, and the balance of £360 to Mr. Hampson, deputy town clerk, Bromley Corporation. The cheque for £1,200 referred to by the last witness was returned to us and my firm advanced the balance of £100 to F. C. Davis.

(Thursday, March 11.)

THEODORE MERLEY STANCOMBE , recalled, produced the original authority to Martin's Bank to honour cheques drawn on behalf of the Bickley Land Company, signed by F. C. Davis, chairman, E.M. Davis, and Frederick Lilly, secretary.

CECIL JOHN THOMAS BURTS , solicitor. I acted as managing clerk to Mr. H. C. Thomas, 5, Salter's Hall Court, who is solicitor to the Woolwich Equitable Building Society. On November 7, 1908, the society recovered judgment against F.C. Davis; in that action Forshaw was a co-defendant with F.C. Davis. I was present on July 20 when, in the bankruptcy of F.C. Davis, T.J. Davis was examined. Ridley appeared as his solicitor, and there produced the deeds, now Exhibits 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. After the examination I saw Ridley, and told him I thought that all these settlements were bogus, that I was in a position to prove it, but that, as the attestation was by him as a solicitor, I could only actually prove it by his own statement. At first he declined to say anything. On September 11 I saw him again, and in the result he made a statement. I suggested that it should be in the form of an affidavit; I drafted an affidavit and gave it to him, telling him he had better think it well over, and that if he gave the information I required I would make the strongest representation I could to the Official Receiver to the effect that he had assisted me. On September 12 he came to our office and swore the affidavit. Subsequently he showed me the drafts of the deeds in question.(Witness detailed the alterations appearing in the various deeds.)

DANIEL WILLIAMS , Assistant Official Receiver. On October 3, 1908, I was present when F.C. Davis, at his own request, had a private interview with the Senior Official Receiver. He asked whether the Official Receiver could do something to help him; he said that his creditors had now been paid in full, that he had experienced some difficulty in raising the money, that he had been greatly worried by the Bromley Corporation. The Official Receiver replied that the department had treated him fairly from the beginning, that from information they had they were of opinion that the settlements had been fabricated, and that Davis had perjured himself on the public examination; that it was the Official Receiver's duty to report the facts to the Court, and that he would carry out that duty fairly to Davis. Davis again asked him to bring his troubles to an end in order to give him a fresh start. The Official Receiver said he had gone out of his way at the public examination that week to give Davis an opportunity to tell the truth about the settlements, and he had failed to take advantage of it; he advised Davis to leave himself in the hands of his solicitors, who had notified their intention of applying for annulment of the bankruptcy. Davis then said he thought the best thing he could do would be to put an end to his life.

Cross-examined by Mr. Jones. When the notes of the public examination were submitted to Davis for his signature he refused to sign them; he said that he had been worried with regard to his health; he may have said that he did not think he could have sworn to what was down on the notes.

Cross-examined by Mr. F. E. Smith. T. J. Davis and his solicitors have given every information and assistance in the investigation of these transactions.

ALFRED ISAAC WRIGHT , official shorthand writer, London Bankruptcy Court, proved his notes of the private examination of T.J. Davis, and extracts from the same were read.

Detective-sergeant HUGH MCLEAN , City Police. On November 30, 1908, at 2 p.m., I saw T.J. Davis at 66, High Street, Bromley. I said to him, "Mr. Davis, can you step outside—I want to speak to you for a few minutes." He knew who I was. I said, "I have come to arrest you, Mr. Davis." He said, "I am not surprised." I said, "You will he charged with being concerned with your brother, Frederick Charles Davis, and Frank Ridley in forging and uttering certain deeds relating to the settlement of your brother's property on his children." He said, "Fortunately for me I have not forged any deeds." I then conveyed him to the City, where he was charged; he made no reply to the charge.

Cross-examined by Mr. F.E. Smith. I saw T.J. Davis a week before this. On the arrest of F.C. Davis I asked him if he would go bail for his brother. I had made some inquiry in the neighbourhood about his position and character. Regarding his honesty there was no doubt—as far as I could ascertain he is regarded with great respect at Bromley by all who know him. I had no occasion to desire his help.

Superintendent JOHN OTTAWAY , City Police. On November 30 I saw Ridley at his office in Aldgate. I said, "I have to arrest you upon a charge of feloniously forging and uttering between October 1, 1907. and July 20, 1908, a number of deeds purporting to be settlements by Frederick Charles Davis of his property upon his children." He said, "I should like to see the deeds you refer to." I took him to Old Jewry Police Office, where he was detained. I afterwards saw F.C. Davis in the Guildhall Yard. I told him I should arrest him for being concerned with Ridley in feloniously forging and uttering number of deeds purporting to be settlements by him upon his children between October 1, 1907, and July 20, 1908. He said, "You do not say so." Subsequently I took him to the station; he was charged with Ridley. Neither of them made any reply. At five p.m. on that day T.J. Davis was brought to Old Jewry Police Office by Sergeant McLean. I charged him. He said, "I am innocent of having committed forgery." I searched Ridley, and found upon him parchment. I searched Ridley's office and found a number of documents. Exhibit 59 is an undated letter in the handwriting of T.J. Davis. Exhibit 67 is in Ridley's writing, "Martin's Bank. F.C. Davis, account May 26, 1907, £150 paid in. June 30, 1907, balance £3 0s. 3d." I found press copy letter book produced. On folio 47 is a letter of January 20, 1908, from Ridley to Davis—" Bromley Road, Burnt Ash Lane. I enclose you by bearer these drafts. I should like to see you before the engrossments are made," etc. Exhibit 77 is an undated letter in F.C. Davis's handwriting. "I enclose plan which will require colouring," etc. Letter produced from T.J. Davis to "Dear Fred," was found at 90, Cannon Street. It is in T.J. Davis's writing, "February 10, 1909. The result is no more than I expected. It might have been brought in the Criminal Court, etc. At folio 106 of the letter book is a letter dated March 13, 1908.

from Ridley to T.J. Davis. Exhibit 51 is a letter in T.J. Davis's handwriting to F. Ridley, dated March 14, 1908.(The witness produced a large number of letters, the handwriting of which he identified).

Cross-examined by Mr. Kemp.(Various further letters were put to the witness and read.)

Cross-examined by Mr. Fulton. In the course of my inquiries I saw Hores, Pattison and Co., of Lincoln's Inn Fields. They gave me every assistance. I know that inquiry has been made with regard to the character of T.J. Davis.

(Friday, March 12.)

(Defence.)

FREDERICK CHARLES DAVIS (prisoner, on oath). I am a builder by trade. I now live at Broadstairs. For 38 years I lived at Bromley and up till quite recently was in a considerable way of business. Up to 1905 I had considerable means—I was worth more than £20,000. From time to time I have been in the habit of making settlements upon my children and have made a great many. I frequently have drawn them myself. Exhibit 5 settles 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road. Exhibit 2 also settles that property, amongst others, 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road being the middle plot. Exhibit 2, of July 2, 1902, is a genuine deed, witnessed by a very old friend of mine, Mr. Hilt, of 110, Cannon Street. Exhibit 3 is dated December 18, 1902. It settles six parcels of land together with six cottages at Hill View (of which there were 14), and 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road on the same estate, making 16 houses. I settled those by Exhibit 3, a deed of December 18, 1902, which is not attacked. Exhibit 4, of June 19. 1903, is in my daughter's handwriting and is an admittedly genuine deed. Exhibit 6, of July 27, 1905, settles nothing that was not settled already by Exhibits 3 and 4. The whole of the property, the subject matter of Exhibits 5 and 6 (which are attacked) is settled by Exhibits 2, 3, and 4, which are not attacked. Exhibits 10, 11, and 12 convey six houses to my three children—two houses to each of them, dated April 30, 1901—they are absolutely genuine conveyances and are in the same form. Exhibit 9 is dated September 6, 1905. It conveys by way of settlement the same six houses as are conveyed by Exhibits 10, 11, and 12. There are a lot of other settlements somewhere—I do not know where they are. It is absolutely untrue that these deeds were prepared for the purpose of defeating creditors. I never defeated a person in my life. I do not owe a penny piece—I never did.(To the Judge.) They were not prepared with the intention of defeating my creditors.(To Mr. Jones.) There were some prior settlements covering the houses conveyed by Exhibits 7 and 8. There was a lot of trouble with Mr. Nesbit. who is dead; he had lots of the deeds; he was a party to some of them and he kept them and we never got them back. As to the other deeds which are attacked, the property settled by which is all covered by prior

and genuine settlements, I never had any intention to defraud my creditors. That applies to Exhibits 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. Exhibit 1 is dated December 9, 1901; I do not know whether it was made in 1908.(To the Judge.) I have heard what Butler says—if he says this is his handwriting, I did sign it in 1908. I do not know his handwriting. He made a lot of deeds—what you may call duplicates—copied from others that were lost, and if this is Butler's handwriting this is one of those. I did give him four drafts and told him to engross them two on parchment and two on paper.(To Mr. Jones.) It was to replace deeds that were lost. One of them was held by Nesbit and we never got it back; I had new ones copied; I put everything in Ridley's hands and said, "Put everything in order"; and this is one of them. I mean there was a genuine settlement in 1901, which is lost, and that is a mere reproduction of it. Exhibit 5 (the subject of the indictment) relating to 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road is one of Butler's. It refers to property settled by genuine settlements of July 2, 1902, and June 20, 1903. Butler continually attended at my office asking me to give him work. In my office we do practically all our law stationery ourselves. We get the drafts from the solicitors. I do not know why I gave that deed to Butler. Exhibit 3 was drawn up by my lawyer, Mr. Ridley—he witnessed my signature on it. Exhibit 4 is copied from it by my daughter—that is her handwriting.(To the Judge.) Exhibit 5 was drawn by a lawyer—it is attested by Ridley.(To Mr. Jones.) Ridley started working for me about 1897, and has been doing work for me ever since. With regard to Exhibits 10, 11 and 12, they were taken with all the title deeds of the estate of Freelands Road to Mr. L.W. Gregory, 1, King's Bench Walk, who acted for me in this matter—his clerk is with my solicitors now—Messrs. Jennings and Jennings. I built the houses in about 1905 or 1906, and they got troublesome with being out of repairs and through bad tenants, and we thought we would sell them. I wrote to the Woolwich Building Society and asked what they would advance to a purchaser if we put them up to auction. They said they would make a preliminary survey. Four surveyors came to me at Bromley by appointment and I showed them over the property. They certified in writing that they would advance £1,500 to any purchaser of the six, or another £150, making £1,650, to be spread over six individual purchases—that is if there were six purchasers they would advance £1,650. That is in writing—in their certificate which is in Court. We did not put them up to auction. I advertised them, and eventually Mr. Forshaw bought them for £1,900, out and out—they were subject to a lease at five guineas each house ground rent; he took a 99 years' lease at five guineas ground rent on each house, and paid £1,900 premium. Part of the purchase money to us was the £1,500 lent by the Woolwich Building Society; £100 of his own money; and £300 was secured by a charge on a reversionary interest under his uncle's will in Lancashire of house property, which I went down and surveyed. He paid me, I think, £10 or £12 for my expenses and the deal went through at that Mr. Gregory advised me that I was the proper

person to grant the lease as my children were all under age. Mr. Forshaw went into possession—he lived in one of the houses himself for about nine months and managed the property himself. Then it appears he got behind in his monthly repayments and the Woolwich Equitable Building Society foreclosed and sold the property for £1,200, although they had valued it at £1,800 a few months before, and lent £1,500 upon it. Then they sued Forshaw for the balance first; he let judgment go by default and then they came on me. Forshaw did not pay because they had taken the property; he had nothing to pay with. They came on me and sued me for fraud and conspiracy. We gave no evidence; I never attended the case, and tie judge gave judgment against me—I was in Court a little while. The counsel said there was nothing for me to answer, and I need not come to the Court. My answer to Question 27 in my examination is not altogether correct. I was at the court at the beginning—the answer wants a little altering. I came away before the case was half over. There has been a tremendous lot of trouble between me and the Bromley Corporation. At the finish I brought an action against them for malicious conduct in pulling down my wall in the middle of the night—at four o'clock in the morning—and throwing the bricks all over my garden. I thought there had been an earthquake in the night when I got up. The judgment was given against me an the legal ground that the corporation could not be sued for malice. Upon that I went to the Court of Appeal—Mr. Shearman said he would guarantee a new trial. We went to the Court of Appeal and I lost. I never intended to defraud the Woolwich Building Society of their money. I have paid both those debts.(To the Judge.) The Bickley Land Company lent me the money—I handed it to my solicitor and he paid it. £100 was lent by my solicitor. (To Mr. Jones.) I have been on bad terms with the Bromley Corporation for a long time. Ultimately they made me bankrupt. Previously to that I wrote and told them that if they would wait a fortnight they could have their money—but they would not wait—they would make me a bankrupt.(To the Judge.) I was going to raise the money in some way but when a man is made bankrupt he cannot raise it. I should have raised it from the same sources that I did afterwards—on the property. I stated in my bankruptcy that I had no property. I used to borrow huge sums of money on the title deeds of these various properties, which were mane subject to the settlement. I used to raise money on it—I do not think we understood our legal position—with the title deeds of the various lands which was not mine, because they were subject to settlements, but which, nevertheless. I would deposit at the bank as security for an overdraft or something like that. I have raised money in the same way as I have borrowed other huge sums. I used to raise money at the banks on the title deeds of the various lands Which were not mine, because they were subject to settlement, but which we used to use for overdrafts.(To Mr. Jones.) I thought I had a perfect right to do that. It was a family matter. Everyone knew it belonged to nobody else—only my

family My brother was the trustee and I was the settlor—their father making a voluntary settlement. Let me give you an instance. Exhibit 2 settles a piece of land that was worth about £200 which I settled. I deposited the deeds with the bank for an overdraft and built 16 houses on it, granted leases, and created a ground rent of £80. which capitalised at 25 years' purchase is worth £2.000, yet the children have got it still. I have made £200 into £2,000 for them, and I am locked up and put in a madman's cell, and put to sleep between four murderers. Four murderers I have been sleeping between through doing my children this justice. It is time someone understood it. I have had to sleep between four murderers nearly a month. It is enough to make a man mad When he has done what I' have done for my family to be locked up like I have been. How could I build the houses without I borrowed the money. After having settled the property and borrowed the money and spent it on that property I have settled it on my children. I and my children have always lived together all my life until I was in prison. Two of my daughters are of age now; they know about all these different transactions. Put them in the witness-box and ask them the same questions. They can tell you everything. They know as much about it as I do. The deeds were drawn up to put the whole estate right. Nesbit had died, and he had had the deeds, and we could not find them. I went to Mr. Ridley and said, "What are we to do? Here is a bother; what shall we do?" and he put everything right: and as a fact, no one has been defrauded out of a penny. Now I thoroughly understand my position, and I am in a bad state of health. Not a wrong thing has been done that I am aware of. It has only been done to put the position clear. I was anxious to keep the property—I knew if it went into the bankruptcy the poor kids would never get a penny all their lives. I have been a creditor in bankruptcy, and I have never got a penny out of it yet, but I have seen thousands squandered. I made an offer to pay in full before the public examination—nearly a week before—through Mr. Edell. (To the Judge.) That was after my brother was publicly examined. (To Mr. Jones.) Before that I made an offer to pay 7s. 6d. in the £ Let me tell you how I came to make that offer. Mr. Aldous, who acts for me as solicitor in the City in various little matters, has on office in the next room on the same floor to Mr. Holmwood, who is one of the District Councillors of Bromley; he is a solicitor, and he and Mr. Aldous had a chat together about this debt to the corporation, and he said, "Well, Mr. Davis has been treated scandalously, there is no doubt—shamefully—and he owes this debt and coste; if he pays 7s. 6d. in the £ to the Bromley Corporation the balance (meaning the 12s. 6d.) would come out of the county fund—that would not benefit Bromley at all." Therefore, if Mr. Davis offered 7s. 6d. in the £ and got the money together he would advise his corporation to accept it and give me a clean sheet. Mr. Thomas, of the Woolwich Building Society, agreed to hold over his claim, because the judgment had been obtained after the bankruptcy—after adjudication, I think—I will not be sure. He said, "We will let this stand out, and if Mr. Davis settles with the corporation there will be no difficulty

in our settling with him." That is how I came to make that offer of 7s. 6d. in the £, which was rejected. They have now got 20s. in the £. I have not heard anything about two small claims. There might be some 2 1/2 d. thing—if there is I will pay for it. I will not owe a man a penny—I never have in all my life. I was examined publicly in bankruptcy and the notes were taken. I declined to sign them because they were not correct—I do not know how I came to make some of the admissions. I came away and I have not been there since. Looking at Questions 260 to 265 in my examination, in which I state that the deeds were executed on. the dates they bear, I suppose I thought that they were executed on those dates. I have signed so many deeds—I may say hundreds—especially about that time, to land companies, and I did not know what Ridley had done. He used to say, "Come down—certain deeds are ready." And I used to come down and sign them. I used to leave it to the lawyer to read them. A man who has got to sign a lot of deeds does not sit down and read a tremendous long document through like this. I certainly signed it and thought I was doing what I was asked to do. I was trying to speak the truth and I did it innocently; I thought that everything was in order. That is the only explanation I can give you. I do not deny Butler's story to-day—I have never denied Butler's story. I had not seen the deeds since I signed them at the solicitor's office. I was in the witness-box and they were handed up to me and I was asked, "Did you sign that?" I said, "Yes"—and "On that date?" I said, "Yes." I was jolly bad that first time—I had been very ill for six months—I had had a tremendous lot of worry—it worried me to death—worried the life out of me. I got hit in the head and had concussion of the brain—I was insensible for nearly three weeks. My little girl wrote a letter to the Official Receiver and told him. They said, "If you do not come up we will arrest you." So I came up and that was the examination. I was very ill—was under the doctor's attention all the time. In January and February I had influenza very badly for two whole months. You have the doctor's certificate in Court. I have been in prison for two months—I never was inside the gate of a prison before. I have consulted a great many doctors during the last twelve months. Dr. Brown was my doctor when I had the accident. I was giving evidence in Bromley County Court and a man waited outside the court and knocked me on the head—I was carried into the court insensible before Judge Emden and he committed the man. He nearly killed me. The bill of sale is a very simple matter. We passed a resolution at the Bickley Land Company to advance to my brother £150.(To the Judge.) By "we" I mean I as the managing director, and the other directors would be there. We had a proper meeting. I do not know at that time whether "we" would be E. M. Davis, or whether we had got other directors there then. We have changed the directors.(Minute book handed to witness.) I am sure I was there—I cannot tell you who were the directors in April, 1907. We passed a resolution to advance £150 to my brother. It was done on purpose to secure my home. The £150 was paid into

my brother's account—I remember making the slip out, and I sent a clerk named Simpson round to the bank with the money, and he paid it into my brother's account. Then my brother lent it to me back again. I do not know whether the other directors had been brought on to the board then. They possibly were my daughter Mr. Fenton, and Mr. Hibbert. I think Mr. Ellis was a director for some little time; then Mr. Ridley was a director, but whether at this time or not I do not know.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kemp. Ridley was only a director for a short time. I remember receiving his letter of resignation. I have known Ridley for 12 years past. The three deeds which I made in 1901 were attested by Ridley. I cannot remember going to his office about it—it is nine years ago. I do not deny having instructed Ridley to make the deed of December, 1901—I could not say if I had the engrossment or whether the draft was prepared by Ridley. It was one of the deeds which were lost. There were two or three settlements of different property in London Road—this is not the only property in London Road I have. There were other settlements and the property was sold at various times. I had six shops in 1896—settled property. There was some property that was pulled down—some old cottages worth about £1,000 pulled down and I have built other houses, which are worth now to-day £7,000, for the children. Exhibit 1 replaces a deed which was lost—I cannot say what deed it was. Exhibit 2 was attested by Hilt. Exhibit 3 is attested by Ridley, Marler, and Thomas Williams. Exhibit 5 comprised property which had been settled by a prior deed—it is dated July 17, 1903. I do not remember instructing Ridley to prepare it—I cannot—I have instructed him hundred of times—I do not deny it. I expect I instructed him to prepare Exhibit 6. I was doing quite a lot of business with Ridley in 1905; I had got four different building estates going and was seeing him daily. I told Ridley to settle the cottage, Mulgrave Road, Sutton. I told him to settle Rosslands (Exhibit 8). I gave Ridley instructions to prepare Exhibit 9. In the summer of 1907 we made a search for the deeds, which had been in Nesbit's possession and could not find them. I went to See Ridley and told him to put everything in order. Mr. Nesbit had been to Malta and had only been back a few weeks when he died. Ridley said, he had not got those deeds, but he had some others. We have been continually searching for the deeds, and I have now been thinking since I have been here, that there is a deed box at the London and County Bank that I have not opened for a good many years, and which has not been deposed to in my bankruptcy. Perhaps they are there now. I have been so bad I have forgotten all about it. I asked Ridley to prepare other settlements. They were to be absolutely the same as the previous deeds. I do not remember whether Ridley prepared drafts and handed them to me and whether I handed him the engrossments.(The various deeds were put to the witness; he stated that he did not recollect what had occurred.)

JAMES SCOTT , called by the prosecution. I am now governor of Holloway Prison. I was formerly medical officer of Brixton Prison

up to February 23. F. C. Davis was admitted an November 20, 1908, and remained in Brixton until November 26, when he was bailed. He returned on November 30 and was in custody until January 15, when he was bailed out again. With the exception of the consultation last Sessions, I have not seen him since until this morning. Daring the time he was in prison under my charge his physical condition was fair. He complained of headaches frequently and that he did not sleep, but the reports given by the warders did not always bear out his statements in that respect. Otherwise his general health was fair. I saw no signs of unsoundness of mind at any time. As far as I could judge from conversations his memory was very fair.

Cross-examined by Mr. Jones. In my opinion he is perfectly sane now. On February 12 I attended a consultation, when Dr. Shillingford, Dr. Savage, Dr. Seymour Taylor, and Dr. Home were present. Dr. Savage is considered one of the highest authorities in England on mental and nervous diseases, and at times he acts for the Home Office or the Treasury. He was acting for the Treasury on this occasion. Dr. Savage drew up a report in my presence; I agreed with the greater part or it, which said that F. C. Davis was sane and fit to plead—with the remaining part, Which said he was not fit to be tried, I did not agree, as I said in Court last Sessions. He was not tried last Sessions in consequence of that report. As far as I understood Dr. Savage, he never doubted that F. C. Davis was fit to plead. I had met Dr. Seymour Taylor before—I believe he is an eminent man—I was not aware that he had published a book on "Malingering." Dr. Taylor agreed with Dr. Savage's report. As far as I know he did not go the length of saying that F. C. Davis was insane or unfit to plead. Dr. Taylor agreed with Dr. Savage that he was unfit to be tried last Sessions. Dr. Taylor took even a stronger view as to the prisoner's nervous symptoms, but he did not go the length of saying that he was not fit to plead. Dr. Shillingford agreed with Dr. Savage and with Dr. Seymour Taylor that he was unfit to be tried last Sessions. F. C. Davis was in the hospital from January 5 to 15, when I left. Ether is given frequently for temporary faintness. The application for an adjournment last Sessions was opposed by the Treasury, and also by the counsel for T. J. Davis. The Recorder in granting the adjournment, stated he wished it to be understood that it was only to the March Sessions. On January 5, when F. C. Davis returned from Court, I was informed that he alleged that he had had a fit. He seemed in rather a weak state, and was sent to the hospital. He afterwards stated that he had one or two fits during the might, but I had no other evidence of them. Influenza sometimes affects the balance of the mental system. Influenza may cause a patient to lose the power of sustained thought for a long period; out it is unlikely that it would do so. (Passages of Sir Thomas Barlow's book on influenza were put to the witness, who agreed with them.)

WILLIAM NORWOOD EAST , Deputy Medical Officer, Brixton Prison. F. C. Davis has been, under my observation from February 24 to the present time, and also during the previous period, when Dr. Scott

was on duty as medical officer. I agree with Dr. Scott's evidence. From February 24 I consider F. C. Davis to have been in good health. I have frequently conversed with him, have detected no symptom of loss of memory; in my opinion, he is perfectly capable of understanding any question put to him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Jones. F. C. Davis is nervous and anxious concerning this trial, but no more than anyone would expect; otherwise his health is quite satisfactory. He is in the hospital in order to be under observation. When a man has said that he had fits and a question is likely to occur at the trial, then I should take him to hospital to observe him. I had under my charge Macdonald, the murderer of Mr. Schlitte, who alleged himself to be suffering from fits—he was in the hospital the whole time he was at Brixton Prison—I am absolutely sure of it. I gave the warder in charge of F. C. Davis a mixture of other and ammonia, so that if he felt faint he could have a dose, which I understand he has had. It was also to be used for any other prisoner who felt faintness. I told the warder if Davis felt faint to give him a dose. I have seen F. C. Davis twice a day and prescribed medicine for nervousness; he has had a sleeping draught at times; he had a tonic and an aperient; he complained of headache, and he was given some medicine for that.

The Rev. GEORGE GRIFFITHS , Vicar, Beckenham Parish Church, and the Rev. JOHN BOND , Vicar of St. Mary's, Plaistow, gave evidence to character in favour of J. T. Davis.

The Hon. RANDOLPH CARTERET TOLLSMACHE, ARTHUR ERNEST JARRETT , shop and office fitter and furniture dealer, trading as Allard and Co., 33, Jewry Street, City; THOMAS DAVID METCALFE , solicitor, and formerly vestry clerk of Portsoken Ward; CHARLES DUNFORD GREENWAY , Solicitor; JOHN TONSFORD TAVERNOR , contract officer to the National Telephone Company; JOHN O'CONNELL , 153, Balls Pond Road, Islington, retired Civil servant; CHARLES NEWBERRY ASHMEAD , builder, 55, Sumatra Road, West Hampstead; and JULIUS COHEN , property dealer,. 7, Harley Street, Bow, gave evidence to the character of Ridley.

FREDERICK CHARLES DAVIS , recalled. Cross-examined by Mr. F. E. Smith. When T. J. Davis paid the £150 to me I think Mr. Bagot Hart kept the document for the purpose of registering it I do not recollect when it was sent to T. J. Davis.

Cross-examined by Mr. Travers Humphreys. (A tin box from the London and County Bank was identified by the witness, broken open and its contents examined.) There is not much in it—an envelope stating that deeds of certain property were given to Mrs. Davis on 13-12-94—"See authority with letter"; a receipt, "Received of F. C. Davis the sum of £1,800, being the balance of purchase money of a field at Bromley belonging to Lord Kinnaird"; also three fire policies. There is nothing in it to do with this case. I have dealt in properties ever since I have been in business. I started work when I was 11 years old as a plumber; I came out of that as a plumber and sanitary engineer. I began to deal in land and to build houses about 1884. Say from 1901, or as early as 1898, I have been buying

property, taking conveyances, and granting leases in the ordinary way as a builder. In 1905 I was worth £30,000. One of my assets was the right to participate in all sulbsidiary companies to be formed by the Welsh Slate Quarries. That would not account for' £25,000 north out of £30,000. In my statement of affairs I stated that my excess of assets over liabilities on January 28, 1905, was £29,517 11s. 10d.; £25,000 was put down as the estimated value of my interest in subsidiary companies to be formed by the Welsh. Slate Quarries Company, Limited; another item is debentures in that company, £3,000; another item is Mulgrave Road property £600. It belonged to me in 1905 when I settled it—it was someone else's at the time I settled it—I do not know the date. To the best of my belief it was my property on January 28, 1905. Another item is "Rosslands," Gordon Road, Bromley, £1,200. That was my property up to the time I settled it. It was my property on January 28, 1905. Another item is Estimated value of Bickley Road building agreement, £500; house partly erected in Bickley Road, £200; and against those items is an overdraft for £999. I lost the whole of the £25,000 in the Welsh, Slate Quarries; also the £3,000 debentures. Two years afterwards my financial position was the same. My action against the Bromley Corporation was decided on May 13, 1907, against me, with costs, which, together with the costs of appeal, amounted to £319—I do not say I was in a position to pay them. I got my brother to execute the bill of sale to save my home and to borrow the money. I was told I should be made bankrupt and I was arranging to get the money to pay. John Nesbit died December 18, 1905. Both before and after his death my sister searched for the deeds. I did not have the deeds renewed then as I was expecting them to turn up. In 1908 I thought it was time the thing was put in proper order—it was not because I was a bankrupt that I wanted the property settled. The deeds were made about the time of the bankruptcy. I cannot say when The original document was executed—or whether there were one or more than one. I do not know whether I have executed a duplicate in October, 1907. In that month a loan was arranged and I gave the deeds of "Rosslands" to my brother to take to the bank. "Rosslands" at that time was settled. I was not at all cheating the bank—I have done the same thing for 15 or 20 years and never cheated them out of a farthing. I have been told since it is a wrong thing to do, but nobody told me at that time. There is a clause which gave me power to do it. It never entered my mind that the settlement was anything to do with the deeds of the property. I did not intend to cheat the 'bank, although there was a settlement; also of the Burnt Ash Lane properties, for which it is agreed there are genuine settlements. I have deposited the deeds in the bank dozens of times without the settlement. I borrowed £1,000 on "Rosslands"; it was lent to the Bickley Land Company at 6 per cent., and the mortgage was given to my brother for £1,000. The money was paid to Martin's Bank in respect of mortgage money owing to them by the Bickley Land Company; so that the money borrowed on this property which was held in trust for my children

was used for the purpose of paying a debt of the Bickley Laud Company; that is a mortgage which was given to my brother on the security of certain ground rents at Bickley. Exhibit 9, of September 6, 1905, was a duplication of a previous deed—I do not know when the previous deed was made—I have made so many settlements of that Burnt Ash Lane property. It was eight years ago. I did not make the settlement in January, 1908, to defeat my creditors. PUG my two daughters in the box and see whether it was not all discussed in my family—they will very soon tell you and bear me out, and everyone else that bad anything at all to do with it. I made leases in September, 1905. Exhibit 5 is a Butler deed—it is a duplication of a previous deed. I have not got the previous deed. I cannot tell you the date of it. The leases of the Freelands Road property were granted to Forshaw in May, 1905. On the action brought by the Woolwich Building Society no settlement was disclosed. I have never invented any deed at all.

(Tuesday, March 16.)

F. C. DAVIS, recalled. Further cross-examined by Mr. Travers Humphreys. I went to Ridley and told him to put the estate in order. I really did not know what it required at that time. I believe we had a consultation—he said he would look into matters. I went to Butler because I was in the habit of getting my deeds engrossed—it was cheaper. I do not remember if Exhibit 2 (a genuine deed) was engrossed by Ridley on parchment. We had a tremendous lot of old parchments from old building estates. When the police took possession of our office they found a heap of engrossments ready to be executed—I do not say a number of blank parchments ready stamped—the forms given to Butler were taken out of a bundle—the rest have been used by the Bickley Land Company—I do not know what the dates of the stamps were. I say purchasers of property from the Bickley Land Company would execute deeds stamped in 1903 or 1904 in respect of property which they were buying in 1908. I do not remember if the leases I granted were on plain paper or parchment. I expect the stamped sheets given to Butler had been in my possession for some years. They had been bought for the purpose of granting leases at the time certainly. I was in the habit of buying a good many skins and getting stamps put on them at Somerset House. I wrote, "21st July" in February, 1908, after the deed had been engrossed by Butler. I do not know where I got the date from; I suppose from the draft; I cannot recollect. On February 4, 1908, I gave answers in my preliminary examination in the Bankruptcy Court and initialled them. I do not know whether I had forgotten my transactions with Butler a few days before. In then stating the property was settled on my children. I knew all along I had settled the property. I do not recollect why I selected the deed of December 18, 1901, and mentioned no others in my answer. I cannot say why I did not mention the later genuine settlements. Mr. Bagot Hart went with me and told me what to

put down. He did not tell me not to disclose the settlements except that one. I disclosed all these deeds in May, 1906; it may have been because at that time the Woolwich Building Society had proved, and Mr. Birch, their solicitor, knew, all about them. On October 1 I commenced my public examination. I knew at that time Butler had made four deeds for me—I did not (mention them because I really did not know which identical deeds they were from memory; I had been very ill and was very ill then. I did not give it a thought. I had paid every shilling I owed before that. When I went to see the copy and found out what I had said, I refused to sign the notes. They were handed up to me and they all looked alike to me. I stated about each that I did not know who engrossed it. With regard to the bill of sale, I told the Official Receiver it was my brother's money. I did not supply the money—it was lent to him by the Bickley Land Company. I did not tell the Official Receiver that I had signed the cheque as managing director, because I was not asked that question. I wrote to Ridley on July 14, 1908, not to show my daughter's passbooks because I had counsel's opinion that they had nothing to do with my examination—I was not afraid of anything. I wrote to Ridley, "Things are desperate, especially for yourself." That referred to this. The deeds were all at Ridley's. C. and W. Webb were appointed solicitors for the trust, and the deeds were all sent to Mr. Webb. Then my brother went as trustee and employed Hores, Pattison, and Bathurst, much against everyone's wishes. Webb at that date had promised to find about £1,500 so as to pay the bankruptcy out, and they said, "If you take the deeds away from us we will do nothing." The deeds were taken away by Hores, Pattison and Co., and they refused to do anything, so I was like a rat in a trap. If the deeds had been left with Webb the money for this bankruptcy would have been found months before. I do not know how that made things desperate, especially for Ridley. That letter was written a short time after I was ordered to file a list of the properties I had dealt with. In October, 1906, I asked T. J. Davis to bum all the settlements. I was sick of the whole thing. I wrote on March 27, 1908, to Ridley, "Do not fill in any dates until I see you." It referred to mortgages for £1,000 and £500 which the Bickley Land Company were borrowing from my brother. The Bickley Land Company have 200 or 300 plots of land. I have never signed a bogus deed with the intention of defeating creditors. I wrote to Ridley, "The dud deed which you got me to sign for no consideration to defeat Smith's creditors with." The word "dud" bas been altered from "deed." I must have written "deed" twice. I cannot say whether it is "dud deed" or "deed deed." I do not know what it means. I do not know why I wrote the passage.

Re-examined. That letter is not addressed—I do not recollect sending it to Ridley. In 1905 I was the owner of the Welsh Slate Quarries, including an estate of 1,000 acres. As a farm it was worth £10,000 or £15,000—with the slate anything between £20,000 and £30,000. (To the Judge.) I did not pay that amount for it. I made it valuable by finding the minerals. I spent £4,000 to £5,000

on it. (To Mr. McDonald.) I am a practical man in slate; I have had seven or eight quarries in America. I had paid £40,000 for a quarry in Pennsylvania, and completed the purchase. I had large quantities of slates from the Welsh Quarries. I covered at least 100 of my own houses with them at Bickley. Whatever money I borrowed from the bank on the deeds I built houses on the trust land with; I did not use it for my own benefit. The whole £28,000 mentioned in my statement of affairs I was swindled out of in 1907. Gyde and Darby got five years' and three years' penal servitude for it—that was my property in the quarries. I had the proceeds of the bill of sale. I spent the £150 that my brother paid me—it was an absolutely bona fide transaction. In 1905, when I made certain settlements, I was in a position to make them. I had any amount of money—as much as I wanted. At the public examinations I did not know which were the genuine and which the duplicated deeds. I was too ill—they were handed to me, and I did the best I could. I discovered it after the examination; I think Ridley told me I had made a mistake, and I refused to sign the notes. I did not tell the untruth wittingly. I went to the Official Receiver and had a very long conversation. I said, "I think there has been some errors made, Sir, and I want you to get me my discharge and wind the whole thing up. Every penny is paid." His answer was, "Your solicitor has written to annul the bankruptcy. "I did not say in so many words, that Ridley had told me I had sworn to deeds which were not genuine. When the Bickley Land Company was formed in 1906 I was perfectly solvent. I had my slate quarries and everything else—properties. At my public examination my daughters were present. but were not called. 90, Cannon Street is now the office of the Bickley Land Company. I am only secretary. I do not use the office for my own purposes. I had a take note for the Welsh quarry. I did not pay anything, but I spent money on it. I sold to Gyde and Darby; they created a company. I claim in one of my statements that I have lost £25,000. because the bargain was that I was to have an interest in the company, and that I lost also £3,000 in debentures of that company. The quarry was sold for practically nothing. I tried to get it back. I believe the freeholder got the farm into his hands again. The minute-book shows I was lent £1,250 without security by the Bickley Land Company, and with that I paid the debts in the bankruptcy, borrowing another £100 from my solicitors. The minute is September 26, 1908. My public examination began in October. I had the; money ready then, and tendered it to the creditors. I had one share in the Bickley Land Company. It is a company worth about £2,000. In September, 1906, it was worth much more—£4,000 to £5,000. My brother in America has 1,500 shares. The register shows myself one share; Gordon Brown one share; Mr. Hibbert one; Dawson one; Fenton one; Frederick Lillie one; Bagot Hart one; William Henry Davis, Wyandotte, Michigan 1,500; Eleanor M. Davis 150; Emily M. Davis 150; Harold Spence 193; that makes the 2,000 shares. I, Fenton and Hibbert, who held three shares, lent to me a quarter of the assets of the company—I wanted it very

badly and they lent it to me; it was the only way to pay these creditors; I was bankrupt. They lent it me without security; they passed the resolution; I wanted the creditors to have their money and that is how I got it. I sent out to my brother, told him the corner I was in, and asked him for a power of attorney over his 1,500 shares, which he sent me, and I put them in the safe of the company. We discussed it and we thought that warranted us in lending me £1,250. That is the only way I had of getting the money, and that is how I used it and the creditors had their money, It took some little time or else they would have had it before. These settlements were all genuine. I had no ready money or any property about that time. I told the Court of Bankruptcy I had no property—I had none—only the one share—my creditors would have been very lucky to gat 7s. 6d. in the £—I always told them I should pay and I did pay. I raised the money to pay thorn in full because I wanted to do so. I have always borne a good name all my life, never owed any money, and I wanted to pay it. It was in order to stop the bankruptcy and get my discharge—not exactly to stop the public examination—to stop the whole proceedings including the public examination. I would like to say this, that for several months during the summer of 1908 I did have an offer of a loan of £1,500 on the trust deeds, and I sent the solicitors to Hores, Pattison and Co., but they would not allow them even inspection of the deeds. My daughters were over age—they could have lent it. My son was not over age. I tried my utmost. The £150 that the Bickley Land Company advanced to my brother in order that he might advance it to me was advanced without security.

CHARLES MACINTOSH , contractor and builder's merchant, 3, Stanley Road, Bromley. I have known F. C. Davis 14 years, and have sold him large amounts of material for which he has always paid. I was at one time his bail.

Cross-examined by Mr. Muir. I know Forshaw, and have heard that an action was brought against Forshaw and F. C. Davis by the Woolwich Society and they lost.

MARSHALL , timber merchant, gave similar evidence to character of F. C. Davis.

WILLIAM HENDERSON CULLOGAN , priest in charge of the Catholic Church, Stock, Essex, gave evidence to the character of Ridley.

FRANK RIDLEY (prisoner on oath). I am a solicitor, 40 years of age; my father was the Rev. J. Ridley, who was for 16 years rector of Norton, Durham. I graduated at Trinity College, Dublin. I was articled to the Registrar of Stockton-on-Tees County Court, and admitted a solicitor in 1886. I am a married man with five children, who are entirely dependent on what I earn. I practised in London from 1880 to 1890 at 49, Bedford Row: from 1890 to 1896 at 52, Leadenhall Street: and from 1896 to 1909, at my present address at 4 and 5, Aldgate High Street—alone. I have worked up my practice entirely myself. I have known F. C. Davis about 11 years. I first did work for him in 1901, and have since acted as his solicitor in a considerable number of matters. My first transaction was in referance

to two houses in Freelands Road, to prepare a draft settlement, which is the draft produced dated April 30, 1901, which I prepared on the instructions of F. C. Davis. I then handed him this very document. Exhibits 10, 11, and 12 are settlements of the same houses in Freelands Road. Those were not engrossed by my instructions. I did not see them till some time later. I only prepared one draft, which appears to be engrossment No. 10. I did not engross that draft, but handed it to F. C. Davis. I saw Exhibits 10, 11, and 12 first in 1905—in July or September. In Exhibit 9 the three deeds of April 30, 1901, are recited so that for the purpose of preparing the draft I had the three deeds of April 30, 1901, before me. Exhibit 1 is a settlement of 36 to 42, London Road, Bromley. Looking at my date book under date December 11, 1901, F. C. Davis called about that time and gave me a rough sketch of a plan (produced) to be elaborated; there is a date in my handwriting upon it, "22nd November, 1901." Looking at my entry I received instructions from F. C. Davis to prepare the settlement or conveyance for the London Road property, of which I handed the draft to F. C. Davis on December 17. It was the draft conveyance that no doubt the solicitor who had acted for him in the purchase of the property had prepared on his behalf—a draft conveyance to him, upon which I was instructed to prepare a settlement. There is an entry that I attested the execution of it on December 19. This is a document I completed myself; there is a genuine entry in my book. According to my recollection I handed that deed to F. C. Davis—he always took his deeds away when the matter was completed.

Rev. EDMUND MAYER , rector of the Catholic Church at Kelvedon, Essex, gave evidence to the character of Ridley.

FRANK RIDLEY , recalled. Exhibit 3 is a settlement of December 18, 1902, of Nos. 1 to 6, Hill View Cottages. I prepared the draft and completed this document. There is an entry in my book that I attested it on December 18. It was prepared on the instructions of F. C. Davis, and the deed was handed to him on July 17, 1903. Looking at my day book, I received instructions from F. C. Davis to prepare a settlement of 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road (Exhibit 5). On July 20 there is an entry of the engrossment and of my attesting F. C. Davis's execution. The deed was handed to F. C. Davis. In Exhibit 5 there is no recital of the deed of July 2, 1902. Exhibit 5 is not the document I prepared—it is a similar deed bearing the same date. On July 17, 1905, I received instructions from F. C. Davis to prepare a settlement of Rosslands. Looking at paper (produced) I received those instructions in July—which are entered in day book 2 at page 294 on July 21, 1905, "F. C. Davis, Rosslands settlement Cottage Mulgrave Road settlement. Engrossing these settlements. Attending you, attesting your execution of same." That shows that I attested the execution of the settlements on July 21. I handed the draft to F. C. Davis. Exhibit 7 is a settlement of the cottage in Mulgrave Road. Looking at piece of paper (produced) I received instructions from F. C. Davis to prepare that, and there is an entry in my day book on July 17, 1905. I handed the draft to F. C.

Davis. I do not say Exhibit 5 was drawn up in 1905. Exhibit 6 is a conveyance of 1 to 14, Hillview Cottages, and 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road, dated July 21, 1905. In my day book on July 17, 1905, at page 295, under date "July 28, 1908," there is an entry referring to it. That entry was made in 1905, "1908" is a clerical error. Exhibit 9 is a settlement dated September 6, 1905, of six houses in Freelands Road. They are the six houses conveyed in 1901. Looking at my day book on September 3, 1905, I received "instructions from F. C. Davis to prepare a settlement of Freelands Road, Bromley." At page 307 on September 7 I have an entry "Freelands Road. Attesting your execution to conveyance." There is no charge for engrossing. That entry is put in between two others—it is made shortly after the others; I discovered that the entry had been dropped, and I put it in under September 7, the actual date of the transaction, to follow on a previous entry for work done for F. C. Davis. I prepared the draft and handed it to F. C. Davis. Exhibit 9 is not the deed drawn up in 1905. During all this time, so far as I knew, F. C. Davis was a man of considerable property. I had no reason to regard him otherwise than as an honourable and straightforward man. In the day book up to the end of April, 1905, there are various entries of work done for F. C. Davis. There are also a number of entries of work done for F. C. Davis in November and December. In about August or September, 1907. F. C. Davis came to see me. There had been a dispute between us with regard to a bill of costs which was settled in November, 1907, by payment in full. I brought an action in October, 1907. F. C. Davis came to see me in August or September, 1907, and wanted to know if I had got any original settlements of his. I said, "No, I never keep your original documents—you have had them all away long ago." He said he thought I must have some, and I unlocked my safe and pulled the whole of the contents out to satisfy him. I told him he had better make a very careful search for them, as they might be in the hands of other people, and he said he would. Shortly afterwards he came to see me and said he could not find the documents, and fresh settlements must be made, and he asked me to prepare drafts of Rosslands and the cottages. Exhibit 10 is the settlement of Rosslands. I prepared it on an abstract of title which I had had in my possession since 1905. The draft was prepared prior to my action against F. C. Davis. I have no entry in the day book about it. In Exhibit 7 there is recited a deed of October 24, 1900, between Joseph Davis and the settler (F. C. Davis). Exhibits 22 and 23 are drafts prepared by me in 1907. In Exhibit 22 there is no date—only "190"—that was handed to F. C. Davis in draft. He said he knew an old chap who was down in the world, and he wished to give him a job. I think he afterwards brought both engrossments to me, and I think also the drafts in which the date was not filled in. It is now filled in, "July 21, 1905," by me at his request. He asked me if I could give him the dates of the previous settlements. I referred to my book and I told him it was July 21, and he said, "Then you had better fill in that date in these documents. "as he put it." so as to make it a duplication of the previous settlement. "I filled it in. I did not see any objection to that

course being adopted. I did not know oi any trouble that F. C. Davis might be in with his creditors. I considered him a man of considerable property. I had no intention of any kind in attesting that date to enable F. C. Davis to defraud his creditors. I knew nothing about the judgment in his action against the Bromley Corporation, or the action. Had I known of it I should not have attested or prepared those documents with the date July 21, 1905. Those deeds were executed at the end of November or the beginning of December, 1907. There is no entry in the day book of it. (To the Judge.) I have attested deeds for F. C. Davis without making an entry—these that I have prepared. The deeds were engrossed on ready stamped parchment. I did not notice the date of the stamps—I did not examine them. F. C. Davis insisted on having the recitals and the provisions as regards the beneficiaries, and as to the power of attorney. I remembered that was in the deed prepared two and a quarter years before. I was quite certain I was repeating what had been done on the previous occasion. I remembered those—the clauses were unusual to be in a trust settlement; also as to 99 years' lease and the maintenance and education of the children; all that was in the previous deed. I was sure I was really duplicating what had been done before. I had no draft. I trusted entirely to my memory. (To Mr. Kemp.) I had no reason whatever to suspect F. C. Davis when the brought me the two engrossments. I think 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road, was dealt with next. Exhibit 5 bears date July 21, 1903. I asked F. C. Davis what had become of the previous settlement. This would be about Christmas, 1907—a little before Christmas. I said, "There was a settlement of this prepared in 1903. He said he bad not got it. I said, "What do you mean He said, "It is lost." I said, Surely it cannot be lost." He said, "Well, at any rate prepare another one." I prepared draft produced (Exhibit 14) settling 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road, and handed it to Davis without a date or year—simply "190," and the same on the back. I took no part in having the draft engrossed; he told me he would get them engrossed. I saw the engrossment early in 1908. Hearing Butler's evidence I think it would be about the middle of January when I handed the draft to F. C. Davis. I think I saw the engrossment at F. C. Davis's office, 90, Cannon Street. The date of the year was in—"1903," but not the day or month. I filled the date, July 21, in by reference to my day book. This was not all done at the same interview. He asked for this information at my office; I referred to my book and gave him the information. I attested the execution and F. C. Davis kept the deed and the draft. The pencil marks on the deed are not in my handwriting—I cannot identify them. My attention was called to them by Mr. Birch when he came to me in September, 1908—I had not seen them before. About the end of January I received instructions to prepare the settlement of the fixed ground rent of 1 to 14, Hillview Cottages, and 1 and 2, Hilldrop Road. He asked me for the date of the prior deeds, and I gave them from my day book—July 27, 1905. That is the entry dated "July 28, 1908." I attested the execution of the

deed. I put in the date. (To the Judge.) I did not examine the stamp. It recites a settlement of July 21, 1903. About the end of January F. C. Davis instructed me to prepare draft for the settlement of Nos. 36 to 44, London Road, which I did, and handed the draft to him, the date being merely"190" as before. I think I saw the engrossment early in February at 90, Cannon Street—I attested the execution of the deed by F. C. Davis. He asked me the date of the prior settlement, which I gave him. The date is filled into the deed in F. C. Davis's handwriting. When I gave him the date I gathered he would put that date in the deed as carrying out what had been done in 1901—as a reproduction of the deed of 1901. I subsequently received the executed deed from F. C. Davis and filled the date into the draft. That would be done between February and July. I parted with it on July 28—I should think this date was put into the draft on the very day when I had to part with the originals. I do not think the date is written over an erasure—no erasure was made by me. Nothing has been done to the draft except to fill in the date. The deed is, "This debenture made December 19, 1901, between F. C. Davis, of 9, Gracechurch Street." That is the address in the prior deed. At the end of 1907 I had the actual draft of this prior deed When I got instructions to. prepare the new draft. I destroyed the old drafts. I could not have remembered all these clauses. It has peculiarities as to power of sale and power to build which are not in the other deeds. I got them from the prior draft. That was at the end of January, 1908. After preparing the new draft I thought it unnecessary to retain the old one and destroyed it—there might be confusion between. the two drafts. I did not then know that John Nesbit was dead. There are no entries in my day book as to that document. Taking Exhibits 9 and 17, before January 20, 1908, I received instructions from F. C. Davis to prepare settlement of Nos. 38 to 48, Freelands Road. The letter of January 20, 1908, refers to that and another draft. There are no entries in my day book of it. In the draft there is a reference to the three deeds of April 30, 1901, Exhibits 10, 11, and 12. I sent the draft by hand to F. C. Davis with the letter of January 20, 1908. When instructing me to prepare the draft he asked me the date of the prior settlement and I gave it to him. I understood from the first that that deed, like the others, was to be a reproduction of the earlier. deed. He afterwards produced me the engrossment with the date filled in by himself. I alttested its execution. He subsequently handed me the deed and I filled the date into the draft. When I sent the draft out, it only had on it "190." In sending the draft I knew F. C. Davis was going to put in the earlier date, but it did not occur to me to put the date in the draft. It is very unusual to put the date in the draft. I cannot add any more to what I have said about that. At the time of the execution of the last of these deeds I had no knowledge whatever that there was an unsatisfied judgment of the Bromley Corporation against F. C. Davis or that bankruptcy proceedings had been taken. In Exhibit 9 there, is only the name of "T. J. Davis" as trustee. In the draft the two

names of Nesbit and Lillie had been struck out. T. J. Davis was the only trustee in the prior deed of September, 1905. The two names "Nesbit" and "Lillie" are put in by F. C. Davis and struck our by him. With regard to all the other five deeds the trustees are T. J. Davis and John Nesbit; that was so in all prior settlements and my instructions were to make the deeds to the same trustees, I had no knowledge of the death of John Nesbit—I heard it in March. In this draft there is put, in F. C. Davis's writing, the date of July. It was struck out when the draft came back to me. I put in "September, 1905" from the original.

(Wednesday, March 17.)

HERBERT JAMES ILOTT , member of Ilott, Grant, Wilson, Scott, and Sothern, surgeons, Bromley; and JOHN YALDON HAY, of Beachcroft, Thompson, Hay, and Ledward, 9 and 11, Theobald's Road, solicitors, gave evidence to the character of T. J. Davis.

FRANK RIDLEY (prisoner, on oath), recalled. Further examined. I was in Court on February 7, 1908, when the judgment was given In the Woolwich Equitable Building Society v. Davis. I was subpœnaed as a witness by the plaintiffs. All the deeds had then been executed. I had no intention of doing anything for the purpose of defeating the claim of the Woolwich Building Society. I knew there was an action running and they wanted to get their money. I did not know that a receiving order had been made on January 28—I never heard it mentioned in Court. Exhibit 60 is a letter of February 8, 1908, from T. J. Davis to F. C. Davis: "The result is no more than I expected. It might have been brought in a Criminal Court. "I knew of no ground for that statement. I. first became personally acquainted with T. J. Davis after February 8, 1908. In Court it was suggested that in the various transactions F. C. Davis had had over Burnt Ash Lane property in selling some portion to Nash and some portion to Forshaw, I appeared as his solicitor, which was not correct. I acted for Nash in one instance and Forshaw in another. F. C. Davis had no solicitor in those transactions. (To the Judge.) Forshaw was the co-conspirator, in the view of the learned Judge, with F. C. Davis. I acted for Forshaw up to the time they got judgment against him. Interlocutory judgment was given on October 29, 1907. (To Mr. Kemp.) An order was obtained early in December from the Master that the judgment should be set aside on Forshaw paying the costs of the application. Those terms were not carried out, and the judgment remained. The costs were £10 or £11. On February 7 the action was going on against F. C. Davis alone, for whom I did not appear. I do not think my name was mentioned in the judgment. I wanted to go into the witness-box, but neither party would call me. F. C. Davis called no witness; Forshaw was not appearing; the plaintiffs did not want me. I think Mr. Gregory or Mr. Barret was acting for F. C. Davis. Until I got the notice from the Official Receiver on March 12, 1908, I had no knowledge of the bankruptcy proceedings. That was when

I had notice to produce the deeds, and I informed T. J. Davis it was the proper course to adopt., T. J. Davis replied on March 14, "I cannot allow the settlements to be taken away from your charge,' etc. I saw F. C. Davis and asked him why he had kept this from me—that was the day or day after I received the notice. I strongly advised him to do the honest thing and pay his creditors. He could have paid at that time—he had assets. I continued urging him that be ought to pay his creditors. I thought he could do so from the interests he had. On March 27 some of the deeds were still in my possession and some in F. C. Davis's possession. At that time the dates had all been filled in. The expression in Davis's letter of March 27 to me, "Do not fill in dates till I see you," had nothing to do with the settlements. F. C. Davis came to me a few days before with a large account of his properties in draft. He said, "I have been directed by the Official Receiver to supply him with an account of all properties that I have acquired in the last ten years, and what I have done with them." He left this account with me for the purposes of filling up dates and figures, amount of costs, and so forth. It took some considerable time to look up the papers, and while the draft was in my possession I received that letter. He afterwards saw me, and some of the dates are. filled in in my writing from drafts, etc., in my possession and some by F. C. Davis. It was what might be called a skeleton account with certain blanks. He completed the account as far as he could, and be brought it to me to finally complete. I gave or sent it to F. C. Davis, and I received it back—he wanted some further additions made to it. It is referred to in letter Exhibit 86, an undated letter received about the 29th. That is the only construction I can put upon it. The statement was correct so far as a any transactions I had to do with went, but there were a lot of transactions in property which I knew nothing of. I have not seen the document since. (To the Judge.) I did not fill in the dates on the drafts till about the time I handed the deeds to Webb in July. The letter about filling in the dates did not refer to the deeds—I copied the dates from the deed. (To Mr. Kemp.) I acted for F. C. Davis in the appeal. I was instructed on March 30, and the appeal was heard on April 4. I delivered my bill of costs in the ordinary course, Which has not been paid. (Between April and July I was constantly urging F. C. Davis to pay his creditors. He said he had. offered them 7s. 6d. in the £. I said, "You will have to make a considerably better offer than that." I told him I thought he would be saving his own money and a lot of worry and trouble if be paid his creditors 20s. in the £. He was in a position to raise the money, and he did it in October. He shrugged his shoulders and said, "Oh, we will see about that." Letter at page 219 of my press copy letter book refers to the completion of a mortgage on which the Lewes Building Society were lending £750 to T. J. Davis. I was acting for him. He was intending to lend F. C. Davis £100 or £150 out of that transaction. When F. C. Davis wrote letter Exhibit 20 he wanted to be his own legal adviser. I received notice at that time from Thomas to produce the deeds, and I appeared at the hearing on July 20, when Mr. Morton Smith, acting for the Woolwich Building Society, called upon T. J.

Davis to produce the deeds. I was there for T. J. Davis, and instructed counsel. I was instructed by F. C. Davis. I handed over 12 deeds altogether, including all the incriminated deeds. Some of them came to me from T. J. Davis on March 13, namely, Exhibits 3 4, 10, 11, and 12. With regard to Exhibits 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, as far as I know, that is the first time they came into the possession of T. J. Davis. On July 25 a question had arisen with regard to when these deeds were executed. In addition to T. J. Davis being subpœnaed, the two daughters of F. C. Davis were also subpœnaed. They were present on July 20, but were not called. I thought then there were no grounds for criminal steps to be taken. I regarded the deeds one and all as merely the reproductions of the original settlements. On July 27 I applied for an adjournment. I prepared draft produced of an undertaking by T. J. Davis to pay the creditors. The application was opposed and the Registrar refused to grant an adjournment. I afterwards discussed the matter with T. J. Davis and Mr. Thomas, the solicitor of the Woolwich Building Society, and the draft undertaking of July 27 was prepared in the handwriting of Mr. Thomas, signed by T. J. Davis and witnessed by myself, and produced to the Court. I handed the deeds to T. J. Davis as he was called upon to produce them, without telling him that they were reduplicated deeds. In September I told him that. F. C. Davis had returned his estate as "nil." I thought he had assets. There would be a question as to the validity of the settlements. I thought the settlements would not hold good it he did not settle his creditors' claim. I regarded them as good settlements. On August 10 I had an interview with Birch, solicitor to the Woolwich Building Society—up to a certain point he was acting on behalf of the Official Receiver. As far as I knew T. J. Davis's undertaking would have been carried out. Birch knew that I had been attesting witness to several of the settlements and he wanted me to tell him what I knew about them. I told him the undertaking would be carried out, and for that reason declined to give any information. Birch knew I had been acting in the matter of the settlements. On August 11 I saw Birch by appointment, and again refused to give information with regard to the dates of the settlements because T. J. Davis's undertaking was intended to he carried out. I met Birch again on September 11—his account of the conversation is substantially correct. I saw him afterwards and told him the deeds were executed between October, 1907, and February, 1908. Birch suggested that I should make an affidavit to that effect. Having thought over the matter, I saw Birch at Thomas's office on September 12. He had an affidavit prepared. I said that I had been always urging F. C. Davis to pay his creditors. He said he wanted the affidavit to enable the Woolwich Building Society to get their money. He said that if F. C. Davis paid off the bankruptcy the affidavit would be returned to me. I said, "Suppose the debts and liabilities are not paid?" He said, "The affidavit will not be used without giving you notice. "Upon that I made the affidavit. In my judgment F. C. Davis ought before this

time to have made arrangements for paying off his creditors and he could have done so. On September 30 the various deeds and drafts were handed over by me, together with the two mortgages. belonging to T. J. Davis, in response to the Official Receiver's letter of that date. I resigned my directorship of the Bickley Land Company on September 30. F. C. Davis's liabilities had not been paid, and as far as I could see there was no attempt being made to pay them. I thought the Official Receiver would attack the company and say it was F. C. Davis under another name. I had nothing to do with the arrangements made for paying the creditors—I knew nothing about the negotiations. Ottaway found upon me an impressed deed stamp of 7s. 6d. (produced) dated March 3, 1905. I got that from a client named George William Girling. He was in, my office at the end of 1905 and he produced it, told me he had cut it off a spoilt deed and asked me if it was any good to me. I said, "My children collect stamps, and if you do not want it I will take it and give it to them." I. put it in my drawer; it was left there for some considerable time, and I transferred it to my pocket-book and had it with me at the time of my arrest. It was worthless—it would have beep impossible to put it on to another deed as it could not have been stuck on to the parchment. With regard to Exhibit 67, 'Martin's Bank, F. C. D. account, May 28,1907, £150 paid in," and underneath "June 30, 1907, balance £3 0s. 3d." Exhibit 69 is an undated letter from T. J. Davis with reference to the ball of sale, "My pass 'book shows £150. How can this be got over?" I never acted for T. J. Davis in the bill of sale transactions—I knew nothing at all about it. I never acted for F. C. Davis in his bankruptcy, When I instructed counsel for T. J. Davis, on instructions of F. C. Davis, I looked upon it as acting for T. J. Davis—I took no other part in the bankruptcy. I cannot explain why T. J. Davis came to me for advice in reference to the bill of sale. I never answered the letter. His letter was found at my office. His letter was written no doubt after he had been served with a subpoena. It is mere accident that I kept the letter. I had nothing to do with the transactions between F. C. Davis and the Bickley Land Company. From the first to the last I had no intention to take any steps in the name of F. C. Davis that could be called in question. I showed the deeds to the Official Receiver—I raised no objection to do so and gave him every assistance. With regard to the settlements, I acted for Davis in the ordinary way as a solicitor. I looked forward to only my ordinary remuneration, which remuneration I have not received.

Cross-examined by Mr. Jones. I did not know much about F. C. Davis's financial position in 1908. I regarded him as a man of some. means. I did not know anything about his losses in the Welsh Slate Quarries. I knew of no other assets except the property which were settled by these deeds and what he had in the Bickley Land Company. I thought he made a considerable sum of money out of dealings with property and that possibly he had some of that left. I did not tell F. C. Davis that I had made the affidavit to Mr. Birch.

Cross-examined by Mr. F. E. Smith. When T. J. Davis appeared to be privately examined I had seen him once before—I think in April at Cannon Street Station. At the examination I told him I was appearing for him—or rather that counsel were appearing under my instructions. I sat close to T. J. Davis when he was examined, and when counsel asked him questions I produced the deeds one by one, handed them to T. J. Davis, and he said, "Yes. "I think I told T. J. Davis that the deeds were duplicated before September 12. Cross-examined by Mr. Travers Humphreys. I have acted in a large number of matters for F. C. Davis, extending over a number of years. I always found him a satisfactory client. He failed to pay me one or two small bills of costs, which were delivered in 1906, and which I sued him for in October, 1907. They did not relate to the preparation of the settlements. With regard to those, he has paid my costs with the exception of the work in 1907 and 1908. I produce my rough cashbook in my handwriting; I keep my own books. I do not find any entry with reference to the deed of December 9, 1901. There is an entry for the work I did on the deed of April 30, 1901, on May 8. On January 16, 1903, there is a payment of £3 3s. in reference to the deed of December 18, 1902. The payment of the deed of December 19, 1901, may have been omitted. On July 21, 1905, I prepared and attested two deeds, Exhibits 7 and 8. I find no entry relating to the payment of those. There is an entry on August 16, 1905, of £6 6s., in re Brennan. There is a payment of £15 9s., which may contain items from the deeds. I did a lot of work for F. C. Davis in 1905. On November 4 there is an entry of £2 on account of Gray v. Daniel, and a further payment of £5 on November 14.

WALTER EDWARD WINSTONE , managing director of Winstone and Co., Limited, Cross Street, Finsbury, wholesale and export ironmongers, gave evidence to the character of F. C. Davis.

FRANK RIDLEY (prisoner, on oath). Further cross-examined by Mr. Travers Humphreys. There is nothing in my diary relating to the settlements—that is only used for appointments. I made draft bills of cost; I do not know of any draft (bills of cost referring to these deeds, but there were a large number of bills of cost left at my office which I have not looked through. I gave the deeds and drafts in each case to F. C. Davis. I keep a book in which receipts are given for documents delivered (produced). I did not always take a receipt from F. C. Davis. I see no receipts here. There were a large number of other deeds which I handed over to F. C. Davis for which I took no receipts. I put confidence in F. C. Davis at the time. It was not a regular custom to take receipts. In this book there is a large number of recipts. It was my practice to take receipts, but it was not carried out always with regard to F. C. Davis and a large number of other clients. I did not take this book if I saw a client at his office and handed him deeds. I have often taken receipts on pieces of paper, which are put into that book. In the day book, July 17, 1903, there is an entry relating to the deed, July 17, 1903 It was put in at or about that time. Very likely I used a different

pen—I have half a dozen penholders on my desk. All three entries there were done on that day. On September 3, 1905, there is an entry of instructions with regard to Freelands Road. That is with regard to Exhibit 9. The instructions may have been given at his office or mine. If September 3, 1905, was a Sunday, all the entries on the sheet are entered under the wrong date. The entry of September 7, 1905, was omitted and entered afterwards—probably the following day—I cannot remember. The entry on July 27 is in my writing and was written on or about that date. The "1908" is a clerical error. There is no question it is an "8." (Book examined by the Jury.) I did not make entries in my day book of attendance upon F. C. Davis in 1907 and 1908 in relation to the duplication of these original deeds—my day book at the time was not written up, and when I came to write it up, I could not fix the exact dates when these documents were executed and the work done, so I thought it better not to put any entries in at all. I should write it up from my cash book and the papers. I was going to charge F. C. Davis for the work. In 1907 I had had a dispute with him about my bill of costs and had to sue him. That was the client whose attendances I omitted to put down. If there had been a dispute about the charges, I should think the taxing master would want to see the original deeds, and would put the client upon his oath. The settlements were in my possession up to July 28. I have made a draft bill of costs a month or two ago, which I have in my pocket. At the time I prepared these deeds I had no knowledge of F. C. Davis having had a judgment against him. I had full knowledge of the action against him and Forshaw by the Woolwich Equitable Society—I was acting for Forshaw, and I knew his co-defendant was F. C. Davis and that the allegations were fraud and conspiracy. Forshaw put in a defence and counter claim. Then interrogatories were delivered, which he did not answer, and there was a peremptory order to file his answer in 14 days. That did not make me very careful what I did for F. C. Davis. I never knew him to dispute a just debt in my life. Between March and July I had seen F. C. Davis several times, and the question of the duplication of the deeds was discussed in a general way. He said, "I suppose I must make a small offer." I urged him very strongly to settle up with his creditors. I told T. J. Davis that the deeds would not bear strict investigation. F. C. Davis said he had told "his brother tall about the deeds—he appeared to know, and never asked me any questions. That was on the morning of July 27, the date of T. J. Davis's examination. The main reason they wanted the private sitting was because they suspected the genuineness of these deeds. T. J. Davis was asked when he last saw the deeds, and he stated in October last year that he had got the tin box with the whole of the deeds in. That was false to my knowledge. I told him at the end of the first day that there must be a settlement, and counsel advised him the same thing. I told him in the luncheon adjournment that he had made a very serious mistake. I drew Exhibit 3 with the help of the Abstract of Title. That would not give me the clause about the power of attorney. I got that from the draft

of the previous deed, which I had not seen since 1903. I remembered it in 1908. I had good reason to remember it, because it is a very unusual clause. F. C. Davis desired in 1903, and again in 1908, that that clause should be there. What I understood was that F. C. Davis was going to duplicate them, and that they would take the place of prior settlements. I put in also a policy of insurance which the original deed did not contain. F. C. Davis pointed out that the policy was not in the prior settlement, and it was struck out.

Cross-examined by Mr. F. E. Smith. Between July 20 and 27 I had no conversation with T. J. Davis. There was a consultation with counsel on July 20 after the private sitting. There was a long conference with Mr. Knocker. I did not then tell T. J. Davis about the irregularity of the deeds. On the 27th I arrived at the Court first. I think T. J. Davis arrived late, and almost directly he came into the room he was put into the box and his examination resumed. What little conversation I had with him would not be more than half a dozen words or so in the passage. I think the next conversation I had with him was in September—the time when my affidavit was sworn.

Re-examined by Mr. Kemp. I still say the whole of the costs of the prior settlements were paid by F. C. Davis. The entry in the day book of July 17, 1903, is correct, and the two entries before and after it were written at the same time and on the same day. I could not fix from memory that they were all made straight off one after another. The same observation would apply to the entry of July 20, 1903.

FREDERICK CHARLES DAVIS (prisoner on oath), recalled, further examined. I produce my London and County Bank pass book showing on January 20, 1902, payment of £2 2s. to Ridley; on May 31, £5; on June 7, 1902, £2 10 s.; on December 10, 1902 £7 5s. I also produce pass book of Martin's Bank: On January 19 there was a payment to Ridley of £3 3s.; on March 7, 15s.; April 15, £2.

To Mr. Travers Humphreys. I told the Official Receiver that my pass books were destroyed in the fire. I thought they were. I found out afterwards that these were with Mr. Gregory—that is how I came by them.

THOMAS JAMES DAVIS (prisoner, on oath). I am 48 years of age I am the elder brother of F. C. Davis and am a married man with two children. For 32 years I have been employed by the same firm of doctors at Bromley, many years as dispenser; the last few years 1 have received a salary of £134 a year, and out of that I have saved some money. For 14 years I lived over the surgery. Occasionally I have bought one or two houses. I bought one house and sold it; then bought three, and I have them still; I bought my own house that I live in. I have had one or two other small deals which have not been fortunate. F. C. Davis made three separate conveyances of the six houses in London Road—he made them on the birthday of his children—two houses to each child as a birthday present, I never saw those deeds till they were produced at the Guildhall. My nieces told me about them. I did not know I was trustee under

them. I was told about the settlement of July 2, 1902. I discussed the matter with my 'brother-in-law, Sergeant-Major Nesbit, and we knew that we were trustees of different properties from time to time. My brother told me, and I always was given to understand, we should not have to act as trustees unless F. C. Davis died. We were also executors of his will. I never took legal advice as to my position. At the beginning of May, 1907, my brother telephoned to me and said he required my evidence at the Law Courts, and that my nieces had some money due to them from the Bickley Land Company, and he desired it should be passed through my account. I was informed at the bank one morning that the money had been paid into my account from London, and I heard either that day or the next from my brother on the telephone—he asked as I was going to town would I bring him my cheque for £150. I was going up to town, I think, on the Wednesday afternoon and I did so. I met my brother at Cannon Street and we went to one or two places, and he said we would call at his solicitor, and we called on Mr. Hart—it was the first time I saw Mr. Hart—there were two or three gentlemen there and I gave my brother my cheque for the £150—that, I understood, was to pay some law costs at Mr. Hart's. Shortly before my brother had moved" his family to Broadstairs, where the girls had taken a house in their own name, and he desired that they should own the furniture of their own house. He told me that oh the day when we went to Bagot Hart. Some document was signed there by my brother which I supposed was a sale of the furniture. It was not read or explained to me, and I was not asked to sign it. I never gave instructions for its preparation. In the following February that bill of sale was. sent me by post from Broadstairs, much to my surprise—there was no letter to my knowledge. I do not know whose handwriting it was in—I had never in my life had anything to do with a bill of sale, and it was the first I had ever seen—that was the first time I learnt there was a bill of sale transaction—I thought it was a sale of the furniture. This was in May, 1907. My 'brother's circumstances, as far as I could judge, were very thriving—he had a motor-car—he had driven a motor-car for a long time. He was always losing or gaining actions—I took no notice of them; one more or less did not matter; he has (been in litigation for the last 20 years, more or less, and he won a great many of those cases—fortunately or unfortunately. In August, 1907, I went to Dover for my holiday with my wife. Mrs. F. C. Davis fetched us to Broadstairs in the motor-car. We slept next door to my brother's. He told me I was trustee for the whole of his property—that was no more than I had known—and I was to look after his children. He made at different times settlements on his children—in fact, I advised him at different times to make a settlement for the protection of his children. I knew I was a trustee before this, but not in the way I know I am a trustee now—I thought it was only after his death. I had seen the deeds Exhibits 3 and 4. At my visit to Broadstairs I had not been shown any others. In October, 1907, my brother telephoned me

would I go over as his messenger to the London and County Bank, as he was not living at Bromley, and would I ask Mr. Wright if he could have a loan of £1,000 on the deed of "Rosslands," the house he had recently left a year or so before. Mr. Wright was not home, and I saw Mr. Foskett, the sub-manager He said he had no objection, provided the deed was in order, and he asked me to bring the deed. I told my brother the result of the interview, and the deed came to me from Broadstairs. There was only one deed—I acted as messenger. After three or four days I went over to the bank, and there was some difficulty as to obtaining the signature; I supposed I had to sign some deeds or something of the sort, and they said "No," it was my brother. I was very busy indeed in my own business, and the bank very kindly sent another clerk to see my brother, and then they told me the matter was all in order, and we could have the money. The money was paid into my account. I have never been able to understand from that day to this how that came about. I did not know that I was borrowing the £1,000. It may be that I was represented as the borrower and my brother as guarantor; I know nothing about it. I had a letter that morning from my brother saying he would send the motor driver over for the £1,000—a man named Harris—'and he came, and I did not think it right that a man in that position of life, who I did not know, should have the £1,000, so I did not let him have it, and said I would bring it myself. I and my wife went to town on purpose that afternoon, and brought the £1,000 in notes and handed it over at the offices of the Bickley Land Company. My brother asked me for notes. I put it on the table and he picked it up, at 90. Cannon Street. There was more than one other person there at the time—two others. I knew no reason why he should not raise £1,000 on Rosslands; I did not know there was any illegality in it. I did know that I was trustee for the property, but I did not know that you had to say you were a trustee in borrowing money. I received nothing out of it—unfortunately it has cost me a deal of money. (To the Judge.) I took one deed and one deed only, which was a conveyance of Rosslands, to my brother. I took no deed to the bank appointing me a trustee. I was not made a trustee by my brother. I remember the litigation between the Woolwich Equitable Society and my brother. I was subpœnaed as a witness by the Woolwich company. I did not trouble myself about the details of it, which did not concern me. I had not the least idea what I was to say for them—they did not call me; I did not give them a proof. I did not hear the judgment but I read it in the papers afterwards. It was fully reported in the local papers. I wrote Exhibit 60: "Dear Fred,—Result is. no more than I expected," etc. "The Lambeth people were at the court and were making inquiries at Bickley. "There had been a transaction between me and my brother about some property and I did not like the transaction and I thought there might be a similar case arise. My brother •said someone else had borrowed money from the building society and I could conceive that further litigation might arise and I, being in the position of taking the money over, might be responsible for seeing

that the loan was properly paid. At the time of my examination I had seen one of the settlements. I met my brother in town one afternoon to be introduced to Mr. Ridley—I believe in October, 1907—Ridley was not there, but I saw Forshaw and was shown a deed which was lying on Ridley's table which I was given to understand was a settlement of the whole of my brother's property. I did not read it I cannot identify it. It was on parchment. As to particular deeds bearing earlier dates I knew absolutely nothing about it. When I got the subpoena to be privately examined I had not the remotest idea what the course of business was. I had never been examined except in the local county court. I have never been examined by a counsel or spoken to one. Just then my assistant was away, on his holiday and I was very pressed indeed, and I had to leave an old servant of the firm, who was very deaf, in charge. I was subpœnaed to go there and produce certain deeds and documents. I did not think of having any lawyer to defend me—I was there as a witness. Ridley met me with my brother at Cannon Street Station. My brother said, "You will have to give evidence, but Mr. Ridley will be there and he will instruct counsel for you. "I knew someone was going to be there to look after his interests. I took it to be counsel for my brother's interests. Ridley did not tell me or convey to me that he was to represent me or that counsel was there for me. (Passages of the witness's examination were put to and explained by him.) That was the first time I had seen the deeds. I accepted it all from Ridley—I looked upon him as an honest man. They were produced one at a time to me and I was asked to look at the signature and at the date and I was asked," Do you produce this," and I said, "Yes, I produce it." When I was asked, Did I know of the existence of a deed before October 25, 1907, I believed that was the deed I had seen of the settlement of the whole of the property. One day I was with my brother and a conversation, arose as to borrowing money on settled property and I was informed that as there was a clause in the deed giving the settlor full power to build or pull down and I supposed it was all right. I may add that the London Road property was only a row of dirty little cottages, which F. C. Davis pulled down and rebuilt into very good stops. I supposed he had the power to do it. (A number of answers given by the witness in private examination were explained by him to Mr. F. E. Smith and to the Judge.) After the examination we all went to Mr. Knocker's chambers—myself, Mr. Ridley, and my two nieces. The matter was discussed very fully. No suggestion was made impugning the bonafides of any of the deeds which I had produced. Ridley did not say that they were duplicated deeds; I had no idea that they were. Between the two examinations I did not see 'Ridley. When I came into court the second time I found Mr. Webb there and was told that Ridley had no more to do with it. My brother had written me that Ridley had no more to do with the matter and Mr. Webb would be there to represent me. I had no conversation with Ridley that morning. Ridley did say that the deeds would not bear strict investigation and there had better be a settlement. That did not convey anything to my mind, because I had already concluded that a settlement ought to take place at once.

I had been trying to get my brother to pay for a long time. When I came to think over it on getting home it seemed to me that the property was settled over and over again, and I took it that Ridley referred to something of that kind. They seemed unnecessary deeds—a number of deeds settling the same property. I had no suspicion on the morning of the second day that there had been tampering with any deeds. I heard it at Guildhall for the first time. I had absolutely no knowledge of it before I proceeded to my examination on July 27. At the end of the second day I went to Messrs. Webb with the object of getting the matter settled, but an attempt was made to come to a settlement before we commenced the first day. At that time there was only one claim against my brother by the Bromley Corporation and I tried to get that settled—I offered to pay it myself. On the Saturday before my second examination I went to the Clerk of the Bromley Corporation and offered him £200 out of my own means. At the second examination Mr. Webb stayed there for an hour or an hour and a half when he left and Ridley stayed. Ater the first examination I was taken to my brother's office in Cannon Street. He was not there, but Mr. Hibbert told me my brother was round at Webb's, where I saw my brother and Mr. William Webb. My brother introduced me to him and said he would act for me, and to do that, he must have possession of the whole of the deeds, and I signed the paper authorising Mr. Webb to receive the deeds. When I got home I thought I ought to have an independent solicitor, so knowing Mr. Hore personally, and he having told me if I was ever in trouble to come to him, I went to him and told him the whole story. He advised me not to write to my brother any more, but I did write one last letter of July 26. I had then seen Mr. Knocker and I thought something was wrong somewhere. I wrote Exhibit 69 to Ridley: "Re bill of sale; my pass book shows £150 paid in a day or two before paying F. C. D. How can this be got over?" My attention had been drawn to that at the Bankruptcy Court and especially as to my having got a bill of sale. From the beginning to the end of my transactions with my brother I have not made a penny piece of profit out of any of these matters.

Cross-examined by Mr. Travers Humphreys. In my answer to Question 108 I stated that I had not seen, the deed of December 19, 1901, until last autumn. That was my recollection. I was under the impression that that was the deed I took to the Inland Revenue official. I said I had not had that until the autumn of last year. I never had the London Road deed in my possession at all. After the examination of July 20, I thought criminal proceedings might be taken against somebody, that the matter was very serious, and that a settlement ought to be effected. On the second occasion I did not know that the deeds were impugned. I thought that criminal proceedings might be taken in connection with the Bickley Land Company and my brother. I may have mixed up 1901 and 1902. It was very confusing to me, indeed. I had never been in Court before. My letter to Ridley saying that some criminal steps might be taken was written in answer to his letter, "It is essential that no

more evidence should be taken. "I had no conversation with Ridley about the deeds of settlement, but we were trying our hardest to get my brother to his senses; he was difficult to manage just at that time. I stated that I had seen the deed relating to the London Road property—it contains the (insurance policy—I looked at 'that in Ridley's office, and I saw it contained an insurance policy as it lay on the table. I saw that, in October, 1907. I state that to the best of my belief. It may have bean another deed I saw. The policy was in the tin box that I had given in at that time—the autumn of 1907—that is the first time I got the policy of insurance. I gave no notice to the insurance company that I was trustee to that property. I understood the bill of sale transaction was a sale of the furniture to my nieces; that they had the money due to them (from the Bickley Land Company as dividends or profits. I was told that on the telephone. I did not know why I was wanted in this transaction, except that I had a banking account, and it was done through that account. All I did was to receive £150, and. pay it back again. In October, 1907, when I deposited the deeds of Rosslands at the bank, I knew I was trustee of Rosslands—when my brother settled the property in 1905 my nieces told me about it. They gave more information than my brother did. I met my nieces on Sunday, after church, and they used to tell me all their different troubles and trials; I always used to go home with them. I knew I was supposed to be trustee of Rosslands for them. I did not ask. to see any documents, because I thought I was not to be trustee till after my brother's death, and that he had also made me executor. I had a conversation with a solicitor at a dinner. I used to go up to town every week to meet my brother, and he usually took me to dine somewhere with him. My brother asked me to burn these deeds. I thought my brother's estate—the trust estate—was worth about £9,000. The houses produced a rental of £500 a year, which' is equal to about £9,000; there was about £3,000 owing; so that the estate was worth £6,000, whether it was settled or not—that is only the property I am trustee of. I have a brother William in America—he is in a small position. Re-examined. The estate brings in £500 a year gross. There is the building society's mortgage to pay off, about £15 10s. a month. I was represented at the police court, and it was under advice that I reserved my defence.

Mr. Justice Phillimore suggested that the Jury might do well to acquit T. J. Davis, as there was no evidence on which they could find him guilty of knowing the deeds to be forged.

The Jury returned a verdict of Not guilty with regard to T. J. Davis.

Mr. Justice Phillimore (to T. J. Davis): Before you go I want to make one remark—it is really not so much to you as for other people. I have no doubt you were very ably represented, and I make no suggestion against the counsel or solicitor who represented you, but it shows to my mind what it has shown to many Judges mind—the mischief that arises from the ingrained idea that people ought always to reserve their defence. I believe that if you had told this story at the police court you would never have had all this trial to undergo.

No evidence was offered on the further indictments of forgery and misdemeanour against T. J. Davis, and the Jury returned a verdict of Not guilty.

(Thursday, March 18.)

Mr. Justice Phillimore, in the course of his summing-up, referring to the alleged practice of duplicating deeds, said that in his experience of 40 years, as barrister and judge, he had never heard of such a thing, and he would have imagined that if it was a practice which was honestly and commonly pursued, some solicitors of position would have been called to say that it was not an uncommon thing when deeds were lost to renew them; but no such evidence had been called.

Verdict, Both prisoners guilty. Upon the count, charging F. C. Davis with conspiring with Thomas James Davis to defeat the ends of justice, a formal verdiot of Not guilty was returned, the Jury having already acquitted T. J. Davis.

Mr. Travers Humphreys stated with regard to Ridley that the inquiries of the police had not had the result of showing that he had been guilty of any fraudulent act, and it was, therefore, to be presumed that until October, 1907, he was a perfectly honest man in all his transactions. One reason, possibly, of his downfall, was that he had taken too much to drink, and was more often to be found in the public-house opposite his office than in the office itself.

Sentences: Davis, Five years' penal servitude; Ridley, Four years' penal servitude.

ESSEX CASES.

BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT. (Tuesday, March. 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-55

OSBORNE, Ethel (22, no occupation), and CHANDLER, Mary Ann (21, laundress) ; "both uttering counterfeit coin three times on same day.

Mr. Beaumont Morice prosecuted; Mr. Wells Thatcher and Mr. P. B. Petrides defended Osborne.

WALTER SIDNEY SMITH , Barking Road, corn merchant. On February 6, 1909, at nine p.m., Chandler came into my shop, asked for 1d. worth of jelly cuttings, tendered half-a-crown, received 2s. 5d. change, and went out. I then found the coin was bad. I followed her, and saw her go into Cook's oilshop. I spoke to Cook, and afterwards gave the coin to the police. I believe it is the one produced.

HENRY GEORGE COOK , 235, Barking Road, oilman. On February 6, at about nine p.m., Chandler came into my shop, which is a few doors from that of the last witness, asked for a cake of soap, 2d., paid for it with a half-crown, and was leaving the shop when Smith and two police officers came in, and made a communication to me. I handed the coin to the police, which I identify (produced).

ALFRED HART , assistant to William Arthur Lewis, 170, Barking Road, cornchandler. On February 6, at about 8.45 p.m., Chandler purchased 1d. worth of jelly cunings, and tendered a half-crown in payment. I tried the coin on a slate, found it bad, handed it to Lewis, who told her it was bad. She said, "Is it. What is the matter with it?" and gave me a penny. Lewis gave her the coin back.

WILLIAM ARTHUR LEWIS , 170, Barking Road, corn merchant, corroborated the last witness. When Chandler received the coin she left the shop, walked up the road, joined Osborne, and they crossed the road to the shop of Mulcaster where Chandler went in, came out, and went into a chemist's shop further on, Osborne walking to the next shop, and waiting outside. I spoke to Mulcaster, and afterwards went to the station, and returned with Police-constable Jarvis, when we found the prisoners near Denmark Street, Barking Road, crossing the road together. I afterwards identified them at the station.

GEORGE MULCASTER , 231, Barking Road, corn merchant. On February 6, at about 8.30 p.m., Chandler came into my shop, asked for 1d. worth of jelly cuttings, tendered (half-crown (produced), which I tested, found bad, and told her it was bad. She said, "Oh. is it!" produced 1d., took the bad coin up, and left. I followed her out, and Lewis spoke to me. We followed her, and saw her join Osborne. Chandler went into a chemist's, while Osborne stayed outside. When she came out the two 'walked down, the road as far as Jones's, a tea grocer's, when again Chandler went in, Osborne waiting outside across the road, Chandler coming out and joining the other. Lewis, who had left me at the chemist's, now returned with a police-constable.

Police-constable RICHARD JARVIS , 574 K. On February 6, at about nine p.m., I was at Plaistow Police Station, in plain clothes, when I received information, and kept observation on prisoners. They stopped opposite 235, Barking Road, when Osborne passed something to Chandler, who went into the shop, came out, and they went up the road together. I called the attention of another officer to the prisoners, and went into the shop and called Cooks attention to the coin. I then followed Chandler, and told her I should arrest her for passing a bad half-crown. She said, "You have made a mistake this time." I then took her to the station. Cook gave me coin produced, which I marked. On the morning of February 8 I took Chandler to West Ham Police Court. On the way she said, "Those coins were given to me by a man who goes under the name of 'Snowball,' in a public-house in Canning Town, on Saturday evening, and we shared them between us."

Cross-examined. Osborne wore the same coat she is wearing now. When she was joined by the other prisoner outside 235, Barking Road I did not notice her put something in her pocket. I was about four or five yards off. Something may have been passed from Chandler to Osborne. (To Chandler.) Chandler did not say, "I did not know they were bad."

CHANDLER denied having said anything to the officer about the other prisoner having shaved the coins.

Police-constable MARTIN BUTCHER , 711 K. On February 6, between eight and nine p.m., I was on duty in Barking Road, when my attention was called to the prisoners by Police-constable Jarvis. Osborne was standing on the kerb outside a fruit shop. I told her I was going to arrest her for being concerned with another person in going round to shops passing counterfeit coin. She said, "I know nothing about any other person, or a woman, nor yet of any bad coin. "I said I should take her to the station. She said, "All right; I will go willingly."

Cross-examined. Osborne went willingly to the station. She said "I do not know anything about any other woman passing bad coins."

ELIZABETH GODDARD , matron Plaistow Police Station. I searched the prisoners. On Osborne I found 2s. and 4 1/2 d. in bronze, good money; three 2d. packets of tea, a tin of blacking, and a tin of boot polish, value 1d. each. On Chandler I found 48s. in silver and 9s. 7 1/2 d. in bronze, altogether loose in the outside pocket of the waterproof jacket she was wearing; there were also two 2-oz. packets of tea, three tablets of soap, three tablets of chocolates, a small tin of boot polish, and a box of ointment.

Police-sergeant GEORGE ASKHAM , 73 K. I received the two coins produced from Smith and Cook, which were marked in my presence "M. B." and "R. J."

WILLIAM SPILSTEAD , Canning Town, grocer, trading as "Jones and Co. "On February 8 I found bad half-crown produced in my till, it having been taken on the Saturday previous. Packet of tea produced has my wrapper on. Lewis's shop is about four minutes' walk from mine; Mulcaster, Smith, and Cook are about 10 minutes' from me.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , Inspector of Coins, His Majesty's Mint. Three half-crowns produced are counterfeit, all made from the same mould; they are very well made from a worn coin in circulation.

Statements. Osborne: "I plead Not guilty." Chandler: "I say that Osborne has had nothing to do with it at all; she was quite innocent. A young man gave me these coins. I know him personally. He asked me to have a drink; I accepted it. In the meantime he asked me where I was going. I said I was going to the Fair. He said, 'Wait a minute; if I have time I will go down with you.' He put his hand in his pocket, counted his money, and then he said, 'Would you mind doing me a favour?' I said, 'Certainly, what is it?’ He said, 'Will you go and get me some change?' I turned round and said, 'Who is going to give change on Saturday night? People are too busy.' He said, 'Never mind, go in any shop along the road, purchase anything so that you can get me change. I will wait here until you come back. I, innocent enough, thought they were good and took them. I have no witnesses here."

(Defence.)

ETHEL OSBORNE (prisoner, on oath). I live at 125, Earl Street, Stepney, with my husband, Leonard Osborne. I have known Chandler four months. She had a room off me at No. 98, where I lived. Since this case has been on I have moved to No. 125. On February 6 I had got my husband's tea ready, when Chandler asked me to go to the Fair in Canning Town. We left at six o'clock. I had 3s. 6d. with me; we had some tea and a few glasses of ale, so that when arrested I had 2s. 4 1/2 d. on me. We took the tram to Canning Town Station, where we met a young man whom Chandler knew called "Snowball," and he asked us to have a drink, which we did. Chandler had some private conversation with him, and he said to her, "Be back by 10." Chandler then said to me, "Have a walk with me." I said, "I do not mind," and we went up the road. She went into a shop, saying, "Wait for me, I won't be a minute," and I waked outside on the pavement. She came out and we walked on. She went into several shops, while I stood outside—to Cook's, 235, Barking Road, and others. She gave me, a box of boracic ointment and three packets of tea from different places, which I put in my pocket. I have never mad a counterfeit coin in my possession knowingly.

Cross-examined. I did not stop and have tea with my husband. We met "Snowball" at about 7.30 p.m. I did not see him pass anything to Chandler. He said, "Be back. at 10 o'clock" as we were coming out of the bar—that meant at the public-house. I think Chandler went into a dozen shops. She only asked me to wait for her; she never mentioned that she was doing anything wrong at all and I naturally waited outside for her to come out; she did not rejoin me; she simply came out of the shop and walked on with me. She never said anything to me. I thought she was very flush with money, but I did not think there was anything wrong. She gave me two little packets of tea and a tin of ointment to hold—nothing else. I did not see that she had anything else. I did not know that she had 9s. 7 1/2 d. in coppers—she did not say anything about it. I did not know that she had any money upon her at all—I thought she was flush of money but I did not think she had all that—I did not know what she was buying; I knew nothing about her having bad half-crowns. We met Snowball at the corner of the Barking Road on the other side of Canning Town Station where we got out of the tram, and he took us into the public-house there. When standing outside Cook's I never passed anything to Chandler—she passed me the box of ointment. I did not know anything about her business—I had not been out with her before.

Re-examined. I am 22 years of age. Saturday is my pay day. It is usual to go shopping on that day.

(Wednesday, March 3.)

ETHEL OSBORNE (cross-examination continued). I put the things in my inside jacket pocket, which is the only pocket I had. Nothing

was found on me but 2s. 4 1/2 d. I never had any counterfeit coin on me. I had nothing to do with counterfeit coins on this occasion or any other. (To the Judge.) We got on the tram at Limehouse to go to Canning Town, which is about fifteen minutes' walk from the fair. We got off at Canning Town Station and went into the public-house at the comer after meeting this young man Snowball. In the public-house he spoke to Chandler and then just as we were going out of the door he said, "Be back at 10 o'clock. "We had not done any shopping before we met Snowball. We went along the road and Chandler went into a good many shops. I did not take any notice of the shops. She asked me to wait and I was not inquisitive. I think she went into a dozen shops—I think about three before we went into Smith's. She began going into the shops about a quarter of an hour after we left Snowball.

MARY ANN CHANDLER (prisoner, on oath). I have no evidence only to say that I did not know they were bad. The young man asked me to do him a favour and I took them. I did not know they were counterfeit or else I would not have done it.

Verdict. Osborne, Not guilty; Chandler, Guilty. Sentence, six months' hard labour.

BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT. (Wednesday, March 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-56

RODLEY, Samuel (21, labourer), and HARDING, Frederick (18, coster), pleaded guilty of both burglary in the dwelling-house of Frederick John Wyness 'and stealing therein eight tins of salmon, six packets of cocoa, and other articles, his goods; both on February 10, 1909, stealing one pair of shears, the goods of the Walthamstow Urban District Council; both on February 9, 1909, stealing one basket, one pot of jam, and other articles, the goods of Maurice Napper.

Mr. A. S. Ramsay prosecuted.

Both prisoners were stated to be of good previous character. The Court missionary (Mr. Scott-France) for Harding, and Mr. Charles Taylor, of the Church Army, for Rodley, having undertaken to find them employment and to report to the Court on April 20, prisoners were released on their own recognisances to come up for judgment if called upon.

Reference Number: t19090302-57

HADLEY, Arthur (26, labourer), pleaded guilty of stealing three rolls of shirting, the goods of Richard Thomas Roberts.

Prisoner confessed to having been convicted at West Ham Quarter Sessions on October 10, 1902, in the name of Arthur Antony, receiving three years' penal servitude on each of three indictments (concurrent) for counting-house breaking and larceny. Several other short convictions for larceny were proved. It was stated that for the last two years prisoner had been at work and had given satisfaction.

Sentence, One month's " hard labour. The Judge recommended the prisoner to Mr. Charles Taylor, of the Church Army, for employment at the conclusion of his sentence.

BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.

(Wednesday, March 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-58

McCOY, George (28, labourer), pleaded guilty of stealing one black leather trunk, one brown leather trunk, one iron trunk, one small tin trunk, and other articles, the goods of the London and India Docks Company, from a certain dock.

Several convictions were proved.

Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.

Reference Number: t19090302-59

CORDELL, Sidney (27, stoker), pleaded guilty of stealing five pieces of zinc and one piece of lead piping, the goods of Horace Randall.

Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-60

CLARIDGE, Edward (52, labourer) , unlawfully and carnally know-ing Sarah Ann Moody, an imbecile; also unlawfully assaulting Emily Louisa Claridge.

Verdict, Not guilty.

Reference Number: t19090302-61

WILLIAMS, William (59, shoemaker), pleaded guilty of stealing one roll of cloth, the goods of Albert Howes.

Previous convictions proved: Seven years' penal servitude in 1870, seven years' penal servitude in 1876, seven years' penal servitude in 1885, one month in 1892, three years' penal servitude in 1893, three years and three months' in 1907.

PRISONER (to the Judge). On January 26 I was charged with stealing 18 yards of cloth, value 8s. I had been three months out of work. I was discharged by the Lambeth Borough Council because I was over 54 years of age. It is the rule of the Council under the Workmen's Compensation Act. I have been working on and off with Messrs. Mitchell Brothers for 18 months. After the conviction in 1907 I went to work for the Lambeth Borough Council. I was discharged in October. I began to steal again because I was out of work. I committed this act to bring my case to your notice. My wife is in the workhouse. While I have been out of prison I have tried to redeem myself. Hunger and being out of work made me do it.

Sentence, Two months' imprisonment, second division.

Reference Number: t19090302-62

CANNON, William (60, stoker) , feloniously causing grievous bodily harm to Ernest Borrott and George Hill.

Prisoner pleaded not guilty with regard to Ernest Borrott, but guilty with regard to George Hill.

Detective-sergeant ELSON , K Division, proved 15 convictions for petty larcenies extending from 1891 to June, 1908, and two for assaults on the police.

Sentence, Three months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-63

WHEELER, Harry (38, stoker), pleaded guilty of, on February 24, 1909, stealing one brass handle and one brass screw, the goods of the Federal Steam Navigation 'Company, Limited; assaulting Alexander Pompey and John Wren.

A previous conviction was proved.

Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-64

MAY, Albert (25, stoker), and RICE, William (24, labourer), pleaded guilty of feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Kate May and stealing therein one gold ring, two remnants, and other articles, the goods of the said Kate May.

Sentence: May, 12 months' hard labour. Rice was released on his own recognisances in the sum of £5 to come up for judgment if called upon.

BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT. (Saturday, March 6.)

Reference Number: t19090302-65

BARTRUP, Joseph (50, painter), ATKIN, Henry (31, labourer), and CHAPMAN, George (46, seaman) ; feloniously robbing William Wright and stealing the sum of £34 in money and four seamen's advance notes of the value of £15 10s., his goods and moneys from his person.

Mr. H. C. Bickmore prosecuted.

WILLIAM WEIGHT , 11, Watford Road, Canning Town, registered money lender. About two p.m., on February 17, I met Peter Ducalow, a seaman, at the ship "Gaika," and cashed an advance note for him. It was for £4 10s.; I gave him £4 5s. 6d. for it; he had signed on the "Gaika." I remained with him until six o'clock. We then met Atkin and Chapman outside the "Becton Arms" public-house at the corner of Peter Street, Canning Town. We all went into the Becton Arms" and stayed there until about eight o'clock. Ducalow's wife joined us in there. Up to that time I had four glasses of four-ale and two shandy-gaffs. We then left the "Becton Arms" and went to 13, Peter Street, me and Mrs. Ducalow and Peter Ducalow and Atkin and Chapman and Bartrup followed and came in afterwards. 13, Peter Street is where Ducalow lives. I stayed there until 8.35. While there half a gallon of beer was sent for. Atkin fetched it and also a mouth organ; that was played and there was some dancing. I had half a tumbler of the beer. Mrs. Ducalow then went to fetch some more beer, but she did not come back; then Peter Ducalow said he would go and fetch her and he went out and did not come back either. I then came over all of a heat. I was sitting on the edge of the bed, and I said "I will be going," and as—

I got up off the bed they knocked one down and robbed me. It was the three prisoners who knocked me down on the bed, and another man I did not recognise rushed into the room and helped them. I had £32 in gold and £2 in silver in a bag and £15 10s. in four advance notes. I struggled with them for five to 10 minutes and then all four of them left the room. My waistcoat was all undone, my belt hanging down, and all my money and the advance notes gone. I then went down into the street and sent a lad for a police-constable. I went with the policeman to the station and gave a description of the men. I have no doubt that prisoners are the three men who attacked me. Chapman was a stranger to me until that night. I had never spoken to Atkin before. Bartrup was a stranger to me. I saw Atkin the following morning in the Barking Road. I said, "Good morning." He said, "Good morning." I said, "You were in my company last night." He said, "I was in the 'Becton Arms' with you, but I did not come in the house. "I told him I had been robbed of everything I had. He said, "I was robbed myself there last week." He told me Bartrup lived in lodging-houses and he did not know where he was. I next saw Bartrup the same morning between 11 and 12 at the corner of the "Becton Arms." I told him I should have him arrested for robbing me. He said I was as—b——fool, that he had never seen me before, and he went to strike me. I next saw Chapman on February 25 at the police station. He was then in custody and I picked him out from among eight other men. I have never seen any more either of my advance notes or of my money.

(Monday, March 8.)

WILLIAM WRIGHT , examination continued. After cashing the advance note for Ducalow, I stayed drinking with him till six p.m. The "Becton Arms" is a place Where seamen go to drink. Bartrup is Ducalow's father-in-law. I found that out since. Bartrup was a stranger to me, but I knew Atkins by sight. I went to 13, Peter Street because Peter Ducalow said I had cashed his advance note very reasonably for him, and he asked me to come up to his house and spend half an hour with him. Singing and drinking and dancing were going on all the time, and then I came over as though I had been drugged after I drunk a drop of beer out of the glass; what I had was the last that was in the bottle.

To Bartrup. There was another man in the room besides you, but I have not got him in custody. The first time I met you was at eight o'clock. I do not know whether you were in the "Becton Arms" before I went to the house.

To Atkins. I did not go into the "Becton Arms" at 3.15; it was half-past five or six. There were not three other men in my company besides you and Ducalow and the other two prisoners; there were other men in the bar, but they were not in my company. When I met you the following morning I did not ask you whether you were in my company the night before. I said, "You were in my company last night. "You did say to me you were very sorry to hear that I had lost my money. I did not tell you that I had been

told that I was robbed by a man named Bartrup. You did say you knew him and I did say, "If you should run across him, call round to 11, Watford Road and you will lose nothing by it. "I did not charge you when I saw you because I knew where I could find you. You did tell me that you had been robbed in the same house yourself. I am sure you said in the same house.

To Chapman. I did not meet you early in the afternoon. I met you at the corner of the "Becton Arms" between half-past five and six. There were two men—not strangers—Jarvis and Smith, in there with me, but they went out and went home. I was not going Tommy Dodd for whelks and mussels in the "Becton Arms"; it was with three cards and the highest number or the lowest number had to pay. I did not give you two 2s. pieces to pay for beer.

Re-examined. While Bartrup and Atkins were rifling my pockets Chapman was holding me down, and the other man that I have not got in custody had hold of my hand, and bit me on the hand.

Police-constable ROBERT FRISBY , 11 K. On February 17 I was on duty in Barking Road at nine p.m., and, on receiving a message, went to 13, Peter Street. I there saw prosecutor outside the house in the street. He was very excited, his hat was off, his clothes all undone, his pockets hanging out, and his belt undone. He made a statement to me, and I went into the house myself. Prosecutor went with me to the station. He was very excited, but did not appear to be drunk. Within about a hundred yards of the station, he became very dizzy, and I had to hold him to stop him from falling; he caught hold of the railings and started to vomit. He could not say anything when he got inside the station. I did not form any opinion as to what was the cause of his condition. Prosecutor gave me no description of the prisoners that night, and he did not come to me the next day. A lad gave me the description of three men he saw running away from the house. He was not called at the police court. I saw a small boy at 13, Peter Street, in the front room upstairs, and he made a statement to me. At 11.10 p.m. next day I was on duty in Hermit Road, and saw Atkins, and told him I was going to take him into custody on suspicion of being concerned with robbing a man at 13, Peter Street. He replied, "It is very strange. I was in the house but did not have any of the money. "I took him to the station, searched him, and found two and ninepence on him and a mouth-organ. He was charged and made no reply.

To Atkins. You did not say to me, "It is very strange, I was there last night but I did not take any part in the robbery. "What you said was," It is very strange; I was in the house but I did not have any of the money. "You made no reply when charged. You did not say," I know nothing about it."

Police-constable WILLIAM WALLER , 218 K. At 11.30 a.m. on February 18 prosecutor spoke to me in the Barking Road. Bartrup was there. Prosecutor said he wished to give Bartrup into custody for robbing him at 13, Peter Street the previous night. I said to Bartrup." You hear what he says," and he said "Yes, he must be a b——

fool. I have never seen him before. "I took him to the station and charged him. I found 10s. 11 1/2 d. on him.

ADA WHITTAKER. I live at 55, Vincent Street, Canning Town, with Chapman. On February he came home about 10 and was in beer. He said he had been drinking in the "Becton Arms" with a millionaire the way he was flashing his money about. He had between 4s. and 5s. on him which he said prosecutor gave him in the "Becton Arms." He was not arrested until about a week after.

To Chapman. You were at work right up to the time you were arrested.

By the Court. He earns good money and is always very good in bringing his money home. He often brings as much as 4s. or 5s. from his work.

Detective JOSEPH PAYNE, K Division. On February 25 I saw Chapman at 55, Vincent Street about 10 p.m. I told him I was a policeofficer and should take him into custody on suspicion of being concerned with Atkins and Bartrup in stealing £34 and some seamen's advance notes from prosecutor. He said he knew nothing of it. I took him to the station and he was subsequently identified from amongst eight other men by prosecutor.

(Defence.)

JOSEPH BARTRUP (prisoner, on oath). I live at 51, Hemsworth Street, and am a painter. On the night of the robbery I left off work at Rotherhithe at five o'clock. I was working for Mr. John Wright, Maple Road, Poplar. I got into a small rowing boat and rowed to Limehouse Hole, and walked up past the "Becton Arms," getting there between six and seven. There I saw Peter Ducalow, the prosecutor, Atkins and Chapman, and several other men were in their company. Peter Ducalow treated me. Prosecutor was worse for drink, and was freely treating anyone in the bar. He started tossing for whelks and mussels in the bar with money, and after eating them became stupid. Just before eight he called for a shout of drinks round. They were all the worse for drnk, and shortly afterwards prosecutor, Atkins, and two other strange men, and Ducalow and his wife left the "Becton Arms." I stayed in the "Becton" and about 20 past eight Mrs. Ducalow came back and bought half a gallon of beer in a stone bottle. She treated me to a glass of ale, and asked me to go back with her to 13, Peter Street, as they were singing and dancing. I went, and upstairs in the front room saw prosecutor, Peter Ducalow, Atkins, and the two strange men that he had been with in the "Becton." Prosecutor was drunk and was dancing round the room as well as he could with the two strange men with their arms all round each other's necks. They all rolled on the bed together. Prosecutor sent Atkins for another half-gallon of ale and told him to bring some music back and gave him some money. Atkins brought the beer back and a mouth organ and gave prosecutor the change. The beer was drunk, Atkins played the mouth organ, and prosecutor and these two strange men still waltzed round the room and frequently fell on the bed because they were

drunk. I came over sick because of the heat of the room, nine of us in the room, and went out into the yard. When I returned there was nobody there but the two children. That is all I know about it.

Cross-examined. I did not leave Peter Street until after nine. I do not know whether Chapman was there because I did not know him. He might have been there, but I did not notice him. He was not one of the two other strange men with prosecutor. I would not like to say whether Chapman went to 13, Peter Street or not. I went down into the yard some time before nine o'clock. I was not drunk. I did not hear any disturbance upstairs and knew nothing about the robbery until I was accused. I did say to prosecutor next morning that I had never seen him before. That was because I had been paid off work and had had a drop of drink and did not recognise him at first. I had been at work for three days, and the money I had on me when arrested was part of my earnings.

HARRY ATKINS (prisoner, on oath). I am a seaman. At 3.15 p.m. on February 17 I was in the Barking Road, Canning Town, and met Peter Ducalow. He asked me to have a drink, and Chapman, who was with me, and the three of us went down to the "Becton Arms." A few minutes after that prosecutor came in with three other men. I stopped in their company till eight o'clock that night drinking all the time until I had had enough, and the prosecutor as well. Then we all went to 13, Peter Street. Peter Ducalow's wife is a cousin of mine Two strange men that had been arguing all the afternoon with prosecutor about vacuum came with prosecutor. Ducalow sent his wife out for half a gallon of beer and there was singing and dancing. Prosecutor asked me to fetch another half-gallon and also a mouth organ. which I did. I gave him his change back. I was playing the mouthorgan for about twenty minutes and they were all dancing round the room. I had enough of it and came over dizzy, so I went home. That was about nine o'clock. Next morning prosecutor came up to me in the Barking Road and said "Good morming." I said, "Good morning." He said, "Were you in my company last night?" I said, "Yes, why?" "Well," he said, "I have been robbed of £34 and £15 10s. in seamen's advance notes. "I said, "It is a funny things, I was robbed last week, but I did not lose as much as that; I lost about £1 17s. myself." He said, "I have been told that a man named Bartrup is the man that robbed me. "He asked me whether I knew him. I said, "Yes." He said, "If you run across him call at No. 11, Watford Road and you will lose nothing by it. "I said very good, and he went away. About 11 o'clock that night I was arrested on suspicion. I said, "It is very strange, I was there but I never took any part in any robbery. I know nothing about it," and I do not know anything about it.

Cross-examined. When I left 13, Peter Street the only people in the room were the two strange men and the prosecutor sitting on the bed and two little boys. Bartrup had been there, but he was not in the room when I came away. Mr. and Mrs. Ducalow went downstairs, and I followed them out, and these other men were left in the room. I left Mr. and Mrs. Ducalow at the corner by the "Becton,"

and I went home. We were all the worse for drink. That is all I have got to say about it.

At this stage the Jury stopped the case and found prisoners Not guilty.

SURREY CASES.

BEFORE THE RECORDER.

(Wednesday, March 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-66

TAYLOR, Richard (60, shoeing smith), pleaded guilty of embezzling the several sums of 8s. 11 1/2 d. and 15s. 7d., the moneys of William Frederick Butcher, his master.

Prisoner confessed to a previous conviction in 1901.

Sentence, Three months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-67

COSTELLO, Michael (61, labourer), pleaded guilty of on February 20, 1909, stealing one piece of pork, the goods of Benjamin Wright. Prisoner confessed to a previous conviction. Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

Reference Number: t19090302-68

ROGERS, Percival (21, labourer), and LAING, James (18, shoemaker), pleaded guilty of being found by night having in their possession, without lawful excuse, certain implements of house-breaking, to wit, one chisel, one steel punch and other articles, with intent to commit a felony.

Sentences: Rogers, Eight months' imprisonment; Laing (who has been previously convicted). Nine months' imprisonment.

BBFORE THE RECORDER.

(Wednesday, March 3.)

Reference Number: t19090302-69

SLATER, Robert (36, labourer), LEE, Ernest (28. labourer), and EDWELL, Ernest (27, traveller) ; all breaking and entering the dwelling-house No. 2, Richmond Park Road. Mortlake, and stealing there-in 32 spoons, 30 forks, and other articles, the goods of Marie Burdell.

Slater and Lee pleaded guilty.

Mr. Marcus Ashby prosecuted.

MARIE BURDELL , single woman, 2, Richmond Park Road, Mortlake. I remember, Friday, February 19. I went out about seven p.m., leaving my house locked up. and I returned between 11 p.m. and 11.30 p.m., when I found the police in charge. The leaden casement window had been pushed out of the front door. I had not been using the stolen articles recently, as I had been away for some time over Christmas. I identify the articles produced; there is an initial on most of them. I have used them for 18 months. They were given to me. I should say the value of the things is about £20.

Detective-sergeant JOHN GILLAN , V. About 11 a.m. on Saturday, February 20, I was on duty in Merton Road, Wandsworth. I saw prisoners and kept observation upon them. After about a quarter of an hour they parted. Edwell entered the front garden of 202, Merton Road. I lost sight of the other two men. At 2.30 p.m. I saw Edwell again at Earlsfield and saw him enter a house. About 6.10 p.m. the same evening it had come to my knowledge that a burglary had been committed at 2 Richmond Park Road. Seeing Edwell again, I, in company with Detective Hunt, followed him to 12, Balvernie Grove, where he went inside. Keeping observation on the premises, I saw him leave about eight o'clock, and followed him up Merton Road till he came to 202, where he entered the front garden and knocked at the door. I then went up to him and said, "We are police officers. You are suspected of breaking and entering 2, Richmond Park Road, Mortlake, last evening." He said, "I know nothing at all about it. Come round to my address, No. 12, Balvemie Grove; I do not live here. "The door was then opened by an old lady. I said, "No; I am going to search these premises first. I saw you enter here this morning. "We then entered the front room on the ground floor and I told the old lady who opened the door my business and that I intended to search the house. She said, "You will find nothing here." I then searched and in a box used as a cradle I found all the Articles produced. The box was in the front room on the ground floor by the side of the window. The plated articles were done up in a brown paper parcel, but a tankard and some of the spoons were protruding. I said to prisoner, "This appears to be the property I am looking for missing from Mortlake." He said, "Yes, I suppose it is. I take the full responsibility of it. My mother knows nothing about it. I did not do the job." We then went to 12, Balvernie Grove, which is prisoner's proper address, but found nothing referring to the charge. We conveyed prisoner to the station, where he was charged. He made no reply.

Divisional-Inspector EDWARD BADCOCK , V. I saw prisoner at the station at one a.m. on Sunday, the 21st of last month. He said, "I wish to speak to you. "I cautioned him, and he said, "I got that plate and the other stuff off 'Bob the Seeker' and Erny Lee. They came to me about 11 o'clock on the Saturday morning and gave me the stuff. I took it into my mother's house and kept it there. They brought it to me to get rid of. I was in the station when Slater and Lee were brought in. On Monday, February 22, I conveyed prisoners to the police court. On the way Edwell said to Slater," You know I was not there when the job was done. I have got five kids and do not want to go away. "Slater replied," You was not with us. We had the stuff, Lee and me. It was in my basket all night. The mirror that is missing was there. It had the letter 'M' on the handle, but it was only worth about 10s. "Lee said, "That is right. He (nodding at Edwell) was not with us. I cannot tell quite what stuff we did have. "We entered the train at Putney and on the way to Mortlake Slater said, "We called at the house first. It was lit up. We knocked at the window in the door and it fell in, so we

opened the door. We were drunk or we should not have done it. We did not use any tools; it was our fists or elbows. "There was a leaden panel forced out of the door. Slater is known as "Bob the Seeker" amongst his companions.

Detective-constable EDWARD HUNT , V, corroborated the evidence of Gillan.

FANNY EDWELL , 12, Stanton Road. I am the mother of prisoner Edwell. In February last I lived at 202, Merton Road. I remember my son bringing a brown paper parcel in, a week last Saturday, sometime before dinner. Sergeant Gillan opened the parcel in the evenings when he came and that was the first I saw of this property.

To prisoner Edwell. I think you said you were minding the things for someone. You; said, "I will leave them here a minute or two," and if anyone called for them I was to give them up.

(Defence.)

ERNEST EDWELL (prisoner on oath). I am a traveller by occupation, but am out of employment just now. I was last in employment about three months ago for a gentleman whose name I prefer not to mention. I was employed selling shares. I had been with the gentleman about six months. This property was brought to me by Slater and Lee. They are flower-sellers and they get all sorts of things in exchange for plants. They asked me if I would mind this parcel for them, as they had a lot of plants to sell, and they did not want to carry the parcel about with them, so I said I did not mind. Being almost outside my mother's place, I took it in there. My own place is distant about seven minutes' walk. I did not look inside the parcel to see what it contained. I thought perhaps it was boots or clothes. I did not think it necessary to ask what it contained. The parcel was in the basket with ferns on the top of it. I certainly should not have taken the parcel if I thought it contained stolen property. Slater and Lee said they would call for it.

Cross-examined. I have known Slater about six months and Lee perhaps a twelvemonth. I have not been in the habit of minding parcels for them. The things did not rattle when I put them in the box; they were done up tight in a cloth when they were opened at the station—not in brown paper. It is not true that some of the articles were sticking out of the brown paper. Slater was carrying the basket and Lee gave me the parcel. I told the detective to come round to my place, because I knew he would not find anything there. I did not think he would find anything at my mother's place. When I said I would take the full responsibility for the things being found at my mother's, I wanted to take all the blame on my own shoulders. I did not want her to get into trouble. When the detective told me I was suspected of receiving stolen goods it did not occur to me that they were in the parcel. I have no idea what "Bob the Seeker" means. It is a nickname. I do not know why. I did not tell the detective where I got the things from; I was startled. I did not know there had been a "job" done till I got tot the station. I said,

"I was not there when the job was done" because I wanted the detectives to know I was not.

ROBERT SLATER (prisoner, on oath), examined by Edwell. I did not see you on the Friday when this house-breaking occurred. When I saw you on Saturday, February 20, we were going to sell the rest of the plants. I asked you to take the bundle. I did not tell you the contents nor where I had got it from.

Cross-examined, I have known Edwell about two or three months. I gave him the parcel to take care of because we had a basket of flowers we wished to sell.

ERNEST LEE (prisoner, on oath) also stated that prisoner Edwell was not with him and Slater on Friday, February 19.

Verdict: Edwell, Guilty; a long list of convictions was proved against him. Lee and Slater have also been previously convicted. Slater, it was stated, since his conviction in 1900 had been working as a navy till about 15 months ago, when he recommenced the practice of housebreaking, in association with Lee and Edwell.

Sentences: Slater, Nine months' hard labour; Lee, 20 months' hard labour; Edwell, 12 months' hard labour.

BEFORE THE RECORDER.

(Thursday, March 4.)

Reference Number: t19090302-70

JONES, Arthur Edward (28, reader), LAUD, John (28, labourer), BROWN, John (60, bricklayer), and BROWN, Eliza (54, dealer). Arthur Edward Jones and John Laud, stealing 13 sheets and other Articles, the goods of Hephzibah Thomley; Jones, stealing 47 pounds of beef, the goods of, John Haines; Jones, stealing one bicycle, the goods of Frank Richard Penfold; Jones, stealing one armchair, the goods of Abraham Marels; John Brown receiving one bicycle well knowing the same to have been stolen; John Brown receiving 10 pairs of trousers well knowing the same to have been stolen; Eliza Brown receiving 47 lb. of beef and divers articles of clothing well knowing the same to have been stolen.

Jones and Laud pleaded guilty.

Mr. T. E. Morris, prosecuted; Mr. Horace J. Douglas defended the Browns.

The case against Eliza Brown was first tried.

JOHN HAINES , butcher, 265, Haydon's Road, Wimbledon. On the night of Thursday, January 28, about 20 past seven I missed from my shop a piece of beef weighing about 50 lb., of the value of £1 7s. I had been in and out of the shop several times. I gave information to the police, and the same evening, about 10 minutes to nine, at the police-station, identified the meat that had been stolen. I was able to identify the meat because I knew the part that had been stolen. It had been cut up, but I was able to put the pieces together so as to identify it. It had been cut into four pieces and the bone taken out.

The meat was from the buttock with the "aitch" bone in it, and there was also a marrow bone. The meat weighed at the station 47 lb. and with the exception of a piece of fat it was complete. The meat was not so clean as it was when it was in my shop. It seemed to have been put down on something dirty.

Cross-examined. These pieces of beef are very much alike. The fact of the meat having been cat up would render it difficult to identify to anyone who was not a butcher.

THOMAS JAMES , Wimbledon. On the evening of Thursday, January 28, about half-past seven I saw two men walking in the roadway coming from the direction of Mr. Haines' shop, one of whom had a large piece of meat on his shoulder.

Detective-constable CONSTANTINE WOOD , V. At 7.50 p.m. on January 28 I was in the police-station at Wimbledon, when the loss of a large piece of beef weighing about 1/2 cwt. was reported. I at once went to Haydon's Road and saw prosecutor, who described the piece of beef to me. I made inquiries in the vicinity of Haydon's Road and as the result of that inquiry in company with another officer I went to 8, South Road, Wimbledon, Where prisoner has a wardrobe dealer's shop. I entered the shop and passed through into the kitchen. On the table in the kitchen was some beef which had been cut up into three pieces. Prisoner was standing alongside the table with a knife is her hand. We got to her house about 20 minutes past 8. I said to her, "We are police-officers and are making inquiries about a large piece of beef stolen from the shop of Mr. Haines in Haydon's Road a short time ago. "Pointing to the beef on the table I said, "Where did you get that from?" She replied, "About half an hour ago a man whom I do not know but whom I have seen before and from whom I have bought some old clothes, came into my shop and asked me if I would buy the meat. I asked him how much he wanted and he replied "Seven shillings." I thought that was too math, so I gave him 5s. He told me it had fallen from a van and that he had picked it up. I was just cutting it up to sell so that I could get my money out of it. "I said to her, "You will have to go to the police station and if the meat is identified you will be charged. "I took her to the police station, where she was subsequently charged. She made no reply. There was a mark of dirt on the meat, as if it had been dropped on the road or dropped on the floor.

Cross-examined. I do not know how long prisoner has lived in Wimbledon I have been unable to find out anything to her detriment. She was quite frank in telling me where she had got the meat from. The shop is a small shop in a poor neighbourhood and mixed articles were erposed for sale—clothing and a little furniture. I know she also carried on business at 570, Garrett Lane, a private house. Previously I knew of no suggestion against her.

Police-constable HERBERT COOK , 440 V, who accompanied last witness, gave corroborative evidence.

The Recorder complained that eleven cases had been committed to this Court (which is a Court of Assize), all of which ought to have

been tried by a jury of the County of Surrey. Assize cases properly belonged to this jurisdiction.

ERNEST BROWN (prisoner's son). My mother carries on business as a wardrobe dealer. I live with my parents. I recollect prisoner Jones coming to my mother's shop on the evening of Thursday, January 28. He brought with him a large piece of beef, which he put on the counter. After conversation with mother, during which time I was not in the shop, the beef was taken into the kitchen. Jones said to me, "That is not a chop. "I said, "No. "Mother put 3s. 6d. on the table for it and prisoner put the money in his pocket. There was dirt on the meat as if it had been dropped.

JOSEPH WILLIAM CHAMBERLAIN , Earlsfield. I manage a laundry for my mother. On January 27 last we missed several articles, table cloths, shirts, collars, towels, and ladies' underwear. I identify the things produced by our laundry mark. A claim for £20 has been sent in to us for these and other things not produced. The articles produced are dirty and in the same condition as they were sent in to us.

Detective CONSTANTINE WOOD , recalled. On January 29 I went with Detective-sergeant Gillan to search prisoner's house. I there found the linen produced. Some of it was upstairs in the bedroom and some bad been recently washed and was hanging on a line in the kitchen. Prisoner told me at the station that she had bought it from two men she had known at Earlsfield for 6s. 6d.

ERNEST BROWN , prisoners son, recalled. I recollect prisoners Jones and Laud coming to my mother's shop on January 26. Laud was carrying a bundle containing linen. (To this charge Jones and Laud pleaded guilty.) Mother brought the linen into the kitchen. I did not see any money pass. She said, "I have bought this (linen) of Laud." She did not say how much she had given for it. I have known Laud 18 years and lived next door to him. He was constantly in and out of the premises and mother has bought stuff of him. By business he is a dealer. All the linen was dirty.

ALFRED CHURCH , 287, Garrett Lane, Wandsworth. On January 21 I had a bundle of trousers hanging outside my shop, which I missed. There were 10 pairs in the bundle and the value would be about 30s. wholesale price.

THOMAS WINKLE , employed by Messrs. Townsend Brothers, clothiers, Wandsworth, identified five pairs of stolen trousers found on the premises of the female prisoner.

Detective-constable CONSTANTINE WOOD gave evidence to finding the stolen property on prisoner's premises.

(Defence.)

ELIZA BROWN (prisoner, on oath). I carry on business as a wardrobe and second-hand furniture dealer at 8, South Road, Wimbledon. My husband lives with me but does not carry on the business. He simply carries the things outside for me and brings them in again.

By occupatian he is a bricklayer but he has not followed it for some years. I had carried on business for only three months at Wimbledon, but for 2 1/2 years I was at Earlsfield. I have lived in the Earlsfield district for 16 years. We have things brought in and offered for sale by all sorts of people. I do not keep a regular set of books—only a shop book. I buy mostly from people who get things very cheap from houses where people are moving away. I have known prisoner Laud for perhaps 16 years. I had never seen Jones till he brought in a bicycle on December 29. The next thing he brought was the trousers, and after that the dirty linen and then the beef. He told me it was his own bicycle. He came in with the beef in his arms and put it on the counter and said, "Will you buy this piece of beef?" I said, "What a lump Where did you get it from?" He said, "I picked it up." I noticed it was dirty. I said, "Why, I shall not get rid of it. What can I do with such a large piece?" He said, "You can easily get rid of it on the counter." I have sometimes sold fish in the same way. He asked me 5s. I gave him 3s. 6d. on account, and when he returned for the 1s. 6d. the detective was there, and that was how they found him. My intention was to cut up the beef and put it on plates on the counter to sell. I purchased the trousers in the ordinary way. Jones brought them round and asked me 7s. for the five pairs, and I bought them. A day or two afterwards he brought me five pairs of smaller ones, for which he asked 5s. These I also bought. I generally pay 1s. 6d. a pair for trousers. I buy them of travellers. The trousers were exposed for sale with other goods on the counter. With regard to the linen, Jones and Laud said they had got it at a house where they had been buying some old furniture. The linen was dirty when I bought it. Some of the things I washed out myself. I have lots of times bought similar things in the course of business. I had no reason to suspect the things were stolen.

(Friday, March 5.)

Verdict, Guilty, with a recommendation to mercy on account of previous good character.

The Recorder said he was afraid that every person convicted of receiving stolen property had a good character, but the fact that the police went straight to the shop on being informed of the theft of the beef convinced him that prisoner had been suspected for some time.

Detective-sergeant GILLAN stated that the shop had been under observation for some time. Both Jones and Laud are known thieves and have been previously convicted; Jones was eight years in the Army.

Sentences: Eliza Brown, 12 months' hard labour; Jones, nine months hard labour; Laud, eight months' hard labour.

The Recorder directed that prisoner John Brown should be tried before another jury.

BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.

(Tuesday, March 9.)

Reference Number: t19090302-71

BROWN, John (60, bricklayer) , indicted of receiving one bicycle well knowing the same to have been stolen; receiving 10 pairs of trousers well knowing the same to have been stolen.

Mr. T.E. Morris prosecuted, Mr. Horace Douglas defended.

FRANK PENFOLD , 21, Vanderbilt Road, Earlsfield, paperhanger. On January 4 I went to a hairdresser's in Garratt Lane, Wandsworth, on my bicycle. I left the bicycle outside while I had a shave. The bolt-head was screwed up tight so that the front wheel would not move one way or the other. It was in the morning. At half-past eight when I came out of the hairdresser's it was gone. The bicycle produced is mine.

Cross-examined. I have bad the bicycle 12 months. I did not buy it new. I had not used it for a week or so before January 4. It was not so clean as it is now.

Detective-constable CONSTANTINE WOODS. E . On January 29 I went with Detective-sergeant Gillon to 8, South Road, a small wardrobe dealer's shop. I saw the prisoner standing in the shop. I said, "We are police officers "; he relied, "Yes, I know you are." I said, "We want to have a look at what you have got in your house"; he said, "Yes." I went upstairs and in the bedroom occupied by prisoner I found the bicycle produced. I asked him where he got it; he said, "We bought it about three weeks ago from a man we do not know. We paid 10s. for it. He always said "We." I examined the bicycle and found it answered the description of one stolen from Wandsworth. I told prisoner I should arrest him. He said, "I have never been in any trouble before."

Cross-examined. As far as I know he has not been in trouble before. I am told he is rather short-sighted. When we went to the shop I used the expression "your house"; I meant the house he was living in and occupying. I believed him to be the tenant. I had been there before and saw prisoner in the house. I have never been able to discover anything against prisoner before. I was present at the trial of prisoner's wife and gave evidence. I remained in Court after the evidence for the prosecution was closed. I did not hear her say she bought the bicycle from a man named Jones. Jones has pleaded guilty to stealing the bicycle. She said she bought it from a man who had given her an explanation as to the way he became possessed of it. I heard her say her husband had nothing at all to do with the business, and that she was responsible. She produced a book in which entries were made of things bought. I did not see it. In the trial of prisoner's wife the other day I put forward three other cases of stolen property being found on her premises. I attached importance to the fact that the man used the word "we." I took it that he knew all about the articles that were bought.

Re-examined. I had been to the shop the day before. I have known prisoner 2 1/2 years. I have seen him serving customers at the other place before they came there.

Detective-sergeant JOHN GILLON, E Division. I accompanied the last witness to 8, South Road. I saw prisoner in the shop; he was wearing a green apron. I told him our business. We went upstairs into the bedroom. We asked if he was the proprietor; he said, "With my wife," or words to that effect. In the bedroom we found the bicycle produced and took possession, of it. When we came downstairs we went into the kitchen at the back of the shop. While Brown was dressing Jones came in. Before that prisoner had given us a description of the man from whom they bought the bicycle. Jones answered that description. I told Jones the charge. He said, "I know nothing at all about it." Brown said, "You know you am the man that sold us the things. Prisoner's son was there. When charged prisoner made no reply.

Cross-examined. I have known prisoner some considerable time as a wardrobe dealer. I have never known him as a bricklayer. The other officer was present practically the whole time I was confronting the man Jones.

CONSTANTINE WOODS recalled. In addition to the bicycle we found 10 pairs of trousers. I took them to the station and some were afterwards identified by an assistant named Wintle; five pairs were taken from one shop and five from another.

Cross-examined. I found five pairs on a chair behind the counter in the shop; there was other clothing laying over them; I would not like to say they were concealed.

THOMAS WINTLE (sworn), employed by Townsend Bros., clothiers, High Street, Merton. At 10 o'clock on the night of January 16 we missed these trousers from outside our shop. We missed five or seven pairs.

Cross-examined. The value of the trousers is 2s. a pair. ALFRED CHURCH, 287, Garratt Lane. On January 21 I had a bundle of trousers exposed outside my shop at four o'clock. At five they went. On February 3 I was at the police-station and saw five pairs of them. One of the pairs here was in that bundle. They cost 2s. 6d. a pair.

(Defence.)

JOHN BROWN (prisoner, on oath). I live at 8, South Road Wimbledon. My eyesight is defective. For 3 1/2 to 4 years I have not been able to lay bricks. I was in my last employment 40 years. I have lived in Earlsfield on and off 16 years. I have never had any charge made against me. The business was my wife's. I have never had anything to do with the purchase off any of the articles which she sells. I do not know how the bicycle came upon the premises. I had nothing to do with stealing or purchasing it. I went upstairs with the police officers. They asked me about the bicycle. I said I knew nothing about it. I did not know the name of the man my

wife bought it of. I saw a receipt she showed me after she bought it with the name of Foster. That is the only thing I saw. I never saw the man. I first saw him when the constable took him in charges for stealing it. I was in the back parlour at the time. If I do not forget I think my son said, "Mother, that is the man you bought the clothes of." I know nothing whatever about the purchase of the trousers. I do not serve in the shop at all. I do wear a green apron. I do cleaning up in the shop, repairs, and that sort of thing, taking in and out a bit of furniture.

Cross-examined. I wear the apron to keep my trousers clean. I have never sold anything. I have to go to my wife first; she comes and takes the money. When a customer comes to the shop I call my wife. The officers are mistaken when they say they have seen me serving. I did not give a description of the man Jones to them. I did not say, "We bought this bicycle three weeks ago from a strange man"; I do not remember saying so. I did not see the man when he sold the bicycle to my wife, nor three days before when he sold some linen, nor when he sold the armchair, nor when he sold a piece of beef. I had never seen him until he was taken in charge. The bicycle was in the shop for a week, and as it was rather in the way my wife asked me to take it upstairs. I have not been to work since we started the business four years ago. I knew the trousers were in the shop; my wife told me she bad bought them. It was not my business to interfere. I know several of her customers. I never said to Jones, "You know you are the man that gold us the things."

ERNEST BROWN (prisoner's son). I was not in the shop when the detectives came in; I came in just after. I did not hear Jones's name mentioned. I do not know that any description was given of the man that sold the bicycle. I did not give a description of Jones. I saw the bicycle when I came home from work about half-past five. It was behind the counter in the shop. It was there about a week. I do not know the man who sold the bicycle. When the two detectives were in the kitchen the man came into the shop and I said, "That is the man." I did not know he was the man that brought the bicycle. I meant that was the man that brought the other things. My father was in the kitchen than. I did not hear him say anything about the man.

Cross-examined. I was in the kitchen when the officers were talking to my father. I did not hear all the conversation. My father might have given a description of the man without my hearing. I knew Jones was the man who brought the chair. He signed his name as Foster for the bicycle. I saw him on the 28th when he brought some beef in. My mother keeps the shop. My father has nothing to do with it; he helps my mother. I have been out of work six or eight weeks. I have been in and out of the shop during that time. My father was out when the meat was brought. I thank he was in when the linen came. My father and I know Laud very well; 15 or 16 years ago we lived next door to him. When Jones and Laud came with the linen my father sat in the kitchen, I think. You can see from the kitchen through the door window.

ELIZA BROWN (prisoner's wife). I have carried on a small wardrobe business about two years and nine months. We have been at 8, South Road about three months. The house is in my name and I pay the rent. I had £350 left me by my mother about 3 1/2 years ago. What I make out of the business I have as my own. My husband is like a child. He does nothing except a little mending or paint up a bedstead. I knew Laud as a boy. Until lately he had been in the Army. He goes with the dealers who call at houses collecting refuse. I purchased the articles from Jones and Laud, and I thought I had given them a fair price. When Jones brought the bicycle it was red with rust. He said it had been laying in the yard two years and asked if I would give 10s. for it. I knew when I got it I should not get more than £1 for it. I gave him 7s. for five pairs of trousers and 5s. for the second lot, which were smaller. That was the price I paid travellers before. Laud was there when I bought the linen from Jones. He emptied them out; he had a sack like a postman's sack—full. My husband was not there when I bought anything; he was always in the back somewhere. The only time he knew Jones was when I bought the armchair, and I said, "This is the man I bought the bicycle from." There is nothing in the place belonging to my husband.

Cross-examined. I won't be certain any husband was present when I bought the armchair; it was some article I bought. I believe it was the day I bought the piece of meat. When I said to my husband "That is the man I bought the bicycle of" he was in the parlour adjoining the shop. My son was not in the kitchen when I bought the linen from Jones. I had not seen Jones before I bought the bicycle. He rode up to the door on it and wheeled it into the shop and asked me if I would have it. I said the tyres were all right if I could get it cleaned up. I asked him where he got it from; he said he bought it when he came out of the Army. It stood in the shop for over a week. My husband has nothing to do with the shop. He lifts the heavy things in—machines, bedsteads, and that kind of thing He cleans up the house for me; I stop in the shop and repair clothes. I swear solemnly my husband never sells a thing, never has done, and never has a penny piece in his possession. I bought the bicycle about the beginning of January. I did not enter it in my book at the time because I had the receipt and kept it in my purse.

Verdict, Guilty; prisoner recommended to mercy on account of his previous good character.

Sentence, Two months' imprisonment, second division.


View as XML