Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 6.0, 21 April 2014), February 1901 (t19010204).

Old Bailey Proceedings, 4th February 1901.


Sessions Paper.








Short-hand Writers to the Court,








Law Booksellers and Publishers.



On the King's Commission of



The City of London,





Held on Monday, February 4th, 1901, and following days,

Before the Right Hon. FRANK GREEN, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir WALTER GEORGE FRANK PHILLIMORE, Knt., one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir REGINALD HANSON, Bart., M.P., LL.D., F.S.A.; and Sir WALTER WILKIN, K.C.M.G., Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON, Knt., K.C., Recorder of the said City; Sir JOSEPH COCKFIELD DIMSDALE, Knt; WILLIAM PURDIE TRELOAR, Esq.; SAMUEL GREEN, Esq.; THOMAS BOOR CROSBY, Esq., M.D., another of the Aldermen of the said City; and ALBERT BOSANQUET, Esq., K.C., Common Serjeant of the said City; His Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer, and General Gaol Delivery holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.









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


OLD COURT.—Monday, February 4th, 1901.

Before Mr. Recorder.

145. EDWARD KINGSTON PIKE, Assaulting James Bristow and occasioning him actual bodily harm.

MR. WHITE Prosecuted, and MR. BEARD Defended.

JAMES BRISTOW . I am a licensed market porter, and live at 143, South Street, Walworth—on December 6th, between 1 and 2 p.m., I went into the Al restaurant to get a light for a cigarette—I did not notice who was in there—there was no disturbance when I went in—nobody spoke to me—I went outside—the prisoner came out and knocked me down—while I was on the ground he hit me under my jaw, breaking it in four places—I am unable to eat now—I knew him before; we were always on friendly terms—we had no quarrel—he was not drunk; he may have had a drop to drink—two blows were struck—I went to the station and to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, where I remained for seven weeks.

Cross-examined. We were not both struggling on the floor inside the public house—I was sober—I know Henry Williams—he is wrong if he says I was struggling on the floor of the public-house—when the prisoner struck me outside I did not get up between the two blows—I did not put my hands up and say, "Do you mean it?"—I cannot suggest any reason why he should have struck me.

CHARLES DEAN . I am manager of the Al public-house—on December 6th, about 2 p.m., I turned the prisoner out—he was disorderly and causing a disturbance, he was not drunk—I do not know if any blows had been struck—he had been quarrelling with the prosecutor, who was in there—I went outside to see that the prisoner did not come in again—while I was there the prosecutor came out—the prisoner struck him violently on the jaw twice without any provocation—the prosecutor did not try to hit him.

Cross-examined. They were not on the floor inside the public-house, to my knowledge—I am quite sure there were two blows—I do not think the prosecutor was drunk.

HENRY WILLIAMS . I am a market waiter, employed at the Al public-house, Central Meat Market—about 2 p.m. on December 6th I

saw the prisoner and the prosecutor struggling on the floor in the bar—the manager and the head barman parted them—the prisoner was turned out—I went for a policeman; when I got back the prisoner was outside—I saw him knock the prosecutor to the ground, and as he got up again he hit him again—there were two blows—the prosecutor gave the prisoner in charge—I did not see him make any attempt to strike the prisoner—I went for the policeman of my own accord—we did not go back together; I ran back as fast as I could.

Cross-examined. The prosecutor came out two or three minutes after the prisoner.

JOHN MOUFLET . I am manager at Griffiths' Tavern in the Meat Market—on December 6th I was outside the Al public-house, speaking to a friend—I saw the prisoner being ejected by the manager—a little while after I saw the prosecutor come out—the prisoner said to him, "Now then," and hit him a blow with his left hand, which knocked him down, and then he hit him again with his right hand on the jaw.

DANIEL PRIDO (324 City). On December 6th I saw a crowd outside the Al public-house—I went up and found the prosecutor bleeding—the prisoner was given into custody for assaulting him by striking him in the mouth twice—the prisoner did not say anything on the way to the station—he had been drinking, but he was not so drunk as not to know what he was doing—the prosecutor was taken to the hospital—the doctor certified then that his jaw was broken in two places, but the doctor who has been subpoenaed here says it was broken in four places.

VICTOR BELL , M.R.C.P. I am house-surgeon at St. Bartholomew's Hospital—on the afternoon of December 6th the prosecutor was admitted there, suffering from a fractured jaw, caused probably by two blows—it was broken in about four places—he had been drinking, but he was not drunk.

Cross-examined. The blow would have rather a sobering effect.

By the COURT. He will have some trouble with his jaw; little pieces of bone will come away from time to time; since he has been discharged from the hospital, I see a small abscess has formed; he has had to lose a tooth or two, and he will never have such a good jaw as he had before; he is an in-patient now.

JAMES BRISTON (Re-examined). I was offered ₤10 as compensation—I said I would not accept it, but would let justice take its own course—I have not been able to carry on my business properly since.

GUILTY .— Judgement Respited.

146. JAMES WILLIAM CASEY (29) , Feloniously wounding Annie Amelia Casey, with intent to do her grievous bodily harm.

MR. GODWIN Prosecuted, and MR. BEARD Defended.

ANNIE AMELIA CASEY . I am the prisoner's wife—I have been separated for a week because he hit me, and he drinks—on the morning of January 18th I was outside my house, just going to work—the prisoner was outside—he put a knife into me—he cut my clothes a little—I did not bleed very much—I did not see a knife in his hand—I was wounded a little in my left shoulder—I went to the hospital—I only remained there about half an hour—it is healed up now.

Cross-examined. I used to work at the Incandescent Light Company—the prisoner complained of my coming home about 10 or 11 at night—I leave work about seven or eight—there were frequent quarrels between us about that—I told him he was not the father of my child—I did not tell him that to annoy him—it is true; I mentioned the name of the man; that upset him very much—he took to drink—he was a sober man before—in November I went away, and took some of the furniture with me—I also pawned his clothes for 9s.—he requested me to return home; I declined to do so—he was very much annoyed at that—I think he stabbed me more to frighten me than to hurt me.

By the COURT. I left him because he hit me on the Thursday before—I do not know why I was unfaithful to him, or why I took his furniture.

Re-examined. I took the knife away from him.

ALICE GROOMBRIDGE . I am the prisoner's wife's sister—on January 18th I saw him take a knife out of his waiscoat pocket—I did not know he had done anything to his wife till she got home—I did not see the knife touch her—I did not say before the Magistrate, that I did.

Cross-examined. I saw his hand go towards her—I do not know if it was a violent blow—I heard them talking before this occurred, but I did not hear what they said.

FREDERICK HANCOCK (Police Inspector, B). The prisoner was brought to me—he said that he had attempted to murder his wife, and had also taken some oxalic acid—he volunteered a statement, and I took it down in writing—I did not warn him before he made it—this is it, signed by him in my presence—(In this the prisoner stated that he had met his wife at 8.55 a.m. on Friday, January 18th, at St. James's Street, Westminster, and said, "Will you come home to-night?" that she had replied, "No, you have hardened me to it," and then ran away, laughing, that he ran after her, pulled the knife out of his pocket, and tried to stab her; that he then went home, and on the way bought twopenny worth of oxalic acid, and, on arriving home, mixed it in a glass of water and drank it, and then went for a walk and gave himself up.

ISAAC EBURNE (146 B). The prisoner came to me on January 18th and said, "Do you want a job, mate?"—I said, "What have you done?"—he said, "I want to give myself up for attempted murder and suicide"—I said, "Who have you attempted to murder?"—he said, "My wife; I have also taken twopenny worth of oxalic acid, but that has not done it et"—I took down what he said—he did not appear to be drunk; he told me had been drinking.

WILLIAM PAYNE . I am head physician at the Westminster Hospital—I examined the prosecutrix—she had two punctured wounds just over the collar-bone; one over the inner end of it, and the other about 1 in. below it—this knife (Produced) could have caused them—they were not dangerous themselves, but the locality was dangerous—I have seen her twice since, but not since the wounds have healed.


147. HENRY BROWN, Being found by night in the garden of a dwelling-house, with intent to commit an offence punishable upon indictment.

MR. SELLS Prosecuted.

WALTER REED (306 N). On January 27th, about 11 p.m., I was on duty in Stamford Hill—I saw the prisoner with three other men—there is a road called Hillside Road, leading off Stamford Hill—there is a passage at the end of Hillside Road leading to the railway—in the road I saw the prisoner open a gate, go into a garden of a house about the middle of the road—he stayed there about a minute and then came out—two of the other men had left him before he went to Hillside Road—the other man remained on the pavement when the prisoner went into the garden—they went back to Stamford Hill again, the same way they had come—they then went down St. Ann's Road, and then went up another turning in St. Ann's Road—they went up about 100 yards, waited there a minute or two, and came back to St. Ann's Road—they went up a little further and then went up another turning—I was with another constable—we lost sight of the other man—the prisoner returned to St. Ann's Road—I followed him and caught him in Vicarage Crescent—he was walking along; he did not run away—I asked him what he was doing by loitering about those roads—he said, "I don't know what you mean"—I asked him where he lived—he said, "That is my business; find out"—I told him I should take him to the Police-station, as he had not given me a satisfactory account of himself—he said, "All right"—on the way to the station he said, "For God's sake, you are not going to lock me up; I have only just come out from doing nine months'—he was then charged—I had never seen him before.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. It was not convenient to arrest you when you entered the garden—I arrested you about half an hour after that—I was not standing under a railway arch when you passed with your friends.

HENRY JARVIS (539 N). On January 27th I was with Reed—we were in plain clothes—we had the prisoner under observation for about half an hour—I saw him into Hillside Road and into a garden—it is a row of houses not semi-detached—there was another man outside the garden—the prisoner remained in there about a minute—he came out and went back to Stamford Hill and into St. Ann's Road; then back to Stamford Hill, then to St. Ann's Road again, and into two roads in St. Ann's Road—he was arrested in Vicarage Crescent—when he went up into the roads he just walked up and came back again—he denied being in the garden—I said, "What are you loitering about Hillside and the other roads for?"—he said, "I don't know what you mean"—I said, "Where do you live?"—he said, "That is my business; find out"—he did not say he had not been in Hillside Road—he told the Magistrate that he was drunk—I said that he might have been drinking, but he was not drunk—he was searched at the station—no house-breaking instruments were found on him.

Cross-examined. It is about half a mile from Hillside Road to Vicarage Crescent.

The prisoner, in a written defence, said that he was in a public-house with some friends; that he said good night to his friends on Stamford Hill; that while he was doing so two plain clothes constables were looking at them, and could have arrested him then, but let him go 300 yards towards his home

before doing so; that he gave the police his friends' names, but they had not come, and that he had asked to be sent for trial, as he knew he would get justice then.


148. JAMES KING and JOHN SEX , stealing five saddles of mutton, the goods of Christopher Poulter and another. Second Count: Receiving the same, knowing them to be stolen. KING PLEADED GUILTY to the Second Count,

MR. HARRISON Prosecuted.

CHARLES HY. OWEN . I am a scalesman to Messrs. Webb & Poulter, meat salesman in the Central Market—Mr. Christopher Poulter is a partner in the firm—King was a meat porter in the market; he worked for a Mr. Fergusson, a meat carrier—on January 2nd I sold five saddles of mutton to a Mr. Scarlett for ₤2 7s. 6d., which was 81/2d. a lb.—about 6 or 6.30 a.m. on the 2nd, King came up to me and asked if there was anything for Bury Street—I said, "Yes, there are five saddles"—they were on the scales; he saw me weigh them; I put them on his shoulders, and he went away with them—a little while afterwards one of Fergusson's men came in, and I found out that the meat had not gone to Fergusson—I thought King was working for Fergusson—I should have had to pay for the mutton if I had not found it.

FRANK HALLAM (Detective Sergeant). On January 2nd I heard of this robbery—I went to 38, Lisson Grove, which is about three miles from the Central Meat Market—the prisoners live there—Sex keeps a coffee-house there—I think King had lived there about two or three months—I went to the premises with another officer—I saw Sex crossing the road with a bundle with which he entered his house—he put it down on a table and spoke to King—I followed him and said, "I am a sergeant of police; I want to know what is in this bundle"—Sex said, "I know nothing about it"—I said, "What is in the bundle? is there any meat?"—Sex said, "I do not know; it belongs to this man," pointing to King—I said, "I saw you crossing the road with it"—I opened the bundle; it contained two saddles of mutton—Sex said, "I have been to Kensington with this meat, and have sold one to a publican"—I said, "What publican?"—he said, "The name of the house is the George"—I said, "Where?"—he said, "Near Kensington Church"—I said, "There are three other saddles; I shall have to charge you, King, with stealing those five saddles of mutton, and you, Sex, with receiving them"—they made no reply—while we were in the train, going towards the City, I said to Sex, "King days that you have had all those saddles"—he said, "Well, I may as well toll the truth; I sold the others to old Charlie Palmer, at Camberwell Green, and I sold him two sheep; I hope he will not get into trouble over it"—all the five saddles have been recovered; two at Palmer's, and one at Nailer's, at Kensington.

CHARLES OWEN (Re-examined). I saw five saddles of mutton at the station and identified them.

GEORGE NAILER . I keep the George public-house, Church Street, Kensington—on January 2nd I saw Sex in the afternoon—I had never seen him before—he had two parcels with him—he came into the front bar and asked me if I wanted to buy some meat—I said No, I did not

as I always left that to my wife—he said his governor was a butcher in the market—I finally bought a saddle from him for 7s.—this (Produced) is the receipt he gave me—the weight is marked here as 14 lb.

CHARLES PALMER . I am a coffee-house keeper at 10, Camberwell Green—I know Sex—he is a coffee-house keeper—on January 2nd he came and said his missus had sent me over two pieces of mutton—I paid him 13s; 6d., which is 6d. or 61/2d. a lb.—he gave me this receipt (Produced)—there were about 26 lb.—my wife had been to visit Mrs. Sex the previous day, and when the prisoner brought the mutton I thought it was what my wife had ordered.

CHARLES GREENER (Detective, City). On January 2nd I searched Sex—I found this letter on him—(This was signed by King, and, commencing "Dear Sir or Madam," it stated that he was desirous of working up a private custom, and that he dealt in English and Scotch stock; that he sent his man withy beautiful Scotch "chine" at 7d. per lb., which he hoped would be accepted at that price.)

Sex, in his defence, said that he took the meat for King; that he did not steal it, and that he was quite innocent.

GUILTY .—KING— Nine months' hard labour. SEX— Six months' hard labour.

NEW COURT.—Monday, February 4th, 1901.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

149. LYDIA FINDOUT (33) PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully making counterfeit coin, also to having counterfeit coin in her possession, with intent to utter it.— Judgment respited.

150. JAMES BURLES (23) , to stealing while employed in the Post Office a letter containing 3 postal orders and 24 stamps, also a letter containing a purse, a pair of sleeve-links, and a money order, the property of His Majesty's Postmaster-General.— Twelve months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

151. HENRY ROBERT HUDSPETH (35) , to stealing while employed in the Post-office a letter containing a postal order, also a letter containing an order for the payment of 10s., the property of His Majesty's Postmaster-General.— Twelve months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

152. ERNEST ALBERT LAGUE (28) , to stealing while employed in the Post Office a letter containing orders for the payment of 15s., 2s. 6d., and 2s. 6d., the property of His Majesty's Postmaster-General.— Twelve months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

153. ALFRED BERRY (19) , to stealing while employed in the Post Office a letter containing an order for the payment of 5s., also a letter containing an order for ₤1 12s., the property of His Majesty's Postmaster-General.— Twelve months' hard labour. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

(154) GEORGE HENRY BUNCE (24, a Soldier), to unlawfully obtaining food and lodging from May Lanham and Harriett Holden by false pretences.— Three months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

155. GEORGE RICHARDSON (21) , Breaking and entering the shop of William Pearce and stealing ₤1 5s., his money.

GEORGE THOMAS WILD . I am a scavenger, in the employ of the Corporation—on January 19th, about 12.15, I went to get water for my cart, and saw three young chaps on Ludgate Hill, near the shop of the

Devonshire Bread Company—coming back—I saw one chap standing in the doorway of 18, St. Paul's Churchyard, which was partly open; he saw that I was watching him; a man came out of the shop, and both ran off towards Ludgate Hill; I called a policeman's attention; he gave chase and blew his whistle—I went back, and picked this jemmy up 10 or 12 yards from the shop—they had run in that direction.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. I do not recognise you.

EDWARD CHIDLEY (134, City). On the morning of January 19th I was on duty on the south side of St. Paul's Churchyard—Wild spoke to me, and I saw the prisoner and another man running away; I chased them—the prisoner went round by a factory and then broke into a walk—as soon as he saw me making straight for him he ran to the north side of St. Paul's Cathedral—I blew my whistle, and shouted "Stop him"; he was stopped, and I took him to the station, and found on him 6s. in silver, 4s 31/2d. in bronze and three keys—he said, "6s. 7d. of that is my own money."

Cross-examined. I did not see anyone enter or leave the shop—a halfpenny was picked up, and you did not say that the rest of the money belonged to your landlady—I think these are not proper keys.

Re-examined. They are not properly finished, and when he was first charged he said, "I can bring you the man who made those."

WILLIAM STEPHENS (City Policeman) I was on duty on the north side of St. Paul's and heard a police whistle blown, and saw the prisoner running towards me—when he was within four yards of me he threw a handful of money at me and tried to pass me—I stopped him, and he was taken by the officer.

Cross-examined. You struck me on my chest.

CHARLES FEBERY (City Police Sergeant,77). On the morning of January 19th I examined the premises of the Devonshire Bread Company, and found that the padlock had been forced off the street door, and an inner door leading to the shop had been forced open, the metal till partly forced open, and the contents of the lower part were missing, this jemmy corresponds with the marks on the door and the till.

CLARA HUMPHREYS . I am a manageress of the Devonshire Bread Company St. Paul's Churchyard—on Jannary 18th I fastened up the premises at 8 o'clock, and when I went next morning at 8.10 I found it had been broken open, and the till broken, and 5s. worth of coppers and 25s. in silver taken.

The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he heard a whistle and joined in the chase, putting his hands in his pockets, as he had money there, and that when he was arrested the money fell, but he did not throw it at the constable.

GUILTY . He then to a conviction at Clerkenwell in the name of George Weston on November 16th, 1897 and five other convictions were proved against him. The Police stated that three other shops had been broken, and the tills forced, and that the marks corresponded with the jemmy found in this case.—PLEADED GUILTY Five years' penal servitude.

OLD COURT.—Tuesday, February 5th, 1901.

Before Mr. Justice Phillimore.

156. BARNET ABRAHAMS (41) was indicted for, and charged on the Coroner's Inquisition, with the wilful murder of Ernest Thompson.

MR. HORACE AVORY , K.C., and MR. BODKIN Prosecuted; and

MR. CHAS. GILL , K.C., and MR. HALDENSTEIN Defended.

HARRY WOODLEY (343 H) produced and proved the plans of the Commercial Road between Union Street and Church Lane.

WILLIAM JAMES BUTCHER . I live at Silver Street, Stepney, and keep a coffee-stall in the Commercial Road, close to Church Lane—on December 1st, about 1 a.m., I saw the deceased constable; he was on duty, and in uniform—he passed my stall, going towards Aldgate—soon afterwards the prisoner came to my stall with two women, who had some refreshments—the prisoner left and walked towards Aldgate; a minute or so afterwards the women followed him—I next heard the prisoner shouting or singing, about 7 ft. or 8 ft. from my stall, and between me and Church Lane—the deceased came up and told him to go away; he went away towards Union Street, or eastwards—the women went in the opposite direction, towards Aldgate—as the prisoner moved away he asked the constable what he had done—he continued walking away, and I see them walk a little way towards Union Street, the prisoner in front of the constable—I went outside my stall, and was talking to a man named Ellis, a cab washer—I saw the constable follow the prisoner to Union Street, and saw the constable stop at Morrison's Buildings; then I saw my father coming towards my stall from the east—the prisoner went as far as the corner of Union Street—I saw him turn round and go towards the deceased, who was on the pavement—the deceased made a step or two towards the prisoner, and I saw them meet and fall—when they fell I heard a police whistle go—I then saw six or seven other constables on the other or south side of the road—they were going along in file, and taking prisoners to Arbour Square—I thought the whistle came from the deceased—the constables ran over to where the deceased had fallen—I did not go up to the place—there was nobody near the spot where the deceased and the prisoner fell—my father and myself were the nearest—there were no passengers in the road.

Cross-examined. I have had a coffee-stall there for about 10 months—I always stand about the same place—my father has a coffee-stall some where else—I know the police of this division pretty well—my stall is there from 12.30 p.m. to 7 a.m.—I know the constables on the beat; I seldom speak to them—I knew the deceased; he was a neighbour of mine—his beat extended from Church Lane to Union Street, and round White-chapel Square, and into Commercial Road—there are not very many people about where my coffee-stall stands; it is not exactly quiet—the places around are factories, and are not used at night—the deceased was a tall man; I should not say he was powerful—the first I saw of the deceased and the prisoner was about 1 o'clock—the women with the prisoner were perfectly quiet—the prisoner paid for coffee, and bread, butter, and eggs for them; he had nothing himself—I did not know him before—he was laughing and joking about my pony—he said something about its being hungry, and offered to buy bread for it—they were all laughing before the deceased came up—there was nothing to attract anybody's attention at my stall—the prisoner was not quarrelsome at my stall—Ellis came on the scene about the same time that the deceased did—I was inside my stall when

the deceased spoke to the prisoner—I did not see him speaking to the prisoner, but I heard him—I did not go out of my stall for two or three minutes after the prisoner had said, "What have I done?"—I did not go out to see what was happening, I went out for exercise—the deceased was not pushing the prisoner along the road when I came outside—the deceased, instead of going on his round, apparently turned back to go up Union Street—I did not hear the prisoner say anything, except "What have I done?"—I said before the Coroner that I was not prepared to say that the constable did not strike the prisoner, but that was on the first occasion, when I was inside my stall—when I saw the prisoner he had no marks of violence on his face—when I came out of my stall I stood close to it—Ellis was drinking coffee—afterwards he went up to the crowd, I believe—from where I was standing I could look straight along the pavement on which the deceased and the prisoner were standing—I saw the back of the deceased and the face of the prisoner—I did not hear Ellis give his evidence at the inquest—I think my father joined us while the prisoner and the deceased were walking along—when the prisoner turned round he did not go off the pavement—I could not see well enough to see if the deceased fell on top of the prisoner—I cannot say if they fell on the pavement or in the road—they were on the ground—at that time there was no one else near them—I did not notice the other constables before they ran up.

Re-examined. The prisoner and the women came up together to my stall—I did not see any more of the women that night—I have not seen them since—they were about 30 or 35 years old—I did not hear anything which would make me think that the deceased struck the prisoner; there was no altercation between them, to my knowledge—the prisoner was making a jolly noise after he left my stall; the women did not join in it—the deceased was walking some yards behind the prisoner up to Union Street—when the prisoner turned round the deceased was standing still.

WILLIAM BUTCHER . I live at 42, Silver Street, Stepney—I keep a coffeestall—my usual stand is by Whitechapel Church—on December 1st, about 1.30 am., I was walking along the right hand side of the Commercial Road, going towards Aldgate; I had to cross over the end of Union Street, when I saw the prisoner walking slowly towards Stepney—we were going in opposite directions, and we met and passed each other; going in the same direction as the prisoner, and about 10 yards behind him, I saw the deceased, whom I knew—I stopped, and had a few words with him—we were then on the pavement opposite Morrison's Buildings—I did not stop for more than half a minute at the outside—I then walked up towards my son's stall—I did not see the deceased move; after I had gone about 15 yards I heard a struggle; I turned round, and saw the deceased and the prisoner struggling on the pavement—they fell in the road—I saw that the prisoner was underneath the constable—there was no one else near at the time, only my son and the other man at the coffee-stall—the struggle took place opposite the last door of Morrison's Buildings, next to Union Street—I walked on up to my son; as I was going I heard a policeman's whistle; it came from Thompson's direction—some other constables came flying across the road from Gower's Walk, which is between the Gun Proof House and the tobacco factory—I saw

them lift the deceased from off the prisoner—I stayed at the coffee-stall with my son.

Cross-examined. I had known the deceased for some time—the first thing that attracted my attention was the struggle—the prisoner is a complete stranger to me—when I saw them struggling I could not see exactly the position in which they had got their hands—I do not know if the deceased blew his whistle as he fell or when he was on the ground—I had not reached my son when the men fell in the road.

Re-examined. I only judged by the sound that the whistle came from the deceased.

DAVID TITTLE (400 H). On December 1st, about 1.20 a.m., I was with six other constables going to Arbour Square Police-station from Leman Street Police-station—we had five prisoners with us—I had charge of a prisoner—we went up Little Aley Street into the Commercial Road, walking on the south side—we were going in single file—I was No. 2 from the front—when near Gower's Walk on the south side, I saw the deceased standing on the north side, on the footway near Union Street—I saw the prisoner in the carriage way, facing the deceased, about 30 yards away, and standing still—the deceased stepped off the footway into the carriage way, towards the prisoner, who at the same time stepped towards him—on reaching striking distance I saw the prisoner raise his right hand above his head and strike the deceased apparently on the left side of his head—the deceased immediately seized the prisoner with both hands by the collar of his coat; a struggle ensued, and the deceased threw the prisoner on his back in the carriage way, falling on top of him—I spoke to Police-constable Beckett, who had no prisoner—he an across the road, and I followed—when I got up to the deceased I saw the prisoner lying on his back in the carriage way, and the deceased lying on top of him bleeding from a wound on the left side of his neck—he was lifted off the prisoner and taken away in a cab—the prisoner was also lifted up and taken to the station—soon after the prisoner was lifted up I saw Police-constable Herding stoop down and pick up an open knife which was lying on the left side of the way, where the prisoner had been lying—I did not see what happened to the prisoner after he was put on his feet.

Cross-examined. When I was walking along with my prisoner I was outside him nearest the road—I was No. 2; the constable in front of me was about three yards in front—I was holding my prisoner by the arm—the struggle between the prisoner and the deceased lasted about a minute—I did not see the prisoner struck by one of the other constables with a truncheon—I saw no blow struck, nor heard any—I went on to Arbour Square with my prisoner—I got there about 2 a.m.—the first statement I made that I had seen this was on the Sunday afternoon, but I made a written report to my inspector at 4 a.m. on Sunday—I did not make a statement of what I had seen on the way to the station—I had no one to make a statement to—I heard of his death about an hour before I made my statement.

Re-examined. There was nobody between me and the deceased when he fell to the ground—when I went across the road I took my prisoner with me—after the prisoner was picked up, a crowd of about 20 people collected—it was a very disorderly crowd—as soon as I saw the knife

picked up I went on to Arbour Square—I left my prisoner there and went back to Leman Street; that is my station.

By the COURT. The first blow I saw was given by the prisoner—the deceased did not strike the prisoner at all.

ZEBA BECKETT (414 H). In the early morning of December 1st I was on my way from Leman Street to Arbour Square—I was acting as escort to some other constables who had some prisoners—we got to Little Aley Street, Commercial Road, going eastwards on the right hand side of the Commercial Road—we passed along the front of the Gun Proof House—when we got to Gower's Walk, Tittle spoke to me—I looked, over to Morrison's Buildings, and saw a policeman and a man struggling in the roadway—I ran towards them—they were on their feet—as I ran towards them I saw blood spurting from the left side of the deceased's neck—I was about 10 yards away then—I blew my whistle—that was the first time any whistle was blown; I heard no other—before I got to them they fell together, the deceased being uppermost—as they fell I heard the deceased say, "I am done; he has stabbed me; hold him"—he fell over on his left side—he held the prisoner by the collar of his coat, with both hands—I tried to loosen his grip—we had some difficulty in doing so—the prisoner was on the ground while we were doing so—he was put on his feet by myself and Atkinson—he struggled violently, and tried to break away—by that time more police whistles had sounded—there were about 20 persons there—the prisoner continued to struggle, and I drew my truncheon and struck him on the left shoulder—Atkinson struck the prisoner in the face with his fists—the prisoner struck me after I struck him—he became quiet, and Atkinson. and I took him to Leman Street Police-station.

Cross-examined. When I went across the road the deceased's face was towards me and the prisoner's back—the deceased was taller than the prisoner—I should say he was a powerful man—they were about ten yards from the pavement when they were struggling—I did not hear anything said while they were struggling or as they were falling; when they were on the ground and when the prisoner was underneath, the deceased had his knee on the prisoner's chest—it was then that the deceased said, "He has stabbed me"—only two of us lifted the prisoner up; when he was on his feet he struggled, before I struck him—Timms came up separately off his beat; as we came along Little Aley Street the constables would be on the inside of the prisoners, the escort would walk: on the outside, on the kerb.

Re-examined. I was walking on the kerb—when I struck the prisoner with my truncheon I did not know where the knife was, or with what the wound had been inflicted.

By the COURT. The crowd was close to us, and hostile to the police—the prisoner had no marks on his face before I struck him.

WALTER ATKINSON (231 H). I was with the other constables passing through Commercial Road on the morning of December 1st—I was acting as escort, walking on the kerb of the footway, by the side of Police-constable Herding; when I first saw the prisoner and the deceased they were struggling on their feet—they had hold of each other when I first saw them—I ran over the road; I was about two yards from them when

they fell—as they fell the deceased said, "I am done; he has stabbed me, hold him"—I saw blood spurting from the left side of his neck—I did not help to take him off the prisoner—I helped to pick the prisoner up—I saw no mark on him then—he became violent when we got him on his feet—Beckett struck him with his truncheon on his left shoulder; at the same time the prisoner struck Beckett a blow on the chest, and I immediately struck him a blow between the eyes with my fist—I did not then know where the knife was—I took the prisoner to the station—Beckett blew the first police whistle, when he was 9 or 10 yards from the deceased and the prisoner—I did not see or hear the deceased blow his whistle.

Cross-examined. When I first saw the men they both had their hands up to each other's collars—they fell with considerable force—when the deceased said he had been stabbed he had his hand on the prisoner's chest—the prisoner was only held to the ground by the deceased, who was on top of him—when he was on his feet he was not struck because of what the deceased had said; he was struck because of his violence—it would be correct to say that I hit him as hard as I could on his face twice—I said before the Coroner, "I struck the accused because I thought the accused had murdered my colleague."

Re-examined. I did not strike the prisoner out of revenge—at the inquest I was rather confused by the way the question was put to me—I did not mean that the prisoner was not violent to the other constables, I meant that he was not violent to me, and it was after he had struck Beckett that I struck him with my fist.

HARRY HERDING (51 KR). I was with the other constables on the early morning of December 1st in Commercial Road—I had a prisoner—when we were quite close to Gower's Walk I saw on the opposite side of the road, near Morrison's Buildings, a man and a constable struggling in the roadway—Beckett and Atkinson ran across the road, I went after them—I kept my prisoner with me—the struggle continued as I crossed the road, and when I got within 10 or 15 yards the two men fell—when the deceased was on the ground I saw a quantity of blood coming from the left side of his neck—I did not notice it before he was on the ground—some other constables came up, and the deceased was put into a cab—the prisoner was taken into custody by Beckett and Atkinson—they caught hold of him—he struggled while he was on the ground, and when he got up—I handed my prisoner to another constable, and caught hold of this prisoner by the back of his neck, and told him to keep quiet—it was a violent struggle—I saw Beckett strike him on his shoulder with his truncheon, and afterwards I saw Atkinson strike him on his face with his fists—he became quiet, and was taken towards the station—after he had been taken away I looked about at the spot where he had been lying, and found this clasp knife, with the blade open, and covered with blood (Produced)

Cross-examined. It is an ordinary knife, and could be purchased for about 8d. or 1s.—when the prisoner got to his feet he was held by three constables—I did not hear him say anything—the whole thing took a very few minutes—when I saw the prisoner and the deceased struggling in the road I was 70 or 80 yards away

By the COURT. I think I was No. 4 in the string of five constables.

ALBERT TIMMS (100 H). I was on duty in Batey Street, Commercial Road on the morning of December 1st—hearing some police whistles, I ran to Union Street and Commercial Road, where I found the deceased bleeding very seriously—I helped to put him in a cab and took him to the hospital—when he was placed in the cab I found a difficulty in getting him into a better position, because of his truncheon, which I found in his tail coat pocket—that is the proper place to carry it when we are wearing great-coats—I undid his great-coat on the way—I found his whistle inside, where mine is now—if it had been pulled out it had been put in again—before we got to the hospital he died.

Cross-examined. When I saw the prisoner the deceased was holding him by the collar and the arm—it is very easy to take our whistles out and use them.

FRANCIS PORTEOUS TYRELL HILLYARD . I am house-surgeon at the London Hospital—the deceased was brought in about 1.30 a.m. on December 1st—he was then dead—I saw that he had a punctured wound on the left side of the neck, about 1 in below the angle of the jaw—the same day I made a post mortem examination—the wound was between 1/2 in. and 3/4 in. long, and had been made with some sharp-edged weapon, the sharp edge being uppermost—it was nearly 2 in. deep as far as I could judge—it severed the carotid artery and jugular vein, and was the cause of death—it could have been caused by this knife.

By the COURT. There was an old scar on one of the shins, and a very old one on the angle of the left shoulder, but nothing recent.

Cross-examined. The carotid-artery was cut more than the jugular vein, but it was all done with one blow.

Re-examined. The wound was slightly downwards and towards the middle line.

WILLIAM WIDENER (Inspector H). The prisoner was brought to Leman Street Police-station by Beckett and Atkinson on the morning of December 1st.—in his presence Beckett said, "This man has stabbed Police-constable Thompson"—I said, "Where is Thompson?"—Beckett said, "Taken to the hospital in a cab"—I told the prisoner he would be detained—he said, "Inspector, if Linda Green were here I would soon get out of this"—I do not know what he meant—I think Linda Green keeps a house, but I do not know—the prisoner had a cut on his head, blood on his face, and his eyes were swollen—I sent for the divisional surgeon.

Cross-examined. The prisoner came to the station about 1.45—I left the station about 2 a.m.—the prisoner was brought before the Magistrate next morning, and then taken to Holloway—the deceased was an ordinary man for a policeman, not a large man—I do not know that he was an exceptionally athletic man, or a first-class boxer—I had known him about five years—he was about 5ft. 9in. high.

FRANK SPENCER (Inspector, H). I took charge of the Leman Street Police-station when the last witness left at 2 a.m. on December 1st—when I first saw the prisoner he said to me, "They have knocked me about cruel"—the divisional surgeon, Dr. Jones, came about 2.20—between six and seven the same morning Inspector Dival came and charged

the prisoner with feloniously killing and slaying—the prisoner said, "It is quite possible; I do not remember anything about it; I had no reason or cause to do an injury to anybody"—he gave his address as 50, Newark Street.

Cross-examined. What the prisoner, said he said all at once—I saw he was bleeding from the nose; he was still bleeding when Dival charged him.

THOMAS JONES . I am surgeon to the H Division of Police—about 2.15 a.m. on December 1st I saw the prisoner at Leman Street Police-station station—he had a lacerated wound on the right side of his head, and another on the left side; he had a small incised wound under his chin about 1in. long, not very deep, and two swollen eyes, a mark over the nasal bone, and a large bruise over his left shoulder; no bones were broken—he had a small mark on the right side of his left thigh—the mark on his nose and the condition of his eyes could have been caused by a blow from a fist; the bruise on the shoulder might have been caused by a truncheon; the wound on the left side of his head might have been caused by a fall, and the one on the right side might have been produced by a truncheon or a boot, or by coming into contact with any hard substance—the next day I examined the deceased's uniform (Produced), and found a mark on the great-coat corresponding with the wound; it is on the upper margin of the collar, on the left side, just above the number—the knife does not appear to have gone through it; it has cut the edge, but not gone through it—the prisoner's clothes were bloody.

Cross-examined. The incised wound on the prisoner's chin was clean cut, and might have been caused by a knife—I did not see a bruise on the calf of the prisoner's left leg—I saw the deceased's whistle; there was blood on it and on his coat.

THOMAS DIVAL (Detective Inspector, H). I saw the prisoner at Leman Street Police-station at 7 a.m. on December 1st—I had by then heard of the death of the deceased—I said to the prisoner, "Do you understand English?"—he said, "Well"—I said, "I am an inspector of police, and I shall charge you with feloniously killing and slaying one Ernest Thompson, Police-constable, 241 H Division, by stabbing him in the neck while on his duty, in Commercial Road, parish of Whitechapel, with this knife"—I had this knife in my hand—he nodded his head and said, "I am charged with maliciously killing"—I said, "With feloniously killing"—he said, "It is quite possible; I do not remember anything about it; I had no reason or cause to do an injury to anybody."

FREDERICK WENSLBY (Detective Sergeant, H). I was at Leman Street Police-station when the prisoner was charged by Inspector Dival—the charge was read over to him—he said, I am charged with maliciously killing"—Inspector Dival said, "You are charged with feloniously killing"—the prisoner said, "It is quite possible; I do not remember anything about it; I had no reason or cause to do any injury to anybody"—he was taken to a passage behind the charge-room, and undressed for the purposes of his description—while there he said to me, "I did do it; it was an unlucky moment for me"; there was a pause, and he said, "May his soul rest in peace'; another pause, then, "I regret it; it cannot be helped."

Cross-examined. I do not know how many police officers saw the

prisoner between 2 a.m. and 7 a.m.—I saw him at 3 a.m.—Inspector Divall saw him before he was in the passage—I was not talking to the prisoner—I had my note-book in my pocket—I took it out in his presence—Police-constable Gallier was there a portion of the time—he did not hear all the statement; all he heard was, "I did do it; it was an unlucky moment for me"; then he went away—this is my note (Produced) of what the prisoner said—I asked him about the bruise on his shoulder—he told me it was recent—I wanted to know the marks, as I was taking his description.

FREDERICK GALLIER (462 H). I was acting as gaoler at Leman Street Police-station on the morning of December 1st—after the prisoner was charged Wensley and I proceeded to take his description—he said, "I did do it; was an unlucky moment for me"—I did not hear anything more—I came away, leaving Wensley there.

Cross-examined. That was said while the prisoner was actually stripped—I left because I had other business to attend to—I made a note of what he had said in his presence.

WILLIAM R. K. WATSON . I am deputy medical officer at Holloway Prison—I saw the prisoner when he was brought to the prison on December 1st—I think it was about 2.30 p.m.

Cross-examined. I made a careful examination of him—all the injuries I found on him had been produced within 24 hours—on his left shoulder there was a very large bruise, extending from the neck, a considerable distance down the arm, and over the back as well; there was a small bruise on the right shoulder—nearly one-half the surface of the right thigh was covered with a recent bruise—I also found bruising on the inner side of his left thigh, and a bruise and an abrasion on his left leg, just below the calf, that might have been caused by a kick—there was very extensive bruising on the face—there were a large number of scratches and abrasions on his forehead and face; none of them at all serious—the inside of his lower lip was cut.

Re-examined. The bruise on the shoulder might have been caused by a truncheon—one blow could not have caused all the small wounds on the face—if the prisoner's face had come in contact with the ground while he was struggling, that might have caused them.

WILLIAM THOMAS ELLIS . (Not examined in chief.)

Cross-examined. I am employed at a cab master's in Assam Street, near Commercial Road—on the morning of Saturday, December 1st, I went to Butcher's coffee-stall to have a cup of coffee—I saw the prisoner and two women there; they were all strangers to me—the women were having something to eat, and they were all laughing and talking—I went back towards the yard—I came back in about five minutes, and saw the deceased pushing the prisoner away from the coffee-stall towards Stepney, as far as the brewery gates—he pushed him two or three times—I had not seen the prisoner doing anything except laughing and talking—outside the brewery gates the deceased stopped—the prisoner walked away across Union Street; he then turned back towards the deceased, who went towards the prisoner—until then the deceased had been standing still—I did not see them struggling much; I saw them close and fall—I cannot say if the deceased took out his whistle and blew it—I heard whistles

blown, and I went towards the spot—I do not remember saying before the Coroner, "The deceased blew his whistle while he was on the ground, kneeling over the accused"—I was on the left side of the road all the time.

Re-examined. The prisoner did not appear to have been drinking—I said before the Coroner, "The accused was not drunk, but I could see he had been drinking"—that was true—when the prisoner turned back the deceased was against the new brewery gates—the prisoner came right back along the pavement towards the constable—when they fell I went up—the other constables were there before me—I saw the prisoner's face was smothered with blood—I did not know where the blood came from—I saw the prisoner lifted up by two constables—I did not see anybody strike him.

By the COURT. The constables got to the spot first, so they must have been nearer than I was—I did not see the deceased do anything to the prisoner except push him—I saw no blows given.

The prisoner, in his defence, on oath, said that the constable struck and pushed and kicked him along the street; that he went towards home, but returned to where the deceased was standing, and said he would report him at the station; that the deceased took his truncheon out and struck him across the head; that he (the prisoner) pulled his knife out and opened it to protect himself; that the deceased caught hold of him; that they closed together, and then fell down, the prisoner underneath; that he had no idea how the deceased received the injury, except that the knife was open, and that the deceased fell right on top of him; and that he did not remember stabbing him before he fell, but that he was in a maze after the deceased struck him with his truncheon.

The prisoner received a good character.

GUILTY of manslaughter .— Twenty years' penal servitude.

NEW COURT.—Tuesday, February 5th,1901.

Before Mr. Recorder.

157. FRANCIS EDWARD FRIDAY (21) , Carnally knowing Lizzie Townsend, a girl under 16. Second Count: Unlawfully taking the said girl out of her father's protection.—He PLEADED GUILTY to the Second Count, andMR. JAY, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence on the first.— Judgment respited.

158. WILLIAM SPARKES (28) , Stealing four sides of bacon, the property of Thomas Morrisson Fairclough and others. Second Count: Receiving the same.

MR. MACMAHON Prosecuted.

— SPOONER (725, City). On January 2nd, about 3 o'clock, I was on duty in the Minories, and from information I received, I followed the prisoner, who was in a van—a man was sitting at the back, who got off and ran away—the prisoner then got off and fell down, and got up and tried to run away, but went back towards the Minories, and I caught him—I was in uniform—he said, "What have I done?"—I took him back to

the van—he said, "I know nothing about it"—I had not spoken to him before he got down, I merely followed, and for some reason he got down and ran away—I never lost sight of him—this (Produced) is the wrapper in which the bacon was; it is marked "491."

THOMAS HOPE (Detective Officer) On January 2nd, about 6.30, I saw the prisoner in custody at the station—he was charged with stealing a bale of bacon—he said that he knew nothing about it—there were two ponies in a van outside the station—a constable searched, and found these three pieces of paper in the prisoner's pocket—they are marked "A," "B" and "C"—I then directed them to turn over the straw in the van, and we found these papers, "D" and "E," which are similar to those found in the prisoner's pocket—I went to him and said, "I found these two pieces of paper in the van; they are very like those found in your pocket; I shall mark them"—when the sergeant returned I marked them, and found that, the torn edges of four of them fitted.

WILLIAM MILLER (Detective Sergeant) I searched the prisoner, and found three pieces of paper, two in his coat and one in his waistcoat, which were marked in my presence "A," "B" and "C"—they were afterwards compared with other papers, and were similar—I found the address in pencil in his pocket, in the condition in which it now is (Produced)

ERNEST THOMPSON . I searched the van, and found these pieces of paper, "D" and "E," and several small pieces, under the sheet—they are the same sort of paper as the pieces found on the prisoner.

ALBERT ERNEST BOTTOMLEY . I am a checker on the Great Eastern Railway—on January 11th, between five and six, I loaded this bacon on a van—the numbers are B 481 to B 492—I have examined the wrapper.

MARK TARRANT . I am employed by Messrs. Fairclough, of St. George's—on January 22nd I received a load and drove with it to Nine Elms Station—I stopped on the road, and when I arrived there I missed one bale—the tail-board was up—I had no boy with me.

ALFRED TWIDY . I am foreman to Messrs. Fairclough, carriers—this bale of bacon is their property—I value it at ₤5.

Prisoner's defence: I was not in the van at all—I had nothing to do with it.

GUILTY on the Second Count. He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Clerkenwell on August 1st, 1899; and four other convictions were proved against him.— Three years' penal servitude.

159. ROBERT WEST (24) , Robbery with violence on William Joseph Webber Steadham, and stealing a watch and chain, his property.

He PLEADED GUILTY to the robbery, but not to the violence. MR. MORGAN, for the Prosecution, accepted this plea. GUILTY of simple robbery . He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of housebreaking on April 14th, 1897, and three other convictions were proved against him.— Nine months' hard labour.

160. HARRY WELLS (23) and THOMAS THOMPSON (22) , Robbery, with other persons, on Albertine Attilie Louisa Schneider, and stealing a bag and other articles and ₤7 5s. in money, her property.

MR. FENNIMORE Prosecuted.

ALBERTINA ATTILIE LOUISA SCHNEIDER . I live at Shoreditch, and am engaged in Mission work—on January 8th, about 3.30 p.m., I was in the north of London, and passed four men—I did not take any notice—another man came up and took hold of my bag, which was in my hand, and the handle snapped; it contained a purse with ₤6 10s. in gold, 15s. in silver, two keys, a bag, a bottle of powder, and two receipts—one man wore a blue coat and a cap—I ran after him, and another man tried to prevent me—I do not identify either of the prisoners—the one who snatched my bag ran into a court, but when I got there nobody was to be seen—the court leads into another street.

LIZA BRIDGMENT . I live at 6, Brick Lane—I am a bed-maker at the Alexandra lodging-house—on January 8th, between 3 and 4 o'clock, I saw Scraggy, as I call Thompson, put a bag under a bed in a first floor room—he said, "Don't stop me, or I will run away," and went downstairs—I went down to the deputy, and saw Thompson standing at the door—he went out the back way—Wells was at the back door—I did not know him, but I knew Thompson before—I picked out both prisoners at the station on the Tuesday from eight or nine others—since I was at the Police-court I have been threatened by one of the chaps.

Cross-examined by Wells. I do not know you as having lodged there, but I used to see you at the window-ledge—you had not an overcoat on.

Cross-examined by Thompson. I saw you come up the stairs with the bag in your hand, and you put it under the bed—Berry called me to see you, but he did not see the bag in your hand—I took it down to him at 7 o'clock—you had on a round hat, not a cap, and a long coat—it was not dark, because the door was open—I had seen you once or twice before, but you had not lodged there.

Re-examined. I picked out both prisoners by myself—nobody told me.

WILLIAM JOHNSON (Detective, H). On January 9th I received this bag from the deputy at the Alexandra lodging-house—I found in it a bottle, a bag, a key, and several memorandums—it was torn—I saw the prisoners in a public-house in Whitechapel—I said, "I want you"—I was going to take him, but one of his confederates came behind me and gave me a violent blow—I re-arrested him about four minutes afterwards, and told him I wanted him for stealing a lady's bag on the 8th—he said, "You have got me for nothing; I know nothing about it"—Bridgment picked out both prisoners.

Cross-examined by Wells. I heard you say to Smart, "I know all about it, but I did not do it, it was young Masher Bancroft and Snaggers"—if I saw you night after night, I did not arrest you, because I wanted to get you all four together—I have seen you with Thompson.

Cross-examined by Thompson. I used no more force than was necessary—I had to get you out of the public-house into the street, and through your violence you escaped—I did not tell anybody to identify you at the station—you wore a cap and a light check suit—you lost your hat, and I lost mine.

THOMAS SMART (Detective, H). I was with Brogden on the evening of January 8th, and saw Thompson with others in a public-house in White-chapel Road—Brogden told him he was wanted for a robbery on the

8th, and when he got him outside he began to struggle, and Brogden received a blow from behind—on the morning of the 15th I was in Worship Street, and saw Wells—I said that he was wanted with three others—he said, "All right, I know all about it; I did not do it; it was young Masher Bancroft and Snaggers"—they were taken to the station, and Bedson identified Thompson, but failed to identify Wells.

Wells, in his defence, stated upon oath, that he was with a woman from 9.30 a.m. to 10 p.m., that he did not tell the officer that he knew all about it; that he lived opposite Alexandra House, but was not at the back-door of it on the afternoon of January 8th; and that he was entirely innocent, and never saw Thompson till they were put together.

Thompson, in his defence, stated on oath, that he did not know where he was on January 8th, but that it was quite untrue that he told Mrs. Bridgman that there was a bag under the bed; and that he did not know who struck the constable.

Witnesses for Wells' Defence.

ROSA BANKS . I get my living by housework—I was with Wells on January 8th from 9.30 till 10.30 at night.

Cross-examined. I was taking a holiday on January 8th—it was Tuesday, the 8th, not the 15th—I often go out with him, but have never been out with him since—I did not see him from that Tuesday till the Monday—he did not mention about Tuesday—I had heard of it.

By the COURT. I had heard of the robbery—I know Thrall Street—I was there on January 8th at 9 o'clock, not at 3.30—I did not know anything of anybody being robbed of a bag—I first heard of this on the Wednesday.

GUILTY .—They then PLEADED GUILTY to previous convictions; Wells at Clerkenwell on December 5th, 1899; and Thompson at this Court on June 26th, 1899. Another conviction was proved against Wells, and six convictions against Thompson, who had been flogged for robbery with violence. WELLS— Twelve months' hard labour; THOMPSON— Seven years' penal servitude.

161. PHILIP WEBBER (50) , Stealing a ₤100 note from the person of George Reed.

MR. MAY and MR. SANDS Prosecuted.

GEORGE REED . I am a foreman lighterman, of 28, Guildford Road, Poplar—in May last I was carrying on a tobacconist's business at 111, Crisp Street, Poplar, which I sold for ₤225, and was paid partly in notes, one of which was a ₤100 note, No. 98361, of January 6th, 1899—I thought I would bank it, and on August 29th I put it in my hip pocket, but had not the opportunity of getting to the bank—I should say that it was in my possession till just after four, because I went down by the 4 o'clock train—I saw the prisoner that day, and we simply had a glass of beer together—I missed the note at 7 o'clock next morning, when I was dressing—I went downstairs to see if the house was securely fastened, and then went to the bank just before 10 o'clock and stopped it—I saw the prisoner about three months afterwards at Fenchurch Street Station, and simply told him that I had lost a ₤100 note—he said that there had been several bad notes—I had known him before; I was a shipmate with him

30 years ago, but have very seldom seen him since—he is a lighterman, and so am I.

WILLIAM JESSER COOPE . I am in the issue department of the Bank of England—I produce a ₤100 note, 93163, of January 7th, 1891—it was stopped on August 30th—Newnham presented it on January 20th, and I took him to the secretary's office.

ALFRED ASHBY NEWNHAM . I am a boiler manufacturer, of Rowton House—I have known the prisoner for the last three years—on the last Monday in January I got a message, and saw him at the Roebuck—he said that he wished to see me during the week, and I arranged to meet him on Wednesday morning, about 11 o'clock—he said, "I am in my working clothes; I have gota ₤100 Bank of England note here; will you go to the bank and get it changed for me?"—I asked him where he got it; he said "From a woman"—I asked him who the woman was; he said that it was a publican's wife, who had had a quarrel with her husband—he was dressed as he is now—I went to the Bank, and was asked into the secretary's office, and went back and saw the prisoner.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. I am under the impression that you said, "A publican's wife."

HENRY PHILLIPS (Police Inspector). On Wednesday, February 11th, I went with Inspector Seagar to the Bank of England—I gave him instructions, and followed him to Threadneedle Street—he went up to the prisoner with Newnham, who said, "That is the man who gave me the note to cash"; I said, "Where did you get it from?"; he said, "I sold a tobacconist's business at 177, Cross Street, Poplar, and got this note"—I took him to the office and said, "You will be charged with stealing this note from Mr. Reed and uttering it, knowing it to be stolen"—I put that down in my pocket-book shortly afterwards.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I neither found the note, nor did I steal the note; my possession was from the prosecutor's wife."

The prisoner, in his defence, stated on oath, that being confused by the constable, he gave him a muddling statement, but said that he neither stole nor found the note, but received it yesterday week from the prosecutor's wife, whom he met in Frith Street, Poplar, and who gave him the note and asked him to get it changed for her; that he asked her if George knew anything about it, and she said, "All right, you get it"; that he was to see her again at her house, after the note was cashed; and that her husband had told him three or four months before that he had lost a ₤100 note; and he thought this might be it, but that he told a lie to the detective in stating that he got it by selling a tobacconist's business, he being a stranger.

Evidence for the Defence.

ANNE REED . I am the wife of George Reed; we have been married 25 years in October—I met the prisoner in the street, and asked him to cash the ₤100 note—I got it down among some papers when I was turning them over a fortnight ago—I knew that my husband had sold the tobacconist's shop over my head some time ago for ₤250—I did not know that he received a ₤100 note in part payment, but he told me that he had lost ₤100 out of his pocket—when I found the note I did not give it to my husband, because I wanted to get away from him, as he had been unkind to me.

Cross-examined. I have only known the prisoner as a customer—I keep the shop, and he used to buy tobacco and cigars—I kept the note a fortnight after I found it, and said nothing to my husband about it in order that I might use the proceeds for myself, and go away from my husband with my children, and set up in business—I did not go and cash the note myself because I am no scholar—the prisoner knew the hard life I had with my husband—I mat him by appointment—I had not got the note in my pocket; I went home and got it at 9 o'clock.


THIRD COURT.—Tuesday, February 5th, 1901.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

162. ROBERT COOGAN (27) PLEADED GUILTY to forgery and uttering an order for ₤3, with intent to defraud.— Judgment respited.

163. JOHN NORRIS (28) , to three indictments for stealing a bag and three letters, the property of the Postmaster General.— Four years' penal servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

164. GEORGE TEARLE (19) , to attempting to carnally know Annie Laura Bandy, aged 6 years and 3 months.— Nine months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

165. EDWARD SMITH (28) , to feloniously marrying Katie Illenburger during the life of his wife.— One month's hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

166. NATHAN BARNETT GOODMAN (21) , to forging and uttering an order for the payment of ₤80.— He received a good character.— Twelve months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

167. FLORENCE KIRBY (36) , to two indictments for stealing a pawn-ticket and a brooch, the property of Mary Ann Payne, and a ring and necklet, the property of John Adam, having been convicted of felony at this Court in May, 1882, in the name of Eliza Hodgson .— Nine months' hard labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

168. EDWARD BARTLE (23) , to stealing two chains and other goods of Lucretia Gill, her mistress, also to stealing a watch and chain and other goods of Henry Walter #x2014; Twelve months' hard labour. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

169. PIRRETT CAMPAGNA (41) , to feloniously uttering an order for the payment of ₤105. Convictions were proved against him in England and on the Continent, and he was stated to have lived by forgery.— Seven years' penal servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

170. JOHN WHITE, Stealing a purse, a photograph and ₤6 10s. of Bertha Webb from her person.

MR. PERROTT Prosecuted, and MR. WARBURTON Defended.

The JURY stopped the case, as they were not satisfied that the evidence was sufficient.


171. FREDERICK THOMAS HAMILTON (43) , Unlawfully making, forging, counterfeiting, and uttering two writings purporting to be true lists of moneys collected by him for the benefit of John Milbourne Cobb, with intent to defraud.

MR. COHEN Prosecuted, and MR. SANDS Defended.

WALTER DEW (Police Inspector, F). I received a warrant for the arrest of the prisoner about January 18th—I executed it with Sergeant Markham that day about 9 p.m.—I said to the prisoner, "You know me as a police

officer; I have a warrant for your arrest"—I read it to him—it charged him with forging and uttering certain writings, namely, subscription lists for the benefit of John Milbourne Cobb—he said, "Good God!" and he afterwards said, "I worked hard for that man for four months"—I made this note shortly afterwards—"I took his case up, or he would have jumped under a tree"—after a pause he said, "I have some enemies about, I have to thank the Rev. Mr. Thornton for this"—at the station, when the charge was read over, he said, "I took that man's case up into the Appeal Court, and got the amount reduced down to 8s. a week, and this is the thanks I get"—I believe he gets his living on the racecourse; he described himself as a commission agent.

Cross-examined. A maintenance order was made by a Magistrate against him for ₤1 a week to his wife—that was considered oppressive—he was sent to prison for not keeping up his payments—there was litigation, and the matter came before the Divisional Court; so I read in the paper.

ROBERT PHILLIP UPTON . I am a solicitor, of 12, John Street, Adelphi—in April, 1900, I acted for Mr. Cobb, and my son instructed Mr. Torr, a barrister, to attend at Petersfield—Hamilton told me that a fund was started to help Cobb—he came to my office in the Adelphi in April—I first heard of the fund from Mr. Torr—Hamilton in April said he would pay my costs out of a fund to be raised—he said he was acting under the auspices of Mr. Torr and the Rev. George Thornton, Vicar of St. Barnabas, Kensington—he said he had plenty of money in hand—he gave me ₤6 at the end of April, and afterwards ₤4 on July 3rd—I sent Hamilton my bill of costs—he replied on July 18th that he was money out of pocket; that he should charge for his expenses, and should confer with Mr. Torr—he had told me generally he was not to charge—in December I brought an action against him in Brompton County Court to deliver an account—that came on on January 8th—at the Court he handed me these five accounts—(These were subscription lists on behalf of J. M. Cobb, outside porter at Addison Road Railway Station, to enable him to appeal against the maintenance order of the Petersfield Magistrate of ₤1 a week)—part of the writing is his and part that of the subscribers, including the amounts—from July to January I had been continually asking him for accounts, and these lists were accepted as a compliance of the order of the Court—he also handed me a list of expenses.

JOHN THOMAS BATTEN . I am clerk at Brompton County Court—I produce the official documents in the proceedings in Hall and Cobb against Hamilton, including the accounts of subscriptions, etc., and of Hamilton's expenditure.

Cross-examined. The case was adjourned till Thursday next for the Registrar to go into the accounts, which he has done.

ROBERT PHILLIP UPTON (continued). The total expenditure is said to be ₤49 10s., and the amount collected ₤42—January 8th was the first I heard of the prisoner's claim for any remuneration—he never said that the lists had been tampered with—Lists "A" and "B" appear to have been altered—the lists were read out in the prisoner's presence to the Registrar—the prisoner did not call attention to any erasures or alterations in the figures—he only said that some amounts had not been paid—the alterations are in "A" and "B"—in "A" they are: Henry

Bryce, 7, Sinclair Road, from ₤1 to 1s.; Serakold Skeels, from ₤1 to 10s.; Alfred G. Dickson, from 10s. to 1s.; A. G. Ronald, from ₤1 to 2s; Mr. H. Liddell, ₤1 to 4s.; Mrs. Brown, ₤1 to 1s., and the word "Paid" is written over the pound column; then Mrs. King, 5s. to 1s.—you can see the "5" under some stamps that are put on the back—Mr. D. R. Low, 10s., has been altered to 3s.; Mrs. Clowes, the nought has been erased; Mrs. W. Ashworth, the words "9, High Street," are in the prisoner's writing, and ₤1 has been erased and 10s. put in—her address is 14, Avonmore Road—there are others not in the indictment—in "B" some of the "1's" in the money column are erased—Mrs. Kent gave 5s.; Mr. Bryce's ₤1 is altered to 1s.; Mr. and Mrs. George Herbert's ₤1 has been altered, and a loop put to the "d" in "Paid," and 10s. is entered—A. E. Mills' number in Holland Park is erased, and ₤1 is now 28.—the other three lists do not appear to have been altered.

Cross-examined. The prisoner's letter to me of July 18th states, "I do not hesitate to state there will be a row; I shall now charge for the trouble taken in this matter," and "I will furnish you with details as soon as possible"—another solicitor's services were dispensed with—the prisoner did a good deal of work in the matter—I believe the subscription lists began in March—Cobb was in prison in December—the lists are as they were given to me—Mrs. Bayley's name was inked over before that—(Holding Lists "A" and "B" up to the light to show the erasures.)

HENRY TREMORNE BRYCE . I live at 17, Sinclair Road—I remember the prisoner calling and showing me a list of subscribers like this produced ("A")—I gave him ₤1, and wrote my name and address—I find here "1s." and the "17s." altered to "7"—I have never been asked for permission to alter it.

Cross-examined. I knew Cobb for some years—he knew where to find me.

HARRY LIDDELL . I live at 16, Addison Crescent—I remember the prisoner calling and asking for subscriptions to pay legal expenses for Cobb, and producing List "A"—he said he was collecting for the love of Cobb—I entered my name here for ₤1; I find now 4s.—I gave no authority to alter it.

Cross-examined. I knew Cobb—he knew where to find me.

PHILLIPPA ASHWORTH . I have lived at 14, Avonmore Road for 18 years—the prisoner called about nine months ago for subscriptions for Cobb, an outdoor porter, with this list—I paid him 20s., and wrote my name; I find it now 10s.—I never gave my consent to this change of address to 9, High Street.

Cross-examined. I live next door to Mr. Torr, and am well known to him—I knew Cobb through his coming to my house with luggage—Hamilton told me that he lived in the neighbourhood.

CONSTANTINE HERBERT . I have lived at 92, Holland Road, Kensington, since 1878—Hamilton called with this List "B" about nine months ago and asked for a subscription—I gave him ₤1, and wrote my name and the amount; I find here 10s.—I gave no permission for the alteration—I knew Cobb.

DILLON ROSS LOW . I live at 85, Holland Road—I remember Hamilton calling for subscriptions for an appeal against the decision of the Petersfield Magistrate in the case of Cobb—I paid 10s., and wrote my name on this list—I gave no authority to alter 10s. to 3s.

Cross-examined. I went into occupation of the house three years ago—I knew Cobb; he came for and brought luggage.

ARTHUR EDWARD MILES . I live at 11, Holland Villas Road—I gave Hamilton a subscription about March last for Cobb of ₤1, and wrote my name against it—I now find 2s. in the shilling column—I did not Authorise the alteration—the "11" has been erased from the address which I put.

Cross-examined. I knew Cobb, and he knew me—I have not spoken to him about this.

EDWARD SERAKOLD SKEELS . I live at 95, Holland Road—I gave Hamilton a subscription for Cobb in March or April last of ₤1, and I wrote my name and address—the ₤l has been erased and 10s. put without my consent.

Cross-examined. Cobb has been at my house many times.

ROBERT GEORGE UPTON . I am the son of Mr. Upton, the solicitor who has been called—I was concerned in Cobb's proceedings at Petersfield, and went there last February 7th to apply to reduce the amount of the wages order—Hamilton gave me no money—I was also professionally engaged when the prisoner produced his accounts before the Registrar—I read them out, with Hamilton checking me—he did not call my attention to any item.

JAMES FENNING TORR . I am a barrister and Recorder of Deal—I have known Cobb about 36 years—he was known to my father and mother, and greatly respected, and that led to my being engaged professionally on his behalf—Hamilton called one morning and said that he was interested in Cobb's case, and that he was very well acquainted with criminal investigations, having been a detective at Scotland Yard for some time; two years, I think—he said he proposed to go to Petersfield and see what could be done, and that he felt sure he could make Mrs. Cobb agree to some terms—he proposed a subscription among people interested, of whom he said there were many in the neighbourhood—I received this letter from him dated January 30th—I know his writing—I threw cold water on it, but on my return from being away, I found that my brother-in-law, who is 20 or 21 years of age, had given ₤1, my sister-in-law another ₤1, and 10s. and 3s. more had been given from my house, and this appears to be Mr. Moore's writing.

Cross-examined. I saw Hamilton from time to time—I knew where to find him—I mentioned some relations and some subscribers, including my next door neighbour, Mrs. Ashworth—the Rev. Mr. Thornton asked for an account, and the prisoner refused, and we were obliged to take action in the County Court for an account.

GUILTY—Two previous convictions were proved against him. A question arose whether the prisoner was liable to be sentenced to hard labour, and on a subsequent day MR. COHEN referred to the case of Reg. v. Riley, 1, Q.B. Reports, p. 309, and contended that the offence came within Sec. 38 of 24 & 25 Vic., c. 98, and also within 14 & 15 Vic., c. 100, it being a "cheat or fraud punishable at Common Law." (See also Reg.v. Barrett and Another, Sessions Papers, Vol. CXXX., p. 797.)The COURT having consulted the RECORDER, reserved the point for the opinion of the Court for the Consideration of Crown Cases Reserved.—Judgment respited.

OLD COURT.—Wednesday, February 6th, 1901.

Before Mr. Justice Phillimore.

172. MARIE CURRY (34), was indicted for and charged, on the Coroner's Inquisition, with the wilful murder of Charles Curry.

MR. BODKIN and MR. STEPHENSON Prosecuted; and MR. HUTTON and

MR. FORDHAM Defended.

ELIZABETH RYAN . I live at 5, Fern Street, St. George's—the prisoner is my landlady—I sleep in the top front room; she slept in the back room downstairs—she is married, and has a family—her last baby was born about four months ago—about 5.40 a.m. on January 4th I was in bed—I heard the prisoner come out of her bedroom—she went out of the house and shut the front door—she had not said anything to me that day—on the Thursday she had complained about her chest being bad—she is a sober woman—I should call her a good mother.

Cross-examined. She did not complain about sleeplessness—I remember when she was confined—since then she did not seem to be well—she has four children living; the deceased was the fifth—she was always kind to this baby, and she seemed affectionate—she did not tell me the child was very fretful, and kept her awake at night—her husband went out early to work, and she got up early—he always brought his money home.

ANGELINA STRINGER . I live at the Salvation Army Shelter, Hanbury Street—a little before 6 a.m. on January 4th I was on my way home; near the Old Gravel Lane Bridge, I saw the prisoner carrying a bundle in her arms—she threw it into the water, and immediately after threw herself in—I was not far from her—there is a parapet to the bridge, and she balanced over it—I screamed.

Cross-examined. I did not have time to reach her before the bundle went over—she went over almost at the same time as the bundle.

JOSEPH COOK . I am a labourer at Dundee Wharf—about 5.45 a.m. on January 4th I was near the Old Gravel Lane Bridge, going to my work—I heard a man singing out "Copper"—I ran to the bridge and saw two men standing on it—I got down under the bridge and saw a body in the water—one of the men went and got a line out of a shed—he was going to throw it from the bridge; I told him it was no good—he gave it to me, and I threw it over the body of a woman and got her out—the men came and helped me—as soon as I got her on the quay I tried artificial respiration; she was insensible—I saw a bundle in the water; it floated down in the direction of the docks.

FRANCIS PERKS (149 H). About 6 a.m. on January 4th I was in Old Gravel Lane, going towards the bridge—I found the prisoner lying on the stone quay underneath the bridge, with Cook attending to her—I sent for a doctor, and also endeavoured to establish artificial respiration—Dr. Sargent came—the prisoner was taken to the St. George's Infirmary.

HUGH CANN SARGENT, M.R.C.S . About 6.15 a.m. on January 4th I was called by the police—I found the prisoner lying on the quay under the Old Gravel Lane Bridge—she was quite unconscious—two constables were using artificial respiration on her—I assisted them—she got better and was taken to the infirmary—I knew her before—I have seen her

several times—the last time I have any record of prescribing for her is in 1897.

Cross-examined. If it had not been for the artificial respiration her life would undoubtedly have been lost.

MARCUS MARWOOD BOWLAN . I am medical superintendent at St. George's-in-the-East Infirmary—the prisoner was admitted on January 4th, about 6.30 a.m.—she was quite unconscious—she rallied about 7.30—a little after that I asked her how she got into the water—she said, "I am tired of my life; I took the baby out with me wrapped up in a shawl, and jumped into the water, with the child in my arms"—she gave me her name and address—she had kept on calling out, "Oh! my poor baby!"—she was extremely depressed—I think she had been drinking a little, but the signs were very slight—she said she had been taking very little food for a long time—I thought from what I saw that that was true—she remained in the infirmary till January 10th—when she was taken away by the police she was still in a very depressed state, but very much better than she was at first.

Cross-examined. I should describe her state as one of great mental depression—on the morning of her admission, about 10.30, she told me she had nothing to live for, and said, "I have never had any comfort in my life"—she was undoubtedly labouring from melancholia, and I should say from a puerperal origin—her mental condition was consistent with its having been brought on two or three months ago at her confinement—sleeplessness is one of the signs, and being constantly roused at night would be likely to aggravate It—it is quite possible for a woman in such circumstances to be unconscious of her doings at times.

Re-examined. I questioned her as to whether she understood what she had done on that morning—she said she had no aversion or dislike to the child, and she did not know what had come across her mind—she told me that on January 7th.

ANDREW ANDERSON . On January 4th, about 8.45 a.m., I was in the London Docks, at Tobacco Building, about 200 yards below the Old Gravel Bridge—I got out of the water the body of an infant wrapped in a shawl—I gave it to Constable Albrow.

ALFRED ALBROW (Dock Constable 104). The infant's body, which was found on January 4th, was handed to me by the last witness—I handed it over to the Coroner's officer.

CHARLES GRAHAM GRANT . I am divisional surgeon of police—on January 4th, about 11 a.m., I was called to see the body of a male child at the mortuary—I satisfied myself that the cause of death was suffocation from drowning—the body was well nourished and clean.

Cross-examined. It had evidently been carefully cared for.

THOMAS DIVALL (Detective Inspector, H). On January 10th I went to St. George's Infirmary and saw the prisoner there—I took her to the station, and told her I should charge her with feloniously killing her son, George Curry, on January 4th, and at the same time with attempting to commit suicide—she said, "I did not know what I was doing of, and I did not intend to do such a thing as that."

Cross-examined. I did not say anything to her at the hospital.

Evidence for the Defence.

JAMES SCOTT . I am head medical officer at Holloway Prison—I have had the prisoner under observation since January 10th, and I have given her case special attention—when she first came under my care she was in a state of mental depression—I have had several conversations with her—in my opinion she has been suffering from melancholia, which, I think, was connected with her confinement—her condition was likely to be aggravated by want of sleep—being unwilling to take food regularly is one of the signs of the disease—I think at times she would not be able to control herself.

Cross-examined. Judging from the evidence, I should not think she would not be able to appreciate the nature and quality of the act she committed on January 4th.

JAMES CURRY . I am a stevedore—the prisoner is my wife—I have been in steady employment, and am now—my wages are 31s. 6d. a week, the greater portion of which was brought home to my wife—she was confined three or four months ago—she has been complaining of pains in her head and neck since—she ate very little food—she complained of sleeplessness—the night before this occurred she sat up all night with the child in her arms—it was fretful—her demeanour was quite altered after her last confinement—she has always been a good mother—she was very fond of this child.

GUILTY, but insane at the time .— To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.

173. ALEXANDER MCDONALD (32) , Feloniously wounding Arthur Charles Day on the high seas, with intent to murder him. Second Count: With intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MR. MUIR Prosecuted.

ARTHUR CHARLES DAY . I am a fireman on board the Insizeva. which is a British ship—the prisoner was also a fireman on the same ship—on our last voyage from London to Durban I was working in the stokehole in the early morning of November 20th—the prisoner was working behind me, breaking coal with this iron maul (Produced)—I was cleaning the fires—I was struck from behind and rendered unconscious, and remained so for some days—I had had no quarrel with the prisoner—we were within a day's run of the line—I had noticed that the prisoner was strange—he had not been up to his work; I was doing it for him.

WILLIAM GRAY . I am an able seaman on board the British ship Insizeva—I was in the stokehole on the early morning of November 20th, while the ship was on a voyage to Durban from London—Day was there—he was cleaning the fire, and the prisoner was breaking coal—Day had his back towards the prisoner—I saw the prisoner knock Day down with his hammer by hitting him on the head—there had been no quarrel between them—the prisoner said to me, "That is all right, chum; I have done it"—Day fell senseless—I went for assistance.

GEORGE YOUNG . I am chief engineer on board the Insizeva—on the early morning of November 20th I was in my berth—the prisoner came to me—he seemed to be all right—he said, "I have done it; I have killed my man"—I said, "How was that?"—he said, "It was all

through that shellful of diamonds in the forecastle"—I said, "Where did you get it?"—I meant the shell—he said, "Amongst the coals"—I went to the stoke-hole and assisted in getting Day on deck.

By the COURT. We were outward bound from England to Natal—it was not as if we were going home, and could posssibly have had any diamonds.

CHARLES LIMBURY . I was fireman on board the Insizeva on the voyage from London to Durban—I remember the day that Day was injured in the stoke-hole—I had seen the prisoner every day before that—I had noticed that he was very funny and very strange in his manner.

CHARLES HAROLD BENNETT , L.R.C.P., Edinburgh. I have other medical qualifications—I was surgeon on board the Insizeva on the voyage from London to Durban—I remember the day that Day was injured in the stoke-hole—he had a wound behind his ear 4in. or 5in. long, right down to the bone—there was no fracture; it was a gaping wound—he had another wound, where he had fallen—the other one could have been caused by this coal hammer—it is a wonder he was not killed—he is still suffering from the blow—I think he may recover—I had the prisoner under my care—he seemed very dazed and bewildered—he did not seem to care a bit for having done it—I saw him the next day—he was undoubtedly very mad indeed—he was very mad for several days afterwards—he seemed to improve after about a week—he was under my care till we got to Natal, where he was landed and put into prison—then they gave him back to us, and we brought him back to England—on the voyage home he was in excellent health, until about a week before we got home; then he was seized with a paralytic stroke—he got better, and was practically well by the time we got to London—he did no work.

WILLIAM READ (Police Inspector). On January 13th, at 5 p.m., I boarded the ship Insizeva, in the Thames, off the West India Docks, and arrested the prisoner—I told him I should take him into custody for attempting to murder Alfred Charles Day by striking him on the head with a hammer whilst on a voyage from London to Natal—he said, "I did hit him; I did not intend to murder him; I did not intend to do him any injury"—I took him to Blackwall Station, where the charge was read over to him, in answer to which he said, "I did not intend to murder him."

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "As I was breaking the coal it came into my head that there was going to be a mutiny on board, and an officer seemed to say to me, 'You secure this man, and I will secure the other,' and I struck Day, not with the intention of hurting him. I lifted him back from the fire, and went and gave myself up."

GUILTY, but insane at the time .— To be detained during His Majesty's pleasure.

174. FREDERICK COURT, Stealing a box and seven cloaks, the property of Edward Saunderson.

MR. OLIVER Prosecuted, and MR. HUTTON Defended.

THOMAS LAMAS . I am a porter employed by Edward Saunderson,

carrier, of Silver Street, City—I was outside my master's premises on January 25th, about 5 p.m.—there was a van there with some parcels on it; it was being loaded—I saw the prisoner walking away with this parcel (Produced) on his shoulder—he was 2ft. or 3ft. from the van—he walked down Monkwell Street—I followed him—I did not lose sight of him—when I got to the bottom of Fell Street I slipped round the side of him and saw our label—I asked him if the parcel belonged to him—he said that it did not—I asked him where he got it—he said a man gave it to him, and he was to take it down the street and meet him at the bottom of Wells Street with it—I had not seen him or anybody take it off the van—I did not see anybody near the prisoner—the box contained seven ladies' mantles, valued at ₤7 19s. 5d.; it was a cardboard box—I asked the prisoner to go back with me to our premises—he said he would come back—he did so—I took him to my master, and he was given into custody.

Cross-examined. I stopped him, 60 or 70 yards from the van—when we came back he walked a little way behind me; he made no attempt to get away—when I was following him the label was not hidden, but I could not see it—he gave the same explanation to my master as he had given to me—when I was following him he did not turn round to see if anybody was following him.

Re-examined. He showed me a note.

By the COURT. He had not passed the turning to Wells Street—there is a little court in Fell Street into Monkwell Street, which leads into Fore Street—if he went down there he could have got into Wells Street.

WILLIAM ROBERT SHAW . I am manager to Edward Saunderson, of 16, Silver Street—on January 25th, about 5.30 p.m., Lamas brought the prisoner to me—he told me in the prisoner's presence that he had seen him carrying a parcel, and had asked him if it belonged to him; that the prisoner had said it did not, whereupon Lamas told him it was ours, and pointed out the label, and asked him to come back with it to see me—I asked the prisoner what he had to say about it—he said it had been given to him by a man to carry—I think he said the man had also given him a letter—anyhow, he produced this letter "Please give the bearer the two books, A and B, that were left last week, and oblige, R. Robinson"—the envelope is addressed, "A. & H. Kemp & Company"—I took him into my office—I said that he had placed himself in a very funny position, and asked if he could give any explanation at all to throw any light on the matter—he said that he was innocent of any theft, and that he had come into Silver Street to see someone at Messrs. Vyse's place of business; that he was standing opposite our van, and he saw a man near our place who asked him to take the parcel—I forget the name of the street which he said—I could not get anything satisfactory, and I gave him into custody—a plain clothes officer came in while I was talking to the prisoner.

Cross-examined. The prisoner told me he was waiting to see a Mr. B. about getting some work—I do not know Mr. B.

GEORGE ROFEE (443, City). On January 25th, about 5.30, I was called to Mr. Saunderson's, and Mr. Shaw gave the prisoner into custody—he said, "I did not steal the parcel; it was given to me by a gentleman to take to Wells Street"—I took him to the station—he showed me a

note; he gave me his correct address—the name on the note was "Kemp & Co."—I do not know of any such firm.

THOMAS LAMAS (Re-examined by the COURT). The box is empty now; it was pretty heavy before—it had been in the front of the van, which has a hood—I was standing on the kerb by the horse's head; the parcel could not have been taken out from behind; it must have been from the front—I had my back to the wall—I did not see anybody who could possibly have given the parcel to the prisoner.

By MR. HUTTON. There were not a number of people passing at the time; there were some—I had only just come out of the shop.

GUILTY .— Discharged on his recognizances.

NEW COURT.—Wednesday and Thursday, February 6th and 7th. 1901.

Before Mr. Recorder.

175. JOSEPH BRITTON (28) and RICHARD SCOTT (26) , Stealing two dead pigs, the property of Ebenezer Penman.

MR. PROBYN Prosecuted.

ALFRED GEORGE HEWETT . I am a licensed meat porter, and carry meat for Mr. Barnett, a butcher, of Plumstead—on January 15th I instructed Britton to fetch four pigs for Mr. Barnett—he fetched two, and I sent him for the other two—he came back and told me that the other two had been delivered—I went down and saw Mr. Penmar, and saw Britton again, and said, "The two pigs are lost"—I know Scott; he is a porter.

Cross-examined by Britton. I did not see you go away with Scott—you said that it was the finish—I said, "No," and told you to go down again, as there were two more pigs to come—I know nothing about three loins.

ARTHUR SWANN . I am a scaleman—on January 15th I weighed some pork and hung it up, and presently Britton came into the shop with Scott, walking side by side—Britton said that he wanted four pigs—I showed him where they were—he took one and Scott another, and I placed another on his shoulder, and they followed each other out—Britton came back and asked for two loins; not for two pigs—I said, "They are all gone"—the pigs were worth about ₤2 10s.—I pointed out Scott from other men at the Police-station.

Cross-examined by Britton. Scott came in with you, but you did not speak to him—he took one pig and followed you out—if we have a doubt of a man we take his number—Scott was laden with one of these pigs before you left, and you turned round.

Cross-examined by Scott. The man who came in for the pigs had a white smock on—this was about 7 o'clock.

CHARLES GRENETT (City Detective). On January 15th, about 9.45, I was watching some stables, and saw Scott leave—I shouted "Scottie"—he said, "Yes, sir"—I said, "I am going to take you in custody for stealing two pigs from Messrs. Barnett's shop"—he said, "I know nothing about it"—I took him to the station, put him with others, and he was identified—on Wednesday, the 16th, I saw Britton—I said, "Is your name Britton?"—he said, "Yes; I know what you are going to talk about; those three pigs; I know nothing about them"—he was taken to the station and identified.

WILLIAM EATON I live at 58, Craven Street, Poplar, and work for Storr & Co.—I was in the shop, and saw four men come in for four pigs—they came a third time—I heard Britton ask for four pigs—I asked why they came together—he said, "I only come in for myself"—a man cannot conveniently carry more than two pigs, and then a third man came—they left soon after one another.

Cross-examined by Britton. I do not recognise Scott as coming with you.

The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate: Britton says: "It is a regular practice in the market for anyone in the shop to help you on with anything on your shoulder, whether they are connected with you or not; the man who put a pig on my shoulder had a white smock; Scotty came to me and asked me if I would mind drawing his money, as he was rather queer; I did draw his money from Robert Billet; I never saw anymore of him till I got home about one o'clock" Scott says: "I was ruptured, and my rupture slipped down, and I asked Britton to draw my money for me; I was not in the shop at all."

Britton, in his defence, stated, upon oath, that Mr. Hewett sent him to get "the" pigs for Barnett, not "four pigs"; that he took one to a porter in a white smock, whose face he did not see, and put another on his shoulder; that he took them to Mr. Hewett, who said that there were two more, and when he went down again they gave him three loins and some fat, which he took to Mr. Hewett, who said, "There are two more pigs," and he replied, "I passed them on the road"; that he went home, and did not see Scott, who lodged with him, till the afternoon.

Scott, in his defence, stated upon oath, that on January 3rd his truss slipped down, and on the 4th he was lying on some straw in the market, feeling very queer, and asked Britton, with whom he lodged, to draw his money for him, and knew nothing about the pigs.

JAMES' SCOTT. I am surgeon to this gaol—Scott has been under my charge for rupture—it is an old rupture—I do not think it had stayed back at all permanently for a long time.


176. CHARLES DESMOND (22) , Assaulting Frederick Gels, with intent to rob him.

MR. CHORLEY Prosecuted.

FREDERICK OELS . I am a horse-keeper, of Bethnal Green—on January 27th I was in Commercial Street, going home; somebody said, "There you are,Bill," and I was struck on the back of my head, thrown on my face, and kicked, and fourpence or sixpence taken from me—there were four or five of them.

HENRY AVORY (257 H), On January 27th, in the early morning, I was on duty in Commercial Street, and saw some men on the footpath, and the prosecutor walking on—I slipped into a doorway and saw the prisoner go behind him and hit him on the back of his head—he fell, and two prisoner kicked him, and some other man attacked him—I took the prisoner—he was charged with assault, with intent to rob—the prosecutor said that he had lost fourpence or fivepence—the prisoner said, "I hit the man, but did not rob him"—I found fivepence on him.

FREDERICK OELS (Re-examined) I had had a glass or two, but I was not drunk—I said that I did not think I had lost anything—I had changed a sixpence, and remember finding fourpence or fivepence in my pocket—I have suffered from this, and am not well yet.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I hit the man, but never put my hand in his pocket at all."

Prisoner's defence: The man came up to me and shoved me in the back and wanted to fight, and I struck him, and as it was wet he fell down, and the policeman took me to the station.

GUILTY .— Eighteen months' hard labour.

177. WILLIAM DANIEL LAMBERT, Feloniously marrying Mary McDowell, his wife being alive.

MR. BODKIN Prosecuted.

ROBERT CHANE . I live at 161, Dalreigh Road, Edinburgh, and have a daughter named Lily—she is 24 years of age now—she was living with me in 1894 and 1895—I had no knowledge that she was keeping company with the prisoner—I had never seen him till June 18th, 1895, when he and she came into the house and showed me this certificate (Produced), which shows that on June 18th, 1895, Corporal William Daniel Lambert, bachelor, and Lily Chane, spinster, were married, and that on the same day their marriage was entered in the register, and there is a declaration of two cabdrivers—I was very angry, and said that she belonged to him now and she was not mine—she was 18 then—I so far relented as to allow him to sleep in the house, but my daughter slept with my wife—the prisoner left next morning, and my daughter continued to live with me—he told me that the 12th Lancers left the same morning, and I did not see him till May, 1896, when he came with his wife to spend two nights under my roof—he left her with me, and I did not see him again—in the early part of 1900 I saw a letter from the Commissioner of City Police—my daughter is in Court.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not try to ascertain where you were during the five years.

Re-examined. When the certificate was brought to me on June 18th the prisoner told me that they had got married.

JOHN AITCHISON . I live at 28, Greyhill Square, Edinburgh, and am Assistant Registrar of Births and Marriages—the registers of marriages are kept there—I remember Lily Chane coming to my office with a man on June 18th, 1895—I knew her; I do not recognise the prisoner—I do not know which of them spoke, but each heard what the other said—I took the particulars either from them or from someone else, either on that occasion or previous to it—I knew the girl, but I do not think she had spoken to me about marriage—the particulars were put down there and then in my book—after that it was necessary for them to go before the Sheriff to get authority for me to register the marriage, and they brought me the certificate of the warrant—I then took down all that is here, and they signed the register—two cabdrivers were there.

By the COURT. That was in accordance with the practice of the country—the Sheriff does not come back with them; he simply grants the warrant; I may have brought it, or some official may have brought it—this

is the official document I gave on June 18th, with my signature on it—many people are married in Scotland in that way, sometimes 50 in a year, in my office—I may have accompanied them to the Sheriff—I usually do.

JAMES LAING . I am a carter, of 4, Dundee Place, Edinburgh; I was formerly a cabman—on June 18th Miss Lily Chane spoke to me—I got another cabman, and we both went to a house in Morrisson Street, Edinburgh—I saw the prisoner there, and asked him if he was going to get married; he said, "Yes"—I drove to the Registrar's office, and they walked—we all went in; Mr. Aitchison was there—I did not hear what took place, but they spoke together; I signed my name in a book, and Chalmers did the same—we then all drove to Sheriff Rutherford's office—the four of us marched in, and the Sheriff asked some questions which I do not remember—I signed a document—I did not go back to the Registrar's office.

JAMES CHALMERS . I am a cabdriver, of 18, Temple Street, Edinburgh—I remember going to the Registrar's office one day in June, 1898—I recognise the prisoner and Miss Chane—I knew that I was going for a special marriage—we went next to Sheriff Rutherford—I did not go back to the Registrar's—the cab was discharged, and we were paid.

ROBERT CAMPBELL . I am a member of the English Bar and of the Scotch Bar, of 5, New Court, Lincoln's Inn—I am well acquainted with the Scotch marriage law—I have heard the evidence—according to this certificate a valid marriage was contracted between William Lambert and Lily Chane on that day, and then they have gone before a substitute of the Sheriff—it is his duty to ascertain that they have declared themselves to be man and wife; the marriage is constituted before they go to the Sheriff—they had stated in the presence of two witnessed that they wished to be married, and they went to the Sheriff and got the warrant—the marriage consists in the declaration before witnesses, but if they want to get a certificate it is necessary to go to the Sheriff to get the warrant—it is a marriage from the time of the declaration—two witnesses are enough—their going to the father's house and stating that they were married was enough—if one was a Protestant and the other a Roman Catholic, that would make no difference—the fact that the girl was 18 would have no bearing on the case; that is the ordinary Roman law.

EMILY MAUD MCDOWELL . I am a school teacher, and live at 1, Brighton Road, Aldershot—I have a sister named Catherine Mary McDowell—she was a barmaid at Aldershot in 1898; the 12th Lancers were there, and she became acquainted with the prisoner, who was a private in the regiment—I was present when they were married on September 4th at St. Philip's Church, Stepney—she was living at 83, Sidney Street, and the prisoner was then a City police-constable—I heard from my sister afterwards that she was living at St. John's Wood, and that the prisoner was ordered to join his regiment, and go to South Africa—he was wounded there, and came back about the middle of last year—he lived with my sister again when he came back—there were no children—she was very ill, and has since died.

JOHN PALFREY (Police Sergeant) I produce a certified extract from the marriage register of St. Philip's, Stepney, showing a marriage

between William Daniel Lambert, bachelor, 26, and Catherine Mary McDowell, spinster, on September 4th, 1899—I subsequently received a warrant for the prisoner's arrest, and took him the next day—the case was a long time before the Magistrates, as they wanted to see whether the woman might get better—I read the warrant to him; he said, "It is perfectly correct; I shall want you to make some inquiries about her"—by "her" I understood Mrs. Lambert.

Prisoner's defence: I told her I had gone through a marriage which was not legal, and she thought the same, and we got married. I went away with my regiment, and should never have seen her again, but I had to go to Aldershot with my regiment, and when I left I left my address where I was going. She knew where to find me in the regiment. If I had thought it was a legal marriage I should not have gone through the ceremony.

GUILTY .— Judgment respited.

178. THOMAS SILVER (18), GEORGE BRAND (17), and JAMES DAVIS (18) , Feloniously shooting at Charles Fallaize, and wounding him, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MR. COHEN Prosecuted.

CHARLES FALLAIZE . I am a machinist, of 128A, Cambridge Road, Bethnal Green—on Christmas night, about 9.30, I was walking in Green Street, Bethnal Green, with two lads about 16, my brothers-in-law—it was rather a dark night, and it is not well lighted at that spot—I saw seven or eight lads coming in the opposite direction, about 25 yards from us, making a noise—I do not recognise either of the prisoners—three or four of them began punching my two lads about their heads and faces—they had done nothing—I was getting one of them away, and told him to run away, and I was about going away, when one of the lads came out of the gang and fired a pistol which I saw in his hand, and saw the glitter of it—I felt my hand numbed; I then saw blood on it—I ran away to Dr. Grant's shop, and met two constables—when I came out I went to the station with one of them, and then went home and back to the station a second time, and then to the London Hospital—I got there between eleven and twelve—I walked there—I did not remain there all night; I went to my brother-in-law's—I went back to the hospital next morning in consequence of directions—I went there about four times, and the fourth time I was kept there as an in-patient, as my wound had become more painful—I was an in-patient a fortnight, and after that I went to a convalescent home at Tenterden for a fortnight—a bullet was extracted from my hand on the second occasion—when I went to the station the second time on Christmas night I saw a boy in custody, and recognised him as one whom I had seen in the crowd—it was not one of the prisoners—about a week after I was an in-patient I went to the station and saw a dozen boys and men in the yard, and picked out one, but neither of the prisoners—the wound is well now, but I have not the use of my hand, and am unable to carry on my business.

HUGH LETT , M.D., M.R.C.S. I am house surgeon to the London Hospital—Fallaize was brought in on Christmas night, and I found a wound between the fourth and fifth finger of his left hand—he told me he had been shot, and I could tell that—I probed for the bullet, but could

not find it—I looked for it at the orifice—I invited him to stay in the hospital, but he said he had rather not, and went home—I told him to come again next day, which he did, and the receiving surgeon saw him, and again on the 27th, and as the result of that visit he was admitted as an in-patient that day—he was under my care, and on the 29th I conducted the first operation—the bullet had been localised by the X rays, and I was present when it was taken out on January 2nd by Mr. Barnard, and I produce it—he was not constitutionally fit to attend the Court, both from the operation, and the wound combined—a bullet such as this would not be dangerous to life in that situation, but in certain circumstances it might.

By the COURT. It would be if it had gone into the heart, or if it had caused the rupture of a large artery—it was discovered lying between the base of the second and third metacarpal bone—we could not have found it without the X rays, without a very serious operation—he had a good deal of pain after that, and a certain amount of inflammation, which was originally caused by the bullet—he was discharged on January 14th—I saw him on the 28th when he returned, the wound had then completely healed, but his first finger was still stiff in the tendons—I think he will recover the use of his hand—the bandages are left off.

JAMES PITT . I live at 4, Preston Street, Bethnal Green—I was in Green Street last Christmas Day, at the top of Preston Street—I saw about six boys, all of whom I know—the prisoners are three of them—Silver and Brand each had a pistol in his hand like this, and Silver loaded his pistol and then shot on the pavement, and then loaded it again—I saw him put something in, and fire it in the air—I then heard two shots in the street, one from Silver and one from Brand—Brand said to the others, "What say if we go into the ice-shop?"—we were all outside the ice-cream shop—they all went in except Davis, and I went in, but I was not talking to them—when I got in, Silver fired his pistol again, and made a hole in this picture (Produced), which was on the wall, and I heard the glass go—someone was near the picture when it was hit—Brand then fired at the door, and I saw the hole made by the bullet—Johnny Ronaldi, who keeps the shop, then turned them out—he did not turn me out, but I went out and saw three men coming along, talking to one another—Fallaize was one of them—the prisoner srushed again, and Silver fired, and Brand also—two or three of them had pistols—I do not know the name of the other boy who bad a pistol—when Silver fired I was a little further from him than I am from you, and the same distance from Brand—after firing they walked quick over the bridge, and three or four more with them—Davis never left them after they cameout of theshop, he did not go into the shop; he remained outside, but joined them when they came out, and was there when Silver and Brand fired—I saw the man shot; he went away holding his hand, and Major and I pulled up at a shop afterwards.

Cross-examined by Brand. It was about 9.30 when you walked into the ice-cream shop—other boys were arrested besides you three—Newman and Skinner were charged before a Magistrate.

Re-examined. I am quite sure I saw the three prisoners that night, and that I saw Silver and Brand fire shots.

ALFRED E. MAJOR . I am 13, and am a boy messenger at the docks—at 9.30 p.m. on Christmas Day I was outside Ronaldi's ice-cream shop, 216, Green Street—Brand was inside with eight or ten others, including Silver and Davis—I heard two pistol shots inside, and the boys came out—I then heard another shot—I saw pistols in Brand's and Silver's hands—they went towards the canal bridge—I followed them as far as Preston Street, where Brand and Silver fired two more shots—I think Brand fired up, and Silver down—I then saw Mr. Fallaize holding his hand—a gentleman with him was kicked; I don't know who by; then the boys walked sharply towards the bridge—I saw Brand with a pistol outside the shop.

By the COURT. I have known Brand and Davis a long while.

AUGUSTIN RONALDI (Interpreted). I keep an ice-cream shop at 216, Green Street, Bethnal Green—about 9.30 on Christmas night 10 boys came in, including Silver—I have known him six or seven months, as coming in for iced—they had hardly entered when two pistol shots were fired—I was serving, with my assistant—I did not see who fired—one bullet went through this advertisement frame hanging on the wall, and into the wall; the other bullet went through the door into the kitchen, but has not been found—I then turned them all out—I did not see this pistol, but one similar.

Cross-examined by Silver. I have seen you with eight or ten boys—I saw you at 8.80, and again at 9.45—I saw you outside when I turned the others out.

PIETRO GEORGE . I am assistant to Ronaldi—I was in the parlour at the back—there is a glass door—I saw the prisoners come in with some others—I knew the prisoners by sight—I saw a pistol like this in Silver's hand—I heard it go off twice, but did not see who fired it—the bullet came through the door passage—I helped my master to turn the boys out.

Cross-examined by Brand. I did not say at Worship Street that I did not know you—you were mixed up with the others.

ALBERT HANDLEY (Police Sergeant, J). I arrested Silver outside 216, Green Street, on the night of December 26th—I said, "I am a police officer; I shall arrest you for being concerned, with others in custody, in shooting Charles Fallaize on the 25th instant"—he said, "I did not shoot; I was with them in this ice-cream shop; I heard some pistols go off; I did not see who let them off; I knew my mates had pistols, but I will swear I never shot anybody"—he was taken to Bethnal Green Police-station, and detained till the 27th—the next day, at the back of Worship Street Police-court, he voluntarily stated, "Handley, I will tell the truth about it; I can see I have been put away, and telling lies won't do any good. I was in Ice-cream Jack's shop on Christmas night about 9 o'clock, with Jack Richards, James Davis, Ted Culiver, George Brand, Charles Newman, and Alfred Skinner, and while we were in the shop some of my mates let a pistol off; I don't know who done it. Jack then turned us all out; we then went towards the bridge; my mates had a row with some men, and they got fighting; who started the row I don't know; I heard several pistol shots go off, but I never shot the man; I shot mine off in the air; we then all ran

away; I was told later that Newman and Skinner were locked up. I then gave my pistol to James Davis, to take care of for me; I went home about 2.30 the next morning"—Newman was fined 40s. for discharging fire-arms, to the danger of the public, and Skinner was bound over in his own recognizance—on December 27th, at 10.30 p.m., I went to 240, Green Street, and arrested Davis—I said, "I am a police officer, and shall arrest you for being concerned, with others in custody, in shooting Charles Fallaize on December 25th"—he said, "All right, I will go with you"—I asked him where his pistol was—he said, "I threw it away in the canal"—I told him I had received certain information, and should search his bedroom—he took me upstairs to his room—he lived with his parents—I commenced to search the chest of drawers, and found one drawer locked—I asked for the key—his mother said there was a pistol locked up there—she said, "I found it hidden under a sack of corn in the shop"—they keep a small shop—Davis said, "Yes, I put it there on Christmas night; that belongs to Tom Silver; he asked me to take care of it for him after the row was over on Christmas night; I don't know who shot the man; I swear I didn't shoot him; mine went off in the air. The reason I carried one was because I was kicked about in Green Street; I had my head cut and some teeth knocked out by the Brady Street mob"—this is the pistol I found, and this bullet extracted from Fallaize's hand fits it.

FREDERICK ALLIN (Detective, J). I arrested Brand on December 28th at a tea warehouse in Mincing Lane, where he has been employed for three and a-half years—I told him I should arrest him for being concerned with other lads in shooting a man in Green Street on Christmas night—he said, "All right, I didn't shoot anyone; I fired my pistol in the air; I bought it from Davis on Christmas Day; I was to give him 2s. for it; I paid him 1s., and was going to pay him the other on Saturday, and if you go to my bedroom you will find it on the frame of an old clock standing on the mantelshelf"—he lives at the Favourite coffee-shop, in the Minories—his father is a butler—he said, "There were five of us had pistols"—I went to his address, but was unable to find the pistol—he said his brother was sleeping in the same room, and might have taken it—he was bailed the same day.

Cross-examined by Brand. If you had said you were in bed and asleep at the time in question I should have made a note of it

HENRY COLLINS (Police Inspector, J) I went to the ice-cream shop on January 1st/emdash/this advertisement frame was hanging on a wooden partition/emdash/this bullet had passed through the frame of the picture, and lodged in the woodwork behind/emdash/it fits Davis's pistol/emdash/the other bullet had gone through the panel of the door, and along the passage and through a nearly half-inch panel board/emdash/it would kill anyone at 15 or 20 yards.

JAMES PATTISON . I am a gunsmith, of 15, Mile End Road—this pistol is a Derringer, worth 2s. 6d.—they come from Germany and Belgium—they cost about 1s. 6d. wholesale—these two bullets fit the pistol—this is the kind of cartridge for them (Produced)—it is the smallest and cheapest weapon to be got—boys will have something to shoot with—mostly youths buy them—we sell thousands of them in a year.

By the COURT. We should not sell so many of them if a tax of 5s. were put on them—the cartridges cost 8d. per 100.

ABRAHAM HOLMES (Police Sergeant, 42 J) I was at the Police-station on Christmas night about 10.20, and shortly after I was in Green Street—I saw three lads in Cranbrook Street about 10.15—one of them discharged a pistol—I cannot identify them—another constable stopped Davis after Fallaize was wounded.

OLIVER FARDON (121 J). I was with Sergeant Holmes about 11.15 on Christmas night—I heard a pistol shot—Davis came from that direction—I stopped him and asked where the pistol was—he replied, "I have not got a pistol; you can search me"—I searched him, and in his right hand jacket pocket I found this tin lid (Produced), apparently that of a cartridge box—I asked his name and address, which he gave me correctly—I let him go.

PERCY SAUNDERS (174 J). I heard the firing of the shot, and saw this tin found on Davis, whose name and address I found to be correct.

The prisoners statements before the Magistrate: Silver says: "I only fired twice, and then I fired in the air; that was on the bridge." Davis says: "I had no pistol on me at the time; I sold it to Brand at dinner time." Brand says: "At the time of the accident I was in bed I wish to call my father."

Brand, in his defence, on oath, stated that he was 16 years old last June, and was a clerk; that he was indoors at 8.55; that he slept at a coffee-shop in Leman Street, where he worked after office hours, and went home on Saturdays; that he went home at 9.10, and never went out again; that he had been at the ice-cream shop, but left at 5.30, and went home, and came out at 6.30, and could not remember where he went, but he met Silver and Davis, and went down Old Ford Road, and had a pistol, which he had bought from Davis in the middle of the day, on him, but no cartridges.

Evidence for Brand.

EDWARD BRAND . I am Brand's father, and am a hatter and tobacconist, of 236a, Green Street—he was at home on Christmas night before nine—I told the children to go to bed, and he said, "All right, I shall go as well," and he went at nine—he generally comes home tired, and goes to bed at 10 or 10.30—he went out after dinner, and came home to tea about five—I should not have noticed his going to bed but for the little ones going—I did not know that he had a pistol.

GUILTY of unlawfully wounding . The JURY expressed their opinion that the sale of these dangerous weapons should be put an end to.

SILVER and BRAND— Four months' hard labour each; DAVIS— Six weeks in the Second Division.

THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday,

February 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th, 1901.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

179. JOHN MURPHY (24) and ROBERT THOMPSON (22) , Robbery with violence on Walter Shepherd, and stealing 3s., his money.

MR. EVANS Prosecuted.

WALTER SHEPHERD . I am a farrier, of 5, Tufton Street, Cambridge Road, Bethnal Green—on January 20th I was in Commercial Road, near Spitalfields Church, about 2.30 a.m., when the prisoners rushed at me—one

struck me on my nose, making it bleed, and knocked me down; the other one jumped on my chest and took 3s. 01/2d. out of my coat pocket, and my pocket-book and club card in it—they left me senseless on the ground—I had had a glass, but was in my senses—they were strangers.

Cross-examined by Murphy. I was not hanging on to a fire-alarm—you took my money, and 1s. 01/2d. were found on you—I heard something drop when the officers were taking you along—I had 2s. in my trousers pocket and 3s. 01/2d. safe in my coat pocket when I came out about midnight—I was going to Machamara's, the contractor—the public-house were closed—I had had one glass of four ale at White's public-house at the corner of Commercial Street—I paid with a penny out of my trousers pocket.

Cross-examined by Thompson. I said at the station that I had 2s. in my trousers pocket.

WILLIAM SIME (263 H). On January 20th, about 2.30 a.m., I was in Commercial Street in plain clothes—I saw the prosecutor walking opposite Spitalfields Church, near the urinal—he was sober—I saw Thompson strike him a violent blow in the face, which knocked him to the ground—Murphy knelt on his chest, and appeared to be getting at his inside pocket—I went round one side of the urinal when Thompson was getting away hurriedly, and arrested him—Cornish arrested Murphy—the prosecutor was lying on his back, his head towards Aldgate—I said to Thompson, "What have you been up to?"—he said, "Nothing"—I took him back to the prosecutor, who was still lying on his back, unconscious—Cornish and I got him on his feet—he put his hand to his breast pocket, and said, "He took 3s. and a club card from me"—Thompson became very violent, and I had to restrain him—money fell on the ground—I tried to pick it up, but was not able, because of Thompson's violence—I was close, and the money fell between the prosecutor and Thompson—he was taken to the station—I went back to try to find the money, but could not—two women were standing there—1s. 1d. was found on Murphy—there is a fire-alarm 15 or 20 yards or less from the place of the robbery, but the prosecutor had not got up to that—I was 15 to 20 yards off when I saw Thompson strike the prosecutor—there is electric light, and it was as clear as day.

Cross-examined by Thompson. I did not put my hand in the prosecutor's pocket.

Cross-examined by Murphy. You were not sitting; you ran between two women and towards Aldgate, and Thompson ran towards Shoreditch—the prosecutor had not done anything to Thompson—we were watching in plain clothes to prevent robberies—nothing was said, and the blow came direct—you got off the prosecutor's chest when you saw me.

GEORGE CORNISH (577 H). I was standing near Spitalfields Church in plain clothes—I saw the prisoners loitering, and watched them—I saw the prosecutor walking towards Shoreditch from Aldgate quietly—when he was opposite the church railings, near the lavatory, Thompson struck him a blow in the face as he was passing; Murphy pounced on him as he was falling, and knelt on him as he lay on his back on the footway—I was about 15 yards away—there was electric light close by—I ran up—the prisoners tried to dodge behind two women—Sime caught Thompson, and

I caught Murphy—I said, "I am a police officer; what's up?"—the prosecutor was then on the ground—I helped him up and asked him what was the matter—he was dazed and almost unconscious; he could not speak for a minute or so—when he did speak he said, "They have knocked me about and robbed me"—I told Murphy I should take him to the station—he said, "It is a lie about the stealing; we never went near his pockets at all"—he was charged, and again said, "It is a lie; we never went near his pockets at all"—I searched him, and found in his outside jacket pocket a shilling, a penny, and a pocket-knife—I heard some money drop, but Thompson was so violent that I had to help Sime—Murphy was quiet after I had given him a bit of a twist—the prosecutor was not near the fire-alarm—he was walking towards it, but had not reached it at the time this occurred.

Cross-examined by Thompson. The money fell on the footway when the struggle occurred as we arrested you—two women, you two, and the officers were all together then—I was standing, when I saw the blow struck, by the fountain outside Spitalfields Church, by the railings; when I came from Aldgate I saw you stop there—I saw the two women with the men before the prosecutor was knocked down—you had blood on your hands, and the prosecutor's nose bled profusely.

The prisoners statements before the Magistrate: Murphy says: "The man lifted his hand and hit Thompson, so Thompson hit him back." Thompson says: "I struck him because he hit me in the mouth." The prisoners, in their defences, repeated these statements, and said that they were innocent of the robbery.

GUILTY .—Seven convictions were proved against THOMPSON.— Eighteen months' hard labour each, and Thompson to receive fifteen strokes with the cat.

180. GEORGE MOORE (50) and DAVID MARKS (16) , Committing acts of gross indecency with each other.

MR. GEE Prosecuted, and MR. PERROT Defended Marks.

MOORE—GUILTY.— One month's hard labour. MARKS— NOT GUILTY .

181. EDWARD CURTIS (27), ALBERT CURTIS (21), and FREDERICK CURTIS (16) , Robbery with violence on Richard Butler, and stealing 1s. 1d., his money.

MR. O'CONNOR Prosecuted, and MR. HUGHES Defended Edward Curtis.

RICHARD BUTLER . I am a road-sweeper, of 3, St. Catherine's Road, Notting Dale—about 1 a.m. on January 24th I was in Clarendon Place; I saw three men, of whom Albert and Frederick Curtis were two, standing at the corner—Albert took a cigarette from my mouth; I said, "If you had asked me for one I would have given you one"—he hit me on the right side of my jaw with his fist—he fell to the ground with me, and I found his hand in my left-hand waistcoat pocket, in which I had 1s., a penny and a packet of cigarettes—all were gone—Frederick kicked me while I was on the ground—the third man was a tall man—Albert kicked me on my side, and all three men ran through a shop doorway—Mr. White came up and went after them, and tried to rush in at the door—I was sober—I saw them afterwards in the house.

Cross-examined by Albert. When you got up Frederick said, "Come on,Jumbo; here's someone coming," and when I got upstairs Frederick said, "Jumbo; get up," and so I recognised the same name—the name called out was not "Lobo"—I can swear to you and Frederick.

Cross-examined by Frederick. I recognise you by your being the shortest one who ran into the house, and by the curl in your hair.

ALFRED WHITE . I keep the Portland Arms, Portland Road, Notting Dale—about 1 a.m. on January 24th I heard in the street, screams of "Murder," "Police," and "Help," as I let the potman out—I ran to Clarendon Place, where I saw the prosecutor on the ground, and three men on the top of him, apparently kicking him—I positively recognise Frederick and Edward as two of the three—they ran into a doorway—I was near enough to have my hand on Frederick's shoulder as he ran into a bottle dealer's shop door, and I got a little bit pinched out of my little finger—a constable and a cabman came up immediately—we knocked at the door, and a man looked out at a window above and said, "What's up?"—the police asked him to let us in—he said, "There is no one here, but I will come down in a moment"—he did not come for 15 minutes, and five of us tried to bash the door in, when the same old man came down, and we pushed open the door and found steps propped against it—I held the old man, who came down, while two constables searched the yard and the bottom floor—then we went upstairs, and in the front room on the first floor we saw Albert and Frederick and two girls—Frederick was lying in a corner on some sacks, in his trousers and a blue dress—the girls were in a bed—Albert was undressed, and pretended to be asleep—Edward was the second, and Frederick last in going in—I woke Frederick up and said, "Come on, get up and dress"—he said, "I have been in bed about four hours, sir"—I said, "I had my hand on your shoulder not long ago"—he said, "Was that you, sir? I know someone did"—I said, "It was me"—the cabman also identified Edward.

Cross-examined by MR. HUGHES. The night was not dark, but an ordinary night—I heard someone say, "Come on, Jumbo"—I got within two yards of them before they could get away—Jumbo was the first to get away—Edward was just in the door as I made a grab at Frederick.

Cross-examined by Albert. I heard "Come on, Jumbo"—I saw some-one's back, but I could not say if it was your back.

WILLIAM FARRANT (360 X). About 1 a.m. on January 24th I was at the corner of Princes Road—I heard someone call out "Police" and "Help"—another constable spoke to me, and we ran to the spot, where we saw a disturbance, the prosecutor on the ground, and the prisoner Albert kicking him—I was about 30 yards off—three men ran inside No. 10, Clarendon Place, and the door was bolted—I knocked several times—an old gentleman looked out of the window on the first floor and asked me what was the matter—I said, "A man here has been assaulted and robbed; come down and open the door"—he said, "There is no one in the house, only me"—I tried with others to force the door, but failed—there were steps behind it—I waited about a quarter of an hour, when the old gentleman came down and opened it—I went into the back kitchen, and then upstairs—there were a man and two young girls lying on a bed in the front room, and Frederick was lying undressed on some

sacks or rubbish—I said to the prosecutor, who was there, "Is this the man who assaulted you?"—he said, "Yes; that is the one they call "Jumbo," referring to Albert, who appeared to be asleep, with only his shirt on—I smacked him on the back—Frederick was lying awake, close to him, with his trousers on—Albert turned over and said, "Holloa! is there a fire?"—I said, "I do not know about a fire; this man here is going to charge you with assaulting and robbing him"—I asked him to dress—he was a long time, and I told him if he did not put his trousers on I should take him without—he said he had been in bed a long time—referring to Frederick, White said, "This is the little one I had my hand on, and I got my finger pinched in the door"—Frederick said, "I know someone had their hand on me; was that you, sir?"—he said he had been in bed four hours, he should think—I took them to the station, they were searched—on Edward was found ₤2 in gold, two half-crowns, two florins, and 6d., and 71/2d. bronze; on Albert two florins, a half crown, and 1s, and 61/2d. bronze; and on Frederick 1s.

Cross-examined by MR. HUGHES. I saw a cabman, two cabs, and I caught hold of Mr. White as soon as I got there—I knew him, and said, "What's the matter?" after turning him round in the hurry—then the prisoners disappeared inside the house—I had run 10 or 20 yards—White was close to the door—I was 30 yards away when the men were on the ground—the length of this court is about 15 yards.

Cross-examined by Albert. You got under the lamp after you kicked the man, to run indoors; besides, you had no collar or tie, but only a choker on, a pair of brown boots, dirty trousers, and a jacket similar to the one you have on.

WILLIAM GUYS (398 X). I was with Farrant, and saw the prosecutor on the ground, being kicked about by Albert.

Cross-examined by MR. HUGHES. Between 20 and 30 people were round, including the three men, but I cannot swear to the other two.

Cross-examined by Albert. You gave the prisoner a kick and crossed the road—you had a muffler and a cap, but no collar—I heard someone shout "Come on, Jumbo"—you had a light jacket—I recognise your face—I recognised you and Frederick afterwards in the room—I found the prosecutor's hat inside the shop—you had no clothes on indoors, but I recognised you in those you put on—there was no proper bed or cover, only old sacking and things.

THOMAS INGRAM (202 X). About 1 a.m. on January 24th, I saw the prisoners Frederick and Albert leave 10, Clarendon Place with two constables—I went to the top floor back—I saw the prisoner Edward sitting up in bed, naked, and rubbing his eyes—I asked him to get up and dress—he said, "Wait a minute, I will do so, but you have made a mistake"—I told him I wanted him to come to Notting Dale Police-station—I took him there—he made no answer to the charge.

Cross-examined by MR. HUGHES. His trousers were at the foot of the bed, his coat was across it, and his boots and socks were against the door—I have said that Mr. White said, "That is the man," but it was the cabman.

HORACE BROOKER . I am a cabman, of 38, Bracken Road, West Fulham—between 12.30 and 1 a.m. on January 24th I was with

my cab in Clarendon Place—I heard a man holloaing "Police! murder! help!"—I drove up and dismounted—I saw the prosecutor and the prisoners in the road, close to the kerb—the prosecutor was on the ground—before that I had asked a man at the corner what was the matter—he said, "Only a little row," and went on—the prisoners disappeared into 10, Clarendon Place—White, who came from the other direction, was close on their heels—the prisoners slammed the door—two policemen came—they knocked at the door—an old gentleman put his head out at a window and said, "What is the matter?"—they said, "Come down and open the door"—some time elapsed, and we banged the door again—the old gentleman again put his head out of the window, and said he would comedown—he came down, and the two constables and White went in, leaving me at the door—I had the lamp of my hansom in my hand, which showed a good light into the premises—I looked round the shop, and then gave the officers the aid of my lamp upstairs—Frederick and Albert dressed, and were brought down and taken away—I consented to stop, and two more constables came—in the back room upstairs we found Edwards, whom I had seen go into the premises—I saw the faces of all three in the street.

Cross-examined by MR. HUGHES. Edward was naked when I saw him in the room—in the street he had a long coat on and a Trilby hat—I heard him say to Albert, "Come on, Jumbo"—when I was on the top stairs I recognised his voice in the back room, speaking to his father—the prisoners were going in the house as I got off my cab—I said at the Police-court, "I have not made any mistake as to two of the defendants"—I was asked about two, but I have no doubt about the three—the man I spoke to at the corner was coming from the direction of the row—I had my doubts about him; I thought he might have been in it.

Cross-examined by Albert. I got off my cab in front of the door—a four-wheeled cab came on the scene from the other direction—White was at the door—the two constables were coming up—you had on a dark jacket—the man at the top of the road, when I asked what was the matter, said, "Nothing serious"—he was wearing dark clothes and a short jacket—I could pick him out from a dozen—he was walking away as if nothing had occurred.

JAMES BROWN (Police-Sergeant, X). This statement, which is signed "A. Curtis," was handed to me on January 26th by a solicitor who appeared to defend the prisoners at the West London Police-court: "Albert Curtis, 10, Clarendon Place, Notting Hill, states: About 1 o'clock early morning Thursday, January 23rd, 1901, I was with Lobs Fisher and Shaunesey outside my house after coming from Montpelier public-house, all three of us standing outside my house. The prosecutor was standing in doorway of chapel, next door. Shaunesey asked prosecutor for a fag (cigarette), and then snatched the cigarette prosecutor was smoking out of his mouth. I said, 'Good night! I am going indoors.' I went indoors, and before I bolted the door I heard screams and shouting "Murder" and "Police." I opened door again, looked out, and saw Fisher and prosecutor rolling in road. Fisher was on top. I pulled Fisher off, and he broke away from me, and he and Shaunesey struck and kicked prosecutor while he was on the ground, and then I

ran from them and ran indoors, and the men Fisher and Shaunesey followed into my house. I ran upstairs and went to bed, leaving them downstairs. About a quarter of an hour afterwards police came and took me from bed to station. I did not tell the police what I have now said. I have read the above, and it is true. January 25th, 1901.—A. Curtis."—I know Fisher—he collects rags, bones, and bottles—he has been convicted—he is medium height, is rather cross-eyed, and about 27 or 28 years of age—he is about the height of prisoner Edward, but much fairer—he is slightly bigger than Albert—I have made inquiries about these two men, and cannot get information.

Cross-examined by MR. HUGHES. From inquiries I find Edward is in regular employment, and nothing is known against his character—he has been 12 months with the Fevers Exploring Association, who give him a good character—I examined the premises, 10, Clarendon Place, on January 26th—the men could have got away across the roof by climbing a 7 ft. wall, but I saw no footmarks.

Edward Curtis, in his defence, on oath, said that he had spent the evening with the young lady he was engaged to be married to, and was home at 10 30, and in bed 10 minutes later, and was awakened by his sisters running about calling "Fire!" and he knew nothing about the robbery. (He received a good character.)—Albert repeated in substance, on oath, his signed statement, and Frederick said that he was not there, but had been in bed for hours and knew nothing about it.

Evidence for Albert Curtis.

ROBERT DESBOROUGH COOPER . I live at the Montpelier public-house, 73, Clarendon Place—about 1 a.m. on January 24th I heard cries of "murder!" and "police!"—I walked on to the pavement in front of the house, and looked up Clarendon Place—30 or 40 yards distant I saw three or four men struggling together on the ground—thinking it only a squabble, I did not go; I went in, but I heard the cries again, and came out, determined to see what it was—a Hansom's cab drove up—the cabman called out—I went to see what was up—I met Fisher, and spoke to him—after he passed on I went to Mr. Curtis's shop, No. 10, where I saw the prosecutor, the cabman, Mr. White, and two policemen trying to force the door—Mr. Curtis opened the window—the police called out, "Come down and open the door"—he said, "What's the matter down there?"—the police said, "Never mind, come down and open the door"—after 10 minutes or a quarter of an hour this was done, and they all went in—I went upstairs, but came down immediately afterwards—I stood at the foot of the stairs—I waited outside till the three prisoners were brought out I then returned home—Albert was in my house that evening—he was not there at closing time, 12.30; I knew him as a customer.

Cross-examined. I gave evidence on January 31st, I believe the third hearing before the Magistrate—Detective Sergeant Brown asked me to go—I may have said that Albert was in my house on the night of the 22nd, but I meant the 23rd—he was there with Fisher about half an hour—they left together—Fisher is a general dealer—he is a young man—I saw broken glass on the ground floor—a short ladder which was behind the front door fell on some bottles—I heard the noise—Edward was not in my public-house that night, nor Frederick—there were two attacks—one

was 30 to 40 yards from the house—Curtis's shop is 20 or 30 yards from the corner—I was about 12 yards from the corner—my house is on the same side as Clarendon Place—I met Fisher coming from the direction of Curtis's shop.

EDWARD CURTIS . I am a painter, of 12, Clarendon Place—I went to bed at 10 p.m. on the night my sons were arrested—Edward came in about 10.30 with a roll of paper in his hand, and he went to his bedroom and stopped there—he said he was going to bed, and I heard him go through into his room and shut the door, and he was in bed when the police came—I was woke up by what I thought was a drunken row—little Fred was sleeping under the window, under what the police called an old sack, but it was a known blanket—Fred said to his sister, "Open the window"; I said, "No"—then there was a banging at the outer door—my son Albert was in the room then—I heard him come into the room—he sleeps there—I said, "What is that row?"—he said, "I don't know; I am not in it"—I looked out and said, "What do you want?"—then I saw a policeman's lamp alight—the banging went on—Albert said, "Don't open the door; they can't come in without a warrant"—Mr. White recognised Albert by his voice when he said that—I got a ladder, and told Albert to go on the roof—he went, but came down again—the other man, Shaunessy, who came into the house with Albert, stopped there—I saw him in my room—a✗ took the ladder down again, and opened the door for the police—I could not open the bolt at the top without the ladder—I took it from the roof, and took it back again after the police had gone, and took this man from the roof; it was very silly of me to let him out at the door.

Cross-examined. I keep the shop at No. 10 as a marine store—Fred used to mind it while I was out at work—I have lived there four or five years—I live there still—I am positive Edward did not go downstairs again—I said, "What do you want down there?" and then, "Oh, police!"—Albert came in before the banging—I let the police in in 10 minutes—Albert had undressed before he went on the roof—Shaunessy had his clothes on—Albert slept in my bed—there were five in the room—the two girls remained in bed—they were not running about calling "Fire!"—they are aged 131/2 and 9—Shaunessy is about Albert's age—he is bigger than Fred, but Mr. White took him for Fred.

Re-examined by Albert. I heard someone outside shout "Help!"—I heard Fisher say, "I'll b—well murder him!"—I know Fisher—when I stood on the ladder I said, "I won't give you up; come down"—I heard you come in—five minutes after that you said, "Don't open the door."

EDWARD CURTIS— NOT GUILTY . ALBERT CURTIS— GUILTY .— Twelve months' hard labour. FREDERICK CURTIS— GUILTY .— Four months' hard labour.

182. WILLIAM JOHN ROBERTS (37), ALFRED JOHN WYATT (35), and ALFRED JOHN CHILD (40) , Conspiring together to cheat and defraud Samuel Horace Candler and others of ₤50 and other sums.

MESSRS. AVORY, MUIR, and JAY Prosecuted; MR. EDMONDSON appeared for Wyatt, and MESSRS. ABINGER and SELLS for Child.

ROBERTS, in the hearing of the JURY, having stated that he was GUILTY , the JURY returned that verdict.

JAMES TERRELL . I am a solicitor, of Queen Victoria Street, City—on September 7th Wyatt called upon me, and handed me this letter—(Dated September 7th, from G. P. Newson & Co., auctioneers and valuers, 19, Mansion House Chambers, and introducing Wyatt as the purchaser of 15, Lightfoot Road, Hornsey, who wanted a temporary loan to complete the purchase on September 29th, as his money was locked up in other properties.)—a few days previously I had had a transaction with Newson & Co., and saw Child as Newson—Wyatt told me that he had purchased 15, Lightfoot Road, that he was residing in Kent, and wanted me to find ₤30 of the deposit of ₤55, as he had paid Newson & Co. ₤25—he handed me this contract—(Between G. Palmer, the vendor, through Newson, and Wyatt, for the purchase of 15, Lightfoot Road, for ₤554, the deposit being ₤55.)—I said I would consider the matter—I wrote to Newson & Co.—Child called the next day as Mr. Newson, with Wyatt—I told them I should probably be prepared to lend them ₤30, but should like to know whether Newson & Co. were the agents—he agreed—I wrote to Palmer—I received this letter—(From Newson & Co., September 8th, 1900, stating that Wyatt had wired that he could arrange for the balance of deposit without assistance; that they would call on Monday, and asking the witness to await instructions.)—on September 13th I received this letter: "Kindly let Wyatt have form of contract between Palmer and Wyatt, left with you"—I did not hand it over; I kept it.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. I ascertained that Child had been carrying on business as an auctioneer for 28 years.

FREDERICK DAVID WILLIAM HATTON . I am a solicitor, of 150, Strand—I have known Wyatt many years—he was manager to Fuller & Fuller, auctioneers, who used to do business with me—in September last Wyatt called to know whether I had a client who would lend about ₤30 towards providing a deposit on the purchase of some stables, I think, Mansion Mews, South Kensington—I told him I was too busy to go into the matter then, but I looked into the particulars, and informed him that I might be able to find a purchaser—he asked me if I could introduce him to anybody, and I mentioned the name of Mr. Candler, and I believe I took him down to Mr. Candler's office—I think he said that he was in business in the City as Newson & Co.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. I knew he was connected with property—I found him honourable.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. I knew that Child was manager for Hankey, Slade, & Healey five or six years ago—I looked upon him as thoroughly respectable—he used to collect rents for clients.

SAMUEL MORRIS CANDLER . I am one of the firm of Kingsford, Dorman & Co., solicitors, of 23, Essex Street, Strand—Roberts and Wyatt were introduced by Mr. Hatton to me on September 14th—they said that Roberts had agreed to purchase 15, Lightfoot Road—they produced this contract, with the receipt for ₤26 as part of the deposit—Between George Palmer, as vendor, and Roberts, of 59, Liverpool Road, as purchaser of 15, Lightfoot Road, for ₤565, the deposit being ₤56)——I said to Roberts, "As you are a stranger, I must have security for an

advance of ₤30"—he replied, "I am manager" or "foreman to Mr. Sparrow, of 59, Liverpool Road, Islington, who owes me ₤600, and a large sum is due to him from the Wimbledon Local Board in respect of a contract, which will be paid next month, and I shall then be in a position to complete the contract, and I will assign part of that debt to you as security"—they impressed upon me that it was necessary to have the money, because the vendor insisted on the matter being settled on the Saturday, and would not take any less deposit; anyway, Roberts said that I should prepare certain documents, and he would call the following morning—Roberts and Wyatt called the following morning, Saturday, September 15th—Roberts then executed the deed securing ₤30 by a charge on the ₤600 due from Josiah Sparrow, and I gave him my firm's cheque (Produced) upon his order for ₤30—it is specially endorsed by Roberts to Newson & Co., and signed "Newson & Co.—the deed is dated September 29th, but it stood over for some time for the purpose of stamping—I then gave notice of the assignment to Mr. Sparrow by a registered letter—I received this letter of September 18th, signed "G. P. Newson & Co."—(Stating that Messrs. Gerrish & Forster, of 26, College Street, would act as Palmer's solicitors.)—then I got a letter from Mr. Sparrow in reply to mine, upon which I went to see Messrs. Gerrish & Forster the following week—I saw Roberts with Mr. Gerrish, and Wyatt called upon me once, I think, afterwards—I asked Wyatt if he knew Child—he said, "No"—I said, "Do you know a man named Child, who used to trade as Hayman & Co., in Warwick Court, Holborn?"—he said, "No," but that he had heard of Hayman & Co.—I said, "Who are Newson & Co.?"—he said, "Mr. Newson is my uncle, and he is an old and respected auctioneer in the City of London"—I received a number of letters from Roberts between September 5th and October 25th, and I saw him on several occasions—he was asking advice as to premises in Pilgrim Street—after what I found out from Mr. Gerrish I laid an information at Bow Street.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. Wyatt was present the whole time when the advance was made—I expected to act in the completion of the purchase—it is an exaggeration to say that Hayman Child was the greatest scoundrel unhung—I tried to induce Roberts to have nothing more to do with it.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. I acted for Mr. Venio, Hayman's partner, in 1898, in an action for dissolution of partnership, for accounts, and a return of the premium; the action was undefended, but the defendant gave us all the trouble he could, and we lost everything, after my client had spent ₤150, while Hayman lived in a house at Maidenhead at ₤50 or ₤60 a year, and could order shrubs from Veitch's and other people.

RICHARD POYNTER . I am a clerk to Messrs. Kingsford, Dorman & Co., solicitors, 23, Essex Street, Strand—this cheque for ₤30 was handed over to Roberts, and in my presence he endorsed it specially to the order of G. P. Newson & Co.—Wyatt was also present—he endorsed it "G. P. Newson & Co."—this is a post-office receipt for a registered letter sent to Mr. Sparrow on September 15th.

EDWARD ROBERTS . I am paying cashier at the Temple Bar Branch of

the London and Westminster Bank—on September 15th I paid this cheque for ₤30 in gold—I cannot remember to whom.

BARRY HOLTHAM (Constable, G.P.O.) I produce post-office receipt for a registered letter delivered at 59, Liverpool Road, N., signed "J. Sparrow," and addressed to Sparrow.

JOSIAH SPARROW . I am a builder, of 59, Liverpool Road, Islington—Roberts, who has pleaded guilty, stayed with us last year, from June till November—he did some writing—I have no manager—he made out estimates, and I filled in the quantities and prices—I owe him nothing, and never did—I never had a contract with the Wimbledon Local Board, nor any money coming from them—Roberts never advanced me any money to complete a contract at Woolwich—he never lent me anything—I never wrote or authorised anyone to write, to Kingsford, Dorman & Co.—Mr. Lacy, or his assistant, came to see me, but I never received a letter from him, to which this letter of December 5th is an answer.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. Roberts married my sister 15 years ago—I have only known him two years next month—I have heard him say he was accountant to the District Messenger Company.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. I have been in business three years—I have not had large contracts—I was eight years a general foreman—Roberts was staying is the house, and did not charge for his writing—he told me Child was a house agent and surveyor, and said, "No doubt I could get you some work"—he did not tell me his business—I knew nothing about his buying property till I heard of it at Bow Street.

ARTHUR HENRY JOHN WALKER . I am a cashier at the Economic Bank, 34, Old Broad Street—I produce a certified copy of the account of George Palfry Newson, who traded as Newson & Co.—I have known Child as George Palfry Newson—the account was opened on September 16th with a credit of ₤15, and closed on November 2nd with ₤16 0s. 10d. overdrawn—the cheque payments are: to Roberts, September 18th ₤3, 20th ₤1 10s.; to Wyatt, September 27th ₤3, 29th ₤2 10s.; to Roberts, October 10th ₤9, and to Wyatt ₤4, and on October 13th ₤2, and 29th ₤4 10s.; on November 2nd, Roberts ₤10, and Wyatt ₤10; and to Wyatt, November 3rd ₤4, 6th ₤11, and 17th ₤10.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. The cheques were signed "Newson & Co."

HENRY GEORGE PALMER, JUNR . I live at 5, Malvern Road, Hornsey—till recently I was owner of 15, Lightfoot Road—in May I advertised the property for sale—in reply I received this letter from Newson & Co.—(Dated May 29th, 1900, from 11, Queen Victoria Street, asking for particulars.)—I sent particulars, and received their letter of May 30th—(Promising to introduce the property to "our applicant," and stipulating for the usual commission.)—I next got this letter from Newson & Co., stating "We have introduced this property to Mr. W. J. Perry, whom we think it might suit"—after that I called at Newson & Co.'s office, 11, Queen Victoria Street—I showed the prisoner Wyatt the letter, and said, "I have not heard anything from Mr. Perry"—he said, "We will write to Mr. Perry in a few days"—the next I heard was from Mr. Terrell, a solicitor—I had not then given any authority to Newson & Co. to receive any deposit on this property, nor had I heard of Mr. Wyatt as

the purchaser—I next went to Mr. Terrell on the Monday, and in consequence of what he told me I went on to Newson & Co.—after waiting, I saw Child—I handed him Mr. Terrell's letter—he read it, and handed it back to me—(This letter stated that his client, Mr. Alfred John Wyatt, had instructed him to act on his behalf in the purchase of this property from G. P. Newson & Co., who wished the deposit paid to them upon signing the contract they had prepared as agents, and asking if he had any objection.)—Child said Mr. Terrell had been too hasty in writing to me, and that he was writing or had written to me—on the Saturday, September 8th, I got this letter of September 8th from Newson & Co.—(Asking the witness to call on Newson & Co. at 11.30 a.m. on Tuesday.)—I did not call—on Tuesday night, September 18th, or Wednesday morning, I received this letter from Newson & Co.—(Stating they had sold the property to Mr. W. J. Roberts for ₤565, and asking for name of a solicitor to whom they might forward the contract.)—on Monday, 17th, I had called at Newson's office by chance, and seen Wyatt, whom I knew as Wyatt for the first time, as the clerk said, "Mr. Newson is not in, but you can see Mr. Wyatt"—I asked Wyatt if anything had been done, and he said, "Haven't you heard? It is all fixed up"—I said, "No, I have heard nothing"—he said, "You had better see Mr. Newson," who was expected—I called three or four times, and waited about all day, but he did not come—I called again on Tuesday, 18th—I told Child that I had called yesterday, and wanted to see him about the house, speaking to him as if he were Newson—he said it was settled—I asked if his client Wyatt had purchased this house—he said "No"—I asked if the deposit had been paid—he said "Yes," it had—I am not certain whether he gave me the purchaser's name—it was a hurried interview—he asked for the name of my solicitor, and I gave him the name of Mr. Gerrish, of College Street—I asked him if the purchaser knew that the house was let, also if he knew there was a mortgage on the property—he said the purchaser knew everything—I told him I should go straight to Mr. Gerrish; then on my return home I got this letter, saying that Mr. W. J. Roberts had purchased it for ₤565—I never received any deposit from Newson & Co.—I have since sold the property.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. I would have sold to Wyatt if he had been prepared to purchase—I wrote Newson & Co. this letter of September 12th—(This stated, "If your Mr. Wyatt will give ₤550 plus your commission for the freehold, you might close with him.")—I expected them to communicate with me before they clenched the bargain—the property was mortgaged for ₤400, through a building society; it was not a standing mortgage—I put up the price—I had offered it for ₤545 before July, 1900, and before I had spent ₤30 or ₤40 on it.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. I would have allowed Newson & Co. their usual commission if they had sold—I gave them authority to sell, provided they let me know what they were doing, and I got my money—I did not know who Mr. Wyatt was—they told me he was going to purchase.

Re-examined. I did not know that Wyatt, the purchaser, belonged to Newson & Co.'s office—when I first saw him there he spoke of them as "we."

ERNEST STRATTON GERRISH . I am a solicitor, practising at 26, College

Street as Gerrish & Forster—I act for a building society of which Stratton is a member—he came to me on September 17th in reference to the sale of 15, Lightfoot Road; I gave him certain particulars—he called again on the 18th—in consequence of what took place I wrote to Newson & Co. this letter of September 18th—(Stating that Mr. Palmer had instructed his firm to prepare the necessary contract, asking for the name and address of the purchaser, when the witness would forward draft for approval, addressed to 19, Mansion House Chambers.)—I received no answer, and wrote again—on the 19th I received a letter from Mr. Palmer, with a letter he had received from Newson & Co., which led me to think a contract had been entered into, and I wrote to them again that day: "Our client has just forwarded to us your letter of 17th inst. which had not reached him yesterday afternoon, when he saw us. He does not understand your suggestion as to forwarding the contract to us, but he wishes to point out that your authority does not extend to entering into a contract on his behalf"—I had no reply to that—on the 20th I sent to know why I did not receive a reply—I was awaiting the name of the purchaser, and had prepared the draft contract—in reply to that I received this letter of September 21st from Newson & Co.—(Stating that they had answered the letter.)—I next received Newson & Co.'s letter of September 27th—(This stated it was clear that their letter of the 18th inst., enclosing contract, and the messages, had not reached Gerrish's office, and they now enclosed a copy of the documents, which they presumed would reach Gerrish's, or be returned in course of time.)—that enclosed a copy of Newson & Co.'s letter of September 18th, and a copy of the contract—(This was dated September 15th, and stated that Palmer had informed Newson & Co. that the witnesses' firm were acting for them, and Kingsford, Dorman & Co. for Roberts, in the contract between Palmer and Roberts, the purchaser of the property for ₤565.)—I wrote again on the 26th, but I never received the original contract, nor any contract signed by Roberts, but I received this letter of September 27th from Newson & Co.—(Complaining of Messrs. Gerrish & Forster's conduct, threatening to put the facts before Roberts, and claiming commission.)—I called on Mr. Candler on September 28th—Roberts was present—I repudiated the contract—I said I could not take any responsibility with regard to the deposit, and from what I had ascertained I thought it better to get their deposit as quickly as they could—I said, "Do you know who Newson is?" (This evidence was objected to, and not continued.)

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. I acted upon Palmer's instructions—I have heard his evidence—I do not admit that instructions to an agent to find a purchaser carry with them authority to sign a contract—I meant in my letter, a written contract.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. It is not customary for auctioneers to enter into preliminary contracts.

JOHN ARSCOTT BARTRAM . I am a solicitor, of 9, Old Jewry Chambers—in November last, Wyatt called and said that he had been engaged in the office of Fuller & Fuller auctioneers, but was now associated with Newson & Co. in business as auctioneers; that he had an opportunity of making an advantageous purchase of the shops, 61 to 67, Queen's Road, Walthamstow, for ₤1,800; that he was prepared to pay ₤130, but

the deposit was ₤180, ₤10 per cent., and he wanted ₤50 to complete the amount of deposit—he gave me particulars of the property, and promised to come again the following day, which he did—he said it was a great bargain, and he should have an opportunity of selling it at a profit—I asked him how he was going to complete the purchase if he was not prepared to pay the deposit—he said if the property was not resold he had other transactions which would produce the necessary funds to complete the purchase; that Newson & Co. were indebted to him, and he offered the amount of that debt as security for the amount of the advance—I agreed to advance him ₤50 on the security of a charge on the contract, and a charge on the debt due from Mr. Newson—it was arranged he should come with Newson, but he came on November 24th, and handed me these two letters, the contract for purchase and, I think, another letter—(These letters were from Newson & Co., 19, Mansion House Chambers, of November 23rd, confirming Wyatt's statements. A third letter was from Wyatt, of 2, Newton Mansions, West, agreeing to pay ₤55 by December 25th for the ₤50 advanced, and authorising the witness to act as his solicitor in the matter. The contract was dated November 16th, and was between Samuel Walter Robinson, of Gwendoline Villa, Albert Road, Hoe Street, Walthamstow, by his agents, Newson & Co., and Albert John Wyatt, for the purchase of 61 to 67, Queen's Road, Walthamstow, for ₤1,800, paying a deposit of ₤180. Signed "G. P. Newson & Co, agents for the vendor, Samuel Robinson." This stated, "As agents for the vendor, we confirm sale and acknowledge receipt of ₤180 as deposit. G. P. NEWSON & Co.")—thereupon I had the charge endorsed on the contract as it now appears, and Wyatt signed the contract and the charge produced on all money commissions or share of profits due to him from Newson & Co. as a security for the payment of the ₤50—I then handed him this cheque for ₤50—he endorsed it, and I wrote the special endorsement in accordance with Newson & Co.'s letter, "Pay to the order of G. P. Newson & Co.," and crossed it—it now appears endorsed "G. P. Newson & Co., R. H. Barnett, P. P. Millar."—it was not given till about 12.30 on Saturday, and it was specially cleared that day—I sent Newson & Co. a copy of the charge given by Wyatt, asking name of vendor's solicitor—I received this reply—(Acknowledging the receipt, and stating that they were awaiting the name of the vendor's solicitor.)—not hearing further, I wrote again about December 3rd, and received this answer from Newson & Co. (Asking the witness to act as vendor's solicitor), and another letter written from Wyatt, of 40, Blandford Square (This stated that he would be at that address the next week, and would arrange terms definitely with the proposed purchaser.)—he refers to the proposed sub sale—I also received this letter of December 5th—(Stating that Wyatt would call on Thursday.)—he called on December 11th—I told him I had received a report from Mr. Lacy, a solicitor, who informed me that he had lent a sum of money to Mr. Roberts to assist him in the payment of a deposit upon the purchase of four freehold shops, and that he had taken as security an assignment of the debt alleged to be due from Mr. Sparrow, but that Mr. Lacy's subsequent investigations had led him to believe that the matter was a fraud, and that I very much suspected this transaction was of the same character—he assured me it was not so, and said that he

had seen the correspondence between the vendor of the shops and Messrs. Newson, and the interview ended with an arrangement that he was to call with Mr. Newson upon me the next day, and bring the correspondence showing his authority for entering into the contract—the appointment was not kept—I wrote him this letter of December 15th—(This letter (which was found on Wyatt) stated that the witness had been expecting a call from Wyatt, that he had had a most unsatisfactory letter from Robinson, and that unless the matter was forthwith put straight he would cause proceedings to be instituted, and asking Wyatt to call on him on Monday without fail.)—he never called—when I advanced Wyatt the cheque for ₤50 I believed he was a bona fide purchaser, and his statement that the deposit of ₤130 had been paid by him to Newson as appeared by the contract.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. My usual rate of interest is 5 per cent.—the ₤5 charged in this case was a bonus to cover the interest, stamp, and trouble—other work would have to be charged for—I did not suspect a fraudulent conspiracy—I never saw Newson—I had no interview with Robinson.

GRANVILLE MILLARD . I am a clerk to Mr. Behrend, solicitor, of Surrey Street, Strand—on Saturday, November 24th, the prisoner Child handed me this cheque for ₤50 of Mr. Bartram to cash—I endorsed it, and cleared it at Behrend's bank by special messenger for a ₤50 note—I endorsed the note and handed it to a cashier of the National Bank, who handed me smaller notes and gold at Child's request—Child then gave me ₤20 to lodge in Court, to enable him to prosecute an appeal in his own bankruptcy—I handed Child the balance.

JAMES FRANCIS KERSHAW . I am a solicitor, of 11, New Inn, Strand—Roberts and Wyatt called on me on Thursday, November 29th—Wyatt introduced himself as having known me when he was employed by Fuller & Fuller, but I had no recollection of him—either the clerk brought in, or he handed me, this card—("G. P. Newson & Co., 19, Mansion House Chambers" with "Mr. J. Wyatt" written upon it.)—I believe he stated that he was in the employment of Newson & Co.—he introduced Roberts as an old friend of his, and I think Wyatt stated that Roberts was purchasing from Wyatt 61, 63, 65 and 67, Queen's Road, Walthamstow, for ₤3,200, with a profit of 10 per cent., and that Roberts wanted ₤220 to be deposited—Roberts stated that he had ₤170, and wished to borrow ₤50 to complete the deposit and to have a solicitor, as he did not know one—after one or two interviews with him I declined the business—they were anxious for me to introduce Roberts to somebody—I did not think it was otherwise than bonafide, and I saw Mr. Lacy and put him in communication with Roberts.

CHARLES EDWARD LACY . I am a solicitor, of 9, King's Bench Walk, Temple—on December 5th, having seen Mr. Kershaw, the prisoner Roberts called and explained that he had got hold of a very good property at Walthamstow, which he could, as a practical man, develop to his advantage; that he had an agreement to purchase the property; that the deposit was ₤220, and that he was ₤50 short owing to all his savings being embarked in the firm of Sparrow & Co., his employers, amounting to over ₤2,000—he explained that Sparrow & Co. had a big contract at

Woolwich which would be completed about Christmas, when his ₤2,000 would be released, and that he had paid ₤170 of the deposit to Newson & Co.—I asked why he did not go to his own solicitor—he said that Mr. Lake was his solicitor, and showed me two letters from Newson & Co., and while we were discussing, Wyatt came in and produced Newson & Co.'s card, upon which I wrote Wyatt's name—Wyatt also produced a contract of November 28th, 1900, between Wyatt and Newson & Co., as agents, and Roberts, for the purchase of 61, 63, 65, and 67, Queen's Road, Walthamstow, for ₤2,200, with a deposit of ₤220, acknowledged to be received by Newson & Co.—I observed that the names were similar—Wyatt said A. J. Wyatt was his uncle, and H. A. Wyatt his own name, and that it was "Alfred John" in the contract—thereupon I drafted a letter to be signed by Mr. Sparrow, and they were to go to Woolwich, where he had a big contract, to see him—they left and came back later in the day with this letter, which I believed had been sent by Mr. Sparrow—(This stated: "We have now on deposit in our business the sum of ₤2,000, belonging to our business manager, W. J. Roberts; the amount is at call," and agreeing not to part with any portion of it without the witness's authority)—this was witnessed by H. G. Collard, 121, Lewisham Road—I then prepared a charge, which Roberts signed, and Wyatt witnessed, on the ₤2,000 owing by Sparrow, in consideration of the advance of ₤50 that I agreed to make to Roberts—I was also to be employed as solicitor in completing the purchase, because I intended to purchase it, and I handed Roberts this cheque (Produced) for ₤50, which is endorsed "W. J. Roberts"—I sent notice of this charge to Sparrow and to Newson & Co. in registered letters—I received Newson's acknowledgment and a letter from Roberts, enclosing my notice of charge, endorsed by Sparrow—having parted with my ₤50, I made inquiries, heard that a warrant was out, and communicated with the police.

JOSIAH SPARROW (Re-examined). The endorsement on this letter is not mine, nor by my authority.

CHARLES EDWARD LACY (Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON). I did not know that Wyatt had previously purchased, and had become the vendor—I did not mistake Wyatt's initials on the card—he told me "H. A."—I advanced my own money, believing, on the introduction of Mr. Gerrish, that Roberts and Wyatt were telling the truth.

ROBERT HENRY BEHREND . I am a solicitor, of Glyn House, Surrey Street, Strand—I acted for Mr. Child—the endorsement on this cheque (Bartram's) is my clerk's writing—Child gave me Lacy's cheque, which I cleared for him through my bank—one evening Child brought it and said that Roberts wanted it cashed—I told him I did not know Mr. Lacy, but that I would clear it for him—he said Mr. Roberts was waiting and anxious for money that evening, and I gave him what loose money I had in my pocket, and the balance by my cheque in favour of Roberts, after it was cleared.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. I have acted for Mr. Child some time, and looked upon him as a man of respectability—I knew him when he was employed at Henley's, Mount Street, Grosvenor Square, as manager—I lodged an appeal from him in bankruptcy, and he left ₤20 with me for that purpose.

Re-examined. I did not know that he passed as Newson.

SIDNEY WALTER ROBINSON . I am a builder, of Albert Road, Walthamstow—I was the owner of 61 to 67, odd numbers, Queen's Road, Walthamstow—since this case has been proceeding I have sold them—early in November last I wrote to various auctioneers about them, among them to Newson & Co, from whom I received these letters of November 20th and 26th, in consequence of which I called at 19, Mansion House Chambers, after the second letter—I found the offices were closed—I called several times, but the last time I saw a person there who said that Newson & Co. called for letters in the morning—on December 6th I received this letter from Newson & Co., asking for a reply to theirs of November 16th, stating that they had secured a purchaser for ₤1,800—I had not, to my recollection, received such a letter—I replied, and received this letter of December 10th from them, expressing surprise at my letter of the 7th instant, after the trouble they had taken in the matter, and stating that they had effected a sale and expected the matter to be carried through, and adding, "Those offices are still ours"—that referred to the fact that I said in my letter that I was informed that they only called for letters, and as I had made an appointment I expected them to keep it—Newsons never introduced a purchaser; I never got any profit from them, and I have sold the property since.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. I have owned property five or six years—I would have paid the commission to them if Newsons had sold the property—I will not swear I did not receive their letter of November 16th, but I do not recollect it—they sent me a telegram, to which I replied by letter, making an appointment for the next morning—I did not give them the name of a solicitor because I thought the firm was a bit shaky, after I had been to their offices and made appointments, and they were never there to keep them—Mr. Houghton was my solicitor—my deeds were at my bank in a box—there was nothing to prevent my getting them—Newsons never told me they had sold the property—there was no one there when I called, and I saw one of my own letters unopened.

Re-examined. I sold the property for ₤1,650—I would have taken the offer for ₤1,800 if it had been good.

ELIZABETH SPENSER . I have lived at 121, Lewisham Road 16 years—I have never known any H. G. Collard live there—this signature witnessing Sparrow's undertaking is like the signature of someone who lives there, but it is not his.

WILLIAM HENRY REYNOLDS . I am house steward at Mansion House Chambers, 11, Queen Victoria Street—in May last Child came to me about taking an office, and I gave him an application form to fill up—he wrote this address, "A. J. Child, Dargyle, Maidenhead," and these references, "Messrs. Hilbred & Co, 28, Victoria Street, S.W.," and "A. J. Wyatt, Esq., Rutland Gate, Belvedere, Kent"—I wrote to the references, and received A. J. Wyatt's reply, that he had had numerous transactions with Child, and that he felt sure I should find him a responsible tenant—I accepted Child as tenant, and he entered into possession of an office—on the door was put" Newson & Co."—the door was generally locked—in November Wyatt came and wanted to remove the goods—I had seen Wyatt more frequently than Child—I asked for the rent, which was

eventually paid—I told Wyatt he was not the tenant, and that I let the office to Child—he said, "I have got authority from Child to remove it'—I refused to let the furniture go, detained the goods till after quarterday, and distrained on them—I knew no one as Newson.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. My duties are to let offices and collect rents—I had a great many inquiries for Child—I received a reference from Palgrave & Co.—I do not doubt they are respectable people—I did not keep that reference back; I gave it up to the solicitor at Bow Street—Wyatt handed me the rent for one quarter—the rent for the broken quarter was not received—I did not ascertain that Child had been in business as an auctioneer in London 28 years.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. I have seen the office open occasionally—I have been employed there 25 years.

DENNIS WILLIAM DOUTHWAITE . I am steward of Gray's Inn—in October last Child came for a set of chambers in Gray's Inn Place, which he agreed to take for three years, at ₤35 a year—he told me he had been, and I think he said he was still a partner in the firm of Newson & Co., of Mansion House Chambers—he gave me as reference G. P. Newson, of Mansion House Chambers, and Mr. Kent, of an address in the Edgware Road—I wrote to those addresses—I got this letter, of October 30th, 1900, from G. P. Newson, marked "Private and confidential"—(This stated that his partnership had terminated on the 29th with Child, who had informed him some weeks ago that he was taking offices on his own account, but that Child would perform any contract he might enter into.)—I have not Kent's reply, but it was satisfactory, and I let Child go into the premises about the end of October—"Farrow & Co." was put on the door—the rent was payable in advance—the half quarter became due on November 9th—that was not paid—I made several applications to Child for the money, first at the beginning of November—I did not know Child was a bankrupt—I believe he furnished the rooms—I distrained about December 20th, and was paid out—the furniture was afterwards removed.

ARTHUR THOMAS GREEN . I am a clerk to Sibley, Cookes & Burrows, house agents, 84, North End Road, West Kensington—in September last we had the letting of 2, Newton Mansions, Queen's Square Gardens—I received an application for a flat from Child, and this reference from A. J. Wyatt—(Dated September 26th, and stating that he had known Child a number of years, and was sure they would find him an excellent tenant, financially and otherwise.)

MARIAN CUNNINGHAM . I live at 2, Newton Mansions, West Kensington—I let a flat there furnished to the prisoner Child, from October 8th last.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. I am married—I did not find Child a desirable tenant—he has not paid for the gas, and a Gladstone bag, a book, and some embroidered sheets are missing—I took no steps to recover them because I could not find him.

GIOVINI VENIO . I am an auctioneer and surveyor at 4 and 5, Warwick Court, Holborn—the prisoner Child was my partner six months—I know this writing—the receipt on this contract and all the signatures.

"G. P. Newson & Co." are his writing, also two of the three letters to Robinson, and the signature of the third.

Cross-examined by MR. ABINGER. The partnership was from the latter end of May to December, 1898, under the style of Hayman & Co.—my portion of the business was respectable—we let a few houses.

ALBERT EDWIN WILLIAMS . I am a clerk to Fuller & Fuller, auctioneers and surveyors, of 70, Queen Street, Cheapside—Wyatt was formerly employed there—I know his writing—these references are in his writing.

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. I have known him over five years—he was respectable and industrious till about 12 months ago.

ALFRED BULL (Detective Sergeant, E). I arrested Roberts on December 12th, and Wyatt on December 23rd, at 40, Blandford Square, N. W.—I was with Detective Walker—I told him we were police officers, and that I held a warrant for his arrest, charging him, with Alfred John Child and William John Roberts, with obtaining ₤50 from Mr. Lacy, of King's Bench Walk, early in the month—I read the warrant to him—he said, "I will come with you"—he afterwards said, "I simply did the introductions; Child is the worst one"—I took him to Bow Street Police-station—when charged he made no reply—about seven that evening I saw the prisoner Alfred John Child detained at Brighton Police-station—I told him I was a police officer from London, and read the warrant to him, which charged him in the same way as Wyatt—he said, "I know of no fraud, and had no intention to do any"—on the Brighton police officer handing me a number of letters Child said, "I see you have got my letters."

Cross-examined by MR. EDMONDSON. I heard at the Police-court, through Wyatt's solicitor stating it, that Wyatt had been to Scotland Yard, but I do not know of any official entry, and the warrant was not in existence when he alleges that he called there—I made inquiries—Wyatt was arrested before the warrant was in existence 12 hours.

Child, in his defence, on oath, said that he had carried on business as an auctioneer for over 20 years, and only tried to dispose of property for Clients in the customary way, and with no intention to defraud, and that he had separated from Wyatt as Newson & Co., except in special matters. Wyatt, in his defence, said that he only introduced business.

GUILTY . ROBERTS— Nine months' hard labour; WYATT— Fifteen months' hard labour; CHILD— Eighteen months' hard labour.

OLD COURT.—Thursday, February 7th, 1901.

Before Mr. Justice Phillimore.

183. CHARLES BROWN SMITH (56) PLEADED GUILTY to that he, being a trustee of ₤2,000 for the use and benefit of Ann and Elizabeth Smith, did convert the same to his own use and benefit, and to the use and benefit of Edward Thorn.

He received a good character.— Six months in the second division.

(For the case of Notalis Salvatore Polombi, tried this day and the next, see Surrey Cases.)

OLD COURT.—Friday, February 8th,1901.

Before Mr. Justice Phillimore.

184. JOHN BUTCHER (19) PLEADED GUILTY to shooting at Violet Ketteridge with intent to do her grievous bodily harm.— Three years' penal servitude.

OLD COURT.—Saturday, February 9th, 1901.

Before Mr. Justice Phillimore.

185. PAUL LEBON (27) , Feloniously administering chloroform to Louise De Ligny, with intent to enable him to steal her goods and money.

MR. COHEN Prosecuted.

The evidence was interpreted to the prisoner and witnesses, where necessary.

LOUISE DE LIGNY . I am a widow, and live at 33, Pelham Street, Kensington—I have lived there nearly five years—on August 28th last a woman named Jeanne Giriot called on me—she wanted to know if I wanted a girl to replace my maid—I refused because I was going to France on September 1st; then she asked me if I wanted a girl for a lodger—I said I lived with my old servant, but if she would pay me two guineas a week she could come, and if she was quite respectable, because I did not want a man in my place—she ultimately came as a lodger on, I think, the next night—she said to me, "I have a young friend from the City; he comes once or twice a week"—I said, "While I am absent you can do what you like with your friend"—I gave her permission to bring her friend once or twice a week—on Sunday, September 2nd, three or four nights after she came, I went out about 10 p.m., leaving my old servant, Anna Le Pesant, at home—Giriot was out—I came back about 11.30—I went straight up to my bedroom—I saw Giriot in the passage—Le Pesant opened the door for me—every night I take a glass of milk, which my servant brings upstairs, with a little piece of bread—on this evening my dog was with me, and I put my bread into the milk and gave it to him, but he would not eat it—I tasted the milk; it was very nasty—I did not drink it; I thought it was poisoned—I was very frightened—I shut my door, and put my bed against it—I did not hear anything in the night—I did not sleep at all—about 8 a.m. I opened my curtains; it was light, and I went to bed again, and to sleep, as I was not frightened—I usually have my breakfast about 8.30—at that time I heard somebody trying to open my door very slowly—I said, "What is it?"—a voice said, "It is me, madame, Jeanne, with your breakfast"—generally my old servant brought my breakfast; Jeanne had never brought it before—I got off my bed, and removed it, and opened the door—Jeanne came in with a tray, and set it out for my breakfast—she put the cup on the table; the tea-cup and tea-pot were empty—I sat on my bed and turned my back to the door—I was in my night-dress—Jeanne put my breakfast on the washstand—I said to her, "Give me my cup of tea"—just at that moment my neck was seized, a cloth was put on my head, a handkerchief was put over my mouth, full of chloroform, and I did not

know any more—I was unconscious for some time—before I became unconscious Jeanne held my legs, and she bit my hand, while the other person put the chloroform over my mouth—I am certain it was chloroform, because five years ago I had an operation, and the doctor gave me chloroform. When I first recovered my senses I could not see anybody—I felt very sick—I heard the woman calling "Charles, Charles, she come back"—at that I was frightened; I wanted to go to the window to cry out—I tried to go, but I was seized—I saw the prisoner then for the first time—he took me by the neck and pushed me into an easy chair which was just opposite my window—I had my back to the window, and he had his face to the light—he said he wanted to strangle me—he said in French, "Have you ₤50, or I kill you"—I said, "No"—he said in French, "Where is your jewellery?"—that is all that was said—Jeanne was beside the chair—that was the first time I had ever seen the prisoner, I shall remember him all my life—he then chloroformed me again with a handkerchief; I do not know if it was the same one—he said, "Let us hurry, and get done with it"—I noticed a wart on his hand; I do not remember which one—I showed it to the inspector when the prisoner was arrested—after a time I opened my eyes a second time; that was about 9.30—it was about half an hour before the police came—when I recovered consciousness I found my wardrobe glass broken, and the door had been forced—I had locked it the night before—the door of the next room, where my travelling trunks were, had also been broken open—some boxes, which had been upstairs, had been brought down, and a great number of things in my bedroom had been put into them—I lost a diamond necklace, a diamond bracelet, a pair of earrings, six rings, and other things, worth altogether about ₤350, ₤30 in gold, two French notes, and nearly ₤2 in silver—the money was in my wardrobe—the boxes with my things in were not shut—it looked as if they had been interrupted—Jeanne knew I had the money, because I wanted to go to France on Monday night, and on the Saturday I had gone to fetch the money—when I came to, these people were not in the room—when I opened my eyes I was dazed—I went to the window to cry out, and I saw Jeanne going across the garden—she went out—she was alone—I did not see the prisoner—I have not seen any of my property since—I had two teeth broken—I was ill after it, and had to stay in bed for a month afterwards—I next saw the prisoner on January 3rd, when he was arrested—when I went with the police to have him arrested I recognised him by his voice before he opened the door—when he opened the door he did not speak to me; he went at the inspector.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. When I went to your house with the police the bell was rung, and you came to the door and looked through a grille—when I saw you I said, "Good-night, Mr. Charles,"and you started back—I did not see you when I was chloroformed the first time—I did not see you for long, but quite long enough to remember you.

By the COURT. Jeanne was about 20 years old; I did not know her before she came to me—I have never seen her since.

ANNA LE PESANT . I am servant to Madame De Ligny; I have been with her for four years—I remember Jeanne Giriot coming as a lodger—on Sunday, September 2nd, she came home at 10.30—I let her in—the prisoner was with her—Madame had gone out—Jeanne said the prisoner

had come to pass the night with her—they both came into the room on the ground floor—Jeanne said the prisoner had to start on a journey at 6 o'clock next morning—I asked Jeanne to take some milk up to Madame, but I took it up myself—next morning I went into the dining-room, where I saw Jeanne; she said, "You are already up, Anna"—I said, "Yes"—she said, "My friend went at 6 o'clock"—I put the dog out into the garden—Jeanne called to me and said, "Come up for a moment"—I asked what for—she said, "To empty the dirty water; my friend has not gone; come up; you need not be afraid; nothing will be done to you"—when I got into the room I was seized by the throat, and chloroform was put on my mouth—I am well acquainted with chloroform, because I have been a nurse in a hospital—it was the prisoner who chloroformed me—I was put on the bed, and was asleep for two hours—when I woke up I was unable to speak—I did not see anybody in the room then—I found myself in the street without remembering how I got there—I called for the police—I next saw the prisoner at the Court—I have not the slightest doubt he is the man who came that day.

Cross-examined. I am perfectly sure you are the man who was with Jeanne on that day at 10 or 10.30 p.m.—I saw you up in the bedroom.

WILLIAM DOUGALL (Police Sergeant) Madame De Ligny made a statement to me on January 3rd—about midnight I was with Inspector Hayter—we went to Tower Cottage, Battersea Rise—the prosecutrix was with us—when we got to the house we made certain arrangements, and Inspector Hayter went with Madame to the gateway, rang the bell, and had a conversation with the prisoner—we could not get admittance, and I climbed over the wall—I opened the gate, and let the inspector and the prosecutrix into the garden—I went to the front door, which was ajar; I pushed it open—the prisoner came out of a bedroom—Madame said in English, "That is the man who stole my jewellery"—the prisoner immediately came at me like a maniac, and caught me by the throat—Inspector Hayter and I struggled with him and sent for assistance—he was placed on the bed, and his hands tied behind him—I searched the house, which had 10 rooms, and found only one occupied; that was the bedroom—we took the prisoner to Lavender Hill Police-station, and then to Walton Street Police-station, where he was charged—he said in English, "I don't know this lady; I have not been in her house"—I searched him, and found on him 10s. in gold, 16s. in silver, 111/2d. in bronze, and 19 pawntickets—on September 3rd I went to the prosecutrix's house, 33, Pelham Street, at 10 a.m.—in the first floor front room I found the wardrobe had been broken open, property strewn about the floor, and some boxes had been broken open—I went into the room on the ground floor which had been occupied by Jeanne—I found in the pocket of a dress lying on the floor this locket (Produced, which contains a photograph of the prisoner—Jeanne Giriot has not been found.

Cross-examined. I did not say in my depositions that the prosecutrix had told me you had a wart on your hand.

GEORGE BROWN (Prison Warder). The prisoner has been in my custody—he has shown me his hands since he has been in the dock; I do not see a wart on either hand.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "About 1.15 a.m. there came a ring at my door; they rang three times. I went to open the door; there is a little girl at the door. I asked the person who was there, Madame, what she wanted; she said she wanted someone who was not in the house, because I was alone. I answered there was nobody only me. Ten minutes or a quarter of an hour after they rung again three times at the garden gate. The house is walled right round. They cannot get into the garden unless they open the door from the inside. I was going to see who was ringing, and just at that time they opened the front door. Two men threw themselves on me; and I defended myself. I could not understand what they were saying; I kept quiet. They came into my room and punched into me; then they took me to the station. They must certainly make a mistake about the business I am charged with; at that time I was in Rouen. The house this happened at is where some women prostitutes live; a lot of people go into the house; they take me in mistake for another. The photograph that has been found I gave to a prostitute about the end of May or the beginning of June. I cannot understand how that photograph happened to be in that lady's house. Between the time they rang and the time they arrested me I had plenty of time to escape; as I was not guilty I never moved from my house. I have no witnesses here."

The prisoner, in his defence, said that he was innocent; that he was not in London at the time of the robbery; that he never knew anybody called Jeanne Giriot; that he had given the photo to a girl with whom he had ceased relations; that he had asked her for his photo back, and some letters he had written, but that he could not get them, as she declared she would keep them to revenge herself if she had a chance; that he knew she had a friend named Jeanne, but he did not know her.

GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Westminster Police-court on August 18th, 1898.— Seven years' penal servitude.

NEW COURT.—Friday and Saturday, February 8th and 9th; and

OLD COURT.—Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday, February 11th, 12th, and 14th,1901.

Before Mr. Recorder.

186. JOSEPH SMITH (45) and CHRISTOPHER CLEOBURY (50) , Unlawfully conspiring to obtain money from Walter Dracon, Walter Noakes, Herbert Hay and others, by false pretences, with intent to defraud.

MR. GRAIN and MR. HUMPHREYS Prosecuted.

MR. A. JONES, K.C., and MR. PETER GRAIN appeared for Smith; and

MR. MUIR and MR. LEYCESTER for Cleobury.

WILLIAM CHARLES COURTNEY . I live at 7, Offey Road, Stockwell, and am a solicitor's clerk—from 1887 to 1897 I was one of the managing clerks to Kingsbury & Turner, solicitors, of Brixton—a Trade Protection Society was carried on in the same building, and Messrs. Kingsbury & Turner were solicitors to it—the prisoner Smith was one of the collectors to it up to 1895, and in that way I became acquainted

with him—he left them and started a business for himself between 1895 and 1897, which was called "The United Kingdom Inquiry and Trade Protection Office," which he carried on at 111, Knatchbull Road, Camberwell, his private house—I went there from time to time, and saw the business being carried on—he was assisted by his son, S. J. H. Smith, who is now about 21 years old—Smith called on me continually for about six months, and suggested that I should leave my employ and become his manager—I said that in my opinion it would require a lot of capital—he said that he had plenty of capital—the negotiations resulted in this document—(Dated December 9th, 1897, by which Smith engaged the witness as manager at a salary of ₤150.)—this is his signature to it, and this is mine—he took offices at 19, Cheapside, three rooms on the second floor—he had one room, the centre room was the solicitor's room, and the outer one the clerk's—a prospectus was prepared; there was one in use, and it was amended, and the name was changed from "Offices" to "Association"—the solicitor is Mr. F. O. Chinnery; Joseph Smith does not appear—the annual subscription is ₤1 1s.—these were printed and sent out in large quantities—at 19, Cheapside, Smith's son acted as cashier part of the time; he was reading for his examination as a scholar part of his time—this circular letter (Produced) was drawn up and issued—when Smith was in London I had opened the letters; he was out all day canvassing to collect members, and when he returned in the afternoon he brought in six or eight documents similar to this(Produced), and sometimes more—they are the names of persons willing to become subscribers at ₤1 1s.—it was his practice to put on those forms the names and addresses of persons, and this is his writing—when he brought them in in the afternoon he gave them to somebody to enter in the subscribers' ledger—the next step was to send out this notice(Produced) for the subscribers to fill in the names and addresses of persons who owed him debts, and if the subscriber did not send anything to collect after six months he was asked for his subscription, and if he took no notice he received notice that if he did not pay by return of post the matter would be placed in the hands of the solicitor, with 1s. 6d. added for expenses—a solicitor's letter was also sent, which was headed "Christopher Cleobury"—(This stated that unless the sum was paid within four days, and 3s. 6d. for charges, legal proceedings would be taken.)—if the subscriber wrote saying that he was not a member, this printed form was sent to him—(Stating that he had signed a printed contract which they could not cancel, but any business that he gave them should receive their best attention.)—when I went to the office a number of forms of that sort were in stock in large quantities—I spoke to Smith about them, and said that it was anticipating complaints, and after that printed forms were not used any more, but they were type-written about half a dozen at a time—when Smith went out he took a card like this(Produced) with him—he very seldom brought in debts to collect for subscribers—persons very frequently came repudiating their signatures—I sometimes saw them or Smith, and Cleobury saw many of them—about nine clerks were employed, who were occupied in sending out notices and other business—I did not pay the salaries till after four months—I paid Cleobury and Smith,

junior, and the other clerks weekly—Mr. Smith paid all the solicitor's out-of-pocket expenses—Chinnery was the solicitor when I went, and he remained till July, 1889—Smith said that Chinnery left because they could not agree, as Cleobury insisted on keeping all the money he earned—when he left I inserted an advertisement by Smith's orders, and Cleobury answered—Smith saw him, and said that he had found a solicitor who would come for ₤2 a week, and who would call on me, and I was to say whether in my judgment he was a competent man—Cleobury called on me with Smith; I asked him if it was quite understood that he would come for ₤2 a week; he said, "Yes"—I said that he would have nothing more; that all the costs would go to the Association—I made inquiries as to his character, and he came about August, 1899—this (Produced) is the petty cash book, I find an entry in it of a payment to Cleobury of ₤2 on July 28th, and that appears several times—here are payments of all kinds in this book, and hearing fees—I received money to pay to the Association, including the solicitor's profit costs—the bank was the City and Midland, Blackfriars branch—I have not seen these books since I left till this moment—I paid out about ₤50 a month—I paid Cleobury till about February, after which Smith said that Mr. Cleobury did not like my paying him, and I was to hand it to him, Smith—on March 5th, 1900, Reg. v. Bice came on in the Bankruptcy Division, and Smith said that he had to make an affidavit at 6 o'clock, and he wanted the book prepared, to show that I was his clerk—Sampson, Cleobury's clerk, was to prepare it—my two years' agreement terminated on November 15th, 1899, after which Smith brought me this letter and asked me to sign it—(This stated that the former agreement having expired, the witness admitted that he had no claim to make, and engaged to remain as clerk at ₤3 a week.)—I did not agree to sign that—I never received any bonus or commissions—I asked him to give me notice to leave—he gave me the notice, and I left on March 30th—before I left he urged me many times to sign that letter, and I refused—while I was there, and while Cleobury was there, an action was commenced against the late solicitor, Mr. Skinner for the return of some documents and some money payments—this is Mr. Skinner's signature to this affidavit—(This was dated February 8th, 1899, declining to act any further for the Association, in consequence of articles in the newspapers, and the way in which the business was carried on.)—these five documents(Produced) are endorsed by Smith, and Nos. 7, 40, 52, 59, and 61 by Cleobury, and one is written by him—Exhibits 71 and 76 are Cleobury's writing, No. 72 is Smith's—after I left Smith's employ I went to see Mr. Lister, my present employer, whom I have known for 12 years, and entered his employment the next day—I afterwards commenced an action against Smith in the City of London Court, and Mr. Lister acted as my solicitor—when I entered Lister's employ I had to make a statement to him about the association, and prepared an affidavit, of which this (Produced) is a fair copy—I do not know what he did with it—I never swore it—this subscribers' ledger is the book in which the names and addresses of persons were entered who were brought in by Smith and other persons, and the amount they agreed to pay, a guinea, with very few exceptions, and if they were not paid a memorandum was made here—the words "Fac-simile traced" means that a fac-simile has been sent to a subscriber who has repudiated his subscription.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I was 10 years with Kingsbury & Turner, and Mr. Lister was a fellow-clerk with me nearly all the time, but not in the same department; he was in the canvassing—Kingsbury & Turner were solicitors to a debt collecting agency—the solicitorial work which went to the High Court was in my department; the rest was County Court—it is the usual practice for debt collecting agencies for canvassers to call on tradesmen and merchants to get them to become subscribers, and the business is carried on both by subscription and commission—before I was with Kingsbury & Turner I was solicitor's clerk to Clayton & Son—they had nothing to do with debt collecting—I have been with Mr. Smith eight years now—he never was a clerk to Kingsbury & Turner—I have heard from him that he was clerk to Stubbs & Co. at the Trade Protection Society—as manager I received all the money, and paid it into the bank—I also assisted the solicitor in actions which he had pending to recover debts—I prepared the writs—I did not keep any books at that time—here is a debt collecting book of 1896, before I was with Mr. Smith—this other begins in January, 1898—this shows the names of the debtors, and the amount of the debts, and the charges—if there was litigation there would be solicitor's charges on letters—the majority of the cases were County Court cases—there were about 36 County Court plaints during the six months after I went, and in more than half it was necessary to litigate, but a large number are entered in the subscription book—the next book commences on January 1st, 1900, and continues to November 28th—if Mr. Smith was not there I opened the letters, and if I was not there somebody else would—as Mr. Smith was very much away very much duty devolved upon me—people would come to the office and complain that they were not subscribers, and I sometimes interviewed them—if I had thought there had been anything seriously wrong I should have thrown up my agreement—I always referred the people to Mr. Smith—about five persons went about collecting, but only one at a time, and all the names they brought would appear in these books—subscribers would send the particulars of their debts by post, but canvassers brought in debts with the orders—I saw very little of the people themselves—I thought they were trying to evade their responsibility, but I sometimes thought they might say, "I never did join your society"—I thought so for a long time—I think it was at the end of 1899 that I first came to the conclusion that there was fraud—I think my agreement had come to an end then—I had been trying for months to get something else, and answering advertisements—I did not decide to leave at all—I did not quarrel with Smith, or he with me—I left on friendly terms, but I did not feel very pleased; I can give you the circumstances—10 days or a fortnight after I left I went to Lister's office, and some time afterwards I told Lister about the circumstance of Cleobury, and he wrote letters to Cleobury—I never had any conversation with Smith about the way the work was conducted—while I was in Smith's office I was appointed by a debtor as the trustee of a small estate, and Smith contended that as I ceased to be manager I should cease to be trustee, but that was not the debtor's view nor the view of Mr. Phillips—I had communication with Mr. Phillips after I left, but

he did not refuse to recognise me—the total amount is not ascertained yet, but ₤20 was the amount in Mr. Smith's hands—I brought an action against Mr. Smith, and Mr. Lister was my solicitor—the money was paid into Court—I am at Mr. Lister's still—I receive ₤2 10s. a week—there is another clerk who receives ₤1—this was in Thavies' Inn—Mr. A. J. H. Smith kept the books and served the process, and assisted in County Court work—his name was always used as secretary—he was usually there—I never thought there was anything wrong during the two years I was there—I found these forms there, and thought it was more likely to bring grist to the mill to have them written, and after that type-writing was used—my objection was that members might object, but I did not think it was a fraud—Mr. Dawson kept the ledger nearly all the time I was there—this is the journal, but it was used as a ledger; it commences at August, 1892, but it soon gets into 1896; there are no entries in 1893; it goes down to 1899—this (Produced) is the cash book—it contains a daily entry of all money received in the office, and another book has the payments—money would be entered from this book into the ledger.

By the COURT. The money collected for debts was all entered in these collecting books—there would be a sum to go to the customer; that would be entered in this journal—the first case is Cutliff, ₤3 8s. 5d. received, and the balance is ₤1 9s. 11d. after deducting the subscription—when the balance was struck the balance was sent to the customer when there was sufficient money in the bank—there were many complaints, but the customers all got paid ultimately.

By MR. JONES. The debts collected were sent out when we had the money; there was no particular day—a cheque sent to Mr. Hoptoun for ₤10 or ₤12 is the only cheque I know to be dishonoured; I do not remember the date—it was subsequently paid through the solicitors.

Cross-examined by MR. LEYCESTER. I made inquiry about Cleobury's character, and found it perfectly satisfactory—the profit went to the association, and he got ₤2 a week—he had a room of his own, with his clerk—he was away twice a week, attending County Court business—there might be 10 or 12 cases a week at County Courts, but there would not be separate attendances for each—he was engaged a great part of his time in conducting High Court cases on behalf of members of the Association—letters addressed to Cleobury would be opened by me or by Mr. Smith—he had no business to do unless Smith or I gave it to him, unless some of the people were complaining, and then anybody would see them—he advised members if they came—this (Produced) is the first letter Cleobury sent, applying for payment of a subscription alleged to be due—it is partly printed, and the client's name is filled in with pen and ink—the matter was not put before him till after an unsuccessful application had been made, but it sometimes went out without his knowledge, and he objected—they were taken to him in a packet, and all signed at the same time, and sometimes signed for him—I signed for him sometimes; he did not object—I had authority to sign his name—I had no idea that the affidavit I made was to be used in a criminal prosecution—Chinnery received a salary at one time, at another time he took his own costs.

Re-examined. I did not swear the affidavit—I made it at Mr. Lister's request—I saw some people who complained about the way their signatures had been obtained, and I spoke to Smith about it—Smith refused to let a canvasser go with him on his rounds, and that attracted my attention—a foot note here says, "The secretary is at the office from 10 to 2"—he was there, but not for the purpose of paying accounts.

ALFRED JOSEPH TEEVEY . I am manager to Mr. Walter Dracon, a grocer, of Bexhill—he has other branches—in the early part of 1898 Smith called on me and said that he represented a Trade Association, and collected debts—I told him I should have to refer to Mr. Dracon, and refused to attend to him—he said that he would send a prospectus on, and asked me to put Mr. Dracon's name on a piece of paper which he gave me—I did so—he took it from a bundle of papers folded over—I did not agree to make Mr. Dracon a member or subscriber to any association, and I did not know that I was doing so.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I heard of the matter again six or seven months afterwards—Mr. Dracon first suggested to me to give evidence in December, 1900; he had already given evidence—when Smith called I thought he was canvassing for members, and that he would send the prospectus to the address I gave him—I do not think there was any print on it, but it was folded as this is now—it did not occur to me to turn it up, I was extremely busy, and was desirous to get rid of him—it was folded, and I do not know whether it was a blank piece of paper.

Re-examined. I have no doubt that it was folded in the way that I have folded this.

WALTER DRACON . I am a grocer, of St. Leonard's, Hastings, and Bexhill—the last witness is my manager at Bexhill—in 1898 I received an account, which I have lost, for one year's subscription with this debt collecting association—I was not aware that I was a subscriber; no debts had been collected for me, and I took no notice of it—after that Smith called at my St. Leonard's shop, and said that he came to collect a guinea for the United Kingdom Association, and showed me a paper bearing my manager's signature, and my name and address; I said that I would inquire of my manager why he signed it, and he left—some time afterwards I received this notice—(This stated that unless the guinea was remitted by return of post, with 1s. 6d. for costs, the matter would be placed in the solicitor's hands.)—I took no notice, and afterwards received this notice—(Stating that unless the amount was paid in 14 days proceedings would be taken.)—on September 29th, 1898, I sent a cheque for one guinea to the association, and denied further liability—the cheque was returned, but I have destroyed it—in May, last year, Smith came to see me again at St. Leonard's, and said that he called for a subscription for my Hastings branch; I asked what he meant; he produced a bundle of papers, and said, "I have your signature"—I said, "Let me have a look at it"—this is it (Produced)—it is signed "W. Dracon, Central Stores, Hastings," but it is not my signature—I said, "This is not my signature"—he said, "Is it your manager's?"—I said, "No," and that I would kick him out—he went out, saying that he would take proceedings to recover the guinea—I said, "The sooner the better"—on May 31st I

received this final notice, but took no notice—on June 18th I received this document, signed "C. Cleobury, Solicitor"—(This stated that unless the guinea and 3s. 6d. were paid, legal proceedings would be commenced.)—I acknowledged that, stating that I should not pay, giving the name of my solicitor—I heard no more about it.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I have a manager at each of my three branches—I live in the suburbs of Hastings—in 1895 and 1896 I was victimised in the same way—I do not recollect Mrs. Hume as a customer in 1896, or Mr. Houghain, a coachman, who left me owing ₤3 9s. 8d, or Mr. Kempstead, a printer, ₤8 6s. 9d., or Mrs. Ratcliff, of 8, Cannon Place, Brighton—I never heard of Mr. Robson, a butcher—Mr. James Springfield did not owe me ₤10 19s.—those were not debts collected—I can refer to books to show that those were not debts recovered for me by the association—Farrell is my manager at Hastings—this is not signed by him, or by any responsible person there—it is in pencil—I have never employed a debt collecting agency, and it would be improper for my manager at Bexhill to do so; I have been a manager myself—I wrote to the City police when I saw the report of these proceedings, and saw Messrs. Humphreys & Son, the solicitors.

Re-examined. To the best of my belief, I have not received anything from this Association.

EDMUND ERMEST WARD . I am a French polisher, of Horse and Groom Yard, Curtain Road—in the spring of 1898 a man called and asked if I would belong to the Trade Protection Society—I said that I had no need of such a society, and that I had no debts to collect—I never signed anything—on October 6th, 1898, I received this acknowledgment for one year's subscription to the Association, but took no notice—on January 26th, 1899, I got this demand for a subscription, and replied, explaining that I had no need for such a society, and that it must be false—on June 12th, 1899, I got this letter—(Threatening to place the matter in a solicitor's hands unless the amount was paid by return of post.)—I wrote and said that I had never signed any document, and they must be mistaken—on June 15th I got this document—(This stated that they held a signed order, and enclosing a copy of it.)—I paid no attention to that—on October 31st I got this letter—(This was from Cleobury, stating that unless the witness paid within four days he would be sued.)—I answered that, saying that I did not intend to pay, as it was a fraud—I was not sued—in December, 1899, Sampson called on me and said that he called from Mr. Cleobury—he brought this paper (Produced), which he said was my signature—I said that it was not; it was very much like it—I said, "I will compare it with the copy you sent me; the man who wrote the copy wrote this"—I compared them by the light—I wrote my name on it in black pencil, at Sampson's request—I work for a number of firms, so that I have no book debts—I receive my money every Saturday, so I had no need of this society—I said that I should keep the paper—Sampson said that if I did I should get a letter from the solicitor in the morning, but I kept it, and in twenty minutes he came back with a young chap about his own age, as a witness—I said, "Well, I will give you the paper back, but I will write my name on it, so that I shall know it again,"—on December 28th I got this letter from Cleobury—(This complained of

the witness's behaviour to their traveller, and stated that the sooner he sent the subscription the quicker he would get over his liability.)—I did not send the money, and heard no more of it.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I recollect the name of the person who called first, but not his features—I receive cash in all my transactions; nobody runs up bills with me—I keep books, as I employ six or seven men—I do no trade besides French polishing—the "E. Ward" in the original and in the copy are both very much like my signature, but I knew that I had signed nothing—the man was about my age and height—I never employed any debt collecting agents in my life.

Re-examined. Prior to receiving Exhibit 58 I had written two letters to them, and signed my usual signature.

W. G. COURTNEY (Re-examined). This endorsement is in Smith's ordinary writing.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. It was Smith's practice to endorse all orders he received when he came back in the evening; I never endorsed them—he would sometimes take the name from the fascia of the shops—I do not think Smith endorsed any orders which he had not received himself—3,000 or 4,000 orders were brought to the Old Jewry.

HERBERT HAY . I am a dairyman, of 42, Childer Street, Deptford—on February 27th I received this document—(This was a final notice to pay ₤1 1s., and stated that previous applications had been made.)—I had received no document before that, nor had anyone called—I wrote to the secretary A. J. H. Smith, and on March 2nd received this reply—(This stated: "In reply to your memo., you are mistaken; you signed an order, of which I enclose a copy.")—the enclosure purported to be a copy of a document which I had signed—I then wrote: "I have made no mistake; my business is not large enough to require the help of an association like yours, and if I had become a member I have received no rules or terms. Let your advertiser call and produce the card you say I signed"—no one called, but on April 7th I received this letter—(Signed "B. Cleobury" and applying for ₤1 1s. due to his clients and 3s. 6d for his charges, to be paid within four days, or legal proceedings would be commenced.)—I discussed the matter with a friend, Mr. Snoswell, a solicitor, and a few days afterwards I received this: "Jan. 18th, 1899. Sir,—Please enter my name as a subscriber of ₤1 1s. per annum—H. HAY, Dairyman"—that looks like my writing, but I never signed any document for this association—I recollect a man calling three years ago about an association which he was canvassing for—I did not become a subscriber, but he asked me to put my name to it, that he might tell the firm that he had called—I took no notice of the solicitor's letter, and no legal proceedings have been taken against me.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. A person did call and explain the objects of a debt collecting association, but I did not sign a paper to become a member—the paper was folded in this way, so that I could not read what was above my signature—this signature is very much like mine, but I will not say it is.

THOMAS SNOSWELL . I am a solicitor's clerk, of 69, Childer Street, Deptford—Mr. Hay is a friend of mine—he handed me the letter he had received from Cleobury, and a day or two afterwards I went to 19, Cheap-side,

and saw Cleobury, taking the letter with me—I said that I had called from Mr. Hay, that he had never signed any document, and if they had any signature it must be a forgery—he said, "I do not think that can be so," and sent for the original and looked at it, and said, "I do not think it can be so, because the man who wrote this has been with us some time; he is not in now; if you like to call again, I will see him in the meantime"—I called again a few days afterwards, and saw Smith, and said, "Mr. Hay says he never signed it, and if you have such a signature, it is a forgery"—he became very indignant, and said, "I took Mr. Hay's signature myself"—I said, "Well, Mr. Hay distinctly denies that he has ever signed any such document"—he said, "If Mr. Hay likes to call here, he can see it"—he produced Exhibit 31, and I took it, and showed it to Mr. Hay, and a few days afterwards I took it back and gave it to one of the clerks.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I told him that it was unfair to expect a tradesman to leave his business to come there—I compared the signature with Mr. Hay's signature, and I thought it was his—when Smith said that he took the signature himself he emphasised it, and therefore I remember it.

Cross-examined by MR. MUIR. I said to Cleobury, "It was probably done by one of your canvassers"—it was after that that he said, "The canvasser who did it has been with us some time"—I first made the suggestion about the canvasser—the date is in ink, and in a different ink to the address—the signature is in blue pencil.

THOMAS HOLMES . I am a house decorator, in partnership with my two brothers, in Freeman's Court, Cheapside—on December 5th, 1900, I received this account by post; it is for ₤1 1s. due to this Association—I took no notice of it, and on February 7th I received another in the same form as the first—I took no notice, and on March 21st I got this final notice, stating that unless I paid the matter would be placed in the hands of a solicitor—I took no notice, and on May 18th I got this solicitor's letter, signed by Cleobury—I then went to 19, Cheapside, and saw Smith, and asked him the meaning of it; he said, "I will soon show you the transaction"—he then showed me this document No. 3—it is not my signature, and not at all like it—my two brothers were not in partnership with me on February 23rd, 1899—nobody but them had authority to sign the name of the firm, and it is not like the signature of either of them—Smith said, "You signed it yourself in your own shop; if that is not your signature, show me what your signature is like," handing me a blue pencil—I refused, and left, and consulted my solicitor.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. He did not say that he wanted to compare the signature—I refused to put it on that paper—he did not offer me any paper.

EDWARD HOLMES . I am a brother of the last witness, and in partnership with him—this signature is not mine.

CHARLES HOLMES . I am in partnership with my brothers—this is not my signature—I know nothing of this association.

EDWARD MARTIN . I manage the business of Mrs. Elizabeth Browby at Eastbourne—early in 1899 Smith called and said that he represented the United Kingdom Trade Protection Society, that they collected debts,

and had agents all over the kingdom—he was very presssing, and at last he asked me to give him a billhead to show his firm that he had called, and I gave him this one (Produced)—I did not write on it—before September, 1899, I received a letter, stating they had much pleasure in seeing our names as subscribers—I wrote and said that it was quite a mistake; no one had been authorised to place our names on the books—on December 18th I received this reply: "In reply to your memorandum, you are certainly making a mistake; you signed a memorandum, a copy of which I enclose for your inspection"—what was supposed to be a copy was enclosed—it is dated June 5th, which was about the time he called—I did not answer that, but I mentioned it to our Chief Constable—on June 13th I got this letter—(Stating that he must pay ₤1 4s. 6d. within four days.)—I paid no attention to that, and on June 19th I received this printed letter (Produced)—I paid no attention to that, and about a fortnight afterwards Smith called on me and said, "I have called for you to settle this account"—I said, "I do not owe you anything"—he said, "I have the agreement here, signed"—I said, "Who is it signed by?"—he said, "By you"—I said, "Will you let me see it?"—he held out this paper (Produced), keeping it in his hand—he held very tight, and so did I—I pulled it, and it came in half—it is exactly like my writing, but it is not mine—he became very excited, and flaw at me, and snatched the piece out of my hand, and said that he would prosecute me for destroying a legal document, and I should get three years—I said, "You do so; it is just what I should like you to do"—he left the shop quickly, taking the two pieces with him—no proceedings had been taken, and I have never heard any more.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. This is an exact copy of my signature; he got that when I wrote to him—that was the only document from which he could get my signature—I swear that I did not sign a document when he called.

By the COURT. I first heard of this prosecution just before Christmas; Mr. Brown told me—there was a report in the papers, but I have mislaid it.

WALTER NOAKES . I am a bootmaker, of 66, Station Road, Bexhill—about September 5th, 1898, Smith, I believe, called on me and said that he represented the United Kingdom Debt Collecting Association, and asked if he could do any work for me in the way of collecting debts—I said, "No; it is done by a firm of solicitors"—he said, "I can do it cheaper; we only charge a small percentage on the work actually done"—he left a form on the counter—I told him it would be of no use, and would lead to no business—he went outside, and my opinion is that he took my name and address from the fascia of the shop—he had a pencil—in November, 1898,1 received an acknowledgment for ₤1 1s. for a subscription to the association, which I answered, saying that I had no knowledge of the association—on January 5th, 1899, I got this application for another subscription—this is my reply—(This was found at the office, and in it the witness stated that he had no knowledge of the Association.)—I then received this: "January 7 th. Dear Sir,—I enclose copy of your order enrolling you as a member of the Association"—the copy was very like my writing, and in some

places I should take it for mine, but it has marks of copying—here are some of my cheques (Produced)—probably a week afterwards I filled up a form for a Trade Directory—that is the only thing I can remember—I have had applications which I destroyed—I paid no attention to the last letter, but I believe I banded it to my solicitor—on December 8th I received this printed form of a solicitor's letter, signed "T. Cleobury" (per pro somebody), and stating that an action would be brought in four days—I instructed my solicitors to defend any action, but no action was taken—in August or September Smith came into my shop in a hurried fashion and said, "I have called for my guinea"—I said, "I am not a member of the association"—he said, "Yes, you are; here is your writing"—I said, "Let me look at it"—he said, "Oh, no, no," but he held it and let me look at it—I said, "It's a very good imitation"—he said, "I must have the money before I go"—I said, "I must refer you to my solicitor"—he said, "I do not acknowledge your solicitor"—I said, "If you don't go I shall call my workmen to put you out of the shop," and he left—I did not pay, and I afterwards got an application for ₤2 2s. and 3s. 6d. and 1s. 6d. for solicitor's costs, as far as I can remember—I tore it up, and took no notice—I have heard nothing since.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I am a very busy man—I am a Town Councillor and a Poor Law Guardian—(The witness signed his name at Counsel's request.)—the "N" in the original order is like the "N" in this cheque, but different from the "N" in the letter I sent—I do not suggest that Smith is the man who called in the first instance, but he was the man in the second instance—I do not think it was Smith who called about the Directory—in my opinion it was a younger man—I have no recollection of signing anything, but it is a long while ago—the copy they sent me was laboured.

GEORGE LIMBY . I am a bootmaker, of 10, Sanford Street, Bedford Row—on November 22nd, 1899, I received this letter—(Applying for ₤1 1s., the witness's subscription to the United Kingdom Debt Collecting Association.)—I knew nothing about the Association, and took no notice—in May, 1900, I received this document—(A demand for ₤1 2s. 6d., and threatening proceedings.)—I took it to my solicitor, Mr. Bromley, and afterwards wrote to Mr. A. J. H. Smith a letter, of which this is a copy—(Declining to recognise the claim.)—I then got this answer: "Before writing to your solicitor I should like to point out to you that you signed a document of which this is a copy"—I took that to my solicitor—on April 24th, 1899, Smith called on me and asked if I would allow him to put my name in a Trade Directory—I said that I had no objection if there was to be no charge—he asked me to put my name on a paper—he had a bundle of them, with an elastic band round them; it was doubled over, and I signed my name—it was folded across the centre longways—this is it—(This being unfolded, stated: "Please enter my name as a subscriber to the Association.")—this is my signature, but I thought I was signing for the Trade Directory.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. After my solicitor had written to the Incorporated Law Society, I was asked to give evidence—I am positive that Smith did not give me a card—I did not know that he was connected with the Debt Collecting Association; nothing was said about it—I did not

understand that I was subscribing to anything—if he had said that there would have been a charge, I would not have signed it—this fold concealed the top—I do not think the "L" in my signature goes above the folding—my solicitor sent a cheque for the subscription—before I went to the Mansion House I reflected and remembered that a Trade Directory was mentioned—it may be I consulted Mr. Bromley at the end of May; I did not tell him about the Trade Directory the first time—he saw the signature, and advised me to pay.

WILLIAM HENRY MILLER . I am a clerk to Edward Bromley, a solicitor, of 43, Bedford Row—Mr. Iindley consulted him in May, 1900, and handed me a letter for Mr. Lindley to sign, which he did, and I posted it—we then communicated with the Law Society.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I was present at the conversation with Mr. Iindley each time; about twice.

FRANCIS ARTHUR BROWN . I am managing clerk to Messrs. Humphreys & Son, solicitors for the prosecution—I have had this matter in hand since June—I took down George Lindley's statement on July 19th, 1900, and endorsed the date at the time.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I took the statement down at his shop—he was the first witness for the prosecution I saw, except Mr. Bromley—I did not see Mr. Courtney till two months afterwards—I think July 19th was the first time I saw Mr. Lindley.

WALTER DRACON (Re-examined). I gave the Association an account in the name of Springhall to collect; his account finished at the end of 1896; it was for ₤10 19s. 5d.—I have not had one penny of it—my stockbroker has written it off as a bad debt—I never knew till last Friday that they had collected any of that money for me—it appears that they have collected ₤2 18s. 6d. of it—Smith called on me in 1898 with regard to another subscription, and again in May—he never mentioned anything about the sums he had collected for me.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. This signature is my manager's at Bexhill—my name is entered for the first time in the books of the association on September 19th, 1896—Springhall's debt occurred in the early part of 1895—I do not know who put the collection of that debt into Smith's hands—my manager at Bexhill has given him an order, but the Springhall debt has nothing to do with the Bexhill business—I have never seen a cash account sent into us on October 2nd, 1896—if it had been sent it would have gone through the cash, book—I look after the finance—I do not keep the books personally; I have a ledger clerk.

A. J. STEABLEEN (Re-examined). This document (Produced) is dated April 28th, 1897, and the signature on it is mine—it was folded up when I signed it—I signed it, so that the particulars of the Association should be sent on.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. There was nothing on the document as it was presented to me to indicate that it was a subscription payable to a debt collecting agency—I signed it without seeing the top—I had no idea that I wad making my employer liable to pay ₤1 1s. a year; I had no authority to do so—the document was held over the desk, when I had three or four customers whom I was anxious to attend to.

AUGUSTUS EDWIN EMERY . I am a bootmaker, at 40, Great St.

Andrew's, W.C.—I remember Smith calling on me in May, 1900—he handed me a card similar to this of the Trade Protection Association—he said the firm he represented were open to collect debts and inquire into the status of people, to know if they should have credit—he said if I had any business to do he would do it for me—I said I had scarcely any debts; my business is almost solely a cash business—he also handed me this document, on which one is to place any debts you require to be collected—I was busy at the time—I said, "You might leave this, and I will have a look into it"—he said, "I cannot leave you this one, I will send you one by post"—I said, "Very well"—he said, "Put your name and address on that"—he handed me a pencil, and I put it down on the place he showed me, and away he went—I did not read anything about its being a subscription for a guinea—I should say this (Produced) is very near my signature, and if I saw it on larger paper I should say it was mine—I never put my name on any paper with the intention of rendering myself liable for a guinea to this Association—I had never seen Smith before; I never saw Exhibit 62 before I saw it at the Mansion House—I also got No. 63, with a letter on the back of it, saying they would be glad to receive my orders with my name under the articles of association, and that the guinea would be payable between 1900 and 1901—I wrote back, and told them I had no intention of becoming a member, that nothing like that had been stated, and under the circumstances I returned No. 63, and would have nothing more to do with them—I then got No. 64—(This was signed "A. J. H. Smith," and stated that he had seen their representative, who said he had explained the terms of membership fully to the witness, and that they could not take his name off their books till the end of his year in May, 1901.)—I took no notice of that—about October 15th I got No. 65, which is a statement of account for one year's subscription—I again wrote, and repudiated all liability, and that I intended to take the opinion of a Judge as to my liability—about October 23rd I got No. 66—(Signed "C. Cleobury," and stating that they would take his name off in March next; that till then they would collect any debts he sent them, but whether he sent any work or not, he would have to pay his subscription, according to his signed contract.)—I took no notice of that, and heard no more of it.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I inferred that I should have to pay something if I had dealings with them—I am positive the paper I signed was larger than this one—I had no intention or desire to become a member.

ARTHUR MARSHALL LISTRR . I am a solicitor, of 19, Thavies' Inn—on March 20th, 1900, Courtney came to see me—he had been my clerk when I was with another firm—in consequence of what he said I wrote this letter to Cleobury on the same day—(Stating that he had had an interview with Mr. Courtney, and would be pleased to see Cleobury in reference to some remarks of Courtney's, as apparently some explanation should be forthcoming, and asking him to call.)—I got this letter, dated March 21st, from him—(Stating that he was surprised at his letter; that he had nothing to say with regard to Mr. Courtney; that the witness had not said what the substance of the remarks were, but that he thought he knew what they were, and that his letter seemed very vague

and extraordinary.)—I wrote this letter on March 22nd to him—(Stating that he was sorry he had not treated the witness's letter seriously, and that he now proposed to ask Mr. Courtney to put his statement into the form of a statutory declaration.)—after that I had several interviews with Cleobury; the subject of them was his position in the association—on April 19th I saw him at my office—I told him that Mr. Courtney had told me that there were continual rows at the association with people who called and said they were never members; that I had seen several reports in the newspapers, running it down and mentioning Cleobury by name—I told him also of a motion in bankruptcy re Price, in which the solicitor for the creditors was attacking the association, and making a very strong affidavit; that Mr. Courtney had adopted the motion, and that the day before the hearing Cleobury had prepared a statement setting out how the salaries were paid—I also told him that Mr. Courtney said he was engaged there at ₤2 a week, and that all his profits went to Smith; that he, Cleobury, had no banking account, and that Smith was taking out his certificate for him—I said, "It is a very serious thing, and there is evidently something very rotten about the association, and I cannot understand your going there"—I had met him once before in a trial on January 30th—he said, "I did not go there from choice, I went there through necessity"—I said I thought it was a very serious tiling—he said he would leave, but at his age it was difficult to get anything else to do, and if he left he should be in the street—I said, "I am awfully sorry, but I cannot be weak-minded enough to let this thing go on. I do not wish to act harshly and hurriedly, and you had better look out for something else to do"—on March 20th I commenced an action on behalf of Courtney as his solicitor against Smith, on which Cleobury acted as Smith's solicitor—in the course of that action I served on him a notice to admit certain documents—on April 24th Cleobury attended at my office for the purpose of inspecting the documents—he inspected them in my presence—they were four cuttings from newspapers; the Star of April 8th, 1899; the City Press of April 1st, 1899; Truth, February 22nd, 1900; and Truth, April 5th, 1900—in my presence Cleobury read the cuttings through—(MR. MUIR objected to these documents being read, and they were withdrawn.)—I continued to write letters to Cleobury till June 20th, 1900—he did not answer them—when he read the comments in the papers he said, "They are scurrilous; I have never seen them before"—I made no reply—getting no reply to my letter of June 20th, 1900, I instructed Courtney to prepare this draft affidavit, which he did—on August 2nd, at my invitation, Cleobury attended at my office and read it—he said, "It is a jumble of truth and lies, but I will leave"; he meant leave the Association—(The affidavit of William Charles Courtney was here put in and read.)—I wrote to Cleobury on August 15th, but got no reply, and on August 18th I handed the affidavit to the Solicitors' Law Society.

Cross-examined by MR. MUIR. Courtney came to me on April 3rd, but I practically engaged him on January 30th, which was before he had left Smith's employment—all I knew about Cleobury's position at Smith's I obtained from Courtney—I saw the newspapers—Courtney supplied the

information to Truth on the last occasion—the affidavit never was lodged; it was shown to Cleobury on August 2nd; it was prepared after June 15th—I first showed it to anybody connected with the Incorporated Law Society on August 19th—on August 18th Mr. Brown, Messrs. Humphreys' managing clerk, called on me, but I declined to discuss it with him; he was not an admitted man—I did not say to Cleobury, "Why don't you leave?"—it came from him—I was glad to get out of it in that way—when he said he was going I said, "Well, why don't you go?" and he said it was difficult for him, at his age, to get a clerkship

WILLIAM GEORGE SAMPSON . I live at 40, Parr Road, Finsbury Park—I was formerly in the employment of Mr. Chinnery, who was then solicitor to the Association—I remained with him till July, 1899, when he resigned—when he left, Smith asked me to stay on—soon afterwards Cleobury became solicitor; I became his clerk, my salary being paid by Courtney—I sat in Cleobury's room—I left about June last—I recollect the matter of re Price—it was on for hearing about March 5th, 1900—this book (Produced)was handed to me; I do not remember the date, or who gave it to me—it was blank then—Cleobury told me I was to put his nett costs on one side, and the other costs on the other side, such as salaries, postages, etc.—he told me Courtney's salary was 30s. a week, and he told me to put ₤1 a week for mine—the entries in it, from September 11th, 1899, to April 28th, 1900, are in my writing—after April 28th there are some entries in pencil, and some in ink; they are all in the writing of A. J. H. Smith, the prisoner's son—after April 28th there are eight pages in my writing—I think Smith, jun., made it up, because I neglected to do so—the matter of re Price was settled, and this book was never used—Cleobury's applications for the payment of subscriptions were sent out two or three times a week—some days there would be 40 or 50 sent out; sometimes they were signed by Cleobury, and sometimes per procuration—when Cleobury signed them I believe they were placed on his table, and he signed them one after another—sometimes only a dozen were sent out in a day—I was instructed by Smith to call on Mr. Ward about paying his subscription—he handed me a letter from Mr. Ward, repudiating it—I went and saw Ward—I do not know the date—I took his letter with me and showed it to him; he said it was not his signature on the document—I asked him to write his name down on the same document, so that I could compare them—I said I thought it was something like his signature—I then asked him to band me back the document—he said, "No, I shall keep this"—he did not say why—I did not get the guinea—I went out and returned in a few minutes with my friend, and again asked him to give me back the document, and he handed it to me—I told Cleobury what had taken place—that was last year—Cleobury said he would write to him—I do not know if I saw him write it—this is his signature—the letter is to Ward, and is dated December 28th, 1899—(This stated that Ward's behaviour had been very bad, and that the sooner he paid the subscription which was overdue, the quicker he would get rid of his liability in the matter.).

Cross-examined by MR. MUIR. I did not go through the batches of forms to see if they were all for subscriptions, I had nothing to do with them—I know hundreds of letters were sent out for payment of debts due to

subscribers—a great many of the debts were paid to the office, and the money paid to the creditors—sometimes we had to use the money for expenses, County Courts and other things—some of the debts we recovered were under ₤2, in which practically no costs were recovered from the County Court, there were about a dozen cases like that—the majority of debts which passed through our hands were under ₤10—I only remember one case in which the debt was not paid over—I believe cheques were sent out to subscribers for the debts which had been collected, less the commission—if a solicitor's letter was sent out it would appear in Cleobury's postage book—I know a considerable sum was collected by means of the solicitor's letters—I left because Cleobury gave me notice—he did not find any fault with me while I was there—I did not see anything to lead mo to think that things were not properly conducted, except that people used to come in occasionally and complain and refuse to pay the guinea—that occurred in Mr. Chinnery's time as well as in Cleobury's—this printed form (Exhibit 8) was never used in Cleobury's time—it may have been used as a type-written form; I do not know if it was or not—it did not pass through the solicitor's department—I know forms like Exhibit 7 were sent out by the firm, outside the solicitor's office—I do not know to what extent it was done.

Re-examined. Mr. Courtney would generally open the letters in the morning; they would afterwards be put away in the back office, not in Cleobury's room—I daresay I have seen 60 or 80 letters of complaint from persons who have had subscriptions demanded from them, from after Chinnery left until I left—I had nothing to do with the collecting of debts—I kept no book showing that the money received from the Court was sent out of the coffers of Smith.

JOHN THOMAS DAY . I am manager to a shoe and leather company, and in 1894 I was with two others, the proprietors of the Drapers' World, and had the lease of the second floor at 19, Cheapside—in 1897 I was interested in the lease, and granted the sub-lease to Smith on December 20th, 1897—it is granted in the name of A. J. H. Smith—after this prosecution had commenced the prisoner Smith called on me and asked me to release him from the lease—I did not know him—I said, "Are you my tenant, or in your son my tenant, because I notice the lease is in the name of A. J. H. Smith, which is the name of your son"—he said, "Yes, there was a mistake made by the solicitor in drawing the lease; I adopted the name to save trouble"—he has always paid his rent.

CHRISTOPHER MAUGHAN . I am manager to W. Cave & Co., printers, of Brixton—we have done printing for Smith for many years—the printed documents which have been put in in this case have been printed by us—we printed them from time to time, from 1,000 to 10,000 at a time—we also printed letter-paper on the instructions of Smith, headed with the name of Cleobury—we were paid for all the printing by Smith, never by Cleobury.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. About four years ago we employed the Association to collect four or five debts of ours—we were paid in a straightforward way by the Association.

JAMES HENRY DOUGLAS . I am cashier at the London, City &

Midland Bank, Blackfriars branch—since 1897 Smith has been a customer of ours—nobody had authority to draw upon his account except himself—we had no account in the name of the United Kingdom Inquiry and Trade Protection Association, or anything of that sort.

HENRY PHILLIPS (Police Inspector, City). On November 28th I went to 19, Cheapside, with a warrant for the arrest of Cleobury—it charged him with conspiring with Smith to defraud Frederick Holmes—I read the warrant to him—he said, "I do not know Mr. Holmes; I only act as solicitor to the Association; it is an abominable thing to go and make a declaration like that"—he was taken to the station, where the chief inspector said to him, "I suppose you have had the warrant read to you; do you understand it?"—he said, "Yes, but I do not quite understand it"—it was read to him again—he said, "I never received the money; I do not know the man; I simply acted as solicitor"—Constable Stewart and I searched the offices, and took away several thousand letters and some books.

JOHN STEWART (City Policeman). After Cleobury's arrest I took away a number of books and documents from the office of the Association; I did not take away more than half of what was there—I have looked through the papers and letters, and among them I found the letter from Noakes (Ex. 42)—I have looked for letters written by Mr. Hay, Mr. Dracon, Mr. Martin and Mr. Ward, but have been unable to find any—I found the original subscription forms—from amongst the papers I have made a bundle of 1,200 letters—I have looked through them, and have come to a conclusion about them—(MR. JONES objected to the witness giving his opinion with regard to the contents of the letters.)—I also found 20 press copy letter books, of which 14 were in Cleobury's office—I have been through the last four of them in point of date (Produced)—they are from December 8th, 1898, to November 17th, 1900—there are from 900 to 1,000 documents in the form of Exhibit 49—Smith's son has been through the 1,200 documents; I do not know if he has been through the letter books—Smith, jun., has made notes on the forms of complaint—amongst other books I found Exhibit 67, written by Sampson—I also found this affidavit of Mr. Chinnery, the late solicitor.

Cross-examined by MR. JONES. I think the correspondence I found extended from 1896 to 1900—there are some thousands of letters at the Police office now—I left as much again behind at the prisoners' office—I thought I had sufficient; I think I found about 82 books—I cannot say how many there were in reference to the business; about 20, I should think—most of the letters were in pigeon holes in the general office—I did not examine the books; the only ones I have looked at are some of the ledger books.

Cross-examined by MR. MUIR. The four books I examined contained from 900 to 1,000 letters; a great many of them are signed "A. J. H. Smith"; some of them have Cleobury's signature to them—I do not know if it is his writing—he did not, to my knowledge, sign any form similar to No. 49.

EILEEN AUGUSTA MAGINN . I am a lady typewriter—in October, 1900, I saw an advertisement in a newspaper with reference to 19, Cheapside—I went there and saw Smith and another man, whom I know now

as "A. J. H. Smith"—later on I was engaged by the prisoner Smith as a type-writer, and entered upon my duties on November 4th or 5th—I answered complaints of this description (Exhibit 49)—I cannot say how many letters I would type in a day—my hours were from 9.30 to 6, during which time I was engaged typing or taking notes,—on November 19th I was looking out for another situation, and I spoke to Cleobury and asked for a testimonial—I did not get the situation I was trying for, and I told Cleobury so—he said, "I am sorry you have not got one, because this place is all a fraud, and you ought to try and get out of it as quickly as you can"—he said, Smith would get me in no end of a bother if I did all he asked me for—he turned up a piece of paper that was on his desk and said, "This is how Mr. Smith gets signatures; he asks people to sign the paper when they are busy"—he said something more, but I did not quite take it in—after that I objected to write any more letters on Cleobury's paper.

Cross-examined by MR. MUIR. I think it was on the same day that Cleobury gave me the testimonial that I had this conversation with him—I was the only one in the room with him—I think the conversation could be heard by Henry Sheldon, the junior clerk, because he said to me when I came out, "Have you also been warned? I have been warned"—I think that is all he said—I saw Inspector Holmes at 19, Cbeapside—I do not think I spoke to him there—I did not know what the charge was till next day—I did not say any thing "about this conversation at the Police-court—when I first went to the office I was not well—at the end of the week Smith said he thought the work was too hard for me—I think it was at the instigation of his daughter that he kept me on while I was looking for another situation—I had not been in regular employment for some time.

FREDERICK HOLMES (City Detective Inspector). On November 29th I found Smith in custody at Tamworth—I read the warrant in the case of Holmes to him—he said, "Who is Frederick Holmes?"—I said, "He is a member of a firm of builders and decorators in Lawrence Lane, Cheapside, London"—he said, "I have his signed contract"—I found upon him a number of cards similar to this—I found this other on him, "Flint & Co, British and Foreign Inquiry Office"—he was a canvasser at the time—he had a book with him with a number of documents in it (Produced)—I also found this letter to him from Cleobury—(Stating that Smith had promised Cleobury that he should have a separate banking account to keep him safe; that he was in a dreadful position, through not having one, and through the two businesses being muddled up together.)—I also found these letters of complaints on him—(No. 73, dated October 30th, 1900, from C. W. Chard, stating that he had never intended to become a subscriber to the association. No. 74: From H. Hawkins, dated April 12th, 1897, stating that he had pat his name in the book on the understanding that he would not incur the slightest liability, and that he would send the notices to the Public Prosecutor to have the matter sifted, and that they could summons him if they liked. No. 75: From the National Association of Master Bakers and Confectioners, dated April 6th, 1897, and stating that they did not see their way to recommend Mr. Buckingham to pay the account sent him.)—I also found on him 119 signed subscription forms of various

dates from January, 1897, to 1900;—also about 860 subscriptions, which seemed to be errors, from ₤1 1s. to ₤6 6s.—some of them bore the names of persons carrying on business in Tarn worth, where he was arrested.

Evidence for Smith's Defence.

WILLIAM CASH . I am one of the firm of Cash, Son & Co., chartered accountants, 90, Cannon Street—in pursuance of instructions, I have examined the books found at 19, Cheapside—I found a list of members, showing the date of their joining, with amount of their subscriptions—five books, called registers, containing details of debts placed in the hands of the association for collection, and the amounts collected—also three ledgers showing transactions for members, and amounts received on their accounts; three County Court ledgers containing payments made in respect of summonses issued—roughly, some 500 or 600 summonses were taken out yearly—I also found two cash books, petty cash books and other small books of account—I have drawn up a tabulated statement showing the amounts collected—in 1896 ₤116 odd, 1897 ₤522 odd, 1898 ₤854, 1899 ₤552, and up to November, 1900, ₤402—I found in addition, on going through the registers, considerable amounts paid direct to the members in consequence of the applications made to debtors by the association, but the evidence is not sufficiently reliable to fix any figure.

Cross-examined. I verified, as far as I could, the book from which I took the amounts of the collections paid to members, with the bank pass book, and satisfied myself that they were genuine payments for the last two years—I tested it in the ordinary accountant's way—for the six years I have taken, from 1895 to the end of November, 1900, the total amount of commission earned was ₤458, but that is not the total income.

Smith, in his defence, said on oath, that he had been a traveller in Stubbs' Agency, and afterwards carried on a debt collecting business, and had subscribers in all parts of the country, and that all his transactions appear in his books; that when a member sent debts to collect, he sent to the debtor, and if he did not reply, a final notice was sent, and then a solicitor's letter; that he used to carry the forms of application always folded in the same way, and sent to subscribers, who questioned their liability, a copy of their signature made by his daughter, by placing a blank form against a window in a strong light against the original; that he never represented those signatures as being the originals; that he never obtained signatures by writing to people and then representing that they had signed the subscription forms; that the papers were not folded so as to hide the print at the top; that he obtained Dracon's, Ward's, Holmes's, and Mortimer's signatures himself, and saw them sign the form; that it was not true that he gave Limby a folded paper, and said that it was for a Trade Directory; and that Cleobury had nothing to do with getting subscriptions.

CHARLES TAYLOR . I am manager of Cripps & Co., of Tunbridge Wells, nurserymen—they have been subscribers to Smith's Association for several years, during which time they have collected from about ₤1,500 to ₤2,000—all the amounts have been paid over, and the business conducted in a satisfactory way.

ARTHUR JOSEPH HAMPDEN SMITH . I am 21, and have been assisting my father on and off for the last five years—we used to issue about 50 County Court plaints at a time—some debtors sent direct to the subscribers.

Cross-examined. I acted as secretary of the Association—I ceased to be secretary because I intend going in for the law.

Re-examined. Since May, 1899, I do not believe my name appeared on any of the forms, but the old ones were used up.

EDWIN SAMUEL BATES . I am one of the firm of Bates & Sainsbury, 135, Borough High Street, stationers—about five years ago I became a member of Smith's Association—Smith collected a large number of small debts for us, and always paid them over—our business together was very satisfactory.

BENJAMIN CROOP . I carry on business at Clapham Common, and I and 2, Acre Lane, Brixton, also at Herne Bay, as undertakers and builders—I think I have been a member of the association since it came into existence—they have collected a large number of debts, and afforded every satisfaction.

DAVID BANKS . I am a tailor, of 142, Acre Lane, Brixton—Smith called on me about 1897, and explained the objects of the association, and I became a member—I have no complaint to make of them.

WILLIAM ALBERT FOSTER . I am a builder, of 5a, Cumberland Road, Dulwich, and became a member of the association in July, 1899—they have recovered debts for me—someone called upon me and explained the objects of the association—I thought them fair and reasonable, and have no complaint to make.

GEORGE MITCHELL . I am a builder, of 122, Larkhall Lane, Clapham, and have been a member of the association since 1898—they have collected debts, and always paid them over—everything has been satisfactory.

HENRY SEARLE . I am an outfitter, of 99, St. James's Road, Brixton—I joined the association the year before last—they have collected a few debts for me—I am very satisfied with them.

OTTA OOLLE . I am a partner in Tuhten & Co., 18, Ely Place, merchants—I joined the association in 1898—they have collected debts for me—they have always paid over the money, and everything has been satisfactory.

The prisoner Cleobury, in his defence, on oath, said that his father was a solicitor and had been Under Sheriff, that he joined Smith's Association in 1899, at a salary of ₤2 a week, and did the solicitor's work, and thought that the business carried on was perfectly legal, and he had no suspicion there was anything fraudulent; that he did not have the conversation with Miss Maginn that she suggested, and did not fold up a piece of paper as she described, nor tell her that was the way Smith obtained the signatures.

Evidence for Cleobury's Defence.

HENRY SHELDON . I was 15 last March—I was a clerk in the service of this Association, and was employed there when the prisoners were arrested—I remember Miss Maginn being there as a type-writer—I never overheard any conversation between her and Cleobury in which it was said that the firm was a fraud, or any conversation of the kind—I never had any conversation with her on the subject—I never asked her, "Have you been warned?"—I never told her that I had been warned, or anything of the kind.

Cleobury received a good character. CLEOBURY— GUILTY . Strongly recommended to mercy by the JURY and the Prosecution. SMITH— GUILTY . Eighteen months' hard labour. CLEOBURY— Six months in the second division.

NEW COURT.—Monday and Tuesday, February 11th and 12th, and Thursday, February 14th; and

OLD COURT.—Friday, February 15th, 1901.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

187. ROBERT GEORGE PORTEOUS (47) and GEORGE HERBERT FRANCIS (35) , Conspiring with Pierre Carton and others to defraud Rogers Ebden and others of ₤10 and other sums. Other Counts: For obtaining money and property by false pretences, with intent to defraud.

MESSRS. AVORY, MUIR, GUY STEPHENSON, and JAY Prosecuted; MR. BLACKWELL appeared for Porteous, and MESSRS. BURNIE and SELLS for Francis.

CHARLES JOHN PARKER . I am a steam printer at Herne Hill—I have known Pierre Carton nine or ten months, and printed racing circulars for him—about November 10th I received from a person who appeared to be a clerk an order to print 10,000 circulars similar to this, with a share application form attached—(This was a circular and application form issued by Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co., stock and share brokers, of 207, High Holborn, dated November 23rd, 1900, guaranteeing 200 per cent, on share transactions entrusted to them, and stating that they were the oldest and most reliable firm, and had the experience of over a quarter of a century, and had not made a single loss for their clients that year.)—I was paid ₤5 on account—on October 24th I printed 2,000 prospectuses of Hunt, Marshall, of 133, Oxford Street, for Carton, of which this is the proof—(Dated November 7th, headed "Private and Confidential," and stated that ₤10 invested would make a profit of ₤20 or ₤30 in a few days.)—there was a similar form of application attached—I agreed to have them ready by 4 p.m. on November 23rd—Carton and the clerk fetched them in a cab—addressed envelopes had been sent to me the day before, and I put the circulars in them and stamped them, and I was paid the balance of my account, ₤14 10s., in cash—on November 28th the clerk gave me an order for 10,000 more of the High Holborn circulars dated November 30th—as I had no envelopes I telegraphed, and received this reply, "Sending to-morrow.—CUNLIFFE"—I never got the envelopes—Carton took back the manuscript of the circular—I never saw the prisoners.

FREDERICK ROGERS EBDEN . I am a schoolmaster at Bournemouth—between November 3rd and 27th I received a similar circular to this, in response to which I sent Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co. this cheque for ₤10, signed "Frederick Ebden," and got this receipt from them—(This was for a guaranteed share railway deal to be opened on Friday, the 30th.)—on December 1st I received from them this telegram: "Opening Great Northern, Monday; have 13 shares unallotted; will you take any more?"—I sent this cheque of December 1st for ₤30 in a letter—I received no reply—the ₤10 cheque has been cashed, but not the ₤30—I implicitly believed the statements in the circular when I parted with my ₤10—I was not certain the firm carried on a genuine business; I did it for curiosity—I looked upon it as a risky thing, but took my chance.

FREDERICK CHARLES PATTEN . I am a clerk on the London and North-Western Railway at Wolverhampton—on November 25th I received one of these circulars, and wrote asking for information, and received this

letter, stating, "If you take a share the money will be withdrawable until the conclusion of the deal," and that there would be no loss—I wrote again, enclosing form filled up for one share, and this cheque for ₤10 on Lloyd's Bank at Wolverhampton, and an envelope for reply—I wrote several times afterwards, and telegraphed, but heard no more—when I parted with my cheque of November 30th I believed Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co. were honest and straightforward—I read their circular and testimonials, and believed them.

WILLIAM GANE . I am a commercial traveller, living at Westbury, in Wiltshire—about the end of November I received one of these circulars, and sent a letter and these two cheques for ₤80 and ₤20—I received this receipt—(For ₤100 "for 10 shares in the great railway deal now open in Great Northern Bails.")—both cheques were cashed—when I parted with them T believed the statements in the circular, and that Cunliffe & Co. were carrying on a genuine business at High Holborn, and their other statements.

SAMUEL RIGGE ROOKE . I live at Stony Stratford—I have no occupation—about the end of November I received a circular identical with this produced—I read it and believed it—on November 26th I sent to Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co. a certificate for ₤70 10s. Mysore Mining Shares, value ₤400, in my name—they now stand at ₤6—I received this receipt of November 27th, which stated "by way of security for 30 ₤10 shares in the guaranteed railway deal," also on 28th a blank transfer of the shares for my signature, and stating, "We shall under no circumstances dispose of them without written authority; we merely ask you to sign transfer as a formal matter of business"—I signed, and returned to Cunliffe's the transfer—I got no acknowledgment, but on December 11th I wrote to the Mysore Company certain instructions, and again on December 18th, to say they were on no account to transfer the shares without my authority—on Wednesday, December 19th, the prisoner Francis called on me with a man who is not here—in conversation Francis said, "I ought to have introduced my friend to you," but I did not catch the name, or it might have been "He is my lawyer" or "solicitor"—he said his own name was Francis, and that he understood from the secretary of the Mysore Company that I had some reason for not allowing the transfer of those shares—I said, "Yes, I hold Cunliffe & Co.'s letter that they will not use my transfer without my written authority," and I showed Francis the letter—he said he had advanced ₤300 to a Mr. Darby, and he produced the transfer which I had signed, with Darby's name attached to it—this is it, with my signature—the name "Joseph Henry Darby, Oak Lodge, Chiselhurst," underneath my signature, and the seals, have been added since I parted with it, and also the witness's name, "F. Timms, Praed Street, builder"—"J. Smith," the witness to my signature, is my groom—all I said was that I should not allow them to be transferred until I had gone further into the matter—Francis left—he gave his address as Gloucester Chambers, Bloomsbury—the next morning I came to London—I called at 257, High Holborn, the address on the circular—I found a plate on the door, "Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co."—I went upstairs to an office, which also had those names on the ground

glass of the door—no one was there, and I could not get admittance, though it was about 11 o'clock, as I had come by the 9.8 train from Wolverton—I went to Bow Street Police-office to make inquiries, and from there to my solicitor, Mr. Chatterton, of Finsbury House, Blomfield Street, City, who gave me advice—I went to Gloucester Chambers, Bloomsbury—Francis was not at home, and I went home to Stony Stratford—I next got his telegram, regretting that he missed me the previous day, and asking me to meet him at an hotel in Holborn next morning—I then wrote him this letter: "Ouse Bank, Stony Stratford, December 21st, 1900. Sir,—I am sorry it was impossible for me to leave here to-day. Will you assist me in prosecuting the scoundrel who has swindled me? If, on the other hand, you are in the swim, I offer you the following alternative, namely, if you will deposit the shares with the secretary of the company on Wednesday next, I will give orders for him to pay you the sum of ₤100, and will give you my word on the honour of a gentleman that no police prosecution or further inquiries shall be made, if you are in the swim.—Yours faithfully, S. R. Rooke. P.S. Please do not wire, write"—I did that through ignorance of offending society—I had no reply—Francis called again with the same man as before, and I said I was prepared to give ₤100, if he would hand me back my certificate—he said, "It is very hard for me to lose so much money; I cannot afford to lose ₤200"—I said, "Very well, then; assuming you are a gentleman, I am sorry I have been the cause of getting you into this trouble; I shall be willing to advance ₤200 for the certificate, and I will lose ₤200 in consequence"—he said, "I have not the certificate with me"—the gentleman with him said it would be better that the transaction should be done through the brokers—I said I was quite willing, and that I would instruct my brokers, Messrs. Bride, Stockdale & Co., of 571/2, Old Broad Street, to pay ₤200 to his brokers on handing him the certificate and transfer—the other man, always calling him "Doctor," said, "Dr. Francis could not afford to lose his money"—Francis seemed satisfied, and they left—I communicated with my solicitors and my brokers—I began an action against Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co. and Francis to prevent their dealing with the certificate, claiming damages and a declaration that the contract was induced by fraud—this is the writ—I asked Francis if he would assist me in prosecuting these men, and give evidence against them—he said he would, but all the evidence he had to give was that he had given ₤300 for my certificate—I have never had my certificate back, nor its value in money.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. It is quite possible the gentleman with Francis was Mr. Norledge, a solicitor—I do not remember taking his card; he might have offered me one—Francis said that he had brought an action for ₤300—the action has not come on.

Re-examined. The writ has been amended by the addition of Porteous and Doyle as defendants.

ALEXANDER SILK CROWTHER DOYLE . I am a solicitor, of New Inn, Strand—I had known Francis prior to December last—on Friday December 21st, I received a telephone message from him about 1 o'clock—I recognised the voice, which said, "I am Dr. Francis. Can you arrange an immediate loan for ₤200 upon the security of 75 shares in the

Mysore Gold Mining Company? They are quoted at 5," and some fraction—I said, "Yes, we can arrange that through our brokers"—he arranged to bring the document that afternoon—he brought this certificate for 70 shares about 3.30 that afternoon, and the transfer from Rooke to Darby, of Oak Lodge, Chislehurst, but with no transferee's name filled in, and it was not stamped—the witness to Mr. Darby's signature on this document is "F. Timms, 58, Praed Street, West, builder"—I said I would ring the brokers up on the telephone, and after doing so I told Francis that my brokers told me it was too late to do anything that day, as the Stock Exchange would be closed before he could get into the City—I then arranged with Francis that he should leave the documents, and that I would forward them to our brokers that night, with instructions to sell sufficient shares, to arrange the amount he required for cash, and to sell the remainder for the account—I explained that it was a special sale, and that he would probably have to pay extra stamp duties, although he was the vendor, as is usual when the purchasing broker has to take them up—I completed the transfer from Darby to Francis, and forwarded the documents as promised—I attested Francis's signature as transferee, and appointed to meet him at my brokers at twelve the next day—I had a telephone message from my broker, and about 1 o'clock Francis called—he said he had seen the broker, but was unable to get the money, as the transfer could not be certified by the company, he not being the registered holder of the shares—that was in accordance with what my broker had telephoned in the morning—he brought back the two transfers and the certificate—he said he very much wanted this ₤200 in connection with some speculation he was interested in with his friend, whose shares I understood these were, and after some pressing on his part and conversation I gave him ₤100—I believed that Francis's description on the transfers, "3, Venner Road, Sydenham, physician," was correct—on Friday, December 28th, I again saw Francis at my office, when he told me that he had arranged with his friend, who had instructed his brokers to pay the ₤200 against the delivery of the certificate and the transfers—a memorandum had been left for me in the office during my Christmas holiday—I went to my brokers that day, and afterwards saw Francis and told him so, and that they had informed me the instructions to pay the ₤200 had been withdrawn.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. I could not swear the memorandum was Francis's writing.

MARY ANN CRAMPTON . I am cook at Oak Lodge, Chislehurst—I have been in service there 18 years—I know no one named Joseph Henry Darby living there during that time.

WILLIAM STEPHENS . I have been to Oak Lodge and made inquiries, and have been unable to find anybody of the name of Darby living there—there is no name of Darby in the Local Directory.

ERNEST BARRETT . I have lived at 58, Praed Street, Paddington, where my father is a furniture dealer, all my life—I know no Timms, a builder.

SIDNEY WYBURN (233 E). On Wednesday, January 2nd, I was at Bow Street on duty—Francis, who was detained there, took some letters

from his overcoat breast-pocket—he selected this one, dated December 15th; 1900, tore it into several pieces, and threw it into the fire-grate—I picked up the pieces, put them together, and seeing that they had connection with the Mysore Gold Mining Company, I handed them to Inspector Pugsley—(This was signed "Henry Darby" and stated: "In consideration of advancing me the sum of ₤200 on 70 Mysore Gold Mine shares for three months, I am willing to pay you, at the expiration of that time, ₤225 sterling. In the event of the shares falling below the amount advanced, I hereby authorise you to dispose of same, without prejudice, after two days' notice in writing")—there is no address on it.

JOHN WILLIAMS . I live at Cardiff—at the end of November I received one of Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co.'s circulars, similar to this produced—I read it, and relying on the statements in it, I sent them this cheque for ₤30, which is now endorsed "Mitchell & Co."—it has been paid, and there is Cunliffe & Co.'s receipt for three shares in the guaranteed railway deal to be opened on Friday, November 30th—I also received this telegram, that they were opening Great Western of Canada shares, that 13 were unallotted, and that an early investment would secure grand profits, upon which I wrote this letter of December 1st, enclosing this cheque for ₤20 for two more shares in the guaranteed railway deal—this cheque has not been paid.

JAMES FRANCIS BEE . I am a tailor, of 63, High Holborn—I had the letting of 257, High Holborn—about November 20th I let a man an office in the first floor front for five weeks certain at a guinea a week—he paid five guineas in advance—he said he was F. Mitchell, a wine merchant, of 5, Warple Road, Wimbledon—I gave him authority to get the key from the caretaker—I have cot seen him since.

CHARLES ALBERT WEST . I am caretaker at 257, High Holborn—I remember showing a man a front room on the first floor—I referred him to the landlord—the room was taken from November 21st, when he came with an order from the landlord for me to hand him the key, which I did not give him till the 22nd, when the room which had not been occupied had been cleaned out—on the office and street doors was painted "Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co."—on November 26th two ladies, Girling and Gibson, came in with the key I had given the man—they came every day till Friday—on the Saturday they were not there—they left the key with me in the evening—I saw no business, nor any books or papers—there was a hole in the door for letters—I accepted and signed for one registered letter, and put it in the office—five others came, registered, which I refused to accept—14 to 16 letters a day came—on November 30th, after the ladies had gone, Forteous called about 3.30 p.m.—he inquired for Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co.—I said that the clerks had left for the day—he said they had no business to leave so early, and that he should report them to Mr. Mitchell for so doing—I asked him if he had any messages, and would he give me his name—he replied, "I am a friend of Mr. Mitchell"—I asked him to describe Mr: Mitchell, so that if he called I should know who he was—I asked if he was dark or fair—he said he was a fair man—as he was descending the stairs I asked again for his name—he said, "Roberts"—he went downstairs, entered a cab, and drove away—I saw him again the

following Tuesday, December 4th, when he said "Good morning" on the landing as I was coming in.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. Our conversation only lasted four to five minutes—I did not go with him to an adjacent house—I have said that if he had said his name was Porteous I should have remembered it equally as well—it is possible I mistook the name Porteous for Roberts—he did not give more than one name; he might possibly have said "Porteous"—I said I should have remembered if he had—my deposition was read over the first day before Mr. Marsham, and I signed it—it was read again afterwards before Sir F. Lushington and before Mr. De Rutzen—I did not notice any omission—I have said before to-day that Mr. Porteous said he would report the young ladies to Mr. Mitchell—I have mentioned this case to my own friends, but have not talked about it to the witnesses—I believe my statement to Porteous in substance was that the ladies had gone for their lunch, and might or might not be back, as I had the key.

HENRIETTA GIRLING . I am deaf—towards the end of November an advertisement was shown me in writing by Miss Gibson, in consequence of which on Friday, November 23rd, I went with her, and outside 257, High Holborn we met a man, who is not here, who engaged us as clerks to take in all letters that should come to 257—on Monday, November 26th, I went with Gibson to outside the Bedford Head Hotel, at 12 o'clock, where we saw two men, but not Mitchell, nor the prisoners, who asked if we were waiting for Mr. Mitchell—we said that we were—they said they would accompany us to the office, and give us the key—they walked with us to within a few steps of 257, High Holborn, and told us to go upstairs, and we should find "Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co." on the door of a room on the first floor—one of us was to take any letters we might find there to Bedford Square—they left us, and we went up to this room at 257—about 40 or 50 letters were on the floor, near the hole in the door—there was a writing table and some chairs—I think two or three were registered letters—I took them to Bedford Square, outside the hotel, and gave them to the two men who were waiting—our hours were to be from ten to three, and our duties to get the letters and take them to these men—we did the same on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, and on Friday, November 30th, we went to Russell Square, and saw one of these men, and a man we had not seen—on catching them up they asked us to get into a cab—I asked them why—they said they were going to take me to a gentleman who would give me instructions for to-morrow, Saturday, and we were to go to Broad Street on the Saturday morning and be paid—the cab drove to Victoria Street—we went into a house, and saw a gentleman—I had not seen who told me to go to Broad Street to be paid on the Saturday—he paid the cab fare back to Holborn—we left the office on the Friday about 1.30 to 2—I took home five registered letters that had come while I was away from the office, and which Gibson gave me, and one of the men called for them in the evening—he said he came from Mr. Mitchell, and asked for them—some of them I had taken with me, but the man said he did not want them, and I took them home—he told me to be at Broad Street on the Saturday morning, and on December 1st I went to Broad

Street, and saw one of the men I had seen on Friday, who paid me and Miss Gibson a sovereign—I did not go on Saturday, but on Monday, December 3rd, I went to the office, and found some letters—the man I saw on Saturday told me he would send for the letters on Monday, but no one came—on Tuesday, December 4th, Porteous came about 11 a.m. with a note in his hand, which said, "Please give bearer all letters signed 'Mitchell'"—I asked him if Mr. Mitchell was coming that day—he said he did not know—I said, "Would you please tell Mr. Mitchell we shall not be here to-morrow, but on Thursday?"—I saw him write on the envelope of one of the letters addressed to Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co., "Ladies not on bus. to-morrow, but on Thursday, take key with them, at 10"—Gibson spoke to him, but I did not hear—he put the letters in his pocket and took them away.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. I heard Porteous's answer to my question—I saw six men, including Porteous—I gave letters to three—Gibson was at the house where we both lived when I gave up the letters—Gibson did not go with me with the letters—there was not on the paper that Porteous brought, "Please give the bearer, Mr. Porteous, my solicitor, all letters"—he kept it in his hand—he wrote on the top letter of the bundle I gave him—Sergeants Peddar and Liddell first spoke to me about this matter on December 4 th—they came up to the office—they asked, Did we know it was a bogus firm?—I said we did not know—they asked us to go to Bow Street, and we had to put our things on, and go to Bow Street the same day, and soon after Porteous was taken—I did not know he was taken till I got there—I told them all I knew, and how I had taken the letters out, but they knew as much as I did—I first saw about Porteous in a newspaper.

AMELIA GIBSON . I live at 105, Ball's Pond Road—I went with Miss Girling on November 23rd to a street near 257, High Holborn, where we were engaged as type-writing clerks by a man giving the name of Mitchell—Girling went out with the letters, and I stayed in the office—I was present on Friday night, November 30th, when a man fetched the letters—on the Saturday I went to Broad Street Station, and was paid by the same man who came for the letters the night before—Girling said she would not take any more letters home—the man said he would send somebody for letters to the office—I attended at the office on Monday—no one came, and we left them there—we were both in the office when Porteous came on Tuesday with a paper in his hand: "Please deliver to bearer all letters (Signed MITCHELL"—we passed him the letters, and told him, if he saw Mr. Mitchell, to tell him we could not attend on the Wednesday, and while the letters were in front of him I asked him his name—he said, "My son could not attend to-day," or something like that—he wrote on top envelope and took the letters and the paper 'away.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. I first saw the police about this matter when they came in the office after they had seen Porteous with the letters—they said they were officers of police, looked round the office, took our names and addresses, asked us about the letters, and if we would go with them to Bow Street—they asked when we were engaged there, and about the business, and I told the whole of it straight through—"Mitchell" was signed under the writing on the paper

Porteous brought, but there was no initial—I did hot take much notice of the paper,

CHARLES HENRY MARSH . I am cashier at the Regent Street Branch of the London and South-Western Bank—on November 27th a man giving the name of Mitchell, of 257, High Holborn, opened an account—he said he was a chartered accountant—I suggested that he should go to one of our nearer branches—he said he was going to open another office in the neighbourhood of Piccadilly, and that he had just returned from Australia—I asked for two references—he said he could only give one—he wrote in our signature book, "Arthur Mitchell"—his reference was "H. Henderson, 5, Warple Road, Wimbledon," who he said was the landlord of the house he had taken—he said he would call the next day and give another reference—he handed me some money to pay into his account, and these two paying in slips from his paying in book—he filled them up—I took the amount subject to the references being satisfactory—I mentioned the matter to Mr. Trower, the manager—the next day I went to 257, High Holborn, to see Mr. Mitchell, with a message from the manager—I saw "Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co." on the door, which was locked; there was nobody there—it was about 4.30 p.m.—I communicated the result of my visit to Mr. Trower.

GEORGE TROWER . I am manager of the Regent Street Branch of the London and South-Western Bank—Mr. Marsh, a cashier, made inquiries of me about opening a new account by Mr. Mitchell on November 27th—the next day I read something in the financial papers, in consequence of which I sent by Mr. Marsh a verbal message to 257, High Holborn—I received no answer—I wrote again on 29th, and received that day this letter, enclosing some cheques and a paying in slip: "Dear Sir,—Will you have the goodness to inform the bearer when I may have a cheque book containing 25 cheques to order? Please credit my account with the enclosed cheque.—Yours faithfully, ARTHUR MITCHELL"—I retained the cheques and told the messenger to go back to Mr. Mitchell and tell him I wished to see him at once, and to bring the paying in book that had been supplied him—the slip was dated November 8th, and was for three country drafts for ₤20 and one for ₤30—the same day Mr. Porteous called with this letter, signed by Mitchell, and dated November 9th, from 5, Crooked Lane, King William Street, E.C: "Dear Sir,—The bearer is Robert George Porteous, my solicitor, at above address, whom I have consulted respecting message of yesterday. I shall be obliged by your explaining the message to him. I have instructed him to act for me, to receive my cheque book, and give receipt for same, or to receive the moneys belonging to me, and give full receipts and discharge in my name. This is his authority for so doing"—I do not understand "message of yesterday"—there may be some confusion of dates—I had simply requested him to come and see us—Porteous introduced himself as the solicitor acting for Mr. Mitchell, and stated that Mr. Mitchell could not understand my message—I said he need have no difficulty in understanding a message—it was that he should come and see me at once, and bring back the paying in book—my object was to decline opening the account—he then said I ought not to pay too much attention to what newspapers said—I

said I could not go into that, but that we declined the account, and that, as authorised in this letter, I would hand him the cheques back—he said I had taken a wrong view of the matter, or words to that effect—I handed him the cheques, notes, and gold, and took this receipt, and undertaking to return before noon the paying in book, on the back of this letter as solicitor for Mr. Mitchell—he took away the money and securities—the paying in book came by post—looking at the signature "Arthur Mitchell" in our signature book, and the writing and signature "Pierre Carton" in this cheque, I think they are the same writing—I should say Mitchell's letter, asking for explanation, Pierre Carton's request to clear the cheque for ₤80 specially, and the signature in our book, are written by the same man—this is the newspaper paragraph (Produced).

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. My interview with Porteous lasted very few minutes, during which he was engaged in writing this receipt—I made no note of the conversation—my attention was called to it about January 1st—it is not the fact that I referred to the newspaper, and he did not—he did not ask why I declined the account—(Read: "Porteous referred to the remarks in the financial papers and asked why we were acting in this manner")—he said we were not acting fairly and right or correctly in what we were doing, but I do not remember those last words—my impression is that he came in the afternoon—I handed him Williams' cheque for ₤30; I cannot say whether this is the same.

SAMUEL EARLY MESSRS. I am manager of the Economic Bank, 34, Old Broad Street—I produce a copy of the account of Pierre Carton which was opened on May 4th, 1900—it was a small account—it was fairly active till the end of July—after July 26th moneys were paid in till October 29th—on August 13th the credit balance was ₤2 10s.; on October 18th 2s. 6d., which remained till November 29th, when ₤80 was paid in—I produce signature book signed by Pierre Carton and his one reference—on November 29th a man whom I believe was Porteous came about paying in—I looked at the account, and told him the account was not closed, and that he could pay in any sum of money he wished to the cashier—I do not think the interview lasted three minutes.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. He signed a receipt for a cheque book, "R. G. Porteous"—I think he came about 4 o'clock, not 11.45—he did not come twice to me that day.

ARTHUR HENRY JOHN WALKER . I am a cashier at the Economic Bank—I recollect on November 29th a payment into Pierre Carton's account by, I believe, Porteous, about mid-day—this is the paying in slip, for three cheques, town, country, and Ireland—on November 30th there was another payment in of an Irish draft for ₤10—we credit country cheques three days afterwards—on December 1st there was another payment in of ₤83 12s. 3d., and there is an entry of ₤80—these are the slips—Porteous signed for the cheque book on November 29th—on December 3rd there is another slip for ₤20, which may have come by post, as the slip is filled up by one of our junior clerks; then on December 3rd a provincial cheque for ₤19 19s. 6d. after deducting our commission, also for ₤40—this cheque of December 1st is credited to Carton on the 4th—it is only dated by our stamp—this is another ₤10

cheque—the ₤80 of December 4th is on the Wilts and Dorset Bank at Frome—this request of Pierre Carton for special clearing accompanied the paying-in slip for the ₤80 cheque, for which 1s. 1d. is charged—here is a cheque for ₤250, dated December 6th—the person who presented it stood behind my desk—I called out, "Would you kindly step into the manager's room?" but immediately the person bolted for the door, and I had no opportunity of seeing his face—I had heard from the police that something was wrong—the amount to credit is now ₤497 16s. 9d.—only two amounts have been drawn out since November 29th; one to self of ₤20 11s., and the other to James for ₤115—the amount received between November 29th and December 4th exceeded ₤600.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. I am clear that a cheque book was given out on November 29th, though it is charged on 30th—that is the regular business—another clerk makes out the debits for cheque books the next day.

THOMAS GLENCROSS . I am in the accountant's department of the G. P. O.—I produce 44 telegrams from the Borough High Street Post-office—I have examined them—they were handed in on December 1st last at 2.30, and the text is the same: "Opening Great Northern Monday; have 13 shares unallotted; will you take any more? We recommend largest investment possible, grand profit being assured.—CUNLIFFE, MITCHELL"—I have experience in handwriting—a great many of these are the same writing as the order to the printer—originals after three months are destroyed.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. We have had application for other originals, but without the sending office is given we cannot trace them—there is no record of the sender's name.

MARGARET KAINE I have been a barmaid at the Horse and Groom, Whetstone Park or Lincoln's Inn Fields, since September 12th last—I know Porteous as a customer—I saw him there in November and December twice or three times a week, in the private bar, at all times of the day—I have seen Francis in the same private bar about three times before Christmas, I think.

THOMAS GEORGE IVES . I am manager of the Horse and Groom—I have known Porteous six or seven years as an occasional customer—I do not recollect the dates—in October and November I think I saw him two or three times, between eleven and two in the day—I have known Francis as customer about seven months—he came in October and November two or three times a week, generally in the morning, but I have seen him in the evening.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. I know Porteous is a solicitor—my house is not far from the Law Courts—part of last year he was a teetotaller—I sell tea, coffee and teetotal drinks sometimes.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. Gloucester Street, Theobald's Road, is not far from my house—I do not recollect seeing Francis and Porteous together there—I was surprised when I did see them together.

WILLIAM CROSTON . I was a detective sergeant of the Metropolitan Police—I received instructions with reference to 257, High Holborn—I also saw a copy of Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co.'s circular—I kept observation on 257, High Holborn on Monday, November 26th—about 6 p.m. I stood

on the landing opposite Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co.'s office, which was a front room on the first floor—there was a dim light in the office, but no light on the landing—I saw Francis close the door behind him—he appeared to lock the door—I went downstairs, followed by Francis close behind me—at the foot of the staircase, where the door opens into the street, there is a good strong light—I had a good look at his face and figure—I kept him there probably a minute to study his features, pretending to be going upstairs for something, and then allowed him to pass—the office is on the south side—he turned right towards the City.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. I was watching the place for the Editor of the Critic—I did not keep Francis five minutes—I pretended to be searching my pockets—I did not identify Francis, but I described him to the officer—I knew nothing of him till I was surprised by seeing him in the dock, when I went to the Court to see how the case got on—I did not notice that he was lame.

JAMES THOMAS FISHER . I am a clerk to Jupper & Co., of 7, Great Castle Street, Oxford Circus, estate agents and auctioneers—about October 14th, a man giving the name of Allan Hunt, and an address of 5, Warple Road, Wimbledon, rented a room at 133, Oxford Street, through me, at ₤2 8s. a month, payable in advance, from October 22nd, the hours to be between eight and eight, only for the business of a stockbroker or general agent—this is the agreement, which I sent by post—Mr. Hunt's friend brought it back, signed "Allan Hunt" and witnesssd by James Hunt, who gave no address—a month's rent was paid in advance, but nothing else to my knowledge—we applied for the second month's rent, found the office shut up and abandoned, and broke in and took possession.

CLINTON HERBERT FOSTER HAMMOND . I carry on business as Ashley & Co., estate agents, at 133, Oxford Street—I remember a back room on the first floor being let—I saw two men there five or six times—the name on the door was Hunt & Marshall—letters were left so addressed, which a third man called for.

AGNES BLACKMORE . I am a domestic servant, employed by Mrs. Mitchell, of 5, Venner Road, Sydenham—I have been at that address for the last five years—I saw the prisoner Francis at No. 3, which is next door, at the end of June last—he left there on October 16th—I saw the furniture moved—afterwards Mrs. Francis came several times—I last saw her on October 20th—I saw Porteous there once while Francis was in the house—he walked down the garden with Mrs. Francis, and I heard Francis talking in the drawing room the same evening—I was called at Bow Street Police-court, and recognised Porteous almost immediately in the dock.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. I saw Porteous there either the end of August or in September, between 6 and 7 p.m.—I was sitting at work in the back garden at the time—Porteous walked down to the mulberry and back with Mrs. Francis—I do not think I should have noticed him, but he came on to the balcony and stared at me—I next saw him at Bow Street on January 16th, in the dock with Francis.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. He had not a hat when he walked down the garden—it was before seven; they went in to dinner at seven—I

heard Francis speaking—I mentioned this to the police last Thursday, voluntarily.

FREDERICK JOHN KEW . I am a stationer, at 5, Warple Road, Wimbledon—I take in letters for customers—I do not remember receiving any in the names of Mitchell, Hunt, Marshall, Carton, Prowse, nor Henderson—neither of those lived there; no one lives there.

RICHARD GOODHALL . I am an estate agent, of 1a, Gower Place—about June 18th or 19th Francis came and agreed to take the house, 3, Venner Road, from Mr. Attwell, the landlord, for three years from June 24th, 1900—in the agreement he is described as George Herbert Francis, of the Hotel Metropole, London, physician; the rent was ₤42 a year, payable quarterly—he executed the agreement in my presence, under seal—I had two satisfactory references, one from Mr. Young, the manager of the Sydenham Branch of the London and Provincial Bank, the other from Norledge & Norledge, solicitors—on October 23rd a lady, I understood to be Mrs. Francis, offered me the key of the house in Gower Place—I declined to take it—on October 29th I went to 3 Venner Road, and found it quite empty—I picked the lock, entered, and had new keys made—the rent was not paid to that date.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. The rent was paid up to Michaelmas—I had a deposit from Francis of ₤5—I informed Messrs. Norledge that I declined to accept Francis's surrender—saw no coals or wine in the house—I went in, and down in the cellar—there was a discussion between the landlord and Messrs. Norledge about the right to take possession while Francis was tenant, and they threatened proceedings.

DAVID LIDDELL (Detective Sergeant, E.) In consequence of instructions I obtained a prospectus and circular, and kept observation on 257, High Holborn from November 27th—it ia let out in offices—about 11 a.m. on December 4th I saw Porteous enter and return in a few minutes, and get into an omnibus going towards the City—he rode about 140 or 150 yards, then got out of the 'bus, and went through the Turnstile into the Horse and Groom public-house—I followed—he stayed about three minutes—I followed him out and said, "I want to speak to you; you have just come from 257, High Holborn"; he said, "Yes"; I said, "I have reason to believe you have a number of letters containing cheques upon you"; he said, "Yes, I have a number of letters"; I told him I was a police officer, and should take him to Bow Street, and no doubt he would be charged with unlawful possession of them; he said, "All right; do not handle me, I will go quietly. I know nothing about it; I simply called for the letters for my client; here is my card," and produced his card: "Mr. Robert G. Porteus, so icitor, 5, Crooked Lane, King William Street"—at Bow Street he produced 21 post-letters—one a large one, two postcards and 34 telegrams, all addressed "Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co., 257, High Holborn"—he was taken into Inspector Pugsley's office, where he produced a second card, a duplicate of the first—Pugsley said he would like to ask him how he came in possession of these letters, and why he went to 257, High Holborn—he replied, "I went for a client to get the letters"—the inspector then asked the client's name and address—he replied, "I do not know the client's name, nor address," and afterwards added, "I now say his name is Carton; he has gone by the name of Prowse. I went there at his request

as his solicitor; the contents of the letters and telegrams I know nothing whatever about"; and "when I called on Friday I told the housekeeper that I was solicitor for Mr. Mitchell; I either handed him my card, or told him my address; we had a drink, and I kept waiting for the clerks; whether they were lady clerks or male clerks I was not aware. I then went to Mr. Ives' public-house, and again returned to No. 257, and saw the housekeeper; this was after I had given him my name, and, I believe, my address or card. I told the housekeeper I knew nothing about the business, and simply called for the letters, and had a written authority to receive them; it was written in blue pencil"—he was asked if he had the authority about him, and he said, "I think I tore it up"—he then drew attention to these words on an envelope: "The ladies not at business till Thursday at X; take key with them"—he was asked if he wished these words put down on his statement—he replied, "Yes"—it was bring taken in writing—he said, "I was going to leave that for Prowse with his letters"—he was then charged with unlawful possession of these letters—when the charge was read over he said, "It was at Lincoln's Inn Fields, called Whetstone Park, where the place was"—seven of the 110 letters contained cheques amounting to about ₤100; one contained two ₤5 notes—amongst them were Ebden's letters and cheques, also Williams' letter and cheque, and others produced here—on December 5th, at Bow Street, Porteous was in the prisoner's room, when he asked me for a sheet of paper, saying he was going to write—I gave it to him, and as he was going into Court he handed it to me, saying, "Here it is"—it is headed "Wednesday," and begins, "Briefly: I met Mitchell or Prowse on Thursday last"—that would be the 29th—this is the statement: "He informed me he had personally opened a banking account at the London and South-Western, Regent Street, and on sending to pay the second time the manager demurred. Prowse then requested me to see the bank manager as Mitchell's solicitor (this was the first time I heard the name Mitchell, of 257, High Holborn). I asked for a written authority, which he gave me on my own headed paper, setting out my name in full and my occupation. I saw the manager, and he declined to say why he did not wish account opened. I then took the cheques, note and gold to Prowse, and he gave me some more cheques to pay into his account, of the name of Pierre Carton, at the Economic Bank, where I had been in the morning, and arranged with the manager there, whom I told my name, address, and occupation. He asked, 'Are you a solicitor?' I said, 'Yes.' He said, 'The account is open, and you can pay cheques, and they will be all right.' I spoke a few more words, and asked for banker's pass book, but it was not there. The manager and cashier assisted in filling up the paying-in slips"—there is written across it, "Gave receipt in my own name in hit presence"—then, "Friday, met Prowse, and he asked me to call at Holborn office for bis letters. I said, 'Funny! why don't you go yourself? How do you carry on business?' He said, 'There are two clerks there, and I have a commitment warrant out.' I asked, How much for?' He said, '₤60, and if I go I might get collared.' I said, 'I must have a written authority.' He wrote, mentioning my name and occupation therein. He further said, as he had to be west at once, would I pay certain other cheques into the bank? I did so, and late in the afternoon I called at

High Holborn; in fact, at Mitchell & Co.'s door; saw the housekeeper, and said, after a conversation, I would return. He and I had a drink and a short talk, and I did return, but nobody was in the office, so I went away, saw Prowse, and told him that when I paid cheque in Friday I took his. written authority for a cheque book, which contained my name and occupation, which I left at bank, and I signed the receipt book 'G. R. Porteous.' I handed this to Prowse. When I saw the cheques on Friday I said, 'Why don't you pay the commitment warrant off? He said, 'This is not all profit,' referring to the cheques,' and, besides, I have a lot more debts, and I am going to get you to arrange all at once by calling a meeting of creditors, and making a composition deed,' or words to that effect. Saturday, December 1st, I saw him, and he promised to wire me Monday, which he did at Victoria at three. I asked for the list of 'c.'s' and addresses, which he promised to have ready for me on Monday. He promised to have it ready by 11.30 Tuesday, and he again requested me to call at office at 10.30 on Tuesday, 'Get the letters and meet me at my office at 11.30.' I told him it would be the last time, as he had money, and could settle and do his own work. He agreed. I went there on Tuesday at 10.35, saw the two ladies whom I had never before seen, gave them my written authority, and received letters and wires, got 'bus, collar loose, got off, put collar in order, and, spoken to by sergeant, gave my proper name and address, etc, answered every question at once. Very roughly, the above are the facts, but I was asked to stand up last night to be identified. I instantly walked out singly, and the witness, without a moment's hesitation, said,' That is not the man,' R. G. Porteous"—then there is written across, "Only knew Prowse under these two other names; never had an office with him, or been to any of his offices."

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. I took down what Porteous said—he did not say I was not taking it down properly—when Porteous said, "I do not know the client's name nor address," Pugsley said, "It is strange you do not know your own olient's name and address"—Porteous said, "I did not say that, I did not say anything of the kind; I will not have that"—Pugsley then appealed to the officers present as to whether he had said so, and that was put down—I am sure he said "nor" and not "and address"—he did not say, "I know his name; his name is Prowse, but I do not know his address"—I was sitting uncomfortably at the edge of the table and made a move, and he said, "Do not go away," but I never left my seat—I continued to let him see me write—the 21 letters were found unopened, and the telegrams—he did not say he was going to leave them for Prowse, nor that he was going to meet Prowse at his office—he ran after the 'bus—in the Horse and Groom he had just finished his tie and collar—his hands were on his tie—he has an office at 5, Crooked Lane, as a solicitor.

Re-examined. He did not say that he was going to meet Prowse, nor where he could be found—I have been trying to find him—Porteous was in my custody about 11.30—he said he was going to leave the letters with Prowse—he never said, "I was going to give the letters to Prowse at my office, and if you had followed me there you would have seen Prowse"—he never gave any address of Prowse.

ALBERT PEDDAR (Detective Sergeant, E) On November 30th I was keeping observation on 257, High Holborn, between 2 and 3 p.m.—I saw Porteous enter, come out, and go into the Roebuck public-house, close by, alone—he came out in a few minutes and got into a hansom cab, drove to the Great Turnstile, and entered the Horse and Groom public-house—the cab remained at the top of the Great Turnstile—in a few minutes he came out with another man; both got in the cab, and drove down Holborn and Chancery Lane into Fieet Street—the other man got out at Fetter Lane—I followed the cab to Ludgate Circus, where I lost sight of it—on Tuesday, December 4th, I was again watching 257, High Holborn—I saw Porteous enter, come out, and get in a 'bus till he got to the Great Turnstile, when he got out and entered the Horse and Groom public-house—liddell and I followed—I saw Porteous arrested—he was taken to Bow Street Police-station—there he made a statement to Inspector Pugsley, which was taken down and read over—I was out of the room once—on January 2nd, knowing of the warrant for Francis's arrest, I went to Gloucester Mansions, Gloucester Street, Theobald's Road, which I had been watching several days, at 9 a.m., and remained intside at the door of the main entrance, while Liddell searched the rooms on the ground floor; then I went in the basement, while Liddell remained upstairs—I saw Francis crouching by the side of a wall in a kind of area in front of the landing—I said, "Come out of that, George; I am a police-sergeant"; we came upstairs—I told him I was going to arrest him on a warrant for being concerned with Porteous and others in obtaining money at 257, High Holborn by fraud—he said, "I do not know Porteous; I do not know anything about it"—he was taken to Bow Street and charged—he made no reply.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. There was a discussion between Pugsley, Liddell, and Porteous in a room about 15ft. by 12ft, but I was at the rear, and out of the room part of the time—when I went into the Hone and Groom Porteous was buttoning his collar, but Liddell spoke to him—he was taken before the Magistrate the next day—questions were put to him by Pugsley in his private room, and the answers were taken down by Liddell—he was in custody.

WILLIAM PUGSLEY (Police-Inspector, E.) On December 15th I received a warrant for the arrest of three persons whom I am doing my best to find—Francis was arrested under a warrant, and brought in on January 2nd about 12 o'clock—Francis's name was not in the warrant, but a description was given—I saw him that day in the waiting-room at Bow Street Police-station—as I entered he said, "What is the charge against me, inspector?"—I said, "You are charged with conspiring with others in obtaining money and other things from 257, High Holborn"—he said, "I know nothing whatever about the matter; I was never at that address"—I said, "You will be further charged, with receiving 70 Mysore Mining shares, value ₤400. You have been dealing with those shares after you knew they were obtained by fraud"—he said, "I bought them and paid for them; I have got them now, or at least I know where to get them from; I went down to Stony Stratford to see the owner, and he offered me ₤200 to get the shares back"—the charge was read over to him from the charge-sheet,

and he made no reply—he was charged with Porteous—on leaving the waiting-room Constable Wyburn handed me the fragments of a letter which I had pasted together—Wyburn made a statement with regard to them—I was at Bow Street Police-station at 11.30 on Tuesday, November 14th, when Porteous was brought there by Liddell and Peddar—Liddell said, "This is the man who has been fetching the letters away from 257, High Holborn"—Porteous handed me his card and said, "This is my card; I have nothing to say," and he threw a parcel of letters on the table—I said, "As a solicitor you must know that I have a right to ask for an explanation how you got possession of these letters"—he said, "Yes, I went to fetch them for a client whose name and address I do not know"—I said, "It is very strange you should have a client whose name you do not know"—he said, "His name is Carton, and he goes by the name of Prowse, but I never knew his address"—he next said, "When I called on Friday at 257, High Holborn, I told the housekeeper that I was a solicitor.,"—he said, "I know nothing about the contents of letters or telegrams; I called on behalf of Mitchell to fetch the letters as a solicitor;" then he made a further statement which Sergeant Liddell took down, and which has been read—I told him that he would be charged with unlawful possession of the letters and obtaining ₤10 by fraud—there was a letter thrown down relating to ₤10, and I said, "In all probability you will be charged with obtaining ₤10"—that made the officer refer to that—it was an ordinary postcard, addressed to 257, High Holborn, and then there was a "Mr. Bunting, Ivy House," and "Gentlemen—Please acknowledge my ₤10, November 29th, and oblige M. B."—he called attention to the pencil note and expressed a wish that it should be made a note of—he said he was going to take the letters to Carton or Prowse.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. At one time he said he was going to take them to Prowse at his own office—Sergeant Liddell went to his office at 5, Crooked Lane—when Liddell was writing, and I said it was strange he should not know the man's name and address, he said, "I did not say that" and went on to say it was Carton or Prowse—he said, "I do not know his name nor address"—first of all, he said he did not know either—he said, "He is Pierre Carton," after I reminded him it was a strange client whose name and address he did not know.

Re-examined. My impression is that he did not say on December 4th that he was going to give the letters to Prowse at his office.

THOMAS HENRY GURRIN . I am an expert in handwriting at 59, Holborn Viaduct—looking at the letter to the manager of the Southwestern Bank, signed "Arthur Mitchell," Porteous's receipt on the back of it, the letter of Pierre Carton to the Economic Bank of December 4th as to specially clearing a cheque, and the endorsement on Williams's cheque for ₤30 of Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co., I am of opinion that they are the same writing—looking at this type-written circular of the London and New York Stock and Share Corporation, 19, Villiers Street, Strand, of September 4th, the signature, "W. Boyd Buchanan," with some initials and "Secretary," in my opinion they are the same writing.

JOHN HERBERT JAMES GOODING . I received from my brother a

ALBERT PEDDAR (Detective Sergeant, E) On November 30th I was keeping observation on 257, High Holborn, between 2 and 3 p.m.—I saw Porteous enter, come out, and go into the Roebuck public-house, close by, alone—he came out in a few minutes and got into a hansom cab, drove to the Great Turnstile, and entered the Horse and Groom public-house—the cab remained at the top of the Great Turnstile—in a few minutes he came out with another man; both got in the cab, and drove down Holborn and Chancery Lane into Fieet Street—the other man got out at Fetter Lane—I followed the cab to Ludgate Circus, where I lost sight of it—on Tuesday, December 4th, I was again watching 257, High Holborn—I saw Porteous enter, come out, and get in a 'bus till he got to the Great Turnstile, when he got out and entered the Horse and Groom public-house—liddell and I followed—I saw Porteous arrested—he was taken to Bow Street Police-station—there he made a statement to Inspector Pugsley, which was taken down and read over—I was out of the room once—on January 2nd, knowing of the warrant for Francis's arrest, I went to Gloucester Mansions, Gloucester Street, Theobald's Road, which I had been watching several days, at 9 a.m., and remained intside at the door of the main entrance, while Liddell searched the rooms on the ground floor; then I went in the basement, while Liddell remained upstairs—I saw Francis crouching by the side of a wall in a kind of area in front of the landing—I said, "Come out of that, George; I am a police-sergeant"; we came upstairs—I told him I was going to arrest him on a warrant for being concerned with Porteous and others in obtaining money at 257, High Holborn by fraud—he said, "I do not know Porteous; I do not know anything about it"—he was taken to Bow Street and charged—he made no reply.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. There was a discussion between Pugsley, Liddell, and Porteous in a room about 15ft. by 12ft, but I was at the rear, and out of the room part of the time—when I went into the Hone and Groom Porteous was buttoning his collar, but Liddell spoke to him—he was taken before the Magistrate the next day—questions were put to him by Pugsley in his private room, and the answers were taken down by Liddell—he was in custody.

WILLIAM PUGSLEY (Police-Inspector, E.) On December 15th I received a warrant for the arrest of three persons whom I am doing my best to find—Francis was arrested under a warrant, and brought in on January 2nd about 12 o'clock—Francis's name was not in the warrant, but a description was given—I saw him that day in the waiting-room at Bow Street Police-station—as I entered he said, "What is the charge against me, inspector?"—I said, "You are charged with conspiring with others in obtaining money and other things from 257, High Holborn"—he said, "I know nothing whatever about the matter; I was never at that address"—I said, "You will be further charged, with receiving 70 Mysore Mining shares, value ₤400. You have been dealing with those shares after you knew they were obtained by fraud"—he said, "I bought them and paid for them; I have got them now, or at least I know where to get them from; I went down to Stony Stratford to see the owner, and he offered me ₤200 to get the shares back"—the charge was read over to him from the charge-sheet,

and he made no reply—he was charged with Porteous—on leaving the waiting-room Constable Wyburn handed me the fragments of a letter which I had pasted together—Wyburn made a statement with regard to them—I was at Bow Street Police-station at 11.30 on Tuesday, November 14th, when Porteous was brought there by Liddell and Peddar—Liddell said, "This is the man who has been fetching the letters away from 257, High Holborn"—Porteous handed me his card and said, "This is my card; I have nothing to say," and he threw a parcel of letters on the table—I said, "As a solicitor you must know that I have a right to ask for an explanation how you got possession of these letters"—he said, "Yes, I went to fetch them for a client whose name and address I do not know"—I said, "It is very strange you should have a client whose name you do not know"—he said, "His name is Carton, and he goes by the name of Prowse, but I never knew his address"—he next said, "When I called on Friday at 257, High Holborn, I told the housekeeper that I was a solicitor"—he said, "I know nothing about the contents of letters or telegrams; I called on behalf of Mitchell to fetch the letters as a solicitor;" then he made a further statement which Sergeant Liddell took down, and which has been read—I told him that he would be charged with unlawful possession of the letters and obtaining ₤10 by fraud—there was a letter thrown down relating to ₤10, and I said, "In all probability you will be charged with obtaining ₤10"—that made the officer refer to that—it was an ordinary postcard, addressed to 257, High Holborn, and then there was a "Mr. Bunting, Ivy House," and "Gentlemen—Please acknowledge my ₤10, November 29th, and oblige M. B."—he called attention to the pencil note and expressed a wish that it should be made a note of—he said he was going to take the letters to Carton or Prowse.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. At one time he said he was going to take them to Prowse at his own office—Sergeant Liddell went to his office at 5, Crooked Lane—when Liddell was writing, and I said it was strange he should not know the man's name and address, he said, "I did not say that" and went on to say it was Carton or Prowse—he said, "I do not know his name nor address"—first of all, he said he did not know either—he said, "He is Pierre Carton," after I reminded him it was a strange client whose name and address he did not know.

Re-examined. My impression is that he did not say on December 4th that he was going to give the letters to Prowse at his office.

THOMAS HENRY GURRIN . I am an expert in handwriting at 59, Holborn Viaduct—looking at the letter to the manager of the Southwestern Bank, signed "Arthur Mitchell," Porteous's receipt on the back of it, the letter of Pierre Carton to the Economic Bank of December 4th as to specially clearing a cheque, and the endorsement on Williams's cheque for ₤30 of Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co., I am of opinion that they are the same writing—looking at this type-written circular of the London and New York Stock and Share Corporation, 19, Villiers Street, Strand, of September 4th, the signature, "W. Boyd Buchanan," with some initials and "Secretary," in my opinion they are the same writing.

JOHN HERBERT JAMES GOODING . I received from my brother a

print of this London and New York Share circular, which came through the post to Ipswich, where I live—I received this form of application for shares—(A circular of advantageous investments, all cheques being payable to Boyd Buchanan.)—I read it and sent this cheque for ₤40—it passed through my bank, and is now endorsed "Henry Harrison—I also had a receipt signed in the same way—I afterwards received a telegram asking if I would take more shares—I have destroyed it—I sent a cheque for ₤10 in answer to that telegram, and got this receipt, signed by Harrison—I received also this letter of August 22nd and September 4th, 7th and 10th; all signed "Boyd Buchanan" in different writings—(Stating that there was a profit of 110 per cent, on Great Easterns, and recommending Allsopps and other investments.)—I sent this cheque for ₤99 in payment of three shares in Allsopps'—the cheque is endorsed "W. Buchanan, Secretary"—I wrote again on October 18th—that letter came back with the envelope marked "Gone away, left no address."

GEORGE DEVEREUX . I am a valuer and accountant, of 23, Buckingham Street, Charing Cross—I formerly had an office at 19, Villiers Street, on the first floor, for four years—the London and New York Stock and Share Corporation had an office in July and August immediately opposite my door—I have seen Porteous twice or three times hanging about, but not in the office—I had seen him once before in King Edward Street—I knew him then by name—I went to Bow Street on December 5th and picked him out at once from 14 or 15 others—I have seen him on the stairs, and once I saw him try the door of the office—the man used to come for letters and go away, leaving a note on the door, "Gone to the City "—they came to the office about 9 a.m. to take away the letters, but frequently, in the daytime, one or two people would come and try the door, but were unable to get in, and we were worried by complaints of people coming from the country—I have seen Francis sitting on the doorstep once or twice, and I have passed him in the porch when I went to lunch, probably waiting for somebody, but not at the office door—I only knew him by sight.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. I did not take particular notice of Porteous—30 or 40 people came up and down the stairs in the evening, but in the day only those who came to the offices—I cannot fix any date or time of day.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. I did not pick out Francis—I am quite sure he is the man—I was coming in from lunch, and saw him standing in the porch—I had no special reason for looking at him—I look at everybody who tries the doors.

Re-examined. I had known him some time before; he was pointed out to me—I had a special reason tor watching him.

DAVID LIDDELL (Re-examined by MR. BLACKWELL). I went to 5, Crooked Lane, and looked over the premises—I did not turn everything upside down—I found nothing relating to this charge—I saw no safe—I had two keys; one of the office; the other did not open any drawer—I looked in one or two drawers that were n' t locked.

The prisoners, in their defence, severally repeated on oath ike substance of the statements before set out which they made after their arrest; Porteous stating that he acted as Prowse's solicitor, and knew nothing of Cunliffe,

Mitchell & Co.'s business, or the contents of their letters; and Francis stated that he had no connection with or knowledge of their business.

ALBERT PEDDAR (Re-examined) I kept the cab in sight the who'e time—it did not stop in Chancery Lane, and not till it got to the corner of Fetter Lane, and Porteous did not get our—I went to 257, High Holborn after his arrest, but found no authority there.

Cross-examined. There was a fire-place in the room, and I believe there was a fire—it was on December 4th—I kept the cab in sight by running by the side of it—I did not see Porteous go to Bell Yard; I swear he did not.

CHARLES ALBERT WEST (Re-examined) It is not true that I opened the door of Cunliffe, Mitchell & Co.'s with a key and admitted Porteous into the office—Porteous did not tell me that he had any note or authority on the Friday to get letters.

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. I believe I said to him that the lady clerks had gone to lunch; I believe I said, "Gone for the day"; they said that they might be back or might not, and I said to Porteous, "They have gone to luncheon, and they may possibly be back, or they may not"—I may have said, "I have the key in my pocket," but I did not open the door—Porteous did not say to me that he had a note to the clerks to get the letters.

GUILTY .—FRANCIS then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at this Court on November 16th, 1896, and another conviction was proved against him.— Judgment respited. PORTEOUS— Three years' penal servitude.

The JURY expressed their appreciation of the admirable way in which the police had done their duty.


Before, Mr. Recorder.

188. ETHEL JAMES (19) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing two blankets and other articles, the property of John Edward Hutchinson; also a quilt and other articles, the property of Frederick Carter; also a counterpane and other articles, the property of David William Blundell; having been convicted of felony at the West London Police-court on October 26th, 1900.— Six months' hard labour.


Before Mr. Justice Phillimore.

189. NOTALIS SALVATOR POLOMBI (51) , Unlawfully attempting to administer to Florence Jones a noxious thing, with intent to procure her miscarriage.


Prosecuted; and MR. O'CONNOR and MR. ABMITAGE Defined.

GUILTY .— Fifteen months' hard labour.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

190. GEORGE FRANCIS PLEADED GUILTY to stealing while employed in the Post Office a postal packet containing a card-case and some chocolate, also a postal packet containing two scarf pins and other articles, the property of the Postmaster-General.— Nine months' hard Labour. And

191. HENRY BARNES (60) to embezzling the sums of ₤11, ₤5, and ₤5, also the sum of ₤4, also to altering an order for ₤21 14s. to ₤1, 621 14s., also to five other falsifications in the books of the Bakers' Law Trade Union, his masters, also to stealing ₤11, ₤5, and ₤5, also to stealing ₤4, the money of his said masters. (The Prisoner's defalcations amounted to ₤2, 175).— Five years' penal servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]