Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 6.0, 24 July 2014), October 1872 (t18721028).

Old Bailey Proceedings, 28th October 1872.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT

Sessions Paper.

GIBBONS, MAYOR.

TWELFTH SESSION, HELD OCTOBER 28TH, 1872.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,

TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND, BY

JAMES DROVER BARNETT

AND

ALEXANDER BUCKLER,

Short-hand Writers to the Court,

ROLLS CHAMBERS, No. 89, CHANCERY LANE.

THE POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE

REVISED AND EDITED, BY

EDWARD T. E. BESLEY, ESQ.,

OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW.

LONDON:

STEVENS & SONS, 119, CHANCERY LANE>.

THE

WHOLE PROCEEDINGS

On the Queen's Commission of

OYER AND TERMINER AND GAOL DELIVERY

FOR

The City of London,

AND GAOL DELIVERY FOR THE

COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, AND THE PARTS OF THE COUNTIES OF ESSEX, KENT, AND SURREY, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION

OF THE

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,

Held on Monday, October 28th, 1872, and following days,

BEFORE THE RIGHT HON. SIR SILLS JOHN GIBBONS, BART., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; The Hon. Sir HENRY SINGER KEATING, Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's Court of Common Pleas; The Hon. Sir JOHN MELLOR , Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's Court of Queen's Bench; Sir ROBERT WALTER CARDEN , Knt., Sir JAMES CRAKE LAWRENCE, Bart., ROBERT BESLEY , Esq., Sir THOMAS DAKIN , Knt., Sir SYDNEY HEDLEY WATERLOW , Knt., DAVID STONE , Esq., THOMAS SCAMBLER OWDEN, Esq., and CHARLES WHETHAM, Esq., Aldermen of the said City; Sir THOMAS CHAMBERS , Knt., Q.C., M.P., Common Serjeant of the said City (acting as Deputy-Recorder); and ROBERT MALCOLM KERR , Esq., LL.D., Judge of the Sheriffs' Court; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery of Newgate, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.

THOMAS WHITE , Esq., Alderman.

FREDERICK PERKINS , Esq.

Sheriffs.

ARTHUR TURNER HEWETT , Esq.

ALEXANDER CROSLEY , Esq.

Under-Sheriffs.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

GIBBONS, MAYOR. TWELFTH SESSION.

A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—an obelisk (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.

LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.

OLD COURT.—Monday, October 28th, and Tuesday 29th, 1872.

Before Mr. Deputy Recorder.

708. LEWIS SMITH (22), a soldier, was indicted for feloniously wounding Mary Ann Webster, with intent to do her grievous bodily harm.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

GEORGE HUDSON . I am a plumber, and live at 3, Taylor's Cottages, Lower Tooting—on 2nd September, about 9.15 at night, I was going through the Park towards Knightsbridge with four or five others, amongst them was Mary Ann Webster—we were laughing and joking with each other, and I gave her a kiss—the prisoner came up behind me and struck a blow at me with his belt and knocked my hat off—I did not hear him say anything—I did not see him do anything to Webster—I did not see whether she fell down or not—after receiving the blow I came back and took Webster to the hospital—after the blow was struck I was excited, and don't know what transpired.

Prisoner. Q. What were you saying when you passed. A. I never saw you—I did not say "What are you doing there, you brute of a soldier?"

JAMES ALLOM . I am a bricklayer, and live at 29, Sheldon Street, Edgware Road—on 2nd September, I was with the others passing through the Park; there were six of us altogether, we were walking abreast towards Knightsbridge, we were laughing and chaffing together—Hudson kissed the young woman—I said to him, "Don't be greedy," and immediately the prisoner came up from behind, and hit away with his belt right and left; I bobbed down and Hudson and his young woman received the blow; one of the blows fell on Hudson's hat and knocked it off, and another hit Webster—on turning round the prisoner said to me, "You b—, I will have you"—I fled from him; he pursued me for about five minutes; I then got assistance, and gave him in charge; the blows were given with the buckle end of his belt—I did not see any one with him when he gave the blows—when I gave him in charge he had a young woman with him—I did not hear any of our party say anything to the prisoner.

Prisoner. Q. Were you saying anything about soldiers as you passed?

A. No, we were talking between ourselves, and larking and joking, when you came up from behind—I did not hear you ask us to apologise for what we had said.

MARY ANN WEBSTER . I am single, and live at 3, Taylor's Cottages, Tooting—on 2nd September, about 9.15, I was in Hyde Park with my mother, Hudson, and others—we were busily engaged talking, and were certainly having a bit of fun—the prisoner came up from behind; I was struck and fell, and I remember nothing more—I was injured on my head, and was in the hospital three weeks—I have quite recovered now.

Prisoner. Q. Do you think I struck the blow at you? A. If you did not intend to hit me, you intended to hit one of the party.

JOHN WALSH . (Policeman A 99). On the night of 2nd September, about 9 o'clock, I was near Stanhope Gate—I heard cries of "Police!"—I went up and saw the prisoner pursuing Allom; I ran and stopped him, and asked if he had assaulted anybody—he said "No"—Allom told me he had assaulted a young lady, who was taken to St. George's Hospital—I took him into custody—he had his belt on.

Prisoner. Q. Was I drunk or sober? A. You were the worse for drink, but you knew well what you were doing.

JAMES GODFREY THRUPP . I am assistant house-surgeon at St. George's—the prosecutrix was brought there—I examined her head—on the upper part of the left side of the forehead there were two cuts about an inch long extending down to the bone; in one of the cuts the bone itself was fissured, or dented; a branch of the temporal artery was divided, which I had to secure—she also had a wound over the outer side of the left eye, which did not lead down to the bone—there was a great swelling over the eye, simply due to the blood which was underneath the skin—it was such a wound as a soldier's belt and buckle would produce, it was a serious wound, but she went on very well without a bad symptom.

Prisoner. Q. How would you suggest the mark came over the eye? A. Very likely by falling on the gravel—the other marks could not have been produced by that.

Prisoner's Defence. I did not intend to strike the woman, I was under the influence of drink; I don't believe there is a soldier in the army that would take his belt off with intent to strike a woman.

GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. — Nine Month's Imprisonment.

709. JAMES LEONARD BROWN (22) , PLEADED GUILTY to wilful and corrupt perjury.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.

710. DOUGLAS SEDGLEY (19) , PLEADED GUILTY to three indictments for forging and uttering receipts for 3s. 3d., 3s. 3d., 4s. 4d., and to stealing the same of William Wilson and another, his masters.— He received a good character, and was recommended to mercy by the prosecutors.—Twelve Months' Imprisonment.

For other cases tried in Old Courts on Wednesday and Thursday, see Surrey Cases.

NEW COURT.—Monday, October 28th, 1872.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

711. STEPHEN BROWN (20) , PLEADED GUILTY to stealing nine bottles of brandy of Frederick Portal and others.— Eight Months' Imprisonment.

712. FREDERICK BLANCHARD (22), and WILLIAM BLANCHARD (26), to stealing a portrait and other goods of His Grace the Duke of Cleveland.— Eight Months' Imprisonment each. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

713. JOHN WESTON (18) , to stealing, whilst employed in the Post Office, a post-letter containing a hair net, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General; also, another post-letter, containing a gold seal.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

714. CHARLES WILLIAM MILLER (30) , to stealing, whilst employed in the Post Office, a post-letter containing postage-stamps, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

715. EDWARD NEWCOMBE (28) , to embezzling the sums of 16l., 15l. 11s. 8d., and 47l. 10s., the moneys of James Whitchurch.— Six Months' Imprisonment. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

716. THOMAS HENRY BLOCK (30) , Feloniously marrying Emma Jane Fordham, his wife Margaret Ann being alive.— Six Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

717. HENRY HOPLEY (32) , Unlawfully obtaining 8064 pieces of braid by false pretences.

MR. LONGFORD conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM WILLERINGHAM . I am a general merchant, of 4, Castle Street, Falcon Square—the prisoner was in my service two or three weeks as town traveller and salesman, but he had no authority to buy for me—I did not authorise him to go to Mr. Sperati on 20th July, 15th August, 3rd September, and 20th September, to buy for me—I never had any dealings with Abraham Lewis, of Houndsditch—on the night of 2nd October the prisoner was in the warehouse, and I asked him if he had bought goods of Sperati—he said "Yes"—the invoices were shown to him—he said that he had had transactions with Sperati formerly, and paid for them, and he meant to pay for these also, and had sold them to a house in Whitechapel, and obtained the money—I sent for a policeman—these two orders of 25th August and 19th July are in the prisoner's writing, I have no doubt—when I had that conversation I knew nothing about the invoices of 3rd and 20th September.

Prisoner. Q. Did not I mention at the time that I should pay the accounts when they became due? A. Yes—the accounts I have received since will not be due till December.

ROBERT MARSH . I am salesman to Sperati & Co.—the prisoner came into the passage a few days before 19th July, and said that he would take all we had in stock, 56 gross; and a little while afterwards I received this order, dated 19th July, from Ralph Wilson—I believed that it was on account of Willeringham, because it was on one of their bill-heads, and I debited Willeringham, and delivered the goods to Wilson.

Prisoner. Q. Previous to this, were not there three parcels of goods which I bought? A. Yes, you paid for them—those were on bits of paper from Willeringham, and I gave the invoice to the porter who had the goods—I have not had any transactions with Willeringham lately.

RALPH WILSON . I am a porter, of 14, London Wall—the prisoner gave me this order, dated 20th July, and told me to get the goods, and take them to Lewis, of Houndsditch—I did so—I received another invoice from Sperati, and gave it to Mr. Hopley—I received a cheque from Lewis, of Houndsditch, and gave it to Mr. Hopley.

Prisoner. Q. When I gave you the order was it sealed? A. Yes. COURT. Q. Did you tell the man at Sperati's that you were employed by the prisoner? A. Yes—I got an envelope from him addressed to Mr. Willeringham.

Prisoner. It was addressed to Mr. Hopley, at Mr. Willeringham's.

GEORGE FRANCIS MARSH . I am a clerk to C. A. Sperati—on 15th August Wilson brought me this order on one of Willeringham's forms—it is for 563 yards of linen—I gave him the goods, and he signed a receipt.

RALPH WILSON (re-examined.) I went with this order to Sperati's—I cannot say who gave it to me—this receipt, "R. Wilson," in pencil, is my writing—I received the goods, ten pieces, and took them to the corner of Bedfordbury, by Mr. Hopley's directions—this is my writing on this order of 20th July—I was employed by Mr. Hopley, and gave him the invoice which I received from Sperati & Co.

GEORGE FRANCIS MARSH (continued). On 3rd September, the prisoner came to me and wanted three pieces of Italian cloth—he did not say who he wanted them for—I delivered them—the order is mislaid—I understood that he bought them for Mr. Willeringham—their value was 11l. 19s. 5d.

Prisoner. I did not come for them—I sent an order in the usual way by Newton.

WILLIAM NEWTON . I am a porter, of 9, Silver Street—on 3rd September the prisoner asked me to get a parcel from Sperati's, and take it to Lewis, of Houndsditch—I did so, and gave the invoice to the prisoner—this receipt is my signature.

Prisoner. Q. Did not I tell you that it was an order from Mr. Hopley? A. Yes.

GEORGE FRANCIS MARSH (re-examined). On 20th September, Wilson came with a written order for six pieces of linen, which came to 26l. 13s. 7d.—I saw him sign this receipt and gave them to him, believing that he came from Willeringham—I only knew Wilson by sight.

RALPH WILSON (re-examined). This is my signature—on 20th September, I received six pieces of cloth from Sperati's—the prisoner sent me for them and told me to carry them on my back to Lewis, of Houndsditch, which I did, and said that Mr. Hopley would call there—I afterwards gave the invoice to the prisoner.

Prisoner. Q. Did I give you the order in an envelope? A. Yes—I did not know the contents.

ABRAHAM LEWIS . I live at 120, Houndsditch, and know the prisoner—I have had several transactions with him—I have got my invoices here—I did not receive ten pieces of cloth from Wilson—on 3rd September I received three pieces of Italian cloth from the prisoner—these are the prisoner's invoices—on 20th September I received from him six pieces of cloth, for which I gave him 1s. 4d. a yard; the total was 19l. 3s., and there was a discount—I paid him by this cheque (produced)—he did not tell me that he had bought them at Sperati's the same day for 6l.

Prisoner. Q. You have known me some years and done business with me; did you ever know me do anything dishonest? A. Nothing; I always thought you were in business for yourself.

GEORGE FRANCIS MARSH (re-examined). I believed that I was selling these goods to Willeringham, because this is the usual form in which their orders are made out—I should not have supplied the goods to the prisoner unless he paid for them—I do not know that he carries on business on his own account—I believed that he came on Willeringham's account, because he was in his employment, but he did not tell me so—I let him have the goods on the faith of this order.

Prisoner's Defence. Mr. Willeringham, since giving me in custody, has

withdrawn the charge twice at the Mansion House, seeing that I gave the order in my own name, and that I had paid three previous accounts.

WILLIAM WILLERINGHAM (re-examined). That is quite correct; I withdrew the charge, believing he intended to pay for them, having paid for goods before; if I had known that before I should not have given him in charge.

NOT GUILTY .

NEW COURT.—Tuesday, October 29th, 1872.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

718. GEORGE BROADLEY (37), and WILLIAM GAWTHORPE (22) , PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a quantity of tartaric acid, and other goods, of Richard Banks Barron, and others, their masters.— Twelve Month's Imprisonment each.

719. LEON THOMAS (29) , to stealing an opera glass, socks, blankets, and other articles, of Joseph Ham, in a vessel in a port.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

720. ALFRED SMITH (18) , to unlawfully assaulting Alfred Keegan. He received a good character.— Four Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

721. JOHN DALLAS (40) , PLEADED GUILTY to stealing six metal taps, the property of James Ellis; also to stealing two metal taps, the property of George Porter.

He was further charged with having been before convicted.

JOSEPH SMITH . I am a warder of Coldbath Fields—in November, 1865, the prisoner was sent there, for three months, for stealing a pair of boots—I have seen him since, and have no doubt of him—(The certificate of the conviction of John Dallas at Bow Street was here put in).

HERBERT REEVES . I saw the prisoner every day in the prison.

GUILTY.**— Seven years' Penal Servitude.

722. GEORGE NAHRGANG (37) , Stealing eight ounces of extract of mutton, two ounces of cotton, and other articles, of Francis Renshaw and another, his masters.

MR. HARRINGTON conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM WILLIAMS . I am day watchman to Messrs. Cousin & Renshaw, of Upper Brock's Wharf, wharfingers—it is my duty to search the workmen when they leave—on 2nd October I searched the prisoner, and found about two ounces of cotton in his pocket, value about 2d.—he said he had taken it to put in his ear, as he suffered from pain in his head.

ALFRED MCKENZIE . I am one of the firm of Cousin & Renshaw, of Upper Brock's Wharf—in consequence of what we heard we instructed the last witness to search the workmen as they left—this cotton is ours; this cochineal is clean, and is similar to what we have in our establishment—if scattered on the floor it would not be allowed to be taken away by the workmen, but it has the appearance of being taken from a bag—all the articles are worth about 1l.—this is a kind of paper which we use; some paper has our name printed on it.

WILLIAM BRAY (City Policeman 571). I took the prisoner on 3rd October; he said "I suffer in my ears, and I took the cotton for my ears, I have never taken any before, I hope you will forgive me"—I went to his lodging, and found a similar quantity of cotton, 8oz. of extract of mutton, about 1oz. of cochineal, about 1 lb. of sugar, in a paper bearing the name of the firm, 1 lb. of nutmegs, 1 oz. of cinnamon, and in the prisoner's box

4 lbs. of wool—the prisoner said "I brought that wool from Germany six years ago."

Prisoner's Defence. I came from Germany; I lent a countryman 2l. 5s., he only repaid me 1l. 15s., but gave me this wool and the nutmegs and extract of mutton instead of money; I picked up the cochineal in a barge. I am obliged to buy my sugar where I buy my tea, as I get it a halfpenny cheaper, and I wrapped it up in this paper.

NOT GUILTY .

723. CORNELIUS LYNCH (19) , Stealing a watch of Alexander Henry Kerzey, from his person.

MR. HARMSWORTH conducted the Prosecution.

FREDERICK DOWNS (City Detective). On 26th August; about 1.30, I saw the prisoner and another man in Broad Street; I watched them in a crowd in front of a shop window, and saw the prisoner feel several gentlemen's pockets—they then went to London Wall, where some persons were assembled in front of a music shop—the man not in custody placed himself on the right side of a gentleman, and Lynch stood behind; they left in half-a-minute rather hurriedly—I spoke to Mr. Kerzey, who made a communication to me—the men proceeded to Spitalfields, where I saw Burroughs, and told him the two men I wanted, and at that time we saw them crossing the road—Burroughs went one way and I went another, to each end of a court which goes from Fashion Street to Flower and Dean Street—Burroughs took Drissell, but he succeeded in getting away; the mob was so great that I was obliged to let him go to save myself from being injured.

JOHN BURROUGHS (Policeman H R 23). On 26th August I was on duty in Commercial Street, Spitalfields—Downs spoke to me, and I saw the prisoner and another man crossing Fashion Street—I took the prisoner and asked him if he had anything about him—he said "No"—I found this watch (produced) in his trousers pocket.

ALEXANDER HENRY KERZEY . I am an architect's assistant, of Moorgate Street—about 1.30, on this afternoon, Downs spoke to me, and I missed my watch; this is it—it was in a side pocket loose, with a chain—the bow was twisted off and put back into my pocket; not left hanging.

Prisoner's Defence. I met a man in London Wall, about 2.30, who gave me a handkerchief and asked me to take care of it for him and he would give me a few halfpence. I did not know what was in it. When he saw the policeman he ran away; I did not run because I had done nothing.— GUILTY . He was further charged with a previous conviction at Clerkenwell in November, 1870, to which he

PLEADED GUILTY.**— Seven Years Penal Servitude.

724. JOHN CONNOR (28) , Stealing a basket, a screw-driver, and other tools of Henry Snowden, and four metal taps of George Crabb.

MR. BROMBY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS the Defence.

ROBERT OUTRAM (City Policeman 175). On the morning of 24th September, about 5 o'clock, I heard a noise in Hamsell Street, and saw the prisoner coming from a hoarding carrying on his back a carpenter's basket of tools—I stopped him; told him we were police officers, and asked him what he had got in the basket?—he said "My tools, I am a carpenter, and am going to work over the water"—I said "What does the basket contain?"—he said "A plane and a saw"—I said "One plane?"—he said "Yes"—I

looked in the basket and found these two planes and these brass taps—Olley said "Where did you bring these from?"—he said "I took them from my job last night, and was going to take them back this morning" I—I said "Where do you live?"—he said "131, Upper White Street"—we went there, but he could not show me where he lived, and I took him to the station—I found an address on him where he was known, also a duplicate relating to some tools stolen on the 23rd—the basket contained two saws, two planes, some chisels and other tools; they were given up.

Cross-examined. He said at the station that he did not steal them himself, they were given to him by another man over the hoarding.

GEORGE OLLEY (City Policeman 646). I was with Outram—I asked the prisoner where he got the taps—he said he brought them home from where he was at work in Westminster Bridge Road, and was taking them back, and they were the plumber's property.

CHARLES BROWN . I am a watchman in Hamsell Street—some houses are being built there with a hoarding round them—on the morning of 27th September I saw a basket come over the hoarding; the prisoner came over after it, and in five or six minutes I saw two policemen bringing him back—I picked up this tap (produced) where the basket fell, and gave it to the foreman when he came at 6 o'clock.

HENRY SNOWDEN . I am a carpenter—I was at work for Mr. Crabb at these buildings—I left all my tools there at 5.30, and missed them and the basket next morning—they have been given up to me.

GEORGE WRIGHT . I am foreman to Mr. Crabb—these taps are his, and were left safe at 6 o'clock; I missed them next morning.

GUILTY .

He was further charged with having been before convicted at this Court in jury 1870, to which he

PLEADED GUILTY.**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude ,

725. ELLEN SMITH (34) , Robbery, with violence, on Caroline Somers, and dealing 1s. 6d., her money.

MR. DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution.

CAROLINE SOMERS . I am the wife of John Somers, of Charles Street, City Road—on 19th October, a little after 12 p.m., I was going home, and the prisoner came up to me and said "Will you tip up that?"—I said "What?"—she said "That money"—I said "I have no money"—she caught hold of my wrist, and one of her companions held an arm while she forced 1s. 6d. out of my hand, and then said "Now, come on, I have enough for another pot"—I followed her and gave her into custody.

Prisoner. Q. Were there not two women with me looking on the ground for my money? A. No; I did not stoop and pick up some of it.

WILLIAM WITHERS . I saw the prosecutrix running after the prisoner—I followed and took her—1s. was found in her pocket.

Prisoner's Defence. I was drunk and dropped some money, and was looking for it—I took no money out of her hand.

GUILTY .

She was further charged with having been convicted of highway robbery in May, 1865, in the name of Ellen Kenny, and sentenced to Eight Years' Penal Servitude, to which she

PLEADED GUILTY.*— Twelve Years' Penal Servitude.

726. GEORGE MINNEY (19) , Feloniously cutting and wounding Archibald Small, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm. Second Count. To resist his lawful apprehension.

MR. MOODY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. L. GLYN the Defence.

ARCHIBALD SMALL (Policeman B 258). About 12.30 on the morning of

7th October I was on duty in Peter Street, Westminster, and saw the prisoner with his coat off fighting with another man—when he saw me he ran down the court—I followed him to take him in custody—he had been causing a disturbance all the evening—I caught him in a passage at the back of 13, Peter Street, but he got away, and got in at the back door; I got it half open, and he put his back to the door—he halloaed out "Come down and bring a stick," and then he said "You b—, if you put a hand on me, I will put a knife into you," and he put a knife into my wrist—the door was then shut—I waited till my sergeant came round; we then went in and searched the house, but did not find the prisoner—as we came out I lifted up the cellar-flap and found him there—he said that it was not he who caused the disturbance in the street, it was several others—a window was broken in the house; I did not open it—I am certain my hand was cut with a knife and not by the broken window.

Cross-examined. There was a crowd in the street, and when they saw me they fled in all directions—it was some time after that that I saw the prisoner again—nobody ran into the house but the prisoner; he was the only one who went down the court—the prisoner was behind the door, but I was half-way in and could see him—he denied cutting me.

Re-examined. I actually saw him inflict the wound on my hand—there was nobody to do it but him.

GEORGE PEARCE . I am a surgeon to the police—I examined Small, and found a superficial wound on his hand, extending about two inches along the wrist—it had been bleeding very much—his shirt-sleeve was saturated with blood—he was disabled for a week—a knife would inflict such a wound.

GUILTY on the Second Count. — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.

727. THOMAS REEVES (28), and JULIA BEDDING (24) , Feloniously assaulting Arthur Pearman, with intent to rob him.

MR. HARRINGTON conducted the Prosecution; and MR. TAYLOR the Defence.

ARTHUR PEARMAN . I live in Red Lion Yard, Gray's Inn Road—on 1st October, about 12.20, I was in Chiswell Street with a friend—the prisoner Redding went up to my friend and struck him—he turned round and Reeves struck him likewise—I turned to pull my friend away, and Reeves struck me on my mouth—three or four persons came round and I lost my watch, chain—a policeman came up and I gave the prisoners in custody—Redding tried to pull Reeves away from the policeman.

Cross-examined. My friend was Mr. Bow, I was just behind him—there were about four of us altogether; there were not eight—I had been to pay my quarter's money to the society, and the others were clubmen who had been to the same place—I did not hear Bow use a bad expression—Redding was a little the worse for liquor—it was Reeves who snatched my watch—I said so just now—they pulled my coat open and pulled a button off—I put my hand like this to save my face; I had so many hitting me, first on one side and then the other—some of them tried to snatch at my chain; they were all associates, I believe, and Reeves tried to snatch it a second time—my intention was to tell the Magistrate so—Bow did not appear the next morning.

Re-examined. I have no doubt that Reeves snatched at my chain—I saw Redding in the crowd, but I do not know that she touched me.

RICHARD WATTS . I live at 2, Princess Row, St. James's—I was with Pearman on 1st October, walking a little behind him, and saw Redding

strike Mr. Bow, and then Reeves struck him—Pearman got hold of Bow's arm, and then Reeves attacked him, and several of the prisoners' friends came up and tried to knock his hat over his eyes, and knocked him against the shutters—a constable came, and Redding got hold of him by the back of his neck and tried to pull him down.

Cross-examined. She did not like Reeves being taken in custody—Pearman and Bow were the only persons with me; I know of no others, but we had been four—I had not had a drain of beer at the club, nor even any tea.

MARK BOW . I am a farrier, of 20, Richmond Street, St. Luke's—I was with Watts and Pearman—Redding came up and struck me on my face; I took no notice, and she struck me again—I turned round, and Reeves struck me—Pearman then came up and they struck him—two men afterwards struck me, but I do not know who they were.

Cross-examined. I did not speak to Redding—there were only three of us; we had just bid one good-night.

WILLIAM KELSEY (Policeman G 117). I was on duty in Chiswell Street—heard a great disturbance, hastened to the spot, and saw Reeves violently assaulting Pearman—I took hold of him, and the prosecutor gave him in charge—as I took hold of him, Redding got round my neck and endeavoured to pull me away from him—eleven or twelve of the prisoner's the prosecutor endeavoured to rescue them from me—I saw Reeves pulling the prosecutor about; she was very violent, indeed.

Cross-examined. I say ten or twelve of the prisoners' associates, because they were men of the same class, and they all took their part—I was not told that some one had said something filthy to the woman and that she struck him—the men did not say a word to me, they only shoved me about and tried to get Reeves from me.

FREDERICK JOHNSON (Policeman G 112). I saw Reeves pulling the prosecutor about—I took Reeves, and Redding came and dealt me three or four blows on the side of my face—I pushed her away, and she came back and put her arm round my neck, and I was thrown down three or four times—while I was on the ground somebody made a kick at me, but did not reach me—I got assistance and took the prisoners to the station.

HUGH THOMPSON (Policeman G R 14). I saw Redding in the road—she said she would go to the station with me—she was more excited than intoxicated.

NOT GUILTY .

728. THOMAS REEVES and JULIA REDDING were again indicted for Unlawfully assaulting Arthur Pearman and occasioning actual bodily harm, to which

REEVES PLEADED GUILTY .— Six Weeks' Imprisonment; and MR. HARRINGTON offered no evidence against REDDING.

NOT GUILTY .

729. AMY MILTON (27) , Feloniously cutting and wounding John Milton, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm.

MR. COLLINS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. HARRINGTON the Defence.

JOHN MILTON . I am the prisoner's husband—on a Tuesday night, at 7.15 p.m., I was standing at the bar of a public-house—the prisoner came in saying "Revenge is sweet," and struck me in the jaw with a knife—I said "Oh!" and then I got another one and fell, and was picked up and carried to the hospital, and was there a week—I had had no quarrel with her.

Cross-examined. She had not the appearance of having been drinking—she did not appear very much excited.

DANIEL COLLINS (Policeman B 155). I was in Tothill Street, Westminster—a soldier told me something, and I went to King's Head Court, and saw the prisoner with a number of very low characters—I told her I should take her in custody for wounding her husband—she said "Allow me to tie my garter"—she went into a doorway, and I saw a knife in her right hand, which she tried to pass away to a woman in the crowd—I think she took it from under her apron—this is it (produced)—it is a common table knife—I took it from her, and she said "That is the knife I stabbed him with"—she had been drinking.

WILLIAM BURRIDGE . I am a private in the Coldstream Guards—I was in a public-house in the Broadway, and saw the prisoner pass me—she returned with a knife in her hand, and made several plunges with it at her husband, after which she said "Revenge is sweet."

FRANCIS BUTLER . I was house-physician to the hospital when Melton was brought in, suffering from an incised and punctured wound below the right ear about an inch and a half long and the same deep—there was also a superficial wound on his left cheek, extending from the angle of the eye to the centre of the radius of the lower jaw—the wound in the neck was serious—it was in the neighbourhood of the external carotid artery—this knife is exactly the sort of weapon which would produce it.

Cross-examined. It was only dangerous from its proximity to the artery.

GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.

730. FREDERICK CORRIE (23), FREDERICK LATHAM (23), and ELLEN CORRIE (24) , Breaking and entering the warehouse of William Glenn Evestaff, and stealing therein 1000 pianoforte strings, his property.

MR. M. WILLIAMS conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN STRONG . I am foreman to John Evestaff, of Great Russell Street, who has a pianoforte factory—the male prisoners were employed there—on the evening of 14th September I left the premises locked up—next morning I went there, and saw some keys on the ground—the door was broken open, and inside the door I saw 11 sets of covered strings placed ready for removal—the counting-house door was broken open, and 18 sets of covered strings and 12 fretwork fronts were missing—I have since seen the property, and identified it as my master's—this bed-key (produced) corresponds with the marks on the yard door.

WILLIAM HENRY ATWELL . I am assistant to Mr. Harrison, a pawnbroker—on 16th September Frederick Corrie pledged six fretwork fronts in the name of Kite, and afterwards some sets of covered strings—on the 16th, Ellen Corrie came and brought some fret, and then went out and fetched Frederick Corrie.

WILLIAM DANIEL MAY (Police Inspector E). I went with Fordham to West Street, Somer's Town, and saw the two male prisoners in the street—I took Corrie, and Fordham took Latham—I told Corrie he was apprehended for stealing strings and frets—he said, "I don't know anything about this job"—they were taken to the station.

BENJAMIN FORDHAM (Detective Officer E). On 27th September, I went to 23, Sandwich Street about 11 A.M.—Ellen Corrie came there, and I took her in custody, and told her the charge—she said, "So help me God, I did not pawn them, Latham's son pawned them—I took Latham at his lodging—he said he was innocent.

Ellen Corrie. I did not say that, you are a false man for saying it; I pledged them myself.

WILLIAM GLENN EVESTAFF . I am a pianoforte manufacturer, and have a factory in Euston Road—Latham came into my employment on 1st June, and Corrie was employed by him for the last three weeks—on 7th September, I paid Latham hit wages for the week—he absented himself after the 14th and was not paid—I never saw him again—I identify these articles, they are of a peculiar manufacture—Latham had been employed upon them, he could not have failed to recognise them—it would be difficult for one man to carry them, the strings would weigh 90 or 100 lbs., and there is a large parcel of frets.

Frederick Latham. Did not I come to the workshop the week before I left and tell you I was ill, and not able to go on with my work? A. Yes, on the Thursday; I went out of town on the Friday, but I heard you had been at work.

JOSEPH APPLEBY . I live at 83, Sandwich Street, Burton Crescent—I am a widower and keep a lodging-house—Latham and a woman took my first-floor back, and the Corries the first-floor front—Latham told me he was working at Mr. Evestaffs ten years, and that Corrie had worked for him three years—on 15th September, about 3.30, I heard some one come in—I got up and called out "Who is there?"—Ellen Corrie said "It is me"—I got up and chained the door—at 6.45, I heard the bell ring, got up and saw Corrie and Latham at the door—I went to the door and found one of them had opened it with a key, but could not get it open for the chain—they were pushing in some pianoforte strings tied up in brown paper—one of them said "Open the door"—I opened it, and asked them what they meant by bringing work into my house on a Sunday morning, as my house was a respectable house, and I did not allow it—Latham said he was getting the work ready to take to the shop on Monday morning—they were both loaded with goods—they went up stairs and came down for a second lot—Latham went out with them in the evening—I knew him as Lester—I never saw him afterwards, he never came back—they had their meals together.

Frederick Corrie's Defence. On the Saturday night I met a man named Pearman, who I knew by drinking with him; he asked me where Latham lived. I told him. He asked me if he would buy anything, I said "I do not know." I went down to see whether he was in, to get my money. He said that his master had not paid him, and that he could not pay me, and I left.

Latham's Defence. Corrie called at my father's place, and I told him I could not pay him. He said that he had met a man who was enquiring about me, who had some pianoforte work to sell. I slept at my father's with Corrie, as it was too late to go home. We went home on Sunday morning for our dirty linen, and met a tall man with a bundle under his arm, who asked me if he could leave the things there till Monday morning.

Ellen Corrie's Defence. These prisoners asked me to take the articles to pledge. I said "Yes," if Corrie went with me, as I did not like to take men's work into a pawnshop. I did not know that it was stolen, or I would not have gone. We paid 5s. for rent out of the 15s. we pawned them for. We did not like to go home till we had paid our rent.

GUILTY of receiving.

Frederick and Ellen Corrie were further charged with farmer convictions at Clerkenwell in November, 1871, to which they

PLEADED GUILTY.**— Seven Years Penal Servitude each.

LATHAM*†— Five Years Penal Servitude.

731. JOHN BALL (21) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Warwick Augustus Hunt, and stealing therein a watch, two chains, and a locket, his property.

MR. LEWIS conducted the Prosecution.

WARWICK AUGUSTUS HUNT . I am a clerk in the War Office, and live at 3, York Place, Baker Street—I have been married more than three years—on 16th September my wife was at Scarborough—I was standing at my own door, smoking, and saw the prisoner pass—he said "Are you in want of a groom, sir?"—I said "No"—he said that he had been living in the service of the Hon. Mrs. Something, and was then living in the Mews opposite—he left me, and I said that if I heard of a situation I would send to him—I opened my door with a latch-key, and I do not remember taking it out—I went up stairs to bed, and put my watch on a small table by the side of the bed—I awoke next morning at 5.45, and found my dressing-room in partial disorder—the wardrobe was open, and some of my clothes were lying about the floor—I missed my watch, and my jewel-box from a drawer—it contained two chains, and some lockets and breastpins—I also missed a locket containing the hair and a photograph of my deceased mother, which was on a chest of drawers—I raised an alarm, and had the police sent for—I had not invited the prisoner into my bed-room, and given him any of these things; that I solemnly swear—the value of the property I missed is over 200l.

The prisoner cross-examined the witness as to whether he had not invited him to his room for an immoral purpose, which the witness strongly denied.

MORRIS TARRANT (Policeman D 260). About 6 o'clock on the morning of 17th September I was called to York Place, Baker Street, and found the things in the prosecutor's dressing-room all scattered about.

HENRY EWING . I am coachman to Mr. Garsten—the prisoner lodges in the same Mews with me—he was out of employment for three or four months preceding his arrest.

HENRY GREENHILL . I am assistant to William James, a pawnbroker—the prisoner pledged this coat and waistcoat there on 17th September for 16s., in the name of John Ward, 16, Great York Mews.

Prisoner. I gave my name and my right address, John Ball. Witness. No, it was John Ward—I do not think I could have mistaken Ball for Ward—this address is right.

GEORGE KING (Detective Officer). Between 12 and 1 o'clock on the afternoon of 18th September I went with the prosecutor to York Mews—the prisoner came home, and I saw him in a bed-room—I told him I was a policeman, and was going to take him for stealing a gold watch and a dressing-case containing jewellery—he said nothing—I took off his scarf, and found this pin in it—I said "Do you wish to give an account of how you got this pin?"—he said nothing—Mr. Hunt said "That pin is my property"—I found on him 9l. 10s. also 4d., and an Australian sovereign—I had previously been into his bed-room, and found a duplicate for the clothes, and also a pair of trousers and another scarf—I said "Do you wish to give any information about this property?"—he said "No, I know nothing about it"—I said "You must know something, because the sovereign was found on you which was on the watch"—he said "I know nothing about them, except that he gave them to me"—I said "When?"—he said when he had been in the house—the keys of the drawers and of the dressing-case were in his pocket, and this latch-key—he was wearing a new suit of clothes—I said "Do you wish to say anything more about the property?"—he said "No, I know nothing."

Prisoner. I was not wearing a new suit of clothes.

WALTER AUGUSTUS HUNT (re-examined). These articles are mine—this Australian sovereign was safe on my watch chain when I went to bed on the night of the 16th, and various other coins, all of which are missing.

GUILTY .— Ten Tears' Penal Servitude.

732. THOMAS HOLIDAY (20) , Stealing 3l. 2s. 10d. of William Augustus Chaplin, and another, his masters.

MR. BRINDLEY conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM WOODLEY . I am a carman in the employ of Messrs. Chaplin & Home, of Hamborough Wharf, Thames Street—the prisoner was my mate, the boy in charge of the van with me—on 15th September I collected 3l. 2s. 10d., but was out too late to pay in the money—next morning I started again too early to pay in the money—the prisoner started with me, and I said, "If you have not had your breakfast will you take this money over to Hamborough Wharf?"—I counted the money into his hand—he said "That is quite right," and I gave him my purse to put it in, and the two sheets—he never came back; I waited till 12.45, when I went to the wharf and found he had not been there, and that the money was not paid in—I tried to find him but could not.

Prisoner. Q. Did not I say I was going to my breakfast when I left you? A. No.

WILLIAM HENRY MEAD . I am manager to Chaplin & Horne, of Hamborough Wharf—the prisoner was in their service about six weeks—he paid me some money on Friday evening, but he did not apply for his pay on the Friday following the 16th; he had not been there—this money has not been paid in—I gave information to the police, and he was taken.

WILLIAM TURNBULL . I am cashier to the prosecutors—this money should have been paid to me—I have not received it.

ENOCH EMERY (City Detective). On 19th September I went in search of the prisoner, and on Monday, the 21st, I met him in the Borough, about 4.30—I told him I was a policeman, and he would be charged with stealing 3l. 2s. 10d. of his employers, Chaplin & Co.—he said "I have not had the money"—I searched him and found 6d.—I made inquiries at his father's, and found he had not been there.

SUSAN ELIZABETH HOLIDAY . I am the wife of Thomas Holiday, of 3, Trinity Street, Southwark, and am the prisoner's stepmother; he lived in the same house with me—on Wednesday night, 16th October, he came home rather late, and on Thursday night he came in between 12 and 1—I said "Thomas, I understand you have got some of Messrs. Chaplin's money entrusted to your care"—he said "Who said so?"—I said "I have had a letter, if you have got it pay it at once, or hand it to me"—he said "I don't care a d—for any one."

Prisoner. Q. Did not I say I never had the money? A. Yes—I said "I had heard, on very good authority, that you have," and you said "Let them prove it"—you said that you had not been well; you were not laid up at home—you came home at night and took your food as if you were going to work.

Prisoner's Defence. I did not go to work because I was ill, and I did not go home because I was more comfortable where I was.

GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his youth,

Eight Months' Imprisonment.

733. JOHN SMITH (24), and JAMES PEARSON (29) , Stealing one purse, four postage labels, 1l. 13s. 9d. in money, and two Prussian notes, and 3l. of Harriet Im Thurn, from her person, to which

PEARSON PLEADED GUILTY .

MR. A. B. KELLY conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM OSBORNE (City Detective). On 7th October, about 11.30 a.m., I was with Westwood in Fenchurch Street, and saw the prisoners walking towards the railway station—I saw a lady coming in the opposite direction; the prisoners stepped and followed her to the end of Fenchurch Street, where she was waiting to cross—Pearson then went to the side of an elderly lady, not the prosecutrix, and I saw him withdraw his hand from the folds of her dress—the first lady then walked to Dean's, Monument House, and they waited for a quarter of an hour—she came out, and they followed her to Cheapside, where there was a crowd looking at Bennett's clock—Smith placed himself on her right side, and Pearson covered him—I saw Smith withdraw his hand from her dress and give something to Pearson, who ran down Ironmonger Lane, and looked at something—Westwood and I ran down King Street, into Gresham Street, and the prisoners went up Basing-hall Street, into Fore Street—I took Pearson—he said "What are you going to do?"—I said "To take you in custody for picking pockets"—he struggled violently—I put my hand in his coat pocket and found this purse, containing two 10 tahler notes, a sovereign, half-a-crown, three sixpences, a 3d. piece, and a return ticket to Loughton—Smith refused his address—he said he did not wish to disgrace his friends.

HARRIET IM THURN . I am single, and live with my mother at Loughton—on 7th October I was in King William Street, and then in Cheapside—there was a crowd—I put my hand in my pocket and missed my purse, containing two 10 tahler notes and other money, and a half return ticket.

JOHN WESTWOOD (City Policeman). I was with Osborne, and can corroborate the whole of his evidence—I took Smith, and said "Do you know what this is for?"—he said "What?"—I said "For picking pockets"—he said "All right."

Smith. I did not answer at all.

Smith called.

JAMES PEARSON (the prisoner). Smith did not steal the purse, I stole it, and put it in my pocket, and never disturbed it till the policeman took it—he was with me, but he did not know what I was doing—I am a stranger to him—I asked him to show me about the City to get work, and he did so—I have pleaded guilty, but he knows nothing of it.

SMITH— GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.

PEARSON.**— Five Years' Penal Servitude.

NEW COURT.—Wednesday, October 30th, 1872.

Before Mr. Justice Mellor.

734. MARY ANN MOORE (44) , Feloniously killing and slaying Georgina Peel.

MR. PLATT. conducted the Prosecution; and MR. LAXTON the Defence.

WILLIAM PERRY . I am a plumber of 18, Suffolk Road, Dalston—about 3.45 on the day in question, I cannot say the date, I was in St. Thomas's Passage, and heard a row between the prisoner and Georgina Peel—Mrs. Peel was the worse for liquor of the two—they had both been drinking

together in the morning as well as in the afternoon—Mrs. Peel called the prisoner a b—y rotten liar, and the prisoner shoved her up against a high fence with her hand, and. said "I ain't rotten, and never was rotten"—she did not fall, she only rolled against the fence and then walked away—the prisoner followed her, struck her, and she fell against, a barrow—she got up and said "Pray don't strike me any more, I am too drunk"—the prisoner hit her again on the head, and she fell against the upright flag stone of the urinal at the public-house—she then rolled over, and never moved or spoke afterwards—two men picked her up and took her into her own house—the prisoner lives in the same house in the front parlour—as the deceased was being carried in the prisoner was rolling her sleeves up, and she said she would kill her or anybody else that called her out of her name—two men who took some brandy to her said that she was dead—I saw no more.

Cross-examined. They both lived in one of my father's houses—they were always on the best of terms—the prisoner Is a widow and a tailoress; she has one child—Mrs. Peel gave her mind to drink very much, and when drunk she was very quarrelsome—she induced the prisoner to drink with her sometimes—Mrs. Peel did not strike at the prisoner; she wanted to get away—she did not hold up her fist—the deceased was not rolling about, but she had had as much as she could manage to walk along with—she was not very steady.

ELIZABETH HORLEY . I am married, and live at 2, Duke Street—on Monday afternoon, 16th September, there was a quarrel between the prisoner and deceased about a man named Taylor in St. Thomas's Passage, and, after the quarrel, Mrs. Peel called the, prisoner a rotten whore—the prisoner said she would not be called such, names by her or any other, woman, and struck her twice—I cannot tell where the blow fell, it was so quickly done—Mrs. Peel ran behind a barrow, and said "Don't hit me, Moore, because I am drunk—she reeled from behind the barrow, and the prisoner hit her again; it appeared to me to be on the side of the head, and she fell down flat on her right side heavily—she did not speak or move—I thought she had fainted; the blow seemed so slight you would not think she was dead—she was tipsy—they were always good friends, and she lived in the house—they had been friendly to half an hour before—the deceased was married.

Cross-examined. She has one son married—she is a respectable woman in her way, and very well conducted, not quarrelling with people—I have known her to be up at 4 0'clock in the morning at needle work—Mrs. Peel was of a quarrelsome disposition, and used to get tipsy—the prisoner never got tipsy except when Mrs. Peel coaxed her to drink—she said that morning "No, Peel, I have got to get my work done; I cannot come out"—the window was open—followed the deceased into the house, and the prisoner Had her hand in hers—she said "No, Mrs. Horley, I have seen her so before; I am sure she is not dead"—she was trying to do her all the good she could—she appeared to be very sorry; tears were rolling down her eyes—the deceased may have fallen from drink, the blow was so slight—I live directly opposite, and saw it.

COURT. Q. Did the fell follow immediately after the blow? A. Yes.

ROBERT PEEL . I am a labourer, of 25, Wellington Street—the deceased was my wife—she was in good health when I left her on this day at a little after 5 o'clock in the morning—when I came home between 4 and 5 o'clock I found her lying dead on the floor—she was not given to drink that I am

aware of—I am out early in the morning and home late at night—I have never heard of any quarrel between them before.

AMBROSE MOORE (Policeman K 587). I took the prisoner on 16th September about 6.30—I told her the charge—she said "I did not do it purposely, policeman; I pushed her and she fell, and I am very sorry for it"—she appeared sober.

Cross-examined. This was about half an hour afterwards—she appeared sobered by the occurrence.

DAVID JAMES . I am a surgeon, of North Street—on 16th September I was called to 25, Wellington Street, and saw Mrs. Peel lying dead on the kitchen floor—the body was quite warm—I afterwards made a post-mortem examination, and found extensive extravasation of blood on the base of the brain, and a slight swelling under the left ear, produced probably by a fall or a blow—the other parts of the body were quite healthy.

Cross-examined. If she fell against a flagstone that would cause the appearances, or slipping in the street would do it—a fall would cause it as well as a blow.

GUILTY under great provocation. Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury. — Five Months' Imprisonment.

735. WILLIAM KING (22) , Feloniously carnally knowing and abusing Harriett Flood, aged 9 years.

MR. GRIFFITHS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. F.H. LEWIS the Defence.

GUILTY .— Twelve Years' Penal Servitude.

736. SARAH GAUNT (20) , Feloniously attempting to murder John Gaunt.

MR. GRIFFITHS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. BRINDLEY the Defence.

JOSEPH KNIGHT . I live at 14, Dunford Place, Kentish Town, and an toll-collector on the Regent's Canal—on Saturday, 14th September, about 8.10, I was at my office at Paddington and heard a splash in the water—I ran out and saw an infant floating in the water—I got a garden-rake, got a child out, and gave it to a constable—it was in the water two minutes or two minutes and a half after I heard the splash—it floated on top of the water—it seemed hearty and well—I did not look to see if any one was about; my attention was attracted to save the child's life.

Cross-examined. I did not see it fall in the water—there was no stone to make it sink—it was near the bridge—it could not have fallen from the bridge without being thrown in—I can be seen in my office by any one from the bridge or the towing-path—if thrown over by accident it would not have floated to where I found it—my door was open—the child was about a yard from the bridge.

Re-examined. A person standing where I think it was thrown from could not see me in my office.

JAMES COLLOP (Policeman X 188). I heard a child crying near the canal and found it in Knight's arms—I took it to Dr. Westmacott—I saw the same child before the Magistrate.

MARY WILKINSON . I am a nurse in the lying-in ward of Paddington Workhouse—on 19th August the prisoner came into the workhouse with the child; she remained there till Saturday, 14th September, when she left at 2.30 with the child—I dressed it, and recognised it after it was found in the water.

Cross-examined. I was in charge of the prisoner the whole time she was in the ward and the baby too—she nursed it and was kind to it; she gave it the breast as often as it required it, and she paid every attention to it—it is not usual to get friends to fetch women from the work house, but it has been made the rule since this that every girl who is confined in the work-house shall not leave till her friends fetch her—the prisoner quite twenty.

COURT. Q. Then she went away without any one coming to fetch her? A. Yes, she said she was going to meet her cousin at Hammersmith—she made up her mind to go all in a moment, and had the child dressed—they give forty-eight hours' notice before they leave the workhouse—she told me she had written to her cousin to meet her, and she wrote, a letter, but whether it was to her cousin I do not know—she got a girl to write the letter, and I posted it.

JOHN GUYS WESTMACOTT (M.R.C.S.) I live at 19, St. Mary's Terrace, Paddington—I examined this child; it was not quite dry, and was wrapped up in a blanket—I ordered it to be taken to the station, and gave a certificate to take it to the workhouse—next day, Sunday, I sent for the prisoner—I examined her breasts, and asked her when she nursed it last—she said on Saturday evening at 7 o'clock—there was no milk in her breasts, it was quite suppressed.

Cross-examined. The milk does go sometimes from different causes; fright, and so on—I examined her the following day, and still there was no milk—suppression of the milk very often affects the mind, but suppression is rather an uncommon thing to come on suddenly—I do not think it would affect her mind—I observed nothing the matter with her mind—I cannot say what state of mind she was in—I do not know that she had been wandering about the streets for five or six hours—she was in her right mind when I examined her.

COURT. Q. Suppose she had nursed the, child up to 7 o'clock, would you expect her mind to be affected an hour and a half afterwards? A. No.

GEORGE HERBERT . (Detective Officer X). On Sunday evening, about 12.30, I went to 25, Essex Place, Hammersmith, and saw the prisoner in a back room—I told her I was a detective, and should arrest her for attempting to murder her child by throwing it into the Regent's Canal on Saturday night—she said "My child! you have made a mistake, my child id dead; it cannot be my child"—I said "it is very fortunate the child is not dead; it was found on Saturday afternoon in the Regent's Canal; here is a porter outside from the workhouse, if you wish me to call him I will do so"—I do not think she made any reply—I said she would have to go with me to the station—I do not think she made any reply—her cousin, who was there with her husband, said "You don't mean to say that, sir"—I said "Yes, that is the truth"—I said "Were not you aware that the was living?"—she said "No, she wrote to me and told me that it was dead, and I wrote to the mother to that effect," meaning the prisoner's mother, "and she will be up to-morrow"—the prisoner replied "You did not tell me that mother was coming to-morrow."

Cross-examined. I went to the house with the porter—I did not take him in because I thought she would know him—I did not want to pump her with a few questions to get up a case against her—I took the porter to identify her—I believe I told the Magistrate that the prisoner said her child was dead; I signed my deposition, and it was read over to me—(The witness's

deposition did not mention it)—it is not an entire mistake on my part to say that she said it was dead—I have not confused the cousin's statement and the prisoner's—I heard my deposition read over, and signed it, and did not notice that important omission—she said she would go quietly with me.

MARY ANN ROUDEN . I live with my husband at 22, Desborough Please Harrow Road—on Saturday evening, 24th December, the prisoner, whom I have known about eight months, came to me and asked me whether I would go in to her mistress after her money—I said "Yes," and said "Where is your child, Ann?" she said "At my cousin's, all right"—that was between 8 and 9 o'clock—I know the spot where the child was found, it is about half-a-mile from where I met her—she said that her cousin lived at Hammersmith—I left her at my door, and went after her money, and just as I had got it, the cousin came to my shop, and I had a conversation with her, and in consequence of what she said, I spoke to the prisoner, who was outside my door, where I had left her—I said, "Ann, where is your baby? tell me"—she was always called Ann—she said it was dead in the workhouse, and they had kept her there till it was buried, and that was the reason she was there so long—her cousin then came out, and they went away together.

JANE DEX . I am the prisoner's cousin, and am the wife of James Dex—on 14th December, between 8 and 9 P.M., I was at Mrs. Rouden's looking for the prisoner—I saw her there standing outside, and said "Well, Sally, you might have let me know about this affair"—I meant her confinement, as she had never let me know about it—that is all I said then, and she went home to my house—it is not true that the baby was left at my house, I have never seen it at all—I had received a letter before this in the prisoner's writing—I have not got it; my children play with letters, and they get destroyed.

Cross-examined. I have known the prisoner some years; she is a girl of weak intellect—I have always found something strange when she has come to my place—she has very weak intellect—she was rather stupid, If you asked her a question she did not answer so quickly as she ought—she has an aunt in an asylum—I went to the workhouse, as we did not know when she was coming out—me and my husband would have met her, and taken her home with us, and then I am sure this would not have happened.

Witnesses for the Defence.

MARY GAUNT . I am the prisoner's mother, and live at St. Ives—her age is nineteen—her character is kind and humane, but she is curious, and has been of weak intellect at times from her childhood—she has been eighth or nine months in town in service.

THE REV. CHARLES DASHWOOD GOLDIE . I am the Vicar of St. Ives—I have known the prisoner's family six years—she was in my family about a month, during the illness of another servant, and bore a very good character indeed—she is kind and humane to children—there are several of her family who act in an unaccountable way.

Cross-examined by MR. GRIFFITHS. I should not like to say that there is insanity in the family—I last saw her eighteen months ago.

COURT. Q. You would not like to take upon yourself to say that she did not know the difference between right and wrong? A. No, but I think, she would very likely act impulsively without proper reason—T do not think she would steal anything without knowing it was stealing—I thinks her wandering about for five or six hours might have caused it.

NOT GUILTY .

737. WILLIAM WOOLF (25) , Feloniously killing and slaying Andrew Wickman.

MR. MOODY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. ST. AUBYN the Defence.

JOHN WINTER (Policeman H 244). On 2nd September, about 10.45 p.m., I was called to the White Bear public-house, St. George's-in-the-East, and saw Andrew Wickman bleeding from a wound in his breast—he pointed out the prisoner as having done it, and I took him in charge—he said "He struck me first, and I could not help it"—the deceased was drunk, and the prisoner was the worse for liquor—the sergeant received this knife from the prisoner.

CHARLOTTE BLAKELBY . I am single, and live at 27, Albert Street, Shadwell—I was in the White Bear, and saw Wickman there—the prisoner came in and called for a bottle of lemonade, and Wickman, who was standing outside in the street, hit the prisoner on the side of the head, and knocked his cap off—the prisoner then came into the bar, and hit him on the side of the head with his fist—Wickman then pulled off his coat to fight him, and was in the act of hitting him again when he called out "Oh, I am stabbed!"—I did not see the prisoner stab him—I saw blood flowing from his shirt—a constable came and took the prisoner.

FREDERICK MOORHOUSE (Police Sergeant H 10). I took the charge at the station; Wickman, who was sitting on a stool, bleeding from his left breast, said, in the prisoner's hearing, "I was standing inside the White Bear public-house, St. George's Street, East, about ten minutes back; we had been drinking together, we quarrelled, and he took out a knife and stabbed me"—I said to the prisoner, "You hear what the prosecutor has said against you"—he said "Yes, he struck me last voyage, and again to-night; we have been shipmates together five or six years, and when he struck me to-night I stabbed him, I could not help it"—I asked him if he heard the prisoner say that he had struck him—he said "Yes, I did, and I will skin the b—when I get over this"—the prisoner, addressing Wickman, said "I could not help it, I am very sorry for it, Peter"—I asked the prisoner for the knife, and he handed me this knife (produced) it was shut.

JOHN COOK . I am house surgeon at the London Hospital—the deceased was brought there on 3rd September, about 12.30—I examined him, and found a stab through his left breast into the lung—he remained in the hospital till 26th September, when he died of pleurisy, occasioned by the wound—I made a post-mortem examination, and found that the knife had actually penetrated the lung; it would not require great force.

SUSAN BONKEN . I am the wife of John Bonken, who keeps the White Bear—I was in the bar on the evening of 2nd September—the prisoner had a bottle of lemonade in the bar—while he was drinking it the deceased came in and struck him on the side of the head and knocked his cap off—the deceased was pulling off his coat to hit him again, and before he had time to do so the prisoner stabbed him—I did not see the blow, but I saw the blood on his left breast—I did not see the knife till the prisoner produced it—I rang, and had the police called in.

Cross-examined. I cannot say whether the prisoner had the knife in his hand before; I did not see it.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. I never had a quarrel with him. I saw him in the White Bear when I went in; I did not speak to him. A girl asked me for a drink; I gave her some lemonade. As I paid for it, and was feeling for my money, Wickman struck me in the face. I fell

backwards, and my hand being on my knife as he struck me again, I pulled it out and stabbed him. I next found myself held by a policeman. The policeman asked me for the knife and I gave it to him.

GUILTY, under great provocation. — Two Years' Imprisonment.

FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, October 30, 1872.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

738. JOHN COGGER (33) , PLEADED GUILTY to stealing 10 waistcoats and 25 shirts of Francis Cook and others, his masters.— Recommended to mercy.—Eight Months' Imprisonment. And

739. ROBERT BROWN , to stealing a watch of Charles Bennett, from his person, having been before convicted.**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

740. WILLIAM BAYS (49) , Feloniously breaking and entering the shop of John Mullen, and stealing three coats, his property.

MR. A. B. KELLY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. WARNER SLEIGH the Defence

JOHN FUSSELL (City Policeman 163). I was on duty in Telegraph Place on the night of 8th October—I went from there to Token house Yard—I heard a noise, and went back to Telegraph Place—I remained there about half a minute, and saw the prisoner leave No. 5, Mr. Mullen's shop, With a bundle under his arm—I followed him into a urinal in Moorgate Street, and asked him what he had—he said "What do you mean?"—I said "The bundle you have got under your arm"—I examined the bundle; it contained three coats and one waistcoat—I took him to the police-station.

Cross-examined. I was 21 yards from him when I saw him go into the urinal—I am sure he had a bundle under his arm when he went in.

JOHN MULLEN . I am a tailor, at 5, Telegraph Place—I left my shop on the night of 6th October perfectly safe—on coming the next morning, I found the door burst open, and glass and frame and everything carried away, and 20l. worth of property gone, these coats amongst them.

CHARLES MILLARD . I am potman at the Butler's Head tavern, Telegraph Street—on the night of 6th October I saw some persons about the place.

Cross-examined. I saw three men outside the house—they had no bundle—one was about twenty-five or thirty—they were dressed respectably, and were loafing about without any apparent purpose.

Prisoner. Q. Am I like one of the persons at all? A. I don't recognise you as one of them—I gave information to the police at 12.40—I saw a man leave the shop with a bundle—the distance was too far for me to recognise any one—I don't know whether the policeman saw down the court.

Prisoner. I went into the urinal, and there was another man there; as the policeman came in the other man left, and left the bundle there.

JOHN FUSSELL (recalled). There was another man in the urinal prisoner said it was the other man who had left the bundle—I saw the prisoner come out of the house with the bundle—the other man was taller and younger—I did not lose sight of the prisoner between his coming out of the house and entering the urinal.

NOT GUILTY .

741. RICHARD THOMAS (51) Unlawfully and maliciously publishing a defamatory libel of and concerning Edward Richard Green.

MR. BESLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. WARNER SLEIGH the Defence

MR. BESLEY proposed to offer no evidence, a satisfactory apology having been

made by the defendant. THE COURT stating that, if no evidence were given, the witnesses would be dealt with on their own recognisances, MR. BESLEY called the witnesses into the box.

EDWARD RICHARD GREEN . I am a tobacconist, and live at 84, Bishop's Road—I was present at a Vestry at Paddington when some letter was read—I never saw the letter.

FRANK DETHERIDGE . I am clerk to the Vestry of Paddington—amongst the papers belonging to the Vestry I have a letter addressed to the Vestry of Paddington, purporting to be signed by one Richard Thomas—I do not produce it—I have not had any communication with Mr. Thomas upon the subject.

COURT. Q. Are you the custodian of the documents belonging to the Vestry? A. Yes—the letter in question is in the strong room, amongst the documents belonging to the Vestry—I hold the key of the strong room—the Vestry passed a resolution declining to furnish a copy of the letter, or to produce it.

FREDERICK JAMES FULLER, GEORGE DARLEY OSTERFIELD , and GEORGE PENTECOST , were then called, but no questions were put to them.

NOT GUILTY .

THE COURT, considering that the terms of the recognisances, "to duly prosecute," had not been complied with, directed them to be estreated.

742. MARY ANN YATES (46), was indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury.

MESSRS, BESLEY and MOODY conducted the Prosecution.

SAMUEL FOULSHAM . I am a clerk in the office of the Clerk of the Peace, at Clerkenwell—I produce the record of the conviction of William Bolton, and the indictment against him, the office copy of that record, the original depositions, the recognisances, also the order of the Court appointing Mr. Borrow as Deputy Assistant Judge.

GEORGE SMITH . I am the usher in the Second Court at the Middlesex Sessions—I was present when William Bolton was put on his trial upon the indictment which has been produced—the prisoner was a witness on his behalf—I administered the oath to her in the usual form—a pencil-case and two copper coins were produced, and shown to her—she said they belonged to the prisoner, that she had given them to him—she was asked whether they belonged to Buckingham, and she said "No"—she said that the pair of trousers which Bolton had got on she had given him, before she had had time to look at them—she said they were her husband's property, and she had given them to Bolton—she was asked whether they belonged to Buckingham, and she said "No"—she was asked as to her relations with the prisoner, and she said he was only a lodger—she was repeatedly asked whether she lived with him as man and wife, and she denied it—she repeated on more than one occasion that the different articles were the property of Bolton, which had been given by her to him—I understood that she said she had given the trousers to Bolton, not that Buckingham had given them to him.

Prisoner. I did not say the trousers belonged to my husband, they were Mr. Buckingham's trousers; and he gave them to him, and I altered them for him.

COURT. Q. Did she say he gave them? A. Yes—I understood her to mean that they belonged to her husband—I only paid general attention to the case—I paid no particular attention to it—I could not tell you what any of the witnesses swore in the previous case; this case was contested and

that was the reason I took a little more notice than usual—there is no shorthand writer at the Middlesex Sessions—there are some reporters there, but I don't know that there was one in the Court at the time—there is no regular shorthand writer there to take evidence verbatim—the prisoner was committed after she gave her evidence.

JAMES BUCKINGHAM . I am a coachman—in July I was living at 4, Abbey Garden Mews—I knew William Bolton, and had employed him occasionally—I left town on 26th July with my horses by the Great Western Railway; Bolton knew of my going—my wife joined me on 29th July—when I left town, I left in the place where I was residing a pair of trousers, and two coins and a pencil-case were safe in my wife's work-box—I returned on 6th September, and missed those articles as well as others—I next saw those things on the 8th, when I gave Bolton into custody, and he was searched at the station—I saw him searched, tad saw several coins taken from his pockets, out of which were two which I identified, and the pencil-case—next morning at the Police Court I saw that he was wearing my trousers—I identified the articles—the pencil-case was taken from Bolton when he was searched—my wife had had the coins previous to my marrying her, and we had been married fifteen years—she has had them all that time—she had the pencil-case at the time I was married, and there was a little toothpick, and that was not found—I had had the trousers about eighteen months I should think—I never gave them to Bolton—I gave him a light suit which he had at the time he was apprehended; but these I did not give him, neither had he any right to take them away—I was present when Bolton was tried before Mr. Barrow, and when the prisoner gave evidence—she was at the Police Court on both occasions, but she did not give evidence there—before Bolton was sent for trial he pleaded guilty, and wished the Magistrate to settle it—the prisoner was there—I listened attentively to what she was saying on the trial, and I heard her give evidence about the pencil-case—to the best of my belief, she said that some friend had given. it to her husband, but who that friend was she could not exactly account for, and the coins were the same, but how she got them he could not say; she said she gave them to Bolton, and he had had them about six weeks at that time—she said the trousers were her husband's, I believe, and she had altered them; I would not say exactly what she said about that—she said they were hers, I believe—I don't think she looked at them before she gave evidence upon them, she looked at the prisoner, but in the position he was, she could not see what trousers they were—she said that Bolton was merely a lodger—it was put to her repeatedly, and she said she had no more interest in him only as a lodger—after the trial and Bolton's conviction she was ordered into custody.

Prisoner. He gave the trousers to Bolton before he went to Reading, and he wore them at the time he was at Reading. Witness. No such thing, Bolton came down to Reading with my wife—he had the suit that I gave him then, the light coat and trousers.

JOHN CATON (Detective Officer S.) I apprehended Bolton on 8th September, at 19, Southam Street, Kensal New Town—the prisoner was there at the time—I took Bolton to the station and searched, amongst other things I found this pencil-case and two copper coins (produced), which Buckingham identified at once—Bolton was brought up next day at the Police Court, and Buckingham then identified the trousers he was wearing—Bolton said, "You are getting of it up for me, Jim"—Bolton was

before the Magistrate on two occasions—I saw the prisoner on both occasions in the passage, not in the Court—she was not called as a witness by Bolton on that occasion, and did not offer to give any evidence—I was present at the Sessions—these are the pencil-case and coins which were produced and shown to her when she gave her evidence, she said the pencil-case was hers, she had had it some time, and had given it to Bolton about six weeks—she said the same with respect to the copper coins—she said Bolton gave her the trousers to mend—I did not hear her say they belonged to her husband—she was asked whether they belonged to Buckingham, she said they did not—the judge made a remark that she identified the trousers before she saw them—she never looked at the prisoner before she said that—she was asked whether they were living as man and wife or not, she said, "No, he is a lodger of mine"—the questions were put to her once or twice, and she repeated the same story each time.

Prisoner. The trousers belonged to Buckingham, as I said at the time, and he gave them to me to mend. The coins were mine years ago, Buckingham said he would lock me up if I appeared.

HERBERT REEVES . I am a warder at the House of Correction—I produce the pair of trousers that were worn by Bolton at the time of trial—the other part of the suit consisted of a light stable suit.

ELLEN BUCKINGHAM . I left town on 29th July to join my husband—before I left I noticed a pair of trousers behind the door—these are the ones—there was also a work-box in my place—when I returned on 6th September I noticed the work-box had been removed from where I had left it, and it had been turned upside down—I missed two copper coins—these are them—I should think I had them twenty-five years—they were given me by my brother—the pencil-case was also in the work-box when I went away on 29th July—I have had that fifteen or sixteen years—I was not present at the Court before Mr. Barron—I am certain these trousers are my husband's—I know a light suit which my husband gave to Bolton—these don't resemble those trousers at all.

Prisoner. She was not at home when the things were given to Bolton—she was in her service—the pair of trousers were given to Bolton before she came home, and those coins and pencil-case belonged to me years ago—the man said he would imprison me—he is a wicked man—he came out of prison on 6th May from eighteen months.

COURT to JAMES BUCKINGHAM. Q. Is that true? A. Yes; the charge was for obtaining two rugs—I was convicted, and had eighteen months' imprisonment; but that is no reason why I am to be robbed—I am a respectable man, and always have been—my eighteen months was at Clerkenwell—that was the first time, and I hope it will be the last—I never was in trouble before.

CAROLINE COLLY . I live at 25, Frederick Street, Portland Town—my husband is James Colly, a lamplighter—I know the prisoner Yates—she occupied two parlours and the back kitchen with me—when I first knew her she was living with her husband—he died about a year ago—after his death Bolton came there—he was a lodger in the house—he lodged with Mrs. Yates, and occupied the same rooms—I have seen them going out together—I have seen Bolton in bed there, and the prisoner in the front parlour at needlework—I have seen them go into the same room together—there were two beds.

Prisoner. Mrs. Colly knows he lodged with my son In the back room.

COURT. Q. Has she a son? A. Yes; he is twenty-seven and Bolton is twenty-three—I did not say anything to the prisoner before she left about her conduct with Bolton—I was not present when any complaints were made to her—the only one that any one could make was Mrs. Yates speaking to the young man and going out with him—she paid her rent and conducted herself respectably—she was there with me four years—I was only a lodger there.

ELLEN BARRON . I live at 19, Southam Street, Kensal New Town—my husband is James Barron, a carpenter—on 28th August Bolton and Mrs. Yates came to my house to take my two parlours—the terms were 4s. 6d. a week, and it was arranged they should come in the next morning, the 29th, and I saw them in possession of the rooms—I never entered the rooms during the time Bolton was there, and I don't know how many beds there were—they remained till Bolton was taken into custody—her daughter, who was about twenty, and three little children came there—they lived there—they occupied the rooms all together—I gave Bolton a latch-Key—he was occupying the rooms with the prisoner till he was taken into custody—I saw him walking out with her—I always considered he was her nephew—she gave her name as Mrs. Yates, and he was called Bolton—I have seen him coming out of Mrs. Yates' rooms at 7 o'clock in the morning in his shirt sleeves—her son was not at my place.

Prisoner's Defence.—I think one of the coins is 1705, and the other is 1805; they are English coins. He picked them up from amongst my things when I was moving; my son and daughter knew them well.

NOT GUILTY .

743. CHARLES JONES (25), and WILLIAM COLLINS (21) , Robbery with violence on George Gunston.

MR. GLYN conducted the Prosecution; MR. W. SLEIGH defended Jones; and MR. A.B. KELLY defended Collins.

GEORGE GUNSTON . I live at 360, Gray's Inn Road—on 17th September, at 12 o'clock, I was turning the corner of Ampton Street into Gray's Inn Road, when three persons pushed against me—they made some remark, "Old boy, I see you have got a watch," or something of that sort—they offered to fight, but I declined—Jones took his coat off—a friend advised me to put my watch in my trousers pocket—I stepped back to do so, and was knocked down—I don't remember any more—my coat was buttoned, but my chain could be seen—I recognise Jones—when I regained my faculties I was asked if I would charge the prisoners, and I said I would—I do not recognise Collins.

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. I was returning from the Theatre—I was dark—no one had pushed against me previously—I heard a man called Neale examined at the Police Court for the defence.

Cross-examined by MR. KELLY. I know Collins was there, but I don't know what part he took in the affair—I thought the remark about the watch was chaffing—I put it down as an ordinary street phrase.

ANNA CRUTCHLEY . I am the wife of David Crutchley, and live at 13, Caledonia Crescent—on the evening of 17th September, about 12 o'clock, I was walking along the Gray's Inn Road behind the prosecutor—my husband and the prosecutor and the other witness were met by these prisoners, and the third one is here as a witness for the prisoners—Collins

pushed very rudely against Gunston, and Gunston said "Mind what you're doing of, mate"—Jones turned round and used very bad language, and took off his coat to fight—he then rushed at Gunston, and made a snatch at his watch—he followed him across the road and knocked him down—when he was down I saw Collins kick him in the ear—I heard my husband gay to Gunston "Take your watch out and put it into your trousers pocket," and he was stepping backwards and Jones followed him, and knocked him down.

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. This was not a quarrel at all—the others would not quarrel with the prisoners—Henry Read has been called as a witness—he was with us—we had been to have a pint of ale—my husband had been to Shoreditch Station to see a friend of his off with Read, and he called for me at a friend's house—this was about 11.50—these men were perfectly sober—they were all on the same side of the road—they tried to get across out of the way, but the prisoners followed them—Gunston took off his watch and chain and put it in his pocket—he did not then put up his hands for the purpose of fighting—I swear he never struck any one—we did not all four take up the pathway as we were walking along—Collins did not complain of any one pushing against him till we were at Clerken-well—he did then—I did net hear Jones say anything about the watch—I said at the Police Court that Collins kicked him in the ear.

Cross-examined by MR. KELLY. When Jones pushed against Gunston, Gunston did not get against the wall and lift his hands, he tried to get away—I went to the Police Station, when the charge was made—Collins followed and went into the Police Station, and walked out again, and then the policeman fetched him in—he walked in of his own accord first.

Re-examined. I heard the prisoners say "For goodness' sake don't give us in charge, let us go"—while the prosecutor was on the ground I saw Collins kick him.

HENRY JAMES READ . I live at 57, Derby Buildings, Britannia Street—I was with Gunston on the night of the 17th—I saw three men coming along, the prisoners and one who appeared as a witness—they pushed against Gunston, and I saw no more till I saw him over the road lying insensible—I identify the prisoners as two of the men—I was walking towards home with the prosecutor, and that is all I know about it.

DAVID CRUTCHLEY . I live at 13, Caledonian Crescent—I was with the prosecutor on this occasion—I saw the prisoners and a third party—they shoved roughly against Gunston—he told them to look where they were going, and Jones pulled off his coat to fight Gunston—I said to Gunston "Put your watch in your pocket, because they mean having your watch"—Gunston put his hand in his trousers pocket and stepped across the road to get away from them, and Jones followed and knocked him down—I saw Jones make a snatch at his watch—I saw Collins go up directly and kick the prosecutor in the head—whilst I was in the act of picking Gunston up I was hit myself, but I could not say who hit me.

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. I did not hear Collins complain of us three men knocking up against him—I heard Anna Crutchley examined at the Police Court—I heard her say that Collins kicked him in the ear; it was not "knocked"—I had been down to Shoreditch Station to see a friend off at 10.30—I had a pint of half-and-half to drink—I was with the prosecutor all the time, not Read.

Cross-examined by MR. KELLY. I looked on these men as quarrelsome

men trying to get up a fight—I did not think anything of a robbery at the time—I am a labourer—I am in work—I went down to the Police Station—I did not give evidence on the first occasion—the prisoners were charged with an assault at first.

Re-examined. I did not knock against Collins—Read helped us to drink the pint of beer.

JOHN KELLY (Policeman G 226). I was in the Gray's Inn Road, and saw the prosecutor and two other men and a woman going up Ampton Street into the Gray's Inn Road, towards the Metropolitan Railway—I heard some one say "What the devil did you knock against me for?"—then I saw Jones take off his coat, and saw the prosecutor cross out in a diagonal way—I ran up, and found him lying senseless in the road and Jones in his shirt sleeves, and he had his foot up to kick the prosecutor—Jones said "All right, old man; you know me"—there was another man named William Williams who began to tell me in confidence what a cowardly assault it was, and Collins said "It is a b—lie; all right, Charlie, I will be witness for you"—they came to the station, and Collins came in—I turned him outside—Crutchley told me he was the man who kicked Gunston when he was on the road, and I took him into custody and got him charged—Gunston's ear was split and bleeding—Collins complained at the station that they knocked against him—I would give my opinion that the expression "What the devil did you knock against me for?" came from the prisoners.

Re-examined. When the prosecutor was down, the prisoners did not say anything about being pushed against, not till we got to the station.

COURT. Q. What was the charge? A. The prisoners at the Police Station were only charged with a common assault—the prosecutor never said anything about the watch chain till he was before the magistrate.

NOT GUILTY .

744. CHARLES JONES and WILLIAM COLLINS were again indicted for unlawfully assaulting George Gunston.

The witnesses repeated their former evidence. Collins received a good character. GUILTY .— Six Months' Imprisonment.

NEW COURT.—Thursday, October 31, 1872.

Before Mr. Justice Mellor.

745. JAMES HOLT , and JOHN WHITE, Feloniously killing and slaying John Finn, they were also charged on the Coroner's Inquisition with the like offence.

MESSRS. W. SLEIGH and SIMMS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. RIBTON

the Defence.

MARY FINN . I am the wife of Michael Finn, a labourer—the deceased was my son—he was 14 on March 7th—he was a plasterer's boy, and was getting 12s. a week—on Saturday night, 7th September, between 6 and 7 o'clock he went out, and I did not see him again till he was brought home at 12.45, when some boys put him inside the gate—he was then quite silly and could not walk—he died about 2.45 next day—I sent for a doctor, but he did not come till the boy was dead.

GEORGE HAROLD . I work with my father at Brick Lane, and live at 16, Manor Gardens—I was in Eaton Square about 11.45 on this night with Greenaway, Somers, Riley, and the deceased—we had been to the Victoria

Theatre, and were going home—as we crossed Eaton Square we met three men and two women—the prisoners are two of the men—when we came up to them, White struck Somers, who was walking in the middle of us, on the side of the ear, and Hill struck Finn on the side of the ear, and he fell with his head on the kerb—we called out "Police!" and the prisoners ran down the street—the other men stopped behind with the women—Holt and White ran after us and kicked us—we were not saying anything, we only called out "Police!"—we did not know either of them before—two constables in uniform came, caught hold of the prisoners and took them to where the boy lay—Holt whispered in the policeman's ear, and said that he was in the E Division—I did not know in what division the policemen were in—Holt said, "Pick the boy up, he is drunk, and take him home"—young Weedon said, "Don't do that, the boy is dead"—the constable caught hold of Weedon and said, "If you don't go away I will lock you up"—Somers and me picked Finn up, and the policemen went away, they did not take the prisoners into custody—Riley, and I, and Somers took Finn to the fountain and bathed his head and took him home to his mother's house—the policeman held Finn up from the ground, and asked him in the prisoners' presence if he had been struck, and he said that no one had struck him—that was after Holt said that he was in the E Division—I am quite sure I saw the blow struck—Holt struck it—I never said a word—we were walking in a row, and they met us—I afterwards picked Holt out at the station from among other men, and have no doubt he is the man—we had only drunk one pot between five of us, and that was in the theatre.

Cross-examined. We walked from the Victoria Theatre, which is in the New Cut, to Chelsea—we left the theatre about 11.30, and this happened about 12.30—we had nothing to drink, we only went to an eel-pie shop—I do not know that one of the party has stated that we had four pots among the five—we nearly, occupied the whole of the pavement, and were singing nice and softly—we had pipes—the first thing was that White struck Somers without saying anything to him, and at the same time Holt struck Finn without saying anything to him—I saw no stone thrown, and did not see that White's head was cut—Finn fell heavily against the stone kerb—I believe Russell is the policeman who asked him if any one hit him—he held him up more than once and asked him if anybody had struck him, and more than once the deceased answered that nobody had struck him—I told the policeman that that was not correct, and that Holt had struck him—I have said so before—Holt struck him with his clenched fist under the left ear, and he fell right backwards on the kerb—we made way for the prisoners; some of us went in the road—they had two women with them—I do not know whether one was Holt's wife.

Re-examined. I am quite sure we had no more beer after we left the theatre—I saw no stones thrown by any of my companions—Finn could hardly speak, but he said that no one struck him—they asked him what he had been drinking, and he said "Tea"—we had not been drinking tea.

HENRY GREENAWAY . I was at the Victoria Theatre on 7th September—I went home with the deceased and Somers and Riley; there were five of us—we met a party of whom the two prisoners formed part; there were three men and two women—they were going towards St. Peter's Church, and we were going towards Sloane Square—we were singing—White slung his arm round and struck Somers, saying "Get out of

the way"—Holt struck Finn just afterwards under the ear—he did not say anything—he wanted to push us off the pavement—we had made way for them—it was a hard blow, and Finn fell backwards and knocked his head—I cannot say that Holt's fist was doubled, but I saw his arm shoot out—they all ran away, and we ran after them calling "Police!"—we went up to them and told them we would give them in charge—they said "If you don't hold we will give you in charge"—two policemen came up, and they fetched the men back by their arms to where the boy was lying—the third man walked behind—I heard Holt whisper in the policeman's ear that he was in the E Division—the policemen then let go of them, and told us to take the boy home for he was drunk—they picked him up and shook him, and asked him who hit him—he said "Nobody, nobody"—I said that Holt had hit him—he was asked what he had been drinking, and we told him one pot of beer between five, but Finn said "Tea"—we had not been throwing stones nor did I see any thrown—we were all abreast, but not arm-in-arm—we had just moved to let them pass, when White struck Somers—we took Finn to the drinking fountain in Sloane Square and gave him half a cup of cold water—I do not know whether he could walk, but we held him up under each arm—we saw him home, and did not tee him again.

COURT. Q. When you gave him some water did he speak? A. He only said "George, George, let me lie down, for my head is a spinning round."

Cross-examined. Holt struck him on the ear—I am quite sure it was not in the face—it was near the ear—I cannot swear where it was—we had drunk one pot of beer—five of us were walking on the pavement in a row, and we moved as they got to us—the two women were behind them—we were singing, but not loud, because the policeman told us not to sing loud when we were by St. Peter's Church five minutes before—we were all singing in chorus.

GEORGE SOMERS . I was with Finn and the others in Eaton Square, and met three men and two women—we were walking together in a line, singing, and White hit me a slap in the face—he said nothing—White then hit Finn in the face, saying "What are you doing of?" and then Holt came and knocked him down, and he fell—they were walking away, and three of us went after them, and called "Police!"—Riley stopped with Finn—the men began hitting us, but the policemen came, and brought them back—a policeman turned his bull's-eye on Finn, and Holt said "I am a policeman in the E Division"—the policeman then said "I will have nothing to do with it," and told us to take the boy home, he was drunk—the policeman asked Finn what he had been drinking, but he did not answer—he asked him if anybody hit him, and he said "Nobody."

COURT. Q. Are you quite sure Holt hit him as well as White? A. Yes, both of them—none of us picked up any stones—we were only singing—we had one pot of beer amongst five.

Cross-examined. I did not see that White's head was bleeding—he said that a stone had been thrown at him—I did not say before the Magistrate that White's head was bleeding—I put a cross to my deposition—I did not say "White's head was bleeding; the hat produced is White's"—I did not know the hat—a gentleman showed it to me—White was between two bars in the Court—that was not the same day, it was on Wednesday, at Rochester Row—nothing was said about stone-throwing before we were struck; it was after the policemen came up that they said we had been throwing stones—Holt struck Finn behind the ear—it was White who struck him in

the face—I cannot be on my oath that it was on the ear—I do not know that I said so—I will be on my oath that it was Holt who bit him last—Riley is not here.

COURT to H. GREENAWAY. Q. Did you see White hit Finn on the face before he was struck by Holt? A. No, I only saw him strike Somers—nothing was said about stone-throwing till the police came up—White then said that a stone had been thrown—I was shown a hat, with a out in it, before the Magistrate.

EDWARD WEEDON . I saw a disturbance in Eaton Square, and saw Harold and Greenaway coming along crying—they complained that White and Holt had been hitting Finn—White could hear what was said—I caught hold of Holt by the sleeve, and my friend Mr. Windsworth caught hold of White, and asked what was the matter—White told me they had been grossly insulted by the boys, who had insulted the females—Finn was then lying on the ground—White told me the boys had been throwing stones—I saw that White's head was bleeding very much—he took his hat off, and showed me that it was cut through and his head was bleeding—Somers and Harold were there then—the policemen did not come up for a few minutes—I asked them to come back, and we went back, and saw Finn lying on the ground, vomiting—I do not mean foaming at the mouth, but sick—Logan put his bull's-eye on Finn, and said "Oh, he it drunk"—before that I heard Holt say "It is all right; I am a detective, in the E Division"—I pointed out Holt, and told the policemen to take him in charge, and I said to them "I think the boy is very much hurt; I will pay for a cab, and send him to the hospital"—he said "Take him home; he is drunk"—I asked the prisoners their names—Holt said "My name is John Bull"—White gave no address or name—I did not know him—Harold and Green-away picked the boy up, took him to the drinking fountain, and washed his face—he did not walk there, his legs were dragging—the policemen said that the boys were drunk, and they said they had one pot between the five—I saw no stone-throwing.

Cross-examined. There is no doubt that White was bleeding from his forehead, and his hat was out through—I asked White if he struck Finn, and he said he merely touched him because he insulted, him and his wife, and all of them.

JOHN DAKIN . I am a plasterer—I was in Eaton Square on the morning of 8th September, and saw a disturbance—a schoolmaster called me across the road, and I saw the boy lying en the ground—I lifted him up, and he was sick very much—the prisoners were a few yards up, but I did not go to them, I stopped with the boy—a few minutes afterwards the police went up to them and brought them, towards me and the boy—I heard Holt say that he belonged to the E Division—a policeman asked Finn if he had had any beer, and Finn said that they had had one pot between five.

Cross-examined. They asked Finn who had struck him, and he said no one had—I asked the boys whether they could point out the man who had struck Finn, and none of them were able to do so—the policemen asked Finn his address, and he said that he lived at Manor Gardens—that was after he said that nobody had hit him—the policemen asked him if he was incapable of walking home, and he said he was—I did not hear him say anything about tea—the other boys were not sober.

Re-examined. I form that opinion because they did not know what they were saying—they were excited, and I heard them swearing.

CHARLES BEACH . I am a gas-fitter—I saw this altercation going on—I did not hear the boys charged with throwing stones; nothing was said about it that I recollect.

JAMES LOGAN (Policeman B 181). I was on duty in Eaton Square on the morning of 8th December, and heard a disturbance—I went up, and saw Finn on the ground—there were seven boys altogether—I am sure of that—I had not heard the cry of "Police!" but I heard a disturbance, and Greenaway pointed out Holt to me, who was 30 or 40 yards from them—I went with him and brought Holt back—I told Russell to detain him while I looked after the boy, who I found lying in the road, vomiting, and he smelt very strong of drink—some one said "Lift the boy up," and he got on a seat, and I asked him if anybody had struck him; he said "No"—I pointed to Holt, and said "Did that man strike you?"—he said "No nobody struck me"—I said "Where do you live?"—he said "10, Manor Gardens"—I said "Do you want to go home?"—he said "Yes, I want to go home"—I said "The best thing you can do is to go home"—Holt gave his name as Hyde, and said he was a policeman of the E Division, and I took his address, 14, Broad Court—he said that loud enough for all the people to hear—that was when I was bringing him to the boy—I had never seen him before—his name is not Hyde—he was a police-constable—he does not live in that place.

COURT. Q. Are you quite sure the boy told you that nobody struck him? A. I am—I examined the boy with my lamp, but could not see any marks—he smelt very strongly of drink—the boys told me at first that they had only one pot of beer, but afterwards one of them, I think it was Greenaway, said they had had four, after my cross-examining them, after asking them a few questions—no one was charged but Holt at that time—I heard some of the bystanders say something about stones being thrown, but I don't know who—I did not notice that White was bleeding.

Cross-examined. One of the crowd said the boys had been throwing—I did not see then that White's head was cut, but I saw it afterwards, and there was a very large cut in his hat—the bystanders did not say that the stones had hit anybody—Holt said that the boys had pushed against them, and would not let them pass, that the boys were all abreast—I am quite sure that one of the boys said that they had four pots of beer—I said "How much have you had to drink?"—they said, "One pot of beer"—I asked them several times, and they admitted that they had had four pots of beer—Holt has been till recently in the police, and it appears that he bears a very good character—I believe it was his wife whom he was with.

DANIEL RUSSELL (Policeman). Examined by MR. RIBTON. The boys were under the influence of drink, I have no doubt of that—I heard Logan ask Finn if Holt was the man who struck him, and he said that no one had struck him.

MR. SIMMS. Q. What do you mean by being under the influence of drink. A. They smelt very strongly of liquor, both Finn and the other boys.

THOMAS KEAN . I am a registered medical practitioner of 209, King's Road, Chelsea—on 8th September I was called to John Finn, and found him dead—I made a post-mortem examination on the 10th and found on the left jaw a loose swelling which might have been the result of a blow—on the back of the head I found a large contusion penetrating the scalp, with effused blood beneath it—I found a quantity of blood effused within the

membranes of the brain, and a part of tie brain structure was broken down, which was the cause of death—I do not think the same fall caused the swelling on the jaw and the damage to the back of the head—the immediate effect of such an injury to the brain would be insensibility and probably vomiting—the insensibility would probably, be instantaneous, followed by a partial restoration—he would not be able to understand a question at the moment, but probably sensibility would return after a short interval.

Cross-examined. The puffy swelling on the jaw might possibly be of two or three days' standing, there were no appearances to guide me—I think his saying that no one struck him, and his giving his name and his correct address, is quite consistent with the nature of the injury.

THE COURT considered that there was no case against

WHITE.— NOT GUILTY .

HOLT— GUILTY.—Strongly recommended to mercy by the jury. — Three Months' Imprisonment.

746. JOHN THOMAS RYMER (25) , Feloniously killing and slaying Sarah Rymer. He was also charged on the Coroner's Inquisition with the like offence.

MR. ST. AUBYN,conducted the prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS the defence.

JAMES RYMER . I live at 24, Blakesley Street Commercial Road—I am the prisoner's brother, and the son of the deceased woman—on Saturday evening, 21st September, I went home about 9.30, and found my brother quarrelling with my mother—I believe, he was drunk—I was struggling with him in the passage; my mother came to part us, and he kicked her in the bottom of the stomach—I do not know whether he was kicking at me—she went in, sat down on a chair, and said, "Oh!" and sent for a doctor—she then kept toiler bed till she died—her age was forty-nine—she died on the Friday morning, the 27th, about 12.30; six days after the kick.

Cross-examined. The passage is two or three feet wide; there is no light in it—I mean that it was dark when we were struggling—my mother came out of the, kitchen to part us; she did not say anything—the kitchen is at the other end of the passage.

COURT. Q. Did your mother scream when he kicked her? A. No—I was examined before the Coroner—I did not say "she Screamed out in great pain, and told me to fetch a doctor"—this is my writing—I did not read what the Coroner put down; I cannot recollect whether he read it over to me—she did not scream out when my brother kicked her, she only said "Oh!"

JOHN BROWN . I am a surgeon, of 20, Collett Place Commercial Road—about 9.30 on this evening I was called to see Mrs. Rymer, and found her in bed, but not undressed; she wais suffering great pain in the lower part of the abdomen, and stated that her son had kicked her there; there was no external mark—I attended her up to her death on the following Friday, the 27th—I made a post-mortem examination, and found the brain and lungs healthy, and the heart congested; the peritoneum was in a state of inflammation, which was the cause of death—that might decidedly have been caused by a kick at the bottom of the abdomen.

Cross-examined. Death did not arise from natural causes—there is no doubt that it was the result of violence.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. I was very drunk, I had no intention of causing her death.

COURT to JAMES RYMER. Q. Where were your mother and the prisoner when they were quarrelling? A. In the kitchen—I went to my brother and told him to leave off quarrelling, and caught hold of him, and some how or other we got into the passage, and we had a struggle there—my mother came out to part us.

NOT GUILTY .

747. FRANCIS HILL (35) , Robbery on Benjamin Lawrence, and stealing from his person a leather case and other articles.

MR. ST. AUBYN conducted the Prosecution.

BENJAMIN LAWRENCE . I am a lighterman, of 12, Chandler Street, St. George's—on 16th September, about 1 a.m., I was going home; I had 7s. 5d. or 7s. 6d. loose in my left-hand waistcoat pocket, and this purse (produced), in my left-hand trousers pocket, with some papers in it—the prisoner and another man came up to me, and the prisoner struck me a violent blow under the right jaw; I was about to fall but they caught hold of me, and his mate struck me on the left jaw—I caught hold of the prisoner by his collar—his mate kept punching me in the face, and kicking me on my legs—when the prisoner found I would not let go of him he took the 7s. 3d. out of my waistcoat pocket, and gave it to his mate—one of them, I do not know which, took the leather purse from my left hand trousers pocket—his mate ran away—I screamed out for the police, and stuck to the prisoner till the police came, and gave him in charge—he said to the policeman "You will find what he has lost."

GEORGE LENNY (Policeman K 259). I heard a cry of "Police!" and ran up and found the prosecutor holding the prisoner—he charged him with stealing his money and purse—the prisoner said he was a false man—the prosecutor said that if he gave him his purse and his waterman's licence and 3s. he would not lock him up—the prisoner said, "If you were to look round you would find it"—going to the station they halloaed out "Here is the purse"—I did not see it picked up, I was a little distance ahead.

JOHN FITZGERALD (Policeman K 486). I heard cries of "Police!" went up, and found the prisoner in Lenny's custody—I saw this purse lying on the ground; a girl picked it up and gave it to me—it was 5 or 6 yards from the place where I saw Lenny and the prisoner.

The prisoner produced a written defence, stating that he fell over the prosecutor, who was lying down on an area grating, and the prosecutor came after him, and asked him to give him his leather purse, caught hold of his coat, and called "Police!" and that the prosecutor stated before the Magistrate that the other man took the parse.

COURT to B. LAWRENCE. Q. Had you been drinking? A. Yes, a little, but I knew perfectly well what I was about—I was not lying on the ground—I will not swear which man took my purse—the prisoner kicked me on the legs, and I have been obliged to go to the hospital—the blows did not hurt me much, because the men caught hold of me and prevented my falling.

Prisoner. Q. Why did not you tell the Inspector you saw me pass it to another man?" A. Because he did not ask me.

GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted in July, 1868, in the name of Francis Burroughs, to which he

PLEADED GUILTY.**

Two Years' Imprisonment.

THIRD COURT.—Thursday, October 31, and Friday, November 1, 1872.

Before Mr. Deputy Recorder.

748. HENRY JOHNSON (18) , PLEADED GUILTY to stealing an operaglass and other articles, the goods of Joseph Levi, his master.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.

749. GEORGE PULLING (46) , Unlawfully pledging, within four months of his bankruptcy, certain property, with intent to defraud. Other Counts—For obtaining, under the false colour and pretence of carrying on trade, certain goods, with intent to defraud.

MR. H. S. GIFFARD, Q.C., with MESSRS. F. KNIGHT and MARRIOTT conducted the Prosecution; and MESSRS. METCALFE and BESLEY the Defence.

Before the prisoner pleaded, MR. METCALFE called attention to certain counts of the indictment, which he submitted were too general, and he applied to have them quashed, or that they should be amended by giving dates, names, and particulars; also that the Prosecution should be called upon to elect upon which set of counts they should proceed. After argument, THE COURT decided against the application.

CHARLES GROSJEAN REMY L'ENFANT . I am a clerk in the Bankruptcy Court, and produce the proceedings under a petition for liquidation of the defendant—it is his own petition, and is dated 30th October, 1871—the petition for adjudication is dated 24th November, 1871—the adjudication is 6th December, 1871—the bankrupt is described as of 125, High Holborn, and 49, Grove End Road, St. John's Wood, in the County of Middlesex, trading under the firm of George Pulling & Co., upholsterers and cabinet manufacturers—Mr. Walter Mitchell is the petitioning creditor, who is described as a cabinetmaker—the petition for liquidation was filed on 31st October, and is witnessed by Mr. Hincks, as attorney and solicitor for the bankrupt—he is the same person who is now prosecuting—the trustee appointed is Mr. Archibald Stewart, of No. 30, Moorgate Street—there is a committee of inspection, who are Henry Ridley Ellington, of 13, Friday Street, manufacturer; John Ridley Hunter, of No. 30, Moorgate Street Walter Mitchell, Arthur Todd, and—Walker—the receiver under that petition, and before the bankruptcy, was the same Archibald Stewart—he was appointed on 1st November, 1871—the meeting of creditors under the liquidation was appointed for the 23rd November, 1871—there was a statement made in accordance with the Act, which is filed—a resolution was passed that the affairs of the said George Pulling should be liquidated in bankruptcy.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. That petition upon the act of Bankruptcy was caused by the petition for liquidation.

WALTER BONHAM . I am an auctioneer, of the firm of Bonham & Son, Leicester Street, Leicester Square—we have salerooms there—I first saw the defendant upon any transaction on the 19th of April, 1871—I had many transactions with him, not personally, but with his agent—the nature of the transactions was we disposed of goods by auction—we advanced money on them previously to the sale—at the time of the bankruptcy we had certain goods in hand which we had received from the defendant—we had made advances on those—the transactions were principally conducted through a person named Marler—I spoke to the defendant as to Marler's authority—we objected to advance money to him without defendant's authority—we received this letter from defendant—(Read: "125, High

Holborn, London, April 13, 1871. Dear sir, please pay the bearer, my agent, as much as you can on their value, the remainder can come when sold. Yours truly, Geo. Pulling."—Marler was the agent who came on every occasion with the goods—I have had about sixty transactions between April and October—when I made the advances there was an agreement in writing—I produce one of them (produced and read as follows:—"I, Geo. Pulling, of No. 125, High Holborn, have this day deposited in the possession of Messrs. Bouham & Son, auctioneers, the following articles (describing the goods), the said Bonham & Son having advanced me this day the sum of £—on the above property. I hereby direct and authorise, whenever convenient to them, to sell by auction, without reserve, the aforesaid property, and to repay themselves the money so advanced, with all costs, commission, and warehouse charges that may accrue thereon, and in case the aforesaid property shall not realise sufficient to pay the same, then, in default, to pay all costs and charges hereby agreed, and to make good such deficiency whenever called upon so to do"—Our charge was 10 per cent. commission on the sales effected, and a nominal sum of 2s. 6d. when a lot was bought in—the defendant stated his object in getting money from me—I cannot say the date—he said that he had bills to meet, and required to raise money to meet them, and to pay wages—that was the subject upon every meeting—I believe he mentioned his partners; I cannot recollect what he did say, except that they left him, and he had bills to meet, as he was in business on his own account; he had to pay off his partners—he spoke about the stock at the time of the dissolution, and stated that he had taken it from his partners at reduced prices, and therefore he could sell at reduced prices—a marked catalogue was sent him for each sale—we sent him the difference after each sale by cheque on the London and Westminster Bank, St. Jame's Square—the cheque would be open "Payable to order"—this agreement (produced) dated the 9th September, 1871, refers to three boudoir cabinets, a pair of large jars, a pair of smaller ditto, 31 yards of crimson silk, and three pairs of green curtains—we received those goods on that date, and advanced 55l.—those goods were in our possession up to the 8th of November—they were in that sale—I cannot refer to the lot—I cannot say that lot 165 refers to them—the agreement of the 4th October (produced) refers to 76 yards of crimson velvet, on which we advanced 40l.—those goods were in our possession on the 8th November, when we sold them by auction—the agreement of the 19th August (produced) refers to four pieces of brocatelle, on which we advanced 55l.—the agreement of the 6th September (produced) refers to one piece of crimson tapestry, on which, with other goods, we advanced 45l.—the brocatelle and this lot were in the sale of 8th November—the agreement of 11th September (produced) refers to one Pietra Doura cabinet, on which, with other goods, we advanced 120l.—I remember selling one cabinet on the 22nd September, but I cannot say if that is the one—I produce another agreement of the 16th September which refers to a pair of cabinets on which we advanced 130l.—I sold those on the 29th September—on the 14th October there is an agreement relating to twelve chairs and two easy chairs, on which we advanced 40l.—they were in our possession, and sold on the 8th November for 33l. 12s.—the large Pietra Doura cabinet sold for 46l. 4s.—the two smaller were sold on the 29th September for 35l. 3s. 6d. the two—the agreement of the 9th September relates to the deposit of an Axminster carpet—it is signed by Marler, on which, with other goods, we advanced 70l.—that was sold on the

22nd September for 50l. 8s—the agreement of the 11th October comprises 6 yards of green silk reps—we advanced 60l. on that—it was sold on the 20th October—the agreement of the 8th September refers to 70 yards of blue satin, on which, with other goods, we advanced 65l.—that silk was divided by order, and sold on the 20th October and 8th November, the first 40 yards at 11s., and 28 yards at 15s. 6d.—the agreement of the 7th September refers to 116 yards of silk, in two lengths, on which we advanced 50l.—I believe that was sold in the November sale—I cannot tell what it fetched, as there is no description of colour—the agreement of 30th August refers, among other property, to 48 yards of blue Japanese silk, on which we advanced 90l.—it was sold on 8th November—the statement (produced) is one from the commencement of the transactions MR. METGALFE objected to its reception, and it was not pressed—on the 31st October we had a considerable quantity of goods in our hands—the sale on the 8th November was by arrangement with the Receiver of all goods we had in our hands—the sum of 471l. 5s. 8d. was then owing to us—after the sale we paid over the balance to the Receiver, 105l. 16s. 8d., after deducting the commission.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Nearly everything was sold in the sale of the 8th November by arrangement with the Receiver—he asked me if I thought there would be a profit, and I said I thought there would—he directed me to sell and pay the proceeds to him—if he had paid me the amount owing I would have given the goods to him, and I wrote to him to that effect—they were sold in the ordinary way—there was no reservation on that day—the Receiver had no one there to buy them in—in the other sales somebody attended to protect the goods or written instructions were sent—I have some of them here (two produced)—when there was a reserved price we did not sell unless the goods reached those prices—on several occasions the goods were bought in—the cabinets were not bought in on previous occasions, but the dining-room suite was, on the 19th October, at 48 guineas—it was not put for sale between that and the 8th November—it then fetched 33l. 12s.—I cannot recollect whether it was soiled; to the best of my recollection the velvet was faded—it was on the first occasion I saw the defendant that he told me he had bills to meet to pay off his partners, and that he had taken the stock and could afford to sell cheaper—I also saw him afterwards—we were specially directed not to sacrifice the goods—I had an interview with him in August in reference to the silk; that was the third occasion on which I saw him—I believe those were the only three occasions on which I saw him—he then told me the silk was not to be sold, and we agreed to hold it over—that applied to all the silk that was sold on the 8th November—he said he would redeem them—there was not to my knowledge any arrangement with Marler to that effect when the silk was deposited—Marler came to us upon that occasion in August, and that was the reason I went to the defendant—the silks had accumulated from time to time, and I told Marler we should sell them the following week, and he said "Do not do so," and then I went to Mr. Pulling to know why we kept them, because they would sell at better prices by being sold in bulk—we never sold without having a price, or some one to represent the defendant at every sale—these things fetch good prices at our sales—the cabinets I consider fetched retail shop prices—on some occasions things fetch better prices than they would at a shop, and sometimes considerably less—I should think thirty to forty lots were bought in

—the 10 percent, included all expenses, and the 2s. 6d. included every expense when the lot was bought in—when bought in the goods are again carried into the account, which is swollen in that way—I cannot tell the amount of the sales previously to the 8th November without looking at the account—(referring to it)—it is an extract from our books—on the 8th November the sale was 642l. 14s. 10d.—that was by far the larger sale we over had—when I spoke to the Receiver about that sale he said he would consult the committee, and he took time for that purpose—I saw Mr. Hincks on the matter, I believe that was after the sale—I do not believe I saw him while he was acting for the prisoner—it is not an uncommon thing in the trade to put furniture into sales at our rooms—it sometimes fetches good prices.

Re-examined. Sometimes it fetches very bad prices—the amount of 418l. 11s. 2d. was the amount due to us the day the account was rendered—that sum represents the goods sold—those were not counted again in the subsequent part of the account—a portion of the sum of 229l. 15s. would be—that amount does not include the total of the buying-in prices, but only the prices of goods sold—the total in the account of 511l. 13s. 3d., nett for 2nd June is for goods sold—the same as to 440l. 11s. 2d., the next item—those are not counted over again—the amount of 2583l. 13s. 8d. between the dates in the account represents all goods—deducting 642l. 10s. the balance shows the goods sold without any negotiation with the trustee—the sale for the 8th November had been fixed originally, and the goods would have been sold in the ordinary course—the negotiation to hold them over was on a previous occasion—the interview with Mr. Stewart was whether, with reference to the interests of the estate, we should hold the goods further, or allow them to be sold—we agreed to do that provided we were indemnified or repaid our advances at once—if we had been repaid our advances we would have handed the goods to the trustee—the silks were, by the direction of Mr. Pulling, held over by us—we did sell some silks between August and the 8th November—the silks he told us to hold over we did hold over; the others we sold—we always had a mark on to protect ourselves—the two letters of instruction I produced are not the only letters I received; the others are on the file—those I produced were merely a sample of them—(Letter read as follows: "September 28th. Dear Sir,—The under-mentioned lots should not be sold under the prices quoted below, but of course we will leave it to your good judgment to a pound or two up or down. Try and do the best you can for us, and oblige, yours truly, S. Marler.")—Then follow the lots—lot 100 refers to a walnut wardrobe, and the reserve price is 20l.—lots 1 and 2 are a washstand and dressing-table, price 22l. 10s.—lot 172, a pair of silk curtains, 4l. 10s.—lot 186, a 17ft. sideboard, 35l.—(The second letter was read as follows: "Oct. 2nd.—Dear Sir,—I do not think there is anything in to-day's sale to reserve besides the sideboard, which we think should fetch 30l. The velvet suite I must leave to your judgment what to sell it for. Yours truly; S. Marler." Those two are a specimen of the directions we received; that is the "velvet suite bought in—pursuant to that letter it was bought in at my discretion—some goods were sold and some bought in—we should not deduct so much as if it were cash; we return the amount of the actual sales—we make no return of the amount that was bought in—we charge 2s. 6d., then a nominal sum—there are lots unsold 5s. 6d., that is the nominal charge for buying in—those goods go in the account of the following sale—the goods are not then carried out in the column as if they had been sold.

HENRY THOMAS WHEELER . I am in the employment of Messrs. Harvey, Pimm, & Co., and have been for six years—I have known the defendant about four years—Messrs. Pimm had transactions with him—I think all things were settled up to March, 1871—I remember calling upon him in the early part of September, 1871—I called upon him on the 8th, and asked him if he had any orders on hand that I could help him with—he said "I have nothing particularly on hand just now; but if you have a short length of any pattern, or any thing of new design, I might put it in the window; something different to what I now have"—I had not one 8 yards length, but two short lengths of about 13 or 15 yards, and I sent them the next day, the 9th September—they were brocatelle silks—I believe I saw tome silk goods afterwards in the window that I had sent—the next supply was on the 20th September, two lengths, one crimson silk and one blue, but one was returned—he retained one length of 54-inch crimson silk and one 63-inch of blue—the crimson was 20s. a yard, and 23s. 6d. the blue—there were 75 yards of crimson and, I believe, 47 yards of blue—the value was 130l. 19s. 2d—there was a short length of 33l. 10s. 8d.—those goods were unpaid for at the time of the stoppage—the patterns are peculiar to Messrs. Pimm Brothers, and they are blocked on boards—on 8th November last I was at Messrs, Bonham's Salerooms, Leicester Street—I recognised the goods—the carpet fetched 33l. 10s. 8d., and the crimson silk, one lot 17s. 6d. and the other 16s. 3d. a yard—Mr. Todd bought in the whole for Messrs. Pimm.

Cross-examined by MR. METOCALFE. The unreserved sale was by the order of the Receiver—it was by the consent of the Receiver, who afterwards received part of the proceeds of sale—I took the orders for the parcel of the 8th September from the defendant himself for two lengths—it was for a short length, and I sent up two lengths for approval—there was one length returned amounting to 40l—that was on the 2nd October—I cannot tell if, besides that, 77l. 10s. was paid off the account on the 4th October—the financial matters have nothing to do with me—I should presume he made a payment on 4th October; I am not in the office—these lengths were not "job lots," but regular goods—they would be saleable as short lengths—they would do for curtains or furniture—as 8 or 9 yards long they would have made a pair of curtains, or have covered a suite—we should not necessarily have sold them as remnants—we are continually making the same patterns, and if defendant had wanted 100 yards we could have made them for him—we do sell "job lots" sometimes, if we have the misfortune to have a piece mildewed.

ARTHUR TODD . I am in the employ of Messrs. Pimm Brothers, and have been their manager for some years—on turning to the ledger account it would appear there was a bill met by defendant on the 4th October for goods bought before that date—the goods supplied between the months of August, September, and October are not paid for—there is an invoice dated 22nd September of crimson brocatelle, 44 inches and 63 inches, 33l. 10s. 8d., and another invoice 3rd October, 130l. 19s. 2d., at folio 150 of the guard book—I bought those goods in or purchased them—I paid 45l. 17s. 6d. for the lot, or 14s. 6d. a yard—the entire amount of debt due to Messrs. Pimm is 594l. 5s. 2d.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. We have had dealings with the defendant about four years, I believe, and during that time he has paid us some hundreds—he continued to meet his bills up to 4th October, 1871

—he gave a bill at three months, I think, on the 28th October for 180l. for some of the goods spoken of—that was 30th January, 1872—there was a bill due on the 31st October for 100l. drawn on the 29th July—the 4th October is the last payment—the previous bill was on the 4th August, 221l. 9s. 2d.—I cannot tell that there was no bill due on the 31st October, the date of the petition—this (produced) is a copy of our ledger, and the bill was drawn on the 29th July in Dublin.

Re-examined. I have not got the bill here; Messrs. Pimm Brothers have the bill.

DONALD ROSS . I am a cabinetmaker in Denmark Street, Soho—on the 27th June last year I sold defendant a cabinet—I subsequently, on the 25th August, sold him four cabinets for 115l., two about 7 feet, and two 15 feet, with brass trellis, winged figures, and Pietra Doura doors—at the time he bought them he said he had done remarkably well with the other cabinets, but he feared he would not be able to give so good a report as to the small ones, as he thought the price was rather high—I made out the invoice, drew out an acceptance, went down with the van, and delivered the cabinets—I handed the defendant the invoice and two acceptances, and he gave me the acceptances back, signed by himself—I left the goods in the shop—the acceptances have never been paid—I know a person named Mascard who resides in Charlotte Street—he is frequently in and out of my place—he saw the cabinets and spoke about them—there was a peculiarity about their manufacture, especially the smaller ones; it was the combination of the brass trusses or rails with the Pietra Doura doors—I did not see the cabinets afterwards.

Cross-examined by MR. METOALFE. A man named Brunswick brought defendant to me—I had dealt with Brunswick before—the cabinets I have spoken of were not sold to Brunswick—defendant told me he had sold one cabinet at a good price—I have not looked at his books—I do not know in what way he sold the four, whether together, or in what way—I cannot tell whether he sold one for 60l. and the other for 45l., being 6l. more than he gave—I paid Brunswick a commission for bringing defendant of 11 per cent, a little over 2s. in the pound; it came to nearly 14l.

HARMAN MASCARD . I reside at 68, Charlotte Street, Fitzroy Square, and am a cabinet manufacturer—I was acquainted with the defendant and dealt with him, and also with the last witness, Donald Ross—in August last, I saw at Ross's two small and one large Pietra Doura cabinets—I subsequently saw them at Bonham's, Leicester Square, in the saleroom.

MOSS HYAM LEVI . I am in the employ of my father's firm, B. Moss & Co., of 45, Leman Street, Whitechapel, wholesale cabinet manufacturers—up to October last I knew the defendant, but our firm had had no transactions with him—I remember in April, 1871, making a mahogany suite; they were twelve stuffed chairs, a lady's and gentleman's easy chair, a settee, and two footstools, covered in velvet—they were made for a gentleman, in the first instance, who afterwards did not wish to keep them—a person of the name of Brunswick called about the 8th or 9th October—in consequence of what he said, those goods were taken to defendant's premises, and a bill was given for 68l. 5s.—we were willing to sell them for 50l.; the difference was commission to Brunswick—the bill for 68l. has not been met, and the goods are unpaid for.

Cross-examined by MR. METOALFE. We told Brunswick we would take 50l., and all else he could get for himself was for commission—I have the books

here—the goods are invoiced to "George Pulling & Co."—I did not make a previous invoice on the 10th October to Brunswick—(invoice-book produced) this invoice (produced) we sent with the goods; it is in the clerk's handwriting—the other one (produced) is not our invoice at all—I never saw that before; I do not know who wrote it—I do not know that the second invoice on blue paper was sent after the bankruptcy—the other is in the handwriting of a clerk named Glover—he is not here—I did not see Mr. Hincks; he did not come to me—I swear I did not make an invoice after the bankruptcy—I did not make the second invoice after the bankruptcy—I am always supposed to be in the warehouse—I did not attend the Bankruptcy Court, our solicitor did—I do not know of any invoice being made charging Brunswick with the goods—the first invoice I believe I made out myself charging 68l. 5d., after I had got the acceptance—that was when the goods were sold—I cannot explain the subsequent invoice—these goods were not stained to my knowledge—they were none of them second-hand goods—I believe Brunswick said at Bow Street that they were—the first price was 70l., and there was no commission then—they were reduced from 70l. to 50l. because they were unsaleable things, and, as a wholesale house, we are very glad to get rid of unsaleable things—they cost us 51l. 1s. 9d., as I have documents here to prove.

Re-examined. I delivered the goods at defendant's shop, and had the bills—I do not know the handwriting of that second invoice.

PATRICK NOLAN . I am a partner in the firm of Messrs. Ellington, Ridley, & Co., silk warehousemen, Watling Street—my firm are creditors for 194l. for goods supplied to the defendant—on 17th August last defendant's buyer bought 44 yards of crimson pekinade at 9s. 6d. a yard, that is a silk and wool rep—the amount was 21l. 5s. 2d.—we also supplied on the same day two pieces of crimson brocatelle, which were invoiced at 5s. 9d. a yard, and amounted to 75l. 18s.—those goods are unpaid for—I subsequently saw them at Messrs. Bonham's on the 8th November—I saw a catalogue produced at the sale, and I identify them as lots 163, 171, 172, 173, 174—they were sold at 6s. 10d. a yard—lot 163 fetched 15l. 4s. 4d., and cost 21l. 5s.—one lot cost 75l. 18s., and produced 77l. 3s. 8d.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Defendant dealt with us from December, 1871—before that it was only a few pounds, but no ledger account—on August 4th he paid us 24l. 12s. 9d.—on May 15th he returned a piece of goods, 11l. 12s. 2d.—there was no bill actually due at the time of the stoppage, 31st October—we buy job lots—none of these goods were job lots—we never buy job lots at salerooms—when a manufacturer has a surplus stock we occasionally clear it out—that does not mean that the manufacturer wants to meet bills—we have done so then sometimes, no doubt.

Re-examined. It is very hard to define a "job lot"—a manufacturer may have 5,000 or 6,000 pieces, and, as he wants to keep his machinery going, he would come to a house and say "Can you clear us out?"—we should say, "Yes, it is only a question of price"—that would be called a job lot—if a man was in pecuniary embarrassment and wanted to sell off all his stock, we should call that a "job lot."

SYDNEY MARLER . I was salesman in the employ of the defendant for some time at a salary of 50s. a week lately—after the dissolution of the partnership defendant managed the business generally himself—besides myself there were two persons, named Harver and Stevens—from April, 1871, to the stoppage, the cash-book was not kept particularly by anybody—defendant

generally made the entries in the ordinary course of business—I remember the differences between defendant and his partners, Wardell and Halton—the stock at that time was worth 10,000l. or 12,000l.—when those partners went out a person of the name of Sherwood was called in—I remember the dealings with Attenborough—I cannot positively say when they began before Halton and Wardell went out, I should say three months—I have pledged goods for the defendant—the reason we went to Bonham's first was this, a customer of the name of Mrs. Giles had been supplied with goods, and she was compelled to sell them off; Mr. Bonham came to us to know whether we had more of the same silk to make some curtains to match; we said "Yes"—previously to that we had been selling goods to Mr. Sherwood when we had bills to meet—Mr. Bonham said, "We always get a long price, you send them to us," and a few days after some were sent—that was the commencement of it—that was April, 1871—I have not an account of the goods that went—I can tell by Bonham's account—in July the transactions were six in number, amounting to 465l. 18s. 6d., and the amount advanced, 450l.—there were goods sent to 42, Wilton Crescent—Messrs. Bonham used to hand me a cheque, and I used to go to the bank and take up defendant's bills that were dishonoured—the cheques were payable to defendant's order, but I had authority to sign—I never sent any goods to Bonham's without instructions from defendant—the goods so sent when entered were entered at the end of the order-book—they were not entered in the day-book in the ordinary way, so far as I know—I cannot say whether the cash was entered—I do not know if defendant entered it—he used to keep the cash-book in his desk—most of the amounts are entered in the cash-book, I having paid bills with them—they were not entered in the ordinary way—the articles on the 9th September are different to the goods of Messrs. Pimm—there are 81 yards of crimson silk—in the invoice it is 46 yards—those goods went to Bonham's on the 16th—the goods sent on the 24th October were supplied on the 20th September—I recollect that was some figured cerise-silk—I was not present at the sale—there was a length of 75 yards—four pieces of brocatelle were supplied by Messrs. Ellington on the 17th August, and an advance was obtained from Bonham's of 55l. on the 18th, the day after—it might have been the 19th, I do not recollect taking them the same day—on the 6th September there were 44 yards of crimson brocatelle on which they advanced 44l., and 5 yards of crimson tapestry, that would be the pekinade—on the 11th September I took one of Donald Ross's Pietra Doura cabinets, and on the 16th two more—on the 14th October I took Moss & Co.'s furniture—they came through Brunswick—there was an advance of 40l.—I did not make any entry of those in the books—on the 8th September there was an Axminster carpet—on that and other things I got 70l—that carpet came from Templeton & Co.—that went for 43l. 4s.—on 15th October there were 60 yards of silk rep, on which, with other things, we got 60l.—I think that was got from Morel—I took those goods to Bonham's on 11th October—they correspond with the description I find here—there were 60 yards of green silk rep, and it is 70 yards on Morel & Co.'s invoice—I cannot say whether they are part of the same goods—on 17th September, 1871, I handed Messr. Bonham 69 yards of blue satin—I see an invoice in the guard-book of 11th September, 1871, of 69 yards of blue satin—on 31st August there are some rolls of silk damask, and there is an invoice of that date—the silk had been ordered for Porchester Gate—on 7th September there were

57 yards of silk, in two lengths—that was from Pitman & Co., of Lyons—on 7th September I took a large quantity to Messrs. Bonham's—on 30th August, 1871, there are 48 yards of blue Japanese silk, and on 9th June, there is an invoice from Messrs. Downes Brothers for 62 yards of blue Japanese silk, at 6s. 3d.—the goods referred to in the agreement between defendant and my father (produced), dated 25th August, 1871, have never been redeemed—it was not thought worth while to have them back for the estate.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. The house belongs to my father; it is one of a row—it was furnished so that a tenant might have it complete—the object was to secure my father's debt; defendant owed him 250l.—we had nothing like the blue Japanese silk—that was obtained on 30th August—I was with defendant between five and six years—he was formerly in business in Skinner Street—we always did a very good business in Holborn, and if he had not been so crippled for money he might have done a very good business—the crippling for money arose, I think, with the Suburban Hotel Company—there was a petition to wind it up—that cost him a lot of money—there was the Chancery suit with his partners also—he was always in the business, superintending it—I am not aware of any extravagance—the partners were paid off, I think, in March, 1870, and they claimed something like 7,000l. or 8,000l.—Mr. Hincks came to the house first, when the liquidation was thought of, with Mr. Walker—he was a large creditor, and I believe defendant put himself in his hands—he was a creditor for 1,500l., I know—I saw Mr. Hincks and defendant together; that was before the petition—Mr. Walker's advice was taken, and the petition arrived at—Mr. Hincks was there the morning the petition was filed, and two mornings afterwards—I thought he was acting for defendant—after the petition for liquidation, Mr. Hincks and Mr. Stewart were there—I believe they came the night before the petition was put on the file—the next morning Mr. Hincks, Mr. Stewart, and Mr. Lamb, his partner, came in a cab, and Mr. Walker was with them—on the following evening, after the petition, they took away some rolls of silk and some Dresden vases—they were very expensive silks—I do not know where they took them to—there was a discussion in Mr. Hincks' presence that some goods were at Bonham's—that was about three days after the petition—defendant was discussing it with them—I heard him tell them they were there—I did not hear him tell them why—I was present when the goods were sold at the sale by Mitchell—I only went in for a few minutes; I did not see everything sold—there were other goods besides defendant's goods—I only know what I heard from Mr. Walker—Mitchell put in some of his own, and Walker also—he is a cabinetmaker also—they were unfinished goods—I always went when goods were sold at Bonham's to bid, or sent them prices for the goods to fetch, to prevent them being sacrificed at low prices—I always used my own discretion—they very often fetched more than they cost; sometimes it was a good sale, and, at other periods, a very bad sale—I used to bid for the things, and run them up, if I saw anybody in the room wanted them—some goods deposited there were fetched away for the purpose of business, and others placed in their stead—defendant used to select the goods to be sent himself—he selected the worst, of course—I recollect the dining-room suite, in crimson velvet—I cannot speak to its condition now; I merely saw it in the upstairs room—I remember defendant starting for Vienna and Constantinople—that was last August—he went as to a large order to furnish a palace for the Sultan

—he was under a contract with Mr. Maribeta to go out—he said he did not like going out; that it would either make him or break him, but he would chance it—I heard it was 500,000l., to be paid by instalments—if he had been enabled to complete it, it would have made his fortune—he borrowed 200l. from Mr. Hunter for the purpose of going, and for samples—he was constantly stopped at the Custom Houses—he wanted to get to Vienna, and great deal of time was lost—he was obliged to come back without completing it—he knew there were many bills coming due when he went away, and he was obliged to come back and make arrangements for them—he could certainly have carried on his business if he had been properly "financed"—Mr. Hunter was one of the creditors—at this time there were moneys owing from really good people to the defendant—there was St. Bartholomew's Hospital, 400l.—I went to get the money about August—we did not get the money; it has been paid to the trustee since—there was 100l. owing from Sir Talbot Constable, and many respectable people—during the last twelve weeks we were making a profit on the ordinary business, independently of the money owing to the partners—we had a good profit from our customers when we sold retail—I should say, speaking in the ordinary way, there was a profit during the last twelve weeks, of 100l. a week—contrasting the last four months preceding the bankruptcy with the corresponding four months in 1870, there was no violent increase of purchases; there was nothing excessive—it is impossible for me to speak with accuracy as to the trade payments during the last four months, whether they were as much as 7,000l.—whenever money was received from Bonham's, or from anywhere else, as a rule, I generally paid trade bills and generally took up dishonoured bills.

Re-examined. I had been in the habit of taking up dishonoured bills about nine months previously to defendant's failure—I know the partners have not been paid—I have been to defendant's house in Grove End Road—he kept a brougham—I was cognisant of the pledgings with Mr. Attenborough during 1870—that continued down to the stoppage whenever he was pressed for money—he paid the ordinary rate, 15 per cent.—before I saw Mr. Hincks I knew defendant was being sued—I saw a good many writs—at the time Mr. Walker came in he was very much pressed indeed—the day after Mr. Hincks came in there was an execution in—I think I took in four writs-and four Judge's orders, and a notice in bankruptcy from Mr. Brooks—Mr. Hincks was Mr. Walker's attorney—the first time I saw Mr. Hincks was one morning at 9 o'clock, up stairs with defendant—that was two or three days previously to filing the petition for liquidation—I do not think the purchases were in excess over the former year; the ledger would show.

JAMES WILLIAM LOGAN . I am an accountant, residing at 22, Great Winchester Street, and was employed by Mr. Stewart, the Receiver, to prepare a statement of the bankrupt's affairs—this (produced) is a copy of it—the bankrupt assisted me in preparing it—the details were obtained from him, and nothing was entered in it without his knowledge—I had access to all the books that were on the premises—there were a cash-book, a bought-and-sold ledger, day-book, an invoice-book, and banker's pass-book—we found no account with Messrs. Bonham on looking over the books—they are returned in the statement as secured creditors—Mr. Stewart applied to them for a statement, which they supplied, and which resulted in a balance of 642l. 0s. 10d.—in that statement there are the debits of cash

received from Bonham & Son—there are no entries in the cash-book to identify them—we could not make the cash account balance; there is a large excess of payments—the cash-book had not been balanced for sixteen months—I have not gone into the question of purchases by the defendant.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. The defendant told me he had had dealings with Messrs. Bonham—there were no entries of them in the cash-book—now and then we found items in the cash-book corresponding with the receipts from Messrs. Bonham, but not in all cases; the book did not furnish the necessary materials—he mentioned that he had had dealings with Meters. Bonham, in the presence of Mr. Hincks and the Receiver—he declined to say anything about it until he got the account—I will swear that he said he could not tell anything about the transactions with Messrs. Bonham—I knew the goods were at Bonham's; I cannot say defendant told me they were there—I asked him why the name of Bonham did not appear in the books, and he said he did not want the name to appear; and, with regard to paying in the cheques, he did not want his banker to know it—he used to get the cheques cashed, so that they might net pass through the bank—besides the books I have mentioned, there was a diary—I cannot say the books were very well kept; the invoice-book was well kept—I do not know anything of any stock being taken away from Holborn; I only know what is in the statement of affairs I was simply employed to make up the statement of affairs—I was then acting under Mr. Stewart's instructions—I have had nothing to do as the accountant in the bankruptcy—I had nothing to see to as to the profit for the last twelve weeks; I cannot tell whether there was any—I cannot say whether he bought largely, or increased, or what he did; I was not asked to ascertain—he was paying away about 1,000l. a week during the last three or four months—his cash account shows payments in excess of the receipts—I have not analyzed the trade payments during the four months, and cannot say whether they were 6,000l.—the purchases of 1871 were not larger than those of 1870—I know nothing about the sale of the cabinets.

Re-examined. The bankrupt was directed by the Court to file a cash account for the last six months of his trading, and I was appointed to assist him in complying with that order—that was my only employment—as to the trade bills we took his word for them as to which were trade bills and which for accommodation—we judged as to that by the names in the statement of affairs, and treated them as trade bills accordingly—when I saw in the statement "Bonham 300l.," I did not assume that was a trade bill—all the bills in the bill-book I treated as trade bills—there were others where no cash was advanced, and which were not in the bill-books—I did not compare them with the invoice ledger, but with the statement of affairs—I found those that should be due appeared according to the bill-book—this account would not be necessary to show whether it was goods supplied or money lent—I found the bill-book corresponded in substance with the proofs of the various creditors—I did not know whether a proof was in respect of an accommodation bill, or money lent, or goods supplied—the amounts received from Messrs. Bonham do not correspond in date with the entries in the cash-book—there was no name attached to them—defendant would tell me which they were—there was nothing in the books to identify them—in July there is a receipt for 100l. from Messrs. Bonham, but there is no entry in the cash-book—there is the same amount, but not corresponding in date—it is the same as to 100l. on the 13th July, 90l. on the 5th

August, 90l. on the 38th August, 50l. on the 31st; September 6th, 45l.; September 7th, 50l.; September 9th, 140l. and 50l.; and September 11th, 25l.—there are some entries corresponding in amount which may or may not form part of those sums.

By MR. METCALFE. I cannot say that there was a single bill outstanding at the date of the petition, the 31st October—from week to week the payments were always in excess—payments were made on the day of the receipt, or a day or two afterwards.

The examination of the defendant in bankruptcy of 13th March, 1872, was put in and read at length. He attributed his failure to an unfortunate speculation in the Suburban Hotel Company, and also to the fact of a dissolution of partnership, he having to pay out the two retiring partners; to meet these calls he sold large quantities of goods at Bonham's auction-rooms, and pledged others at Attenborough's. Portions of further examinations on 22nd March and 20th April were also read at the request of defendants counsel.

DAVID WHITE LAMB . I am in partnership with Mr. Stewart, the trustee to this estate—we are accountants—I understand that, at the time of the liquidation, there was some property taken to secure the costs of the petition—they were brought back again, and sold in the bankrupt's premises—I saw every article sold—I did not see them taken away—this (produced) is the stock account of the sale—the goods consisted of a pair of large vases, lot 102, and a pair of small vases, lot 107; a piece of crimson silk, and a piece of gold—those were sold at the sale, and the proceeds duly carried to the credit of the estate—the charges upon it, 12l. 10s. to Mr. Hincks and 12l. 10s. to our firm, were paid—with the exception of those two sums the rest of the property has gone to the credit of the estate—I have looked at the books to see what they are; there is a cash-book, a day-book, a guard-book for invoices, a banker's pass-book, and some scroll diaries—all those books are here, and susceptible of being examined—they are not kept so as to show what was the bankrupt's condition at the time of his stoppage—credits were not posted in the ledger for a considerable time before the bankruptcy—the cash-book is not kept in an ordinary way; it is very badly kept, imperfectly kept—the invoices show the amount of purchases during the last four months, before the petition for liquidation, to be 6,535l. 14s. 2d.—this is a statement prepared in our office—the statement of affairs shows a deficiency of 15,000l.—that does not include the 4,000l. or 5,000l. at which he overstated his stock at the time of the dissolution of his partnership—there was no notice taken of that in his statement of affairs which he prepared for the liquidation—I am not able in any way, by these books, to find out how that deficiency could have arisen.

Cross-examined. The 5,000l. would add to the deficiency if it were taken notice of, but it is not; it would not make any difference in the actual state of affairs at present, but it is unaccounted for—he said there was 8,000l. more stock than there was—I was not present when the goods I have spoken of were taken away; I was on the premises, I believe, but engaged on the books—I understand that my partner was on the premises; I can't speak with certainty as to Mr. Hincks—I cannot explain why 150l. worth of goods were taken away to cover 20l. odd due to Mr. Hincks and us—I understand they were taken to Mr. Walker's in Bunhill Row; he was not one of the committee then; he was one of the largest creditors—he was inquiring into the state of affairs—I believe the goods were retained at his place until they were brought back to the sale—I am not sure, I won't swear to it—I believe

other goods of Mr. Walker's were brought into the sale—he is a cabinet-maker—I can't say whether they were new or second-hand goods—some goods of Mr. Mitchell's were also brought in, I understand; he is a cabinet-maker, and the petitioning creditor—I am not aware that any other persons put in goods—I cannot tell you how much the bankrupt paid to trade creditors in the last four months; it is impossible to find from his books—we don't consider the cash account filed by the bankrupt reliable—we have not been able to ascertain with certainty how much he paid away within the last four months; I have not personally tried to do that—the amount of the purchases in the corresponding four months in 1871 was ascertained, but I really forget it at this moment—I am sure they were not as large as those I have mentioned—it was apparently a very large business—I could not say that it turned over 24,000l., or 30,000l.—it is quite possible—it is impossible that it could be making a profit during the last twelvemonths—I have not worked it out—I don't see how it is possible—I have not sent in any account yet against the estate, with the exception of the small account of 12l. odd—I am not aware that an account for 300l. odd has been sent in—my partner is trustee—the 300l. odd has nothing to do with the trustee's personal work; that is the lawyer's charges—I can't speak to these accounts—I don't know about them—it is a very difficult question to answer what has been done—everything has been done with regard to winding up the estate—I have not made an estimate of the purchases for the whole year of 1871—possibly I could have done it—it is not possible from the bankrupt's books to make any estimate of the payments at any period—I was present part of the time at the meeting when lie was asking to pass his last examination—I remember a document being produced—it was not to my knowledge put into the hands of the trustee and supported by affidavit—I can't say whether it was put into Mr. Hincks' hands—I will swear that I don't know that—I am not aware that trade creditors to the amount of 11,000l. opposed the prosecution, and asked that he might be admitted to pass his last examination—I was not present on any occasion when such a thing was done; it has never been placed before the trustees.

ARCHIBALD STEWART . I am an accountant, at 30, Moorgate Street—some goods were taken away to secure the costs of the petition for liquidation; they were taken to Mr. Walker's—they were two pairs of vases and two pieces of crimson silk and gold—they were afterwards returned, and received by myself—I was appointed trustee on 9th June—I was present at a meeting of creditors, where it was resolved that the defendant should be made bankrupt, and not be permitted to proceed in liquidation; it was somewhere about 23rd November—the matter was discussed, and the bankrupt himself was heard—I was afterwards present at a meeting when it was determined to prosecute him; the meeting was specially called for that purpose—I think it was on 10th May—it was then resolved by a considerable majority that he should be prosecuted—there might have been some dissentients in the room, possibly, but they did not give expression to their opinions in public—the minutes were submitted to the Registrar in Bankruptcy before any steps were taken at all, and his advice and permission were requested to proceed under this resolution.

Cross-examined. I can't tax my memory as to how many creditors were present; it is all recorded—there was a very large number—notices were sent to every one—I think there were about thirty-nine or forty—the notice was not that it was intended to prosecute; I can't recollect the exact

wording of it—this is it: it is "a meeting of creditors to receive a report from the trustee as to what has been done, and to take the direction of the creditors as to the course to be pursued in the matter referred to in the report"—I do not know that a very large number of creditors wished not to prosecute, and to memorialise the Court to allow him to pass—I have not seen such a document (looking at a paper)—I may have seen that, I can't say—it is asserted that a great number of trade creditors dissent from the prosecution—they never said so to us, with the exception of one or two—I do not know that creditors to the amount of 10,000l. or 11,000l. dissent from this prosecution; I swear that—the goods were taken away to provide for professional expenses that were being incurred prior to the presentation of the petition—they were taken away jointly by me and Mr. Hineks—it is not correct that at that time about 12l. was owing to each of us; there was nothing owing, the expenses were being incurred at that time—I did not look to see whether they were goods that had been paid for or not; we requested the insolvent to give us some goods to protect us in any expense in the event of our not being appointed, and he gave us those goods—we did not know the value of the silk or of the vases—I was not trustee or receiver at that time, I was nothing at all—the goods were taken to the office of one of the creditors for safe custody, Mr. Walker, of 119, Bunhill Row; they were kept there until shortly before the sale in February—I think they were ordered back to the premises by me, and received by me, not by Mr. Hincks'; they were jointly mine and Mr. Hincks'—they did not come back with other goods of Walker's; I swear that—they came back with other goods, goods belonging to me in the first instance, because I had paid for them—I think they were silks or reps that I had redeemed and deposited with Mr. Walker for safe custody—they had been taken away under the Sheriff's warrant in execution—those goods were estimated at 122l. 18s.—I advanced 83l. 7s. 6d. to pay for them—I don't, of my own Personal knowledge, know that any of Walker's goods got into the sale—I believe some did, under an arrangement with the auctioneer—I am not aware whether or not Mitehell sent in any goods, my sanction was never asked—the lease of the premises is given up—the mortgagee had a claim for 1000l. on it—there was more than one mortgagee, two or three—I gave up the leases—as we had not the lease we did not try to sell the goodwill; we could not do one without the other—the furniture at the bankrupt's own house was not included in the statement of accounts—a Mr. Harris had a bill of sale over that to a certain amount—it came into the original statement of assets; the original amount was 400l., but it was estimated at 1,000l. the proofs allowed amount to about 16,500l.—138 Proofs were admitted—I did not take any steps to ascertain the amount of purchases that the defendant had made during the year, because it was considered that there was no occasion to do so, only for six months—it was upwards of 6,000l. for six months—I don't recollect exactly; I believe that was for four months—I believe I made an estimate of the purchases in the corresponding months in 1870, but I have not a copy of that—the books have been so badly kept that I can't give you the correct amount of the payments in those four months in 1871—I can give you a summary—I can tell you, with reservation, that there was no accurate account ever kept of them, and never had been—as rendered by Mr. Pulling, they were about 16,000l.; but to take the two together you must get the receipts as well—I must, as an accountant, put the two together—the accommodation bills

and renewals were so treated that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to trace them at all—I can't answer what the trade payments were—I should say they were not 6,150l., but I can't tell you—he kept on paying some tradesmen until the day that he petitioned—I can't tell you whether, during the last twelve months, he was making a profit of 100l. a week, but I don't believe it—I can't say whether the business, taken by itself, realised 3,000l. a year—the business might have been a good one, but as it was conducted certainly not—it might have been a paying one in proper hands and properly conducted—my belief is that it was not a paying business as then conducted—I am taking the working account in—I can't tell you whether it was a paying business, taking the trade simply, stripped of the bills, the partners, and that sort of thing—I took steps to inquire, but I could not arrive at any conclusion—I was told by some of the neighbours that it ought to have been a paying business, but it was not—that was their impression, but I say they were not in a position to judge—I can't call to memory whether the defendant told me that goods had gone to Bonham's; my impression is that he did, either when I first went there, before I was appointed receiver, or very shortly afterwards—I don't recollect whether Mr. Hincks was there then; I won't deny and I won't admit, for I don't recollect whether he said he must send some goods to pay for the wages that were due, nor do I recollect Mr. Hincks saying he had better do so—I will not say he did not—I can't recollect these minor matters—I know the wages were not all paid at that time.

Re-examined. The mortgagee foreclosed his mortgage—the creditors and myself went into the matter, to see what the lease could be valued at, and we found it was a great deal more than-we could possibly be justified in throwing away money to redeem—it was a lease, 10 years unexpired—somewhere about 1,025l. was charged upon it—the rent was 265l. per annum, irrespective of taxes—I came to the conclusion that it would not be for the advantage of the estate to redeem the lease out of the hands of the mortgagee, and the result justified our opinion, from the amount realised by the sale—the bankrupt himself attaches 1,500l. value to the lease—at the sale it realised somewhere about 400l. nett—the first mortgagee would make no offer for it—without the cash account, which I afterwards filed by order of the Court, there were no materials on the books by which I could see what money he had paid during the last four months—the answer I give about it depends upon whether he is accurate in his statement—I have endeavoured to check it, and I cannot—his banker's book would contain some—the cash account distinguishes the bank payments from the cash—the entire amount of the cash account for the four months is stated as 16,000l.—out of those payments 9,700/. has gone in cash, not through the bank at all—I have endeavoured to check those payments, but cannot—the cash account was not rendered till a late period, after he had had the assistance of Mr. Logan—that must have been some time in April, or somewhat later; I can't say—the meeting of creditors on 2nd May, 1872, was to receive the report of the trustee as to what had been done, and to take the direction of the creditors as to the course to be pursued—that report was considered by the creditors, and a case submitted to Counsel—on Counsel's advice the prosecution was instituted—we requested the sanction of the Registrar, and submitted the documents to him, and he sanctioned the proceeding.

HENRY ARTHUR ATTENBOROUGH . I am the son of Mr. Attenborough—I have here the documents that were signed by the defendant's agent—this

(produced) is a record of every transaction that we had—it shows the first pledging and the last—2,707l. 14s. was the total amount that he received—the date of the first pledging was 12th March, 1870, and the last 21st September, 1871—our rate of interest is 15 per cent. per annum.

Cross-examined. These were not taken away and others substituted for them without a fresh agreement—we should treat that as two transactions, a redemption and a re-pledge—that would increase the apparent amount of the total—our account will show the number of redemptions—we had 170 transactions, but each agreement was renewed every three months—there were 58 separate pledgings—they were all redeemed—the interest was kept up; nothing was forfeited; nothing was ever sold by us—the last payment of interest was on 27th September, 1871.

Re-examined. All after that was taken out by the trustees—we did not receive any money after that—I see there is one, a snuff-box, which we were not aware was included in the estate of the bankrupt—at the time of the bankruptcy he had received from us 1,855l/. 14s. 6d.

NOT GUILTY .

FOURTH COURT.—Thursday, October 31st, 1872.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

750. SAMUEL HOWARD (23) , PLEADED GUILTY to feloniously forging a request for the delivery of four boxes of cigars, with intent to defraud.—

Twelve Months' Imprisonment.

751. CHARLES PARMENTER (24), and WILLIAM FLOYD (21) , Stealing two pieces of paper, the property of the Metropolitan Railway, the masters of Parmenter. Second Count against Floyd—For receiving the same.

MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS conducted the Prosecution; MR. F.H. LEWIS defended Parmenter, and MR. LYONS defended Floyd.

THE COURT was of opinion that the charge of larceny could not be sustained, as there was no intention to steal the tickets or to convert them so their own use, but the intention was to travel with them without payment; therefore it was a fraud more than a larceny.

NOT GUILTY .

752. CHARLES PARMENTER and WILLIAM FLOYD were again Indicted for unlawfully conspiring with others unknown to defraud the Metropolitan Railway of their goods.

CHARLES VINCENT . I live at 21, Poplar Place, Bayswater—I have been employed by the Metropolitan Railway to watch the defendants and others—on 21st October, I went with a man named Cremish to Notting Hill Gate Station, where I saw Floyd with another man, who is not in custody—he left the other man outside, came into the station, and spoke to Parmenter—I then saw him go to a tray, where the collected tickets were put, in front of Parmenter—he selected some tickets, and put them in his coat pocket—Parmenter was looking at him at the time—Floyd went out and called the other man, and they then passed Parmenter, whose duty it was to click the tickets—I saw him clicking the passengers' tickets as they passed by; but neither of those men showed their tickets to be clipped—they passed Parmenter without his doing it—Cremish and I followed them—they got into the train and so did we—we got out at South Kensington, and so did they—we followed them up the stairs—there is a ticket-collector there—Floyd spoke to him, and the man who was with Floyd passed out without showing any ticket—Floyd gave a ticket up to the collector—on

the 23rd I went with Cremish, and Walker, and Urban to the Notting Hill Gate Station—I left them there at 10.30, and went to St. James's Park—about 11 o'clock I saw Floyd and the same man I had seen with him before come out of the station, followed by Urban, Cremish, and Walker—Urban stopped Floyd—he said he was a detective, and asked what ticket he had given to the collector—he said the one he had come up with—Urban asked him where he had come from, and he said "From Victoria"—Urban asked him if he had any more tickets on him—he said be thought he had one more, and he took a half-ticket from his pocket and gave it to Urban—Urban said "You can't go back with that, as it is cancelled"—he said "Oh, yes, I can; I am known down the line, and I can be passed through"—Urban left Floyd with Cremish, and went up to a man named Cooper—shortly after he came back, and took Floyd to Cooper—Cooper was given In charge, but he was subsequently discharged by the Magistrate—Cooper said, in Floyd's presence, "That is the man; I know him well; he is up and down here three or four times a day"—Urban said "Then you know the man?"—Cooper said "Yes, I know him perfectly well"—Floyd said that he had given the ticket to Cooper as he came through the barrier—Cooper said "Yes, he did give me a ticket"—he was then told he would be taken in charge for conspiring to defraud the Railway Company.

Cross-examined by MR. LEWIS. Cooper was discharged—he was the person who would receive the cancelled tickets—any cancelled ticket would be refused by an honest collector—I was a gentleman's servant, and am now in the employment of the Metropolitan Railway Company—I was in Dr. Oldham's service—he became a bankrupt and I left—Mr. White employed me on the railway—I never acted as detective before, and this is my first trial—it is not the first time I have been a witness; I was at the police-court as a witness—I have been acting as detective about a fortnight—I saw Floyd go up to where Parmenter was standing—the booking clerk was inside—I don't believe he could see what was going on—I was reading a reward against the ticket-office: I was not thinking of a reward—I saw Floyd take a ticket from a little drawer at the top of the desk—he was face to face with Parmenter—there were one or two persons going down—I don't know whether there was any train in the station—Floyd was about 7 yards from me—I was just against where you get the tickets—there is a refreshment station there: I was not in there.

Cross-examined by MR. LYONS. I have not had much experience myself In traveling about the line—when you pass the barrier you show the ticket and have it cancelled—I never saw a person employed on the line pass a ticket-collector without giving up a ticket—I have known Floyd four or five years—I have never known a ticket-collector to cancel the wrong end of a ticket—it has never happened to me—I don't know that it is often done—a man coming from Victoria, westward, might alight at St. James's Park—I should say about twenty persons got out at St. James's Park that day, but I was not looking after the passengers at all—I heard Cooper say that Floyd was in the employment of the Company—Floyd made no reply, to my knowledge—I have never been in this Court before.

CHARLES CREMISH . I am a plasterer—I am at present employed by the Metropolitan Railway to watch the prisoners and others—on Monday, 21st October, about 11.30, I saw Floyd go through the Notting Hill Gate Station—I followed him to where Parmenter was standing at the ticket place—I saw Floyd take some tickets out of a drawer—Parmenter's face was to him,

and he gave him either one or two himself—Floyd went out of the station and talked to another man, and they went through the station afterwards to go down on to the platform—they passed Parmenter without showing their tickets—I got into the train, and followed them to the South Kensington Station—Floyd gave a cancelled half-ticket to collector, and the other man passed out without giving one.

Cross-examined by MR. LEWIS. I am a plasterer—I was employed by Mr. Langridge before I was employed by the Metropolitan Railway—I have been employed by them eighteen months—the police found me out to turn detective—I was standing with the last witness.

Cross-examined by MR. LYONS. I followed Floyd to where Parmenter was collecting tickets—I was about 5 yards from him when he passed Parmenter.

PETER WALKER . I am an accountant, and live at 12, Regina Road, Tollington Park, Hornsey—in consequence of a communication from Mr. White, I went to Notting Hill Gate Station on 23rd October—I saw Floyd there—he went up to the booking-office, but did not pay any money or take a ticket—he went to a kind of pigeon-hole by the side of which Parmenter was standing—I saw him put his hand in and take out either one or two tickets; Parmenter gave him either one or two, I could not say the number—he put them in a little pocket at the side of his great coat—he went outside the station and spoke to some man, dressed like a gentleman—they came in, and went down the stairs together; the gentleman did not take any ticket—they went to the platform from which the trains depart for St. James's Park—I travelled by the same train, and alighted, at St. James's Park—on the top of the stairs I saw Floyd make a sort of motion to Cooper, as if he knew him—Cooper was at the barrier collecting tickets—I saw the other man pass the barrier, but I could not swear that he did not give up a ticket—I think it was a green-coloured ticket that Floyd gave Cooper; it looked like a single ticket—I spoke to Urban, and he tapped Floyd on the shoulder and detained him.

Cross-examined by MR. LEWIS. I carry on business as an accountant at Hawley Crescent, Camden Town—I have been acting for the Metropolitan Railway about three or four weeks—I have not done anything of this sort before—I do all sorts of business—I do general agency business as well, anything to get a living in a respectable manner—I did not say before the Magistrate that the other man passed the barrier without giving up a ticket—I think I said that I did not know whether he did or not.

Cross-examined by MR. LYONS. There is a refreshment-bar at Notting Hill Station—I was standing outside the bar, having a glass of stont, when Floyd went up to the booking-office—the refreshment bar is about 12 feet from the booking-office—he went up to the booking-office, and made a movement with his hand outside—I should think the clerk would have noticed it—he did not take a ticket at the office; I will swear that—he went up to the place where Parmenter was and took some tickets out—I would not like to say the number; I am sure he took some—he was sideways to me then; I could see every thing that was going on—I am certain he took a ticket—there is not a pigeon-hole at every station—I noticed that the one at St. James's Park is totally different to the one at Notting Hill—I saw Floyd give a ticket to Cooper; I could not say that it was the same that we took from Parmenter; I believe it was a green one—I was close to him, following him up—I believe that different classes have different colours.

Re-examined. I was there for the purpose of noticing these men—I am certain that he put his hand into the pigeon-hole, and that parmenter also gave him some.

GEORGE URBAN (Detective officer X). I went to Notting Hill Gate RailWay Station about 10.30 on the 23rd October, and followed Floyd and another man through the booking-office on to the platform—Gremish and I and the others all got into the same train—we alighted at St. James's Park Station—I saw Floyd go up to the barrier where Cooper was and give him something—I stopped Floyd, and told him I wanted to speak to him—I said "I am a detective, and I want to know what ticket you gave to the collector"—he said he gave a ticket from Victoria—I said "Have you come from Victoria, then?"—he said "Yes, I have"—I said "Have you any more tickets?"—he said "I think I have one"—he took this half ticket out of his coat pocket and gave it to me; it is a half return which has been cancelled—I told him so, and he said, "It is all right, they will pass me back with that"—I said "I don't know, I don't think they will; I never have a cancelled ticket myself to go back with. Who is this friend of yours? I don't believe he has a ticket either"—he said "I don't know"—I said "you must know him"—he said "I do not"—I found an old half return-ticket in his trousers pocket from the Mansion House to Notting Hill Gate—before that he said he had only got the one which he gave to me—I subsequently searched Parmenter—I found thirteen tickets, of different dates, in his inner coat pocket.

GEORGE WHITE . I am chief travelling inspector in the service of the Metropolitan Railway—Floyd was originally in the service, but he was allowed to resign in April last—I have seen him and Parmenter together at the refreshment bar and at the public-houses in the neighbourhood—I have seen them spend money freely, in consequence of which I ordered them to be watched—the thirteen tickets found upon Parmenter had no right in his pocket—one of them was issued on the 7th October, and they range from that date up to the 23rd, the day he was taken into custody—some of them have been altered—this ticket was originally issued on 21st October, it has been again issued on the 22nd, and re-dated—we have seen the ticket collectors in the clerk's office sometimes—the duty of the collector is to partially sort the tickets, put them into a bag, and send them to the audit office, at High Street Station—he has no right to detain a ticket of any kind—there is no reason why he should put them in his pocket at all, the sorting tray is close by his side—no one has a right to pass a collector without showing his pass or ticket—the ticket which Floyd gave to Urban was issued on the morning of the 23rd, from West Brompton to Notting Hill Station—the other half was found at the proper station.

Cross-examined by MR. LEWIS. Parmenter came into the service upon the recommendation of a lady at Hammersmith—I don't know that he came with four years and a half's character—he came into the service on 26th July as a porter, at 17s. a week and his clothes—he was appointed ticket-collector on 26th August, and had an additional 1s. a week—his duties were to collect the tickets, and to cancel them as well—persons would pass both ways by the same barrier—there is a ticket dish there—there is not often an accumulation of dirt there; there ought not to be, and there was not to my knowledge—I was there on the morning of 23rd October—he was on duty from 5 in the morning till 3 in the afternoon—it is the porter's duty to clean the station in the morning—if he porter had not done it he would do it no doubt.

Cross-examined by MR. LYONS. I don't know bow it was that ticket was issued twice—the date is stamped on the tickets, but there are two dates stamped there; that is most unusual—I believe many gentlemen pass without showing their season tickets—it is not a custom, to my knowledge, for ticket-collectors to pass servants of the Company without their showing passes or tickets—it has been done, and they have been reported for it.

GUILTY .— Two Months' Imprisonment each.

753. ROBERT LACK (22) , Feloniously wounding James Higden Lee, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MR. A. B. KELLY concluded the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS the Defence.

JAMES HIGDEN LEE . I am a painter, and live at 81, St. John Street, Clerkenwell—on 30th September I arrived home a little after 3—the prisoner occupied the shop and parlour; I lived up stairs—I remonstrated with the prisoner on account of some blackguard expression he had made use of the day previous—I said I would serve, him the same, and threatened to pull his nose, and made use of some bad words—he said "If you touch me I will cat your b—head off "—he struck at me, and I don't remember any more—he was doing his work, and I was leaning with my hands on the counter—he made a hit at me, and cut all one side of my face—I did not see anything in his hand—he is a shoemaker by trade—he was sitting at work when I went in to him—my wife came and took me away, and a man fetched the police.

Cross-examined. I told him I would pull his b—nose—I did not put my arm over the counter, trying to catch hold of his nose—his wife was standing there during the occurrence—I did not say anything to her—I threatened I would strike the prisoner, but I did not attempt to do it across the counter—he said the words, and he delivered the blow at the same time—he did not put his arm up to defend himself.

GEORGE PERRY . I live at Hartshorn Court, Golden Lane—on 30th September I was looking in through the shop window reading a play bill—I saw the prisoner, with a knife in his hand, reach across the counter and cut the man's throat—I went away and got a policeman.

Cross-examined. I did not hear what was said—the man was leaning on the counter.

JOHN ALEXANDER MILLER . I am divisional surgeon of police—I was called to the police-station on 30th September—I found the prosecutor there, suffering from an incised wound, extending from the scalp to the cheek-the greater part was superficial, but where the carotid artery passes up towards the head it was very deep, in fact so deep that I could see the artery—the wound was 5 inches long—the carotid artery was laid bare, but not injured at all—the wound was not in a dangerous place, but a very little more would have punctured the artery—a knife like this would inflict such a wound.

JOSEPH ASHMAN (Policeman G 314). I took the prisoner—he had this knife in his hand—he was cutting leather with it at the time—I told him the charge—he said nothing.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I had been annoyed ever since I went up as a witness against him for using bad language."

He received a good character.

GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. — Four Months' Imprisonment.

754. JAMES MOODY (23), and ANN BROWN (19) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of James Strugnell, and stealing two coats, his property, and a jacket, the property of Kate Susannah Page.

MR. RIBTON conducted the Prosecution,

JAMES STRUGNELL . I live at 56, Liverpool Road, and am a cabinet-maker—on 19th September I went to bed between 10 and 12, leaving my house secure—I got up about 5.30, and found the kitchen in confusion—entrance had been gained by the water-closet window, which had a button on—it was secure when I went to bed—I missed two coats, an umbrella, a satin dress, and other articles; there was also a jacket which belonged to Mrs. Page, who had been staying at the house—on the top of the dust-hole I found this woollen scarf—I have seen the jacket, but I could not swear to it.

KATE SUSANNAH PAGE . I had been staying at the house of Mr. Strugnell, and left my jacket behind—this is my jacket; I know it by a button being off, and by some sewing—I wore it all the winter.

MAXWELL ALLINGHAM (Detective Officer). From information I received I went to 82, Cromer Street, on 10th October—I had heard of burglary, and went to make inquiry—I found the female prisoner in bed, and the male prisoner standing up, reading a newspaper—I told them I should take them into custody for committing a burglary at 56, Liverpool Road—they said they knew nothing about it—the jacket produced was on the bed, covering the female over—I received this scarf from Strugnell on the morning of the burglary.

Moody. Q. Did not you take another man up for this? A. Yes, for stealing a coat from the same place; the prosecutor could not identify the coat and he was not given in charge—I went to your place at the latter end of September, and searched it.

Re-examined. I went after him for the burglary, but he kept out of the way—he shifted his lodgings to 82, Cromer Street, and there I found him.

DAVID LEWIS (Policeman Y R 19). On 20th September I was on duty on Pentonville Hill, opposite St. James's Church—I saw Moody there about 1 o'clock—he said "Good night, Lewis"—I followed up Pentonville Hill to the corner of Penton Street—I walked in the middle of the road to avoid him seeing me—he saw me, and he ran down Chapel Street, which leads into the Liverpool Road—he was wearing this scarf, or one exactly like it, when he passed me, and I have seen him wearing one on several occasions exactly like this

Moody. This scarf never did belong to me, and never was in my possession. I bought the jacket some time ago, and the female prisoner has been wearing it ever since.

MOODY— GUILTY . He also

PLEADED GUILTY to having been before convicted, in March, 1869.**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.

BROWN— NOT GUILTY .

755. GEORGE HOARE (18) , Stealing a purse and 9s. 6d. of Ruth Lys, from her person.

MR. PLATT conducted the Prosecution.

RUTH LYS . I am the wife of Samuel Lys, and live at 59, Union Street, Kennington Road—on 21st September I was on the platform of the Ludgate Hill Station; the prisoner was by my side—I had a purse in my pocket

containing 9s. 6d.; I had seen it shortly before—I was pointing to the porter to take my box—I felt my dress move on one side—I looked down, and caught the prisoner's hand in my pocket—he was in front of me—I held his hand tight and the front part of his coat, and I said "You have got your hand in my pocket "—he made no answer, and dropped the purse to the bottom of my pocket—I did not see the purse in his hand—there was nothing else to drop in the pocket—I took the purse out myself afterwards—I held him until the inspector of cabs came.

Prisoner. Q. How far was my hand in your pocket? A. Very nearly up to your elbow—there were plenty of people on the platform—I caught your hand from the outside first, and then I got hold of your wrist and the front part of your coat—I did not hear you say "I beg your pardon, I could not help it; I slipped, and caught hold of your dress"—I heard you say something to Mr. Oates, I could not say what it was—I believe you spoke first.

JAMES OATES . I am inspected of cabs at the Ludgate Hill Station—the prisoner was given into my custody by Mrs. Lys for picking her pocket—she said she caught his hand in her pocket, with the purse in his hand—I turned from the lady to the prisoner, and said, "Is it you?"—he said "Yes, Mr. Oates, this is the second time"—I asked the lady if she charged him—she said "Yes, that is what I want"—on the way to the station he said "I shall not deny it, I did have my hand in her pocket."

The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he was waiting for the train, and that when it came up he slipped and caught hold of the prosecutrix's dress to prevent him falling.

GUILTY .**— Five years' penal servitude.

756. ELLEN RALPH (21) , Stealing 8l. 2 yards of mohair, of Joseph Westbroom, her master.

MR. SMITH conducted the prosecution.

DORCAS WESTBROOM . I am the wife of Joseph Westbroom, and live at 13, Howard Street, Strand—the prisoner was in my employment as servant—I had about 30l. in gold and notes locked up in my drawer—there was about 13l. in gold—I missed 2l. the first time—the day she was going away I went up to get a sovereign to pay her 9s., and I missed 6l. more—she said she did not take it, and we had a policeman in—I missed 2 yards of mohair, and several other things—this is the mohair; I would swear to it, and I also recognise this piece of lace.

Prisoner. I did not take the money.

THOMAS PARTRIDGE (Detective Officer E). I went to the Strand Theatre, about 7.30, on 9th October, from information I received—I saw the prisoner leave the gallery entrance—I stopped her, and told her I was a police officer, and should take her into custody for stealing 8l. and 2 yards of mohair, from 13, Howard Street—she said "You will take me innocent of the money, but I have taken the mohair; if yon go to 297, Strand, to my lodgings, you will find it in my box; I have partly made it up into a jacket"—I went there and found the mohair; I also found a corkscrew, scissors, and a number of things that have been identified by Mrs. Raymond—at the time I took her she was wearing a waterproof cloak which wad stolen from Miss Raymond.

GUILTY.— There was another indictment against the prisoner.—Judgment respited.

NEW COURT.—Friday, November 1st, 1872.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

757. HENRY CHARLES TAYLOR (24) , Embezzling the sums of 5l. 1s., 13l. 14s. 8d., and 2l. 5s. 7d. of George Barker, his master.

MR. CLARKR conducted the prosecution.

CHARLES FREDERICK HALL I am manager to George Barker, of 48, Bishopsgate Street Without, wine merchant—the prisoner was his cashier—it was his duty to receive all moneys from customers, or from the carmen at night, when they returned from their rounds, and to enter all sums in at cash-book, and to hand the whole over to me the following morning, for which I signed—he has not handed over to me the sums mentioned—I received from him this letter, and also a list of his deficiencies, amounting to 21l.

Prisoner. Q. Suppose in checking the books you noticed and amount overpaid, would you call my attention to it? A. Certainly—whoever made a mistake would have to pay the difference—I saw your testimonials; they were very satisfactory. (This letter was addressed to Messrs. Barker & Sons, from the prisoner, stating that he was sorry to say that he was a defaulter, and had consulted his solicitor, who advised him to place a reversion of 200l. in their hands, to be held at interest until his service with them expired, stating that when the books were audited a balance would be found in his favour, and requesting to be allowed to continue in their service.)

WILLIAM WOODMAN . I am a clerk to Messrs. Barker—on 3rd October I received 5l. 16s. from Mrs. Hamilton, and paid it to the prisoner.

Prisoner. Q. Do you remember an amount which was paid to me as 37s? A. Yes—I cannot say whether it should have been 27s.—the cash-book and day-book were the same—there was a mark made in red ink that it should have been 27s.—that was passed over, and not set straight—if you received only 27s. you should only have paid 27s.—the 10s. was passed over by Mr. Hall.

COURT to C.F. HALL. Q. What became of this 10s? A. According to his book he received 1l. 17s., therefore it was his duty to pay 1l. 17s.—I made a note in the day-book at the time that the customer had been charged 10s. too much for the goods, and when the customer returned he should mention it, and it would have been returned to him—the 10s. remains in our hands, to the credit of the customer—it is not a special account—if the customer never appears again it will remain in our hands.

MR. CLARKS. Q. What was the date? A. September 9th—we do not know who customer is, or where to find him.

Prisoner. I made a mistake in entering 1l. 17s. instead of 1l. 7s., and the goods should only have come to 17s.

Prisoner to W. WOODMAN, Q. Do you remember the case of peel, who returned empties to the value of his goods, and I, not knowing, paid them at the time, so that there was only one debit and two credits; he received the goods and he also had money? A. I don't recollect the case, but the books are checked every day—it is impossible that, in making up your cash, you, instead of crediting the customer, paid the money in, so that we not only received the empties but the money as well.

MR. CLARKE. Q. Has any claim been made on your by the prisoner for The 10s., or for this peel business? A. Never.

WILLIAM HARLEY . On 3rd October I received 13l. 14s. 8d. from customers, and paid it over to the prisoner.

Prisoner. Q. Have you frequently seen me there as late as 11 o'clock at night, when you have returned with your goods? A. Yes.

JOSEPH NEWTON . I am a carman to the prosecutors—on 3rd October I received 2l. 5s. 7d. from customers, and paid it to the prisoner.

EVELYN BLACK . I am a clerk in the employ of Barker & Son, and was so on 3rd and 4th October—the prisoner accounted tome every morning for sums he had received—he did not pay or account to me for any of these sums.

EDWARD WARREN (City Policeman 904). I took the prisoner on, 5th October, and found on him 1l. 2s. 1d.

JOHN OBCOTT . I am a clerk to Barker & Son, and keep the day-book—my duty was to check the customers' lists and the prisoner's book every morning, and see that the cash taken by the prisoner the previous day corresponded.

Prisoner. Q. A short time after I went there did you go for a holiday? A. Yes; I was away ten days, and during that time you did my duty—I remember your saying that you thought you had not received 2l. 2s.—you were not sure of the man, but I pointed out to you had man who paid it to you, and you did not speak to him about it—I do not know that I asked him, myself and that he denied paying it—I had no date for it being received—you had accounted for the 2l. 2s., and there was a doubt whether you had received it—that is three months ago—I do not recollect your asking the man whether he had paid it—when you first went there you had to make several entries in the day-book which were not in the cash-book; and I said it was very careless not having them in the cash-book; in fact, that occurred two or three times a week.

COURT Q. In this case he had paid over money to the firm, without knowing whether he had received it himself? A. I don't see how that is possible—he only received money from chance customers and from me—customers would come in for goods in my absence, and then be would book them himself, and in checking the books instances occurred where he did not know whether he had received the cash.

Prisoner. The amounts were found in the day-book, but not in the cash-book and I paid the cash under protest.

COURT to C. F. HALL. Q. You hear what the prisoner says about paying money when it was doubtful whether he received it? A. It is quite impossible—he could not enter the goods in the daybook unless he had received the money.

MR. CLARKE. Q. Did he pay money to yon under protest? A. Never.

Prisoner. All that you had to do was to receive the gross amount—it was for me to search out the matter and get it returned.

The prisoner in his defence stated that he was perfectly bewildered the business being entirely new to him, by having to do his own work and the day-book clerk's as well, and frequently had his desk covered with money, and that the confusion was so great that he had no doubt committed many errors, and Mr. Hall had had to remove Mr. Woodman to another part of the building—that Mr. Orcott, who held the same office for a few months, was 50l. deficient. He complained that the office-stamp, which ought to have been kept for him alone, as it rendered him responsible, was used in common for everything, and that Mr. Hall declined to allow him a separate stamp; upon which he declined to be responsible, unless

allowed to put his initials on the back of the tickets. Not being able to balance his books he went to a solicitor, and under his advice wrote the letter to Messrs. Barker, and he denied ever using any of their money on his own accounts.

J. ORCOTT (re-examined). I held the same situation four months—my accounts were wrong to the amount of 50l., but the system was different then.

NOT GUILTY .

758. ANN DAVIS (30) , Unlawfully endeavouring to conceal the birth of her child.

MR. PLATT conducted the prosecution.

NOT GUILTY .

759. JOHN HAMPDEN (55) , PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully writing and publishing a malicious and defamatory libel concerning Alfred Russell Wallace.

MR. GOODMAN appeared to prosecute; and MR. COLLINS for the Prisoner, agreed that he should apologise both to Mr. and Mrs. Wallace, which apology should be inserted in twelve newspapers; but he declined to do anything which might bar his right of action against Mr. Wallace— Judgment respited.

KENT CASES.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

760. SARAH MAHONEY (24) , Unlawfully endeavouring to conceal the birth of her child.

MR. BROMLEY conducted the Prosecution.

NOT GUILTY .

761. THOMAS PAYNE LEE (24) , Unlawfully obtaining money by false pretences.

MR. GIBBONS conducted the prosecution; and MR. STRAIGHT the Defence.

JAMES WILLIAM TUTT . I am a fishmonger, of Blackheath, and know the Prisoner, he is a grocer in Lewisham Road—on 24th August he came and asked me to change a cheque, and again on the 27th—one was for 5l. 10s., and the other for 15l.—I did so, and they have both been dishonoured.

Cross-examined. I have been in the habit of changing cheques for him—I have changed it may be a dozen for him on the same bank, and they have all been paid—he has started a branch business on Blackheath Hill, but I cannot tell you when he took it—I do not keep a banking account—I paid away the cheque for 15l.—I took it to market daily, and if I had bought sufficient I should have paid it away.

Re-examined. Q. Had you ever mentioned to the prisoner that you had no banking account? A. Never.

MARTINDALE ANDREWS . I am an ironmonger, of Blackheath—the prisoner brought me these cheques (produced) and I gave him the money for them—they were dishonoured.

Cross-examined. I paid the 5l. 2s. 6d. cheque into my bankers on the 20th—I saw the defendant about the 10l. 10s. 10d. cheque, and he said he was sorry—this other cheque has not been presented.

GEORGE STROUD . I am manager to Mr. Glasscock, a draper, of Lewisham—I know the prisoner, and have received three cheques from him, one on 15th August for 15l., one on the 19th for 15l., one on the 22nd for 15l.—I gave him the money for them, and they were dishonoured.

Cross-examined. I had had cheques before from him, and they had always

been paid—I remember his coining and asking me if I had passed two former cheques which he had given me—I said that I had not, but I should have to do so in a day or two—he said "You can pass them away as soon as you like"—it was not then that the last 15l. cheque was cashed—he sent his boy with that, and perhaps three days had elapsed—I have known him a long time, and always considered him an honest man—I have heard that he has started another business at Blackheath Hill.

Re-examined. I know that there are other cheques out besides these.

VINCENT CORNWELL . I am manager of the Lewisham branch of the London and Provincial Bank—the prisoner had been allowed to overdraw, but that has been revoked—this (produced) is a copy from the ledger—other clerks make entries in the ledger as well as me—he opened his account with a small sum; we allowed him a little latitude originally, but about August 8 we revoked that, and he was not allowed to overdraw without coming to us first—the revocation of the authority to overdraw was both verbally and in writing—it was by myself to him—after that thirty or forty cheques were presented by him—they were not dishonoured; here they are debited—he paid money in up to 27th August, and he paid in 41l. on 27th August.

COURT. Q. What was the state his account? A. On 15th August, at the end of the day, he had 6l. 10s. 11d. left—on the 16th he paid in 98l. 6s., and then it appeared that owed the bank 9l. 10s. 1d.—on the 19th three cheques were paid in, amounting to 37l. 3s. 6d., which made 1l. 17s. 8d. in his favour—between the 15th and the 27th the largest amount to his credit at the end of any day was 8l. 5s. 1d.—the first cheque which has dishonoured was on the 23rd—we gave him no notice of it; we simply returned the cheque unpaid—we honoured six cheques after that, because he paid in money—the bank are not prosecuting him—we paid fifty cheques, amounting to over 1,000l., between the 15th and the 27th.

NOT GUILTY .

THE COURT considered that the Prosecution ought never to have been instituted, and disallowed the costs.

762. WILLIAM FLOWERS (22) ,. Stealing one pair of trousers, the property of Our Lady the Queen.

MR. HOLLINGS conducted the Prosecution.

CHRISTOPHER KELLY . I am a gunner in the 22nd Brigade Royal Artillery, Woolwich—the prisoner is in my battery—on 20th October I placed a pair of trousers on my shelf in the room where I sleep—I missed them that same day—these are the trousers (produced)—I saw them the next day in the tailor's shop of the Brigade—I reported the loss of them on the evening of the 23rd.

JAMES HAYLER . I am a bombardier of the Royal Artillery, and am employed in the tailor's shop of the 22nd Brigade—the prisoner brought this pair of trousers to me on the morning of the 23rd, about 11.30—I was to help him to fit them.

JOHN NEABN (Policeman R 303). I took the prisoner into custody—he said he was not guilty of charge.

Prisoner. On the 21st I bought a pair of trousers from a man in the street; there was a man discharged from the depot.

C. KELLY (recalled). I don't know that there was a man discharged—they may do whatever they like with their trousers as far as I know.

WILLIAM RITCHIE . When a man is discharged he can sell his clothes—there are sales in the garrison, and all men wishing to buy clothes attend them—they have no right to buy things of one another—there is a sale twice a week—the prisoner has been in the Brigade since March—these trousers could not have been sold at a sale.

Prisoner. I would not have bought the trousers if had known that they were stolen. I am shortly entitled to a good-conduct badge.

NOT GUILTY .

SURREY CASES.

Before Mr. Deputy Recorder.

763. GEORGE THOMAS CONDY (47), HENRY HARVEY (53), and CHARLES ANDREWS (48), were indicted for Unlawfully conspiring to induce persons to make False claims under: the bankruptcy of James Abraham Fox—Other Counts varying the manner of stating the charge.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY with MR. PALMER conducted the Prosecution; MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH with MR. GIBBONS defended Condy, MR. RIBTON appeared For Harvey, and MR. LILLEY for Andrews.

JOHN CHARLES REES . I am a Parliamentary agent, carrying on business in Westminster—I know the bankrupt, James Abraham Fox—this is his signature to this agreement. (This was dated 27th December, 1866, by which the Witness agreed to let and Fox to take a meadow in New Road, Wandswarth Road, Comprising 7 acres, then in his occupation, for seven years from 25th December, Determinable by either party by six months' notice, at an annual rental of 30l. payable half-yearly.) I received one half-year's rent under that agreement—it was not received by myself; I received it from a clerk of mine, named Laurence—he is at my office now—I did not receive any other money during the time Fox was tenant; not in the name of rent for that land—of course I received other money, but not in the name of rent for that land—I never had any rent for the land except what I received from my clerk Laurence—where that came from I don't know—I subsequently sued Fox for the rent through my solicitor, Mr. Rutter—I subsequently petitioned the Bankruptcy Court to adjudge Fox a bankrupt upon a debt due to me—I was the petitioning creditor.

Cross-examined by MR. GIBBONS. I have been served with a subpoena and notice to produce my title to this land—I have no documents here relating to it; my solicitor has the whole of my practice now—Mr. Rutter is my solicitor; he has had all the papers relating to this matter—under advice I do not produce any deeds relating to this land—I have not any—Mr. Rutter holds as my attorney, bus I am told that I am not bound to Produce anything at all relating to title—I decline to answer whether I have any deeds here relating to this land—I don't like to charge my memory accurately as to when I first became possessed of this land, but I think it must have been in '66 or '65—I received possession from a person of the name of Graham—I can't give you his address; he is in America—I gave him a sum of money—I purchased from him what interest he had in the land—I believe he was not the freeholder—I did not know at the time whether he was or was not—I paid him 50l.; I won't be quite sure about the date; I can give it you if you wish to see it particularly; but it must have been

'66 or '65—I have a paper here showing that I paid him the 50l. for this land—as I have said before, I have no personal objection to produce it, but I am told I am not bound to produce it—(looking at a paper) this will give me the date perhaps, it was earlier than I thought, it is 12th September, '64, I should not have thought it was before '65—I then purchased from Graham the interest he had in that piece of land—I had no other interest than I purchased from Graham—that was the only piece of paper that passed between me and Graham in respect of the purchase of this land—it is not in the nature of a conveyance at all; it is a receipt—I should tell you that Mr. Graham was at that time on the eve of leaving England; I think he went away the next day; I had no time to get any other document—that is the only interest I had in this land, for which I paid 50l.—Fox was not in possession at that time—I went on the land long before Fox was there—he certainly was not on the land at that very time; it was Simmonds I think, he was a grazier I believe—it was a meadow at that time used by Simmonds as grazing ground, and Simmonds paid me rent—at the time I got possession of the land he was paying to Graham, 30l. a year for the land—I knew that from Simmonds and from Graham both, and he continued to pay me that sum, and I let Fox in possession on the same terms—I let Fox in possession of the land—I don't mean to say that I actually went on the land and put him in in that sense—this is the only document I have respecting the land, "To John Charles Rees, Esq. In consideration of the sum of fifty pounds paid by you to me for the assignment of all my interest in the premises let by me to James Morphew, dated 12th September, 1864, I do hereby undertake to hold you harmless, and to indemnify you for any claim on the said premises"—the reference to this land is "the premises let by me to James Morphew," that is let by Graham—a man named Simmonds was in possession; I believe it was in this way, Morphew was Graham's tenant, and Simmonds took from Morphew; I believe it was Simmonds, I won't be quite sure about the name, it was somebody who was under Morphew—I did not mention Morphew's name to you before, because Simmonds was in possession of the land, and you asked me who was in possession—I did not give Simmonds notice to quit, he left without notice to quit—Fox was substituted as his tenant—I did not let Fox into possession; I believe Simmonds did—I said just now that I did not do so physically, but in the sense in which I entered into an agreement—I do not draw a distinction between the natural and the non-natural sense, but I drew a distinction at the time; I did not let him into the physical possession of the ground; he had possession under the agreement from me—I believe Fox was let into possession by Simmonds; I believe he held first under Simmonds before he held direct from me—I do not know when Simmonds gave up possession to Fox; I fancy it was shortly before the date of the agreement that Fox had with me—I did not go to Fox and represent that I was the freeholder; certainly not—I did not represent to him that I had a better title to the land than he had—I made no representation to him on the subject at all—Fox came to me; I believe Simmonds and Fox came together, and I agreed to accept Fox as tenant in place of Simmonds, that was the simple transaction, or the person I call Simmonds, I won't be quite sure that is the name; it is seven or eight years ago, and I cannot charge my memory; I believe the name was Simmonds—I think Simmonds' name is mentioned in the agreement; I think you will find it in a memorandum at the foot that there is something about

Simmonds, if that is the right name—I am not aware that an agreement would be void by parol if it was more than three years; a lease is void, I believe, if not for three years—I don't know that that is void I really have not considered the question whether it is or not; I will not give an opinion upon it; more shame to me if it be, for I believe I drew it—it does not purport to create a term of years; it is a yearly tenancy for seven years, I think—I am not aware that it is necessary to have an agreement under seal—this does not create a term of seven years; it is an agreement to let—I cannot see that there is anything illegal in that—I was a witness on Fox's trial at Guildford, he was indicted there for perjury—I believe he was acquitted—I was not present at the acquittal; I believe he was acquitted by direction of the Judge—perhaps you will allow me to add that I was ordered by the Judge of the County Court to prosecute him for perjury—previously to this transaction of letting the land to him I had no acquaintance with Fox—I said then that I could not prove that I had received any rent from him, nor can I now—I am not in a position to give legal proof of it, I believe—I should say that when I sued Fox for the rent, I gave credit for the half year's rent—I was sent for and bound over by the County Court Judge to prosecute Fox very much against my will—I was not present when the Judge made the order.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. I am generally aware that one of the assignments of perjury against Fox was with reference to the tenancy of this land, but I had never seen the indictment—I was called as a witness to prove that Fox had paid me rent—I never heard Fox state that he had never paid me any rent—I believe he did, but I never heard him say so—I did not go to Guildford for the purpose of proving that he had paid me rent; I was called as a witness, and I answered such questions as were put to me, as I have to-day—I gave the evidence that I have given here to-day, that I never received any myself—I have not brought my clerk here—I have recollected since how the rent was paid—I can't say whether there I was an assignment of perjury as to Elsey's debt; I really don't know I was only the nominal prosecutor—I brought an action against Fox in the County Court for his rent—I was asked to produce my title-deeds, or explain how I became possessed of the land—I was advised that Fox was not in a position, having accepted tenancy under me, to dispute my title, and I declined to answer or to produce any deeds—I have persistently done so up to to-day—the paper that I have produced, and which has been read, is the only document that I have showing that I derive my title from Graham, and for that I gave about 50l—I have not the remotest notion of the value of these seven acres—I am not in possession of them now; they are not my property now; they have passed from me to the London, Chatham, and Dover Company—I made an arrangement with them, and gave them up possession—they stated that I was quite right in the contention—I have not received any money—I did not make them a present of the land; I gave them possession of it without requiring them to give me notice to quit, upon certain grounds—they did not repay me the 50l.—I wish you to know all about it, as far as I am concerned—I have satisfied myself of that which I was totally ignorant of before, that the London, Chatham, and Dover Company bought that land, and are entitled to it, and had a conveyance of it years and years before, long before I had anything to do with it; upon being satisfied that that was so, as soon as I ascertained it, I said "I am very willing that you should have possession; I am satisfied the land belongs to you, the freehold;

I am perfectly well in possession as tenant," which they admitted; they were old clients of mine, and I said "You shall have possession at once, and Mr. Forbes, the General Manager, shall say what you ought to do, as far as I am concerned, under the circumstances;" that is exactly how it stands—Mr. Forbes has not yet settled what is to be done between us—he is my friend also—I was undoubtedly against Fox—this piece of land was not originally waste land, occupied by anybody—to the best of my knowledge and belief it never was—I don't know where Simmonds is—I don't know that he has gone to America—I don't know how long he was in possession; I found him in possession—I paid the 50l. to Graham without calling upon him for any evidence of his title—he told me the circumstances under which the land was in his possession—he was a connexion of mine—he was going out to America, and I said "Very well, if you like to leave the land in my possession there is 50l. for you"—Fox was not then in possession; it was Simmonds or Morphew, I won't say which—allow me to add that I took very great pains to ascertain to whom the freehold of the land belonged; no rent had been paid for it for some years, and I could not, at that time, ascertain who the freeholder was—afterwards the London, Chatham, and Dover Company came to me, and satisfied me that they had the best right to it.

Re-examined. This (produced) is the agreement between Graham and Morphew—I know Graham's handwriting—this is his writing—this agreement was deposited with me at the time I gave the 50l.—it is dated 7th September, 1864, the date referred to in the memorandum—these two documents are my title to whatever interest I have in the land—I took whatever interest Graham had—I never pretended to be the freeholder, and never was.

COURT. A very vague, undetermined kind of interest. Witness. Very; Graham was a relative of my own, and I made him a present of 50l.; that is really what it was; he was not in very good circumstances.

MR. RIBTON. Q. Shortly after you became, as you say, the lessor of this land to Fox, did you know that the London, Chatham, and Dover Company served him with a notice not to pay you any rent? A. No, I did not; he never told me so, nor did I know it—I am intimately connected with the Company in Parliamentary matters—I acted as their Parliamentary agent at that time—I heard from the solicitors to the Company that Fox had been served with some notice; I really don't know what the notice was about, I never saw it—I have not heard that it was a notice not to pay me any rent, but that he had some notice served on him I heard recently; I believe down at Guildford, this year—I was not bound over by the Judge to prosecute Mr. Condy, I was Harvey—I only know from reading an account in the papers that an application was made to the Judge to prosecute Mr. Condy—I was not there—it was not made under my instructions—I really know nothing about it.

WILLIAM ARTHUR WILLOUGHBY . I am Registrar of the County Court of Surrey, held at Wandsworth—I produce the proceedings in the bankruptcy of James Abraham Fox; the adjudication was made on 27th October last—Condy was present at the proceedings in opposition to that adjudication—the first meeting of creditors was on 10th November last—it is necessary for a creditor to prove his debt before he can take part in the proceedings; he does that by affidavit—on 10th November, Condy and Harvey were present, Mr. Rutter, the petitioning creditor, Elsey, and the wife of the bankrupt,

and some others whom I did not know personally: I don't recollect whether William Clark was there—I attended as official chairman of the meeting, there being no trustee appointed-the proofs of Deacon and Elsey were both handed in to me; I received ten proofs that day, Elsey's for 23l. Condy 27l. 10s., England 17l. 10s., Mayo 62l. 3s. 2d., Rees 143l. 6s., Andrews 50l., Patteson 50l., Henry Harvey 49l. 15s., Chandler 25l. 10s. 6d., and Deacon 25l. 10s.; of those Elsey's Deaconls, Harvey's, Patteson's, Andrews, and England's were subsequently expunged, and two reduced, heaving one creditor besides the petitioning creditor-the two attorneys, Mr. Condy's and Mr. Mayo's, were both reduced on taration, condy's to 18l. 8s., and Mayo's to 23l. 9s. 8d.—I think Harvey handed in the proofs on 10th November—Condy was sitting by his side; they were in concert, communicating, together—I have Elsey's affidavit of proof here; there are two signatures of J.E. Elsey, one to the proof of debt and the other to the proxy paper, which is in favour of Harvey; that would enable him to act for the creditor at the meeting of creditors—Deacon's proof was exhibited to me on 10th November, it is marked by me as exhibited on that day—the handwriting in the body of Elsey's proof is different from that of the jurat—I should think the body is Harvey's writing, I have seen him write in the meeting; the jurat is Condy's, I know his signature—the affidavit purports to be made at Battersea House, Battersea, on 9th November, 1871—there are two signatures of Deacon's one to his proof of debt, and the other to the proxy to Harvey—the body of that is Harvey's, and the jurat Condy's—I have on the file an affidavit of Condy's. of 12th March, 1872; it was sworn before me. (In this affidavit Condy moore that Deacon and Elsey at the Wandsworth Country Court.) Three were sworn before me on that day, Harvay's, England's, and Condy's—I have also on the file of the proceedings, an affidavit of Condy's, dated 2nd January, 1871, but it ought to be 1872; it is a mere clerical error. (This declared that an affidavit of Hughes, stating that Harvey was his (Condy's) clerk was untrue; that he was an accountant and agent, that he had known him twenty years, and not having an office himself in that district, he had left there papers and documents necessary to the district,.) Elsey's debt was subsequently reintroduced in a reduced form for 6l. only.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJHANT SLEIGH. All the proceedings which Became matter of record in Fox's bankruptcy are before me, with the Shorthand writers' notes; they form a portion of it—I have known Mr. Condy as a solicitor for some years, occasionally practising in our Court; I do not know anything against him—he appeared on behalf of Fox before the adjudication, and opposed it—I don't think there was any adjournment upon the adjudication—the petition was to be heard on 27th October, and he was made a bankrupt then—Mr. Rees' debt has never been reduced; it stands now to the full amount—at the first meeting of creditors it was objected to by the bankrupt, and I marked it so, but it was afterwards admitted by the Court to the full amount—an application was made by the solicitor engaged in this matter for an order to prosecute Harvey, and granted; the order is on the proceedings—a similar application was made to the Judge of the country Court to prosecute Condy; that was refused; the ground is stated in the judgment-all the affidavits that were filed are here on the proceedings—I know Mr. Hughes—I have no recollection of his appearing in the proceedings until an application was made to remove the trustee; he

was the managing man who then appeared on the scene—I was not aware that he was managing clerk to the solicitors of the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway until quite recently—he acted as managing clerk to the petitioning creditor, Mr. Rees; he did not appear for the Company—here is the order of 13th February, 1872, also one of 27th October, 1871—I can't say whether some of the debts were expunged owing to the fact that Fox had previously been a bankrupt, that that bankruptcy was reopened, and that these were proofs under the old bankruptcy; I was not in Court at the time the matter came before the Judge, Mr. Stonor; I don't know the fact—I think there was some subsequent proof of some other creditor whilst these proceedings were pending—the old bankruptcy did not come up for a long time afterwards.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. No doubt Elsey was examined, or his debt would not have been expunged—I was at Guildford; I heard Elsey examined there; I heard the Judge make a remark in reference to Elsey—I think Swinford was examined at Guildford—Patteson's debt was expunged, I can't say that it was on account of his non-appearance, having left the country; I don't think I was in Court at the time—the Judge made the order, and I drew it up—if a creditor does not appear in support of his claim of course it would be expunged—I don't recollect Patteson's case at all—England's was expunged and then restored, but afterwards expunged, I believe, on account of his bankruptcy, and his assignees would be the proper creditors—there are one or two affidavits of Mrs. Fox on the file—I think an I O U for 23l. was produced on the trial of Fox; I did not see it; there was some document handed up—I think I heard Elsey say it was his handwriting.

Re-examined. After the meeting of 10th November, when the proofs ere given in, there was an inquiry ordered which came on about 6th or 10th February upon an application to remove—that was heard before Mr. Stonor—I think that inquiry embraced the validity of the debts of Deacon, Elsey, and Harvey, but the application will speak for itself, it is on the files of the Court—I was not present when Mr. Stonor was examining witnesses; I had to attend to other business—I do not know the ground of Mr. Stonor's judgment; all I know is that certain debts were ordered to be expunged, the particulars of which I have given; that was after hearing proofs on both sides—I was subpoenaed by the attorney for the prosecution to bring all documents—these are the shorthand writers' notes of the witnesses who were examined before Mr. Stonor; Mr. Stonor would not hear the case without having a shorthand writer to take down the evidence—there is no account of any meeting of creditors on 3rd January, held in Sloane Street—there was an application to remove the trustee, Mr. Harvey; that application came before me, and in the interval, between the application and the hearing, the trustee directed a meeting of creditors—I adjourned the hearing of the case before the Judge, and expressed my opinion that it was a very improper proceeding for a trustee to take—I saw Mr. Harvey on the subject, and told him it was most improper for him to summon a meeting of creditors as trustee, when there was an application that he had knowledge of to remove him from being trustee for fraud—he made no remark—about twelve creditors subsequently proved besides these ten, they have been dropping in at different times, all for small proofs, the highest 17l. 10s.; they were all put in before the order to prosecute.

JOSEPH HUGHES . I am now managing clerk to Messrs. White & Co., of

the City, I have been so within a week—before that I was managing clerk to Messrs. Hayward, Keele, & Swan, of 5, Frederick's Place, Old Jewry—Mr. Keele, one of the firm, is attorney for the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company, he has the management of the land department of the Company—I was there five years and eight months—I am sorry to say that almost from first to last I have had the management of this prosecution, it has lasted a long time—there was a prosecution at Guildford, there were other persons before the Magistrate, and this prosecution now—during that time I was managing clerk to the firm—this prosecution is not promoted by the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company; the proceedings in bankruptcy were, in conjunction with Mr. Rees, the under tenant, so to speak; he appears to be the under tenant of Mr. Graham—Mr. Rutter is the attorney for Mr. Rees—inferentially I hare acted with him, and assisted him in this prosecution by permission of Messrs, Hayward, Keele, & Swan, because from the first it was left entirely to me to exercise my discretion as to what proceedings should be taken, with a view to obtain and secure the possession of this land—the body of Deacon's proof it in Mr. Harvey's handwriting, and the jurat in Mr. Condy's, and the same as to Elsey's—I was present at the County Court, Whet Deacon and Elsey, were examined as to their proof and when they Were ordered to be expunged—I remember Andrews being examined on two days, the 6th and 15th February—his proof was afterwards expunged by the Judge as fraudulent—I spoke to him on the subject of his proof several times—on 4th January he told me, after some considerable discussion on the matter, that Fox, the bankrupt, only owed him 20l., and he was d—sorry that he had anything to do with the vagabond—this is Andrews' proof. (This, being read, stated that Fox was indebted to him 50l. for money lent, for which he had received no consideration, except a bill of exchange for 50l., due 23rd September, 1871.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH. Until the last week I was in the employment of Messrs. Hayward, Keele, and Swan, they being solicitors to the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company respect of land—I was with them five years and eight months—I have for a long time past contemplated depriving them of my services—I challenge you to read anything that my late employers have said of me, I invite you to do it—(letter read; "24th October, 1872. To Mr. Miller, Solicitor. Dear Sir, Mr. Hughes having left our office, we beg to return the enclosed subpoena, Hayward, Keele, & Swan")—I thought there was something very denunciatory in it, according to your introduction—I first came on the scene with reference to this matter of Fox and the land, early in October, 1871—I had seen Fox once previously, I think I served him with a writ of ejectment in July, 1871, at the suit of the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway—I had not previously had a communication with Mr. Rees on the subject of this land; I believe Mr. Keele had—we did not go on with the action because we were too late for the then Surrey Assiees; it has never been determined to this day—I should have gone on with it if I had had my instructions in time, but I was just a day too late—I was not at the Wandsworth County Court when Fox was adjudicated a bankrupt; I was in the country—I knew of the proceedings—I advised them, in order, if possible, to obtain an adjudication in bankruptcy against him; my employers called upon me to give my assistance, and I was bound to do it, I gave them the best of my advice, as I was bound to do; I could not refuse the service they appointed to me

—I attended at the Wandsworth County Court on all the occasions after the first meeting for proofs—Mr. Rutter appeared, and took the active part in promoting the proceedings in bankruptcy—previous to their initiation, I was only once in communication with Mr. Rutter at my employers' office—I was present when an application was made to the County Court Judge to institute a prosecution against certain parties, including Mr. Condy; that application, as far as Mr. Condy was concerned, was refused by the Judge, and he gave his reason for it—I was at Guildford, but not examined—Fox was prosecuted there for perjury and subornation—he was acquitted—the County Court Judge ordered that prosecution; Mr. Rees was the prosecutor, he was put under recognisances to prosecute by the Judge—I am the prosecutor of this indictment for conspiracy to-day—at the time I instituted this prosecution against Mr. Condy I was clerk to Messrs. Hayward & Co., the solicitors to the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway; I was not acting under their instructions, I did it upon my own impulse; put it on the love of justice if you please; I did not like to see great rascals escape; I am not bearing the expense of this prosecution, I have been called on for nothing yet—I don't know who has found the funds up to the present time; that is a question that should be addressed to the solicitor for the prosecution, my mind is a blank on the subject—it has not always been a blank, we have had so many of these proceedings that I am surprised that I have any mind left at all; so many proceedings were initiated together that a necessary complication arises—I take it for granted Mr. Rutter has found the money—I, of course, have paid certain expenses—I have not been called upon to pay professional fees, a bill of costs, or anything of that sort—I know Mrs. Fox very well, I have only known her since these bankruptcy proceedings—I have been contributing 15s. a week to her support since the date of her husband's committal for trial, by direction of Mr. Rutter and Mr. Keele; they find the money—I suggested to them that this woman ought not to be allowed to starve—they find the money, and pay it through my hands; I have paid it to her personally, taking her receipt every week—I have paid it at various places, generally at my house; I have generally left it out for her to call, and the receipt to be signed; sometimes my wife has paid her, and sometimes my servant—I have seen her very frequently since her husband's committal, sometimes at my own house, never at other people's houses—I have seen her in public-houses, never alone; I have been very careful all through; it is very dangerous to be with another man's wife anywhere—I have not been paying money to any one else, only the witnesses; I have paid Mr. Elsey some, I have given him a subpoena, Mr. Deacon, I have paid him, Mr. Swinford, and other witnesses whose names I can give you, many witnesses; I never gave them anything only with the subpoena—I have stated that I took care not to give them too much for fear it should be suggested that I had bribed them—you don't know the company I have been in—I was in the employment of the Poor Law Board—I have not seen Mr. Glenn here to day, you mean a member of the Bar, and one of the officers of the Board—he was a fellow-clerk of mine for years, I see he is sitting behind you, I have not seen him for ten years—I was in the legal department of the Poor Law Board about twenty years—I was called on to resign—this is not my first appearance in the witness-box—you have not the honour of speak-to an ex-judge, that is a delusion of the other side; I know what is coming—the cause of my resigning at the Poor Law Board was this, I was fined 20l. by Sir Thomas Henry, myself and another, for being the registered

proprietors of certain premises in the Strand upon which some liquors were said to have been consumed without a licence—I was at the time in the country, the thing was very well arranged for me, and I paid the penalty—that was not the Coal Hole, the Coal Hole is on the other side of the Strand—I know every place in London, so do you, I have seen you at these places you know—I never acted as judge, I have as counsel, not as a witness—the Bar of which I am a member does not practise at the Coal Hole, it was first at the Garrick, as it was then called, it is now the Opera Tavern, but my appearances on these matters were generally in the country, on a special retainer—I used to appear nightly at those places, with an audience drinking and smoking, acting as counsel in cases which were re-enacted there; I was principally in the country; I was there for months and years at intervals; there was counsel opposed to me; I was paid for it—I was subsequently a candidate for the clerkship of the Fulham Union; I was elected; the election was invalid because the majority of those then and there present did not vote; there was another election because of that technical difficulty; I did not apply again—I was not informed that it had been reported of me that I was an actor as counsel at such places as those mentioned, enacting disgusting and filthy trials, and that, if I did not resign, my appointment would be cancelled; nothing of the kind—I never received any communication from the Fulham Board except one, in which they regretted that my election for the second time had not taken place, and enclosing me a Post Office Order for my expenses—I did not apply again—it is perfectly untrue that I acted as counsel in obscene and disgusting re-enactments of trials; they were not obscene, no doubt they tended to promote virtue and morality, and our principal patrons were gentlemen of your profession and the other professions—I was secretary to a benefit club on the south-side of the water—I was summoned to the South wark Police Court; I have the summons and the report of the case; it lasted four months, it was for detaining books, moneys, papers, and so on—I had not to pay 13l. on that occasion—will you inform your own mind by reading the report of the case?

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. I have seen Mrs. Fox here to-day—I took her down to Guildford; she wanted to see her husband—I did not tell her that she was to be a witness; I believe she had a subposna, I don't know for what purpose; of course Mr. Butter and I knew she could not be a witness; she made an appeal ad miserecordiam to me take her down to see her husband, and I thought it was only fair that she should see him—she had seen him in Horsemonger Lane Gaol—she stayed at the same hotel at Guildford; I was never alone with her there; I was never with her alone in my life—I think we were there four days; I paid her expenses, in addition to the 15s. a week—I think she has made from first to last three or four affidavits in this case for her husband and for the present defendants—I believe she made one on 13th February—I was at home ill at the time she quarrelled with her husband in April, 1872—I did not know anything of it till some fortnight after it took place—up to that time I believe she had been on her husband's side; she was not on my side—I had nothing whatever to do with her turning—her husband was committed on 2nd July from the Wandsworth Court, and I think it was on 9th July I began to allow her the 15s. a week—I had made her no allowance from April to July—she made affidavits for Mr. Butter, but I was at home ill, and could not be supposed to know what was going on—it is not a fact that she handed

over to me, all her husband's papers, or a great portion of them—I received some papers anonymously.

Cross-examined by MR. LILLEY. I think I became acquainted with Andrews in November, 1871—the adjudication had taken place on 27th October, and the first meeting was on 10th November; I had nothing to do with those—I first went to him—I was then acting as managing clerk to my late firm, and conducting the inquiry into the validity of the proofs; it was in pursuance of that office that I called on Andrews—I had never seen him before—I then saw him at his house in Arthur Road, Brixton—I saw him several times afterwards, at the Windmill public-house, Lower Kennington Lane; that was his rendezvous, and I used to find him there at various hours in the evening; sometimes at 6 o'clock, sometimes 8 o'clock, and on one occasion I did not find him till about 11.30—the communications he made to me were not over our glass; I think we had finished our glass—on 4th January he told me; that was not the evening when I found him at 11.30, that was about 7.30 I think, a summer's evening—there were no other persons present on that occasion; I found him in front of the bar; there were no other persons where we were—the bar is divided into three bulk head compartments, and he and I were in one compartment together—there were other persons in the other compartments at a distance—I have also met him at his house, but never only on this business; I have been there once, twice, or three times—I did not see him on each occasion, only on one; he was alone then, in his front parlour.

Re-examined. Fox was acquitted on the charge of perjury, but stands remanded till the next assizes on four indictments—he has not been out on bail; I offered to let him out on easy bail if he could get it—the reason I was called on to resign my office at the Poor Law Board was this, I was fined for an offence against the Refreshment Houses Act, the Act was then new; I was one of the joint lessees of a place in which this took place, and the proceedings were taken against me; of course I could not deny it, I was in the country at the time, and I paid the penalty—I was not called upon to resign; I resigned rather than have any inquiry into the matter; it 'was a matter that I could not congratulate myself upon; it was on account of the fine that I resigned; I did not think the Board should suffer any annoyance through it—a summons was taken out against me for detaining some books, papers, moneys, and so on, belonging to the society of which I was secretary, and the oldest member; it was called the Borough of Southwark Fifty Pound Provident Society—the summons was heard before Mr. Burcham and extended. over four months—the result was that Mr. Burcham suggested that it should be referred—I said rather than protract the proceedings any longer, I would make the payment without prejudice, to the society of 13l.,; they were satisfied with that—Mr. Burcham said it was a very handsome offer, and that my accounts were most correct—that was the close of the transaction between me and the society; they found out afterwards that they owed me money—there is no truth in the suggestion that I have been guilty of any impropriety with Mrs. Fox—in what I have done with reference to her I had the sanction of my employers previously obtained—the allowance of 15s. a week has gone on from July to now—I had not the slightest personal knowledge of the quarrel with her husband; I was quite surprised to hear it—I had never known Mrs. Fox before this matter, or Mr. Fox.

MR. RIBTON. Q. Is Fox here? A. I have heard so; I don't know it;

I don't know whether he is to be a witness or not—I suggested that he should be brought here—I have been in communication with him during the time he has been in gaol—he has written several letters to me, asking me to get him out on bail; I promised to do so—I did not do so, he put it out of my power—he wrote to me certain statements that he was going to make as a witness, but before the Grand Jury he adhered to all his old former statements—I told him before, as the Magistrate told him that I would not believe him if he was to swear upon a stack of Bibles—I did not call him as a witness before the Grand Jury; I told the Grand Jury that I must call him, I suppose, because his name was on the back of the indictment—I put his name on the back of the bill, because I was bound to do so—I did not think him a favourable witness at that time; I was bound to put his name there, because his wife had made a certain statement to me; I relied on the statement she made—I did not believe anything of him—I put his name on the bill because he Would have an opportunity then of doing what the Judge of the County Court advised him, making a clean breast of the whole matter; that was not to retract what he had first stated and swore to; I did not know what he was going to say at all—I knew what he had sworn, and I was present when the Judge gave him the advice to put himself into my hands and make a clean breast of it—I thought he would make a clean breast of it, but I did not care whether he did or not—the Grand Jury examined him shortly, and would not hear any more; he did not say half-a-dozen words.

JONATHAN EVE ELSEY . I am a clerk to the St. Katharine Dock Company—I knew James Abraham Fox, the bankrupt, for three or four years—I knew Mr. Condy prior to the bankruptcy proceedings quite well; I have known him five or six years—I signed this proof in Bankruptcy and the appointment of a proxy, at the Wands worth County Court, at Mr. Harvey's request; he did not say anything to me as to why I should sign it—I signed the proxy at the same time, at the meeting of creditors, as one to be appointed for a committee of inspection, I understood; Harvey told me so, for the purpose of my being one of the committee of inspection—at that time Fox owed me about 7l., not more—prior to this he had given me an I O U for 23l.—I had been collecting various moneys for him, and I could not get any settlement with him, and there were certain other moneys to collect, and he said "You had better draw upon me an I O U for 23l.," which I did at his request—it was money that I handed over to him, that I had collected, not more; I had collected debts, and had further debts to collect, and in consequence of that he gave me an I O U for 23l.—I subsequently returned that I O U to Fox as of no use—I never saw it again till I saw it at Guildford; I beg pardon, I saw it at the County Court, prior to going to Guildford; I got it from Harvey then, he gave it to me back; he did not say for what purpose—it was after he had given it to me, that I was called upon to sign these two papers—I never swore an affidavit before Mr. Condy—I know his handwriting—I have seen this proof of debt; it purports that I swore an affidavit before him at Battersea House, Battersea—I never was in that house in my life, and never swore an affidavit anywhere—I believe Battersea House is the joint office of Condy and Harvey; I don't know, I never was in the house—I had known Condy over six years previous to these proceedings—during the progress of the

bankruptcy proceedings I had no communication whatever with Condy as to this proof of debt; no, otherwise than when I was leaving the first meeting of creditors, he stopped me on the stairs as I was coming from the County Court, and said, "You know that you swore that at Battersea House"—I said, "I never was at Battersea House in my life, and never swore that affidavit"—he said, "Oh, you know better than that, we can make that right"—my debt was subsequently expunged by the Judge—7l. only was due from Fox to me—my proof after being removed, was subsequently reinstated on the proceedings for 7l.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. I have not been particularly acquainted with Fox, but I have known him several years—I had not transacted business with him very long prior to his giving me the I O U, only a few weeks, that is all—I had never had any transaction with him before; I received 1l. on account of what I had done, so it was not long—I don't know what day of the month it was now; it was at the time he gave me the I O U—it is true that he gave me the I O U in consequence of what I had collected, and what I was to collect—he paid me the I O U for past services, and services that were to come, to the amount of the 23l.—I wrote out the I O U myself at his request, he could not write I suppose—my debt of 23l. was expunged, and I was put down as a creditor for 7l. by the Judge; I explained to the Judge, as I have done here to-day, that the I O U was given to me for past as well as future services—Fox and I never had any dispute about the amount—I don't know what Fox swore; I was at Guildford—the I O U was put into my hands, and I admitted that it was all in my handwriting, except the date and Fox's signature—I don't know whether the Judge stopped the case against Fox or not; I don't remember what he said—he did not tell me that he could not ask the Jury to convict even a cat upon my evidence; he never made use of those words, or I should have heard it, and I don't think he did, nor anything like it—I don't know what he said to the Jury about me, I swear that; I only attended one meeting, that was the first, at which Mr. Harvey was elected trustee—I received two or three letters from Mr. Harvey to attend, but I never attended, and never took any interest in the affair—I don't know what they put me down as a creditor for—when I put my signature it was in blank and part print; the amount was in blank—I signed this paper of course for one of the Committee of Inspection; the signature is mine; they are not my figures, I swear that; at the time I signed it the figures were not there, I swear that; I ought not to have put my signature to this of course—I never sent in any amount, for I was not in possession of the I O U—it was given to me by Harvey—I can't tell the day that Fox gave it to me, but whoever received the I O U when I gave it bock put a date to it—Fox gave it into my own hands, I kept it for some short time, and returned it to him again as useless—when he became bankrupt I did not send in my claim for 23l., I never put it down—I deny the 23l.; I acknowledge to the 7l.—I never admitted the figures on the I O U to be mine.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH. I never made an affidavit at the Wandsworth County Court; I never took an oath there—I did not know Harvey till the first meeting—I know England—I don't know Carroll; I have seen him—I should know him if I saw him again—Fox and his wife I know—I persist in swearing that I never made an affidavit at the Wandsworth County Court on that day; neither there nor anywhere else—I never took an oath there—I was there on 10th November—I was never asked to

do it, and I never did it—I was not there two or three hours; I might have been there an hour and a half perhaps—I never left till the proceedings were over—I did not see other persons taking oaths; there was only one oath taken there, that was England's, the only one—I swear that while I was there, only one affidavit was administered—I was there before the proceedings commenced, and until they were concluded—I never saw Harvey make an affidavit—I never saw one taken.

COURT. Q. What do you expect to see when a man makes an affidavit? A. I should suppose it would be the book handed to him, and the oath administered, and he kiss the book—I only saw that once, and that was with regard to England.

MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH. Q. You will not venture to repeat that that was the only affidavit that was administered while you were there, will you? A. That was the only one I saw, and I think I should have seen it if there had been others—I was there all the while—there were no others taken besides England's whilst I was there—I did not see them—if they were taken when I was not there that is a different thing—I say positively no other oath was administered while I was there but England's—I never saw it—I know more were not taken—I will undertake to say that Harvey never left his seat to go up to the front to do it—I did not see it, I say—Mr. Condy did not make an affidavit that day; that I will undertake to swear positively—I am not now a clerk in St. Katharine's Docks, I am here—I am when I am in business—I am not at this moment in that employment—it might be nine or ten days since I ceased to be in their employment—we are very slack now—I did not intend to convey that I was still in the employment—when I am not there I am not paid—I receive my money every night—some days. I get 6s., sometimes 66s. 26d., just according to what we have to do, piece work—I have been employed at Millwall Woolworks—I am not paid weekly, I am paid daily—I am not a dock labourer; I am paid so much per day, when I get work; a supernumerary, called in when they are busy, and paid according to the work I do, so much per hour—I am a check clerk, or I put the weights on, whatever may be required—I did live at Battersea; I don't live there now—I lived at Gladstone Street—I lived at Battersea between two and three yean—I think it is twelve months ago; somewhere about that—I know Mr. Thelenberg, the butcher there—I very likely gave him a cheque in payment of something that I owed him; I have done some hundreds, in the usual way of business—if it was dishonoured that was not my fault; it was through unforeseen circumstances—he kept the cheque three or four weeks; the money was there at the time—there were funds to meet it when it was presented, but not sufficient—I can't tell you now how much it was for—it was more than 2l. or 4l.—he has had the money since—I know Mr. Hind, the baker, at Battersea—I gave him a cheque, and got some change—I don't think that cheque was paid—I can explain that; I supplied 600l. or 700l. worth of things, and never got a shilling, in Battersea—I know Mr. Wigmore, of Fulham—I never owed him money; to the contrary, he owes me money at the present time—I was never in his employment; I never did a thing for him—I have had plenty of money transactions with him in the way of business—I supplied him with materials when I was a lime merchant—I don't owe him a farthing, and never did; the contrary, he owes me money now for goods supplied—I have seen Mr. Spence, of Battersea Square, greengrocer—I have never had any dealings with him myself, nor my wife

—I never had goods from him—I understand there was about 9d. that my little niece had there, and I offered to pay him, but he would not bring the bill—he has been paid; not by me—I asked him if he had any claim, and he said "If you stand a pot of beer I will forgive you the rest"—when I left my house at Battersea I did not owe about two years' rent; it was all paid up with the things they received of mine—I am not at this present moment indebted one penny to my landlord for the rent of that house—I have been a bankrupt; that was owing to these cheques not being paid—that was when I lived at Battersea, not since—that was the reason these cheques were not paid; it only wants an explanation; a common occurrence in business—I don't know Mr. Newman, a brickdealer; there is no Mr. Newman, a brickdealer, or I should know him—I know many persons of that name—I used to know a Mr. Newman, a plasterer, at Battersea, when I supplied him with lime—I have been at the Wandsworth Police Court on one or two occasions when I have had business there—only once on my own account—I was compelled to attend there on a summons by Mr. Newman, in reference to some bricks that he let me have in lieu of money—the charge was for obtaining bricks by false pretences—I did not pay him a sum of money—the charge was dismissed, because he owed me money—Mr. Haynes defended me—I did not give Mr. Haynes the wherewith to satisfy his demand—it was proved by his own brother that he gave me leave to have a load or two of bricks in lieu of money, and he still owes me the 7l. odd—I am the prosecutor to some of these charges—I did not enter into recognisances before the Magistrate to prosecute—I have not instructed my attorney to conduct these proceedings—I have not given any undertaking to be responsible for the costs of this prosecution—Mr. Palmer, the Counsel, conducted the proceedings at the Police Court—I know Mr. Hughes—I had a communication with him before I went to the Wandsworth Police Court to be a witness; I thought it my duty to do so; not prompted by a love of justice, but finding my name placed on the files, an affidavit with a proof of debt for 23l., and I never put it there, I think it was quite time I should stop it—I did write out a paper, making Fox my debtor for 23l. odd, but I gave; it him back again—he would have owed me that money if I had collected the debts—there was a gentleman who took me round, saying I should in future collect the debts—I had received orders to collect a sufficient amount of money which would pay me a commission to the amount of 23l.—I could not act more honourably than I did; when I found it was no good I gave the I O U back again—I have not received any money from Mr. Hughes during these proceedings, only merely my expenses to go anywhere where I was called upon to go—besides Guildford I have been to Wandsworth, and I have been barely paid; I have not been paid—I can't tell you how much I have been paid altogether; not 10l.—it might be more than 5l.—it has been eleven months on—I will swear I have not had 20l., nor half 20l.—I can't say I have not had 10l.; I don't know; I have been barely paid my expenses.

Re-examined. I have been barely paid the expenses of my journeys backwards and forwards to the places, with my subpoena; I have not received a shilling, beyond that, from Mr. Hughes or any one—I have been up now three times and I have had nothing—the cheques that I gave were my own cheques, drawn on my bankers—unfortunately, at the time I was in difficulties, and the cheque Mr. Thalenberg had three or four weeks—I was a lime and cement merchant, at Battersea—I lived there altogether

about three years, and at Kensington—I failed while I was there for between 1000l. and 2000l.—I never authorised Harvey to write on my proof that I was a creditor of Pox for 23l.—the writing of Harvey's was not there then I signed the paper—I never swore that affidavit at Battersea, as is represented on the face of it—I never authorised Mr. Condy to write it for me—I was never sworn before him—I was not sworn at the County Court, nor anywhere—neither the writing of Mr. Condy or Mr. Harvey were on those papers when I signed—I received the I O U for 23l., which Was to be valid against Fox if I collected moneys for him, and earned sufficient up to 23l—I collected about 5l. or 6l. for him after I received that—I afterwards gave the I O U back to Fox, on 10th November—I was at the first meeting of creditors, and signed this paper in blank; it must have been: two, three, or tour weeks before that that I gave the I O U back to Fox, or longer than that—while I was at the County Court I only saw England make an affidavit.

COURT. Q. He went up to a desk, you say? A. Yes—I saw some officer give him a book and administer the oath—I sat on the opposite side—I did not see anybody else do that, except England—I don't know whether I voted at the meeting on 10th November—I only signed these two papers.

WILLIAM DEACON . I am a licensed victualler, and timber merchant and contractor—I knew Fox, the bankrupt, for four or five years before November 1871—I saw this paper, purporting to be signed by me, at Guildford—there are two signatures to it—they are mine—the bankrupt owed me some money, 25l. 10s., I think, for work done, and I took an acceptance of him—it was for fencing round the field that he occupied—two persons paid me 11l. each, and Fox gave me an acceptance for 25l. 106s.—I paid it to Mr. Rose—I saw it again seven or eight months before I went to Guildford—I have been called upon to pay it again—I have not paid it yet—Fox never paid it—I never authorised Harvey to write my name in as a creditor of Fox for 25l. 10s.—I never took an oath on this paper, or swore to it in any way—I never was at Battersea House in my lift, nor did Mr. Condy administer an oath to me—I was at the County Court and examined before Mr. Stonor; I can't speak to the day, I have been there two or three times.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH. The fencing was done about three years ago, I think—from that time to this it has never been paid—when I sought to prove my debt at the Bankruptcy Courts I mentioned about the bill, and that I held not got it; and, because I had not got it, my proof was expunged—I do not remember the Judge examining me as to whether I had or not sworn the affidavit; he asked me several questions, whether I had been paid—he committed me to the custody of the usher for contempt in the mode in which I answered him—when the Judge asked me where I was on 9th November, the day on which the affidavit purports to have been sworn, I did not say, I would be d—d if I knew; those are not the words I mentioned—he asked me the same questions so many times over, and I said, "Do you think I am telling you a lie?"—I did not tell the Court that Mr. Hughes was a d—liar, pointing to him offensively—I never was at Battersea House—I don't know Mr. Tann, the usher of the Wandsworth County Court—I should not know him if I was to see him; I know his name—I did not say to him, when I was removed, in custody, "I really can't remember whether I swore it or whether I did not;" I don't recollect that—I don't know what I said to Mr. Tann when I went down stairs, I was a little elicited in the matter—I did not say that to him, nor anything of

the kind, that I am aware of; I don't recollect anything about it; I would not swear that I did not—I never did tell him that I could not swear whether I had sworn to the affidavit or not, nothing of the sort; that I swear—I never was in the man's house—I did not say to him that I was so drunk on 9th November that I really could not say where I was that day.

Re-examined. I received two sums of 11l. in cash or in cheques, and the 25l. 10s. in a bill—I was not at any meeting of creditors—my debt was expunged after I gave evidence to the County Court Judge, but it was due at the same time—I put my name on it—I gave the bill to Mr. Rose, a timber-merchant in Camberwell, who I have done business with—I have not seen him to-day—it is still due, and I have got to settle with Mr. Hose for it—I have not paid the bill, or taken it up.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH. I did not know Mr. Condy or Harvey until Fox's affair—I never saw them till the day I was examined by the Judge—I met Mr. Harvey in a public-house with Fox—Fox introduced me to him, and he said, "Don't you recollect coming over to my house over at Pimlico?"—I said, "No, I did not know where you lived"—after we came out of that house we met Mr. Condy, and Mr. Condy says, "Are you Mr. Deacon?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "Well, we are going up to the Court; I will see you presently"—he left me, and Harvey, and Fox, and one or two besides, and went away—when I told Harvey that I did not know where he lived, he said, "Yes, you recollect me"—I did not recollect the man; I never saw him before—he said, "You have been over to my house at Pimlico"—I said, "Not I; I never was there; I never saw you before"—this was after Christmas—it was not in November—it was about the beginning of the year I should think.

ADJOURNED,

Tuesday, October 29th.

FREDERICK SWINFORD . I carry on business as at builder at Battersea—I know Fox—in June, 1871, I was desirous of borrowing 300l. on some houses—at Fox's request I gave him a bill of exchange for 49l. 15s.—nothing came of the transaction—the bill was not returned to me—I asked Fox for it a good many times, but did not get it back—in October, 1871, Fox and me met Mr. Condy in Battersea—he had not got the bill with him then—Fox said to Mr. Condy, "This is Swinford"—Condy said, "Have you got the papers with you?"—Fox said, "No"—Condy said it was no use bringing any one to him if they had not got the papers—that was all Mr. Condy said in the transaction—he did not say for what purpose the papers were wanted; he never spoke no more about it; he went on, and we went on—that was all Mr. Condy ever said to me about it—I saw the bill in Fox's hand after I gave it him, before the bankruptcy, and he said he would tear it up; I could not say when that was—it was in June that I gave it to him—it came due in September; it was after September that he had it—I had no other conversation with him about it in the presence of Mr. Condy or Harvey—I never knew Harvey—I made an affidavit of facts which is on the files of the Court—I never received any compensation for the bill, simply gave it to Fox on a transaction that fell through.

SARAH MARIA FOX . I am the wife of James Abraham Fox, who became bankrupt in November, 1871—I was aware of all the proceedings in reference to his bankruptcy from time to time—I know Mr. Condy, and Mr. Harvey, and Andrews—I don't know anything about Andrews; I never knew him to do anything for my husband—I was at the County

Court, at Wandsworth, on 10th November last; that was the first meeting of creditors—I saw Mr. Condy there, Mr. Harvey, Elsey, England, and several others, but I could not say who they were—Mr. Condy did not stay there the whole time—he might have been there half or three-quarters of an hour—during that time he did not administer an oath to Elsey; I am positive he did not—I know, of course, what is meant by administering an oath, the same that I have done this morning—Mr. Willoughby, the Registrar, presided—I have been at the Police Court several times—Mr. England was called as a witness there—I don't think Clark was, I could not say for certain—he was not present at the bankruptcy proceedings on 10th November—when Mr. Condy left, he said he was going to some other County Court, Bow—I am quite sure that he administered no oath to Elsey before that, nor did any one else—I remember a transaction about a bill of exchange between my husband and Mr. Harvey; I had the bill myself up to 10th November, the day of the first examination; it was Swinford's bill, my husband gave it to me; I had it in my possession always; my husband asked me to give it to him for Mr. Harvey, so as he could claim a debt, and I did give it to him, in Mr. Condy's and Mr. Harvey's presence, at Mr. Harvey's office, Battersea House—my husband said then Mr. Harvey would be the largest creditor, as it was the largest amount, 50l., and he would be able to be trustee—once or twice before that Mr. Harvey had said, "Have you not got an old bill, or make out one, so as you can make me a creditor?"—that was in October, I think—I don't think Mr. Condy was present when that was said—Harvey alone asked that—when I gave him the bill at Battersea House, Mr. Harvey pinned it on another piece of paper, a large sheet of paper with writing on it and printed—then we came out of the office, and we had to meet him at the County Court, where the meeting of creditors was; this was on the morning of 10th of November—I then went to the County Court with my husband, and met Condy and Harvey there—I saw the piece of paper and the bill handed up on the top of the desk to the Registrar—on Saturday, 11th November, my husband had a letter from Mr. Harvey to meet him at his office at 71, Sloane Street, and to arrange about the bill, about the money—I went with him—Mr. Condy was there when we got there—he was asked if Mr. Harvey was in—he said, "No, he is not"—my husband said, "How tiresome; I was to meet him."—Condy said, "I know all about it, you must wait, he will not be long"—Harvey came in, shortly afterwards—Mr. Condy said, "As usual, all behind;" Harvey said, "Wait a moment, I must go and get the money for the bill, I will be in in a few moments"—he went out again, and came in and brought the money in his hand, and then he said, "You will be able to go and take an oath clear that you have had the money"—he brought in some money and gave it to my husband—he said, "Now you will be able to swear to the Court that you had the money," and he says, "You must give it me back again"—he gave some notes to my husband, and he gave it him back again—Mr. Condy was not in the room at this time, he was in the front office—when we first went in we were in the front office, adjoining the other, a little office—when Mr. Harvey came back we went out of the front office into a little office—Mr. Harvey said, "Come in here, come in this way, shut the door, we don't want those to hear in the front, you know nobody"—there were two persons, I think, in the front, Mr. Condy and a young lad—Mr. Condy was present when Harvey said, "We don't want any one to hear"—he heard it, because as we went in, he said, "Shut the

door;" of course he must have heard it—then Harvey gave the notes to my husband, and said, "You can now swear that you have received money for the bill," and he said, "Give them to your wife first, then she can say that she has"—that ceremony was gone through and I put them on the desk, and he picked them up and put them in his pocket again—Fox said "Of course Mr. Condy knows all about it," and Harvey said, "Oh, yes, that is all right"—there were two 10l. notes the first time, that was 20l., the first money—on Monday, the 13th, we went again and met Mr. Harvey and Mr. Condy there—Harvey said "I must go and borrow some money"—he went out again and borrowed some money, and came back in a few minutes with three 5l. notes and 5l. in gold, that was 20l. altogether—Oh, I think I have made a mistake, I think it was three 10l. notes the first time, that would be 50l. altogether—when Harvey gave Mr. Fox the three 5l. notes and the 5l. in gold, he said, "Give it to your wife, and if any one asks you what you have done with it, say you have given it to your wife, and she is an extravagant woman, and spent it in clothes"—Mr. Condy was not present in the office then—Harvey said, "You must give me 5s. back"—Fox said "I have not got 5s.," and he said, "Well, I will give you the 5s. and you can give it to me back," and he gave him two half-crowns and he gave it him back—the money was all given back to Mr. Harvey—that all passed in my presence—Mr. Condy was not present in the back office, he was in the front office, and when we came out of the back office Mr. Condy said, "Have you settled it?"—my husband said "Yes, and it is all right"—Mr. Condy and Harvey came out of the office, and me and my husband went away—I believe they went to a public-house below—nothing was said between Condy and Harvey, that I know of, as to the money having been borrowed—I did not hear anything of it—Harvey said he would have to borrow the money; he said that to Mr. Fox and Mr. Condy, in the front office, that was in the presence of Condy—I remember an inquiry made before the Judge at the County Court—in March afterwards I was at 71, Sloane Street with my husband, when I saw Mr. Condy, Harvey, and Harvey's son—Harvey gave my husband a piece of paper so as he should remember; that was after the first examination, I think—I can't say whether it was in March, it was after the first examination; it was in March—Mr. Harvey was very angry with Mr. Fox because he made a mistake about the money—I can't exactly say the words he said, but he was very angry with him, and told him he was a fool to take and make such a mistake—he made a mistake in the dates of the bill that Mr. Harvey told him to say when he had the bill; for having made a mistake in the date, in the evidence he had given before Mr. Stonor—Harvey wrote an affidavit, and my husband had to sign it, and he gave him a piece of paper to keep in his pocket, and he said, "Read it night and day, and don't forget when you go there again to remember the date."—there was an affidavit made at that time about making a mistake, at that very place, and Harvey wrote on a paper, and said, "Keep that, read it over day and night, and then you won't forget about the date, perhaps"—Condy was there at this interview—I don't remember a person named Carroll coming to the office; I never saw him at Mr. Condy's office—I have only seen Carroll with Condy and Harvey since this case has been on, about here and at the Police Court; I have seen them once or twice together—he was at the County Court on the day of the first examination, but he came in just after it was over—he wanted to make an affidavit or something about a debt Mr. Fox owed another gentleman, and

he said, "You are too late, you should have been here before," that was on 10th November—I never saw Carroll after that, at any time, at Mr. Condy's—some papers were written out for me by Mr. Condy and Mr. Harvey when I nave gone there to swear affidavits about things; they read them down to me and asked me to sign them—I did so under the jurisdiction of my husband, or else I was knocked about if I did not—my husband was present at the time; he wished me to sign them—I signed two papers—I was asked to sign others and I would not—I heard Mr. Harvey and Mr. Condy both tell Mr. Fox that he must say that he left Deacon in the fields (that is Battersea fields), and they must say that he came to the office, or some man like him, to swear his affidavit—I believe there was an affidavit made to that effect—I was at Guildford—Mr. Harvey was not there; he had not surrendered—yesterday afternoon, while I was down stairs, Mr. Harvey brought two rough men up to me in the street; he says, "You know her, that is Mrs. Fox, you will know her again, won't you?" and then again he brought up another one, a respectable-looking man, I think he was a policeman in disguise, I have been told so, and he said, "That is Mrs. Fox, that is her; do you know her, the cat," and he pointed his finger at me like that, and he said "Yes, I think I know her;" and I said, "I will lock you up if you insult me," and they walked away, and Mr. Harvey insulted another gentleman who was outside in the tame manner—he brought these two men up to Mr. Elsey, and he said "Do you know him? look at him from top to toe; that is the villain "—that was yesterday morning, before the Court was opened.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH. I don't know whether these persons came to identify me or not; Mr. Harvey brought them to me, and insulted me—he called me a cat—I did not recognise one of those persons as a police-constable whom I had known by sight several years ago—I was told that they believed he was a policeman—I don't know whether he is here now—I never knew a person called Duck-legged Dick, who was convicted land sentenced to ten years' imprisonment for burglary—I never knew any one of such a name, or any one who was Convicted—I do not know William Clark who was in the police, and on duty in Chelsea—I have been married to Fox fifteen years last May—I was away from him eight years and nine months—I left him in 1859, through his ill-usage, and he was tried and punished for it, and he was punished again only six months ago by bail, put under recognisances—I can't say exactly how long I lived with him after we were married before we separated—we were often apart; I was earning my living by hard work, and I can prove it—I first saw Mr. Hughes at the first meeting of creditors—(Clark was here called in)—that is the man who came up and insulted me yesterday with Mr. Harvey—I think I separated from my husband the first year we were married; he was taken for debt—I have never walked about the streets of Fulham at night—I know the Admiral Keppel public-house, because we lived there when we were children—I will take my oath it was not so—I have always led a perfectly moral life—I was summoned before the Magistrate by my landlord, Mr. Halliday, for illegally pawning his property; it was my property; I don't know what the Counsel said, it was dismissed—the Counsel (Mr. Palmer) took an objection that it was more than six months since the pawning took place, and the Magistrate said he had no jurisdiction—I did not have other charges preferred against me—I know a Mrs. Schofield and her husband, and Lester—I worked with Mrs. Schofield about five years at

the same laundry—she has not a grown up son; a little boy, I suppose he is now about fourteen or fifteen—there was no other Mr. Schofield but her husband—Lester has been dead these nine years—I knew him about fifteen years if he had been alive now—I knew him before I was married—I was not living with him; I swear that—I have not been in the habit of seeing Mr. Hughes very frequently since the bankruptcy proceedings were commenced—I think I have seen him at every meeting, and at every charge at the Police Court; on all the occasions when any public inquiry has been going on about this matter—I have been receiving 15s. a-week from him towards my support; that has been paid by him and his wife ever since October; I don't know whose pocket it came out of—Mrs. Hughes has paid me sometimes, and Mr. Hughes sometimes, when he has been at home—when we have come out of Court I have gone with Mr. Hughes to have refreshment—at the trial at Guildford I was staying at the same hotel as Mr. Hughes, three or four days, because I was a stranger there, I did not know any one—I believe the expense came from what I had from the Court, I don't know; of course Mr. Hughes paid all—I went down to give evidence against Harvey—Mr. Elsey was in the same hotel—Mr. Hughes did not ask me to go and see my husband when he was acquitted—I have been at times to see my husband while he has been in custody—he gave me one or two papers in this matter, which I gave to Mr. Hughes; he gave them to me for him; I gave them to him by my husband's wish; they were papers that he wrote on and gave me; he pushed them under the door—I did not go with Mr. Hughes to a public-house near the terminus of the London and North-Western Railway and wait there until the arrival of Mr. Harvey in custody—I waited at the platform, we walked up and down the platform; I walked one way and Mr. Hughes another—we were not together—I went to identify him, as the gentleman did not know that he was right—we went to have some tea together—I don't know whether it was at a public-house or what it was; I believe it was an hotel—it was about 7.30 or 8 o'clock when Mr. Harvey arrived—I met Mr. Hughes at the railway station about 5.30 or 6 o'clock; the train was due at 7 o'clock—I went with Mr. Hughes to Horsemonger Lane Gaol, and saw Harvey safely lodged in custody—that was to please myself—Mr. Condy was instructed by my husband to oppose the adjudication in bankruptcy—I believe I made two affidavits in this matter—the first meeting where the money passed was in Sloane Street—all that Mr. Condy said before Harvey came in was, that Mr. Harvey was not in, but that he would be in presently—when Harvey came in we almost immediately went into the back room—I suppose we were in that back room ten, minutes, or it might not have been so long—there is a door between the two rooms, but they can see in—it is about as high as that (the witness box); it is only a partition—there is a glass door leading to the little room that we were in—it is not a green baize door, it is is a glass door, or else they have altered it; a little low door—there is another door—I don't know whether it is a baize door or not; it is a low door, to match the partition—when Mr. Harvey took us into that room and produced the notes, he shut the door, and said "Take care that those in the front office can't hear what we say, for we can't be too careful "—the first thing he said to me and my husband when he came into the office where Mr. Condy was, was "Come into the back room"—when the interview was over my husband and I immediately left—we had no further conversation with

Harvey or Condy—the other transaction on the 13th was at the tame place—I had some conversation with Mr. Harvey in reference to the 20l. and 30l. at the office in Battersea, Mr. Harvey's office, and Mr. Condy's house—Mr. Harvey's name was up there, and I have a card of his at home, of his office at Mr. Condy's—we have always gone there to Mr. Harvey if he has not sent for us to Sloane Street—I don't know that the Mr. Harvey there is an auctioneer, a different person; I have always believed it to be Mr. Harvey's office—I have seen him there when I have had to see him or Mr. Condy in reference to my husband's affairs—Mr. Harvey is the person who principally managed my husband's affairs—it was Mr. Harvey to whom my husband first applied in reference to the bankruptcy matters, before he ever saw Mr. Condy—I believe it was through Mr. Harvey that Mr. Condy was employed as solicitor to conduct the formal part of the business.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. I had the 50l. bill in my possession up to 10th November—I gave it up on the 10th at Mr. Condy's office—I had had it in my possession some time—I always used to keep the papers in one of my drawers—I daresay I had had the bill three or four months—at that time I was on good terms with my husband—we were never on very good terms—he gave me the bill to put in the drawer, as he did other papers—I am not accustomed to see bills of exchange—I don't know how many I have seen in my time—I may have seen three or four; I don't know—I don't think I have seen many more—I used not to keep all his bills—I can't tell whether I have ever seen that bill (one produced)—I don't think that is it; it was blue paper—I have seen it—I can't read or write—I think it was a blue paper bill that I had—I am almost positive it was a blue paper—I did not think you were going to ask me about its colour—no one has told me to say it was blue paper—I positively assert that I had it in my possession up to 10th November—I saw Mr. Hughes here yesterday, in the hall—I had not a long conversation with him; I was not talking to him at all—I spoke to him once or twice—I asked him if I should be called in to-day, and he said "Yes, don't go away "—he made me the last payment, on Saturday, at his house—I went there—I don't remember making an affidavit on 10th April—Mr. Hughes did not draw up all the affidavits I made—I don't know how many I have made—I made two for the Ceunty Court; I made one at Mr. Rutter's office—Mr. Rutter made that affidavit of 10th April: "About two or three days after the said adjudication, I went with my husband to the office of Harvey, 71, Sloane Street, and my said husband then handed over the said bill of exchange to Harvey in my presence"—I did swear that, my husband of course made me do so—I deliberately swore what I knew to be a falsehood, on the jurisdiction of my husband, he made me—this is my signature to the affidavit, I can write my name—it was read over to me; this was made of course at Mr. Condy's office, not at Mr. Rutter's—I think it was made at Mr. Condy's office, I won't be sure which it was; I did not hear a gentleman say "Chancery, Lane" to you—I can't say where that was made, but they were mostly made at Mr. Condy's office—I can't tell whether I swore it at Chancery Lane, I went to Chancery Lane, that was Mr. Rutter'a, that was the one I thought it was at first—I quarrelled with my husband before that I think; before 10th April—he was committed on bail for six months on 8th April—I did not swear that one at his instance; of course I made two or three—it was not false what I said about the bill, it is quite true—I did not say it was false, it was a mistake—I say I had that bill up to 10th November, I

am positive of it, I remember so well giving it—it was not a great many days after the adjudication that I handed it over to Harvey—I say I mad I an affidavit on 13th February, I don't know whether my husband did, have not troubled myself about that—this signature is my writing, I put my name to it, I swore it—(This stated: "I was present when Harvey lent to my husband the sum of 30l. in gold and bank-notes, in the early part of the year 1871, and also a further sum of 20l. in September last. On the latter occasion my husband deposited with Harvey a bill of exchange for 49l. 15s., and he gave my husband 5s. in change; both of which sums my husband handed to me. The above transactions took place at Harvey's office, 32, Lupus Street, Pimlico.")—I swore that; I was bound to do so, or else to be ill-used—that is untrue—my husband threatened to cut my throat if I did not make affidavits; that was why I had him up at the Court—Mr. Hughes and my husband have jangled coming out of Court—I don't think he made an assault upon him; I never saw him do so—I swore that he did, because I was bound to do it; he made me do so—that was in an affidavit of 2nd January—(Read: On 19th December last, on leaving the Court, Hughes assaulted my husband, and threatened to strike him, and on my interfering to prevent it, he called me a drunken wh—, and said he could prove it")—I swore that—of course I was bound to do so and of course I cannot do no other when my husband gives me such a character—it is not true; he did not call me those names—I know Mr. Tann, the officer of the Court—he did not use those words to me in Mr. Tann's presence—my husband asked Mr. Tann if he would come up if he wanted him, and he said "No, I never heard it, and I won't do any such thing"—my husband invented it—he told me to say that he had called me those names; he did, indeed—that affidavit is in Mr. Condy's handwriting, I think—I also swore this: "The same man has come to my house to serve a writ for the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company in some proceedings in bankruptcy, and he, on several such occasions, insulted me by using abusive language, calling me a rogue, a thief, and threatening to make an example of such a woman as me "—I did swear that—it is not true—I know that gentleman (Mr. Tann) quite well; I have seen him plenty of times—I say that in hit presence Mr. Hughes did not call me those words—I think it was in the affidavit of 10th April that I first gave the account of the sham transfer of money—that was after I had quarrelled with my husband—I threatened him that I would do it at the time—I don't know how often I had seen Hughes before I made that affidavit—I saw him each time at the Court—he was not paying me any money then; I had not made it up with him then; I had not been on speaking terms with him—Mr. Rutter read over this affidavit to me before I signed it, in Chancery Lane, and his clerk went with me to swear it—before he read it over to me I had given him an account of what I was going to swear, at Mr. Rutter's office in Chancery Lane, I never saw Mr. Hughes—my husband sent me to Mr. Hughes once; he took me to Mr. Hughes—I had not seen Hughes before I made this affidavit; not on that account I had not—I say now that I had the bill in my possession till 10th November—I have not been told that since, I swore the affidavit of 10th April—(McQueen was here called in)—I know that man—I believe his name is McQueen, by my husband talking and drinking with him—that is all I know—I don't know that he is in the police—I only knew him about Battersea as a detective when my husband spoke to him—I believe he is a detective by my husband telling me so; I don't know—my husband told me

he had him removed from Chelsea over to Battersea for something he had done to him—he don't know no bad of me—this (produced) is Swinford's bill; I knew it was a blue bill—the first of these sham, interviews, when the money passed, was on the 11th—I said at first it was two 10l. notes; that was only a mistake of mine—on the second it was three 5l., notes, and 5l. in gold—it was not when I found out that that would only make 40l. that I corrected myself; I had forgot the three 10l. notes—I am quite positive that it was three 5l. notes and 5l. in gold on the second occasion—I might have sworn it was two 5l. notes and 10l. in gold, by my husband's orders—(The witness's affidavit of 10th April, being read, stated: "My; husband handed me two 5l. notes and 10l. in gold")—I did not swear that affidavit by my husband's orders—I did not know whither that was one of his, for I don't know what is his—I suppose I must have, made a mistake, or Mr. Rutter has—that affidavit was, not sworn at the instance of my husband—I threatened him before, that—I don't know how many times I have threatened him—I threatened to speak about that bill.—during the eight years I was away from my husband I was not living with other men—I never used to walk the streets, of Battersea and Chelsea years, ago at night—I never was at Battersea till my husband brought me there four years ago, last June—I do not know anybody of the name of Flash Emma—I do not remember Clark taking my husband on a charge of assaulting me; he never was locked, up like, that—he has been up once or twice at Hammersmith Police Court for ill-using me; three times, I think—he, was not discharged—I don't say he has. not been discharged; he has once, perhaps, when I made a charge, against him, and another time when I was, kept out of the way, and he was dismissed—the Magistrate did not say he would not believe me on my oath—it was him who was the man with these girls, for he even brought one up there with my clothes that I was, married in—he used to visit all those singing rooms and concerts, and come home and ill-use me.

Cross-examined by MR. LILLEY. I attended at Guildford prior to, the trial of my husband-Andrews was there; I don't know what for; I believe he was there among the witnesses—I believe he dined with them once—I think it was the night he had some tea with us—he was there, on his, subpoena as a witness.

Re-examined. I have had occasion to apply for protection orders against my husband, I have it in my pocket now, from Hammersmith—I have applied more than once; I should say eight or nine times I have had, occasion to complain of his ill-using me—during the whole of the eight years and nine months I was away from him I supported myself by my labour and got a good home; he did not contribute anything, I made a good home, and now he has lost it for me—I worked for clergyman at Kensington Gate for a long time; they have gone away; they are In people—there is no pretence for saying that I ever, walked the streets as a prostitute, I think it is cruel—I did not know Condy and Harvey at all before this business; my husband did, I have heard him talk of them—a summons was taken out against me six or seven days ago by Halliday, the person that I entrusted my things to, to take care of, because I had bought them, and I have my books to prove it; Halliday is the landlord of the house where I was stopping; the things are my own, and were my own at the time—Mr. Condy has been a great many times to Halliday's; I know that—I never heard anything said by Condy to Halliday, only when I went to take the summons out for my husband—Halliday claims the, things now

as his own; my husband sent a letter to him to say that he was to say they were his, that he made a bill on him, and gave it him to protect him from the Bankruptcy, and then he brings his accusation against me for taking the property; it is my own property, the result of my own labour and industry, and I have the books to prove it; I bought them and paid for them—no impropriety has ever happened between me and Mr. Hughes; he has never insulted me or offered me any impropriety—I have gone to his house and received the 15s., besides that, I have only received the ordinary expenses of attending as a witness—I can't say by whom the two affidavits of 13th February and 2nd January were drawn up; they were always ready for me when I have gone to sign my name to them at Mr. Condy's office at Battersea House—I have not always known Harvey to be at Battersea House; I have seen him frequently there, when I have gone there, and I always understood that it was his office—I made those two affidavits under the coercion of my husband; he said he would knock my b—head off if I did not do them; I was in fear; I took him up to the Magistrate on that account; he was standing over me with a razor one night, because I would not make an affidavit about Andrews; he wanted me to make a false affidavit about him and I would not, and Mr. Halliday and his wife went up against my husband on that occasion, but they were not called as witnesses—on 8th April, he was bound over to keep the peace towards me for six months; that was on my complaint. (The witness's affidavit of 10th April was read at length)—With the exception of the two 5l. notes and 10l. in gold, the affidavit is quite true; it was three 5l. notes and 5l. in gold—I have remembered it since; it was drawn up by Mr. Butter, at his office in Chancery Lane; I went there to give my evidence to him—that was the first step I took in the proceeding.

COURT. Q. You mentioned three 10l. notes given one day, and three 5l. notes and 5l. in gold another day; what was done with that money? A. It was given back to Mr. Harvey directly.

By MR. RIBTON. The things were not sold to Halliday, they were only made over to him; the poor man had not got money to pay his rent at the time, therefore I am quite sure he had not got money to pay for things like those; they were moved after the first bankruptcy—an inventory was made out of goods sold by valuation on 18th September, 1871, to Halliday, but that was not the day the things were moved; they were not sold to him; they were moved in October, after the first adjudication in bankruptcy, some, and some at Christmas—he did not pay 7l. 16s.; my husband signed a receipt for it, but he never bought them—it was done for a sham sale, so that the bankruptcy should not have them; I was taken up on a charge.

By MR. SERJEANT PARRY. A Mr. Parnell drew up this document, and Elsey was their witness at the time and saw how they were sold; it was altogether a sham sale for the purpose of defeating the bankruptcy—it was done under favour—I would not trust my own sisters, or any of them; I would have trusted my life with that woman.

COURT. Q. You speak pf a front office and a back office? A. Yes, Condy was in one and Harvey, my husband, and me in the other—the partition between the two was only a little glass door; it went up to the ceiling—I don't know whether the partition was wooden or brick, but I know the door went right up; it shut it in—the partition I speak of was like a partition in a passage—when the door was shut between the two offices one was quite shut out from the other.

JOHN NORVAL . I am a corn porter of 64, Cardigan Street, Kennington.

Cross-examined. I am connected with the South-Western Railway, and have been there fourteen or fifteen years—I know Fox, and remember his bankruptcy—I had dealings with him several times—I attended on 10th November at the Wandsworth County Court at the first meeting of creditors—I was there the whole time—I saw Elsey there, and Condy and Harvey—I sat next to Elsey—he was not sworn on that eccasion, I am quite sure of that.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH. Mr. England was sworn and no one else, that I am perfectly sure of—I was there half-an-hour before the Registrar took his seat, and until it was concluded—I am perfectly certain the oath was administered to only one person, England—I am sure of it, because I sat next to Elsey the whole time—no one got into the box but Mr. England to be sworn—I am prepared to swear that Mr. England got into the box and nobody else—I did not see anybody else sworn—only bankruptcy proceedings were going on that morning—there might have been twelve or fourteen persons there—I read in the papers about two months ago that Elsey denied being sworn—I have never given evidence until to-day—I have had a little litigation with the bankrupt—Mr. Rutter brought me here on a subpoena—it was not served by Mr. Hughes, by Mr. Rutter's man, Mr. Kersey—I told Mr. Rutter at the first meeting that people had gone and sworn to debts that did not owe a halfpenny—I was not called on any of the previous occasions; this is my first appearance—I was not ejected from this very land by Fox—he filed a bill, and got an ejectment to restrain us from going on the land; we were going to view it—I saw Mr. Rees, and he said the land belonged to him—I said "If it does you shall have it, but if Fox still sticks to it I shall keep it on to him;" and he said "Fox is only a trespasser like yourself"—I was turned out—that was before the bankruptcy case.

JAMES WHITE . I was the shorthand writer appointed by the Judge of the County Court to take notes of this examination—I was sworn to take what passed—I have the notes before me—the transcript produced is correct—at page 127 in the examination of Fox, Mr. Condy, addressing the Judge, says: "Sir, in Elsey's last affidavit he swears that the money was due to him, but he swears that he did not take the affidavit before me. I see that I swore the affidavit on the 10th, therefore I must have made a mistake in the jurat, copying probably from one of the affidavits. I think it was before the learned Registrar arrived in Court. I am extremely sorry that such a mistake should have occurred, but it probably occurred from copying from another affidavit. But, at all events, he swears to the amount, and he was one of the committee of inspection; if, therefore, any one was imposing on the Court, it was Elsey himself. Mr. Stonor: Do you know Elsey? Mr. Condy: Yes sir, I know him, and I remember his taking the oath now—he does not dispute the amount that is due to him. Mr. Stonor: Yes he does; he swears that there was an I O U for 23l., but that there was only 6l. really due. His proof, therefore, will have to be reduced to 6l. "Andrews was examined on 6th and 13th February, and his proof was expunged. In Harvey's examination he is asked:" Q. Now, then, I believe that under this bankruptcy there is no estate whatever, save and except this land? A. There is none whatever, I believe—"A little further on, Mr. Stonor asks:" Is there a dispute as to the freehold? and Mr. Condy says: Yes, we have had possession of it since 1866, and now they

are setting up a claim to it. Mr. Ribton: There is no dispute, and can he no dispute upon it; we have recovered our judgment debt against them. Mr. Condy: We have never attorned at all Mr. Miller: But you, as trustee, are very willing to give up the land if they can show a better title to it? Mr. Condy: Yes, a better title than I have got. Q. And has there been an action of ejectment commenced? A. Yes, and I mean to try it—"At page 90 in the examination of Fox, Mr. Stonor says:" As the case stands, the creditor and trustee contradict him in every material part of the transaction. The transaction is almost beyond belief, and as to all the circumstances surrounding it, the bankrupt contradicts the trustee in every one of them. He says that the payments were made at three different times, instead of one. The trustee says you were present when he says you were not. Mr. Condy: You will not fail to perceive, sir, that the man is anything but a man of business, and therefore we must not read him too strictly. Mr. Stonor: If you go into the case further, you must put that straight about yourself. Mr. Condy: With reference to whit, sir t Mr. Stonor: Mr. Harvey says that you were present when 30l. was paid. Mr. Condy: I was present when some was advanced, but on what occasion I cannot tell you."

MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH proposed to refer to certain affidavits on the file of the bankruptcy proceedings which had not been given in evidence on the part of the prosecution, but which, he contended, formed part of that evidence, and part of the record of the Bankruptcy Court; and that on the part of the defence he was entitled to make me of them. MR. SERJEANT PARRY objected to the assumption that all the proceedings were in evidence; for instance, there were portions which the prosecution placed no confidence in. THE DEPUTY-RECORDER was unwilling to decide the abstract question whether the mass of documents produced from the Bankruptcy Court could be said to be put in evidence: he should certainly be disposed to decide against that view; but suggested that such portions as the defendant's counsel required to use might be referred to if not objected to on the other side. MR. SERJEANT PARRY objected to the affidavit of Fox being referred to, but not to those of the present defendants. MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH still claimed the right to use the whole proceedings.

SARAH MARIA FOX (re-examined by MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH). It is not true that I left my husband for four years, and that during that time I was living in adultery with Mr. Schofield and Mr. Lester, at Park Walk, Chelsea, and Arthur Street, Chelsea—I have got my rent-book here—I lived single by myself—my husband thought these books were burnt, bat I kept them.

ADJOURNED.

Wednesday, October 30th.

The following Witnesses were called for the Defence.

PHILIP NEWBERRY ENGLAND . I am an accountant and monetary agent—I was one of the creditors under the bankruptcy of Fox—I was present at the first meeting on the 10th November, and was sworn to my proof on that occasion—I saw a person there amongst the creditors whom I know now to be Elsey—I saw the oath administered to him by Mr. Condy, and saw him swear to the affidavit of proof—my proof was expunged by the Judge in a most unprecedented manner—I was a creditor under a former bankruptcy of Fox—the debt which I proved was a debt that ranked under the prior bankruptcy, and upon that being made known to the Judge, my proof was expunged—I observed that Elsey voted, and he occupied the office of Committee of Inspection with me—he asked me whether I would

take it, and I said I had no objection—he was standing at my right hand, close to me—I heard the particulars of Elsey's proof—it was on an I O U—he pulled out a bit of paper, and there was some discussion as to whether it should be put in proof—he gave it to Mr. Harvey, who was sitting in front of me, and by his side at the time.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY.—I know William Clark—he went down to Wandsworth with me—I have known him I should say fifteen years—he was never in my employ—he has never acted for ms—I have never seized any goods with him, or anything of that kind—I saw him on the landing outside—I was in Court yesterday at the examination of Mrs. Fox, but I thought it better not to remain, and I went out—that is the only time I went into Court at all—I was sworn at the County Court by the Registrar, and so were Harvey and Condy, and Elsey was sworn by Condy himself; he wanted to leave the Court—I don't know that he remained till the rising of the Court—this debt of 17l. 10s. was incurred by Fox, on 23rd December, 1867—here is the bill, and I have other bills as well—that is the only one I proved on then—I never knew that Fox was a bankrupt before, till I heard it in that Court—I have applied to re-open the former bankruptcy, and to prove under it on the ground that he did not disclose his estate—that alludes to this piece of land, the seven acres—I don't know of any other estate—I have proved for more than 17l. 10s. under that former bankruptcy—I can't tell the amount to a shilling, but about 60l. or 70l.—I think it was in June, they allowed me to re-open it, and I did re-open it—I think that bankruptcy was in July, 1868—I did not prove at the time, because I never heard of it till I heard of it at the Wandsworth Court—I have paid the necessary fees, and have applied for an assigneeship, in order to see what he has got—it certainly was not to get possession of the land—I said I would very soon see if there was anything for the creditors—I did not swear about it, and say I would damned soon clear off the people that were on the land—I never saw Fox, nor any one belonging to him until I went down on 10th November to prove my debt—I never told Fox that I should put building materials on the land, and take possession of it—I never told either Fox, Condy, or Harvey that—I have never been a bankrupt—I made a deed of composition about two years ago, but it never went into a bankruptcy—I lend money—I don't call myself a money-lender, because I get other people's money, therefore it would not be right—I lived at 30, The Paragon-l live there now, and carry on business as monetary agent—I could not say how many thousand pounds I owed when I entered into the composition—I should say it was over twenty thousand—I don't think it was thirty thousand—I was to pay a certain sum in the pound under that composition;—I was to pay eight shillings—I must decline to answer whether I hare paid a farthing; well, I have paid some—I can't say how much—I decline to say to whom—I have certainly paid some under the composition to various persons—I paid some to Mr. Coleman, of the Brixton Road—I paid him I should say 40l.—I swear that distinctly—he was a creditor—there was a man living at Clapton; I forget his name for the moment—I paid him about 20l.—there would be several others, but I can't recollect them—my son-in-law, Mr. Garey, was a creditor under that composition deed; I think it was for 5,000l.—I have not paid him a farthing—I do mean to pay—I don't remember Mrs. Churchhouse, at Aldgate, whose goods I seized, and who brought an action against me—I don't think I have had actions brought

against me for seizing goods—I have had actions brought against me; a man in my position would have actions brought against him for anything—I have never been charged with unlawfully seizing goods—I was once charged with unlawfully seizing goods belonging to a bankrupt—I was never committed by the Court of Bankruptcy for that—I was in possession of some goods in the Euston Road, and the Bankruptcy Court came in to shut me out—there were some omissions made by my solicitor, who did not place the proceeding properly before the Court, and therefore I was ordered to pay a certain amount of money, I think 400l.—I never paid it—I was not committed for contempt by the Court of Bankruptcy—I swear that distinctly, never—I went to Holloway Gaol a twelvemonth ago—I never went for contempt—it was on a solicitor's bill of costs—I was only once in the Debtor's Gaol at Holloway—I have never been arrested for debts besides—I was arrested for Poor Rates about twelve months ago—it was 6l. or 7l.—they took me, and of course when I got to the place I paid the money; that was Holloway Gaol—I was never engaged with Clark in seizing goods belonging to a lady in Aldgate—one action has been brought against me, and damages given against me for 200l. or 300l.—it was about ten yean ago—there was a landlord who seized some goods, and I had a bill of sale on them—I never hired a number of men to seize goods for me by violence, only what belonged to me—I could not say how many times; very seldom—I have never had an action brought against me in consequence of what the men have done—about ten years ago a person brought an action against me; a landlord seized some goods, my goods; I went to take them away, and he brought an action against me for that—I never employed Clark in my life—I was examined at the Police Court—I said there "I have known Clark about twenty years; he has assisted me a little; when persons hare wanted money he brings them to me"—that is right, but I never employed him—I don't remember a great robbery of Post Office stamps at Manchester—I am quite sure—I never knew anything about it—I was examined as a witness, but I. did not know where the stamps came from—some stamps were brought to me, and I was asked to buy them—I declined to do that, and ultimately I lent 4l. or 5l. on them—there was 10l. worth—they were bill stamps—they were in my possession about three days—they summoned me as a witness against the man—he was charged with being in possession of stamps, and some of them were brought to me—I have known Mr. Condy about three or four years—I have employed him as my attorney—I know Harvey—I have employed Condy and Harvey together—I believe Mr. Condy was engaged in a bankruptcy relating to a man of the name of Whyatt—he was solicitor to Whyatt, the bankrupt, I believe—I was not the assignee, I was nothing—I knew Whyatt—I did not recommend Condy to him; Whyatt knew him as well as I did—I presume that Harvey was employed—I did not advise Whyatt, or take any interest in him—I did not advise him to go through the Court and employ Harvey to take him through—I believe he was taken through the Court—I did not attend; I will swear that—I think Whyatt charged me with an assault about a month ago—he said I knocked his hat off, or something, and they wanted me to be bound over to keep the peace not to touch him again, or something—the Magistrate bound me over—that was the only assault I was ever charged with—I can't recollect that I was charged with any other—I certainly was never committed for trial by a Magistrate for an assault—I am sure of that—I was never charged with assaulting any one at Ealing, nor anywhere; decidedly

not—I think I recollect now that there was a man in the Euston Road; he came down to my office, I ordered him out, and he charged me at the Clerkenwell Police Court with assaulting him—the Magistrate told him he should not come to my office in the way he did, and he dismissed the summons—that is the only instance—I don't know any one a builder at Ealing who was a debtor of mine; I swear that—I was never charged with assaulting him, and I never paid him money to compromise it—I did not know Fox; only through this matter—I never saw him before the Wandsworth examination on 10th November—I forget who told me that Fox was a bankrupt, but there was a letter—my impression is that it was Mr. Harvey, but I can't say—I fancy he sent a letter, knowing that I was a creditor—I have sworn the debt of 60l. under the old bankruptcy—I swore to 17l. 10s. because Mr. Crook, of Moorgate Street, had the other bills, and I could not recollect who had them, but I discovered they were in his possession aftewards—they were Fox's own acceptances—I discounted them for a person named Smith, who drew them—I never heard of Fox's bankruptcy in 1867 or 1868.

Re-examined. The debt I claimed was on a bill of exchange drawn by Smith, which came into my hands in the ordinary way of business—I never law Fox—I have never been a party to any proceeding in the shape of an assault other than those which I have now stated to the Court, and I thought it was too trivial to mention—I think Mr. Whyatt made a compotition deed; that was four years ago, I think—as to the Post Office stamps, I lent 5l. upon them; I only had them three days, and I came forward and gave evidence against the man—there is no pretence for the suggestion that I was implicated in the robbery of those stamps—I was never committed by the Court of Bankruptcy for contempt—I have been forty-two years engaged in this matter, and I have never been in this building before to give evidence—I was never in the criminal part of a gaol before in my life—there were many persons at the Wandsworth Court besides those I have mentioned whom I have seen about here—Condy swore Elsey—the Registrar was not in Court, and Elsey stood by my side and said, "I shall go, I can't stay any longer;" I looked round and said, "Mr. Condy can take your oath," and I asked him, and he said he would; he stood up, and Elsey stood up at my right hand, and Condy took the book off the desk in front of him, and handed it to him—the Registrar was out of Court at the time; he did not come in till about 3 o'clock—those were the circumstances under which Mr. Condy administered that oath.

JOSEPH THELENBERG . I am a butcher at Battersea—I know Elsey and Mr. Condy—I was at the Wandsworth County Court on 10th November—I was not interested in Fox's bankruptcy; I was there on business of my own—I saw Elsey and Fox—I saw Elsey and Condy speaking to one another—I did not see the oath administered; they were standing in the middle of the Court.

WILLIAM CLARK . I reside at 28, Sidney Villas, Richmond; I did live at Woburn House, Euston Square—I am a surveyor—on 10th November last year, I had some business with Mr. England, and I went with him to the Wandsworth County Court on that day—I remained the whole of the time he was there—I saw Mr. and Mrs. Fox there, Mr. Condy, and Mr. Harvey, and several others—I saw Elsey there, but I did not know him then; I have seen him about this Court—during the proceedings I saw the oath administered to Elsey by Mr. Condy—the Registrar administered the oath afterwards to Mr. England, Mr. Harvey, and Mr. Condy—the

Registrar was not there at the time Condy administered the oath to Elsey—about the time the form was being filled up, I saw Elsey speaking to Mr. Harvey—I saw him show Harvey an I O U; there seemed to be a dispute as to whether it should be put in—I saw Mr. Harvey take the I O U in his hand, and he appeared to copy it on the form—it was before Condy administered the oath to Elsey—I had no connection with the bankruptcy whatever, as a creditor, or in any shape—I happened to be there having some business with Mr. England.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. I have known Mr. England about fifteen years—I was not in his employ—I have done business with him; I have taken him persons who required money—perhaps I have token him thirty or forty—if it was a good security I used to make a bargain, and he would give me I percent., bat not in every case—I am an architect and surveyor; I carry on that business now at Richmond—I have some works at Richmond now—I have lived there about three months—before that I lived at Woburn House, Upper Woburn Place—I was there nearly two years—I have been a bankrupt—I lived in London Street then—I failed for about 1000l., I think—my creditors have not got any money; they are perfectly satisfied, they are waiting till the death of a person, to get a reversionary interest—I failed in 1867—Mr. England was not a creditor, he was a debtor—I don't know how much he owes me, it is a disputed amount; I put it down as 800l.—I have not had it—it was not a sham debt, it was a real, genuine debt—I have never got a farthing of it—I have never been engaged with Mr. England in helping to take possession of goods—I have never been instructed by him to take possession of anything—I was asked to go with a person in a friendly way, but I was not engaged—no goods were seized at Mrs. Churchhouse's—I believe the money was paid—I believe she brought an action against Mr. England—I don't know that she recovered damages against him—I was not a witness, and I was not in Court—Mr. Easley was the person who asked me to go with him—he lived at Netting Hill; he was Mr. England's clerk—Mr. Easley did not seize goods at all—I have accompanied him as a friend—I went to the Highgate Road with him to Mr. Smith, who was a greengrooer—Mr. Easley instructed the men to seize the goods—there were about a dozen men—Mr. England did not ask me to go—I presumed he knew something about it—we did not break open the house or the doors; it was not done in my presence—we were there about an hour—a portion of the goods were taken away—I had nothing to do with it; I accompanied him as a friend—it was understood there would be a partial riot there, and that was the reason I went, perhaps it was to see the fun—I had a job as architect on hand at that time—I had not accompanied Mr. Easley before, nor have I since—I swear that—I accompanied Mr. Whyatt down to Essex Road—there were about four men employed there—I think that was in 1869—Whyatt afterwards became a bankrupt—he did owe me something, but I don't know whether I signed his composition deed or not—we went to Mr. Cogswell in the Essex Road—we seized goods there, and they were taken away by order of the Bankruptcy Court—they did not take them by order of the Bankruptcy Court—they had not seized before we got there—it was the trustee who seized them—I only accompanied Mr. Whyatt—I don't know a person named Mrs. Pearce—I know a Mrs. Weir who took the name of Mrs. Pearce—I am a married man—she is not my wife—she lived at 9, Church Row, Euston Road—she took the house of Mr. Force—I was her

referee—I did not live with her at that time; I am quite certain of that—I was guardian to her children—it was not a brothel; it was a brothel before she took it—she was turned out by Mr. Force because he wanted to increase the rent—she took it for herself and her children—she did not carry on any business—to my knowledge it was not a brothel while she was there—I used to go backwards and forwards, and I never saw anything that was at all wrong—I did not take a coffee-house in White Lion Street, Islington; Mrs. Weir did—she did not pass by the name of Pearce there—she took the house of Mr. Force in the name of Pearee—I did not live at the house in Islington; I visited there—it was not a brothel to my knowledge; I never heard that the inhabitants complained of it as such—she sold it—I know Mr. Perkiss—I never employed him to paint it—he did a portion, but Mrs. Weir employed him—I did not pay him because I did not employ him—I did not employ a person named Giles to paint it, and I did not pay him—I went backwards and forwards to that house as f thought proper, but never to live or stay there—I went backwards and forwards every day, and two or three times a day—I have stopped there occasionally—the inhabitants did not present a petition to the vestry that it was a brothel—I have slept there about half-a-dozen times—Mrs. Weir now lives in James Street, Boston Road—she does not keep a brothel them to my knowledge—I have been there several times, and have never seen anything—I don't live there—I have slept there—I have not had my meals there, as living there; I have had my dinner, tea, and breakfast there—she is still living in James Street, and the name of Mrs. Weir is on the door—I have bean charged with an assault—it was a man—I was never charged with assaulting a woman—it was about eight months ago—I was fined 3l.—the day I went to Wandsworth I was going with Mr. England to Richmond Terrace, Hackney; he had some houses there to survey for repairs—that was in the way of my profession as an architect, and had nothing to do with seizing goods.

Re-examined; I don't know that Mr. England had anything to do with the transactions—I was engaged with Mr. Easley—I know nothing of the action that Mrs. Churchhouse brought against Mr. England—I don't know that any action was brought, I only beard so—there is not a word of truth in the imputations that have been made with regard to Mrs. Weir, or that she was a brothel-housekeeper—I have never assaulted a woman, there is no truth in that—I had a squabble with some man, and was fined 3l.—I was examined at the Police Court.

ALFRED CARARROLL . I am an accountant, and live at Battersea—I was at the Wandsworth County Court on 10th November—I saw Mr. Conady there—I only knew him by sight before—I saw a man there whom I now know to be Elsey—I was some distance behind—I saw Condy hand the book to somebody—I suppose it was the testament, it was a small book—I believe it was to Elsey he handed it—I attended there to prove a debt for Mr. Acome, who is a client of mine—there was a dispute about something between Elsey and Harvey, but I was not close enough to hear what it was—I did not see what Elsey did with the book when it was handed to him—I saw him take it, but I did not see whether he kissed it or not—I don't know whether Condy was sitting or standing when he handed the book—they were close together, but I could not say whether they were sitting or standing.

Cross-examined. I went there with Mr. Acome for the purpose of proving

a debt of 10l.—I did not swear it—I got there at two o'clock—the reason we did not prove was this; the Registrar said that, it being a judgment summons, we were not required to prove—I was not told anything about being too late—I know Mr. Condy now—I mean to say I have only known him since this case—I never saw Harvey before that—I am an accountant at Bridge Road, Battersea—I only knew Condy by sight—I was never employed by him—I had not served notices for him before that—I have since served subpoenas since it has been at the different Courts, Wandsworth and the others—I have not been employed by Mr. Harvey also, and Mr. Condy has not paid me—I saw Mr. England at the County Court—I have known him ten or eleven years, when I was articled to Messrs. Abrahams and Welsh as an auctioneer—I have not been employed by him in any way, I am certain of that.

Re-examined. I saw the Registrar administer an oath—I should say he administered two or three—I can't say—I have seen Elsey here—Mr. Acome knew him well, and shook hands with him—to the best of my belief he if the person to whom I refer—I stayed there till four or five o'clock—it was towards the close of the proceedings that the Registrar administered the oaths—it was at the earlier part that I saw, Condy hand the book to the person I believe to be Elsey—I did not see Condy hand the book to any one else except that one person.

GEORGE TANNS . I have been assistant bailiff at the Wandsworth County Court fifteen years—I administer oaths sometimes—my position is sometimes close to the witness-box and sometimes out of the Court; if we have a great many people there I go out to keep them quiet—I was at the Court on 10th November, the day of the inquiry into Fox's bankruptcy, sometimes in Court and sometimes outside—I remember Deacon being examined by the Judge—Deacon was not sober when he was in the witness box—the Judge ordered him into custody, and I had to take him down stairs; as I was taking him down, he said "I don't know whether I swore the affidavit or whether I did not"—I saw Mr. Condy, Mr. Harvey, Mr. England, and several others there that day—Mr. Hughes was there almost every examination—Mr., and Mrs. Fox were there—I had to move them off the landing—they were insulting Mr. Hughes, and calling him all manner of names—Deacon said "I don't know whether I swore the affidavit or whether I did not; I thought I signed a paper to have five shillings in the pound"—he said that at the same time when he was drunk—when the Registrar is out of Court it happens that a solicitor who is a Commissioner to administer oaths takes affidavits—Mr. Condy has sworn me to a great many affidavits, and none of them came back—I have to make affidavits as an official of the Court, and when the Registrar has not been present and Mr. Condy has, he has sworn me often.

Cross-examined. To the best of my belief Hughes was there every Court day—he was there before Christmas time—I believe he was there on 10th November.

Re-examined. I don't pledge myself positively to that occasion, but I don't believe he missed one—I won't pledge my oath that he was there on the first occasion.

WILLIAM CLARK . I reside now at 3, Duke Street, Chelsea—I was formerly an officer in the B division of police for fifteen years—I have retired from the force—I was private orderly to Captain Labalmondiere, the Commissioner—the B division included Chelsea at that time—I knew Mrs.

Fox who was examined here as a Witness yesterday—I have known her about ten years, but have lost sight of her for some time—I would not believe her on her oath.

Cross-examined. I knew her as Mrs. Fox—she used to live in Elizabeth Street, Chelsea—I have never heard her examined on oath—I was not a groom; I was private orderly to see that the horses were got out properly; sometimes I attended to them and cleaned them myself—I was not discharged from the Force for drunkeness—I was not charged with being drunk while I was in the Police Force—I will swear that—I don't know Mr. Harvey; the first time I saw him was yesterday and the day before—I have not been drinking this morning—he did not take me and another man up to Mrs. Fox the night before last, and point her out after the case was over—I did not hear Mrs. Fox say that he did—if that is Mr. Harvey I did not know his name—no one came to me to ask me to be a witness—I was subpoenaed by a man named Smith—the first time I saw Mr. Harvey was the day before yesterday—I knew I had to come here respecting Mrs. Fox—that was last month, and the case did not come on—I am keeping an eating-house and coffee-shop now, at 3, Duke Street—I have been doing that six months—before that I was living on my means—after I left the Force I went down in the country, I wanted a holiday—Mr. Harvey did not point out Mrs. Fox to me the night before last and say "There is the old cat"—I did not hear that—I was not with Harvey at all; I never saw him till the day before yesterday—I spoke to him and had a glass of ale With him in the middle of the day—I have not seen him since, nor spoken to him.

Re-examined. From the time I left the Force until I entered into business in Chelsea I was living upon what I saved while I Was in the Force; I resigned, and left as a first class constable.

COURT. Q. did you see Mrs. Fox outside? A. I did; Mr. Harvey was there, and I was standing there at the time—I did not see Harvey point to Mrs. Fox, nor hear him say "That is her, that is Mrs. Fox, you will know her again, won't you?—he said "That is Mrs. Fox"—I turned round and said' "Yes"—till the day before yesterday it was about four year since I had seen her; I recognized her directly—I was subpoenaed here for the last session—I came up and the case was put off—I saw Mrs. Fox then in the neighbourhood of the Court—I did not know at the time what I was to give evidence about—I did not know what I was going to say till I got into the witness-box.

JAMES MCQUEEN (Detective Officer B). I have been in the Force about twelve years, and have been four years a detective; I have been on duty at Battersea I should think about six years; from 1865 or 1866 till this year—I saw Mrs. Fox yesterday; I have seen her before repeatedly in Battertea; I have Been her about half-a-dozen times a day since I have been in the neigh-bourhood of Battersea, both night and day—I have heard things in reference to her—from what I know of her, and from what I have seen, I would not believe her on her oath; any one can do as they like about that, but I would not myself—I swear that of course.

Cross-examined. The last time I saw her before I saw her here was at the Wandsworth Police Court—it might be three or four years since I knew her at Battersea—I knew her as Mrs. Fox—I knew Mr. Fox well—I know Mr. Condy—I never spoke to Mr. Harvey, but I know him; I did not know him as acting with Mr. Condy—Mr. Harvey did not surrender—I was entrusted with the warrant for his apprehension, I have it here—he left

Battersea on or about 22nd July, I think—Sergeant Coombes apprehended him at Liverpool; I can't tell you the date—the warrant was placed in my hands on 22nd July, I think—I believe Mr. Harvey left three days before that—I could not apprehend him—I was making the necessary inquiries—I have heard Mrs. Fox examined on oath repeatedly at the Police Courts—I don't know that she has got protection orders from her husband; I know she has applied at the Police Courts repeatedly—the Magistrate has granted her a summons, but I don't know anything about protection orders—I have been there when she has applied, but I never took the trouble to inquire whether she got them—I don't wish to state anything false against the woman; I speak of her from her general conduct in. the streets, not from what I have heard her say.

Re-examined. I have never heard the Magistrate say that he would not believe her.

JOHN WILLAM HALLIDAT . I live at 26, Landseer Street, Battersea Pack—I am a cabinet and chair maker—I have lived there about three years; previous to that I lived in Dorrington Grove, and Henley Street—Mrs. Fox lived with us at Dorrington Grove about six months—from what I know of her I should not believe her on her oath.

Cross-examined. I purchased some furniture for 7l. Odd—I never told Elsey it was a sham sale—I never spoke to him till he was at the Police Court—it was not a sham sale—I did not pay the 7l., Mr. Fox owed me 5l. 10s., and I paid him 2l.; that was twelve months ago, before he became a bankrupt—he told me he was going to get into a bit of trouble, and he, owed me some money which he had borrowed of me—I have no document to show that he owed me 5l. 10s., and never had any—he told me that he was going to get into trouble, but I did not know he was going through the Bankruptcy Court—I did not know what it was—I found it out after I had bought the things—he said he expected to get into some trouble about a lump. Of land—I nave been in possession of the things ever since, and I have some now, I believe—Mrs. Fox lived with us more than six months; she lived with us at different times—I keep a respectable house—she has lived with us nine months and six months at a time; she has lived about three years with us altogether—I am married—Mrs. Halliday is in Court.

MARTHA EMMA HALLIDAY . I have known Mrs. Fox by living with us; she has lived at our house at different times—from what I have known of her, I should not believe her on her oath.*

MARY ANN WOODHAM . I live at 41, coleville Road, Battersea; my husband's name is William, he is a mason—I have known Mrs. Fox about eighteen years—from what I have seen and known of her, I should not believe her on her oath.

Cross-examined. I have never given evidence of this kind before about any of my acquaintances—no one explained to me the questions I was to be asked—I did not know till the last thing last night that I was coming to-day—I would not believe her on her oath—my husband was in the room when the subpoena was served—I don't know Mr. Condy or Mr. Harvey; I know McQueen; he came with two other gentlemen.

Re-examined. they inquired what I knew of Mrs. Fox, and I told them.

EDWARD BROWN . I am a butcher at Langton Street, Chelsea; I have been a butcher five years, and before that I was a licensed victualler in the same district—I know Mrs. Fox—from what I know and have heard, I would not believe her on her oath.

Cross-examined. I was applied to this morning to give evidence—I had a subpoena—I don't know who it was that came,

WILLIAM FROST . I am a labourer, and live at 5, Orchard Street, Wandsworth—I am fifty-four years old, and have never been out of the parish of Wandsworth—I have known Mrs. Fox and her husband for five or six years; it may be seven or eight—from what I know of her, I would not believe her on her oath.

Cross-examined. I am not related to Mr. Fox—I have seen Mr. Condy about where I work—I don't know Harrey at all—I was asked this morning to come and give evidence.

HANNAH THOMAS . I am a widow, and reside at James Yard, Wandsworth—I am a laundress; my husband was Mr. Fox's brother—I have known Mrs. Fox sixteen or seventeen years—from what I know of her I would not believe her; I never thought her worthy of it.

Cross-examined. I bad a subpoena sent me last Thursday by post—no one took my evidence down before—I was act told I should be examined about believing her on her oath—I did not know what I was going to, be asked.

Re-examined. I heard from her husband that the trial was coming on—I have visited her husband since he has been in goal.

RICHARD THOMAS SMITH . I am a carman and contractor, at Battersea—I have known Mrs. Fox four or five years—I would not believe her on her oath, or her husband either—I have known Elsey fifteen or sixteen years, and from what I know of him I would not believe him on his oath—I know Mr. Hughes—he came to me just after the trial at Guildford.

Cross-examined. I knew Fox at the time he was in the occupation of the land—I wrote this letter to Mr. Rees in. 1867—on 26th June I wrote this letter at the request of Fox—I did not know that he was negotiating with the owners of the land—I was called as a witness at Guildford to prove these two letters—(Read: "Sir,—Mr. Fox and myself will call on you in a few days, and pay the rent of the ground in New Road, Battersea." "Mr. Rees,—Sir,—You shall have the three quarters' rent up to the 29th September on that date. I should say that the fence would be put up when the other party shows the boundary of his part of his property. Yours, Richard Smith. The land that Fox rents.")

Re-examined. I was transacting business for Fox—he told me he should have to pay 30l. a year for the land—I was not a creditor of his—he did not pay me for my services—I had known him about two years before that, and had transacted other business for him—I think the time those letters were written was about the time I first knew his wife—I have seen her since. that—I was sent for by Mr. Hughes, and taken down to Guildford as a witness—I had not seen Mr. Hughes before that—I gave evidence—Fox was acquitted.

JOSEPH THELENBURG (recalled). I have known the witness Elsey five or six years—from what I nave known of and about him I would not believe him on his oath.

WILLIAM SAVAGE . It am a builder, at 5, Park Road, Battersea—I have been at Battersea twenty years—I know Elsey, and from what I know of him I would not believe him on his oath.

Cross-examined. I was subpoenaed to come here last Thursday.

CHARLES HEINE . I am a baker, at 219, Lower Wandsworth Road, Battersea—I have known Elsey about six years—from what I know of him and

His character I would not believe him on his oath—I was asked to come and give evidence last month—I was here then.

HENRY NEWMAN . I am a builder, at 4, George's Road, Battersea—I have known Elsey about six years, or six and a half—from what I know of him it is not likely that I would believe him on his oath.

A number of witnesses deposed to the good character of Condy and Harvey.

THE COURT considered there was not a sufficient case against ANDREWS— NOT GUILTY .

CONDY and HARVEY— GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment each.

Before Mr. Justice Keating.

764. WILLIAM JAMES TAYLOR (38), was indicted for the willful murder of Susannah Hebden. He was also charged, on the Coroner's Inquiresition, with the like offence.

MESSRS. POLAND and COLLINS conducted the Prosecution; and

MR. M. WILLIAMS the Defence.

WALTER MARCH (Policeman M 135). On Sunday night, 30th June last, I was on duty in Bermondsey New Road, about 1 o'clock, close to the top of Webb Street—I saw the prisoner coming up Webb Street from the direction of No. 12—he could not speak, he made motions to me; I then saw that he was bleeding from a wound in the throat, and from the head—he pointed in the direction of 12, Webb Street—I said, "Show me where this occurred," and he took me to 12, Webb Street, to the first-floor back room—he was very excited; I don't think it was drink—he walked with me—I had my lamp with me—I found three persons in the room: a woman, a little child, and a boy, lying insensible in different parts of the room—there was a bed against the window, on the floor, but no bedstead—there was a smaller bed opposite the door going in, on the left—the little girl was lying on the smaller bed—there was about 3 yards between the two beds—the prisoner pointed out the beds to me—on the larger bed I saw the woman Susannah Hebden, and the boy Moses Israel—the woman was lying crossways on the bed, partly on the bed and her legs on the floor, and the boy was lying on her left, close to her—she was partly dressed—she had got on two petticoats and her chemise—I think that was all—I saw, from the state of the bodies, that they were dying; they were insensible, they could not speak—about that time the police-constable Bridgman came in, and I sent him for a doctor—I asked the prisoner for a candle, and he got one—I did not see where from—he was standing against the window, and he took the candle from somewhere close to him—it was not lighted—some-one lit it; there was no candlestick—I then examined the floor of the room—there were several places bloody, also on the bed-clothes—there were smears and splashes of blood on the floor—the greater quantity of blood was on the larger bed—I waited in the room till Dr. Cuolahan came—the prisoner was very excited, he kept pointing to the bodies and then to his throat—he could not speak—when the doctor came he directed that the prisoner should be taken to the hospital, and Bridgman tried to remove him from the room—he resisted—he was afterwards taken down stairs and put into a cab—he was taken into a front room for a short time—I did not see him again till the following Thursday—I stopped with the bodies—they both died while I was in the room—the two bodies were removed to the dead-house, and the boy was removed to the workhouse—on the following Thursday I was placed as guard over the prisoner in the hospital—he was then quite calm and

Sensible—I asked him how he was, but could not hear him answer; his throat was so bad he could not speak—on Wednesday, 10th July, he was able to speak a little—I could pick up words that he said then—he said he could not think he had murdered the little girl—he was very sorry for the little girl, for she was so fond of him—he said that the woman had driven him to this—he said before the Derby he bought her a new suit of clothes, and she went and pawned it, and got drunk—he said just previous to this she went away four days along with another man, on the Saturday, stopped four days, and returned on the Wednesday before this occurrence—he said he had been drinking, previous to that, for a fortnight; she drove him to it by going and stopping away—I remained with him from the Thursday, 4th July, until the 30th September, on and off—he seemed very sensible except when he had the erysepilas in his head; that was in August, then he was strapped down to the bed—he was delirious—with the exception of that he was usually calm—he conversed with me sensibly—on 30th "September he was taken away from the hospital by Inspector Walton and myself and taken before the Magistrate—he remained three months in the hospital, from 30th June to 30th September.

Cross-examined. I saw that he was bleeding from the head—it was a very bad wound—he could not speak to me in the street when he first came up—he could only make gestures—I believe his throat was not dressed before he was taken to the hospital—he was taken there on the Sunday morning—I was directed by my inspector to go there on the Thursday—I believe he tore the bandages off after his throat had been dressed—I believe he did that on two or three occasions, but not in my presence—I have heard that he tore his throat open—I don't think that was before the Thursday, but I was relieved by other constables—I don't know what constable was there at that time—his violent conduct lasted about four days, I think—he was strapped to his bed during the four days—in consequence of his violence we could not have held him if he had not been strapped down, and all that time he was raving, very delirious.

Re-examined. It was on the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th August he was raving—that was when he had the erysipelas—he did not rave at any other time while I was there—he seemed quite calm—did not see him do anything to his throat.

WILLIAM CHARLES PRITCHARD . I am a costermonger and labourer, and live at 96, Bermondsey New Road—on Sunday morning, 30th June, I was at the corner of Webb Street, just before the clock struck one—I saw the last witness there—I saw the prisoner run out of the house in Webb Street and come towards me—I could see that his head was bleeding; the blood ran down his face and his shirt—he had nothing on but his trousers and shirt—no shoes, or stockings, or coat, or hat—he came and showed his head to the constable, and the constable said, "Come down and show me who done that," and took hold of his left arm—the prisoner went to 12, Webb Street—I followed the constable—we went up to the back-room, first floor, and I saw the three persons lying there on the ground—the prisoner got a candle out of the corner of the room, and some one lighted it—I remained there until the doctor came, and another constable—I saw a bolt and a pocket-knife found in the room—I found the knife myself at the side of the bed—it was open—this is it (produced)—I gave it Doctor Coulahan—it had blood on it—this bolt was found in the room at the right hand side going in—there was blood and hair on it—I weighed it—it weighs

Four pounds six ounces—the hair was on it then, on the end—the little girl Frances was removed in a shell, and the woman too on my barrow—they were all three alive when I first went into the room—I afterwards saw the doctor bathing the woman and child—the child died first, and the woman after, in the room—I went with them to the dead-house—the little boy was taken to the workhouse on a stretcher—I saw the doctor bathing the woman, and there was a jug of water—the prisoner stood at his side, and he stooped down and drank out of the jug of blood and water—I was there when the constable came and took the prisoner to the hospital—I did not know the prisoner before that night—he looked very wild, and was vomiting from the mouth—he could not speak.

Cross-examined. His manner appeared to be very wild—the water he was drinking was water mixed with the blood that was coming from his wife's wound.

JAMES BRIDGMAN (Policeman M 136). I was on duty in the Bermondsey New Road—I went on duty at 10 o'clock, and passed and repassed 12, Webb Street—I did not hear any disturbance or cries during the time I was on duty—I was at the corner of Webb Street just before 1 o'clock when I was called by a female—from what she said I went to 12, Webb Street, and listened—I heard nothing—I went into the back yard and listened, and heard nothing there—upon returning I was informed that some man had cut his throat—I went to 12, Webb Street into the back room—I saw March and the three bodies in the room—I was told to remove the prisoner to Guy's Hospital—he looked in a very wild excited state and he kept pointing up and down and to the side of his head where the injuries were—when we got to the head of the stairs to go down he resisted—he wanted to kiss the little child that was breathing just its last—we allowed him to kiss the child, and he then went quietly all the way to the hospital—when we arrived there he asked, by signs, for something to write on—he was handed a slate by the doctor and a piece of pencil—he wrote something on the slate which was afterwards rubbed off, but I took a copy of it; this is it—"A boy up stairs. I told you to go up. My two boys have not come home. I think they are stopped by the same party. They left home about 8.30: James Taylor and Alfred Taylor. Over at Mile End. Grandmother sent to Stone's End to fetch one. Uncle, March. Young Cone said he would do for me to night. He has been a soldier "—this was about half-an-hour after we got to the hospital—Stone's End mentioned there is the police-station in the borough—there are two detectives; one goes by the name of "Uncle" and another is Marsh or March—Cone, I believe, is the name of a person who lodges in the house—I did not wait with him after he wrote that on the slate—I think I was with him about three-quarters of an hour; he complained of thirst, and drank several times in the hospital—another constable took charge of him, and I came away—I went on duty there again the following Thursday morning, 4th July—I was in charge of him then for four weeks and three or four days—he was delirious the first week or ten days, and two or three days before be left the hospital he had a little swelling come in his face, from erysipelas—he was very delirious then—he told the night nurse when she came down that I threw three buckets of water over the day nurse—at other times he was sensible and right in his mind, and he could converse.

Cross-examined. He was sensible and right through a great portion of the period—during the first week he showed symptoms of insanity, to my

Idea—for the four weeks and three or four days I was constantly with him—I had to go sick then and did not go after—during the time he was under my observation, he was not controllable several times—he wanted to kiss the little girl when we took him away from the house—he could not speak, but we took it from his signs it was the little girl he wished to kiss—I know that at the time this tragedy occurred, James Taylor was in the house—I don't know anything about his going on the previous Thursday to the Stone's End Station—when we were passing out I saw him pass with a constable going towards the station on the Wednesday night—why he went there I don't know—the constable is here that he gave himself up to on the Wednesday night.

Re-examined. He wrote down very strange things on the slate; things that he would want to make use of—I did not copy all of them—he appeared very weak and ill—I have not copied those things from the slate, only what he wrote the first night—there was nothing else besides that—I did not judge from that that he showed symptoms of insanity; chiefly from his manner—he was very strange sometimes; he would jump up in bed—he was always very strange in his manner—there was nothing else—there were a few other things written on the slate, I believe—I saw one or two which did not refer to the crime, and I did not copy them—I could not remember them.

DR. HUGH COULAHAN . I am an M.D. and a surgeon—I live at 9, Grange Road, Bermondsey—on Sunday morning, 30th June, a constable came to me about 1.10 or 1.15—in consequence of what he said, I went to 12, Webb Street—I went up stairs to the back room first floor—the prisoner was there, and there were three persons on the floor—the mattrass was on the floor—a woman, about forty years of age, was lying across the mattrass, her feet resting on the floor—she was partially dressed, and unconscious—there were several wounds on her head, from which blood was issuing—she died in about half-an-hour on the same spot—a little girl, about five years old, was lying on another mattrass in the corner of the room, dying—she had a wound in the head, extending from the frontal bone to the occipital, and the brain was protruding—she died about twenty minutes after my attending—the little boy, about thirteen or fourteen, was not quite unconscious, he was crying—he had wounds on the head—he was sent to the workhouse; I accompanied him there—the other bodies were removed—I examined carefully the injuries they bad sustained—on the girl there was a wound extending from the frontal bone over the skull to the back-bone, only one wound; the side bones were broken in, and fragments were embedded in the brain, and the brain protruded—this piece of iron would produce the injuries—I sponged the woman's head, and partially examined her then; on the following Tuesday more particularly—on the left side of the head were two wounds, one above and one below the external angle of the left eyelid, with a fracture of the bones of the orbit; an irregular wound over the left temple, 2 inches in a transverse direction, and one in a vertical; a smaller wound, 1 inch in diameter, over the backbone of the head, on the left side, 1 inch above and a little behind the tip of the ear, and another wound a little above the junction of the left ear with the scalp—there was blood issuing from the left ear, which was an evidence of fracture of the base of the skull—on the right side there was one triangular and two straight wounds of the scalp, penetrating to the bone: over the right lateral half of the frontal bone, there was a fracture

Corresponding with the straight wound, contusion of the nose, discolouration of the left wrist and arm, 4 inches vertically and 2 transversely, apparently the result of a grasp, and contusion of the right shin bone—the body was well nourished, but very dirty—a little above the left breast there were two punctures, not of recent date; they might have been inflicted by a fork; they were very superficial; possibly they may have been inflicted within a week or so—the little boy was lying at right angles with the woman, on the right side, his head resting on her shoulder—on the right side of his head there were two scalp wounds, with fracture of the skull; on the left side were two wounds over the occipital bone, and two wounds over the parietal bone, and confusion of the left thumb—the boy was suffering from concussion of the brain as well as fracture—he was unconscious for three or four days—the wounds, both on the woman and the boy, might have been inflicted by this iron bolt—the woman and the girl died of the injuries that I have described—I saw the prisoner in the room, standing in the corner at the feet of the woman, in a very excited state, very restless, endeavoring to talk inconstantly, but, in consequence of the wound in his throat, he could not articulate—I could not understand what he said—the windpipe was severed, the throat was bleeding—it was a very severe wound—I did not then notice the wound on his head; I did at the hospital—it was on the right side, at the upper edge of the right parietal bone, and about 4 inches long—it was a severe wound—there was fracture of the skull—I formed an opinion, such as it is, as to how that wound had been caused—I went back to the house to ascertain by marks of blood how such a wound could have been inflicted, and I found the box of the lock of the door was covered with blood, especially the edge, and I concluded it was that—it curresponded with the length of the wound, and possibly in struggling with the woman he might have fallen or been pushed back against it—that is mere conjecture—the blow must have been very severe—I did not examine the head myself, but I understood from the house-surgeon that there was fracture of the skull—the room was exceedingly dirty, these was very little furniture in it—it was a dirty mattrass across which the woman lay—the wall near the child's bed was bespattered with brains and blood—there was blood on the floor, and on this bolt, and on this knife which was handed to me by the last witness—the bolt I found myself concealed under the mattrass; it was covered with blood and some hairs—the injuries on the throat could have been inflicted with the knife—I also found a Bible on which there was blood—the boy has recovered.

Cross-examined. The front and lateral parts of the prosecutor's windpipe were cut through—it must have been a very severe wound indeed—the injury to the head extended right along the right side of the head.

MOSES ISRAEL . I am fourteen years old in March—the deceased, Susannah Hebden, was my mother—she lived with the prisoner at. 12, Webb Street, Bermondsey—we had lived there about six months—they had lived together five or six years—we had five rooms in Webb Street—the family consisted of the prisoner, my mother, myself, Frances, aged four or five, and the baby, two years, Joseph Taylor, about fifteen, a son of the prisoner, and Samuel, about eleven—we all slept at the top of the house except Frances, who slept in the room with the prisoner and my mother in the second-floor back room—I don't know that my mother went away anywhere on the Saturday week before this—I used to go to work at half-past 6 in

the morning, and came home about about half-past 7 or 8 at night—I worked at the saw-mills—On the Saturday night that this happened I came home about 8 o'clock—I brought my wages home and gave them to Mr. Taylor—he was in the back room where they slept—the sitting-room was down stairs, the front parlour—my mother and Frances were also in the bedroom—on that day I had a new jacket that my aunt had given me, and I tried it on and took it off, and put it down on the ground, and sat on the foot of the bed and went to sleep—the groans from my mother woke me up—I felt about, it was quite dark—I felt my mother arid I felt her head, and felt something like blood on her head and down by the side; so I said, "You have killed my mother"—I did not know who was in the room—I heard footsteps going about—Mr. Taylor answered me, and said, "I know that; you see how it was done "—directly after that something threw lightning across my eyes, and I don't recollect anything after that till four or five days afterwards, when I found myself in the workhouse with my head very bad—on the Wednesday evening before this Saturday when I had been home about an hour and half my mother was there, and the prisoner and my aunt came to the door—he was telling my mother that they were going to take a shop, he was holding her hand; she said "Let me go," and he pulled something out—I did not know what it was then, but I found afterwards it was a fork, and he struck my mother in the breast—my aunt directly ran out—the prisoner ran out of the door—I followed him and told him he had killed my mother—he said "I will give myself in charge, I don't want you to give me in charge"—I then returned and met my mother coming down the street, leaning against the wall holding her breast, very ill—I took her back to the room, went and got a cab, and took her to the hospital with my aunt—the prisoner did not come home that night—my mother came out of the hospital and went to my aunt's on the Friday, and the prisoner brought her home from my aunt's on the Friday—I came home that night about eight o'clock, and found my mother lying on the bed very bad indeed—sometimes the prisoner and my mother were very good friends, at other times they would be always quarrelling—he drank very much—he did not quarrel then—sometimes he would go straight up to bed when he came in—he had been drinking a great deal for some time before this happened—I had not noticed anything in his manner a little before, he was as usual—there was no change in him to what there had been for some time before.

Cross-examined. I don't remember his saying about three weeks before that somebody was following him about, or anything about a watch-dog—there had been a row next door to us, and he thought it was about him; he said somebody was going to kill him, and told me to go and tell a policeman to look out there, to see if the people next door made any. Disturbance—I did not hear him say he thought they were waiting to kill him—my brother lived in the house, and sometimes Bill Taylor, his other son, would be there, and sometimes he would not.

Re-examined. There was a row with the people next door; they were Irish people—the row was about three weeks before, and there was a row on the same night as he told me to tell a policeman; that was three weeks before my mother's death.

JAMES TAYLOR . I live at 18, Grange Walk, Bermondsey—I am going on for sixteen years of age—the prisoner is my father—I used to live with him at 12, Webb Street—I slept there on this Saturday night, down stairs

in the first floor; I usually slept up stairs in the top room, but I fell off to sleep by the fire with my little cousin Sam and the baby, about 7.30, or 8 o'clock; before I fell asleep I saw my father up stairs in the back room first floor, about 6 o'clock—he told me to go down and feed the horse, and then go and fetch March and Uncle from Stone's End—I did not know at that time who March and Uncle were—he told me to tell them that there was somebody going to murder him—he said, "If you miss me, very likely you will find me 3 yards further away, dead in the shed; I heard them say they were going to put me there;" when he said this he was walking up and down the room, crying and sweating—I went over and fed the horse, and then went back and fell asleep—I did not go to Stone's End—about 1 o'clock or 1.30 I heard a noise coming down the stairs, and a gurgling in the throat, like somebody choking, and then I heard some one open the street door and go out, and afterwards the policeman came in and turned on his light, and I found what had occurred—my father used to go out with a horse and cart to buy iron, and I assisted him—I was out with him on the Thursday in that week, and he kept on saying that there were people after murdering him, and following him about in cabs, and when he saw anybody in a cab, he said "Here they come after me," and he would hit the horse and make him go quick—he went to the Mansion House, and went up to a policeman there, and told him that there were people after murdering him, and he fetched a gentleman in a round hat, who asked me if there was anybody after killing him, and I was obliged to say "Yes;" I was frightened, for I knew father was in such a state of mind—I know this piece of iron; I got it when we came home on the Thursday—father said there were people Outside going to kill him, and he could hear them calling—I could not hear them—he kept saying "Look here, outside, listen;" and he told me to pick up a piece of iron, and he said "If they touch me, you follow me up behind, and if anybody touches me, you run and fetch a policeman "—I went and fetched this piece of iron from a stack of iron that was lying on the ground in Grange Walk, and gave it to my father on the Thursday night, he held it in his hand, then he put it in his pocket, and then he put it down; my little brother Alf picked it up, and father turned round and came all over in a sweat, and began crying—I saw this piece of iron on the Friday up stairs in the bedroom—my father drank that week—he generally drank very heavily—two or three weeks before this happened he armed us all with choppers, and hammers, and knives—he went to the yard door, I had to go to the yard door, and Moss had to go by the window, and we all had to walk about—aunt was up stairs, and father was waiting at the window saying that they were coming in to him—he continued to drink hard all that week; he used not to go to work for two or three days before this—he was always out drinking—I heard about his stabbing my aunt, but I did not see it—I was abed—I called the deceased aunt.

Cross-examined. He gave a chopper to my aunt, and all of us, to Watch, as he said there were people coming in to kill him; he said they would get in at a broken window, that he could hear them getting through—there was a broken pane—he crouched down on the ground, and said "I shall be a watch-dog"—when he heard a whistle he said "Here is a signal;" and when we were on London Bridge he heard some chap halloa out "Echo!" he said they said "What a good coat Taylor has got on;" and when he saw a crowd he said "Keep your eye upon them, they mean settling me"—on the Saturday he had been particularly quiet all day—I remember once his

fighting a window and cutting himself, that was in Grange Road, Bermondsey, at a shop where we used to live—he cut the tendons of his wrist, and the blood flowed; he went outside, there happened to be a doctor passing, and he said "Pull my sinews out"—he was taken to Guy's Hospital—this must be seven years ago—he was sober at the time, it was at night—on that same occasion he tried to hang himself in the shop, and mother cut him down when she came back; he had sent her out for some spirits—shortly before this Saturday night he was crying a good deal—he was very fond of the children, especially of the little girl—he used to wash and dress her himself.

COOPER FOSTER . I am one of the surgeons at Guy's Hospital—in June last Mr. Southey was house-surgeon there, and attended to this case; he has left, and I believe has gone to Peru—I saw the prisoner thirty-six hours after his admission; he was suffering then from the effects of a wound on the right aide of his head, also from a severe wound in the throat; he was in a semi-conscious condition, able to answer questions; he spoke with difficulty, on account of the wound in his throat—I could just understand what he said, but owing to the windpipe being divided it was with difficulty we could make out what he uttered—there was a compound comminuted fracture of the skull; that is, the bone was broken up in several pieces—that injury could not have been caused without great violence—I should think it impossible to have been caused by falling against the lock of the door—it would be accounted for by a blow on the head—I doubt very much whether it could have been self-inflicted—somebody must have hurled him with tremendous force against a projecting body to have done it, and I doubt even that being possible—the wound in the throat was not dangerous, it was very long and severed the windpipe—he remained in the hospital, I believe, up to 30th September—I went away about the 8th—up to that time I saw him every other day, on every third day—I did not notice any appearance of delirium firemens about him from the time I first saw him up to 8th September—he was as conscious as you or I, of sound mind I should think—from the time I removed the pieces of broken bone he became perfectly conscious, and was in a sound state of mind from that time—he was admitted on the Sunday morning at 2.30—severe symptoms of compression came on, and on the Tuesday after, at 3 o'clock, I removed the pieces—he had a slight attack of erysepilas in August; and, as many patients are with erysipelas, he was a little delirious at night; that was simply from the erysepilas—remembering his antecedents we thought it advisable to strap him down—the deceased woman had been brought to the hospital on the previous Wednesday, and was under my care—she was suffering then from two slight punctures, such as may have been made by a fork—she was there two days—I saw her on the Thursday and Friday—I told her there was nothing very serious—she discharged herself, I think.

Cross-examined. The prisoner was strapped to his bed and placed in the strong room—I believe a constable sat up with him night and day; he was considered to be in charge, and therefore that necessitated it; it had nothing to do with me—I visited him two or three times a week; they were not hurried visits—I am judging from those visits—I think the evidence given by the preceding witness to myself is very corroborative of the man having suffered from delirium tremens—homicidal mania is frequently preceded by delusion—I have not experience enough to say whether the sudden restoration to reason is met with in cases of homicidal mania; I would not say it is not so—Professor Taylor is an unquestionable authority on such matters

—in many cases the sudden cessation from hard drinking is the exciting cause of delirium tremens.

JURY. Q. Would the wound on the man's head be likely to be produced by that weapon? A. I believe it would.

JAMES COVE . I did live at 12, Webb Street, Bermondsey—I occupied the front room first floor, the rest of the house was occupied by the prisoner and his family—on Saturday night, 30th June, I went to bed at 11 o'clock—I had not seen the prisoner during the whole of that day—I heard no noise in his room, I am rather deaf—I was awoke by a policeman coming into the room—I was then told of the murder—on Friday night, the 29th June, I saw the prisoner brought home in a cab and taken up stairs by some man—I did not see him take anything out of his pocket, or hear him say anything; I said so before the Magistrate, but it was a mistake—it was only what my wife told me—he was highly excited, apparently by drink—in consequence of what my wife said, I went to the door to look for a policeman; I then went indoors again—I heard nothing after that—on the Wednesday night a policeman came to the house, and I saw him pick up a fork broken in the handle and one point—I saw the prisoner at the station on the Thursday morning—he said it was all up with him, and seemed in a frantic state on his knees in the cell—he said "Oh, it is all over, I have done it"—I said "No, it is not so bad as you imagine"—I have a son a soldier living in Edward Street, Bermondsey.

MARY ANN COVE . I am the wife of james cove—In June last I was living at 12, Webb Street, in the front room first floor—I knew the deceased living with the prisoner as Mrs. Taylor, and on the morning of the Derby day (29th May) she came out and told me that Taylor had struck her—I did not see what occurred—I remember this matter occurring on the Saturday night; she had been away in the previous week for two days—she went away on the Friday afternoon, and I saw her again on the Monday morning at 6 o'clock; she came to my bedside and awoke me—I had attended to the children while she was away, and also to the prisoner, made his tea and breakfast—she told me she had been to her mother's—prisoner seemed very uneasy and angry about her being away—he thought perhaps she had gone away with some man in their trade—he said if she did not return on the Sunday night he would kill her—I told him if he talked like that, when she did return I would not let her in—then he seemed to calm down about it—I was in bed and asleep when she came back, and did not see her till the Monday morning—she went away again on Tuesday night and returned on Wednesday morning—on the Wednesday might, between 9 and 10, they were in their room on the ground floor with her sister, Emma Stanley, and I saw him rise and pull her down—he then went out, and I went into the room and found her fainting away—she was stabbed under the arm and in her left breast—her sister sent for a cab, and we took her to Guy's Hospital and left her there—she spat blood before that—I saw the prisoner speak to a constable in the road nearly opposite the house—he said "Take me in charge, I have murdered my wife," and I think he said "my child"—I said "No you have not, Mr. Taylor"—the constable took him, and I went back to the house—she came out of the hospital on the Thursday evening, I believe—I saw her on the Friday, and the prisoner as well in the morning; he told me she was up stairs in bed—I asked him if I might go and see her—he said, I might, and I went and saw her in bed, and he gave me 1s. to get her some beef tea and some

linseed meal for a poultice, which I did—she was very ill indeed during the day—I saw the prisoner come home in the evening—A man came up stairs with him between 8 and 9—the prisoner called to the man, "Tom, come up," and when the man stood at the door the prisoner walked in front of her, and said "There she is, now you will see what I am going to do," and he held something in his hand, it looked to me like a clock weight, it was this bolt—I screamed and rushed into my own room, and told my husband I thought he was going to kill her, and sent him for a constable, but none came—I heard nothing more that night—on the Saturday night I heard nothing till the police came—I had not seen the prisoner since 3 o'clock in the afternoon—I saw very little of him—he generally came home of a night after we were in bed—I had a conversation with him on the Saturday morning about giving me two such dreadful frights—he asked me if I thought it was drink that made him go off in these violent tempers—I said very possibly it might be, as he told me he drank very strong liquors—he said he had no wish to frighten me or hurt me, and he would not drink any more—I saw no drink that day, nothing but two bottles of ginger-beer brought into the house by his youngest son.

Cross-examined. He appeared to be very quiet on the Saturday—when he gave me the money for the beef tea and linseed he said it was for his wife; they appeared very good friends then.

GEORGE ELLIS (Policeman M). On Wednesday night, 26th June, about 10 o'clock I was on duty in the Bermondsey New Road—about 50 yards from Webb Street, the prisoner came up to me, he seemed to be suffering from drink—he said "I give myself up on a charge of murder"—I said "Who have you murdered?—he said "Susannah Hebden, the woman I am living with; if you do not take me to the station I will go down myself"—I took him there, and he made a statement which was taken down, and he signed it—next day I went to the hospital, but the woman refused to charge him—the prisoner was taken before the Magistrate and fined 5s. for being drunk—he appeared to be delirious.

JAMES WATSON (Police Inspector M). On Wednesday I was. at the Bermondsey Police Station, when Ellis brought the prisoner there; he was in a very excited state, apparently suffering from the influence of drink, or hard drinking—he said that he had murdered his wife—I asked him where—he said he did not know—I asked him what street—he said "I don't know"—I asked the number—he said "No. 12"—I asked if she was dead—he said "Yes, I have reason to believe that she is dead"—I asked how he had killed her—he said "I have stabbed her "—I asked what with—he said" I don't know "—I said "Was it with a knife"—he said "I don't know "—I said "Do you think you struck her with a piece of wood"—he said "I am sure I don't know"—this was taken down by the Sergeant and afterwards read over to him, and he signed it—I afterwards went with a constable to 12, Webb Street, and in the ground floor front room found four pieces of a carving fork; neither of the prongs were broken; they were old and rusty; the handle was broken into three pieces—from 30th June I had a constable at the hospital to keep charge of the prisoner until 30th September, where I took him into custody there in the strong room—I said to him "Taylor, undoubtedly you know what I have come here for"—he said "No, I do not"—I said "Well, I am an inspector of police (I was in plain clothes), and I have come to take you to-day before the Magistrate for the murder of Susannah and Frances Hebden—he made no reply.

THOMAS HENRY WATERWORTH , M.R.C.S., Bengal Place, New Kent Road. I am surgeon to the Surrey County Goal, Horsemonger Lane—the prisoner was confined there from 30th September to 22nd October—he was under my care the whole of that time—he was very quiet and well behaved while there—I conversed with him on different subjects, and he answered rationally—I talked with him for a motive—at the present moment he is of perfectly sound mind, and was so the whole of the time he was under my care.

Cross-examined. What he was before, of course, I can't say—I have heard the evidence of the boy James Taylor to-day—the account he has given of what the prisoner did and said, with regard to the delusion of people following him and trying to kill him, is consistent with an attack of delirium tremens.

JOHN ROWLAND GIBSON . I am surgeon to Her Majesty's Gaol of Newgate, and have been so for many years—the prisoner came into the gaol on 22nd October—I have seen him daily since then, and have conversed with him—during the time he has been in Newgate in my judgment he has been of sound mind.

Cross-examined. The symptoms described by the boy Taylor are strikingly indicative of delirium tremens—I think a person suffering from delirium tremens, and under those delusions, would not be at all controllable as to his action.

COURT. Q. When you say not controllable, do you mean that he would not be able to restrain his acts? A. I think not; not under a severe form of delirium tremens—supposing that he had homicidal tendencies, I do not think he could restrain them.

ROBERT BEAVIS (Policeman M 283). On 1st July I was put in charge of the prisoner at the hospital; he had then been in the hospital about four hours—when I first saw him he was lying very quietly in his bed; he suddenly jumped out of bed; took the weights off the clock, and stood over me with them as if he was going to throw them at me; he then turned round, and the window being a little open, he raised it and jumped out; it is about 3 feet from the ground; he ran into the female ward, seized a poker, and ran into the top floor—I attempted to follow him, and he rushed on to. the landing, swinging the poker, and attempted to throw the weights at me; I went down again, and got two ladders; I tied them together to put to the top window to get in that way, and he rushed across and threw the ladders down; I and another constable then went into the ward and tried to get the clock weights from him—he attempted to strike us with the weights and the poker—I tried to frighten him by saying I would strike him with, my staff; at last we managed to get on the landing, and the nurse promised if he would lay the weights and poker down she would give him some brandy; after some ten minutes he laid them down, and we rushed in and secured him; he was taken to the strong room and strapped down in his bed—he was wild, and I thought he was suffering from delirium tremens.

Cross-examined. I believe on the staircase he tore open the wound in his throat, and wrote on the wall with the blood with his finger.

Re-examined. I did not see him tear the wound open; it was open already—I saw the blood on the wall; it was writing of some kind—I could not say what it was—I did not actually see him do it—it was very near the top landing, after he had got away from the ward.

HENRY PHILLIPS . I keep a general shop at 10, Webb Street—about 1 o'clock on Sunday morning, 30th June, I heard a very shrill scream in a woman's voice—I thought it came from next door, that is, in the direction of No. 12—at the same time I heard the breaking of glass—I heard nothing more till the constables came—I got up directly—it was a shrill scream at first, and then it went off as if some one was holding her throat, or over her mouth.

NOT GUILTY on the ground of insanity. — Ordered to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure.

765. JOHANNA WRIGHT (18) , Feloniously attempting to murder John Woods. Second Count—Wounding, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MESSRS. POLAND and COLLINS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. STRAIGHT the Defence.

JOHN WOODS (Police Sergeant M). On Saturday night, 4th August, or Sunday morning, I was on duty in White Street, Borough—there is a court called Collier's Rents there, and through that a court called St. George's Square, which consists of six houses, three on each side—it is occupied mostly by the lower class of Irish—in consequence of what I heard I went to a court which was at the back of this court, and heard voices as if persons were quarrelling and fighting—I was in uniform—I went down the place, and found a number of the inhabitants fighting and making a great disturbance, both in Collier's Rents and St. George's Square—it is a place where there is always a special man on duty, and constables do not go down there singly—Martin was the special constable on duty there that night, and Dale was on the beat—I found them there—the people seemed to be fighting in different lots; it was a kind of free fight; we term them faction fights—Mrs. Regan, the prisoner's mother, came up to me, and said "For God's sake, sergeant, put a stop to this disturbance, or there will be murder done;" at the same time I heard Timothy Regan, the prisoner's brother, call out from a first-floor window "Stand on one side, old woman, while I knock the b—'s brains out"—I saw him throw from the window a stone ginger-beer bottle, with very great force—it struck my left shoulder—it bounced up about 2 feet or 3 feet into the air, and then dropped on the pavement—it entirely disabled my left arm, I could not use it—the woman stepped on one side when he called out—she said "Oh, he has broken the sergeant's arm; he does not live in that house, he has only run in there to avoid the police"—I called M 232, and we went into the house, he first, I following—the stairs were very steep and narrow—there are three floors, but only three rooms; I believe there are no back ones—when I was half way up the stairs, Timothy Regan rushed out of the front room, passed 232, and seemed to jump right down to avoid his catching hold of him—as he came past me I seized him with my right hand, but he was going with such force down the stairs that he dragged me headlong down, and him too—we both fell at the foot of the stairs; I fell on my left side—Regan jumped up much quicker than I could, and got away—Martin followed him—Dale was in the court close by the door—I heard a man's voice call out "Look out, policeman!"—I turned my eye round, and saw the prisoner—I had known her for very nearly two years by sight—she was close behind ma, and had an instrument in her hand, which looked like a lathrender's hammer, raised above my head—before I could get away from her she struck me a

blow right on my shoulder, a dull heavy blow—she aimed at my head, but I ducked my head, and the blow came on my shoulder—it seemed to send a pain up into my head—my eyes flashed, and it seemed to knock me almost insensible for a moment—she struck me again twice after that very quickly on the back, one blow just at the back of my shoulder, and the other close by the corner of the bladebone—the third blow appeared to stick in my clothes—she could not get it out—she had to jerk it twice to get it out—I attempted to seize her, but she ran into the passage and up the stairs of the same house from which the ginger-beer bottle was thrown—I followed her into the passage, and about halfway up the stairs, but I became so faint from loss of blood that I went down again—she ran up stairs straight into the same room that she came out of—I went out into Collier's Bents, and met Dale—I made a complaint to him, and described the woman who had assaulted me—the blood was pouring down me between my shirt and skin and down the legs of my trousers, and you could track the blood right up into the Borough—I was cut right through two coats, my great uniform coat and another coat under that, and my shirt—I became nearly insensible, and was taken to the hospital—I remained there until the following Wednesday—I was then taken to my own house, and put under the care of the divisional surgeon—erysipelas came on, and I was confined to my bed for nine weeks—I have not recovered yet—the prisoner was brought to the hospital about half an hour after I was there, and I recognised her directly—I had a good look at her face, and I knew her so well previously.

Cross-examined. I have been in Collier's Rents before to the prisoner's brother, when he has been making a disturbance there several times—I can't say the number of the house, but I think it is No. 1—it was out of that window the bottle was thrown at me; from the first-floor window—I was suffering a great deal of pain when I went into the house from the injury to my shoulder—the fall did not hurt me much more—I felt numbed—I should say not more than one or two minutes elapsed from the time Martin passed me to go after Regan and my getting outside the door—there was no one near the door when I went out but the prisoner—she was about a yard from the door—I was standing still looking round the court when I heard the exclamation, "Look out, policeman!"—there is a lamp at the end of the court; it may be 12 yards from the door, possibly, at the entrance of the court—that was about 12.30, as near as possible—when I first went up the court, I dare say there were fifty people altogether in the square and the rents together—I should say about thirty in the square—they seemed to be all in a heap, fighting and striking anyhow—I have seen that sort of thing there before—there were very few in the square when I was struck by the prisoner—they were retreating towards Collier's Rentsmen and women were fighting, and children amongst them—I believe the prisoner had been employed at Mr. Leving's, the furriers, for a long time—I told Martin that I had been stabbed with a chopper—it was like a little hatchet on one side and a hammer on the other—I believe the prisoner lives at No. 1 with her husband, and the Regans also live in that house—I don't know in what rooms.

Re-examined. When I came out of the house and the prisoner attacked me, there were, very few persons in the square—there might possibly have been half a dozen, but they were nowhere near us; they were up towards the top of the square—there was plenty of light from the lamp to see her

face, because it shone full on her face—my lameness is the result of the violence that night; I had some abscesses form.

HARRY MARTIN (Policeman M 232). I was on special duty on this occasion—Dale called me, and I proceeded with him up Collier's Rents to St. George's Square—I saw several of the Irish inhabitants quarrelling and fighting—Regan was there, and seemed to be the ringleader—I was in uniform—I went to lay hold of him, and he escaped into his mother's house, and almost immediately afterwards appeared at the first-floor window—he commenced using very bad language, and threw a piece of crockery-ware at me; I think it was a jug—it struck me on the breast, but did not hurt me—it fell on the pavement and broke—while I was endeavouring to quell the disturbance, Sergeant Woods came up; I saw a woman speaking to him—Regan at the window got a ginger-beer bottle, and exclaimed "Stand on one side, old woman; let me knock the b—brains out," and he threw the bottle and struck the sergeant—I saw him stagger against the wall—he called to me, and we went into the house—I went up stairs first on to the landing of the first floor, and saw Regan at the entrance of the room door; he had a poker or a piece of iron in his hand—he lifted it up as if to strike me, and I struck him with my staff—he then rushed past me, and jumped down the stairs—the sergeant was half-way up, and laid hold of him, and they both went to the bottom together—I saw the prisoner and a man I supposed to be her husband up stairs in the room that Regan came from—I Knew him by sight for some time—I ran down stairs, and pursued Regan; he was up on his feet in an instant and off—I pursued him through Collier's Rents, but lost sight of him—I then returned, and, at the entrance of Angel Place, I met the sergeant bleeding from two wounds in the back—he made a statement to me—t toot him to the hospital, and Dale returned to the court—I have never seen Regan since that night.

Cross-examined. He does not live in the square; he lives in Collier's Rents with some woman—when I first went into the square I should imagine there were about eight or nine persons there fighting—there were more than that there, some fighting and some looking on—Regan was fighting, I think, with a man; but they were so mixed up together that really I could not tell—I did not go after him till the sergeant was struck—I saw him at the top of the stairs with a piece of iron in his hand—there was a candle-light in the room—I don't think there was a fire—I was out of the House directly after him—there were some people round the door, not a great many, more than a dozen, men and women.

GEORGE DALE (Policeman M 243). I was on duty on this Sunday morning by Collier's Rents, and seeing this disturbance I went to fetch Martin, who was on special duty, to help me—we then went to St. George's Square, and saw a number of the inhabitants fighting together—Timothy Regan was taking an active part in it—I have known him before—Martin tried to take hold of him to take him into custody, and he went in No. 1 and fastened the door—the prisoner's father and mother live in that house, and his sister too, I think, and the prisoner and her husband—we tried to disperse the people—I saw Regan throw something from the window—I did not see whether it hit Martin—about that time Sergeant Woods came up—I saw Mrs. Regan speak to him, and heard Regan call out "Stand aside, old woman, I will knock the b—brains out," and he immediately threw the ginger-beer bottle, which took the sergeant in the left arm near the shoulder—the sergeant and Martin went into the house—I remained at the door—I saw

them go up stairs, and shortly afterwards I saw Regan and the sergeant tumble down stairs together—Regan came out—I went towards him to take him, but some one took me by the shoulder, put their legs between mine, and threw me over on my back—when I got up I saw the prisoner—she came down stairs behind the sergeant towards the sergeant—I and Martin followed Regan, but he escaped—I afterwards returned, and found the sergeant just coming out of the square bleeding and very weak—he made a complaint to me and gave me a description—I have known the prisoner for the last five years—I am quite certain she is the woman I saw coming down stairs towards the sergeant—I went back to the square with Webb, another constable, and went to No. 1—we found the door fastened—I heard a noise as of talking inside, and I called out—finding they would not admit me, I broke open the door, and on the ground floor I found the prisoner and some half-dozen others, her mother, her sister, and her husband amongst them—before I said anything the prisoner said "I did not touch one of the policemen"—I said "I shall take you into custody for stabbing the sergeant"—the said "I did not do it, I was in bed at the time"—she had got no dress on, merely her skirts and no boots—I took her out of the house—as we were passing by Angel Court a number of persons were there, and she turned round and said to them "For God's sake, don't let them take me, they will kill me before they get me out of the court"—we took her to the station—she was afterwards taken to the hospital and shown to the sergeant, and he identified her as the woman who struck him—she denied it, and said "If I get twenty years for it, I did not do it."

Cross-examined. I was examined before the Magistrate—I mentioned then that the prisoner said "I did not touch one of the policemen"—I am sure that was before I spoke to her—I did not mention her observation on the way to the station—I recollected it afterwards—I said there might be twenty people in the court not three or four paces from the sergeant—they would be at least twenty paces from him, nearly at the end of the court—there were as many as twenty people about the door and round the door when Martin came out, but they all followed him—Woods had not got up from the floor then—he got up scarcely a minute afterwards—I searched the house but could not find any weapon.

STEPHEN WEBB (Policeman M 84). I went with Dale to St. George's Square, after Woods had been taken to the hospital—we found the door of No. 1 fastened—we could not obtain admission, and broke the door open—I went into the room on the ground floor, and there saw the prisoner and about a dozen other persons—she said "I did not touch the policeman"—Dale told her he would take her into custody for stabbing the sergeant—she said "I was in bed; I know nothing about it"—on the way to the station she said to the gang who were standing by "For God's sake don't let them take me or else they will murder me before I get out of the court."

THOMAS EVANS . I am a surgeon, of 3, Trinity Square, Southwark, and am surgeon to the division of police to which Woods belongs—I first saw him on 7th August at the police-station—he had two incised wounds on the upper part of the left shoulder, one about an inch and a half long, and the other not quite so long—I did not probe them—they had been attended to at the hospital and were healing—they were not dangerous wounds—they had been done with some cutting instrument—he complained of his shoulder, but I did not examine that particularly—I have attended him ever since—he went on very well for about a week when the wounds began

to reopen, and he had symptoms of blood-poisoning—he became very ill, and had erysipelitas inflammation—blood-poisoning is caused by the absoption of matter into the blood—pyemia is the scientific term—he had large abscesses form in his left thigh from the same cause—I quite despaired of his life for some days—his wounds were such as might have been inflicted by a lathrender's hammer—I should think there must have been a considerable bleeding from the wounds—Mr. Southey, who was the house-surgeon, has gone abroad.

The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. I reserve my defence. I have Hannah and Margaret Leary, Mary Mahoney, and Johanna Driscoll I will call at my trial.

The following Witnesses were called for the Defence.

MARY REGAN . I am the wife of Dennis Regan, and I live at 1, St. George's Square, on the ground floor—the prisoner is my daughter; she lived with her husband on the first floor—Timothy Began is my son—he did not live with me—he was living in some place, I don't know where—he came into my place when the policeman rushed in after him on this Sunday morning—I saw my daughter on that morning when she came out of her bed from the policeman rushing into her room—I did not speak to any constable that night except one who came and broke the door, and I told him "Don't break open the door"—they broke three doors—my daughter was there in bed with her husband—I don't know Sergeant Woods—I heard somebody call out that a constable was cut, and a cab was called, and he was taken to the hospital—I did not see my son Timothy throw a ginger-beer bottle, nor did I see the constable struck with it—I did not ask him to interfere—I saw nothing of the row before the police came to my house and knocked at the door, and broke it to pieces, and they went up stain into the prisoner's room—she jumped out of bed, and came down in her nightgown and petticoats, but no boots—there was a young man in my place, and she said to him "They will break all my things;" and he said "No they won't," and then the went out into the court clapping her hands and crying—that is all I know about it.

Cross-examined. My daughter, Ellen Regan, who is married, lives in the house—she was out at the time; she came in afterwards—when the policeman came in my husband was there, and a young man named Downs, the prisoner, and her husband—Downs is a labouring man—a neighbour, Hannah Leary, was there, and Margaret Leary, and Mary Mahoney, and Johanna Driscoll—I can't tell you where Timothy Regan is now—I have not seen him for a long time.

DENNIS REGAN . I am the prisoner's father, and live at 1, St. George's Square—the prisoner was in the employ of Messrs. Leving and Co, skin merchants and furriers, at this time, and has been for three years—she is a peaceable orderly woman—she lives with her husband on the first floor at No. 1—on this Sunday morning about 12 o'clock there was a row in the court by the women—Downs came in and smoked a pipe with me, and after it was striking 12 we heard a row—my missus was outside on some business, so I did not like to shut the door—the row came up the court, and Tim Regan ran up stairs, and clapped the door too—the sergeant and four men came and broke the door open, and ran upstairs into Johanna's room—the court was full of people—she jumped up in her nightgown and petticoat, and came down into my room, and sang out "They will break all my things," and went out into the

court clapping her hands—the constables got beating Tim Regan with their staves, and he ran away and they after him—my daughter was not out of my sight all the time—she was in the court singing out that they would murder her brother—she had no chopper or anything of that kind in her hand—I went out and brought her in—she could not have struck the constable without me seeing it—she did not, I am sure of that—I can take my solemn oath she never put a thing near him—she was not within 10 yards of him—it was about half-an-hour afterwards that the police came and broke open the door.

Cross-examined. When Timothy Regan came into the house I was in the bottom floor—I had not been out fighting, nor my wife—she had gone out to get something for dinner next day—I did not hear Tim Regan open the window, or say anything, or see anything thrown out—he lives in Collier's Rents with his wife—I saw him and the constable tumble down the stairs—I did not see him with a poker or anything in his hand—he came out of the house about three or four minutes after the policemen went up after him—they were beating him with their staves in the prisoner's room, three of them—I don't know whether they beat him—I saw them draw their staves on him—the prisoner followed them down stairs, and went out into the court, clapping her hands—Downs came in as a neighbour, to smoke a pipe with me, and he was there when the police broke open the door.

WILLIAM DOWNS . I live at 7, St. George's Square—about 11 o'clock on this Saturday night I was sitting smoking my pipe with Mr. Regan in the ground-floor room, and he was mending a pair of drawers at the same time—about 12.30, or from that to 1 o'clock, Timothy Regan rushed in, and three or four others with him, and went up stairs where the prisoner and her husband were—he shut the door when he came in, and bolted it—I can't say that I had heard any row going on in the court before that—then the police came, and broke the door open, and rushed up stairs after Tim Regan—the police were there about ten minutes, or it might be a little less, and Tim Regan ran down, and the police after him—I was in the parlour all this time—when the police came in the prisoner came down in her nightgown and petticoat, and she says to me "Billy Downs, "she says, "they will break all my little bits of things;" "Hold your tongue," says I, "they will break nothing "—she stayed in there till the police ran out after Tim Regan, and then she said "They will kill my poor brother," and out she ran with nothing on her feet, and her father followed her, and came back with her in about ten minutes—she had not a thing in her hand; no weapon of any kind—she came back into the parlour, and stayed there about half-an-hour with her husband, till the police came back and kicked the door in, relation of the Regans—he was not one of the men that ran up stairs with Tim Regan—I don't know how he came there—I believe he is the husband of the prisoner's sister, by what I hear; I don't know his name—the front door had been broken before; it was the front room door that they kicked in the second time; the other door was out in the yard, broken all to pieces—when the police came back, they said "Open the door"—they had their staves up, and came in and said to the prisoner "You are the woman we want," and took her away.

Cross-examined. It was about 10.30 when I went in to Regan's—I am

no relation—I am a waterside labourer—I remained in the room all the time till about 2 o'clock—I never heard any fighting outside—what first attracted my attention was Timothy Regan running indoors, and several others following him, a lot of chaps—I could not tell you their names—I should think there was about four of them—Buckley was one, the husband of the prisoner's sister—I know Tim Regan—he is no friend of mine—I only know him by sight—I don't know what he is—I did not see anything that occurred at the window—I heard nothing up stairs, I heard a noise up stairs—I saw two policemen go up stairs, they burst open the door and rushed up—I did not see Tim Regan with a poker, or anything in his hand—I saw him come down stairs and run out—I saw one of the policeman fall against the stairs—I could not swear that Tim Regan upset him—the prisoner came down before Tim Regan ran out—it was after the police went out that she said "They will kill my poor brother"—she was not very angry—she was in the ground-floor room when she said that—she went out into the court directly afterwards, and I lost sight of her—I did hot go outside the door—Mrs. Regan was there up stairs—I believe I had seen her in the parlour about a quarter of an hour before—she was sitting down there with us—she left when the police came—she was out when the fighting was going on—I expect she went out to fetch her daughter in or to look after her son—I don't know where she went—there was no row going on at the time that I know of—the kitchen was very nearly full when the police came back, I could not tell you the names—I did not hear at that time that the sergeant had been wounded—there was the prisoner and her husband, Mr. Regan, and Buckley there, and others—I did not know the police were outside till they forced in the door—it was not my place to open the door—I did not know then that anybody had been wounded.—I had not heard it; I swear that.

ELLIN REGAN . I am the prisoner's sister, and live at 1St. George's Square, with my father and mother—I was not in when the row began—I was not gone above ten minutes, and when I came back it was all over—I was going across to the Borough to my sister, Mrs. Buckley, and when I came back I saw my sister standing by my father's place crying and clapping her hands, and saying her poor brother was killed—that was in the room, not outside—there were a lot of people outside—I did not see any weapon in her hand; she only had on her petticoat and night-dress, no stockings or boots—it was half-an-hour after I came back before the police-man came and kicked the door in—they held up their staves to hit a young man, and he said "I have done nothing"—I opened the door to see who it was, but they would not wait; they kicked in the panel of the kitchen door—I asked them to wait till I opened it, and the sergeant said he would kick it in if it was a prison—my father, my brother-in-law, my sister, and William Downs were in the kitchen; those were all.

Cross-examined. The row was all over when I came, and the police had gone after my brother—there was a rare lot of people about—my mother was there—I did not know for the moment that the constable had been wounded—I was listening to how the row began when the policeman came—I heard that the man was wounded from the people at the top, but I did not know what they followed him for, or what damage was done—I heard that he was wounded before I went into the room—I did not see any blood about—I did not hear who had wounded him—the street door was all broken when they came back, and I stood the remainder of it at the side of the wall.

ANNA LEIRY . I live at 3, Collier's Rents—I did live at 3, St. Gedrge's Square at this time—I was standing at my own door that night, and saw and heard the row—I saw Timothy Regan run into his fathers house, and the policemen after him—they remained outside for a short time holding an argument with him, and then I saw them burst in the door—I heard a great struggle inside, and in about ten minutes he got away, and the police quickly followed—there was a crowd in the court, but not round the door—I think there were three or four policemen ran after him—I saw the prisoner come from her own place clapping her hands and saying she thought they would kill him—I don't think she went further than my door, which is next door but one to hers—she had nothing in her hand, and was quite undressed except her petticoat and night-dress—the policeman did not return again for twenty or thirty minutes—I did not see her strike any policeman or do any violence—I did not see anybody do anything to the policeman—she went indoors again, and then the police came back—I was still standing at my own door; there was a great mob accumulated—there were several women there—I did not hear any noise at all till the policemen came.

Cross-examined. I did not see any fighting—I don't know what caused Timothy Regan to run into the house—he was running away from the police—I don't know what he had been doing—I did not see any crockery thrown or any ginger-beer bottle—there was nobody with Timothy Regan when he ran into the house—he was quite alone—I heard no threats used—I can't tell how the constable got wounded—I did not see him wounded—I did not hear that he had been wounded for two hours afterwards—I have known the Regans about twelve months—they are nothing at all to me.

MARGARET LEARY . I live at 3, St. George's Square, and my daughter with me—the first thing I saw was the door broken open, and the prisoner run down in her night-dress and petticoat, and out into the court—I did not see her do anything—she only ran down stairs, and the policemen passed into the court—she was crying, and going up and down dapping her hands, and saying "They will kill my poor brother"—I did not see her strike anybody—she went up the court after the police, and her father followed her and brought her back—I was looking out at my bedroom window—I saw Tim Regan jump over the policemen and run out of doors, and they followed him.

Cross-examined. I was at my first-floor window—it was the report of the breaking of the doors that woke me—I had been in bed—the prisoner was in the court when Timothy Regan ran away and the police after him, and she followed up, and her father after her—I saw the constables breaking the door in—I did not see the sergeant injured or know that he was injured.

MARY MAHONEY . I live at 4, St. George's Square—I was in bed, and heard the noise, and the rush of the police from getting indoors after Tim Regan—I jumped out of bed and stood at my door after dressing myself—I saw the police come and run after him up the court—the prisoner came out and put her hands together, and said "Oh, my poor brother, they will kill him;" and up the court she went, without a shoe or stocking, only her night-gown and petticoat—she then came back and went indoors, and about half-an-hour after the police returned and went indoors, and paraded her out without shoe or stocking, and took her up the court—I did not see her father in the court with her—she went indoors by herself—I never saw her strike anybody with the weight of a pin—she had nothing in her hands—

there were a few people in the court at the time she came out, about twenty I expect, little and big—there were more women than men; there always will be a quantity of women on such a business.

Cross-examined. I saw Timothy Regan make a rush of course to save his life, and the prisoner came after him—I did not see a constable knocked over or tripped up by the door—I did not know that the sergeant was wounded till about 1.30.

GUILTY on the Second Count. — Two Years' Imprisonment.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

766. CAROLINE PERCIVAL (24) , PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully endeavouring to conceal the birth of her child.— Judgment Respited. And

767. SARAH PAXMAN (50), and JANE ROBINSON (35) , to unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.— ROBINSON— Two Years' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

768. The said SARAH PAXMAN was again indicted for feloniously uttering counterfeit coin after a previous conviction.—She PLEADED GUILTY to the uttering but not to the previous conviction.

THOMAS BUNTING (Policeman P). I produce a certificate—(Read: "Central Criminal Court. Sarah Mahan, convicted September, 1866, of unlawfully having counterfeit coin in her possession. Sentence: Five Years' Penal Servitude")—the prisoner is the person; she was tried with George Mahan.

Prisoner. I was drawn into it then, and I am drawn into it now.

GUILTY.**— Ten Years' Penal Servitude.

769. WILLIAM JONES (27), was indicted for feloniously uttering counterfeit coin.

MESSRS. POLAND and DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution.

DANIEL PACKMAN . I keep the Palmerston beerhouse, Upper Kennington Lane—on 24th September the prisoner gave me a florin for some half-and-half—I gave him 1s. 11d., and he left directly without finishing his beer—I then broke the florin and put it away—on 29th September the prisoner came again into a different compartment—he asked for a glass of stout and mild and tendered a bad florin—I bent it on the counter, and asked a customer to close the door—I then sent for a constable, and gave the prisoner in charge with the two "florins—I told him I knew him there before—he said nothing to that.

Prisoner. Q. Did you remember me by my dress? A. No, by your features.

EDWARD CUMMING . I am potman at the Palmerston beerhouse—on 24th September I saw Mr. Packman serve the prisoner, who gave him a florin—he swept the change off the counter, and walked off without finishing the beer—I am sure he is the man.

Prisoner. Q. How do you recognise me? A. By the projection of your teeth, and you have a rather peculiar look.

ROBERT BARNES (Policeman L 222). On 28th September the prisoner was given into my custody—he said it was a sharp thing a man could not go into a public-house and have a glass of ale without being locked up—going to the station he tried to kick me up—I found on him three good half-crowns—I produce the two coins.

PRISONER. Q. What did I do? A. You kicked me on my left heel—I was not laid up—I got the assistance of another constable.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to Her Majesty's Mint—these two florins are bad.

GUILTY .

He was further charged with having been convicted of feloniously uttering counterfeit coin in September, 1867, to which he

PLEADED GUILTY.— Ten Years' Penal Servitude.

770. WILLIAM SMITH (23) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MR. POLAND conducted the Prosecution; and MR. W. SLEIGH the Defence.

HARRIET IBBETSON . I am barmaid at the George and Dragon, High Street, Vauxhall—on Tuesday, 10th September, about quarter to 4, I served the prisoner with a glass of beer—he asked if I would give him change for a half-sovereign which he gave me—I suspected it, tried it, and took it to my mistress, and when I came back the prisoner was gone—I marked it—this is it (produced).

Cross-examined. I was sent for to the Vauxhall Tavern the same afternoon—I went into a room there where there were three or four men, one of whom was the prisoner—he was not pointed out to me—I did not express a doubt about his being the man; I said I was certain it was him, but he had a different necktie on—the prisoner did not ask me whether he was wearing the same necktie—he asked me whether it was the same watch-chain, but he had none at all then—he had one when he came to me—Reynolds did not ask me anything about the chain, it was the sergeant—nothing was said about it at the Vauxhall Tavern, but there was a discussion at the station about his indentity—I said at the tavern that the prisoner had a coloured tie on when he came to me, and he had a black one afterwards—I am sure it was at quarter to 4, and I was at the Vauxhall Tavern near upon 5.

Re-examined. Somebody fetched me to the Vauxhall Tavern—it is about ten minutes' walk, or hardly that if you walk quickly—notwithstanding the different colour of the necktie, I have not the least doubt about his being the man who gave the half-sovereign.

COURT. Q. What was done when you pointed him out? A. He was taken to the station—I did not go to the station—when the sergeant came to me I gave a description of him before he went to Mr. Morton—that was before I went to Vauxhall—when he left, the police sergeant came to me and asked me what he had on, and what his height and age were—I said I did not look at him much, but he had a watch-chain on—after that I was sent for to Vauxhall and identified him.

ALICE FANNY YEOMAN . I am barmaid at the Vauxhall Tavern, Upper Kennington Lane—on Tuesday afternoon, 10th September, at 4.30, I served the prisoner with a glass of cooper, which came to 1d.—he gave me a half-sovereign—I found it was bad, and gave it to Mr. Morton, the landlord, who gave him in custody.

Cross-examined. I am sure it was 4.30 and not 3.45—I did not tell the Magistrate next day that it was 3.45—I said 4.30—I heard Ibbetson give her evidence—I have had no conversation with Reynolds about the time—the prisoner was locked up in our bar-parlour—it was about ten minutes from the time of his being locked up till Ibbetson came—he was not locked up there more than an hour to my knowledge, but I was busy in the bar, and did not notice—Reynolds left the house while he was locked up.

THOMAS MORTON . I keep the Vauxhall Tavern—on 10th September Yeoman brought me a bad half-sovereign, and said that the prisoner gave it to her—I went round and asked him if he had any more of them—he said

"No"—said "Of course, you know it is bad—he said "No"—I said "How did you come by it?"—he said that he had got it in change for a sovereign—I said "Where?"—he said "I don't know"—I gave him in custody with the coin—this was at 4.30—he was put in the public parlour, and Ibbetson came to see him.

Cross-examined. I am not aware whether I stated the time before the Magistrate—I heard Yeoman give her evidence at the Police Court—I cannot say whether she said that the prisoner came to the house at 3.45—my evidence was read over to me; it was correct, and I signed it, and she did the same—I cannot swear to the time she gave—I told the prisoner I would give him in custody—he made no disturbance or attempt to get away.

JOHN REYNOLDS (Policeman L 196). I took the prisoner, and found on I him a metal Albert chain, a good shilling, 4d., and a halfpenny—I received this half-sovereign from Mr. Frostick, who marked it—the prisoner gave his correct address and name.

Cross-examined. I was called at 3.45—I locked the prisoner in the public bar, and at 4.50 the young woman was taken to identify him—there were about twenty people there—I cannot say whether they were all men—the prisoner was in front of the bar, and I stood next to him.

Re-examined. Mr. Morton was there—only three or four people were in the room when I first went in.

Prisoner. When I was taken to the station I had my chain on, and the policeman took it off. Witness. The chain was in your pocket.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These two half-sovereigns are bad, but from different moulds.

NOT GUILTY .

771. ALFRED WILLIAMS (28), was indicted for a like offence.

MR. POLAND conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS the Defence.

MARY ANN BELL . I am barmaid at the Star and Garter, at Putney—on 21st September I served the prisoner and another man with two glasses of cooper, which came to 3d.—the prisoner gave me a half-crown—I broke it easily in the detector into three pieces, and told the prisoner it was bad—he gave me a good one—I gave him the change, and threw the pieces away—I afterwards tried to find them, but could not—he was in the house nearly ten minutes—I saw him again a day or two afterwards.

Cross-examined. I saw that he was suffering from an affection of the eyes.

WILLIAM WIGGINS . I am potman at the Star and Garter, Putney—on 21st September, at 8.10 or 8.15, I saw the prisoner at the top of the steps, with an elderly man—I afterwards saw them leave the Star and Garter.

PERCY DENHAM . I am booking clerk at Putney Railway Station, seven minutes' walk from the Star and Garter—on 21st September, about 8.20 p.m., the prisoner asked me for a third-class ticket to Waterloo, price 5d.—he gave me a half-crown—I said. "This won't do; it is bad;" I bent it—he made no reply, but paid me in coppers—I kept it, and went out and gave him in custody with the half-crown—he said that he got it at Alexandra Park Races.

WILLIAM DENHAM (Policeman). On this Saturday evening, the last witness spoke to me, and I took the prisoner in custody—he said "If it is a bad half-crown, I took it at Alexandra Park Races"—he said he lived at 5, Market Place.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . This is a bad half-crown.

GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.

772. ANN DORLING (43) , Feloniously marrying Edward Pratt, her husband, Benjamin, being alive.

MR. MOODY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS the Defence.

CHARLES STEVENS (Detective Officer P). I took the prisoner into custody on Tuesday night, 15th October, at 170, High Street, Peckham—I told her I should take her for marrying Edward Pratt, her former husband being alive—she said "Very well, I will go with you"—I took her to the station, and Charged her—the inspector showed her the first certificate with the name of Benjamin Dorling—I received that from Pratt—the inspector said "This is the certificate of your farmer husband, Benjamin Dorling"—she said" That is right"—I afterwards showed her the second certificate of her marriage with Edward Pratt—she said that was also right—I have compared them with the register, and they are correct.

Cross-examined. When I said it was the certificate of her marriage, she said "Yes, and I have been a good wife to him—(The first was a certificate, dated 10th September, 1850, of a marriage between Benjamin Dorling and Ann Ashley at St. John's Church, Waterloo, and the second was dated 24th February, 1867, between Edward Pratt and Ann Ashley, spinster, at St. Saviour's, Southwark.)

ALFRED ASHLEY . I am an umbrella-maker, at Railway Approach, in the Borough—I was present at St. John's Church, in the Waterloo Road, on 10th September, 1650, when the prisoner was married to Benjamin Dorling—they lived together, I think, for about fifteen years; I should think up to 1866, as near as I can guess—the prisoner worked for me as shopwoman from 1860 up to about April 1868—I received two letters directed to Mrs. Ashley at my place—I read those letters, and then I spoke to the prisoner—I asked her if she was married again to another person, I think I did name the name—she swore that she was not; she took an oath that she was not—she said "I am not; so help me God, I am not," and I showed her the letters and said "What do you mean by that?" and then she said she was married the second time to Mr. Pratt—I have seen Dorling nearly every day since that—he was at the Lambeth Police Court—he has been into me for money once or twice since the prisoner left my employment—he came to my place at the time she was working for me, and she saw him as late as three or four years ago—it was very shortly before she confessed she was married again—I should think it was about six years ago that she and Dorling separated.

Cross-examined. I will swear that I have seen the prisoner and Dorling together since 1864—the latest date at which I saw them together was 1867—I was subpœnaed to come here by Mr. Pratt—he is the prosecutor.

EDWARD PRATT . I am in business as an umbrella-maker, at 130, High Street, Peckham—I became acquainted with the prisoner in 1867—I knew her as Ann Ashley, and ultimately married her—we were married by license at her wish—she did not tell me previous to the marriage that she was a married woman—I did not know till about twelve months after, when her brother came and told me—I was in the army at the time I married her—I was invalided afterwards, and retired on a pension of 8s. 6d. a week, and I received 10l. when I left—I subsequently established myself in business with the prisoner in High Street, Peckham—after her brother came to me I spoke to her about her previous marriage, and she told me she was married—she did not give me the date or any particulars of her marriage—a summons

was taken out against me at the Lambeth Police Court, and she appeared as a witness against me; but before that we had agreed to part, and I was to give her the furniture and 75l.—she had the furniture, and I have never had it back from her—it was arranged that she should go to Chelsea, but after that she established herself in business close to me—I went to a person named Moss, where she was residing, and in consequence of that the summons was taken out against me.

Cross-examined. I gave her into custody because she annoyed me, and had committed bigamy—I learnt that she was married twelve months after I married her; that was in 1868—I did not give her into custody then because I thought I had nothing to prove it, that is my reason—I tried to get proof—I asked her and I asked her husband—I did not go to drink with him—I have certainly drank with him; I don't know when; I have been more than once—I have seen him several times—when I first met the prisoner I was a soldier, and on furlough—I was married to her about fourteen days after I knew her—I went back to my duties after the expiration of my furlough and while I was away she carried on business as an umbrella-Maker some part of the time—she was not in business when I went away—I came home on sick leave, and she nursed me—I don't know what was the matter with me, rheumatics I think—I was discharged in June, 1868, and I was ill then—I believe it was rheumatics—the prisoner brought some biscuits once or twice down to my quarters—she taught me a portion of the umbrella business when I came home, and I can do anything in it now—i did not tell her that as long as she behaved herself it did not matter whether she was married or not—I might have said so, but I was under a severe cross-examination, and I was not prepared for what I was going to say—I am prepared now—I won't swear that I did not say so—I said that I saw the first husband, and went and, drank with him several times—I did not say "I did not take the trouble to inquire whether he was her husband"—I don't recollect it—I did take the trouble—I can't say that I have never sworn it—(MR. WILLIAMS here stated that he could not dispute the facts).

GUILTY .— Six Weeks' Imprisonment.

ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18TH.