JOSEPH GOLDSMID.
16th November 1909
Reference Numbert19091116-82
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment

Related Material

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Navigation< Previous text (trial account) | Next text (trial account) >

GOLDSMID, Joseph (27, salesman) ; incurring certain debts and liabilities to the several amounts of £36 19s. 2d. to Charles Morris Simons and others, £57 15s. to W. Dennis and Sons, Limited, £67 11s. 11d. to Henry Gaspard Fient, £51 3s. to Samuel Isaacs, £17 5s. 6d. to Dilnot Dilbey Pankhurst, £14 12s. 4d. to Francis Rodley Ridley and others, £44 18s. 2d. to Arthur James Adam and another, £22 9s. 6d. to Richard Joseph Grant and others, £17 19s. 10d. to Fred William Brown and others, and £17 3s. 9d. to M. Isaacs and Sons, Limited, did obtain credit in each case by means of fraud; obtaining by false pretences from Charles Morris Simons and others 81 cases of apples, from W. Dennis and Sons, Limited, 120 boxes of apples, from Dilnot Dilbey Pankhurst a quantity of fruit, from Francis Robert Ridley and others a quantity of fruit, from Arthur James Adam and another 107 barrels of grapes, from Richard Joseph Grant and others 54 barrels of grapes, from Fred William Brown and others 19 barrels of grapes and other articles, and from M. Isaacs and Sons, Limited, 29 barrels of grapes and other articles, in each case with intent to defraud.

Mr. Walter Frampton and Mr. Gilbert Beyfus prosecuted; Mr. Curtis Bennett defended.

JOHN JACOBS , manager to Messrs. Garcia Jacobs and Co., fruit brokers, Covent Garden. On Wednesday, October 6, I saw prisoner's representative, a man named Myers, and sold him 100 cases of apples at 9s. per case, and there was also a charge of 1 1/2 d. for case for porterage. The apples were "Newtown Pippins," and the cases bore the mark "Navacovich and Stolich" a Sclavonian firm. Prisoner's buyer went to the office and paid for the things by cheque.

Cross-examined. I have known prisoner in business for twelve or fifteen months. He has had a great many transactions with my firm, but I have nothing to do with the cash department, and do not know whether his transactions have amounted to £620. In some cases the buyer goes to the office with a blank cheque and leaves the amount to be filled up, and I believe it was so on this occasion.

Re-examined. When I sold the goods I believed prisoner could pay for them.

HENRY THOMAS PRESTIGE , cashier in charge of the sales department of Messrs. Garcia Jacobs. On Wednesday, October 6, prisoner's buyer asked for a delivery order in respect of some "Newtown Pippins," and I gave it him in return for prisoner's cheque, which I filled in for £36 19s. 2d. When I gave the delivery order I believed the cheque would be met. I should not have given it had I known prisoner's account at the bank was in debit. I paid the cheque into the account of the firm and it was returned marked, "Refer to drawer."

Cross-examined. My firm have had a great number of transactions with prisoner, amounting in all to £500 or £600. None of his previous

cheques have been dishonoured. The cheque was paid in on the following day.

WILLIAM HARRUP , rostrum clerk to Messrs. Dennis and Sons, Limited, James Street, Covent Garden. On October 6 I saw prisoner's representative. He bought from our sale room 120 boxes of apples, for which I afterwards issued a delivery order in return for his cheque for £57 15s. I filled in the amount. When I received the cheque I believed it to be a good one. I should not have issued the delivery order had I known prisoner was overdrawn. The cheque was handed to me at about five o'clock and I gave it to our head cashier the following morning. It was returned, Refer to drawer."

Cross-examined. My firm have had considerable dealings with prisoner, but I could not say whether they totalled £1,200, and as far as I know his cheques have always been honoured.

To the Court. It is frequently left to the discretion of the buyer how much and at what price he shall buy.

Precisely similar evidence as to purchases by prisoner's buyer and of the giving of delivery orders in exchange for dishonoured cheques was given by GEORGE WILLIAM SCHOFIELD, salesman to Messrs. Dilnot Brothers, fruit salesmen, Covent Garden; HENRY EUGENE FORRESTER, salesman to Messrs. Ridley, Holding, and Co., Covent Garden: THOMAS LEONARD BYLES, salesman to Henry Gaspard Fient, trading as George Fient, Covent Garden; and ALBEERRY RALPH, employed by Samuel Isaacs, trading as Isaacs Brothers.

EDWARD EMMANUEL , fruit salesman, living at 35, Queen's Block, Stoney Lane, Hounsditch. I knew prisoner's shop in Spitalfields. I was there on Friday, October 8, between five and six o'clock in the evening. I did not see Sergeant Gillard there, but I saw a rush made upon the shop. I went there to draw my stuff, which I had bought earlier in the day. There were several persons there. I spoke to the salesman (Myers) and he said, "You can come back presently and take the stuff away. "I had bought £109 worth and paid £40 deposit about two o'clock to prisoner; not by cheque but all in coin. He put the money in a bag and put it in his pocket, saying, "There is £40 more for Katey." "Katey" is his wife. I returned about seven o'clock with three vans and paid the balance of £69 in cash to Solomons or Myers, prisoner's brother-in-law, who gave me the receipt produced, I took the goods away. They were found on my stand late at night, barring 18 cases of apples and two of grapes, which I had sold. I went there on the Saturday (October 9) at five o'clock, when the market opened, to sell the goods, but the police stopped me selling them. My stand is known as Moss and Emmanuel's. Prisoner came round to me about eight o'clock on Friday evening and asked me if I had got the remainder of the money, so I told him I had given it to his brother-in-law. He said, "Why did not you give it to my old woman?"

Cross-examined. This is the first occasion I have mentioned about prisoner coming round to me. It slipped my memory. I say the receipt for the balance of the money is a true receipt. It is not true that the whole of the money was paid at one time and that the words,

"Balance £69," have been added. As a rule, we do not give receipts in the market. I applied to Sir Albert de Rutzen to have these goods handed to me, but he made no order. It is not true that I bought the whole of them of Solomons after the rush or scuffle had taken place. I do not know that Solomons disappeared altogether; he has been about the market since, he was there the day after. I do not know where he can be found. I do not know where he lives. When I went to prisoner's place in the afternoon I saw a considerable quantity of stuff there. When I went at six o'clock a good deal of it had been cleared away.

WILLIAM HENRY KEEPING , managed, Covent Garden branch, London City and Midland Bank. Prisoner had an account at the branch, of which I produce a certified copy. The account was opened in June of last year with a credit of £48 8s. 9d. The most the account has been in credit is, roughly, £130, taking it from last June. On October 1 the balance was £7 19s. 10d. There was a cash payment in on the 2nd of £29 10s., and the account was then £32 10s. in credit. That was reduced to £26 8s. 7d. on the 4th and to £14 16s. 1d. on the 5th. There was a payment out by cheque of £10 9s. 8d. on the 6th, and finally there was left a debit balance of £13 5s. 2d. Nothing has been paid in since then. Cheques were presented to the amount of £366 between the 7th and the 9th; all were dishonoured.

Cross-examined. Prisoner has been in the habit of paying in money to meet cheques coming in. I stated at the police court that the turnover of his account had been between £5,500 and £6,000 in the last two months, and he has issued several hundreds of cheques which have always been met. On October 8 or 9 a communication was made to him by telephone. He replied to my cashier that he had a large consignment of apples which he wanted to pay for, and that he would pay in his takings, as he ordinarily did on the Friday evening or Saturday morning. I do not know that Mr. Myers, prisoner's father-in-law, has paid into his account on different occasions substantial cheques in order that prisoner's cheques should be met. Two of Mr. Myers' cheques produced are for £70 and £100.

WILLIAM WATSON , foreman of Messrs. Garcia Jacobs and Co. On Friday, October 8, I went with Detective-Sergeant Gillard to Spitalfields Market. We arrived there about half-past five. Prisoner was in his shop sitting at his desk. I saw some goods on the premises that had belonged to us and some that had belonged to Messrs. Dennis. I counted 70 crates of apples. When I went into the shop I said to prisoner, "Joe, I have come down to count what apples there are of ours here. This is Mr. Gillard, who has come down to arrest you." He said, "Yes, I know Mr. Gillard." took some books and papers, which he handed to me, and asked me if I would oblige him by taking care of them. I proceeded to wrap them in paper and put them on a half bushel basket. A whole crowd of people came into the shop just about that time; I suppose there must have been between 40 and 50. In consequence of what Gillard said to me I went out to find some police, leaving the books on the basket. When I

came back they were not there, nor prisoner either. I returned to prisoner's shop between half-past six and seven, after I had been to the police station. By that time the shop had been cleared of the goods and there was nothing there. Later on I went to Brushfield Street to a stand occupied by Moss and Emmanuel. I did not find any apples that night; they were covered over with a tarpaulin. I went down to Spitalfields with the detective between one and two o'clock in the morning and stayed there till daylight almost. We found 102 cases of apples at the stall, of which the detective took possession.

Cross-examined. I have known prisoner since he was quite a baby, and up till this time had always looked upon him as a highly respectable merchant, a man who always carried out his obligations, met his cheques, and so on. Sergeant Gillard took some of the books from the desk and went to take some from the drawer, but prisoner resisted and said he had no right to take them. I did not hear prisoner ask where Gil lard's warrant for searching the premises was. At the time the mob of 40 or 50 people rushed in prisoner was talking to Gillard. They hustled the detective and hustled me. I had never experienced such a thing before; it was pretty rough. When we went to Emmanuel's stall Emmanuel did not in my presence produce any receipt.

Detective-sergeant JOSEPH GILLARD, E. On October 8 I was entrusted with a warrant for the arrest of prisoner, and went with last witness to Spitalfields Market, where we arrived about 5.45 p.m. I knew prisoner by having seen him in Covent Garden Market. I said to prisoner, "You know me, Mr. Goldsmid. I have a warrant for your arrest. "I read the warrant to him and said, "I am going to take possession of your books and papers." He said "Yes, I know you, Mr. Gillard, but you are not going to take possesssion of me or of my books and papers. "I proceeded to take possession of the books on his desk and handed them to Watson. There were five or six other persons in the shop. Prisoner twisted; he hummed and had in order to gain time, a whisper went round, and in a moment or two 40 or 50 roughs came rushing in.

Judge Lumley Smith. A whisper went round.

Witness. A sort of general nod that I can understand, probably an inexperienced person would not, but I understood it, and within half a minute the sale room was flooded with 40 or 50 men; it looked to me like a preconcerted plot. I requested Watson to get help. I had not actually placed hands on prisoner. It was not necessary; I knew him perfectly well, and I had read the warrant to him, which is an arrest. As I was taking possession of the books the crowd rushed in towards the back of the shop, where I was standing, surged round me and rushed me towards the front of the shop, and I did not secure my prisoner. The books mysteriously disappeared during this rush, because they were not there a minute later. I went to Commercial Street Police Station to get proper assistance to carry out the remaining part of the business that was to be done. I got back to the sale room about half-past six; there was not anything there; everything

had been moved within the space of about half an hour. At nine o'clock that night I saw prisoner at 22, British Street, Bow, where he lives. Accompanied by another officer I gained admittance to the house. We found prisoner lying on a sofa in the kitchen. We had previously been told he was not there by the person who answered the door. I said to prisoner, "It is needless for me to say what I have come for this time," or something to that effect, and I told him in the usual way he was still under arrest. He said, "It is a good job you have got me now; I was going over the water tomorrow. I am very sorry I have caused you so much trouble. I was led away by the others." A little later on, on his way to Bow Street, he said, "The stuff you want is now at Moss's stand outside the Market House, Brushfield Street, Spitalfields. I do not want to suffer for what they have done and the profits go to them instead of to my old woman." At the station he made no reply to the charge. He was searched; 5s. 11d. was found upon him, a counterfoil cheque book containing the counterfoils of the cheques given on October 6 and 7. No blank cheques remained in it.

Cross-examined. Prisoner did not hand me his books. I took possession of them. When I found prisoner at his own address I do not recollect that I said to him, "I hear that you are going abroad." It is quite possible that some of the crowd that rushed in were not above removing things that did not belong to them.

Mr. Curtis Bennett submitted' that there was no case to go to the jury.

Judge Lumley Smith declined to stop the case.

Mr. Curtis Bennett said he had a number of witnesses to character, but as it was agreed that there was nothing against prisoner before this it was unnecessary to call them.

(Defence.)

JOSEPH GOLDSMID (prisoner, on oath). I have been in business for myself about 12 or 15 months. Before that I was for some years in the employ of my mother, who took over the business of my father, who is a carman and contractor in Covent Garden. During those 12 or 15 months I have been trading in Covent Garden Market, and until this occasion none of my cheques have been dishonoured. I gave my buyer blank cheques with discretion to buy anything he thought cheap. I used to reckon up at night what I had bought and provide accordingly, allowing three days for the cheque to go through. If I had not enough money of my own I used to borrow of my father-in-law. When I sold the goods I would pay in the cash. On October 6 and 7 I had no intention of defrauding the people of whom I was buying. On Friday, October 8, I suppose I had in my shop at Spitalfields stock of the value of £300 or £400. As you have heard from Mr. Keeping, I had some conversation on that day as to what was to be done with the cheques. I told him about six months ago I was working with a very small sum and I might not always have the necessary amount at the back of the cheques, and I asked

if he would telephone me in that event and I would try and raise it. It is true, as Mr. Keeping has said, that I had a lot of stock and would send the takings to the bank as soon as I had sold it. I have known Detective Gil lard for some time, being at Covent Garden and sometimes going into Bow Street. Watson has known me from a child. Between half-past five and six on the afternoon of Friday, October 8, Mr. Watson came into the shop with Sergeant Gillard. I was sitting at the back turning some accounts out. He said, "Joe, I have got a very unthankful job. "I said, "What is it?" He said, "There is a detective outside who has got a warrant for your arrest. "I said, "What is it for?" Gillard said, "You have been buying goods at several places and some of your cheques have been dishonoured. "I told him that unless he read the warrant he would neither take me nor my books. He then went across to my desk and took the books, which Watson wrapped in paper. Up to that time I had received no notification that my cheques had been dishonoured, or I would have endeavoured to meet them or tried to sell the stock. I sold nothing to Emmanuel that day and he did not pay me £40 at two o'clock. In the evening I was advised to go back to the shop. Passing through Brushfield Street I saw some vans unloading my stock. I asked Emmanuel whom he had bought them of and he said Solomons. I said, "Did you pay Solomons or did you pay my brother-in-law?" He said, "I paid Solomons. "So I said, "Do you know whether he handed the money to my wife?" He said, "I do not know anything at all about what was done with the money or anything at all about your wife. I know your wife was in the shop. "With regard to the money, he said, "I paid it to Solomons; I know no more about it, and I have got a receipt here for it." I said, "Can I see the receipt?" He said, "I cannot bother. I have got the receipt; he has got the money; I have got the things." I said, "If you do not give me satisfaction I shall stop you selling the goods. "When I got home Gillard came to me and said, "I heard you were going abroad. "I said, "This is the first I have heard of it. "I made use of no such expression as, "It is a good job you have got me now; I was going over the water to-morrow. "Gillard said, "I heard you were going abroad," and Inspector Smart, who was with him, said, "I heard you were going to Manchester. "I never had any of the money myself for the sale of these things. I know nothing of this mob of 40 or 50 persons. I could not understand them coming in at all. I was completely taken by surprise. When they came in I went out. I came back again in a few hours and afterwards went home.

Cross-examined. It was the practice to make out cheques in the name of certain firms with my signature and leave the amount to be filled in. I intended it to be believed that these were good cheques, and that they should supply me with the goods in the belief that I was going to pay for them. My account had not been overdrawn before last October. I knew my account was in debit to the extent of £13 when I drew the cheque. I asked Mr. Keeping to advance me £25 cash until Saturday on my private account. I have had no

chance of examining the account, as I have been in prison for seven weeks. The most I had drawn previously in one day since July was £78. I accept the figures of the amounts drawn: July 7, £32; July 12, £78; July 13, £31; July 14, £70; July 19, £53; July 21, £39; July 22, £40; July 26, £25; July 27, £30; July 28, £27, etc. On all these occasions there was money in the bank to meet the cheques. On October 6, when I knew my account was not good for £25, I was giving the cheques for £360, because I was buying goods to meet these cheques on the Saturday, the usual thing that I have always done. If you turn back to this time last year I think you will find I was laying out the same amount in the same way, but I was not then overdrawn. I did not expect the cheques would come back before the 9th. I had a telephone message from the bank on the 7th informing me that my cheques were being dishonoured. I heard Watson swear that I resisted Gil lard taking the books. It is true that at that point some 40 or 50 persons came rushing into the shop. I have no idea what they came there for. Watson went to fetch police assistance and I disappeared. My brother-in-law was in the shop. Both my brother-in-law and my buyer are named Myers. My buyer is no relation to me. I do not understand my brother-in-law signing Emmanuel's receipt. He had no authority to do so. When I came back about seven o'clock I was very much surprised to find my shop empty. The Commercial Street Police Station is 10 minutes from my shop. I did hot go down there and lodge a complaint against the persons who had robbed me. I supposed that my brother-in-law had sold the goods and handed my wife the money. My wife's name is "Katey." I asked Emmanuel to whom he had paid the balance of the £69, and he said he had paid it to Solomons. I did not ask him why he had not paid it to my wife. Solomons is the proper person to receive it. I never had any idea at all of crossing the water. I gave myself up. I do not know who answered the door when Gillard called upon me. I am not aware that the servant told Sergeant Gillard that I was not at home. I had given no instructions that I was to be denied to anyone. I did not tell the detective that the stuff was at Emmanuel's and that I did not want the profits to go to them instead of to my old woman.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sentence, Three months' imprisonment in the second division.


View as XML