Vol. CLVI.] [Part 930
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
HELD MARCH 19TH, 1912, AND FOLLOWING DAYS.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORTHAND BY
GEORGE WALPOLE & CO.,
Shorthand Writers to the Court.
POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE
H. DELACOMBE ROOME, ESQUIRE,
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE
[Published by Annual Subscription.]
GEO. WALPOLE & CO., PORTUGAL STREET BUILDINGS, LINCOLN'S INN, W.C.
THE ARGUS PRINTING COMPANY, LIMITED,
10, TEMPLE AVENUE, LONDON, E.C.
On the King's Commission of
OYER AND TERMINER AND GAOL DELIVERY
The City of London,
AND GAOL DELIVERY FOR THE
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX AND THE PARTS OF OTHER COUNTIES
WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,
Held on Tuesday, March 19th, 1912, and following days.
Before the Right Hon. Sir THOMAS BOOR CROSBY, M.D., LORD MAYOR of the said City of London; the Hon. Sir THOMAS GARDNER HORRIDGE , Knight, one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir G. F. FAUDEL-PHILLIPS, Bart.; G.C.I.E.; Sir JAMES T. RITCHIE , Bart.; Sir JOHN CHARLES BELL , Bart.; The Rt. Hon. Sir T. VEZEY. STRONG , K.C.V.O.; Sir T. VANSITTART BOWATER , Knight.; Sir GEORGE JOSEPH WOODMAN , Knight.; 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; His Honour Judge LUMLEY SMITH , K.C., Commissioner; 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.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
CROSBY, MAYOR. SIXTH SESSION.
BEFORE THE RECORDER.
(Tuesday, March 19.)
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
Sentence: Nine months' hard labour.
KYLE, Samuel Woods (33, postman) pleaded guilty , of stealing from a postal packet 11s. and three penny postage stamps, the property of His Majesty's Postmaster General, he being an officer of the Post Office.
Sentence: Nine months' hard labour.
Mr. Beaumont Morice prosecuted.
DAISY PAINE , barmaid, the "Lord Nelson," Manchester Road, E. About 9.30 a.m. on February 16 prisoner asked me for a penny glass of ale. I served him; he tendered 2s. piece (produced), which I tested with acid and found to be bad. I handed it to my mistress, Mrs. Day, and she told him it was bad. He said nothing, but paid for the drink with a good 3s. piece. I handed him back the bad coin, and he went out. On Tuesday, March 12, I picked prisoner out at the Thames Police Station from a row of nine other men as being the man who had tendered me the bad coin. I am quite sure he is the man.
Police-constable JOHN BASSETT SMITH, 115 K. On February 16 the landlady of the "Lord Nelson" called to me and pointed out prisoner, who was about 50 yards away. I went up to him and said, "I am informed you have got bad coin." He took a 2s. piece out of his waistcoat pocket, and said, "Yes; I must have got it in change for half a sovereign last evening." marked the coin with my initials, "J. B. S." (produced) I found on prisoner 1s. 6d. silver an 15d. bronze, good money. I too-k his name, "John Larkins," and his address, and let him go. On March 12 I picked him out from eight or nine other men as being the man.
I served him, and he handed me 2s. piece (produced), which I bent and found to be bad. I asked him what he bad got there. As he made no reply I repeated my words, and he asked me what I meant. I said, "The coin is bad." I then took the ale away. Prisoner said, "Do not take that away; I will pay for it." He then handed me another 2s. piece (produced), which I also found to be bad. He then ran away. I gave chase, and found him in a garden of a house in custody of a police-constable.
Police-constable THOMAS BIRCH, 718 K. About 11.15 a.m. on March 5 I saw prisoner in the backyard of a house in Sherwood Street. I asked him what he was doing there. He said, "I came in here for a rest." Lindsay then came up and gave prisoner into custody. I found nothing on him. He said, "I had 2s. Id. when I entered the public-house."
Sergeant HORACE TRAVERS, K Division. When charged prisoner said, "All right; I was drunk when I done it."
Prisoner handed in the following written statement: The coin I passed at the "Lord Nelson" I did not know was bad. I afterwards sold a couple of razors for 2s. and received in payment the 2s. piece I tendered to Lindsay. I then gave him a penny to pay for the ale, and ran away because I did not want to be shown up in that neighbourhood where I am known. I did not tender him the other florin. He must have had that passed on to him, and he accused me of passing it to have his own back.
Five previous convictions were proved of larceny, loitering, and assault. Prisoner was stated to have done casual work.
Sentence: Nine months' hard labour.
Prisoner was stated to have married his first wife in 1902, and prosecutrix in 1904. Prosecutrix stated that he had treated her well.
Sentence: One day's imprisonment.
Prisoner was stated to be of very good character, to have lost his situation through illness and got into bad company. His late employer stated that he was ready to take him back.
Prisoner was released on his own recognizances in £20 to come up for judgment if called upon.
BAKER, William (40, traveller) , unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin: unlawfully possessing counterfeit coin; feloniously possessing a mould in and upon which was impressed the obverse and reverse sides of a sovereign.
Prisoner pleaded guilty of possessing a mould, which plea was accepted by the prosecution.
Convictions proved: October 28, 1907, at this court, receiving 22 months' for housebreaking; bound over on January 5, 1903, at Lambeth Police Court for picking pockets. Prisoner stated that he had not used the mould, but intended to use it for making medals.
Sentence: Eighteen months' hard labour.
ARMSTRONG, James (54, insurance manager) pleaded guilty , of, having received certain property, to wit, six banker's cheques for £317s. 6d., £5 16., £4 10s. 6d., £3 15s., £6 15s., and £6 15s. 6d. for and on account of the British General Insurance Company, Limited, in order that he might pay the same to certain persons, unlawfully fraudulently converting the same to his own use and benefit; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, the endorsements on the said cheques, with intent to defraud; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain receipt for the payment of £3 15s., with intent to defraud.
Prisoner was stated to have defrauded the British General Insurance Company, whose servant he was, in scores of cases, amounting in all to £1,246.
Sentence: Twelve months' hard labour.
BEFORE. JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH.
(Tuesday, March 19.)
Prisoner confessed to a conviction of possessing counterfeit coin on February 2, 1909, at this court, in the name of Thomas Brown . He was released on January 4, and this offence was committed in February.
Sentence: For the felony, Three years' penal servitude; for the misdemeanour, One day's imprisonment.
Mr. Wilkinson prosecuted.
LEONARD RICKARD , barman, "Newcastle Arms," Cubitt Town. On March 5, at 7.10 a.m., prisoner came in and ordered three-ha'porth of rum and a penny screw of shag; he put down a 2s. piece; I was doubtful about it and told him to wait. Having tested the coin and found it was bad I sent for the police and prisoner was arrested.
Prisoner. I don't remember anything about it. I was in drink at the time.
Witness. He was not in drink.
Police-constable ALFRED TYSON, 282 K. I was called in by last Stress. I asked prisoner if fie knew why he was being detained and he said "Yes." I was handed by Rickard this counterfeit florin. Upon searching prisoner I found on him 1 1/2 d. in bronze; no counterfei coin.
Judge Lumley Smith pointed out that there was no evidence that prisoner knew that the coin he tendered was false.
Verdict, Not guilty.
Prisoner was further indicted for uttering a counterfeit coin to Frank Whinnington on March 5, and on the same day uttering a counterfeit coin to Leonard Rickard; uttering on December 16 to Henry Hewitt a counterfeit florin.
FRANK WHINNINGTON , barman, "Pier" tavern, Manchester Road, Cubitt Town. On March 5, about 6.45 a.m., prisoner came in and asked for three-ha'porth of rum and a penny screw of shag; he put down a 2s. piece and I gave him 1s. 9 1/2 d. change. An hour after he had left I examined the florin and found it was bad. Later on I picked out prisoner from a number of men. My place is about six minutes' walk from the "Newcastle Arms."
HENRY HEWITT , landlord of the "Robert Burns," Westferry Road, Millwall. On December 16, about 7 a.m., prisoner came in and asked for two of rum; he put down a florin; I gave him the change, and he left hurriedly. The coin was bad. On March 5 I picked out prisoner from a number of men.
Police-constable ALBERT TOOLES, 371 K. On December 16 I was on duty at the Isle of Dogs Police Station, about 7.30 a.m., when Hewitt came and handed me this florin.
Prisoner (not on oath) declared that on December 15 he slept at a lodging-house at Walworth and did not leave there till 8.50 a.m. on the 16th.
Prisoner had been previously convicted of a coinage offence, but for the past ten years there was nothing against him.
Sentence: Six months' hard labour.
HUGHES, Alfred (26, printer) , forging and uttering a banker's cheque for the payment of the sum of £60 11s., with intent to defraud the London Joint Stock Bank, Limited; stealing the said cheque, the property of Charles Bowden; receiving the said cheque knowing it to have been stolen.
Mr. Muir and Mr. Briggs prosecuted.
CHARLES BOWDEN , builder, 79, Elizabeth Street, S.W. I have an account with the London Joint Stock Bank, Limited, 24, Buckingham Palace Road, and they issue to me bearer cheques crossed with a rubber. stamp. On March 7 I made out this cheque (Exhibit 1) for £1 11s., striking out the word "Bearer" and substituting "Order." I handed it to Mr. Kennedy, my accountant, for checking and postage. It has now been altered to £61 11s., and the crossing, the stroke through "Bearer" and the word "Order" have been removed.
None of the alterations have been made with my authority. The three blots and the long dash are not mine. "Pound" has also been altered to "Pounds."
HENRY KENNEDY , accountant, Charles Bowden and Co. On March 7 I was handed this cheque to check and post. I posted it to the Arts Pavement Company, to whom it is payable, at a pillar-box at the corner of Chester Square, S.W. The endorsement it now bears was not on it then.
SAMUEL LEE , cashier, Arts Pavements and Decorations, Limited, 9, Emerald Street, Theobalds Road. We never received this cheque by post either on March 7 or 8. I do not know the writing of the endorsement "T. H. Henderson, Manager," and the name of my company; there is no person of that name in our employ. No person had authority to endorse it in that way. So far as I know, our letter-box is all right; there is no trace of it having been tampered with. We missed no other letters about that date.
JOHN FIELDER , head cashier, London Joint Stock Bank, Limited, 24, Buckingham Palace Road. At 2.30 p.m. on March 8 prisoner presented this cheque. I examined it carefully and noticed that the crossing had been obliterated and that the figures had been altered. I communicated with the manager, who asked prisoner to step into his room. I had told prisoner that I noticed the crossing had been taken out, and he said he knew nothing at all about it. The manager asked him where he came from, and he said, "The Arts Pavement Company." He was asked if they had sent him to get the cash for them, and he said, "Yes." He was asked where the Arts Pavement Company was, and he hesitated somewhat. The manager said, "Surely you know where it is?" He then said, "Oh, in Gray's Inn Road; or at least the man who sent me with the cheque said it was." The manager said, "Who sent you?" He said, "A man who stands outside the 'Cranbourn' in Leicester Square for four or five hours every day. He is a bookmaker. "We asked him if he could identify him, and he said, "Yes." I asked him how he intended to take the money for the cheque, and he said, "In seven small notes and the rest in gold." He produced this piece of paper (produced), and said, "I have written it down here. I was told to write it down so that I should make no mistake." I may say that while I was examining the cheque he was writing something, but I cannot say what it was. We communicated with the drawer and the payee, and having got certain information from them we sent for the police.
Detective-constable GREGOR CAMERON, A Division. At 3.45 p.m. on March 8 I was called to the Victoria branch of the London Joint Stock Bank, where the manager made a statement to me and handed me Exhibit 1. I said to prisoner, "Where did you get this cheque from?" He said, "I got it from a man they call" Harry who stands outside the 'Cranbourn' public-house." I said, "What dealings have you had with that man to get a cheque for this amount?" and he said, "I won't tell you any more. You find out." I then took him to the station. On the way, at the corner of Francis Street, I was suddenly seized from behind by a man, and two other men rushed in front from behind
took hold of prisoner and tried to get him away. One of them shouted, "Have a b—go for it, Alf! We are all with you!" The other threw himself on me and we both fell to the ground. On getting up to my feet I pulled prisoner up and he struck me on the nose with his right fist, causing me to fall. I took him with me, he being on top. The others managed to free him, and as he was getting up he hit me behind the ear and said, "Take that, you German ponce." He then ran away. I freed myself from the others and ran after him, and rearrested him in the Vauxhall Bridge Road. I took him to the station. On the forgery charge being read over to him he said, "I did not know it was forged. Put yourself in my place. Wouldn't you have had a go for it when you knew it was a 'dud'?" On searching him I found this style pen and 3d. in bronze. He gave the address "16, Murphy Street." I went there, but failed to trace him. I have tried to trace "Harry," but have failed.
Cross-examined by prisoner. You also had a card case on you. I did not see a penknife on you.
ALFRED HUGHES (prisoner, on oath). About 11 a.m. on the Friday morning I was walking past the "Cranbourn," when I met this book-maker, whom I knew as "Harry." I have been 'in London about six months and have had several bets with him. He asked me to go in and have a drink and I went. He asked me if I would do a little business for him and I said I would. He then asked me to cash this cheque and told me to write on the paper how to draw it. He gave me 3d. for my 'bus fare and told me where to go to. When I was asked by the manager I told him that the man had told me to say I came from the Arts Pavement Company, which was true. When the other fellows came up it was not me who struck the policeman.
Cross-examined. I belong to Manchester. I do not know who the three men that came up were. I never heard what they said. They were men off the building and they thought me and the constable were having a fight. I cannot account for their knowing my name. I was struggling with the policeman at the time and he was in plain clothes. I have known "Harry" about six months. I had not a penny in my pocket when I met him on this occasion and he knew it. I cannot say why he should trust me with a cheque for £60. I did say, in effect, what the policeman has said, but I did not use the word "dud." I am a printer by trade, but I have not been working this past year. I did not look at the cheque at all before cashing it. I had no idea at ail why the Arts Pavement Company should give "Harry" a cheque for such an amount.
Verdict, Guilty of uttering.
Judge Lumley Smith, on being informed that Detective-constable Cameron had not been seriously hurt in consequence of the prisoner's alleged assault upon him, stated that he did not think it necessary that the prosecution should proceed with the indictment of assault.
Mr. Muir asked that sentence should be postponed till next sessions, stating that by that time more might be known about prisoner and the other persons who were assisting him on this occasion.
Judge Lumley Smith took this course, stating that, in any case, the sentence would be over three months, so that the prisoner's position would not be prejudiced by the postponement.
PROCTOR, Charles (34, dairyman) pleaded guilty , of, having been entrusted with certain property, to wit, £99 10s., in order that he might apply the same for a certain purpose, unlawfully and fraudulently converting the same to his own use.
Prisoner, who, it was stated, had previously borne an excellent character, had absconded with moneys given to him by the prosecutrix, to whom he was engaged, for the purpose of buying a dairy business which they intended carrying on when they were married. He was arrested a month afterwards at Cardiff and £30 of the money had been recovered. The prosecutrix had made arrangements to marry him on his release. Prisoner stated that he had lost his self-control on obtaining possession of the money and went to Portsmouth; he had been desirous of returning the money to the prosecutrix, but did not know her address. He stated that he was willing that the balance found upon him should be handed to her, and Judge Lumley Smith postponed sentence to enable this to be done.
GARDNER, Charles (22, butcher) , burglary in the dwelling-house of Harry Heap and stealing therein three bunches of keys and two blouses and the sum of 12s. 6d., his goods and moneys; burglary in the dwelling-house of Alec Elder and stealing therein four rings and other articles, his goods; burglary in the dwelling-house of Robert Irvine Gardner and stealing therein one pair of candlesticks and other articles, his goods.
Prisoner pleaded guilty to the indictment relating to Heap and confessed to a previous conviction of felony at the Newington Sessions on September 21, 1909. Seven previous convictions, dating from 1905, were proved; he was released from his last sentence in July, 1910. He had stated that he was a butcher working at Smithfield Market, but had declined to state for whom he had been working. He declared that he knew nothing about the proceeds of the other two burglaries. (The indictments as to these are to remain on the file of the Court.)
Sentence (March 22): Fifteen months' hard labour.
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE HORRIDGE.
(Wednesday, March 20.)
Mr. Leycester and Mr. Adrian Clark prosecuted; Mr. Pendry Oliver defended.
GEORGINA PEGG , wife of Harold Pegg, 3, Dungerry House, Foley Street, W. I have known prisoner since Easter of last year; she is a tailoress. On February 6 I saw her at 10, Ogle Street, where she occupies a back room. I do not think she has any relations in London. She was doing very little work at the time. She said, "I have pains in my stomach; I think it is cramp "; she was in bed. She had no fire and very little food. At my invitation she came to my place, where she stayed a few hours and then returned. She said nothing about being pregnant. I saw her the next day when she again complained of pains in her stomach; she said nothing about pregnancy. She left me early in the evening and returned at 11.30. I gave her some coals and food and turpentine for the pains. On the 8th, at about 11 a.m., I went to see her. She said the pains had gone and she thought the turpentine had done it. She said she would not get up, although I told her if the pains had gone she ought to go to work. The floor was all wet through the rain having come through the skylight. At her request I later on sent her round some food. I went again at 4.15 p.m., when she asked me to keep her a few days. I said I could not, but offered to send for her mother or the relieving officer. She said she did not want anybody and commenced to sob; she said she thought she had got to be there for a day or two as she did not feel well enough to get up. She asked me if I could keep a secret. I said, "What is the secret?" She said, "I have given birth to a little boy this morning at a quarter to seven." I said, "Where is it?" She said, "Under the bed in brown paper." I said, "Was it healthy?" and she said, "It was snuffling at the nose and its mouth wanted washing out." I said, "Was it breathing?" and she said "Yes." I said, "Is—it alive now?" She said "No, it is dead." I asked to see it and she said, "No, it is too terrible "; she was sobbing. She said, "I thought of the string on the wall. "Then she asked me if I would give her some more food and I left. She showed me her stomach and I saw it was very blistered through the turpentine.
Cross-examined. She had no coal or food except what I gave her. On the morning of the 8th she looked very ill and she was very excited; she talked a good deal to herself and rather frightened me. It was that that roused my suspicions.
ELLEN PHILLIPS , parlour-maid, 3, Dungerry House, Foley Street. I have known prisoner since last September. About 1.45 p.m. I went to see her, she was in bad and seemed ill. I asked her how she was and she said she was feeling better and that her monthly turns had come on and she expected that that was why she had the pains before. I gave her some food and cleaned up her room. In emptying the slops I noticed there were stains of blood on the wash-stand; the sheets were also stained with blood. She did not tell me then that she had had a baby that morning and I saw no body. Afterwards, from something I had heard, I fetched Dr. Brown about 7.30 p.m. I accompanied him into her room and she said, "Who
sent the doctor here?" I pretended I did not know. I left him with her. When he went I returned to her and she again asked me who had sent the doctor and I again pretended I did not know. She then said, "Had Georgina done what I asked her I would have got over it all right, as gipsies and poor people never have doctors in such cases."
HARRY BROWN , registered medical practitioner, 36a, New Cavendish Street. I have also a surgery at 3, Candover Street. At 7.30 p.m. on February 8 I was called by the last witness and I went to 10, Ogle Street; I found prisoner lying on a couch. She was very distressed and asked who had sent for me and why I had been brought there. I told her that I knew what was the matter. The last witness then went out of the room. She was sobbing and her sentences were more or less disjointed. She said, "You don't know what I have done. I had a baby this morning. I put a piece of string round its neck. It was alive. It is under the bed." I there found a brown paper package in which I found the dead body of a male child with the afterbirth detached; the cord had been cut and roughly tied with a piece of thread. Twice round the neck there were tied a piece of tape-like material and a piece of thread; there was a double knot. I was present at the post-mortem and in my opinion the cause of death was asphyxia caused by the tape. Dr. Rose and I formed the opinion that the child had had a separate existence. There was a very extensive injury to the skull, which I should say was caused before death and possibly might have caused the death itself; it might have been caused by the child falling on the floor at birth.
Cross-examined. To the best of my opinion the tape was not put round the neck after death. Apart from the child falling on; he floor there is a possibility of the injury to the skull being caused inside the pelvis; the bones of the head are very easily injured. It is possible that the lungs may be expanded before complete delivery (provided it is a natural head presentation), and that the child might fall on to the floor and inflict the injury to the skull, thus causing death. It is possible that the child might have been dying from this injury at the time the tape was put round the neck, but I do not think it could have been dead, although I do not say that is impossible. I did not hear anything a-bout the previous history of the case. She was a very muscular and well-developed woman, and she did not look more worn than one would expect under the circumstances. When confinement comes on women frequently suffer from temporary insanity and they have been known to suffer from delusions; if a woman were having her first confinement by herself I think those circumstances might send to make her do things without realising what she was doing.
MR. JUSTICE HORRIDGE stated that in view of the medical evidence that death might have been caused by accidental fracture in the act of delivery, it would not be safe in his opinion for the jury to return a verdict of guilty on the capital charge.
Prisoner then pleaded guilty to attempted concealment of birth, and the jury in accordance with his Lordship's direction returned a verdict to that effect.
Mr. OLIVER urged in mitigation of the sentence that prisoner did not know what she was doing in concealing the body as she did.
Dr. BROWN, recalled by the Court on this point, stated that prisoner appeared to him when he saw her to be in a healthy condition mentally, but she did not seem to realise the seriousness of her position, although she certainly knew that what she was doing was wrong.
Sentence: Four months' imprisonment. The Court Missionary, Mr. Scott-France, was requested to see prisoner on her release.
PITFIELD, Eilen (45, nurse) pleaded guilty , of feloniously setting fire to a basket containing shavings and other things at the General Post Office under such circumstances that if she had set fire to the building it would have amounted to a felony.
Prisoner stated that she was guilty of the action, but that the guilt rested with the Cabinet.
It, was stated that prisoner had become interested in the movement for woman's suffrage in November, 1910, and had on the 25th of that month been sentenced to two months' imprisonment for damage: in the course of the demonstration leading to that offence she had received a blow resulting in cancer, which, despite two operations, had been found to be incurable. It was urged on her behalf that her state of mind owing to this illness might account for her committing such a serious offence and that it was not at all clear that she committed it with the intention of burning down the building, since she had at once given the alarm. Medical evidence was called, corroborating the state of her health.
Sentence: Six months' imprisonment, second division; Mr. Justice Horridge remarking that it was due to her health and not to the motives which prompted her to commit this offence, that the sentence was such a light one.
Prosecutor was stated not to be permanently injured. It was urged on prisoner's behalf that the act was done under great provocation, the prosecutor (her husband) having deserted her with three children to support.
Sentence: Six months' hard labour.
Mr. Pasmore prosecuted.
Detective WILLIAM ALLEN, L Division. I produce the two marriage certificates, the first being dated June 28, 1891, and the second September 30, 1911. On February 9 I went to Rattray Road, Brixton, where I saw prisoner and told him I was a police officer and that I should arrest him for bigamously marrying Maud Emily Dettmar in September, 1911, his wife, Rachel Fuchs, being then alive. He said, "Quite right. I have been expecting it. I won't give you any trouble. I have sent money to my wife in New York on several occasions. I have got receipts for the registered letters. He then produced five
receipts. "I left my wife in New York seven years ago on the 17th of this month. I ought not to have married a second time, but you know what it is. I got the girl into trouble so chanced it and married her. A man I know came from New York and told me my wife in New York was carrying on with a man. He has gone to Germany." When charged he said. "Yes, sir; that is quite right."
ABRAHAM BLASKY , tailor. I was present at the marriage of my sister Rachel to prisoner on June 28, 1891, at the East London Synagogue. Stepney; she is misdescribed in the certificate, because she could not speak English and they misspelt her name. They lived in London, and 12 years ago they left and lived in Cardiff. In 1905 prisoner went to New York alone and she followed him. I followed. The last time I saw them together as man and wife would be in March, 1905, when I left New York. I believe she is still alive.
Cross-examined by prisoner. It may be that I left New York in 1904.
BAENETT MOSKOVITCH , 11, Jubilee Street, E.C. I last saw Rachel Fuchs on February 6 last in New York. I last saw prisoner two years ago in the West End of London. He asked me if I had seen her and I said, "Yes; I saw her in New York." I went to New York about three years ago as well. He said, "I send her letters and never receive answers."
To prisoner. She lived at 156, Second Street when I saw her last. (Prisoner here stated that Blasky had given a different address as the address from which she had written him, Blasky, a fortnight ago.)
REUBEN ROSENTHAL , licensee, the "Britannia, "Berwick Street, W. I know prisoner as a customer; I have heard him speak of his wife and family. On a Sunday towards the end of last September he came into the house and said he was going to get married on the following Saturday, September 30. I thought he was joking and said that of course 1 knew that he was a married man and it was impossible. He said, "That's right. I have arranged everything. "I met him a week afterwards on Black Fast Day and said, "Have you got married?" He said, "No, you know yourself I have not got married because I have got a wife in America."
To prisoner. You did not say, "Yes, I could not help myself, as I got the girl in trouble."
MAUD EMILY DETTMAR , 67, Rattray Road, Brixton. On September 30 1 went through the form of marriage at the Registry Office with the prisoner as "Henry Fuchs "; I thought he was single; I had known him a year last August. After the marriage I heard that he was married. I have lived with him up to the time of his arrest. I have one child eight weeks' old by him.
HENRY FUCHS (prisoner, on oath) stated that ever since he had married his first wife she had not given him a day's peace; that he went to America and had sent for her two months afterwards in the hope that she would be better; that he worked as hard as he could for her and his children, but she was not satisfied with New York and wished
to return, but he could not afford this; that in 1904 her brother arrived and on his return to England sent her a ticket which she insisted upon him using; on his return to England in 1905 he worked hard and constantly sent money for her and his children's keep; that in 1906 at her request he had sent her money for her ticket home, but had not since heard from her or of her; that in August, 1911, he met Miss Dettmar and having got her into trouble felt bound to marry her.
Cross-examined. I last saw my wife in March, 1905. I knew she had written to my sister in 1906. When Rosenthal told me that he knew I was a married man I said I knew I was, but I had not seen my wife for such a long time and did not know where she was. I did not deny that 1 had married when I saw him later. I admit the evidence as to what I stated on arrest is true.
Miss Dettmar stated that she had not been seduced by prisoner under promise of marriage; that he married her because of her condition and had since been very kind to her.
Sentence: Three months' hard labour.
BEFORE JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH.
(Wednesday, March 20.)
PROCTOR, Charles (34, dairyman) pleaded guilty, of, having been entrusted with certain property, to wit, £99 10s. in order that he might apply the same for a certain purpose, unlawfully, fraudulently converting the same to his own use and benefit.
Prosecutrix, sister of prisoner, having stated that she was ready to wait for her brother to pay the money, prisoner was released on his own recognisances in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.
Four previous convictions for similar offences were proved.
Sentence: Twelve months' hard labour.
TAYLOR, Edward James (39, clerk), and BROWN, Thomas Weymouth (43, fishmonger), both stealing seven cases of frozen salmon, the goods of John Layton and Co., Limited; both conspiring, combining and agreeing together to steal the said seven cases of frozen salmon, the goods of J. Layton and Co., Limited ; Taylor embezzling the sum of £3 and £2 10s., received by him for and on account of the Union Cold Storage Company, Limited, his masters.
Mr. Eustace Fulton prosecuted; Mr. W. Saunderson defended Taylor; Mr. Daniel Warde defended Brown.
Taylor pleaded guilty of embezzling £3 and £2 10s. Prisoners were tried on the first indictment.
country from Siberia, which is stored at the Union Cold Storage Company, Limited, Allhallows Lane and delivered to customers, who purchase at the office, by means of our delivery order. No one at the Cold Storage Company has a right to sell or deal with the salmon except upon our order, which releases the cases of salmon to the purchaser. Two classes of salmon are kept, No. 1, being this year's supply, and No. 2, that which has been kept from last year. Brown first dealt with us on January 16, 1912, when he came to the office and ordered one case, February 1 one case, February 3 two cases, February 6 one case, February 12 one case, February 19 two cases, all second grade. On February 24 he ordered two cases of new season's salmon—that is first grade; on February 26 one case. For all these purchases we gave him delivery orders on the Cold Storage Company. Brown had never been employed as agent to sell or advertise our goods for us. Each case contains about 36 fish, each of which is wrapped in a parchment wrapper containing our name; the cases are packed in the cold chamber. We have no customer named Parkes, of Luton. We did not authorise two cases of salmon to be sent to Parkes on February 28.
Cross-examined by Mr. Saunderson. Layton and Co. do a very extensive business; mistakes may sometimes occur. We have a customer named Parkes, of Cambridge. Last year's salmon would be put into cases last year.
Cross-examined by Mr. Warde. On February 24 a case of salmon was delivered from the cold storage without a delivery order—that was irregular. We ascertained that more cases than we had given delivery order for had been found at Luton; we had issued delivery order for two and more than two had gone out. On February 24 Brown ordered two cases of new salmon and on the 28th, paid £6 10s. 11d.; £7 being afterwards paid to Taylor, who is a checker at the cold storage. That was irregular, as Taylor was not authorised to take money for us, the £7 was paid to us through the superintendent of the cold storage, who reprimanded Taylor for receiving it; we lost nothing by that transaction. On February 26 Brown paid £6 9s. 4d. for one case of new salmon, for which we gave him a delivery order. On March 2 we sold him four cases of first grade, which he paid by cheque—£24; there may be two cases still at the cold storage to his order for which he has paid.
Re-examined. We sold in all to Brown 15 cases of salmon. 42 cases have been delivered to him.
FREDERICK JACKSON CARR , traveller to J. Layton and Co., Limited. On February 26 I saw Brown selling salmon in Luton market, which was wrapped in our wrappers. Salmon would remain fresh in the case for four or five days; taken out of the case it would thaw in two or three days. He was selling new season's salmon at 2s. and 2s. 6d. a fish; that is about half the value. He sold five cases of first-grade fish.
To Mr. Warde. The price at which he was selling would be about right if it was second-grade fish. There was no disguise with regard to the wrappers; it was in open market and anyone could see
that the fish had come from Layton's. The customer did not take away the wrapper generally; it was taken off. I knew he had bought first-grade fish and that it had gone to Luton. The fish he was selling had probably left the cold storage on Saturday, February 24; it would be hard on Monday; if it had left earlier than that it would have been soft. The first-grade fish is bright in colour, the second-grade being yellowish.
Re-examined. I knew Brown had only bought three cases of first-grade; he was selling five cases of first-grade fish.
EDWARD THOMPSON , 32, Brunswick Street, Liverpool, fish salesman. I have sold fish at Luton market for 20 years. I first saw Brown there five weeks ago; he was selling frozen salmon in Lay ton's wrappers; he said he was selling it to advertise the fish and that he was agent to sell for his principals; he sold at about 2s. to 2s. 6d. a fish. I had a stall next to him. After he had been there a few weeks I told him my governor could possibly do with some of these fish. He said, "I will see him. On my governor's instructions I said to Brown, "Will you sell me any salmon?. He said, "I have not got authority to sell it to you, I have got to sell it myself in the market. I said, "My master has left me money to buy it if you will sell it. He said, "No, I cannot, but I will see him when he next comes down from London," and I suppose he met him the next day. He had a brisk trade; the first time I saw him he had two cases and later on two; the last week I think he had four cases.
To Mr. Warde. He sold a lot more than eight cases altogether. It was entirely a new thing in the market.
DAVID HAMMETT , fishmonger, Luton. I know Brown as selling frozen salmon in Luton market. I have bought 10 cases from him and have paid for eight at £4'a case; it was best salmon. He said, "If anyone should ask you what you pay for this salmon, say you paid £6 a case, as it might get me in an awful row if they knew I was selling it at that price—at the price I had to retail it at. I understood that he was agent for Layton and Co. The cases were always consigned to me from the cold storage, four in my name and four in Brown's. On February 28 Brown told me he had four cases of salmon consigned to Luton in the name of Parkes; he would sell them to me or, if I did not want them, he would sell them in the market; he said if he did not get the cheque for them he should sell them to me. I have been many years in Luton. I know no fishmonger of the name of Parkes there.
To Mr. Warde. I had only once before sold frozen salmon; about three weeks before Brown came I bought from Shepherd at 3d. a lb. I paid Brown about 4d. a lb. He said he was agent for Layton's. I wanted to buy salmon from him and he said he would speak to the governor and try to get me the agency for Luton. I should have been very pleased to have taken the agency and I tried to get it. Brown kept putting me off by saying that he had only seen the clerk, it was no use to talk to him about it, but that he would see me next week. There was no disguise about its being Layton's fish, I could have written to Layton's if I had wanted; I did not know the firm, I thought Brown was the firm; he told me he was the agent.
Re-examined. The fish I bought of Shepherd at 3d. was last season's—what I bought from Brown was all fresh fish, No. 1.
EDWARD CESAR GILL , manager to J. Layton and Co. In January Brown bought second-grade salmon from me at about 2 1/2 d. a lb. The price of first grade was 6d. He continued to buy second-grade salmon up to February 19 and afterwards bought first grade up to February 26. He never told me he had bought from a clerk at the Union Cold Storage or suggested that he was entitled to buy from there.
To Mr. Warde. I know Taylor received £7 from Brown, which he paid over through the superintendent of the Cold Storage. I did not tell Brown he was never to pay money to Taylor; 2 1/2 d. was the price for second-grade salmon up to February. The first grade begun to come in towards the end of January. Brown would give me an order for a case and pay on account; Taylor having weighed the case, the balance was carried forward to the next transaction. My firm has received from Brown £10 odd for cases which have not been delivered.
GEORGE JAMES , vanboy, Midland Railway, 14, Monument Street. On February 19 Brown brought to the office two cases of frozen salmon. From January 27 to March 4 12 cases were consigned by Brown to Luton. Four cases were consigned to Hammett of Luton by Brown; two cases were consigned to Parkes Brothers of Luton from John Layton and Co.
JOHN PATRICK DRISCOLL , clerk, Midland Railway, Luton. I saw Brown in my parcels office on February 17 and 19 and March 4. There were consigned to him on February 17 one case frozen fish; 19th, two cases; March 4, two cases; 20th, two cases; 22nd, two cases. On February 29 two cases came from Whitecross Street in the name of Parkes, which were returned.
Detective-inspector JOHN COLLISON, City. On March 4, at 12.30 p.m., I saw Brown selling salmon at a stall in Luton Market. I told him I was a police officer from the City and was making inquiries respecting two cases of salmon which he had sold about February 28 to Hammett of that town. He said, "Yes, I sold him two cases." I said, "Where did you get them from?" He said, "The Union Cold Storage Company, Limited. I saw a Mr. Taylor there on or about the 22nd and told him that I should require two cases an 1 paid him £5 on account." He then produced this receipt: "Received from Mr. Brown the sum of £5 on account of two cases of frozen salmon.—Edward J. Taylor." There is no stamp upon it; it is written in pencil, dated February 22. I told him that the Union Cold Storage Company, or John Layton and Co., had no record of those two cases leaving their premises and that I should take him to London, where he would be charged with stealing and receiving the two cases of fish. I brought him to London. At about 9.30 p.m. I saw Taylor at the Old Jewry Police Office. I told him I was a police officer and cautioned him. I showed him two labels which I had taken from two cases of salmon at Luton Station consigned to Parkes Brothers of Luton. He said,
"Yes, they are in my handwriting." I said, "The firm has no record of those cases leaving their premises, and further, there is no firm of Parkes Brothers at Luton; there are also two cases consigned to Brown of Luton on or about February 28 and the firm have no record of those cases leaving their premises." He said, "All I have sent out I have received instructions to do so from the firm by 'phone or otherwise." They were both given into custody by Mr. Hooton. On the way to Cloak Lane Station Taylor said, "It is a terrible thing for me; what would you advise me to do?" I said, "Speak the truth." He then said to Mr. Hooton, "I take the responsibility for sending those two cases to Parkes of Luton. I am very sorry; do not be too hard upon me."
To Mr. Saunderson. The labels are in Taylor's ordinary writing; he admitted it after a little hesitation. He said he had received instructions in all cases. He did not begin by saying, "The whole thing is a mistake." He said what he had done he had done under instructions from the chief office. He said that addressing them to Parkes Brothers of Luton was a clerical error. When he said, "I take the responsibility of sending the two cases to Parkes, of Luton, I took it as an admission of stealing the fish. I did not understand that he merely took the responsibility for having made a mistake.
To Mr. Warde. When Brown was selling the fish I saw the wrappers with the name John Layton and Co.; the name is also printed conspicuously on the labels.
Mr. Saunderson submitted that there was no evidence against Taylor.
Mr. Warde submitted that there was no evidence against Brown of stealing; there was no evidence of deficiency in the stock of Layton and Co.
Judge Lumley Smith said that he would leave the whole case to the jury.
EDWARD JAMES TAYLOR (prisoner, on oath). For six or seven years 1 have been forwarding clerk to the Union Cold Storage Company. When asked by Collisson about the two cases consigned to Parkes of Luton, I said there was no such firm as Parkes at Luton; it was a clerical error. Parkes, of Cambridge, had ordered two cases and by mistake I had consigned them to Luton. I am always employed at high pressure. I had no intention chat those two cases should fall into the hands of Brown. Collisson mentioned the two cases consigned to Brown, of Luton, on February 23—that the firm had no record of those going out. I said, "Anything I have sent I have been advised by telephone or otherwise to do so." I never have delivered a single case unless I have had the money or something on account, or an order from John Layton and Co.
Cross-examined. I more frequently had instructions on the telephone than in writing from Layton's. I had authority to deliver goods without their instructions until the end of February, when they told
me not to do so. They gave me to understand that I was quite in order in delivering under certain circumstances. On January 29 I collected 50s. from Brown for one case of second-grade fish; he wanted to get to market in the early morning and I naturally used my discretion, thinking I had authority to deliver a case; there was no one at Layton's who could have confirmed ft. I also received £5, £7, and £6 10s. 11d. for cases sold to Brown by me, which were paid to Layton's through the superintendent he repremanded me for taking the money. Whenever I have delivered to Brown without orders I have always had something on account, which has been paid over.
THOMAS WEYMOUTH BROWN (prisoner, on oath). I have been for several years in business as a fishmonger at 221, Market Place, Luton; there has never been any charge against me. When I first did business with Layton's I saw Gill and arranged to buy salmon at 2 1/2 d. a lb. and to pay £2 10s. on account when I wanted a case. I paid him £210s. and got a delivery order, upon which Taylor delivered me the goods. He told me that any time I wanted a case in the early morning he would take my money, which he did on several mornings at 2 or 3 a.m. I saw Gill and told him that I had paid Taylor 50s. on account of one case, and he had let me have it. Gill said, "That is all right, I will send you on the receipt." In one transaction I paid Taylor £7 on account of two cases, and on the following Monday I paid the balance, £6 10s. 11d., to Taylor in front of Mr. Barber, the superintendent. On a Friday Taylor told me he had sent by error two cases of salmon to a firm of Parkes to Luton instead of Cambridge and he was going to Layton to see whether they would give him a transfer to hand to me for me to pay Layton's the cash. After telling Gill about paying Taylor I thought I was perfectly safe in paying Taylor for any stuff I wanted early in the morning and I continued doing so until February 22. The fish I had in the early time was all second grade. On February 24 I bought some first grade and some second grade; I had four cases; I paid him £5 on account of two cases and £7 on account of two cases first quality, which I did not know the price of until after I had sold them at Luton Market and made a loss upon them. I told Hammett I was sole agent, meaning of my own firm, of which I was also master. I never took an order in the name of Layton nor sold a case in their name. I never said I was agent for Layton. I have paid Layton's for two cases of best salmon, which I have not taken delivery of. On February 26 I was told, I think by Barber, not to pay Taylor any more money. The same night I saw Mr. Gill and bought a case of first quality at 5 3/4 d. and paid him to 9s. 4d. It worked out at £5 7s., so that they had overcharged me £1 2s. Some of the cases were consigned direct to Hammett by my instructions as I had sold them to him. I sold both first grade and second grade at the same price on one occasion. If I made £4 a case for second grade and paid 50s. I was doing very well, but I sold some of the best grade in with it.
Cross-examined. If you picked out about half a dozen discoloured fish from the second grade, you could not tell the difference between second grade and first quality fish. I have taken out the discoloured fish, smoked them, and sold them as smoked salmon. I cannot say
how many parcels I have bought. I have always paid either Taylor or Layton's.
(Thursday, March 21.)
Verdict (both), Not guilty.
On the charge of embezzlement, a very good character was given Taylor, and he, having been some time in prison, was released on his own recognisances to come up for judgment if called upon.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Wednesday, March 20.)
Prisoner was released on his own recognisances in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.
DOVE, James, otherwise Wilson (70, tailor) pleaded guilty , of stealing one overcoat, one pair of gloves, and one cigar case, the goods of Horace Broughton Nash, and one umbrella, the goods of George Samuel.
A previous conviction was proved.
Sentence (March 22): Seven days' hard labour, Judge Rentoul remarking that he was merely sending prisoner to finish his last sentence.
WILSON, George, otherwise Nolan (27, porter) pleaded guilty , of breaking and entering the shop of George Baxter, with intent to steal therein; being found by night having in his possession without lawful excuse, certain implements of housebreaking.
Prisoner confessed to a conviction of felony at this Court on September 10, 1907.
Sentence: Eighteen months' hard labour on each indictment, to run concurrently.
LAZARUS, Simon (19, dealer), FRANKEL, Reuben (39, traveller), and GOLDSTEIN, Sophie (38) , feloniously receiving five rolls of silk, the goods of George Beck with, well knowing the same to have been stolen.
Mr. Jones Lewis prosecuted; Mr. Huntly Jenkins defended Lazarus; Mr. Purcell defended Frankel.
ROBERT JAMES ELVIN . I am warehouseman to prosecutor, whose warehouse is at 14, Knightrider Street, E.C. The premises were locked up on February 8 at 7 p.m. with a padlock and a bar. Next morning I found the door splintered and the lock broken away. The lock was in the hands of the police. I missed 48 pieces of silk and 68 pieces of cotton goods. I identify the goods produced as belonging to my master.
Cross-examined by Mr. Jenkins. I also identified a man named Stern. He was discharged. The magistrate had no right to let him off. The stealing of the goods was all done momentarily. The one I saw sitting at the side of the van sat on the things at the back. Had I known there was anything wrong going on I should have taken more notice. There were four men altogether. I said to the best, of my belief Lazarus was the man who brought out the goods. (To the jury.) I had no previous knowledge of him.
Sergeant HENRY DESSENT, H. At 9.30 p.m. on February 14 I went with Detective-sergeant Boreham to 39, Yalford Street, White-chapel. We knocked. The door was opened by Lazarus. I said, "I want to see Mr. Lazarus." He said, "He is out; what do you want? I am in charge here." I said, "We are police officers making inquiries respecting some silk; we have reason to believe you have a large quantity in your possession; we believe it to be stolen." He replied, "We have no silk here; we only deal in rags." I said, "Are you sure?" I then showed him a sample. He said, "Well, I suppose I must tell you the truth." My father had nothing to do with it. A man came to me last Friday and showed me some samples. He said he had 1, 650 yards and wanted 6d. a yard. I bought five rolls and gave him £10. I gave him £6 then and £4 later in the day. My father was there when I gave him the £4." We went upstairs to a front room on the first floor and he there endeavoured to break the padlock of a cupboard in the room. He was unable to do so and asked Sergeant Boreham to break it. He said his father had the key. Sergeant Boreham forced the door and took from the cupboard this sack containing four rolls similar to this one. I asked if he knew the name of the man from whom he bought them. He said, "No, I never saw him before; he was a respectable-looking fellow." I asked if he had got a receipt; he said no.
To Mr. Jenkins. He gave me every facility after he said "I suppose I must tell you the truth." Five rolls were found. I do not know whether he knew me. I know he knew Sergeant Boreham.
Detective-sergeant ALBERT BOREHAM corroborated. On February 22 at 11 a.m. I went with Detective Stevens to 17, Sutton Street, E. I saw Frankel enter the house with a key. He remained there about 20 minutes. He came out and went towards Aldgate, where I lost sight of him. At 11.30 p.m. that night I was with Sergeant Cridland and Chief Inspector Wensley. I arrested him at 342, Cable Street. I said, "You know, us." He said "Yes." I said, "I believe you hired a room from Mrs. Davis (Goldstein) at 17, Sutton Street, and took some property there which we have since recovered, and which we believe to have been stolen." He replied, "I know nothing about it." On the way to the station he said, "Did Mrs. Davis say I hired a room?" I said, "Yes; however, you were there this evening." He said, "She can say what she likes. Although I hired a room she cannot say I put stolen stuff in." On the way
to the station Goldstein said, "That is the man that hired the room off me," meaning Frankel.
Detective-sergeant FREDERICK WISE, City Police. On February 14 I went with prosecutor's clerk, Elvin, to Leman Street. He there identified five pieces of silk as the property of his firm and which had been stolen from 14, Knightrider Street, on the 8th. I then saw Lazarus. I told him I was a police officer and was going to arrest him and take him to the station, where he would be charged with other men not in custody in breaking and entering 14, Knightrider Street, and stealing there from a quantity of silk and cotton goods valued at £225. Lazarus said, "Stealing! I do not know how you can charge me with stealing; if you charge me with stealing it will be a trumped up charge. I can prove where I was on Thursday night." I then conveyed him with the property to Bridewell Police Station. Later in the afternoon he was asked to place himself amongst eight other men. He was then picked out by Mrs. Alice Smith. She said to the best of her belief he was one of the men she had seen outside 14, Knightrider Street, on the night of the robbery between 7 and 7.30. Five others were arrested; two have been discharged.
Inspector HERBERT HINE, City Police. I saw Frankel and Goldstein detained at Shad well Police Station. I was shown 13 pieces of silk and cotton goods. I afterwards said to the two accused and others," I am a City police officer and 1 am going to take you to Bridewell Place Police station, where you will be charged together with being concerned in receiving 13 pieces of silk and cotton goods which were stolen by means of warehouse breaking on February 8, the property of Messrs. Beckwith." Frankel said, "I know nothing about it. I was not at 17, Sutton Street, yesterday." Goldstein said, pointing to Frankel, "That is the man who brought the silk to my house and hired a room from me." Neither of the accused here made any reply when formally charged.
To Goldstein. I received some keys from another officer and with that officer I went to 117, Old Montague Street, where Frankel said a key fitted the door. That key does not fit either of the doors at that address, but it does fit your street door. I do not know if the other key fitted the kitchen door. I do not know if the other officer tried it.
ELLEN COLEMAN , 70, Sutton Street, E. On February 22 as I was returning from getting some bread, I was talking to Mrs. Yepslow when Mrs. Goldstein beckoned me across the road. We went across to her. I had only spoken to her once before. She asked me if I would do something for her. I said, "Yes; what is it?" She said, "Come inside and I will show you." My friend and I went inside. Goldstein said she was having the brokers in on Friday, would I mind some things for her till Sunday, when she was going to leave. She said she would pay me. She closed the door and went into the cellar. I went behind her and Mrs. Yepslow next to me. She took a chopper (produced) from the yard and wrenched the padlock from the cellar door and brought out two sacks. She undid them and took several
rolls of silk from them. She put some into my apron and some into Mrs. Yepslow's. She asked where my friend lived; I told her 16, Fenton Street. She said, "Take the silk there; it will be the lightest; the heaviest stuff you can take across to your house. Mrs. Yepslow's boy helped us carry it away—not the silk. We came back again and Mrs. Goldstein undid a sack with some cloth in it. My friend's apron was not big enough and Mrs. Goldstein lent her a pinofore to put the cloth in. It was put under Mrs. Yepslow's bed. Mrs. Goldstein gave us 2s. 6d.
To Mr. Purcell. I do not know Frankel. I believe there are lodgers at Mrs. Goldstein's. I have heard it is a bad house.
The evidence was interpreted to Goldstein, who said that everything witness said was a lie.
Detective-sergeant WILLIAM CRIDLAND, H. At 8.30 on February 22 I went with another officer to 17, Sutton Street. I saw Goldstein, and told her that two women and a boy had been stopped, having some cloth in their possession which was supposed to be stolen, and I had seen it come out from her house. I said they had made a statement implicating her. She replied, "I know nothing; no cloth or stuff went out of here; they tell lies." She said, "A man named Reuben "(that is Frankel) "who had a shop in Commercial Road four years ago, came here last Monday and hired the kitchen. He afterwards brought some stuff. Next day, Tuesday, about 12.30 p.m., he came here with a tall thin man with a van; brought some sacks; it was cloth and silk. He came in to-day and brought the other people with him and they took the stuff out. I know nothing." I told her one of the women said she gave her 2s. 6d. to take the stuff out. She said, "Yes, Reuben was in the kitchen at the same time." I went to 16, Fenton Street, and under the bed at Mrs. Yepslow's I found 13 rolls of silk and 15 lengths of cloth. I went back to Sutton Street and told Mrs. Goldstein what I had found. She said, "I can only tell you what I have told you before; Mr. Reuben took the room off me, and this evening when the two women and the boy came Reuben was in my room with the door partly shut." I took her to Shadwell Police Station, where she was detained. About 11 p.m. the same evening I went with Chief-inspector Wensley and Sergeant Boreham to 342, Cable Street and assisted to arrest Reuben Frankel. He was taken to Shadwell Police Station, where Mrs. Goldstein was detained. On entering the charge room Goldstein said, pointing to Frankel, "That is the man I let the room to and gave him a key of the front door." When Frankel was searched a bunch of keys was found on him. Goldstein, pointing to one of them, said, "That is the key I gave him." That was the key of the front door. On the 27th, at Frankel's request, I went to 117, Old Montague Street, with Inspector Hine, and tried this key which Frankel said belonged to the door. It did not fit. (To the Jury.) There is no key on the bunch that fits the padlock.
Detective CHRISTOPHER, H. In consequence of what I heard I went to Sutton Street on February 22 and kept observation. At 7.10 p.m. I saw Frankel enter No. 17, I believe with a key. At 7.40 I saw two women and a boy knock at 17, Sutton Street. The door was immediately
opened and they entered. Ten minutes later they returned to the street, the lad was carrying a big bag on his shoulders and the two women something bulky in their aprons, which I subsequently found contained 15 rolls of cloth. They were taken to Shadwell Police Station.
To Mr. Jenkins. I knew that Frankel was carrying on business as a small provision dealer in Old Montague Street.
CHARLES CLIFF , traveller to George Harrison, 16, Belfast Chambers, Beak Street, W., identified a piece of cloth as part of two bales despatched by his firm on January 26 to Heron and Co., 98, Victoria Street.
GEORGE SEARLE , carman to Charles A. Matthews and Co., Hop Exchange. I had three bales of woollen goods on my van, which I collected from Hermitage Wharf on January 29. I left the van in Wapping with the boy. When I returned the van was gone.
Mr. Purcell submitted that statements by Goldstein were not evidence against her co-prisoners but only evidence against herself; that there was no case to go to the jury against Frankel; that there was no legal evidence that Frankel knew anything at all about the property that was found at Mrs. Goldstein's.
Judge Rentoul ruled that there was no evidence against Frankel, and a verdict of Not guilty was returned.
SIMON LAZARUS (prisoner, on oath). I live with my parents. I have never had any accusation brought against me. On February 22 a stranger called on me. He said he was the agent of a firm who had gone bankrupt and asked if I would buy any silk. He produced about 20 patterns in a paper. I picked out five and he said he would bring them in the afternoon. He brought them on a barrow. He asked me 6d. a yard at first, and then he said to me, "I should buy by the piece, by the roll." The stuff is half cotton, half silk. I agreed to pay £10 for five rolls. I asked for a receipt; he offered one on a blank piece of paper; I did not care for it and he said he would bring one in the evening. I did not pay him the whole £10; I intended paying him the £4 balance when he brought the receipt. He never came back. The detectives came about five days afterwards. Their evidence is substantially true.
Cross-examined. I have only previously bought rags of strangers. I did not think there was anything suspicious about the silk. I deal in old rags and tailors' trimmings. Other goods were locked in the cupboard besides the silk, not rags. I have not bought as much valuable silk as this before. The reason the cupboard was locked was that there are people passing. I was afraid of getting into trouble at the time the police came and asked if my father was in. I had suspicions all was not right. I thought 6d. a yard a fair price. I did not think of
getting paper and pen and ink for the man to write a receipt. I had 40 worth of goods in stock at the time.
Re-examined. The man had not a stamp with him at the time; nor had I. (To the Court.) I did not know the need for a stamp; I know over 2 requires a stamp. I think a penny stamp carries any amount. I realise I have done a very stupid thing.
SOPHIE GOLDSTEIN (prisoner, on oath). I live at 17, Button Street. I am married. My husband is living. Frankel took from me the kitchen. He paid me 2s. and I gave him the key of the street door on Monday. Tuesday he moved in. He brought the sacks the same day. On Thursday the two women came. I do not know their names. They live in a street by me. I knew the woman Coleman before. She stole a big sheet and pillow-case out of a stranger's house where she went cleaning. I was told that. I never spoke to her in my life. When the women came they told me they wanted to take some goods from my place and asked for Reuben. He was in my place all day long. They asked Reuben, "You have got something to do in the kitchen; you want to take away some goods." He said yes and asked when she comes; she says in the afternoon. She comes with the other woman; she was by herself before. In the afternoon she brought the other woman to take the things away. She come down in the kitchen; she screams up, "Missis, the kitchen is shut." I told Reuben the kitchen is shut. He said, "You go round and tell her to open it." The opened it herself. When she went away she asked for 1s. I told Reuben to give her 1s.; he said, "All right, here is 2s. 6d." I gave it her from my hande. When the constable came he asked, "Is that the lot." I say, "I do not think so; perhaps it is the lot." He asked, "Who belongs to the locked-up room." I say Reuben took from me the kitchen; he gave me 2s. deposit and I gave him the street door key. I have a man and his wife living on the first floor. I don't have no lodgers at all. I keep a respectable place. I do not have immoral women there. My husband and I are Russians. He is in work. He is here.
Cross-examined. I did not beckon the women over. I can prove that by my tenant who opened the door. I did not expect any bailiffs. I owe nobody a penny. This apron (produced) is mine. I do not know how it came in Mrs. Coleman's possession. I did not lend it. Perhaps she got it in the kitchen. She asked me for a pinny. I do not know what she carried away in the apron. They both had a load of goods in their aprons.
WOLFF COHEN , 1, Salter Street, Cannon Street Road. I remember the silk being delivered. I took it in. There was no concealment about it. I remember Lazarus speaking to the man who brought it. The price was 2 a roll. Lazarus said, "I want a receipt before I pay the money. "The other man said, "I will writ you something out on a piece of paper; I have not got a stamp with me. "Lazarus said, "That one is no good; I want a stamped receipt. "I saw 6 paid. Lazarus said he would pay the rest when he brought the receipt. I am in the employ of prisoner's father. (To the Court.)
Prisoner asked me last week if I remembered who was there at the time he bought the stuff. I said I took the stuff in.
Cross-examined. The money was paid on Friday, February 9. I took the silk up myself. I did not lock it up. I left it open.
Verdict, Not guilty.
McDONALD, Patrick (41, labourer) pleaded guilty , of feloniously and without lawful authority or excuse, in the name of Frederick Anthony, acknowledging a certain recognisance when becoming bail for Catherine Praeter, thereby obtaining her release from lawful custody.
Prisoner confessed to a conviction of felony at the County of London Sessions on September 24, 1907.
Sentence: One months' hard labour.
TOMLIN, Elizabeth pleaded guilty , of stealing a banker's cheque for £4 14s. 6d., the property of Henry Lewis; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, the endorsement on the said cheque, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from Robert Sunner £1, his moneys, with intent to defraud.
(March 21.) Prisoner was released on her own recognisances and those of her father, in £10 each, to come up for judgment if called upon.
BEFORE JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH.
(Thursday, March 21.)
JENNER, Tom (35, tailor) pleaded guilty , of being bailee of certain property, to wit, one costume, the goods of Annie Laxter, fraudulently converting the same to his own use thereby stealing the same.
Prisoner, having been in custody two weeks and having a previous good character, was released on his own recognisances in £5 to come up for judgment if called upon.
COLLINS, John (54, labourer), and SEYMOUR, Henry (41, labourer) , both breaking and entering a place of Divine worship, to wit, St. Marylebone Parish Church, and stealing therein one pair of solitaires, the goods of Mary Ann Clarke, and three bottles of wine, the goods of the churchwardens of the said church; both burglary in the dwelling-house of Walter Sharp with intent to steal therein.
Mr. Adrian Clark prosecuted.
Prisoners were tried on the first indictment.
MARY ANN CLARK , 25, Paddington Street, vestry woman at Marylebone Parish Church. Pair of solitaires produced are mine. On February 16 I locked them attached to a pair of cuffs in a drawer in the vestry; I left at 4 p.m. On February 17 at 8.45 a.m. I found the drawers in the vestry broken, things turned out on to the dresser; in the lavatory some empty bottles and my cuffs on the sink. The cupboard in the vestry was broken open and the wine gone, one wine
bottle was half emptied, was in the lavatory quite empty. The stained glass window of the church had great holes in it.
Cross-examined by Seymour. I have no private mark on the solitaires, but I can swear to them as my property; I have worn them for 25 years. I do not know either of the prisoners.
CHARLES EDWIN HEWITT , verger, St. Marylebone Parish Church. On February 16 at 10 p.m. I locked up the church. At 8 a.m. the next day I found four collection boxes broken, the stained glass memorial window was broken in; in the vestry the drawers were taken out of the sideboard, the contents thrown about. The door leading to the safe had been attempted to be forced, a hair brush put in as a wedge, and the handle of a shovel used as a lever. There were two empty wine bottles on the floor. The safe contained the Communion plate. The fire-irons were broken into two pieces.
Sergeant JAMES BERRETT, B Division. On February 17 at 11.30 a.m. I saw prisoners at Marylebone Police court. I said, "As you are going to be charged with breaking into the parish church of Marylebone and a pair of solitaires have been stolen at that place which have not been found, I propose searching you thoroughly, and if necessary I shall remove your clothing." Both prisoners said, "You can do what you like." They laughed. I searched Collins and found nothing upon him, but I noticed him wink at Seymour; Seymour winked and pointed to the cap he was wearing. I then searched Seymour and found in the lining of his cap, which was pinned, pair of solitaires (produced). I said, "There are the solitaires I have been looking for." Seymour replied, "God bli'me, governor, that has done it, but it is our place to hide and your place to find; you cannot expect us to tell you where the stuff is." Collins said, "Well, that finishes it up now, and I hope you are satisfied; you do not want anything further."
To Seymour. You were arrested at 3 a.m. Information was received that the church had been broken into at 9 a.m.
Detective CHARLES BERESFORD, D Division, corroborated as to the state of the church. At the front entrance I saw foot prints and and traced them past the newly dug flower-beds to a wall about 12 ft. high, which surrounded the church. I there found some marks as if somebody had got over. At the side entrance I found similar marks. At the base of the wall I picked up button (produced), which I handed to Inspector MacPherson.
Inspector JOHN MACPHERSON, D Division. On February 17 I received button (produced) and told prisoners where it had been found. I found on Seymour's jacket a button was missing; this button was similar to the others and I told him so. I said, "You will be charged with being concerned together in breaking and entering the church during the night." Seymour said, "You can charge me with what you like." Collins said, "All right." I examined their boots and found some new mould on them. I had noticed the grounds of the church had been lately dug up.
Verdict (both), Guilty.
Mr. Clark said that he did not think it necessary to proceed on the indictment for burglary.
Both prisoners were indicted as habitual criminals.
Collins pleaded guilty. With regard to Seymour—Sergeant JAMES BERRETT produced the authority of the Director of Public Prosecutions and proved the service of the notices on the prisoner.
Inspector SIDNEY BETTS. I was present at this court on December 11, 1899, when Seymour was sentenced to six years' penal servitude for burglary, breaking into a chapel and stealing a set of Communion Plate; also at North London Sessions on October 11, 1904, when he was sentenced to three months' hard labour and license revoked for stealing lead.
Police-constable JOSEPH CRIPPS, 27 AR. I was present at the North London Sessions on October 22, 1907, when Henry Seymour was sentenced to three years' penal servitude for stealing lead pipe, and brass fittings.
Inspector HENRY BROOKS, S Division. On April 30, 1906, I was present at this court when Seymour was sentenced to 12 months' hard labour for breaking and entering a church. In 1904 he was over 16 years of age.
Sergeant JAMES BERRETT, recalled. Collins commenced his career of crime in 1895, when he and Seymour were together sentenced at Marylebone Police Court; he has been in and out of prison ever since. In addition to the six years' penal servitude for sacrilege, on another occasion Seymour was found breaking into a church, and also found in another church in course of erection; he was only released from prison two days prior to his arrest. I have known him 14 years in the Westminster district. With others he takes a barrow round ostensibly to collect bottles, taking anything they can come across. On one occasion he fell 35 ft. from a church and injured himself; that was taken into consideration in his sentence of 12 months at this court.
Sergeant MARK PINNICK (called by Seymour). When you were at Marylebone Police Court on October 23, 1911, you were bound over in £5, being charged as a suspected person. You told me that you had walked from Grimsby, where you had been working in the docks, and had been discharged owing to your sight failing; you said you had been collecting bottles, rags, and bones and selling them to Dickinson, 49, Wood Street, Westminster. I saw Dickinson, who did not recollect you, but said you might have sold bottles there. I had correspondence with the Grimsby Police, and the magistrate, Mr. Paul Taylor, took into consideration that you had very bad sight, bound you over, and, as you promised to go to Dover, gave you 5s. out of the poor box. Very soon after you were charged again at Marylebone.
Sentence (each prisoner): Three years' penal servitude and Five years' preventive detention.
Brown pleaded guilty.
Mr. G. Tully-Christie prosecuted.
Verdict (Tyrrell), Not guilty.
Brown having a good character, was released on his own recognisances in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.
GALLAFENT, Arthur (36, labourer), and HAYES, Richard (26, warehouseman) , feloniously causing certain grievous bodily harm to Walter Bymay with intent to resist the lawful apprehension of the said R. Hayes.
Mr. Travers Humphreys and Mr. Roland Oliver prosecuted; Mr. C. A. H. Black defended Hayes.
Police-constable WALTER BYMAY, 477 G. On February 13, at 1 p.m., I saw Hayes betting in Goswell Road. I told him I was a police officer and should arrest him for bookmaking. He said, "All right—I did not think you were a copper." On the way to the station he struck me in the chest with his fist. We both fell; he got up and ran down Hatfield Street. I followed two or three yards behind. He called to Gallafent, who was there talking to a woman, "Put the bastard out," ran to the bottom of the street, then doubled back; I followed and caught him against the "Rising Sun" public-house. Gallafent ran at me with chopper produced. I struck him across the back and breast with my truncheon. These was a hostile crowd. Gallafent caught me by the sleeve, someone kicked me and I fell down. Gallafent then kicked me twice in the stomach; as he was kicking me a third time I caught hold of the leg of his trousers and pulled him down and struck him across the head with my truncheon. I got my whistle out and blew it, another constable arrived, and after a few minutes we got him to the station. Hayes meantime had got away. At the station I told the Inspector this man had assaulted me as I was arresting Hayes. I was put under the doctor. I am now recovered.
Cross-examined by Mr. Black. I was on plain clothes duty, looking out for bookmakers. I saw Hayes giving slips of paper. He went into a public-house; I followed him and called for a glass of beer. I was told I was in the wrong bar. I had no warrant. I did not arrest him in the public-house. When arrested he went for 12 yards quietly, I having hold of his sleeve; he struck me, we grappled and fell. When Hayes said, "Put the bastard out," there were a lot of people in the road; I am certain it was Hayes said it.
Cross-examined by Gallafent. You were at No. 9, Hatfield Street, talking to a woman—not under the arch. In the struggle the chopper fell to the ground.
DR. HENRY BAILEY , divisional surgeon. On February 13, a little after 2 p.m., I saw prosecutor at Shepherdess Walk Police Station. He was sitting on a chair; his pulse was very small and weak; he was pale, sweating on the forehead, and collapsed. He complained of great pain on the left side of the stomach, where he had received a blow. He was quite unfit for duty. I put him on the sick-list; he lives at
the section house, and went straight upstairs to bed on my order. I have no doubt he had been seriously injured. I saw him again at 5 p.m.; he was still collapsed. The next day a large bruise came out on the left side of his stomach, probably due to a severe kick. He was on the sick-list for a fortnight and then resumed duty. At the station I also dressed a wound over Gallafent's eye, caused by a blow with a truncheon.
To Mr. Black. I think it is very unlikely the bruise was caused by running against a barrow. He made no complaint to me about a blow with a chopper.
ARTHUR CROW , 66a, Marlboro Road, Bowes Park, warehouseman. On February 13 I was in Hatfield Street in my dinner hour about 20 yards from Goswell Road. I saw Hayes running towards Goswell Road, with prosecutor six yards behind. They passed me. Hayes got to Goswell Road, turned, passed the prosecutor; they fell together; prosecutor fried to strike Hayes on the head with the truncheon, and he turned to protect his head. Gallafent came up, put his arms round prosecutor, and pulled him away from Hayes, who ran away up Hatfield Street. Gallafent followed him.
To Gallafent. I believe you came from the archway. I did not see you strike prosecutor.
Police-constable FRANK COOK, 485 G. On February 13 I heard a police whistle and went into Hatfield Street; there was a crowd of some 200 people. Gallafent was walking through the crowd towards Goswell Road. I stopped him and said, "What is the matter?" He said. "I have been assaulted." I said, "Do you know who has done it?" He said, "I do not know." I said, "Do you want to go to the hospital?" He said, "Oh, no. "Prosecutor came up and said, "I want you; you have assaulted me." Prosecutor was in a very dazed condition. Gallafent made no reply. I took him to the station. On the way he was abusing prosecutor and shouting to people in the crowd who were following.
To Gallafent. You were coming from Baldock Street towards me. Prosecutor walked with you on your left side to the station and I think held your arm; you made no attempt to get away.
Inspector WILLIAM DUNCAN. On February 13, at 2 p.m., Gallafent was brought to City Road Police Station by Police-constable Cook and prosecutor. Prosecutor stated that his prisoner had been rescued and Gallafent had assaulted him; he then collapsed. After the doctor had attended prosecutor and Gallafent I charged Gallafent with causing grievous bodily harm with intent to resist the lawful apprehension of another person. Gallafent had a slight wound over his eye. He said, "He has pinched me to cover up this. Can I have bail." I said, "No. "I heard nothing about the chopper at that time. I visited prosecutor about two hours afterwards, and at 9 p.m. went to 10, Hatfield Street, where, in the fender in the front room, I found chopper (produced), which was identified by prosecutor. The next day prosecutor's truncheon was brought to the station by Gallafent's brother.
To Mr. Black. I have known Hayes for some years as a betting man and as a peaceful and quiet man.
To Gallafent. There was no attempt to conceal the chopper; prosecutor recognised it the next day.
Sergeant FREDERICK BIGGS, G Division. On February 14 at 11.30 a.m. Hayes came to Shepherdess Walk Police Station and said, "I hear inquiries are being made over the Gallafent affair. If I am wanted I give myself up. I was in the 'Shakespeare' at the time, when a man followed me out and caught hold of me; I did not know he was a policeman, and ran away." I told him he would be charged with causing grievous bodily harm to the constable and also with street betting. He said, "Betting admitted; but I know nothing about the other."
On the submission of Mr. Black, Judge Lumley Smith said he did not think there was a case against Hayes on this indictment.
Mr. Travers Humphreys said he proposed to try the misdemeanour indictment of causing actual bodily harm and common assault.
(Friday, March 22.)
JOHN SHEARMAN . (To the Court.) On Tuesday afternoon, February 13, At 1.30, I was standing at the corner of Goswell Road and Hatfield Street talking to my wife. I afterwards saw two men running from Goswell Road through Hatfield Street. As we passed Gallafent and his wife we went indoors, five houses up on the left-hand side. Two or three minutes after I got indoors I heard a shout. I rushed out, looked down the bottom of the street. Only five doors from me I saw Gallafent standing at the corner. I saw two men running. One ran past Gallafent up the street. There was a barrow about 30 or 40 feet up the street; one man ran one side of the barrow and the other the other. Then he dodged back, went a few paces in Goswell Road and ran round Gallafent, who stepped out of the way. I know now one of them was a constable. The constable had his staff, pulled it out and struck Gallafent across the eye. Gallafent had not struck the constable first, only stepped out of the way. The constable continued running after Hayes. I knew Hayes. They ran up a little yard that runs into Goswell Road. The constable captured the man in the corner and there was a bit of a tussle between Hayes and the constable, Hayes trying to get away. In the meantime Gallafent walked up the court into the open to this nook, and stood there wiping his eye, and while the struggle was going on—it did not last more than two or three minutes—he said, "You cowardly bastard." The constable closed with him and holding Hayes by the cuff Gallafent tried to get the stick; the constable claimed him and there was a tussle. Hayes ran away, the constable continued his running after Hayes; they seemed exhausted. I did not see Gallafent do anything to the constable. I did not see any reason for the constable striking him over the eye. He had not struck at the constable. He did not kick him. I swear that. People flocked from Goswell Road, but they did not go up the street; one or
two passed up the street. I never saw the, constable or anyone on the ground.
To Gallafent. After the constable struck you with the truncheon he chased Hayes, who escaped round the turning over the wall. I did not see you go near your door the whole time. You never had a chopper. You never had anything in your hand. While I was speaking to the other policeman in uniform two policemen in uniform came from Goswell Road and asked what was the matter. You said, "Some man struck me with a stick." I never heard Police-constable Bymay say he was a police constable.
Cross-examined. I am Gallafent's father-in-law. Hayes and Police-constable Bymay came into the street after I had spoken to Gallafent. The shout I heard was like a young girl holloaing in the street. Directly I went to the door I saw them running. They were 40 feet off. I measured it. I did not hear Hayes call out to Gallafent. I did not hear him say, "Put the bastard out." I did not hear anybody say that. It could have been said without my hearing it. There was no chopper. It could not have been used without me seeing it. I saw it at five o'clock in the room. While the constable was taking Gallafent to the station I went in the room with another friend to look for a certain thing and the chopper was in the fender. I did not hear Gallafent say anything to my daughter. I heard him say, "Give me a handkerchief "; he had nothing but his bare hand up to his eye. I was not more than a foot a way from him. I saw the officer draw his truncheon from this pocket, not the one where they always carry them. He was holding it in his hand when he closed with Hayes. I never saw Bymay on the ground. I saw the whole of the tussle with the policeman when he captured Hayes the second time. There was no one on the ground then. The constable did not detain Hayes more than a minute. He left Gallafent to run after Hayes. I swear Gallafent never kicked the officer in the corner where the tussle was. If it was after the shout I should have seen it. I heard the officer was injured next morning. I did not know it then. He ran up the street. I saw nobody do anything to the officer that would account for his injuries. I cannot account for how he came by them. Within about three minutes there was a crowd of about 50 people, but there was only three at the beginning. I was one of them. There was a crowd of 200 at the Goswell Road end of the court. The crowd was not hostile; they were frightened. I was a little bit nervous. It is absolutely false that the crowd pulled the officer to the ground and that Hayes kicked him. It was at the bottom of the court that he hit Hayes with his truncheon. I heard someone blow a whistle in Little Baltic Street. two constables came up before that. Bymay did not blow the whistle till he got to Little Baltic Street. Gallafent's wife gave me the truncheon and I sent it back to the, police. A stranger gave it to her. No one took it away from the officer; it fell to the ground in the tussle.
WILLIAM DESMOND , newsvendor. (To the Court.) I saw Gallafent talking to his wife at the corner of Hatfield Street, when two men run in from Goswell Road, and as the behind man approached Hatfield Street he gave Gallafent a blow over the eye with a thick black stick, then went on running up the street after the first man. chased him
round a wheelbarrow. Gallafent came up the street with his hand where he caught the blow, said, "Oh, you coward" to the man. The stick dropped; he tried to get the stick; then the other man tried to get Gahafent, and the other man on the pavement, and tried to pin them to the wall, in which one of the men got away. He left Gallafent bleeding. He ran after the first man into Baltic Street, where he lost him. He stood there about two minutes blowing his whistle. He came back into Hatfield Street, saw Gallafent talking to two policemen outside the coal shop and there he charged Gallafent. I do not know what he charged him with. I know he told two policemen to take him to the station.
To Gallafent. The constable struck you across the eye deliberately. You did nothing to the constable. You were talking to your wife a foot away. From the time they chased you till you were arrested you were not near your door. You were in one position at the corner of the street. You had no weapon. The constable was standing up when he struck you; so were you. No kicking was done. I did not hear him say he was a constable.
Cross-examined. I saw nothing happen before the men ran out of Goswell Road and the constable struck Gallafent. They ran round a barrow. I believe it was before that that the officer struck Gallafant on. the head. The officer was never on the ground. He was not kicked. There was a crowd round when Hayes was struggling with the officer. The crowd was not hostile; they were all strangers to Hatfield Street. They might have been saying, "Oh, you coward," against the man that struck him. I did not get too near in case I caught a blow from the stick. The officer only blew his whistle in Baltic Street. I do not know whether the other officers heard the whistle; I know they ran into Hatfield Street. I saw them talking to Gallafent. That must have been while the whistle was blowing. They were nowhere near Hatfield Street till they heard the whistle. I only knew Hayes by sight. I live opposite Gallafent.
HERBERT CRESSWELL , insurance agent. (To the Court.) I saw Hayes running away from another man. They ran down the street and back again, dodged round a coaster's barrow. Gallafent appeared to be hindering the policeman; they got in a corner; there was a struggle and Hayes eventually got away. There was a struggle between the three. The policeman came back and arrested Hayes. He hit Hayes with the truncheon. That was when they came back after he caught Hayes by the barrow.
To Gallafent. I did not see you on the ground. I saw no one kicked. You ran towards Golden Lane. I did not see you near your door. I saw no chopper.
Cross-examined. I was opposite No. 10, about ten yards from where the struggle was. There was no crowd, only youngsters. There was a crowd after several policemen came down. I saw Gallafent arrested. There were a good many people there then. The officer was at no time on the ground. He was never kicked. I cannot suggest how he was injured. I did not see him hit Gallafent on the head. I saw the two men when they first ran into Hatfield Street. The constable was close enough to hit Gallafent. I did not see it. He did not
hit Gallifent after they dodged round the barrow. I do not know Desmond, Crow, or Shearman. I did not hear a whistle blown.
FRANCIS WARD , insurance agent, 41, Turner Square, Hoxton. (To the Court.) I was with last witness. He is in the same insurance office. I first saw two men running down the street, Hayes and a detective. They went up the turning and back again and dodged round a barrow. They got into a corner and closed grips. The detective started to hit Hayes with a truncheon. This went on for a few seconds, and Gallafent came across the other side of the turning and held the detective. In the struggle Hayes gat away. After a few seconds wrestling the detective got away and took up the chase after Hayes down the street. At that time Hayes was out of it. He came back, and Gallafent was standing aside, and they arrested Gallafent. I did not see any blows struck or anybody on the ground or anybody kicked.
To Gallafent. I did not see you near your door. I did not see a chopper. I did not see you kick the constable. I did not see the constable on the ground.
Cross-examined. I only know Gallafent by sight. I collect down this turning. I do not know how Gallafent got the cut on his head or how the constable got the bruise on his stomach. I was asked to give evidence by a woman at No. 7 where I collect. I do not know her name. I told her I would not. I was not asked what I had seen. I did not want to give evidence because it interferes with my business. I have had to do my work after I have been to the court each day.
ARTHUR GALLAFENT (prisoner, not on oath). Bymay says he was assaulted 15 yards from Goswell Road, in Hatfield Street. Cook tells you he came from Goswell Road, and speaks to me 30 to 50 yards in the street. If Bymay had been lying on the ground 15 ft. away he must have passed him blowing his whistle without seeing him; instead of that Cook tells you he did not see him on the ground, neither did he see him in Hatfield Street after speaking to me, yet he tells you he came in the direction of Golden Lane and Baltic Street when I was arrested. If he had been kicked—this place has warehouses in 'he street—don't you think someone would have gone to his assistance? Why did he fabricate this charge? I will tell you. He could not go to the police station and tell the truth. He could not say," I have lost a bookmaker and lost my truncheon." He manufactured this to caver up this and his own misdemeanors. You heard him say he was not in the inspector's room. The inspector tells you he was in that room and he followed him out. He told you yesterday he mentioned the-chopper to Inspector Duncan. I asked the inspector both at the police court and yesterday was that chopper mentioned. You heard his answer: No; neither was it for eight days afterwards. He spoke to Hayes, as he admitted, at 1.40. It takes a quarter of an hour to get from Hatfield Street to Shepherdess Walk Police Station. That would leave three or four minutes for this drama to be played. Yon don't think for one moment these people I have never seen before would come and jeopardise their positions and face possibly a term of penal servitude to tell lies. If there is any point I have overlooked I trust you will point it out to the jury.
Verdict, Not guilty.
Prisoners were further indicted for unlawfully assaulting Walter Bymay and occasioning him actual bodily harm; assaulting him, he being a police constable, while in the execution of his duty; common assault.
Hayes pleaded guilty of common assault.
Police-constable WALTER BYMAY, Police-constable FRANCIS COOK, DR. BULL, and Inspector DUNCAN repeated their evidence.
Verdict (Gallafent), Guilty on the 2nd and 3rd counts.
Several convictions for assault, etc., were proved against Gallafent.
Sentence: Gallafent, Six months' hard labour; Hayes was released on his own recognizances in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.
BEFORE THE COMMON SERJEANT.
(Friday, March 22.)
Mr. W. T. Spratling prosecuted; Mr. Cecil Hayes defended.
HILDA ISEMAN . I married prisoner on October 18, 1910, at Hackney Registry Office; we then kept a boot shop at 149, Church Street, Stoke Newington. On January 8 last I had a pair of diamond earrings, a marquise diamond ring, a half-hoop diamond ring, a long gold chain with ruby pendant, a diamond and ruby gold bangle, and £45 in gold locked up in a cashbox, of which I kept the key. That day prisoner persuaded me to take out £55 in notes from my banking account; I put that also in the cashbox. That evening my husband persuaded me to go to a picture palace. When I came back he said he had a headache and told me to go to bed at once. Next morning he asked me to make him some sandwiches as he was going to warehouses to choose goods. He told me to tell the customers that they would have their boot repairs by 10 o'clock that night. I fully expected him back that night. He did not return, and I found all the keys were gone. I then borrowed a lot of keys from the lady next door and succeeded in opening my cashbox with one of them. It contained nothing but two pieces of iron (produced). I then went to live with my mother at 25, Leyton Road, Stratford, where I am living now. I took out a warrant a few days after he left. I did not see him again or. hear from him until he called at my mother's house on January 26. I sent for the police and he was arrested.
Cross-examined. Prisoner was a bootmaker. At my wedding my brother made me a present of £175, which I put into the bank in the joint names of myself and prisoner. The £55 notes was part of that. Cheques had to be signed by us both. Prisoner persuaded me and I consented to take £55 to be spent on improving the boot repairing business Prisoner made me a present of an engagement ring, which I
partly paid for, and a bracelet. I never consented to the jewellery being sold to improve the business. After I was married my brother gave me a cheque for £20, with which I bought the rest of the jewellery from a Mrs. Weidenbaum, Black Lion Yard, Stepney. I took £55 out of the bank to save the trouble of going a lot of times; I intended to hand it over to prisoner a little at a time. I did not notice prisoner packing his things before he went. Prisoner never talked to me about going to America and starting business there; I should not like to go to America. When prisoner came to my mother's house on January 26 he kissed me and said, "You need not think, because I took your money and your jewellery and deserted you, that I married you for that purpose. I had to go to America because some time ago I bought some stolen jewellery and I went there to sell it; I made a lot of money. I have sold your earrings and your marquise ring, and I will buy you another pair of earrings and another marquise ring; I will take your bracelet and other jewellery out of pawn. I will pay your brother back for the ring I took from him. If the landlord will not let me have the shop back I will take another shop, but I will not work any more, I have found a better way to make money." I said, "Where is the money?" He showed me some American paper-money and asked me to lend him £20.
Re-examined. I paid for the business. He had no money at all when I married him.
Detective-sergeant THOMAS EVANS. On February 26 I saw prisoner at the West Ham Police Station. I said, "I am a police officer; I believe your name is Phillip Iseman?" He said, "Yes." I said, "I hold a warrant for your arrest." I read the warrant. He said, "I bought the earrings and sold them again as I wanted the money. It was only £50. I sent her to the bank to get it. I can get the manager to prove it was a joint account. I went to America and I came back and went straight to my wife, and my mother-in-law asked me to go upstairs, and next the police came. I went away just for a little time to get rid of my mother-in-law; if she had not interfered I should not have gone. I bought some jewellery before we were married and sold it again as she was not satisfied with it." I conveyed him to the Stoke Newington Police Station. When charged, he said, "I did not steal it. She gave me the money and I can prove it. It is not £95, it was only £50, and she gave it to me." I searched 'him and found three notes for 20 dollars, one for 5 dollars and 2s. 3d. English money.
Cross-examined. Prisoner is known as a very respectable and very hard-working man. I know nothing against him.
MRS. SARAH WEIDENBAUM , Black Lion Yard, Stepney, jeweller. I have known prisoner and his wife for the last few years. They came together and bought an engagement ring, diamond cluster earrings, and a wedding-ring. Prisoner and his wife afterwards told me they did not like clusters and that I was to make them some other earrings. A few days afterwards prisoner brought back the earrings I had sold them and asked me to give him the money back and his wife would pay for the earrings they had ordered. I gave him the money back and took the receipt from him.
FLORENCE WESTON , 151, Church Street, Stoke Newington, wife of Charles Weston. I lived next door to prisoner and his wife. At about 5.30 p.m. on January 8 prisoner asked my daughter to go with his wife to see the pictures. About 10 a.m. the next day prisoner's wife made a communication to me and borrowed some of my keys. I went into her house and we succeeded in opening her cashbox. There were only two pieces of iron in it.
LEWIS FISHER , 115, High Street, Kingsland, furniture dealer. Prisoner's wife is my sister. At her marriage I gave her a cheque for £175 as a present. At that time she had £45 of her own. I afterwards made her presents of furniture and money to buy jewellery. Prisoner's was not worth £10 when he was married.
Cross-examined. I did not give £175 to them mutually for the business.
Mr. Hayes submitted that under Section 12 of the Married Women's Property Act, 1882 (45 and 46 Viet., c 75) a wife can bring criminal proceedings against the husband for the protection and security of her separate property, but "separate property" had a special meaning in law, and referred to marriage settlements.
The Common Serjeant. I do not know that.
Mr. Hayes further submitted that a husband could not be convicted of stealing his wife's property unless he had left her or was about to desert her altogether; in this case the prisoner had only left his wife for a short time.
The Common Serjeant. It is a case for the jury.
PHILIP ISEMAN (prisoner, on. oath). I am a Jew and a bootmaker and live at 18, Montford Street, Whitechapel. I have been seven years in: his country and there has never been anything against my character. Before I married I bought my wife a diamond ring from Mrs. Weidenbaum for £10 15s., and a long gold chain. After the marriage I. bought her a diamond and ruby bracelet, brooches and bracelets for a few pounds in Whitechapel. When I married her she promised to give me the £175 her brother gave her. About three months before I left my wife we talked of going to America. I said I would go first and then she would follow. She said, "We are young people and we must try our luck." I did not talk of going to America any more after that. In January I found the shop did not pay, and I determined to go to America. I told my wife to get £55 out of the bank, and she did so. Next morning I took all the jewellery from the cashbox; there was no money. I sold some of the jewellery in England and some I sold in America. I went to America to open a business there and because my mother-in-law used to worry me. I had no intention of deserting my wife. I went to Chicago and opened a shop. I wrote her a letter nine days afterwards. I found the business was no good and I came back to my wife. I did not take the jewellery with the intention of depriving my wife of it.
Cross-examined. I had £50 in Moorfields Savings Bank and a shop when I was married. At the police court, in my evidence, I said, "I
did not tell my wife I was going as I knew she would not have liked it. I did not take a return ticket to America. (To the Court. I always kept those pieces of iron in the cashbox for the last six years as a remembrance; I had once used them as tools.) My brother-inlaw lent me the £20 to buy jewellery for my wife; I gave it back to him seven days afterwards. I and my wife went to Mrs. Weidenbaum and asked her to change some earrings we had previously bought. A few days afterwards, on the day I went away, I went to Mrs. Weidenbaum and got the money back. I asked my wife to draw out £55; I did not tell her what for. She had four free tickets to see the pictures and wished to go. I went to the next door neighbour and asked her daughter to go with my wife. Next day I asked her to make some sandwiches for me. I did not tell her I was going to warehouses for goods. I told her I wanted the sandwiches because I was going away.
Re-examined. I kept the key of the cashbox.
Verdict, Not guilty.
ESPINASSE, Bernard (43, journalist), ULLMAN, Edith May, and ULLMAN, Sam (47, jeweller) , all conspiring and agreeing together and with other persons unknown to defraud C. Arthur Pearson Limited,, and such of His Majesty's liege subjects as should become genuine competitors in certain competitions called "Sparklets "; all obtaining by false pretences from C. Arthur Pearson, Limited, certain valuable securities, to wit, bankers' cheques for £25, £15 10s., £19, £20 15s., £18 15s., £24, £26, £20, £31, £26 16s., £45 13s., and £14 3s., in each case with intent to defraud; all attempting to obtain by false pretences from C. Arthur Pearson, Limited, a certain valuable security, to wit, a banker's cheque for £31 14s., with intent to defraud; all forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, certain endorsements upon certain banker's cheques, to wit, upon cheques for £1, £1 1s., and £24, in each case with intent to defraud, and feloniously demanding and obtaining valuable securities and money under certain forged instruments, to wit, under the said cheques, knowing the same to be forged.
Mr. Muir and Baron Albert Profumo prosecuted; Mr. Cecil Haws defended.
Mr. Muir opened the case.
(Saturday, March 23.)
JOHN MARSHALL BATHGATE , assistant managing director to C. Arthur Pearson, Limited, proprietors of "Pearson's Weekly. From August, 1911, until January, 1912, "Pearson's Weekly" advertised competitions called "Sparklets," in which readers were invited to compete. They were conducted by the Editor, Mr. Lambourne, Mr. Paterson, and the prisoner Espinasse. who was a member of the staff. My attention was called to a correspondence between Lionel L. Hall and our company, and caused inquiries to be made. We received one letter dated December 11, 1911, from 168, Norwood Road, West Norwood, addressed to "the cashier, 'Pearson's Weekly,' Henrietta Street. Dear, sir, I am the winner of the first prize in your 'Sparklets'
competition, No. 16; the prize, £31 14s., as enclosed in your paper of December 14, 1 have not yet received for the following reasons. I have been out of work for a long time and being very hard up have been staying with different friends, and therefore have had no very fixed abode. In the circumstances my friend at 43, Romany Road, West Norwood, agreed to take in any letters that might come for me while I was away looking for work—he sold his business and the new tenants returned my letters to the Post Office; so if you have sent a letter I suppose it has been returned to you through the dead letter office. Will you please send the money to me at the above address, 168, Norwood Road, West Norwood, where my friend now is and where it will be quite safe. I hope you will do this it is no fault of mine that at has gone astray, and I am very urgently in need of the money just now. Thanking you in anticipation.—I am, yours faithfully, Lionel Hall. P.S.—My line, 'Rhyme critically scan,' was written on the top line of the coupon, and I printed it in two colours." We received another letter, signed "L. L. Hall," from 237, Clarence Road, Camden Town," January 12, 1912, to the cashier. Dear Sir,—I am writing to thank you for your letter and for the trouble you have taken to place the cheque which I won in your 'Sparklets' Competition. I have myself made every possible inquiry but there is no trace of it, and the only explanation is that it must have been mislaid by the Post Office or detained by someone who has no right to it. It seems to me to be hard that I should lose this money which I have rightfully won and greatly need, and I should be thankful if you would suggest any means by which I might recover it." That enclosed a registered envelope for a reply. About January 8 I gave instructions for a letter to be written to L. L. Hall inviting him to call upon us; he never did so. Throughout that competition I compared the signatures on winning coupons sent in, with the endorsements on cheques given as prizes; I find in a great many cases they do not agree. As a result of other inquiries on January 22 a warrant was issued for the arrest of Espinasse and Edith Ullman, and on January 23 they were brought up to Bow Street and remanded for a week. A warrant was then issued for the arrest of Sam Ullman, and he was brought up at Bow Street on January 29. They were subsequently all three committed for trial on charges of conspiracy, obtaining cheques by false pretences, and forgery. At the police court Mrs. Davis gave evidence and produced a list of results of "Sparklets" competitions with the names of the prize winners, in which she underlined those she knew. She underlined names in every competition, except Nos. 1 and 2, which were judged when Espinasse was away and was not judging the prizes, No. 12 when Espinasse was away ill, Nos. 19 and 20 when Espinasse was judging the competitions, but while the Lionel L. Hall correspondence was going on, and 23 and 24 when this prosecution had been started and Espinasse was not judging. I have compared handwriting on winning coupon in Competition 4 with the endorsement on cheque given as first prize, which was returned by our bankers, and I find they do not agree, sent in by "Frank Sutton, 141, Oldham Road, City, Manchester," the answer sent in by Mrs. Pestry, 74,
Betlow Road, Shepherd's Bush, of December 12, does not agree with the endorsement on the prize cheque. I have seen a specimen of Sam Ullman's writing, and I consider the writing on the coupon to be his. Answer sent in by "D. Lester, jun., 132, Rylance street, Ardwick, Manchester," is typewritten on the coupon, and signed on the cheque in writing. Endorsement on a cheque won by Miss Lucas, signed "Annie Lucas," is like Mrs. (Ullman's handwriting, Endorsement on prize cheque sent to Miss Effie Boyle, 2, Market Parade, Southall, does not agree with the writing on the coupon. Endorsement on cheque sent to Miss Osborne, Tollington Park, Holloway, does not agree with writing on coupon. Endorsement on cheque to Mrs. N. Franklin, Park Farm, Northwood, is similar to writing on coupon. Answer and endorsement do not agree in the case of J. Allen, 6, Albert Hill, Bishop Auckland. In the case of A. Ingleby, 15, Blackstock Road, Finsbury Park, N., the writing does agree, and in, by opinion, is that of Espinasse. They do not agree in the case of Miss Lucas, 132, Rylance Street, Ardwick, Manchester; in my opinion the writing on the coupon is Mrs. Ullman's, the person endorsing the cheque has began to write "Edith" and then has written "Esther." They do not agree in the case of Mrs. A. Mundy. In the case of "B. Lockman, 311, Camberwell Road, "the address is a printed cutting and is stuck on in leather; the name is printed in ink. In Competition 14, "M. A. Hughes, 60a, Queen's Road, Brighton, "the endorsement does not agree with the writing on the coupon. They do not agree in the case of Lionel L. Hall, Competition 16, in which a prize cheque of 31 14s., dated December 11, was sent, but was never presented for payment at our bankers, the writing on endorsement and coupons do not agree in "F. C. Puttock, 112, Heath Road, Twickenham" (Competition 17); "J. Allen, 6, Albert Hill, Bishops Auckland" (Competition 18); and John Mumford, 22, Churton Street, Victoria" (Competition 21); In the case of Mrs. Franklyn, Park Farm, North-wood, Middlesex, first prize, cheque dated January 8, 14 3s. was sent on January 8, 1912, but has never been presented.
(Monday, March 25.)
JOHN MARSHALL BATHGATE , recalled. Further examined. I have examined six bottles, Nos. 1 to 6, of different coloured inks found in Espinasse's bedroom at Beaconswood Farm, Ickenham, and compared the ink on a number of coupons, paying special attention to those from addresses identified by Mrs. Davis. In Competition No. 4, coupons from P. Benson, Harrow Road, and Charles Forrest, of Brentford, are in dark brown ink, exactly corresponding with bottles numbered 4 and 5; coupon from Minnie Newton, Kingston-on-Thames, is written with green ink like No. 3; coupon from Heywood, of Acton, is written with violet ink like bottle No. 2; coupons from Richmore, of Mitcham, and Scott, of Chiswick, are written with dark brown ink like bottles 4 and 5; coupon from Bean, of Kingston, is written with No. 6 (red) ink. In Competition 5, coupon from Miss Topely, Teddington, is
written in four inks—from bottle No. 1, which is a chemical preparation or hair dye, No. 4, dark brown, and No. 6, red, and an ordinary black ink; the coupon from Horace Weather by is written with No. 1. (To the jury. Competition No. 4 was published in the paper dated August 31, which would be issued a week before. The winners of that competition would be announced two or three weeks afterwards. The closing date for sending in coupons would be August 31.) I have found 80 coupons apparently written with the six different inks produced. There are 20 coupons typewritten. I have received Exhibits 30 and 31—a large typewriter taken from Espinasse's bedroom and a smaller one from Mrs. Ullman's room. The 20 typed coupons are, in my opinion, produced from one or other of those machines. In Competition 8, the coupon from Ingleby is in Espinasse's writing disguised. (A number of coupons and endorsements of cheques were stated to be in the handwriting of one or other of the three prisoners.) Letter produced of June 5, 1911, from 20, Uxbridge Road—"My dear May, I forgot to tell you might ask R. to send me just one letter in each place to see same. They go Acton and Ealing this week in the names of Vale and Pestry. I forgot to ask you what he told me to ask you about—Bob, but I should think that would be all right for you. Good luck. God bless you both. Sam,"—is in Sam Ullman's handwriting. W. Vale, of Acton, and Mrs. Pestry were winners in that week's competition. The undated letter from Beaconswood Farm, "Dear Mr. Pomeroy, will. you please cash the enclosed cheque for me. E. M. Ullman," is in Mrs. Ullman's writing. The letter of May 3, 1910, from 20, Uxbridge Road, is in. S. Ullman's writing. According to the printed rules, 10 per cent, of the money received was to be deducted by "Pearson's Weekly "for expenses and the remainder divided as prizes. In fact, throughout the competitions £1,290 has been received and only £42 deducted for expenses—less than five per cent. In the winning coupons traced to the prisoners in the majority of cases the endorsement on the cheque does not tally with the writing on the coupon. In those which I consider genuine it does.
Cross-examined. I represent "Pearson's Weekly" in this prosecution. Espinasse came into our employment five years ago. I did not warn him or ask him to give back the prize money before I applied for the warrant against him. As far as I know he never signed any agreement that he and his friends should not compete in these competitions. The staff were told verbally that they and their friends must not compete. I have examined the coupons which won prizes; I have not examined those which did not win a prize; we have not got them. There was no rule forbidding competitors to compete under an assumed name; it simply said, "Write your name and address." If we had found a competitor was giving a false name and address we should have disqualified him. There was no rule which forbade two or more persons putting their heads together and composing one answer; they would have to send it in one name. Since this prosecution we have added this rule to our competitions, "Each entry must bear the usual signature in, ink of the competitor. Names and addresses may not be typewritten or printed. Each competitor must give his real name and
address. Unless this rule is complied with the competitor forfeits his or her right to a prize." If the conditions were complied with, the wittiest, most clever, and most brilliant line would win the prize. I cannot say, and I do not think anybody could say, whether the answers which the prisoners are alleged to have sent in were the best or were not the best. In none of the competitions can I produce any better answers. I have no account of any answers sent in by the prisoners which did not win prizes. Between 1, 700 and 2, 000 answers were sent in every week. Espinasse was paid by my firm £2 a week for five days' work; he also contributed articles to "Pearson's Weekly" and other papers. There was no rule to prevent a competitor getting his friend to fill up the answer; I should have withheld the prize if I had known two different people would fill in the answer and endorse the cheque. When the answer sent in was typewritten we gave a prize although the cheque would have to be written and would be in writing. I know a good deal about handwriting, although I do not hold myself out as an expert.
Re-examined. In Competition No. 16 prisoners got 16 prizes, including the first, out of 26 prizes given. Thirteen first prizes were awarded to the prisoners; in two of those the cheques were never presented to our bankers for payment. I never came across any coupons in the name of Espinasse or Ullman.
ANDREW PATERSON , journalist, on the staff of "Pearson's Weekly." 1 controlled the department which dealt with "Sparklets" Competitions. I came into the employment of the firm in 1907; Espinasse came in November, 1908. Last summer he was residing at Beaconswood Farm, Ickenham. On one occasion I went there and Espinasse introduced Mrs. Ullman to me as his sister. To answer the "Sparklets Competitions the public had to cut out and fill up a coupon from the current copy of "Pearson's Weekly" and send it, together with a 6d. postal order, to us. When the post arrived the coupons were sorted out and sent up to my department. Espinasse then went through them alone and selected the 400 or 500 which he considered best. Espinasse and I then went through those together and selected about 30, which were sent up to the editor for his final judgment. He awarded the first prize. Each of the 30 got some prize. The first prize consisted of half the competition receipts. When Espinasse first came into the employment of Pearsons I told him that members of the staff and their friends were not allowed to compete. He was away for eight or nine weeks in 1909 and 1910; I repeated that rule to him each time he returned. While Competitions 1 and 2 were going on Espinasse was away ill and had nothing to do with the judging. He and I judged Competitions 3 to 7 inclusive. He judged No. 8 by himself, as I was away; 9, 10, and 11, we judged together. Espinasse was away ill while No. 12 was going on; 13 to 22, inclusive, we did together. He had nothing to do with 23 and 24. We then discontinued our "Sparklets" Competitions. I did not suspect him at all; I had great faith in him.
Cross-examined. Espinasse could not have sent a coupon to the editor without my consenting. Sometimes when he thought a coupon better than I thought it I gave way and let it go up. I only remember
one occasion when the editor asked to see the rejected coupons. I consider that these competitions need intelligence on the part of the competitor. I cannot produce any coupons which were better than those of the prisoners which won the prizes. Espinasse was under me. I consider the coupons sent in by the prisoners were witty, brilliant, and sparkling.
Re-examined. As Espinasse had gone through the whole competetion, I relied more upon his opinion than upon my own. (To the Judge.) In each competition a word was given and the competitor had to form a sentence each word of which had to contain one letter of the original word; the sentence should contain some reference to the original word, and should be a pun, a proverb, or a witticism. In one case the word "tea "was given, and the answer was "Stage decanters, contain." It was not a mere gamble.
FRANCIS JOHN LAMBOURNE , editor of "Pearson's Weekly." I chose the first prize winner in Sparklets Competitions out of 30 or more coupons that were sent up to me. I relied upon Paterson and Espinasse doing the previous judging fairly and honestly. Each coupon other than the best, of those sent up to me, got a small prize. I was not aware that any of the coupons came from members of the staff or their friends; I thought they all came from genuine members of the public. If I had known that a coupon had been sent in by a member of the staff or a relation of any member of the staff I should not have given that coupon a prize.
Cross-examined. Members of the staff signed no agreement that neither they nor their relations would compete; there was no printed notice anywhere in the office to that effect. On the coupon it says "Sign, "and tells the competitor to sign his own name. I take that to imply that fictitious names and addresses were not allowed. We are now taking special precautions, and tell the competitors that fictitious names and addressee are not allowed. I put that in under the instructtions of my employers, the directors; I personally did not think it necessary. I could not say whether I could bring the unsuccessful coupons.
CHARLES PAINTER , 22, Churton Street, Pimlico, newsagent. Four or five years ago Espinasse came to me, gave the name of J. Mumford, and asked me if I would take in letters for him. I agreed, and letters came from time to time in that name. At intervals of about three months letters would come in that name bearing the Pearson stamp on the flap of the envelope. More than once he told me he was expecting a rather important letter. On those occasions a letter with Pearson's stamp would come for him. On one occasion a lady, whom I cannot identify, called for the letters. The last time I saw him was in December, 1911, when he received about five letters. One of them bore Pearson's stamp. When Espinasse got outside the shop he threw all the letters down except one. A man passing by picked up the other letters and brought them in to me. They were opened and contained circulars. Some of the letters he took were addressed to "Mrs. Mumford." At Bow Street Police Court I picked out Espinasse
out from a dozen other men as being the man who gave the name of Mumford.
(Tuesday, March 26.)
GEORGE CROOKALL , butcher, Ruislip. I have known Espinasse and Mrs. Ullman for about three years. They lived at Beaconswood Farm and were customers of mine. I have cashed about a dozen cheques for Mrs. Ullman altogether. On December 23, 1911, I cashed two cheques (produced) for a guinea each, payable to Mumford on the account of "Pearson's Weekly." I paid all those cheques into my account at Barclay's Bank, Northwood. Nobody else ever gave me cheques drawn by "Pearson's Weekly."
Cross-examined. It is quite easy to see from the cheque that it was a "Pearson's Weekly" competition prize. There was no disguise about it. I have always had satisfactory dealings with them.
EBENEZER BRADLEY HUNT , cashier, Barclay's Bank, Northwood. I produce certified extract of the account of George Crookall. On December 27, 1911, two cheques on Pearson's for one guinea each were paid into his account. There are also cheques payable to J. Mum-ford and Mrs. Lucy.
GEORGE ALBERT PUSY , manager to Elizabeth Mary Bradford, corn merchant, 128, High Street, Uxbridge. I supplied goods to Beacons-wood Farm, Ickenham, where Espinasse and Mrs. Ullman were living. I at first looked to Mrs. Ullman for payment, but from Christmas, 1910, I looked to Espinasse. I had cashed and received for goods delivered cheques drawn by Pearson's for Mrs. Ullman, which I paid into our account at Barclay's Bank, Uxbridge. I never to my knowledge received Pearson's cheques from anybody else. Mrs. Ullman told me Espinasse was her brother. Since the account was changed into the name of Espinasse I have received these Pearson's cheques.
Cross-examined. I saw from the cheques that they were received as prizes from "Pearson's Weekly."
Evidence, not cross-examined to by the defence, was called tracing to the' prisoners through Mrs. Bradford's account three cheques of £1 each in October, 1911, payable to Mrs. Evans, Miss J. Fowler, and P. Blunt; October 23 cheque payable to R. Cox. In the account of John Vasey, builder, Uxbridge, two £5 notes (Exhibits 36 and 37) were traced to Espinasse and Mrs. Ullman in November and December. In the account of Halkeston Paul Herron, wine merchant of Uxbridge, £5 note (Exhibit 38), was traced to Mrs. Ullman and Espinasse on December 18.
HARRY BARBER , salesman to Kastner and Co., 34, Margaret Street, W., pianoforte manufacturers. Espinasss bought a piano player from us on September 18 and paid for it with £5 note (No. 67, 321) and cheque for £7 drawn by H. Pomeroy in favour of "E. M. Ullman." I hesitated about accepting the cheque; Espinasse said.
"You do not mind accepting my sister's cheque," the cheque was paid into our account at Parr's Bank.
A £5 note 67, 321, a £5 note 08, 094, a £5 note 78, 680 on December 18, and a £5 note 75, 512, were traced to Espinasse.
MARY NICHOLLS , wife of Arthur Nicholls, Park Farm, Northwood. In 1908 Mrs. Ullman asked me to take in letters for her in the name of Mrs. Franklin. From time to time since then letters have come in that name. The last one came in January; it had Pearson's stamp on the flap. In 1908 we were in hospital together; Ullman called to see her. After we came out of the hospital she stayed at my house as a paying guest in May or June for a week or so.
Cross-examined. When we were in hospital together I knew she was competing in newspaper competitions.
Re-examined. When we were in hospital, I said to her, "What are you doing?. She said, "I am trying to do competitions." I do not know what name she was competing in.
JOHN HENRY POMEROY , 62, Marchmont Street, Russell Square, draper. I have changed from 20 to 30 Pearson's cheques for Mrs. Ullman; I paid them into my account at the London and Southwestern Bank, Southampton Row. I think I have changed one or two Pearson's cheques for other people. On October 17, 1911, she asked me to change a cheque, and as I had not change I gave her my cheque for £7.
Cross-examined. I saw that these were prize competition cheques; I think Mrs. Ullman told me so.
Re-examined. I do not remember any one of these cheques being drawn in her favour; very few if any were.
An extract from the bank account of J. H. Pomeroy was proved, showing that, on October 18, Pearson's cheques for £18 15s., four cheques for £1 each, and six cheques for £1 1s. were paid into that Account. On December 12, two Pearson's cheques for £1 each and seven cheques for £1.
GEORGE CARTER SNOW , 3 Vine Street, Uxbridge, grocer. I have supplied goods to Beaconswood Farm, where I saw Mrs. Ullman. In payment of my account I have received about a dozen Pearson's prize cheques of £1 or £1 1s. from Mrs. Ullman drawn in other names. I paid them all into my account at the London County and Westminster Bank. I have never received any Pearson's cheques from anybody else.
An extract from George Carter Snow's bank account was proved, showing that Pearson's cheques were paid in: for £1, payable to Mrs. Thompson, paid in October 14, dated September 5, Competition No. 3; for £1, payable to M. Newton, paid in September 22, Competition 4; for £1, payable to W. Vale, paid in November 3, Competition 10.
NORMAN EDWARD DAVIS , manager to Max Ullman, 20, Uxbridge Road, fishmonger. I have known Sam Ullman for 20 years; he worked for his brother, who is my employer. I was above him. About 18 months or a year ago he asked me to get him addresses where letters could be received in reference to competitions; I am not sure whether he said Pearson's competitions or not. He said he had three well-educated
university friends who were very clever at doing competitions, I got him between 20 to 25 addresses where letters could be received, mostly newspaper shops and tobacconists. I never gave my name or Ullman's name at these addresses; I gave any name that came into my head. Once I used my own address, and my name reversed," Davis Norman." I gave Ullman a list of the names and addresses I had collected. Sam Ullman then wrote a test letter to the false name ami address which I posted and afterwards collected and brought back to him. He would open them in my presence; they contained blank pieces of paper. When I collected the test letter, acting under Sam Ullman's instructions, I told the people in the shop that I expected an important letter which they were to take care of. I then looked in "Pearson's Weekly" for the false name and address among the prize winners, and if I found it I collected the letter containing the prize and gave it to Sam Ullman. I collected between 15 to 20 such letters and gave them to Sam Ullman. They always had the Pearson's stamp on me flap. Sam Ullman never opened them in my presence. He did not tell me what was in them, but I knew what was in them. I copied the letter purporting to come from Lionel L. Hall from a draft given me by Sam Ullman. It was quite untrue. My wife got the addresses 43, Romany Road, West Norwood, and 168, Norwood Road, Norwood, which are mentioned in the letter. I had further correspondence with Pearson's; they wrote inviting me to call. I do not know what has happened to that letter; my little boy may have torn it up. I received it at 237, Clarence Road, Camden Town, my mother's address, where I had told them to send the money. I showed that letter to Sam Ullman; he said lie would see about it and let me know; later on he said, "You had better not go and see them about it." He did not give me any reason. I wrote three letters to Pearson's altogether, from dr'afcs supplied to me by Sam Ullman, which I returned to him—he asked me for them. At first I got 1s. for each letter I collected; afterwards half a crown. I was only told to look in "Pearson's Weekly" for the list of prize winners, and I never die look in any other paper.
Cross-examined. The letters I collected which had not the Pearson's stamp might have come from other competitions.
ANNIE ELLEN DAVIS , wife of the last witness. About 12 months ago my husband introduced me to Sam Ullman, who asked me to get him addresses for competitions in "Pearson's." I collected addresses in London and the country. The names were always other than Davis or Ullman. I collected letters in the London district and gave them to Sam Ullman. He never opened them in my presence. I was paid half a crown for each letter and travelling expenses. The country letters were posted to me by the people at the addresses where they were received; some had Pearson's stamp on the back. I then sent them on to Mr. Ullman. With regard to collecting London letters, I was told by Sam Ullman to look in the prize list in "Pearson's Weekly," where I would see that a prize was going to a particular address which we had found for Sam Ullman; I then went to that address and collected the letter. Inspector Gough and I went through lists of prize winners from "Pearson's Weekly "(produced) and he,
under my direction, underlined all the names and addresses which we had collected for Sam Ullman. We underlined names and addresses in every competition except 1, 2, 12, 19, and 20, in which competitions I did not know any of the names and addresses.
Cross-examined. When we underlined the names and addresses only Inspector Gough, Police-constable Gillard, and myself were present. I cannot remember whether Gough gave me assistance in remembering which names and addresses to underline or whether I found difficulty in remembering them.
MARY CAROLINE DAVIS , 23Y, Clarence Road, Camden Town, mother of, Norman. Davis. I received letters for my son at my house in the name of Lionel Hall, which he called for and received. He had a house of his own at the time.
SIDNEY FRANCIS BISSENT , newsagent. I formerly had a shop at 43, Romany Road, Norwood; in October, 1911, I moved to 168, Norwood Road, West Norwood. Soon afterwards Norman Davis called, gave the name of Lionel Hall, and received letters in that name.
ALFRED BRIDGE , newsagent. On November 6 I moved into 43, Romany Road, West Norwood. Soon afterwards a woman called for letters addressed to Hall. After that Norman Davis called; I refused to take letters in for him in the name of Hall, but agreed to re-address them to 168, Norwood Road, which I did.
RICHARD GEORGE , 173, Holloway Road, Kensington, butcher. Sam Ullman, who I know as working at the shop of Max Ullman, was a customer of mine. He always paid for his goods in cash. I have changed 20 or 30 Pearson's cheques for him, all of which I paid into my account at the Holland Park Avenue West Branch of the London and South-Western Bank. I never received any Pearson's cheques from anybody else. I changed some cheques for £34, some for £1 1s., and some for more than that; one was for £19. Ullman never told me how he came to have those cheques; I never directly asked him. I have occasionally joked with him about having the cheques; once I said, "What, another?" He said, "Yes, but it is not me; I am not clever; it is my wife who is clever." I used to wait until the cheques had been cleared before I paid him the money. On one or two occasions Sam Ullman has brought me more than one cheque at a time. He brought me the last cheque about a fortnight before I heard of this prosecution.
Cross-examined. I knew they were going in for these competitions; after he had made the remark about his wife being clever they made no secret about it. I changed the cheques, although they were in names different to Ullman. I did it in the ordinary course of business.
Re-examined. I will not go so far as to say that I did not suspect anything because the cheques were in different names; a man at common sense would know that there was something not quite right.
Extracts from the books of the London and South-Western Bank of the account of the last witness, being proved, showed the following Pearson's cheques credited: Five cheques for £1 on September 15, two cheques for £1 on September 21, one cheque for £19
on September 30, cheque for 10s. on October 7, cheques for £1 and £1 1s. on October 11, two for £1 1s. on October 16, £1 on October 21, £1 1s. on October 23, two for £1 on November 30, three for £1 1s. and one for £1 on December 13, £1 1s. on January 4, two for £1 on January 22. All these cheques were produced and were in names other than Espinasse and Ullman.
(Wednesday, March 27.)
ARTHUR JAMES GILBERT , 5, Stainforth Road, Walthamstow. I know Max Ullman, fishmonger, of 85, Lower Thames Street, and have known his brother, Sam Ullman, for about four years as working for Max Ullman. For the last fifteen months Sam Ullman has brought me Pearson's cheques, which I have cashed for him in the Fish Market with Forge, Beechcroft, and another fishmonger. On the first occasion I asked, "Is this cheque all right?" He said, "Do you think I should bring anything to you if it was not right?" On inquiry I was told they were as good as the Bank of England. They have varied in amount from £1, £1 1s., to £15, and upwards; one in January, 1912, was £45. He brought them about once a week and paid me 1s. or 2s. for cashing them. He has shown me a number of 6d. postal orders, and said, "These are what I am sending in for the competition." He asked me if he could have letters sent to my address; I agreed, and three letterscame in the name of "Hilbert," which I handed to him.
GEORGE BEECROFT , member of Beecroft and Sons, 14, Billingsgate Market, wholesale fishmongers. Gilbert has brought me a number of Pearson's cheques payable to different names of amounts between £10 and £40, and one of £45, which I paid into my bank and gave open cheques for the amounts in the name of Sam Ullman; also a number of smaller Pearson's cheques for which I gave cash. I paid him in all £278 9s. 6d. for the cheques cashed between May 5 and December 27, 1911. They were all Pearson's cheques.
FREDERICK WILLIAM FORGE , trading as Peter Forge, 23, Monument Street, fish salesman. I have cashed a number of Pearson's cheque for Gilbert, giving cash from the till and paying the cheques into the London City and Midland Bank, Eastcheap.
PHILLIP WILLIAM KINDELL , joint manager, London City and Midland Bank, Eastcheap, produced account of Peter Forge and identified 18 Pearson's cheques of £1 and £1 1s. in various names paid into that account from September 20 to December 23, 1911; also account of W. Beecroft and Sons, and identified the following Pearson's cheques paid into that account: September 16, £25; 23rd, £15 10s.; October 7, £20 15s.; 11th, three cheques of £1 1s.; 23rd, £24; 28th, £26; November 7, £20; 14th, £1; 18th, £31; 24th, two of £1; 29th, £1; December 5, two of £1; 18th, £36 16s.; 23rd, two of £1; 27th, £45 13s.—all in different names.
LEONARD ALFRED LOCK , assistant cashier to C. Arthur Pearson, Limited. I made out cheques to prize winners in "Sparklets" Competitions from the names contained in the lists of winners published in "Pearson's Weekly."
Detective-inspector WILLIAM GOUOH, E division. On January 22 I arrested Espinasse on a warrant at Pearson's offices in Henrietta street, Covent Garden. I read the warrant. He said, "I do not in the least know what it is; it may be so; I do not understand." I said, "shall I explain it?" He said, "Yes, please." I told him that in effect: he, being the adjudicator of solutions of competitions under the title of "Sparklets, "advertised in "Pearson's Weekly," had caused the cheques for prizes awarded to successful competitors to be addressed to fictitious names and addresses, such as newsvendors and tobacconists which were houses of call for letters: "It has been ascertained that the cheques contained in the letters for the prize winners were obtained by Mrs. Ullman, who obtained the money for them by passing the same through different persons' accounts. You have been living with this woman, who is married and has been living apart from her husband, and it is alleged you both had the proceeds of the cheques." He said, "Mrs. Ullman is a relative of mine. I have nothing to do with awarding prizes. I have nothing to do as to where the prizes go. I understand the charge now. Has Mrs. Ullman been changing these cheques? She is a distant relation of mine." I took him to Bow Street Police Station, where the charge was read over; he made no reply. He gave his address as Beaconswood Farm, Ickenham, Middlesex. On January 29 I arrested Sam Ullman on a warrant charging him with conspiring with Eepinasse and Mrs. Ullman. He said, "I neither admit nor deny anything about that or what is mentioned in the warrant. You had better see my solicitor." He said nothing when the charge was read over.
Detective-sergeant JOSEPH GILLABD, E division. On January 22, at 8 p.m., I went with Detective-constable Warner to Beaconswood Farm, Ickenham, and saw Mrs. Ullman in the dining-room. I said, "We are detective police officers and hold a warrant for your arrest for conspireing with Bernard Espinasse, now in custody, "to cheat and defraud C. Arthur Pearson, Limited, of 13, Henrietta Street, W.C. "I read the warrant. She said, "I do not understand this. I have done a few coupons on my own, but I have had nothing to do with Pearson's coupons. I have used various names in competitions connected with 'Answers' and other papers, but have never competed in Pearson's competitions. Will you explain it further to me? I do not know what to do." I said, "It is alleged that you have received cheques from Pearson s, Limited, posted to fictitious persons at newspaper and tobacconists' shops which are houses of call for letters and have taken them to a medium who has cashed them and given you their proceeds." She said, "Have you any proofs?" I said, "You will hear everything later on." I conveyed her to Bow Street, where she was charged and made no reply. On the way she said, referring to Espinasse, "Mr. B. is a cousin of mine—my husband only comes home for week-ends."
Detective-constable FREDERICK WARNER, E division, corroborated. Mrs. Beesley showed me Mrs. Ullman's bedroom, where I found three letters and small typewriter (produced). In Espinasse's bedroom I found the large typewriter and six bottles of coloured inks. I saw a piano-player in the house.
seven months. Espinasse and Mrs. Ullman lived there; Sam Ullman came down for week-ends. I have seen many coupons such as produced.
Mr. Hayes submitted that no case had been made out on the charge of forgery as the effect of the instrument did not depend on the identity of the person personating.
(Stephen's Digest p. 27; R. v. Dunn, 1 Leach, p. 57; R. v. Martin, 5 Q.B.D., p. 34.)
The Common Sergeant said the thought the facts brought the offence within the general description of forgery; but it was not very material, because it was only another way of stating what would be a misdemeanour under another title.
(Thursday, March 28.)
Verdict (all), Guilty of conspiracy; Not guilty (on the direction of the Common Serjeant) of forgery.
Sentences: Espinasse (who had been in custody two and a half months), Nine months' imprisonment; Edith Ullman, Two months' imprisonment; Sam Ullman, Four months' imprisonment—all without hard labour—the sentences to run concurrently, on each count.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL
(Friday, March 22.)
Mr. Cohen prosecuted; Mr. Curtis Bennett and Mr. St. John Hutchinson defended Wright and Goodman; Mr. Purcell defended Stevens.
MICHAEL BURKE , costermonger, of 9, Bottom Yard, North End Road, Fulham. On Sunday February 25 last I left home and went to Hatten to buy some roots arriving there about 3 p.m. On my way home I arrived at Harlington at about 6.15. I went into the "Coach and Horses," Bath Road, and then into the "Berkeley" Hotel, where I met prisoners who were strangers to me. I was with a man named Sims, who worked with me. He and I and two of the prisoners started playing darts for drinks and I lost. I had on me about 38s., half a sovereign of which was in gold and the rest in silver. I left about 8.10 with three other men who were in there when we got in, and we went to the" Jolly Waggoners," about a mile away. A second after prisoners came in. I called for six pints of ale. Sims had gone home by this; he left me at the "Berkeley." We stopped there about 30 minutes; there was no quarrelling to my knowledge. At about 8.45 we left; I believe that the man would not serve us any more. I was not sober; I was not drunk; I had had several drinks Six men, including prisoners, left with me and we went to the "Travellers' Friend," about three-quarter mile away. We stayed
there till closing time, 10 p.m. There was no trouble between us up to then that I know of. On leaving, the three other men were in front of me some little distance; they were singing; I was behind by myself and the three prisoners were following me; I cannot say bow far they were behind. About two seconds after leaving my arms were suddenly pulled from behind me. I struggled and was thrown to the ground. I saw Wright and Goodman in front of me when my arms were pulled; I did not see the man behind me; when on the ground the three prisoners hit me in the face. When paying for the drinks I generally put my hand in my pocket and pulled out a handful of silver; I believe I did that at the "Jolly Waggoners "; I cannot say I did so at the "Travellers' Friend." My money was in my trousers pockets; I suppose when I left the "Travellers' Friend" I had about 33s., 10s., of which was in gold. When some people helped me to my feet I found that my pockets were turned out and my money was gone. I struggled and hit out when my pockets were being rifled; I may have kicked; the attack lasted two or three minutes. I do not know how long I was lying there before a person came to my assistance. I walked to the police station about two miles away, where I was seen by a doctor. I was quite sober then. It is my belief that the three prisoners are the men who set about me.
Cross-examined by Mr. Purcell. The first public-house I called at on the day was at Hatton at about 3.30 p.m., where Sims and I had a couple of drinks; the last time I had had solid food was at 11 a.m. I do not remember quite how long we stayed there. The next drink I had was at the "Coach and Horses," where we stayed 10 minutes and had one drink. The next public-house was the "Berkeley," where I stood drinks two or three times because I lost at dart; I only had one drink there before then. There was a man there lifting two chairs—a chair by the leg; I did say I would pay for smokes and drinks all round if he could lift two. He did so, and I paid for drinks and smokes all round. Then the darts began and I was paying for drinks from 6.30 to 8.30; we only played two or three games, and I may have paid for drinks three times; I will not swear it was not four times; there were about seven of us; there may have been 12, but I did pot stand for 12 people. I will swear I did not stand drinks five times. They may have stood drinks to me also. I cannot swear that I had the half-sovereign on me when I left the "Berkeley." I may have put it down there for a sixpence. I am not clear as to the number of drinks and who were in the party at the different times. I have an idea that I had 30s. odd in my pocket when I left the "Jolly Waggoners." I did not describe myself as "one of the Fulham boys." It is true I have lived there 20 years. I did not say I did not care much about the Hounslow people. I have never been picked up in the street incapable; I have been charged six times with being drunk. I do not remember Stevens drawing my attention to the fact that I was going out leaving change for half a sovereign on the counter. I am always jolly when I get drunk; I do not get quarrelsome. On leaving the "Travellers' Friend" I did not have a fight with one of these men. The road
was very dark and I cannot say where the nearest house was. Further down the road it is true there is open country. When I first complained to the police I complained of being assaulted, and then afterwards complained that I had been robbed. I may have produced all my money at one of the public-houses, and Stevens may have taken some out of his pocket and said, "You are not the only man who has got money."
Cross-examined by Mr. Hutchinson. I never got quarrelsome at all. Sims has worked for me four years; he may have a different opinion of me than I have. I do not remember having an argument with 'Wright about a cigar. We had one drink at the "Jolly Waggoners" and then we were refused more drinks. We all left there singing. I do not remember a lot of horse play at the "Traveller's Friend." It is not true that on leaving there I was so drunk that Wright had to help me along. I did not start quarrelling with him again. I might have struck him on the mouth. They all knocked me down. I believe it was Stevens who first caught me from behind. I am positive that Wright and Goodman then came in front of me. Wright did not hit me in self-defence, I did not see them run away; I was knocked silly. Somebody came up to help me and I told them that my money had been taken, but I cannot remember showing them my pockets turned inside out.
Re-examined. After being knocked down I did not see any more of them till at the station the same night; I had given a description of them. We were drinking beer at 2d. a pint.
WALTER SIMS , Costermonger. I work for Burke; I have known him four or five years. On February 25 I met him at 12.30 p.m. and I was with him when he went to the "Berkeley." The three prisoners were in there;—did not know them before. We talked to them about some chairs. I went to the back of the house for a certain purpose and while there Goodman and Stevens came in. Goodman said to Stevens, "I will kick him in the private." I did not hear Stevens say anything. Wright came in with them. He said nothing. I reckoned Goodman referred to us. On returning to the public-house Wright said to the other two, "I am with you." I had returned by myself; I did not say anything to them in the urinal. We had had one game of darts before this happened. We did not play after we returned. I left Burke at about 7 and did not see him again that night. I do not know what money he had on him; he paid for one lot of drinks while I was there.
To Mr. Curtis Bennett. Burke was not getting somewhat quarrelsome and trying to have rows with people before I left. I remember saying at the police court that he was getting quarrelsome and cantankerous; that is true. He drinks a good deal and my object in going out with him is to try and prevent him getting drunk. When he gets a little quarrelsome and cantankerous I like to get away from him; but that is not why I left him on this occasion. The first game of darts was after the remark in the urinal.
To Mr. Purcell. I cannot say if Burke said he would play the best man in the house. He is not good at it in my opinion. I was sober. I was there when he said he would pay for drinks all round if a man could hold up two chairs in one hand. I did not see him change half
a sovereign. I was not there when Stevens drew his attention to the fast that he had left his change.
FREDERICK WILLIAM PAVITT , licensee, Berkeley Hotel, Cranford. I remember prisoners coming into my house on February 25, about 5.00 p.m.; I had never seen them before; they said they came from Hammersmith and I let them in. About 6.30 p.m. Burke came in with Sims. While he was in my house there was nothing wrong with him; he was only talking rather loudly. I cannot say whether he spoke to prisoners first, but I saw them talking and drinking together. Burke stood drinks in one or two cases and I think Stevens did afterwards. On one occasion Burke tendered half a sovereign and I placed the change on the counter. He turned away as if to leave, leaving the change, and I and Stevens called after him and he came back and took it. I also saw him produce a handful of silver; I should think about 10s. There was no quarrelling going on. They all left about 8 p.m.
To Mr. Purcell. On one or two occasions Burke wanted to pay and Stevens wanted to pay as well; Stevens paid on one occasion. Stevens went after him when he left the change on the counter. I remember Stevens pulling out a handful of silver and saying, "You are not the only man with money. Let me pay."
ANDREW HAYES , master, "Jolly Waggoners," Bath Road. The "Berkeley" is about half a mile from me. At about 9 p.m. Burke came in with the prisoners; I had seen none of them before. He called for drinks, producing, I should say, about 20s. in silver; he paid 1s. 4d. I will not say he was perfectly sober, but he was in a fit state to be served; all the lot of them were. There was no trouble of any kind and no signs of fighting between them. They all left at 9.10 p.m. They did not ask for any more drinks; I did not refuse to serve them.
To Mr. Curtis Bennett. I was not in the bar when they first came in. My wife was there and she whistled to me, as she thought there was going to be trouble; crossing the road they were singing and dancing, and she thought it better that I should be there. I did not think they had quite reached the limit where they ought not to be served.
WILLIAM HOLLAND , market gardener, Lavender Cottage, Bath Road. I am a sidesman at the local church. My house is about 200 yards from the "Travellers' Friend" and at about 10 p.m. on Sunday, February 25, there would be one lamppost alight between; it is about 50 yards from my house. At about 10.15 p.m. on that day I was indoors when I heard singing and then a man cried out, "Oh!. five or six times. I went out and saw just a little to the right of my house some five men surrounding another man on the ground, knocking him about; I found out afterwards that this was Burke. It was dark. There are two houses just near there. One of them said, "I have got it. I saw one put his hand into Burke's pocket, but I cannot say if he brought anything out. They lifted him up on his knees. I only saw one strike him. I have not been able to identify any of the persons. They tried to lift him up on the path, but they left him in the gutter. They then walked quickly away together towards Hounslow, in the direction of the station. I then went up to Burke, who was
by then standing on his feet covered with mud; he was not holding on to anything. I advised him to go to the station and told him which way to go. He went.
To Mr. Curtis Bennett. When I went out he was on the ground and they were striking him; I cannot say how many struck him. Then somebody put his hand in his pocket and said, "I've got it." Then I heard a jingling of money. Then one struck a blow and they walked away.
To Mr. Purcell. There are two lamps near my house. My house is the only one along this part of the road. The nearest lamp where I saw the men was 50 yards away. I saw some other people, passersby, against the lamppost. I did say before the magistrates that I heard the jingling of money; I did not notice that the clerk had left it out.
FREDERICK DURRANT , market labourer, Cranford. About 10 p.m. on February 25 I was just leaving Hounslow Park Station, which is a quarter of a mile from the "Travellers' Friend," when, passing by Mr. Holland's house, I saw four or five fellows scrambling in the road. I had passed them by for about 30 yards when I heard a man cry, "Oh! Oh" four or five times. I turned back and found Burke lying in the gutter with his mouth bleeding and covered with mud; the five men were then a good way up the Bath Road, going in the direction of the station. I heard one of them say, "Come on, chum"—to Burke, I expect. I noticed nothing particular about Burke's clothes. It was very dark. I helped him up and told him to go to the nearest police station. I could not see the faces of the other men as it was dark.
To Mr. Hutchinson. I heard no sound of blows. I did not think it was a robbery. They walked away quietly.
Mr. Purcell. They were all scrambling in a heap and then one of them said, "Come on, chums." I saw two or three people coming up from the "Travellers' Friend "; it was closing time. If I had thought it was a robbery I should have gone to his assistance.
WILLIAM ERNEST DENNIS , farm labourer, Vicarage Farm Road. At 9.30 p.m. on February 25 I was in the "Travellers' Friend," when I saw the three prisoners, the two Ludkins and young Rice; I knew them before. Burke was also there. Stevens asked me if my name was not Dennis and I said "Yes "; there the conversation stopped. He and Goodman tried to pull Burke on his knees and he was trying to get away. I remained there till closing time. All the six left with Burke; I left about three or four minutes after, going in the same direction. I noticed Holland (I think it was him) pick up Burke, who was on the ground at the side of the gutter. He was plastered in mud and he had blood on his face. His pockets were turned inside out. I walked on to the Park Station, when I met Stevens, Goodman, and Ludkin walking back from the station to Burke; nothing passed between us. I got into the train and saw all the six men get in. They got out at Heston Hounslow Station. Stevens had a handful of money and he was singing" Put a bit away for a rainy day."
To Mr. Hutchinson. I am not sure whether all these men were
singing in the public-house. They seemed all jolly together. On coming out I saw Durrant and his friends.
To Mr. Purcell. I am sure there was no singing. I did not say before the magistrates that I saw one of them picking him up in the road; it was Mr. Holland I saw. I have known these men all my life.
Re-examined. Burke seemed all right in the public-house.
HUGH GEORGE ROBINSON , Assistant to the Divisional Surgeon, Hounslow. About 12.10 a.m. on February 26 I saw Burke at the station; he was bleeding from the mouth; he had a swelling at the mouth and three teeth were loosened. He complained of acbing all over, but I could not find any other injuries. The injuries were of recent origin and were compatible with his having been mauled. He was quite sober.
To Mr. Hutchinson. I doubt if one Wow could have caused the injury to his mouth. I could find no marks of kicks. At the time I saw him there might not have been left marks of a number of blows. To Mr. Purcell. I could smell drink.
Police-sergeant WESTROP, I 46. At 10.50 p.m. on February 25 Burke came with another man to the Hounslow Police Station; he was rather excited, but quite sober. He was bleeding from the mouth and covered with mud. He made a statement and described three people to me. I went to High Street, Hounslow, about 50 yards away, and saw Police-constable Oliver. At the corner of Bell Road I saw the prisoners; this was about 300 yards from the station; it was about 11.15; they would have had time to reach there leaving the "Travellers' Friend" at 10. I told them I was making inquiries about a case of assault in the Bath Road. Goodman said, "Why, we have not been in Bath Road to-night, have we?" The others said "No." I said, "I have reason to believe you have and you must accompany me to the station." I took them to the station where Burke identified them. Wright said to him "Didn't you have a fair fight with me and I beat you? I am the man who will stand for the lot." Burke said, "It's a lie; there was no fight." The others said nothing. Burke was all right then. When charged they made no reply. Wright was bleeding from the mouth. The first two knuckles of Stevens's right hand were bleeding, and I asked him to account for this, but he only laughed. Wright told me that Burke had struck him in the mouth. Goodman had a smear of blood between his thumb and first finger on the right hand and the middle knuckle of his right hand was bruised; he said, "I did that boxing." On Wright I found 10s. in gold, 4s. silver, 3 1/2 d. bronze, and a pocket-knife; on Stevens, 12s. 6d. silver, 2 1/2 d. bronze, and a pair of scissors; and on Goodman, 3s. silver, 2 1/2 d. bronze, and a dagger. I did not know any of them before.
To Mr. Hutchinson. Burke complained when he came to the tation of having been robbed.
Police-constable WALTER OLIVER, 276 I, corroborated. Detective ROBERT CHARLES, I Division. At 12.30 a.m. on February 26 at Hounslow Police Station I saw the three prisoners detained. I took a statement from Burke, which he signed. Stevens
said. "That's a lie." Wright said, "Look at my mouth, Mr. Charles. He wanted to fight me in the "Waggoners," and hit me in the mouth, and when we came outside we had a fair fight and I beat him, and that's the truth." Both Wright's lips were swollen and dried blood was adhering to them.
To Mr. Hutchinson. No charge has ever been brought against Wright before. He is a bricklayer and has a good character (the references were put to and accepted by the witness).
To Mr. Purcell. Stevens is a hard working and respectable man. He lives with his mother in a caravan in an archway which she has rented for a number of years. In the winter he sells wood and coal for his mother and in the summer he travels with his mother.
ALBERT EDWARD WRIGHT (prisoner, on oath), bricklayer, 54, Ringwood Road, Hounslow. I have lived in Hounslow all my life and have never been in a police station before. I was earning at this time £2 3s. a week. At 1 p.m. on February 25 I went to the "King's Arms." I left there and went to the "Berkeley" with 17s. 6d. in my pocket. We began playing darts when Burke and another man came in. One of my friends was holding up a chair by the front leg and Burke said he would stand drinks and smokes all round if he would do it with two. My friend did, and Burke paid. He then wanted to sell half a sovereign (that was the only money I saw on him) for a penny to my friend, but we would not take any notice of him. We started playing darts for drinks and he lost every time he played. He got a little quarrelsome over some cigars; I said he ought to have had eight when he was only given seven, and he said he did not want me to shout about it and that he had got the money to pay for it. When I saw how he was I did not take any more notice of him. Sims had told me not to, and that he was one of the best; he came from Fulham. We had several drinks and then we all went on to the "Jolly Waggoners," where we had more drinks. We went on to the "Travellers' Friend," where we stayed till 10 singing. We then left; three of them went first, and Burke, the other prisoner and I followed. Burke was very drunk and I was helping him; Goodman and Stevens were just a little way in front. Then Burke got quarrelsome and hit me in the mouth. I turned round and said, "I've got it" and set about him; I think I knocked one of the others over with him. They stopped us fighting, and they picked him up and were going to help him home, but he refused, so we left him. We walked quietly to the station. From there we went to Bell Road, where we stood talking in the light. We were arrested and I made the statements alleged. I had upon me then 14s. 3 1/2 d. part of my wages. I never took a penny from Burke.
Cross-examined. I had had some liquor at the finish. I never went with Goodman and Stevens to the urinal at the "Berkeley." Sims is telling an untruth when he says that I said to them, "I am with you"
In telling Detective Charles that we had a fight outside the "Jolly Waggoners "I was making a mistake in the name of the public-house. In that public-house he poured a pint of beer over me. I mentioned that at the police court. Hayes, the landlord there, was sitting in the side room and he could not see everything; he is wrong in saying there was no quarrelling going on. I told him not to do it again; it may be that we made it up. In the "Travellers' Friend" there was no disturbance except that he wanted to sing; I never had much to do with him there; I told him to sit down; otherwise we were perfectly friendly. When he hit me I hit him and we had a fair fight; I knocked him down and he got up again and hit me again; I knocked him down twice and he did not get up the second time. We then tried to pick him up, but he would not let us. Only the three of us were round him then. I did not see his pockets turned out. Stevens may have been singing at the station, but I never saw any money.
JAMES GOODMAN (prisoner, on oath), marine store and wardrobe dealer. I have never had a charge brought against me before. Wright's evidence as to what happened up to the time of leaving the "Travellers' Friend" is true. When I left, Burke followed just behind with Wright. I heard them talking and arguing; they had both had a good deal to drink. I heard a bit of a scramble and we looked round. They were struggling on the ground. Stevens and I parted them. Burke was really mad drunk and he started hollaoing. He would not get up. We left him and went on to the station. I started out with 5s. or 6s. and had then on me 3s. 2 1/2 d. Wright's evidence as to what subsequently happened is true.
Cross-examined. When at the "Berkeley" I never went to the lavatory; Sims must have invented that part of his evidence. There was no quarrelling at the "Jolly Waggoners." We had all been drinking more or less square. I should think Burke fell to the ground more than once. If there was any blood on my hand it came from Wright's mouth when I examined it. I did not see Burke's pockets turned out. I did not see Stevens flourishing money at the station, although I was with him the whole time. I do not remember telling the constables that we has not been in the Bath Road at all that night; if I did say it anybody would say the same thing so as not to be mixed up in it. The dagger found upon me was in my line of business.
JOSEPH STEVENS . I have lived with my mother at the Arches, Kingsley Road, Hounslow, for eight years. I have lived in Hounslow all my life. In the winter I sell potatoes for my brother and in the summer go about with my mother with the roundabouts and swings. Upon this Sunday I had upon me 17s. 6d. In the course of the morning I met Wright and Goodman, whom I have known for years. About 5.30. p.m. we went into the "Berkeley Arms." (Witness here corroborated the previous evidence of Wright and Goodman as to the incidents of the chairs and darts.) Burke paid for drinks with half a sovereign. He went out and left his change on the counter. I ran after him and found him in the road and told him. He came back and treated me for telling him. Later he started paying for more drinks and fetching his money out. I said, "You are not the only man who has got money," and I pulled some money out and paid for six pints; that was
the only drink I stood there. We then went to the "Jolly Waggoners "; all the lot of us had had a drop of drink then. From there we went to the "Travellers' Friend." There Burke wanted to sing, but Goodman would not let him. On leaving there together we had got down the road a bit when Wright and Burke started fighting. I and Goodman came back and stopped them. Wright knocked Burke down. We tried to pull him up, but he would not get up and we walked down me road. We went back again to see if he would come, and he started to fight with Wright again. They had a fair fight and Wright beat him. We then left him. I might have pulled my money out at the station and started singing; I had only spent 1s. 6d. from my 17s. 6d. I never attempted to rob Burke.
Cross-examined. I might have gone into the lavatory at the "Berkeley "; I did not see Sims there. I never spoke to Goodman there. The fight between Burke and Wright lasted five minutes. I account for the bruises on my fingers by the fact that when Wright hit Burke Burke fell on top of me.
Verdict, (all), Not guilty.
The prosecution offered no evidence on the indictment charging prisoners with unlawfully assaulting Michael Burke, thereby occasioning actual bodily harm, and the jury returned a verdict of Not guilty.
Mr. MacMahon prosecuted; Mr. Stony Deans defended.
Detective-sergeant FREDERICK STEPHENS, W division. At 9 p.m. on March 2 I went to 14, Portland Place, N., where I saw prisoner and told her she would be charged with bigamy. She said, "Oh dear, has Burch told you this. He knew it a long time ago. I thought he was not going to say anything about it. What was I to do. When he courted me my husband was a long way away. I had little children to support and I thought, 'it would be a home for them.' "On the way to the station she said, "When I was walking out with Burch I told him I had a secret and could not get married, but afterwards I did it. Then some kind friend told him I was married and he turned me out. I went to service, but he came there and I went back with him again. I knew my proper husband was alive but I had not seen him for several years. "When charged she made no reply. I produce certificates of marriage between John Joseph Hall and prisoner, who was then named Emma Florence Bunker, and Preston Burch and prisoner as Emma Florence Hall.
Cross-examined. A desertion order was made, dated August 5, 1899, which relates to the first husband. I cannot say if he ever returned to her after that. Prisoner is a thoroughly respectable woman as far as I know and has always earned her own living.
Cross-examined. I cannot remember exactly when it was I discovered her husband was alive. Two years ago my son turned her out on account of her bad treatment of my daughter; I had discovered it just previous to that. I believe she went into service. She wrote to me. It was not until some time afterwards that I asked her to come back and to manage my house. She left me a second time, taking a lot of my property with her; I do not know why she left me. I consider myself a very much injured man.
This closing the case for the prosecution, Mr. Storry Deans submitted that there was no case to go to the jury, on the ground that it was not proved that prisoner had knowledge of her first husband being alive at the time of her second marriage, since she had not seen him for a period of seven years, and that her statement to the police was capable of the construction that she knew he was alive only on the occasion when she returned to Burch.
Judge Rentoul, agreeing with this contention, directed the jury to return a verdict of Not guilty, which they accordingly did.
It being stated that prisoner's employer declined to take him back into his employment, prisoner was sentenced to Four months' hard labour.
Mr. Graham-Campbell, prosecuting, said that the authorities took a serious view of this offence. Prisoner had acted as interpreter to couples coming over to this country from Germany to get married owing to reasons which prevented their being married in their own country. In this case prisoner, as interpreter for Oelgartner, told the St. Pancras registrar that he and the woman had been in England 16 days, whereas they had arrived only the night before. In Germany there existed firms which arranged these quick marriages in England. Having read from a letter of one of the firms, in which it was stated that the female was only 16 1/4 years old, but that the registrar must be told that she was 20, and that the girl would wear a veil so that her youth should not be noticed, counsel said there was evidently a deliberate intention to deceive in these cases. In a comparatively short period prisoner had been concerned in 16 of these marriages.
Sentence: One month's imprisonment; recommended for expulsion under the Aliens Act.
JAMES, William Henry (93, none) pleaded guilty , of obtaining by false pretences from Isabella Crawford certain title deeds and a fire policy relating to certain land and premises, with intent to de-fraud; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain deed purporting to be a mortgage between Archibald Crawford, Charles George Lodge, and Walter Harper of certain freehold hereditaments and premises and to have been signed, sealed, and delivered by the said A. Crawford, with intent to defraud; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a promissory note for £26, with intent to defraud; forging the endorsement on a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque for £20, with intent to defraud; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged; a certain authority for the delivery and transfer of goods, to wit, deeds relating to certain premises, with intent to defraud; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain deed purporting to be a mortgage between Archibald Crawford and Richard Midworth of certain freehold hereditaments and premises and to have been signed, sealed, and delivered by the said A. Crawford, with intent to defraud; forging the endorsement on a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque for £112 4s. 6d., with intent to defraud; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain authority for the delivery and transfer of goods, to wit, deeds relating to certain premises, with intent to defraud.
Prisoner confessed to a previous conviction of felony at the Warwick Sessions on October 20, 1908. He was stated to be an extremely clever and ingenious forger and to be a danger to the public. Dr. Dyer stated that he was feeble physically.
Sentence: Twelve months' imprisonment, second division.
BEFORE JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH.
(Saturday, March 23.)
Mr. F. J. Green prosecuted; Mr. J. R. Lort Williams defended Smith.
CHARLES GRIFFITHS , clerk, Worthington and Co., 95, Finsbury Pavement, E.C. On March 4, on coming from lunch about 1.10, I hung this overcoat, which I have on now, in the passage by the side of our office. When I went for it later it was gone. The passage is used by people going to the board room.
Mr. GRAY, liftman, 95, Finsbury Pavement. On March 4 about 11.30 a.m. I saw prisoners. I saw them again between 1 and 1.30. I was then coming down with the lift. I was just past the first floor when I saw prisoners running downstairs. Smith had an overcoat and Edmunds a mackintosh under their arms. I knew Edmunds. I did
not know Smith. I did not see them again till they were put up for identification the next day. I had no difficulty in identifying them.
Cross-examined. The lift is not very well lighted. The staircase is fairly lighted by daylight. I had never seen Smith before I saw him at the police court. Edmunds asked me at 11.30 on March 4, "Are you still working here?" I said "Yes." Smith was with him then.
BENJAMIN BRADFORD , assistant to Mr. Pockett, pawnbroker, 6, Exmouth Street, E.C. About 4.30 on March 4 a great coat was pawned. Exhibit 2 is the ticket. I could not say who pawned it. It was pawned by one man.
Detective FRANCIS BRADFORD, Witness Gray spoke to me on March 4. Next morning at 10 I saw prisoners together in Golden Lane. I followed them and they entered a coffee house in Old Street. I telephoned for assistance and on the arrival of Detective Hayward we arrested them as they were leaving. I arrested Edmunds. I told him I should charge him with being concerned with the other man in stealing and receiving an overcoat and mackintosh from 95, Finsbury Pavement, the previous day. He smiled and said, "I know nothing about it."
Detective-constable HENEY FORD. On March 5 about 10.15 a.m. I saw the two accused being taken to the station by the two other officers, I followed almost immediately behind them. On entering the station door I saw a pawnticket lying on the mat. I immediately told the inspector on duty what I had found. I said nothing to accused at the time, but after they were identified and formally charged I told them 1 had picked this pawnticket up on the mat and I thought probably it referred to the coat they were charged with stealing, and I thought it more than likely one of them had dropped it. Smith said, "You did no: see us drop it." I said no. I was present at the identification. Gray had no difficulty in picking them out. He had previously told us who they were, or who one of them was.
JOHN SMITH (prisoner, on oath). I am a ship's cook. When I am at home I live with my parents at, 22, Leach Street, City Road. I have known Edmunds the last fortnight. I was with him on March 4 at 1145 at 95, Finsbury Pavement. We then went to White Cross street. We met George Hogg and Joe Harding and stood talking to them. I left the three of them about 12.50 and went home to dinner. I did not steal any coat that day. I did not pawn any coat. I had only the coat I was wearing when I went home to dinner. I got home about 12.55. I went out again about two. I had dinner with my father, mother, and sister. My aunt was upstairs. My sister keeps
house. My father gets home about 10 past 1. My mother works at Spottiswoode's.
Cross-examined. It is about eight minutes' walk home from where I left Edmunds. My mother was not home when I got there. The first time she went in the box she said I came in about 1.10. My father came in about 1.10. Our house is 15 minutes' walk from 95, Finsbury Pavement.
Cross-examined. I really do not know what I said before the magistrates. I know I made a few mistakes, I was confused that day and said things I should never have said. I do not remember saying 1 was home before my son. I did not see him come in. He was there. I may have said, "I was at home all day." I was not. I told an untruth. I expect I said I was there when my son came in. I was not there. I told an untruth. I did not wan: the police to go to my firm, but they followed me and found out. I generally leave work before one.
Cross-examined. It was not 1.30 when he came in; it was shortly after his mother came in.
ANNIE SMITH , 22, Leach Street. I keep house. I prepared the dinner. My brother came in at 12.57. He was in three minutes before the one o'clock hooter went from the factory close by. He had no coat on his arm when he came in.
Cross-examined. He was in before mother. Last witness came down during dinner time. Dinner time is 20 or 1/4 past one. It is between 1/2-past 1 and 1/4 to 2, something like that. I know my brother came in at 12.57. It all came into my head when my mother told me next day.
ALBERT EDMUNDS (prisoner, on oath). On March 4 in the morning I saw Smith going to the Library, Cripplegate Institute. I asked what he was doing. He said, "Looking for work." I said, "I will have a walk round with you." In Moorgate Street it was raining. Smith said, "Step in here." We stepped in 95, Finsbury Pavement, and spoke to the liftman Gray. We stopped ten minutes or 1/4 hour. I asked Smith the time; it was 11.45. We left there and made our way to Whitecross Street, stopped on the corner talking to two fellows who were going back to work. About 10 to 1 Smith said he was going home to dinner. I stood there a little longer talking to these fellows. I said, "I am going out of the rain to the coffee shop, are you coming?" He said, "No." I went to the coffee shop, Playhouse Yard till 1/4 to 2. It was about 10 or 1/4-past one when I got there. I have a witness who served me with what I had.
Cross-examined. Smith did not come to the coffee shop with me. He left me between 1/4 and 10 to 1. It could not have been 1 o'clock, because these two fellows had to get back to work. I was talking: to these fellows after Smith left. I was with Smith all the morning from 10 to 12.45. (To the Court.) The pawnticket was shown to us about
an hour after our arrest. Several other, people had walked in the place by that time. I had known Gray by working next door about nine months. I had been on the first floor once to take tea and biscuits. I did not go upstairs on March 4. We stood on the step inside out of the rain.
PHYLLIS MAY , waitress, 58, Golden Lane. Edmunds was in our coffee shop between the hour of one and two on Monday, March 4. He had some tea and pastry. I heard next day he was in custody. He had no coat or mackintosh.
Cross-examined. I am not certain what time he was there; it was between 1.15 and 1.20.
The jury disagreed.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL. (Monday, March 25.)
Prisoners were again tried, the former evidence being repeated.
Verdict (both), Guilty.
Smith confessed to a previous conviction of felony at the Clerkenwell Sessions on April 28, 1908. On February 28, 1908, for warehouse breaking he had been sent to a Borstal institution for 23 months; three previous and one subsequent conviction (for uttering counterfeit coin) were proved. Edmunds had been bound over once and discharged once. His father has done everything he could to induce him to lead an honest life, but without success; he could not now see his way clear to say anything on his 'behalf and wished his son to be sent to a Borstal institution.
Sentences: Smith, Twelve months hard labour; Edmunds, Four months imprisonment, second division.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Saturday, March 23.)
Mr. A. M. Latham prosecuted.
Verdict (both), Guilty.
A previous conviction at this Court on April 5, 1910, was proved against Lambert; he was then sentenced to three months' imprisonment in the second division. He had recently been in the employment of a French club. Weighell was stated to be an associate of thieves and prostitutes; for the past two years he had not been known to do any work.
Sentences: Lambert, Six months' hard labour; recommended for expulsion under the Aliens' Act; Weighell, Six months' hard labour.
BEFORE JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH
(Monday, March 25.)
HARRIS, Henry (50, traveller) ; having been entrusted with certain property, to wit, a piano, the goods of Walter Saville, in order that he might retain the same in safe custody unlawfully, fraudulently converting the same to his own use and benefit.
Mr. T. E. Morris prosecuted.
ROBERT WM. HY. SMITH , 318, St. Paul's Road, Canonbury. I am manager to Saville and Co., piano dealers. On February 6 prisoner agreed to take a piano at the price of 18 guineas, payment to be 16s. on that date, and 8s. a month afterwards. I produce the agreement. The piano was delivered that day to his address, 167, Offord Road, Barnsbury. Prisoner had the opportunity of reading the agreement; I do not know whether he did or not. He signed it in my presence. The only amount he has paid is the 16s. 8s. was due on March 6.
Cross-examined by prisoner. You were not in arrears up to March 6. When you came in you asked if we had a piano to sell. You did not say you would pay as soon as you could. You asked the terms; I told you 16s. down and 8s. a month afterwards. I did not say if you paid in six months I would give you 33 per cent. (I told you if you paid the whole 18 guineas in three years from date of delivery I would give you 5 per cent. on the balance.
JOHN ELLIOTT , agent to Messrs. Saville. On February 28 I went to 16, Botolph Road, Bow, where prisoner was living. I said, "I have called to see our instrument, please." He asked me inside. He said, "I am sorry I cannot show it to you, but I do not owe the money till to-morrow morning." I said, "Never mind about the money, I want to see the piano." He said, "I must tell you the truth, I have sold it. I was in drink at the time with some pals and I got rid of it." I said, "Can you show me where it is, or who bought it." He said, "No, I cannot. I would not give my pals away, I would sooner do chokey first. I sent to the shop for an assistant, Mr. Berry, and prisoner repeated the same words to him when he came. He said, "If you like I will take you both down to Chapel Street, and I will try and find the man I sold it to." (We went with him as far as Highbury, and he said then, "Supposing I am only swanking?" I said, "If you are only swanking I will take you to the police station." He said, "I will go there myself." We went to the police station.
To prisoner. You did not say you would give me your home which was worth £30 or £40. I did not say I did not want it. (To the Court. He sold it within four days of the hire. It has not been traced.) You said, "Give me till Monday and I will give it you back." I would not trust you. It took me three days to trace you from Offord Road.
Detective-sergeant HORACE CASTLETON. I saw prisoner Elliott and Berry at Upper Street police station. Elliott explained the case. I said to prisoner, "You hear what this man says." He said, "That is what he says. I have still got it." I said, "Why not say where it is and finish this business." He said, "I shall not tell you, or him either where it is." I said, "If you will not do that I shall detain you and make inquiries. Later on he was charged and made no reply.
HENRY HARRIS (prisoner, not on oath). I was under the impression I bought it. I did not sell it. I am willing to pay, willing to give it up. I have not sold it. I signed the agreement. I am willing to pay. My agreement was not up before March 6; that is nine days I had, and he would not give me one minute to get it back or try to get it back, which I am willing to do.
Previous convictions were proved.
Sentence: Eighteen months' hard labour.
Mr. Taylor prosecuted; Mr. St. John McDonald defended.
Prisoner was tried at the January (2) Sessions (see page 509), on an indictment for robbery with violence upon Foile, convicted, and sentenced. Upon appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeal quashed the conviction. (7 Cr. App. R., p. 176.)
Mr. McDonald tendered on behalf of prisoner the plea of autrefois convict, citing R. v. Miles (1890, 24 Q.B.D., p. 423); R. v. Norton (5 Cr. App. R., p. 197); and (Broom), "Nemo debet bis vexari pre una et eadem causa."
Judge Lumley Smith said he would let the case go to the jury upon this indictment, and subsequently, if necessary, deal with the special plea of autrefois convict.
The evidence at the former trial was repeated.
Verdict, Not guilty.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.,
(Monday, March 25.)
BELL, George (34) , unlawfully taking Annie Louisa Melton, a girl under the age of 18 years out of the possession and against the will of Constance Cohen, having the lawful care of her, with intent that she should be carnally known by himself the said G. Bell; (Second Count) taking Annie Louisa Melton, a girl under the age of 18 years out of the possession and against the will of Constance Cohen, her mistress.
Prisoner pleaded guilty to the second count, and this plea was accepted by Mr. Clarke Hall for the prosecution.
Prisoner was, released on his own recognizances in £20 to come up for judgment if called upon.
Verdict, Not guilty.
BEFORE JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH.
(Tuesday, March 26.)
STEVENS, Arthur (26, labourer), TURNER, John (24, salesman), and ROSE, Lilian (22, tailoress) , all feloniously making counterfeit coin; Stevens and Turner feloniously possessing counterfeit coin with intent to utter same.
Turner pleaded guilty of 'having counterfeit coin in his possession. Prisoners were tried upon the indictment charging them with feloniously making counterfeit coin.
Mr. Beaumont Morice prosecuted.
Detective-inspector ARTHUR NEIL, T Division. About 11.45 a.m. on February 21, I went with other officers to 18, Drummond Crescent, occupied by Turner and Rose; the ground floor consists of a small shop (with no business in it) and a back parlour with a glass panel door between. In the back parlour I found Turner. Sergeant Goodchild had gone upstairs, and Sergeant Butters to the back. Turner said, "Who's there?" I said, "I am a police officer. I have reason to believe you are making, or you have been making counterfeit coin." He immediately shouted out several times, "Lil, look out—the 'tecs are here!" He then said to me, "You won't find anything to do with coining here." Sergeant Butters then joined me, and I commenced to search. In a tin on the mantelpiece I found a counterfeit florin; and on the table a piece of metal called a "jet." In the shop I found four bags of plaster of paris used for making moulds, a tin of whitening for polishing purposes; two saucers of whitening, showing that it had been used; and a saucer of wet sand, used in polishing and cleaning. A piece of French cloth was hanging over the glass portion of the door between the shop and the parlour to prevent anybody seeing over the shop window into the parlour. I also found two knives, one in the sand and one in the whitening. In the back parlour I also found five spoons which apparently had been used in mixing the plaster of paris, two files used for filing the edges of the coins, one ladle used for melting, some small sections of tissue paper used for wrapping up the coins after they had been polished, three pieces of copper wire which had apparently been attached to a battery, an incomplete galvanised battery, which I suggest had been used in the tin can we found, a bag of sand similar to that in the saucer, a box containing cyanide of potassium, and a packet of antimony used in connection with the battery (some of this latter had bean scattered over the floor); in the grate there were portions of moulds, and also a little saucepan, which apparently had been used on a very hot fire (there was at that time a big fire in the grate). (All
these articles were produced.) Sergeant Butters found on Turner in my presence £1 10s. gold, £2 9s. silver, and 4d. in bronze. He said, "That is my money, which I honestly worked for." I said, "For whom have you worked?" He said, "That is my business." In his waistcoat I found these six live cartridges. I said, "You have a revolver." He said, "Not me; I wish I had." Leaving him in charge of Sergeant Butters I went to the first floor front room, where Sergeant Goodchild had preceded me. By that time Rose was partly dressed. From what I had been told I looked into a cupboard and found this box (Exhibit 21) containing 141 florins and 137 shillings, all counterfeit. I compared these subsequently with the money found on Turner, and found that the dates on some of them corresponded; the good money apparently had been used as pattern money. I was the shown a fully-loaded six-chambered revolver, which had been taken from a window ledge just above the head of the bed, so that had the prisoner been laying in bed, all he had to do was to put up his hand and take it down; a box of cartridges fitting the revolver and corresponding to those found on prisoner was also found. There were also handed to me these little boxes of fat and pieces of scrap metal (Exhibit 19). I said to Rose, "I shall arrest you." I took her downstairs to where Turner was. I then said to them, "You have both been living together. Are you married?" They replied, "No; we have only been living together." I said to Rose, "What is your name?" she said, "Mrs. Smith "; she afterwards gave the name of "Rose." Turner said to her, "They have taken all my money." She said, "What the b——hell have they done that for? That's my money. I earned it by prostitution. I should like to know the b——who put us away." They were taken to the station and charged. Neither made any reply. I afterwards saw a bank book taken from Turner; it showed a total of £9 10s. paid in since January 3.
Cross-examined by Turner. I did not see you doing anything which led me to believe you were making counterfeit coin. The whitening and sand may be used for household purposes. The saucepan may have had a little water in it. You can look over the whitened part of the shop window right through into the parlour if there is no cloth put over the window of the door. It is true that the plaster of paris was done up in paper, but the parcel was lying open.
Cross-examined by Stevens. You were not arrested until 30 hours afterwards. You were arrested in the street. I directed the officers not to go to your registered house to find you in case you might not be in. There was no animosity against you in this case as far as I or anybody else is concerned.
Detective-sergeant FREDERICK BUTTERS. I was with the last witness when 18, Drummond Crescent was raided on February 21. I saw him find nearly all the articles which he has produced. It was I who took the 141 florins and 137 shillings found to the station; I counted them and they have been in my custody ever since, except when they were with the Mint. Sergeant Goodchild and I went upstairs. After getting more assistance we went into the room where Inspector Neil and
Turner were. Turner said, "Come on, tell me who 'shopped' us. There was only one man that knew." I said to him, "Who is the landlord?" He said, "Ask the man that put us away—the man that brought the stuff here last night." In addition to the articles already produced I found on the mantelpiece a tin of liquid, and a small file (Exhibit 32). After I raked the fire out I found these pieces of mould (Exhibit 18). I was present when prisoners were charged. Turner afterwards made a statement. (Witness here corroborated Inspector Neil as to the finding of the French cloth put over the parlour door window for the purpose, it was alleged, of a screen.)
Cross-examined by Turner. Without the cloth you can see over the shop window into your room; I have been there since and verified that.
Cross-examined by Rose. You were in bed when I went to your room and I asked you to get up and you refused several times; you used most shameful language. I did not threaten to strike you.
To Stevens. While I went into the charge room you were sitting on a seat by the side of a table; I think you had an umbrella. I was not present when you were searched.
Re-examined. We got Mrs. Bedford to stop with Rose while she dressed.
Detective-sergeant CHARLES GOODCHILD, Y Division. I assisted the other officers to arrest Turner and Rose on February 21. I went up to the first floor front room, when I saw Rose in bed. I said to her, "I have reasons to believe you have some counterfeit coin here." She said, "You won't find any here," I found some scrap metal in the fireplace and I also found two tins of grease (Exhibit 19). I found nothing in the cupboard. Rose refused to dress and I called in Mrs. Bedford and told her to remain there until she was dressed. I partly closed the bedroom door and stood outside. I heard them having a conversation and I looked round the door and saw Rose go to the cupboard that I had searched just before and put this box (Exhibit 21) into it. I later on pointed it out to Inspector Neil. There were two double beds in the front room and one in the back room. About 4.30 p.m. that day I was in the first floor front room when I saw Stevens come and speak to a little girl outside. He then walked away. I hurried down the stairs and got into the street, but I could not see him. At 9 p.m. on the following day with Sergeant Page I was in the Kingsland Road, when I saw him with eight or ten other men. I said to him, "I am going to arrest you for being concerned with John Turner and Lilian Rose, in custody for possessing implements and articles for the manufacture of base coin. A large quantity of counterfeit shillings and florins have been found at 18, Drummond Crescent." He said, "You have made a great mistake. I do not know Turner or Rose. I have never been to Drummond Crescent." I had hold of his right arm and we walked a short distance to Old Street for the purpose of getting into a cab when he wrenched his arm away and struck at my face with his umbrella. I knocked the blow on one side and hit him in the face with my fist. He said, "All right; I'll go quietly. I shall want you to send for Mr. Tynewell. He will get me out of this to-morrow. He is well after you people." On the way to the station he said, "What number did you say in Drummond
Crescent?" I said, "No 18." He said, "Well, I do know Turner and Rose. I suppose I can go there if I like. I have only slept there one night. I suppose they have put me away." I took him to the station, and in the presence of the inspector on duty and Sergeant Page searched him. I found 5s. 3 1/2 d. in good money, and in his lefthand overcoat pocket two florins and six separate shillings (Exhibit 25), all counterfeit, wrapped up separately in tissue paper. He said, "You put them in my pocket. You are doing it on me. I will have your b—life when I come out." I had not put them in his pocket. He was identified by Mrs. Bedford. When the charge was read over to him he said, "It sounds very pretty. Wait until I come out."
To Turner. I handed the tin of grease to Inspector Neil in the room after I found them.
To Rose. I was not surprised when Inspector Neil took the box from the cupboard.
To Stevens. I saw you only for a minute or so when you came to 18, Drummond Crescent; when I saw you you were opposite the road and you crossed over. I did not have sufficient time to get down and arrest you. You were not outside the house four minutes. When I arrested you Sergeant Page took hold of your left arm. I know nothing about the detectives knowing you lived in Kingsland Road. So far as I knew, you never knew until you were arrested that Turner and Rose had been arrested. I did not before you tried to strike me say, "Now, we have got you, you tike," and strike you in the mouth. I allowed you to keep your umbrella after you tried to strike me. When you said I had put the coins in your pocket I did not say, "What, in front of the inspector?" I had nothing to do with the Mackintosh case. We got a taxi at the corner of City Road; there were trams, but we are not allowed to take prisoners in those. In the taxi I did not suspect that you tried to throw something away. Sergeant Page put his head out of the right side window and told the driver where to go to. I had nothing whatever to do with the coins found in the house.
Re-examined. I had no idea as to what the box contained when I saw Rose put it in the cupboard.
Detective-sergeant FRANK PAGE. On February 23 I was talking to prisoner outside the Clerkenwell Police Court, when he said "I did not know that that this address (48, Drummond Crescent) was on Neil's ground." I wits present when he was searched by Detective-sergeant Goodchild, and saw him take the coins from his pocket. He said, "You put them on me. You are trying to do it on me."
To Stevens. I do not remember whispering to Sergeant Goodchild in the cab; I leaned out of the right window to speak to the driver. I did not put the coins in your pocket.
Detective-constable FREDERICK LOCKWOOD, 504 T. About 4 p.m. on February 20 I started keeping observation on 18, Drummond Crescent. I saw the three prisoners go in and out on several occasions; I kept observation until 10.30 p.m. They came to the door and looked up and down the street; they stood there for different
periods. Shortly after 10 Stevens came to the door, stood there about 30 seconds and then went back into the house. He was the last person I saw. When I left at 10.30, as far as I know, all the prisoners were in the house. I was present at the raid on the next day. After Rose had left her room I went in and found this revolver (Exhibit 22) on the window sash at the head of the bed; it was fully loaded. I handed it to Inspector Neil.
To Turner. On February 20 I saw another woman go in and out of the house once or twice; I know her now to be Mrs. Bedford. I reported that night to Inspector Niel what I had seen. I am not in a position to say why the raid was not made till the following day.
To Rose. I was there till 10.30 and you had not left the house then.
To Stevens. I have never said that I saw you go in at 4.30; when I first saw you you came to the door; I do not know the time that you did that first. I saw you on two occasions come to the door previous to when I saw you at 10; I should think it was between six and seven. I had seen you previous to this day, but it might be detrimental to you if I said where. (Prisoner Stevens persisted in asking when this occasion was.) It was when you were brought into the Kentish Town Police Station charged with larceny. I have not been instructed to say that I saw you at the house on the 20th.
ALICE BEDFORD . I am caretaker for several houses at Drummona Crescent. About 4.30 p.m. on February 13 Turner and Rose (i knew them as "Mr. and Mrs. Turner ") came to me about the keys of No. 16, and I gave them to them and showed them over that house. They took No. 18. On the next day Turner came alone, and then later he and the other two prisoners came; this was about 10 p.m. They came with a van and some furniture; Stevens had charge of the van. They moved the furniture into No. 16. I went out for about half an hour, and on my return Stevens asked me if I could show them over No. 18, and I did. They moved there from No. 16. I got some coals and oil for them. Between the 14th and the 21st I saw Stevens there nearly every day; I had to go there for water because No. 18 was the only house that had the water put on. He used to say, "Good morning" or "Good afternoon" to me. On the night of the 20th I went there to get some water and I saw Stevens. He said, "Who's there?" and I said, "It's only me" On the next day I was in the passage again on my way to get some water when one of the officers called me up. I went to the first floor front, where I saw Rose in bed. One of the officers told her to get up. I remained there till she was dressed. When she was dressed she said to me, "It will mean five years for me, will you take this?" She was referring to this box (produced) that she had pulled out from between the bed and the mattress. I said I could not. She offered me £1 if I would take it and I said I could not. She said she would wrap it up in some dirty clothes and I could say it was dirty washing. I said, "No, I cannot." She tried to put it down her chest, but it would not go there. So she put it in the cupboard. I was present when it was found by the officer.
To Turner. I did not notice what things you brought to the house; I did not help you to carry them in; I never came into your room; I stood against the door; it was not wide open. I am not aware that Rose had all the dirty linen washed on the night of the 20th. Stevens answered the door to me when I went there on the night of the 20th. I used to get the water for the other tenants because you would not allow them to go through. You did not let a little girl come in on the morning of the 21st; you stood at the door while I got it.
To Rose. I do not remember your telling me to get the washing on the night of the 20th, as you were going to a play. When I fetched my marriage lines I did not go into Turner's room; Mr. Freeman did not come in while I was in there. You asked me not to let anybody else fetch water. It is not true that the tenants used to come in at six and seven in the morning, as you always had the front door bolted.
To Stevens. You did not open the door to me on the night of the 20th; I let myself in with the key and you called out, "Who's there!"I saw you with my own eyes; you looked out of the parlour door. You came out early in the morning and went in late at night; I have known you to stop there. Rose told me you were her brother and you were going to have the back room. On the Saturday evening I let you all three in and you had a woman with you. Nearly every night I used to see you go in; you only missed about one day out of the eight. I never took notice of the particular time of the day I saw you because I was in there so often. You were there on the morning and night of the Monday before the raid; also on the Tuesday. The words "To let" were put up after the raid to prevent you people going there. I did not see you speak to the little girl; I did not see you come to the house at all.
Re-examined. No. 16 was an occupied house, but No. 18 was empty.
DAVID WALSH , painter's labourer. About the middle of February I was employed to do some work in Retford Street. Whilst working there I saw all three prisoners go in and out of No. 28. I used to see Stevens two or three times a day. I have seen Rose standing on the doorstep of No. 28 feeding horses with bread. I was working a fortnight there.
To Stevens. I saw you in Retford Street on the 20th, in the morning and in the afternoon; between one and two; it was. I did not see you in the evening. At 5.30 p.m. on that day I am sure you were not standing outside the public-house at the corner. I have seen you also go into No. 3.
SIDNEY WILLIAM SMITH , Assistant Assayer, H.M. Mint. On February 29 I examined a number of articles brought to me by the police (Exhibits 1 to 26); a great many of them are things that would be useful for making counterfeit coin. Exhibit 21 consists of 141 counterfeit florins and 137 counterfeit shillings; they are fairly good imitations. The eight counterfeit coins (Exhibit 25) are identical with certain of those found in the box. I have compared these four genuine coins, found on Turner with those found in the box and find
that they are the identical pattern pieces which were used in making the moulds from which certain of those coins were made. To Turner. I cannot swear that you used them.
LILIAN ROSE (prisoner, on oath). I am innocent of this charge. Mrs. Bedford has uttered nothing but falsehoods; she and Goodchild have planned this affair between them and they have both told falsehoods. They have got nothing to say against me. I wish the statement read: "To the Judge. My Lord. I am writing this to let you know that I am honest and truly innocent of this terrible charge brought against me. I swear by the Almighty God above that I know nothing whatever about this terrible affair. Sir, an officer in the case said that he saw me place the box in the cupboard. Well, sir, don't you think that if he saw me do that, as soon as he came into the room he would have gone straight over and taken the box out. But instead an officer came up from downstairs and commenced to search, and he found them and he said to the other officer, 'God bli' me. Look what's here.' I will tell you why they are so down on me, and that is because when they came to search the place I was in bed fast asleep and they asked me to get up and be quick about it and I said, 'Well, if you are gentlemen, you will go outside while I dress myself,' and one of the officers called me a bad name and went to strike me, and I said that I would ask the judge if he was allowed to strike people when he came to arrest them, and he said, 'You don't want to say anything. Let's be friends.' I promise if you will give me a chance I will never get mixed up in an affair like this again."
Cross-examined. We had been in the place a week before we were arrested. I did not know that No. 16 was empty when we moved into No. 18. I had been previously living with Turner at 28, Retford Street; Stevens came there, but not always to see us. I did not hear Turner shout anything to me on the morning of the raid. I would not get up with the men in the room. I called Mrs. Bedford to get the clean washing, and she came up and stayed with me. I did not take the box from under the bed and I had no conversation with her about it. I do not know how it came to be in the cupboard. All I said to Mrs. Bedford was to stop with me while I dressed. The revolver that was found Turner and Stevens took away from some fellows that were insulting us on the previous Saturday; they had threatened to shoot their brains out with it because they interfered. I do not know anything about the cartridges. Before I went downstairs I did not know what the officers had come for; I swear that Goodchild did not stay in my room. He was a police officer and had reason to believe there was counterfeit coin in the room. I had never seen the box before. I know nothing about the other articles that were found. Stevens was not there nearly every day. The last time I saw him was on Saturday night, when he came and slept with a
friend in the back room. Just after 10 p.m. on the 20th I went and did some shopping.
ARTHUR STEVENS (prisoner, on oath). I have known Turner since about Christmas, and have always been very friendly with him. About a fortnight before the arrest he offered me a job as a caretaker in some furnished rooms that he was going to let out, and he asked me to help him move in to 18, Drummond Crescent, and I did so. I called on him three or four times since he went there. The last time I was there was on Saturday night, and I stopped till Sunday morning. On the Monday afternoon I caught a cold and had a stiff neck. On Tuesday I was so bad that I did not get up till alter 11. All that' afternoon and evening I was in and out of the "Model Anna." My cold got much worse and Mrs. Reynolds, the proprietor's wife, and a friend of her's, a nurse named Walsh, said to me at 9 p.m. that I ought to go home, and that I was more bad than I looked. That same evening a friend of mine named Wilkie, and two other friends, a licensed victualler and a licensed carrier, came in and had a game of skittles with Mr. Reynolds, who asked me to have a game, but I could not play because of my neck. I did not leave there till 12 o'clock. I then went home to 32, Union Street, my registered address, and my landlady poulticed my neck. I did not get up on the following day, Wednesday, till 12, and left the house just after one. At two I went to Stamford's coffee shop, 89, Kingsland Road. I went up home again, and then I thought I would go and look Turner up, and I went to 18, Drummond Crescent between four and five. It was then that Detective Goodchid saw me. I then went home again. At about 7 p.m. on the following day, Thursday, I went to the same coffee shop and got a cap I had left there; I put it in my left hand overcoat pocket. I then went home, and my landlady, her brother-in-law, and a friend of his came into the room where I was. I pulled the cap from my pocket, and asked them how they liked it. In pulling it the lining of my left hand overcoat pocket also came out. (They laughed and said it did not suit me. I then went out with Preschner and Kaiser for a walk up the Kingsland Road. We met a joy called "Abie," and we were all standing on the kerb when I was arrested. I made no attempt to resist. Goodchild said, u We will give you time—you dirty little tike," and punched me in the mouth. The only statement I ever made was, "It sounds very pretty "; that was when I was charged.
Cross-examined. It is true I went to 28, Retford Street to see Turner and Rose. I was not at No 18, Drummond Crescent nearly every day. I suppose I went there about three times during the week; I was not there on the evening before the raid. In the afternoon of the raid I went there and spoke to a little girl outside. I have never when I have been in the house seen anything to make me suspect coining was going on. Sergeant Goodchild's evidence as to what I said when arrested is a distinct concoction. It is true that I said I did know Turner. Detective-sergeant Goodchild started searching me on the left-hand side, and then he searched the right, and
then went back to the left. I know there was no such thing as a counterfeit coin in my pocket before my arrest. Who else could have put them there except the officer? I suggest that the detectives are at the bottom of it, because I nearly got one of Sergeant Goodchild's chums five years' penal servitude, and it is his revenge.
MARY PRESCHNER , 32, Union Street. (To Stevens.) You were living in my place just on two months. It is true that on the night of February 22 you asked Kaiser and Morris Preschner to go for a walk. When you came in doors you (brought a new cap and in pulling it out of your overcoat left-hand pocket you pulled the lining out as well. Twenty minutes after you left the boys came back and said you were arrested.
MORRIS KAISER , 32, Union Street. (To Stevens.) On the day you were arrested you came home with a cap in your left-hand side outside pocket of your overcoat. You took it out and left the lining sticking out. You had nothing in that pocket. We went out for a walk. When you were arrested you never lifted your hand at all.
Cross-examined. I had met him the first time the night before. Two people came to arrest him. He had an umbrella. He never struggled at all. I cannot say whether either of the officers did anything to him; I did see one hit him for nothing at all.
MORRIS PRESCHNER . (TO Stevens.) Mary Preschner is my sister and I live at 28, Steward Street. I was present when you came in with a cap in your coat pocket. As you brought it out you pulled out the lining. I was present when you were arrested. You did not strike one officer at all.
Cross-examined. They took him down the road and then I lost sight of them. I did not see the officer strike him; that was after I had left to tell my sister (he had been arrested.
(Stevens desired Mr. and Mrs. Reynolds to be called. They were called, but did not appear.)
JOSEPH THOMAS ROSE , skittle attendant, "Model Arms," Kingsland Road. (To Stevens.) On the night of the 20th a friend of mine named Wilkie came in with another man. You were there also. You had something the matter with your neck; I heard Mrs. Reynolds say that you were more ill than you looked and you ought to go home. (To the Court.) I cannot remember exactly the night that this occurred; I should think it was the Thursday night about 10.30.
Upon Stevens returning to the dock he alleged that the reason why this charge was being brought against him was that a detective friend of the officers in this case had asked him to get some man with a blemished character in order that he should be arrested for being in possession of a jemmy, which the detective would place in his pocket; that on informing the editor of the "Daily Mail" as to this plot he had been referred to a Mr. Tynewell, who had arranged for the attendance of a well-known barrister and an actor; that these men were arrested on his assuring the detective who had met him for the purpose of arresting the man he had promised to find that they were men of blemished character, but were discharged by the magistrate; as a consequence a question was asked in the House of Commons.
JOHN TURNER (Prisoner not on oath). I can account for about eight of these articles found, but I will say how the rest came into my possession. Rose used the whitening for the windows and the sand for the pots; the French cloth was for the table, and the little saucepan was for cooking. On the night that the officer was supposed to be watching the house a man came and said the detectives were after him and asked me to keep some things which he brought in a piece of sacking. I will not say I did not know what they were. I took the paster out and put it in the shop, and the things that were found in the plate I put there. I took the coins upstairs and put them underneath the mattress. Rose knows nothing about it because I never mentioned anything about it to her. From what I can see of it it was a trap by this man to let me fall into.
Verdict, (all), Guilty.
Stevens had been sentenced to five years' penal servitude in 1906 for making counterfeit coin. In 1897 he had been sent to an industrial school till the age of 19. Three further convictions in 1904, and 1910, were proved. Turner had been sentenced in 1910 to eight months' hard labour for uttering counterfeit coin. Two convictions in 1906 and 1907 were proved. (He had never been known to do any work; he and Rose had been convicted of keeping a brothel. Inspector Neil proved convictions against Rose for assaulting the police and brothel keeping and stated that Stevens had previously been suspected of making counterfeit coin, but there was not sufficient evidence to charge him with it. He explained the method by which Stevens had by his false representations induced a young and inexperienced officer to arrest two men who were found afterwards to be of unimpeachable character. It was Stevens's practice, when charged, to make serious allegations against the police, which were invariaibly false.
Sentences: Stevens, Five years' penal servitude; Turner, Four years' penal servitude; Rose, eighteen months' hard labour.
BEFORE JUDGE RENTOUL.
(Thursday, March 21.)
Mr. Warburton prosecuted.
LEWIS GREEN , mason, 36, Greenwood Road, Walthamstow. Prisoner and his wife had three rooms from me on the first floor when I was at Stafford Road at 3s. 6d. a week. On February 11 I spoke to him about three weeks' arrears of rent, and gave him a week's notice. Shortly after 11 p.m. on February 18 I was sitting up waiting for him to come in to see what he was going to do about clearing out. He and his wife came in and went upstairs. I called to him from the foot of the stairs, but could not get an answer. I went up to his door and he came out. I asked him whether he was going to clear out. He said he had only earned 2s. 6d., and he had paid some deposit on a room. I said that would not do for me; I could not pay my own landlord. I have since been turned out. He struck me, and we had a bit of a struggle. I went downstairs and he went back to his room. He then caught me up at the bottom of the stairs and stabbed me over the eye, in the cheek, and under the chin with a table knife. The passage was in darkness and I could not see to defend myself; I could not see what was in his hand. My daughter came between us. He then went out of the front door and I was taken to the hospital and from there to the infirmary, where I remained till March 15. I feel very weak now, and my head is still very sore.
Cross-examined by prisoner. When I gave you notice I did not say I would pay you if you did not pay me. It is true you were in at dinner time on the 18th, but I could not then call you down because my wife was very ill, and I could not leave her.
Re-examined. Four weeks' rent was owing altogether on the 18th. While I have been in the infirmary I have not been able to earn anything, and I have been turned out of the house.
ESTHER GREEN , chocolate packer. I am the daughter of the last, witness. On the night of February 18 I was in bed when I heard my father and prisoner talking. Then I heard a struggle. Upon that I went downstairs and saw my father lying on the floor with prisoner and his wife leaning over him. I picked him up. Prisoner got hold of me by the throat and threw me on the ground. His wife then opened the door and they ran out. I sent for a doctor. My. father's face was covered with blood. About half an hour afterwards prisoner's
wife and his brother came back. They appeared to be looking for something in the passage. I went out and picked up this knife (produced) in the passage; it was smothered in blood. I have seen prisoner's wife cutting bread with it. I handed it to the police. When my father was in the infirmary we could not pay the rent and we had to leave.
JAMES O'SHEA , house surgeon. Between 1 and 2 a.m. on February 19 prosecutor was brought to the hospital. He had a black eye and cuts over his left eye, at the side of his mouth, and on his chin, all about an inch long, but not very deep. I stitched them up. I sent him home and gave him an out-patient's ticket.
WILLIAM REGINALD MARGETTS TURTLE , assistant medical superintendent, West Ham Infirmary. On February 19 prosecutor was admitted to the infirmary suffering from the three cuts the last witness has described. He had lost a fair amount of blood and was suffering slightly from shock. None of the wounds turned out to be dangerous. He was detained till March 15. I think the wounds could be caused by this knife (produced).
Detective JOHN LEE, N Division. Shortly after 2 a.m. on Feb?ruary 19 I was called to 14, Grange Road, where I saw prisoner. I said I should take him into custody for stabbing a man the night before. He said, "I know all about it and what it is for. This is through owing that man two weeks' rent. I had been out selling flowers from 9 in the morning and earned 9d. I did not go up till half-past 11, when Mr. Green spoke to me about the rent and if I had got a place yet, when he punched me in the mouth, inside here. I then ran upstairs and picked the knife off the table, and ran downstairs and done it on him. I have done it and I must put up with the punishment. I do not mind so long as my wife and children get some food to eat. "On arriving at the station he said, "I done it right enough. I do not want anybody else to get into trouble for it." On his right sleeve, on both hands, and the right forearm I saw blood.
Detective-inspector ISRAEL BEDFORD, N Division. On February 19 I saw prisoner detained at the station and told him I should charge him with feloniously wounding the prosecutor. He said, "I did not mean to murder him. I done it in self-defence." When the charge was read over to him he made no reply.
Prisoner's statement before the magistrate: "On February 11, at 9.30 a.m., I went out selling flowers. I came home at half-past two to dinner. At half-past three I was going out and I passed in the passage Mr. Green and his daughter Maud. I happened to shut the door a bit heavy. I got three doors by from the gate, when Mr. Green came running after me. He said, 'Look here, if you don't pay your rent, it is either pay or be paid,' and he made two attempts to hit me on that Sunday and he thought better of it. He said, 'You take a week's notice. 'On February 18 I went out at 9.30 with my flowers. I came home at three to dinner. It was half-past seven before I got sold out and got to my wife's
brother's. I stopped there from half-past seven till eleven o'clock playing cards. I reached home. I came to help my wife with the mailcart. Mr. Green holloa'd out, 'George.' I said, 'What?' He made no reply. I went downstairs. He said, 'You understand, I want you out of here this week?' I said, 'Yes, I'm going to-morrow or Tuesday.' He said, 'Before you take anything out of here I want two weeks' rent out of you. Either pay or be paid.' I said, 'I have not got it. I only earned 2s. 6d. and I have got to pay the deposit for a room out of that.' He said, 'You will have to put up with the consequence.' With that I walked upstairs. He came up to the top of the stairs, all but three, and he said to my wife, 'My daughter will fight you in the back yard.' I said, 'Not in the back yard. She will fight her in the street.' He walked downstairs; I went into my kitchen. He called me again. I went down. He said, 'I want my rent.' With that he pulled me and tore a button off my coat, and hit me behind the ear. With that, I goes upstairs and gets the knife and I stabbed him."
Cross-examined. I did not see a knife in my husband's hand before prosecutor struck him in the mouth. I admit that this knife (produced) is one that I have used. He has been a good husband to me.
The jury disagreed.
Prisoner was again tried (before Judge Rentoul.) The evidence was repeated, and prisoner was found guilty of unlawful wounding.
Prisoner, who received a good character, was released on his own recognisances to come up for judgment if called upon.
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE HORRIDGE.
(Friday, March 22.)
BOWMAN, Guy (40, journalist); BUCK, Charles Ernest (38, printer); and BUCK, Benjamin Edward (42, printer). (1) Endeavouring, by the publication of an article in a certain printed paper called the "Syndicalist, "to seduce persons serving in His Majesty's land forces from their duty and allegiance to His Majesty. (2) Endeavouring to incite the same persons to commit acts of mutiny, to wit acts of disobedience to the lawful commands of their superior officers. (3) Endeavouring to incite the same persons to commit certain traitorous and mutinous practices.
Mr. Muir, Mr. Bodkin, and Mr. Graham-Campbell prosecuted; Sir Frederick Low, K. C., M. P., and Mr. J. B. Melville defended Bowman; Mr. J. B. Melville defended C. E. Buck and B. E. Buck.
Before plea, Sir Frederick Low moved to quash the indictment. It was preferred under a very old Act (37 Geo. III., c. 70). That Act was renewed from time to time, and in 1817 it was re-enacted and made perpetual (57 Geo. III., c. 7). The original Act, thus perpetuated, was a highly penal statute; it provided that any person convicted of the offence alleged against the present defendants should be adjudged guilty of felony and should suffer death without benefit of clergy. Section 3 provided explicitly that a person who had been tried for an offence under that Act and acquitted or convicted should not be tried again, upon the same facts, for high treason or misprision of treason. This emphasised the necessity of the greatest particularity in any charge framed under the Act. He submitted that this indictment was bad for uncertainty; it charged the endeavouring "to seduce divers persons serving in His Majesty's Forces by land "; it designated no soldier, no person who had been approached or interfered with in any way. It designated no body on whom the accused could lay their finger and say, "There is the charge made against us." Suppose hereafter a further indictment were preferred against them, how were they to say," We have been charged with that offence and we have been acquitted of it or convicted," as the case might be. There was nothing to identify anyone—any soldier, any persons serving in His Majesty's Forces—as the person with whom they had endeavoured to tamper. The form of indictment set out in Archbold, 24th Edition, page 1113, indicated a definite person; the charge was "endeavouring to seduce one J. N., he the said J. N. then being a person serving," etc. Neither in the depositions taken before the magistrate nor in the indictment itself was there a suggestion that the defendants had endeavoured to tamper with any specified person serving in His Majesty's Forces.
Mr. Melville, for the prisoners Buck, took the same objection.
Mr. Muir said this was a pure pleading point; it was a question of definitely naming the "persons" referred to in the statute, and the rule was that they must be named as definitely as circumstances will permit. Here the incitement itself showed the class to whom it was addressed. Indictments had for many years been drawn and held to be sufficiently definite where the persons referred to were named as a class. It was intended that this incitement should come into the hands of soldiers—the very class named in the statute. The incitement of an individual soldier was of small moment; it was the incitement of soldiers in the bulk which could alone be effective for any mischievous purposes. To say of this statute that while it was felony punishable with penal servitude for life to incite one individual soldier it was not an offence to incite the whole British Army was to reduce the statute to an absolute absurdity. (Cited R. v. Most, 7 Q.B.D., p. 244; 50 L.J. (M.C.), p. 113; 14 Cox, p. 583).
Mr. Justice Horridge. At this point of the case I will say nothing more than that, in my view, the indictment sufficiently discloses an offence under the statute.
Prisoners then pleaded Not guilty.
The article the subject of the charge, published in the January number of the "Syndicalist," was as follows: "Open Letter to British Soldiers. Men, Comrades, Brothers,—You are in the Army, so are we—you in the Army of destruction, we in the industrial or army of construction. We work at mine, mill, forge, factory, or dock, etc., producing and transporting all the goods, clothing, stuffs, etc., which make it possible for people to live; you are working men's sons. When we go on strike to better our lot, which is the lot also of your
fathers, mothers, brothers, and sisters, you are called upon by your officers to murder us. Don't do it. You know how it happens—always has happened. We stand out as long as we can. Then one of our (of your) irresponsible brothers, goaded by the sight and thought of his and his loved one's misery and hunger, commits a crime on property. Immediately you are ordered to murder us, as you did at Mitchelstown, at Featherstone, at Belfast. Don't you know that when you are out of the Colours and become a civilian again that you, like us, may be on strike, and you, like us, be liable to be murdered by other soldiers? Boys, don't do it. Thou shall not kill,' says the Book. Don't forget that. It does not say—unless you have a uniform on. No; murder is murder whether committed in the heat of anger on one who has wronged a loved one or by pipe-clayed Tommies with rifles. Boys, don't do it. Act the man! Act the brother! Act the human being! Property can be replaced! Human life never! The idle rich class who own and order you about own and order us about also. They and their friends own the land and means of life of Britain. You don't. We don't. When we kick they order you to murder us. When you kick you get court-martial and cells. Your fight is our fight. Instead of fighting against each other we should be fighting with each other. Out of our loins, our lives, our homes you come. Don't disgrace your parents, your class, by being willing tools any longer of the master class. You, like us, are of the slave class. When we rise you rise; when we fall, even by your bullets, ye fall also. England, with its fertile valleys and dells, its mineral resources, its sea harvests, is the heritage of ages to us. You, no doubt, joined the Army out of poverty. We work long hours for small wages at hard work because of our poverty, and both your poverty and ours arises from the fact that Britain, with its resources, belongs only to a few people. These few, owning Britain, own our jobs. Owning our jobs they own our very lives. Comrades, have we called in vain? Think things out, and refuse any longer to murder your kindred. Help us to win back Britain for the British and the world for the workers."
GEORGE RILEY , inspector, special branch, New Scotland Yard. On March 8 I went to 9, Stainforth Road, Walthamstow; on the front of the house was the title "Buck Brothers." I saw B. E. Buck, and read the warrant to him; he made no reply. Subsequently C. E. Buck came in; I read to him the warrant, and he made no reply. On the same night I went to 4, Maud Terrace, Waltham stow. I waited until early in the following morning, when Bowman came in. I read the warrant to him. When I had got to the word "Syndicalist" he said, "All right, I know what it means; you need not read any more." I subsequently went to 9, Stainforth Road, and there found two printers' formes of type, apparently for the printing of the February number of the "Syndicalist."
Sir F. Low objected to any evidence as to the February number; the indictment referred only to the article in the January number.
Mr. Muir submitted that other writings of the accused might be given in evidence to show the meaning of the particular writing in question. (R. v. Robinson, 2 Leach, p. 749; R. v. Bouchier, 4 C. & P., 562.)
Mr. Justice Horridge said that, in order to establish a prima facie case of printing, it was sufficient for the Crown to get the documents relating to the January number.
Examination continued. I found this copy of the issue of January; on the last page are the words "Printed by Buck Brothers, (T.U.), 9, Stainforth Road, Walthamstow, and published by Guy Bowman at 4, Maud Terrace, Walthamstow." On page 2 is "The Syndicalist Printed under the auspices of the Industrial Syndicalist Education League. Offices, 4, Maud Terrace, Walthamstow. Monthly, one penny. Subscriptions, Great Britain or abroad, twelve months, 1s. 6d. Orders for subscriptions and copies of the paper and advertisements should be sent to the publisher, Guy Bowman, 4, Maud Terrace, Walthamstow." The number sets out a number of addresses at which the paper can be obtained; four in London, one in Birmingham, two in Manchester, two in Glasgow, one in Bristol. On page 3 appears the "Open Letter to British Soldiers." I also found a number of proofs of articles; a number of letters passing between the Bucks and Bowman; and account-books of Bucks' business. On going to 4, Maud Terrace, I found 14 copies of the January number; copy of a letter dated February 20, addressed to a Mr. Tobin ("Dear Comrade.—I enclose a copy of No. 1 of the 'Syndicalist,' on the back of which you will find all particulars about the I.S.E.L. "); letter from a man at Rugby subscribing to the "Syndicalist "; copy of Bowman's acknowledgment of same.
Cross-examined. I found no manuscript of the "Open Letter."
Detective-sergeant THOMAS HANSEN, New Scotland Yard, said that on February 12 he purchased two copies of the January number of the "Syndicalist" from a newsagent at 1, St. Bride's Passage, Fleet Street; on March 14 he purchased a copy from a newsagent at 191, Old street, St. Luke's.
No evidence was called for the defence.
Verdict (against the three prisoners), Guilty on all counts.
Sentences: Bowman, Nine months' hard labour; C. E. Buck, Six months' hard labour; B. E. Buck, Six months' hard labour; the sentences passed upon each count, and to run concurrently.
A further indictment, for unlawfully uttering and publishing certain printed matter in the form of an article, entitled, "Open Letter to British Soldiers," contained in the "Syndicalist," with intent to seduce soldiers in the service of His Majesty the King from their allegiance, and to incite them to mutinous conduct, was ordered to remain on the file of the court.
BEFORE JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH.
(Friday, March 22.)
Mr. W. W. Grantham prosecuted; Mr. G. H. Head defended.
EDWARD ALBERT GARDINER , salesman to E. H. Banckham, pawn-broker, 41, Crownfield Road, Ley ton. There is a side door of our shop in Ashlin Road. On February 28 I returned there about 11 p.m. I was lighting the gas in the shop when I heard a crackling noise at the side door. I came out to the front and saw a man on the kerb. Witness Cooper came out with me. I then went round to the door in Ashlin Road and saw prisoner coming away from the door. He walked up Ashlin Road feigning drunkenness. About 30 yards up Ashlin Road he threw away something which sounded like a piece of hard metal. I did not stop to see what it was. I blew a whistle I subsequently gave information to a policeman. I had then lost sight of prisoner and the other man. I afterwards found the skeleton key (produced) in Ashlin Road and handed it to the constable. Next morning at five o'clock I picked prisoner out from about 12 men. 1 had seen him several times in the previous three months.
Cross-examined. He had a scarf round his neck, I could not say the colour, and a brownish coat. I did not notice his trousers. I saw prisoner last summer. I told the constable he was wearing brown clothes. When I went to identify I expected to see a man with brown clothes. I had not been told he would be wearing a brown suit, or that he would be wearing the same clothes as he did the night before. Most of the men were dressed as navvies. I only saw three in corduroy trousers. There was no other man in a brown suit.
Re-examined. About last Christmas prisoner came to our front and tried to take an armchair, A customer came in and told us. We went to the front and saw prisoner with the chair outside 39, Crownfield Road.
Inspector HARDING, K Division. On February 29, at 2.45 a.m., I went to 41, Crownfield Road. I examined the door in Ashlin Road. I found a recent mark on the jamb of the door which was caused by a blunt instrument. I then made inquiries and afterwards went to 8, Florence Road, where prisoner lives. It was then 4 a.m. I asked if his name was Pearce; he said, "Yes "; I said, "You will have to come to the station with me. You answer the description of a man who was concerned with another in attempting to break and enter a pawnbroker's shop at Crownfield Road during the night." He asked me to come in. I went in with Constable Chambers. He said, "You have made a mistake." I said to him at the station, "I want to be
quite fair with you. One of the witnesses gays he knows the man who was at the door well by the name of Pearce; so if you are not the man he knows by the name of Pearce you cannot be the man who attempted to break the door, but you can be put up for identification if you like." He said be would like to be put up for identification. He made no complaint as to the people he was put up with. Only one man had corduroy trousers. I was present whan Gardiner and Cooper identified him. When formally charged, he said, "You have made a mistake." The key produced was handed to me by the station serjeant.
Police-constable FREDERICK CHAMBERS. In the early morning of February 29 I searched the road leading from prosecutor's premises. About 30 yards away, in Ashlin Road, I found this nail. (To the Court.) It would be very useful for wrenching off the locks of gasmeters when once the man got inside.
Prisoner's statement. "At nine o'clock I arrived home. I had my supper with my wife and children and a lady named Mrs. Mallows, also my sister-in-law, Florence Rusby. About 10 o'clock I went to bed, where I remained till the officer came this morning. I am sure the witnesses are under a wrong impression and have made a great mistake, and I do not think it fair in the way I was placed among other men at the station, the class of men I was placed with at the station. The witness Cooper admits there was no other man dressed similarly to me there. I am entirely innocent of this charge."
WILLIAM PEARCE (prisoner, on oath) On February 28 I arrived home about 8.30. I had supper with my wife and children and Mrs. Busby, my sister-in-law. She lives in the same house. Mrs. Mallows came in during the evening. While I was having my supper my wife asked me to chop up a box for firewood in the back yard. Before doing that I took the youngest child to bed. While I was in the bedroom Mrs. Mallows came in. She was in the kitchen as I went through to the yard. I said "Good night" to her at the time. After chopping up the box I sat with my wife about half an hour in the kitchen. We went to bed about 10. I called out "Good night" to Mrs. Rusby. I did not go out again.
Cross-examined. I lived in Ashlin Road at one time. Mrs. Mallows did not have supper with us, as I said at the police court. What I was trying to explain was that Mrs. Mallows knew I was in the house at the time. Mrs. Rushy took her supper into the room where her child was, as it was crying. That was 8.45 or 8.50. I did not hear the constable knock. Mrs. Rusby shouted, "Somebody is knocking at the door "from her room. I got up and opened the door. I made no complaint when I was put up for identification. I did not know I could. There was nobody there anything like me; two or three had long beards; the majority were dressed as navvies.
bed. He said "Good night" to Mrs. Rusby between 9 and 10. He did not go out again that night.
Cross-examined. My husband is a dock labourer. He was out of work at the time. Mrs. Mallows did not have supper with us. She came in about 8.45. She did not stay long. I am a good sleeper.
FLORENCE RUSBY . I live in the same house as the Pearces. I saw prisoner on February 28, about 8.30 p.m., in the kitchen. Before he went to bed he called out "Good night" to me. My suppe" is generally laid out in their room. That night I picked up my plate and took it in my own room because my boy, who is a cripple, called me. After that I did not hear anybody come in or go out of the house.
Cross-examined. I did not see Mrs. Mallows there. She might have been in the bedroom or outside.
Mrs. MALLOWS. On February 28 I went to prisoner's house between 8.45 and 9 p.m. 1 beard him call out, "Good night" soon after. I only saw him from the kitchen. He was not in the same room as myself.
Cross-examined. I was not there long. As he said "Good night," he went up the passage towards the bedroom. It was the first time I had been in the house.
Verdict, Not guilty.
BEFORE JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH.
(Monday, March 25.)
REED, Daniel Gardner (31, hairdresser) , on January 23, 1912, having been lawfully sworn as a witness in a judicial proceeding, did unlawfully and wilfully make a statement material in that proceeding which he knew to be false.
Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted; Mr. Salkeld Green defended.
JAMES EDWARD JACKSON , clerk to the Justices, West Ham. I was in court when the summons was heard against Joseph James Green for assaulting a Miss Dyer He was bound over to keep the peace. I took a shorthand note. Prisoner said, "I am tenant to the defendant At 6.15 on December 18 I was having tea. I heard complainant shouting out, "Mr. Reed" three times. I opened the middle door The defendant had her by the hair of her head. She was holding his wrist trying to get free. I said, "Mr. Green, have you lost your senses?" He was pulling the girl back by her hair. A shelf was ton, down and a window was broken. I did not see her fall down, In cross-examination he said, "The first thing I heard was a broken window. I was in the front shop. The defendant was the first to fall in. He was falling with his hands in her hair. He was pulling her with him." The case was one of assault. It did not matter whether he pulled her by the hair or wrists. He admitted he pulled her by her wrists.
JOSEPH JAMES GREEN , 1a, Andrew Street, Silvertown. Miss Dyer occupies part of the same premises that I do. Prisoner also occupied a shop as my tenant. He was occupying that shop on the 18th when the disturbance arose. At 6.5 p.m. that day I was returning from work. I went in through the gates to the backyard. I heard Miss Dyer say, "Do you see anything, you sneak?. She sprang at me. I clutched at her in the dark by the wrist and arm in self-defence. We were going backwards. I fell into Reed's shop, breaking the glass of the door. Miss Dyer partly fell. I did mot see anything of Reed till I was getting up. He was in the corner of the shop, two yards from me. It was impossible for him to see what was taking place in the yard or anything till I burst through his door. I heard him give evidence at the police court. I gave him notice to quit on January 26. On January 30 prisoner handed me a letter, saying, "It is a letter making an apology for what happened at the police court. I said, "All right, I will come down presently. I read the letter upstairs. Next day I went with my wife into prisoner's shop. I said to him, "What about this letter you gave me last night. I said, "Are you going to stand by this, and are you going to help me all you can to put it right?. He said, "I will. I said, "You know you went up there and told lies. He said, "Yes, I did," and he was saying how he had been led away by the Dyers and he should never do it again, he would never go near them in fact, and he hoped I would be as lenient as I could with him. I wanted him to go up to the magistrate with me the morning I was ordered to go up. He said it was late and he did not want the shop to be closed any longer. I tried my utmost to get him to go up in a friendly way. I said, "You will get a good talking to, no doubt. I want you to substantiate what you wrote in the letter. He did not seem, inclined. I went to the court and saw Mr. Jackson. He had a doubt as to whether Reed had written the letter. I came back and said to Reed, "You may be called on Saturday, and that is your busy day. Will you give me something in writing verifying that first letter?. He said, "I will be only too pleased rather than he away, as it is an awkard day" He then wrote the letter of February 22. The wording is partly his.
Cross-examined. I intended to bring him to book. That is why I went to the police court and why I wanted the second letter. I had already intimated to him that I was going to get him into trouble for swearing falsely. I was trying to trap him, if you call it a trap. They trapped me. Nearly the whole of the letter he wrote voluntarily. I cannot remember what part I dictated. I did not dictate, "I should never have given evidence only I was pressed to say what I did by Dyers' solicitor. He did not say Dyers' solicitor; he said Mr. Robinson. He said he never saw Mr. Robinson, so my wife said, "What do you want to put it down for then?. John Filman swore he saw me holding Miss Dyer by the hair. He was not there. Miss Dyer is committing perjury. Prisoner will tell you why the boy is committing perjury. I suggest he got the boy to commit perjury with the aid of Miss Dyer. I could have got rid of prisoner by giving him a week's notice. His living depended on me. When Mrs. Dyer
approached him about giving evidence he said, "I cannot very well; he may give me a week's notice." He told me that himself. I did not say that at the police court, but it was put before the solicitor in writing. I did not know prisoner attended there on subpoena. It was my business before I let it to prisoner. On January 26, when I gave him notice, I was alone. I did not say, "I will make you humbly apologise and go on your hands and knees." I am not aware that a man named Ryland went there for me and asked for an apology. I have not heard of it. I withdrew my notice verbally. I got the summons for perjury to clear my character.
SARAH GREEN , wife of the last witness. On December 18 I came down just as my husband and Miss Dyer passed our back door into the barber's shop. With one hand he had hold of her arm and his dinner dishes in the other and, and in her hand she had his cap. He did not have hold of her hair at any time. Reed was then in his shop. He could not see because the door was shut. I went with my husband to Reed's shop on January 31. My husband said to Reed, "Do you mean what you said in this letter." Reed said yes. My husband said, "Are you willing to stand by it." Reed said yes. My husband said, "Are you willing to go up to court with me and have this put right." Reed said, "Yes, and I am very sorry, Mr. Green, I said that in court, but I was led away and talked over by the Dyers." I went there again with my husband on February 22. Reed then and there wrote Exhibit 5. He did it willingly enough, only some of the words he asked my husband whether it would read better this way, and my husband told him. I witnessed it afterwards and Reed said he was most pleased to do it.
Cross-examined. My husband told Reed he was going to take him up to the court; he did not say anything about locking him up. I did not hear Saturday mentioned or any day.
Inspector WILLIAM BURRELL. On February 27 I served a summons upon prisoner to appear at the West Ham Police Court. I read it to him. He said, "This is all through the letter I wrote. It was dictated to me by Mr. Green. They have all been at me, first one and then the other. Mrs. Dyer got me to give false evidence first and then Mr. Green got me to write the letter. I did not know what I was doing. They are a dangerous lot. They worried me to death. They have dragged me into this. I will attend."
Cross-examined. He was excited and agitated a bit. He is a man of excellent character.
DANIEL GARDNER REED (prisoner, on oath). On December 18 I was in the shop with the boy Filman. I was having tea. Green came through the door; his back was towards me; he was followed by Miss Dyer. He was holding her by the hair. I got up and asked him if he had lost his senses. He knocked a shelf down and broke three shaving mugs. I was afterwards served with a subpoena to attend the police court. The evidence I gave was the solemn truth. On
January 26 Green came to see me; he called Rylands into the shop. He gave me notice to quit and told me he would make me go on my hands and knees and humbly apologise to him and shake hands with him for what I had done. Next day I had some conversation with Rylands. Eventually I wrote the letter of January 30 in Rylands' kitchen. I do not know who dictated it; it was made out before I got there; I copied it. Rylands put the original on the fire. I wrote it so that I would not get turned out of the business to starve my wife and four children. It was done under threats. The next night the notice to quit was withdrawn. I was asked if I adhered to what was in the letter; I simply said, "You have the letter." On February 22 Green came to my shop and said he wished me to go before Mr. Jackson and make a statement. He said he was going to take out a summons against a young man who had set about him the night previous. I did not compose the letter of February 22. Green dictated it to me. He said he would post it to the court. The same morning he offered me 4s. to go up to the court, but I would not. I did not tell the officer that Mrs. Dyer got me to give false evidence. When he gave me the summons I said, "That is what I get for copying letters, "or, "what I have got by writing letters. I have never seen Mr. Robinson to speak to him.
Cross-examined. I can bear witness to say I never said that Mrs. Dyer got me to give false evidence. My evidence at West Ham was correct. I wrote the two letters under pressure. The statements in them are not true.
JOHN FILMAN , lather boy. On December 18 I was working at Mr. Reed's. About 6.30 I heard the door open, then the window broke. Mr. Green came in backwards. When we heard the window break Mr. Reed jumped up from having his tea and opened the door which led into the shop and Mr. Green fell into his arms. Mr. Reed called out, "Green, you are going mad. "Green had hold of Miss Dyer by the hair.
Cross-examined. Mrs. Dyer talked to me between December 18 and January 23. She told me to say what I said at Stratford before the magistrate.
Re-examined. I told the magistrate what I had seen. Police-constable CHISNELL, 86 K R. On December 18 I was called to la, Andrew Street, Silvertown. I went in the shop and saw Miss Dyer crying. I afterwards saw Green, and told him Miss Dyer had told me he had been pulling her hair, He said, "Well, she started on me first, and I protected myself."
ETHEL DYER . I assist my mother in her confectionery and tobacconist's business. On December 18 I went to the back to get bicycle out of the stable. Someone came in the gate. It was very dark. I thought it was the gentleman for his bicycle. I said, "Oh, here's your bike. "I was called a filthy name. I did not recognise the voice then. Somebody caught hold of me. I found out afterwards it was Green. He caught me by the hair of the head, and I really did not remember anything more until I got down by the bottom of the yard by the door. I heard the window smash. I called out, "Oh
Mr. Reed." I do not remember anything again till I was up on my feet in the barber's shop. I was afterwards seen by the doctor.
Cross-examined. Green has not taken proceedings against us before, but we have against him. We are continually quarrelling about the right to use the gates. We say we have the exclusive right. The gates lead from the yard to the street. I am not violent. I have never had words with anybody else. I did not nail Mr. Green in the w. c. I do not know who did. I do not know if he was imprisoned there. I am not always trying to interfere with him. He has used the gates many times, and I have never interfered with him. I did not use the word "sneak." I did not hear him say, "Mind your own business." I did not strike him or catch hold of his cap. I had his cap in my hand when I got up off the floor, but how I got it I do not remember.
Verdict, Not guilty.
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE HORRIDGE.
(Wednesday, March 20.)
Mr. Muir, Mr. Leycester, and Mr. Adrian Clark prosecuted; Mr. Curtis Bennett and Mr. Ronald Cruickshank defended.
Prisoner pleaded guilty to manslaughter, which plea was accepted by the prosecution, and a verdict of Guilty of manslaughter was returned.
Mr. Justice Horridge, stating that prisoner had been evidently submitted to a long course of provocation by his wife, whom he had killed, sentenced him to Five years' penal servitude.