3rd August 1880
Reference Numbert18800803-449
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > lesser offence; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment

Related Material

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

449. SAMUEL JOHN HOLMES (32), HENRY JOHN DOVER (53), HENRY LAWRENCE (44), WILLIAM FARRINGTON (41), FREDERICK HISCOCK (39), ALFRED VINCENT (62), EDWARD SIMMONDS (48), and WILLIAM PHLLIPS (33) (, were indicted, together with GEORGE HOLMES and HENRY WHITEHOUSE not in custody), for unlawfully obtaining, and attempting to obtain from divers persons, goods by false pretences, and for conspiracy to defraud.

MR. TALPOURD SLATER, Q.C., with MR. SNAGGB Prosecuted; MESSRS. FULTON and R. LEVY appeared for Holmes; MR. GEOGHBGANW Dover; it as R. S.LYNCH and SAMPSON for Farrington; MR. FILLAN for Vincent and Simmonds.

MATTHEW FOX (Police Inspector, Criminal Investigation Department). I have from time to time received information about 89 and 91, Long Lane, Bermondsey; they were one house, but it has been re-numbered—I applied for a warrant at the beginning of May, which was granted, and executed by two officers, Walsh and Harvey—I was at the station when Holmes was brought in; I saw him searched, and I looked over the papers that were taken from him; these are them. (These were three cheques for 10l. 15s., 9l. 10s., and 6l. 10s., drawn by F. Jackson and Co. in favour of C. J. Holmes, and various other papers.) I went to 91, Long Lane, at 7 o'clock on the evening of 10th May, directly after Holmes was brought in; it was baker's shop, with the name of Holmes outside, and arranged on shelves round the shop inside were 23 empty butter firkins, 20 empty cheese boxes, 14 empty biscuit boxes, and some dummy cheeses arranged carefully on the shelves round the shop, and painted in large letters round the shop were "Choicest dairy provisions, rich old Cheshire and other cheeses, prime mild Wiltshire and other bacons, prime Devon and Dorset butters"—I did not find the smallest particle of butter, cheese, bacon, or anything else; I found some bread, and some flour in small paper bags similar to the bag found in Holmes's pocket—outside, on the lamp, was "Bread, 5s. per quartern," and that was also marked on the window with chalk—there was a bakehouse, and two sacks of flour—I searched the house and brought away a sack full of letters and papers; they consisted of orders for goods, and commission from every part of England respecting flour, provisions, and other articles, and a large number of answers—while I was searching the shop a man brought in a County Court writ, and I found about 40 or 50 County Court summonses; there were judgments amongst them—I found no general business books; there were small account books for credit customers—I Handed the papers I found to Mr. Wontner—on Monday morning, 31st May, I went to Lawrence's premises, 19, Charing Cross; he occupied the first floor back room over the shop, and written on the door was "H. Lawrence and Co., the Accidental and General Arbitration Company'—the room was very scantily furnished—I found there papers and books which I took away, and cards with "H. Lawrence and Co., rectifiers and cordial manufacturers" on them; also a lot of bill-heads of "The Accidental and General

Arbitration Company, 19, Charing Cross, London, all communications to be addressed to the manager, Mr. H. Lawrence"—I found some large bills on coloured paper, on which was printed "The Princess Royal Arabian Tonic, solely imported by H. Lawrence and Co."—there were no business books such as are generally found in an office—I saw the landlord and he made a communication to me—I looked into the books; I did not find a single entry this year; those that were there were for very small amount; the largest was a little over 1l.—I found a mere handful of papers; they are here—I can't recollect whether there were any County Court summonses—I have had charge of several prosecutions of this kind—I remember one against Ruppert, Case, and Grouer, a few sessions back; they were convicted and sentenced to five years' penal servitude.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. It was at 7 p.m. that I went to Holmel's shop; I found bread and flour, but no other articles of provision—there were some small tin boxes; some of them had concentrated essence of meat—I only took away a sample of the flour bags, there were a great many on the premises—I saw his wife at the shop, and a publican, who lives within a few doors—there was a girl serving in the shop, no one else—I said before the magistrate that the shop had the appearance of being well furnished; a casual observer from outside would believe that all the cases and casks were filled, that they were genuine—I have seen some dummy cheeses and things in other shops, but I never saw a whole place so filled—I have known this shop a good many years, but did not know who occupied it; I believe, from my inquiries, Holmes's father kept it for some years.

Cross-examined by Laurence. Your place contained about six chain, a carpet in the middle of the room, and a table—I considered it very shabby—your landlord did not tell me that you had paid 6l. for the furniture—I am not aware that you had a sleeping partner named Boss, of Great George Street, or that you had carried on business at 16, Burton Crescent; I made no inquiry there—I cannot speak of the contents of your books; I only looked at the date of the latest order—I found two letters from you as Holmes.

Re-examined. These are the letters. (These were dated 6th and 10th May)—his landlord told me that he owed him 8/. rent, and he should be glad to get it.

JAMBS WALSH (Police Sergeant M). On Saturday, May 29, I went with Harvey to 52, Manor Place, Walworth—I there found Lawrence and a woman who he represented to be his wife in aback room on the ground floor—I told him I had a warrant for his apprehension for being concerned with Holmes—it was a very small room with a bed in it, a chest of drawers, one or two chairs, and several other little things—what I found on him I handed over to Inspector Fox—next day I went to Hiscock's place, 19, Houghton Road, Peckham; I found him in bed in the back room with his wife—it was a new house; he occupied the downstairs part—I found on him some papers, which I handed to Inspector Fox—before I went to Hiscock's I knew of two persons named Laird and Gear; I had apprehended them months before; I had seen Hiscock in their company the day I arrested them, and followed them all through the City—I have also seen Lawrence in Holmes's company—I arrested Vincent at 217, Hill Street, Walworth, on 14th June; he occupied one room, a front room first floor—I found these papers and 16 pawntickets

on him. (One of time letters was dated from Newgate to His wife about procuring bail; the other was from C. J. Holmes, dated 11th April: "Dear Sir,—If you should have a letter from any one about Farrington let me bow at once")—I found no sign of any business being carried on at Vincent's place.

Cross-examined by MR. FILLAN. I am not aware that Vincent was charged with embezzlement by his employer, and released without a stain on his character.

Cross-examined by Lawrence. I don't know how long you had lived at your place—you told me that you believed Holmes to be a substantial man, that you paid three guineas to a solicitor to make special inquiries into Holme's character, and he reported favourably of him—I have seen you at Long Lane with Holmes three or four days before he was arrested, and you shook hands with him and parted—I can't say that I have seen you with any of the at he prisoners.

GEORGE HARVEY (Police Sergeant M). On Saturday evening, 29th May, I was with Sergeant Walsh near the corner of Lower Bland Street, and saw Furington in the street there with several others—I said to him "Mr. Fox wrote to see you at the station about Holmes's case"—he said "I expected I should have been called in it"—I took him into custody and took him to the station—I then went to his house, 52, Great Dover Street, and searched it; I found a lot of papers, which I put together in a bag sad gave to Inspector Fox—Farrington's place was tolerably well furnished; he had not the whole house; he had some lodgers upstairs; it was not a place of business; there was not the least sign of business about the place; it was more than one room—I Went with Walsh to the Cemetery Road, Nunhead, where Dover lives—Walsh went to the front door and hocked repeatedly—I went to the back and saw Dover come out at the back and go down the garden—a uniform man called to him, and he turned back and went into a water-closet—we waited till he came out—I read the warrant to him—he said "I have given Holmes bills of accommodation, but I have never swindled any one"—I searched the house and found a bag full of papers, which I took to the station and gave to Inspector Fox—Dover's house was in a beastly state; it was a four-roomed house—all the windows were out in some places—it was not a house of business—it was in a fearful state; if we walked across the kitchen our feet slipped in human dirt and cats' and dogs' dirt—the stink was enough to suffocate one—I went twice to Lawrence's office, 19, Charing Cross—I have heard Inspector Fox's description of it, and agree with him—I was with Walsh when he took Lawrence into custody at 52, Manor Place—the description he has given of the room is correct.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. It was between 6 and 7 o'clock on sunday morning when I arrested Dover—the house is one of five or six in a row—I did not ascertain that it was his own house—he went over the the house with me and saw me find the papers—there were some children up stairs in the back room; the whole house was in a most filthy condition. Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. I arrested Farrington about 9 o'clock on Saturday evening there were about five others with him—one of them was Mr. Griffith, one of the witnesses for the prosecution—I did not understand Farrington to say that he expected to be called as a witness, but that some one would want to make inquiry of him—I do not know a man named

Skinner—I did not read the papers I found—the wife told me that then was a woman up stairs ill, and she did not want any more fuss made than was necessary.

MATTHEW FOX (Re-examined). Walsh and Harvey handed me certain papers at the police-station, and I handed them all to Mr. Wontner without examining them.

JOSEPH ISEL BIRCH . I have, with Mr. St. John Wontner, attended to this prosecution for the Government—we received from the different witnesses a mass of papers, some of which I now have before me, and which are separately marked—I assisted Mr. Wontner in sorting them, and those we thought not essential to the prosecution we handed back to the police.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. I think Farrington's papers were a small bagful, out of which I selected 13—Farrington's brother applied for some papers; I told him we had no power, the police had them.

Cross-examined by Lawrence. I have here three letter from you to Holmes; there may have been others—you called on Messrs. Wontner—they declined to see you—you wrote a letter to the firm.

Re-examined. It is our custom, after going through the papers, to give back to the police those we think unimportant, and they are then out of our hands—a pawn-ticket was found on Farrington for a pair of trousers, pledged for 6s. by Lawrence—on Holmes was found a bill of exchange, drawn by Farrington and accepted by Holmes and endorsed by Farrington and Lawrence; also a letter from Messrs. Stoneham, millers at Maidstone, addressed to Farrington, stating, "We are in receipt of an application for flour from 0. J. Holmes;" also a letter to Farrington, on the back of which is the name of "R. Simmonds, 24, Oldbridge Square"—amongst Hiscock's papers is a letter from Whitehouse beginning, "Dear Fred."—amongst Dover's papers is a letter from Lawrence to Farrington, and various claims and summonses against Dover, and a number of pawn-tickets.

EDWARD STRANGLEY ELLABY . I am a starch manufacturer at Battersea, and carry on business as Davis and Co.—I received this letter on 13th August, 1879, from C. J. Holmes, asking for our lowest prices—I replied to that letter, and then received one of the 14th of August ordering half a ton, and another on the 15th ordering half a ton of blue and half a ton of white, another for 5 cwt. of white and 5cwt. of blue—I supplied them—they came to 25l. 15s.—we had references given us—Farrington is one, and one I cannot remember—my manager called on Farrington—he did not see him, but we supplied the order—the terms were two months—on the 22nd of October I wrote to Holmes, stating that we had received an anonymous communication reflecting on his reputation, and requesting a cheque for the amount—I got no answer, and never got any money—we had a subsequent order—we did not execute it—this (produced) is a box in which we supplied some of the starch—this is some of our starch—the best quality is 29s.

Cross-examined. We made inquiries as to Holmes, and it thought the answer we received was about him, but I found out afterwards it applied to his father—I did not consider at first there was any criminality in the transaction.

JOSEPH HENRY SAUNDERS . I am an oil and colourman of 75, Southampton Street, Camberwell—on the 25th of August I purchased of Samuel Holmes five hnnredweight of starch at 22s. a hundred weight.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. It is Davis's best quality—the market value is 29s.—the value of the second quality is from 24s. to 25s—a person named Moulsey sold the starch to me—he had tailed on me several times for different things.

STEPHEN HAWTRET . I assist my brother, a tea dealer in Muscovy Court, Tower Hill—he trades with a partner as Hawtrey and Brett—on the 16th of December, 1879, I received this letter, signed C. J. Holmes, 89, Long Lane, Bermondsey, asking for samples of goods—we replied, and I took down some samples myself—on the 17th we received a letter, ordering two and a half casks of one sort, and two halves of another, and stating he would pay on Saturday—they were sent—these are the invoices—the amount was 16l. 9s., inclusive of duty—they were to pay the duty, which they afterwards did—on the 23rd of December I received this letter from 18, Long Lane, containing a further order, amounting to 24l. 5s. 6d.—we paid the duty on that—it came to 14l. 17s.—I applied for payment, and on the 3rd of February received a promissory note for 25l. 6s.—it was net paid we were applied to to renew the bill for a month, but refused—the money has not been, paid—I supposed we were dealing with genuine traders, and on that belief furnished the goods—they paid 4l. on the duty.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. References were given to us, but unfortunately we did not make inquiries—they were mislaid—I do not recollect anything but one address, which was Peckham Rye.

GEORGE EDWIN JENKINSON . I am harness manufacture, of 44, London Wall—I received this letter, dated the 14th of January, from C. J. Holmes; of 89, Long Lane, in consequence of which we supplied three sets of harness to the value of 20l. 10s—we also supplied him with another set—we got a bill at a month for the first three before that—it was not honoured—before the bill arrived at maturity he ordered another set worth 7l. for which he agreed to pay in a few days—he did not call and pay—he called and gave us a fresh bill, which included the amount of the fourth set—that bill was dishonoured—we placed the matter in the hands of our solicitors, but get no money—we supplied the harness believing that he was trading in a legitimate way and required it for his own use.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. Our firm had done business with his father—it was not the usual style of baker's harness, but he might it for that purpose—we supplied it because we had been connected with his father before—I do not know how long we had knows him—I believe he was a Highly respectable man, and had carried on the business some time.

Re-examined. I can not speak from my own knowledge as to when we had supplied goods to the father—we did not know that Holmes was anying on a separate business—we believed it was the same—I have never been to his place.

JOHN GEORGE VENTRIS FIELD JOHNSON . I carry on business as Johnson and Co., millers, at Wolverton, Bucks—on the 16th of March last I received this letter from C. J. Holmes, wholesale and retail baker, dairyman, grocer, etc., 91, Long Lane, Bermondsey, established 20 years (stating: "I beg to hand you parties that may be security for me for the amount of 50l" (at the back were the names of Dover Brothers, builders and contractors, Station Road Nunhead, and W. Lawrence, 19, Charing Cross., I applied to both those references—I received these replies from Lawrence and Dover-if I afterwards received this letter of the 23rd of March from Lawrence; but we

did not supply the goods—we communicated with the police immediately on receiving the first letter.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I only received one letter from Dover—I was suspicious from the tone of the first letter from Holmes.

HENRY BLAKE SMART . I am cashier to Messrs. Hadley, millers, of Queen Victoria Street—on the 20th September I received a communication, signed C. J. Holmes, baker, and asking for lowest prices of households—I sent the prices, and got another letter from him stating that he would take 10 or 12 sacks on the usual trade terms—I subsequently received this communication from Dover Brothers, on the 20th January, 1880: "Dover Brothers, railway sewage and general contractors. Gentlemen,—We have a wish to assist a young man, by name C. J, Holmes, 91, Long Lane, Bermondsey, baker, who wishes to open an account with some good miller, to supply from 10 to 15 sacks of four per week payable every Monday morning; we will become surety for him to the amount of 50l., to stand good from the date of the first delivery. If you will send us guarantee, we will sign and return at once"—upon that I wrote to Dover Brothers for a reference as to themselves and got a satisfactory one—I ultimately got from them this guarantee on the 4th February, which we agreed to take—we then delivered 10 sacks upon that guarantee, to the amount of 21l. odd, and on the 17th February we received from Dover a promissory note for 21l. 5s. at 2 months—we after wards supplied some flour amounting to 41l. 10s. on the 13th February—we did not send anything on the promissory note—we only delivered it upon Dover's guarantee—we returned the promissory note, refusing to deliver any flour upon it, because that was an order from Dovers themselves—they had opened a shanty—we refused the order, because it was out of our way of business—Holmes's debt of 41l. is still due—we were not paid by Holmes or Dover, and we took proceedings against both, but got nothing—the first 10 sacks were paid for—I do not know whether we obtained judgment, or whether this prosecution stopped it—this letter of the 4th of March we wrote to Dover asking for a cheque of 41l., as we had not obtained payment from Holmes—we got no answer.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. Ten sacks were supplied, for which we were paid, and 20 for which we were not paid, and for those we sued—I knew that Holmes's father carried on business for 16 or 20 years—I cannot say that I knew Holmes.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I do not know how long the father has been dead—this guarantee is for 50l.—we had the name of Ashton as a reference for Dover—we wrote to him; I believe he is a surveyor at Kingston—I did not enquire whether Dover had a large contract at Thornton Heath, and that he wanted flour for his workmen—I think Ashton mentioned in his letter that the contract was at Kingston—this is the letter—I never saw Dover till he was at the police-court—I did not sue Dover and Holmes on the promissory note—it was on the guarantee; I am sure of that—it did not go to trial—we instructed Mr. Gaisford, of the Temple, and a writ was taken out by him.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. I stated at the police-court that Farrington some years ago got credit from us, representing that he was a contractor for Horsemonger Lane Gaol, and that we had to sue him and obtain judgment, which was unsatisfied—it is still an unsatisfied claim—I

have been with Messrs. Hadley 16 years—I did not know Of Farrington being in their employ—I heard that he was—I believe that he left with a good character and got another situation—I believe he did obtain a contract for Horsemonger Lane Gaol, and he came and saw one of the partners—I think an arrangement was made, and he was to pay when he got the money from the gaol—I think we got a cheque from the gaol for 35l—we supplied 46 lots of flour, I believe—according to our books Farrington now owes us 9l.—I am speaking from memory of a thing that happened years ago.

Re-examined. I have not found anything out about Mr. Ashton—we relied upon his letter, and upon that gave credit to both these people.

CHARLES HENRY BINGHAM . I live at Sheffield—in April last I advertised a cob for sale; I received this letter from C. J. Holmes, dated 12th August 1880, asking the lowest price I would take for the cob, and if I would take a bill at one month with security—I answered that and on the 14th received this, offering 30l. and giving as the parties who would back the bill "Henry Lawrence, 19, Charing Cross, and W. Farrington, 52, Great Dover Street"—I received a further letter on 17th, and in the result I declined to let the cob go without the money.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. I had not sufficient confidence in the transaction to part with my cob.

JOHN LIBBY . I live at Cambourne, Cornwall—I advertise poultry, butter and eggs for sale—on 8th March last I received this letter and card from C. J. Holmes, asking for price-list, which I sent, and asked cash or banker's reference—on 5th April I received as reference Lawrence and Oris Jones, 8, Bedford Square,. Commercial Road—I wrote to Lawrence and received this reply of 9th April; I was not satisfied and did not send the goods.

WILLIAM SCOTSON . I am cashier to Messrs. Fairclough & Sons, millers, at Warrington—on 7th April, 1880, I received this letter from C. J. Holmes, asking for samples and prices which I sent, and received references to Dover and Lawrence—I received other letters, made inquiries, and declined the order.

RICHARD SMITH . I am a miller, at Stone, Staffordshire—on 10th January, 1880, I received this letter from C. J. Holmes asking for samples—I replied and on 14th January received references to Farrington and Hiscock, of 24, Nigel Road, Peckham Bye—I applied to Farrington and received this answer—I then received other letters from Holmes referring to Dover Brothers, and Rev. Mr. Haynes, of Houghton, Stone—I found no such persons or place—I did not supply anything.

FRANCIS ALWYN TALLANT . I am a miller, at Midhurst—in August last year, George Holmes gave orders for flour—we had several transactions with him last year which were duly paid for—in the early part of the present year he increased his orders—altogether after August he did business with me and paid me money to the amount of 250l. or 400l. a month—he is still on my books to that amount, but he reduced it and then increased it again to 450l.—he sent me a bill for 100l. and another for 74l. 17s. 6d.; I sent them up to a private inquiry office for collection—they have not been returned, I have never got the money. (Several letters were read from George Holmes, baker and confectioner, from 23, North Cross Road, East Dulwich, to the witness containing orders for flour; also one of 14th April 1880, from 24, Nigel Street, Peckham Rye, enclosing cheque

for 50l., a bill for 4l. 17l. 6d., and one of 20th April as to Farrington's respectability.)

Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. I have never supplied Harrington with any goods, he has never applied to me for any—I have never had any communication from him.

Cross-examined by MR. FILLAN. I never saw Hiscock; I heard nothing of him except that his name was on the back of one of the bills.

By the COURT. My transactions with George Holmes extended over about 10 months ending in April—he kept on paying up to 17th April, all his cheques were honoured but the last.

THOMAS HENRY LEWIS . I am a coachbuilder, of 122; Gloucester Road, Regent's Park—in March last I received these several letters from C. J. Holmes with reference to the purchase of a cart—he offered bilk and referred to Lawrence and Dover Brothers; I made inquiry through my clerk and was not satisfied and did not supply anything.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. In one letter he offered 5l. down—we do business on the letting system—I believe I offered him a van on the-letting system, but I would not accept his bills.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I wrote two or three letters to Dover, but got no reply.

Cross-examined by Lawrence. You gave Holmes a very good character but I was not satisfied with my clerk's report; I sent him Long Lane—I don't know whether the suggestion came from you.

RORERT MUNRO . I am manager to the Consumers' Tea Association, Tower Hill—on 30th December, I received this letter from C. J. Holmes, giving an order for four half chests and two boxes of tea, to the value of between 20l. and 30l., and another letter, not dated, referring to Farington and Hiscock; I communicated with both—I received a favourable reply from Farrington, but none from Hiscock—rafter inquiries, I declined to supply anything—I took a view of Holmes's place and Famngton's and did not like the look of them.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. I thought. Holmes's place did not look like a place that such an order would come from; it did not look bond fide.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. My inquiry of Farrington was whether Holmes was good for 50l.—the order was for 25l.

HENRY BEVERIDGE . I am a tea importer, of 158, Leadenhall Street—on January this year, I advertised for a traveller and engaged Hiscock; he referred me to George Holmes, 22, North Cross Road, East Dulwich—he gave his own address as 24, Nigel Road, Peckham Rye—during the time he was my traveller, he introduced about 600 orders from customers—I think I have received payment from three or four—George Holmes was one of those customers—I have received about 15l. altogether; I (supplied George Holmes to about 50l., he paid about 5l.—Hiscock introduced an order from Henry Whitehouse, of Old Kent Road; he was supplied with five half chests of tea, amounting to 26l. or 27l.—he did not pay for them—he also introduced orders from E. Williams, the Little Wonder, High Street, Leyton, Essex—after the amount became due, I went to Leyton, but could find no such shop occupied by Williams—I treated these as genuine trade orders—I received, through Hiscock, an order from Fleming, 79, Ansdell Road, Nunhead—I received such a satisfactory reference of

Hiscock from Mr. Buxton, and I said I would trust to his honour in selling only to respectable men, and if he got an order from any man he did not know, if he would bring me the references I would make inquiry—he was paid by commission—the result of his employment is that I am out of pocket about 600l.

Cross-examined by MR. FILLAN. I have not had complaints about the quality of my tea; only one, that it was a little dusty, and I agreed to make a small reduction—I have gone to the customers and could not find a great number of them; the shops were shut—I have very little hope of recovering my money; I did not make inquiry before executing the orders—I trusted to Hiscock.

GEORGE. WALTER DASH . I am with Messrs. Clark Brothers, millers, of Chalford, near Stroud—on 24th January last, I received a letter from G. J. Holmes, ordering flower, and giving as references Dover, Fanington and Hiscock—we did not execute the order, it did not commend itself to our judgment; we did not think it worth while to apply to, the references.

GEORGE WALTER BLOW . I am agent for Messrs. Croskill and Sons, cart manufacturers, of Beverley—I carry on a business at 11, Queen Victoria Street, City—in December last Hiscock called on me in company with George Holmes—they asked me the price of a cart—I told them 30 guineas—they gave me a verbal order—Holmes gave me a reference to Farrington, 52, Great Dover Street—Hiscock was present—they asked my terms; I told them cash in a month—Holmes was the chief speaker—Holmes was to be the buyer; he wanted the cart—I wrote to Farrington and received this reply: "December 23, 1879. Gentlemen—I have known and done business with Mr. Holmes, of East Dulwich, for some years, and should think he was safe for what you name"—according to pur usual practice I had asked for reference to double the amount the cart would come to, 50l.—on. the receipt of that letter I delivered the cart—they afterwards both came together again, I think in May, and gave a further order for two vans from George Holmes, in Hiscock's presence; he heard the order given—the prices were to be 52l. 10s. and 63l. 10s.—I was paid for the cart just about the time the second order was given—I delivered the two vans—I told Holmes that I did not care to trust him quite so much, as 116l. and shortly after that he paid me 20l.; I have not received any more—Hiscock asked me for a commission for introducing Holmes, he said it was a usual thing—I said I would enquire into the matter, and asked his name, as I did not know who he was—he said "Dickinson"—I asked his address—he said "a letter addressed to Holmes will find me at any time"—I did this as an ordinary trade business.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. It was about 20th December that I wrote to Farrington—it was not about the prisoner Holmes, but George Holmes, of Dulwich—I did not know him before—I did not write again to Farrington before I supplied the two vans—I stopped the delivery of the second van because I found that George Holmes had left his place, but he came and said he had sold it for 200l. and I let him have the van—I made no further "enquiry of Farrington.

Cross-examined by MR. FILLAN. Hiscock did not introduce Holmes, they both came together—they asked me to stand something to drink after the bargain, and I took them to the Cannon Street Hotel—it was chiefly

Farrington's reference that induced me to part with the first cart, and I parted with the second partly because I was paid for the first, and believed he was carrying on a legimate business.

Re-examined. Ninety-six pound is still owing—about the time these payments became due Samuel Holmes was in custody—I wrote two or three letters to George Holmes, at 24, Nigel Road, the address he gave me, and he wrote to say he would call and see me, but he did not; and just about that time I had a letter from Messrs. Wontner saying the case was in their hands, and I took no further steps—I have traced my 52l. van to the possession of Brierly, a carman in Btermondsey—I have not been able to trace the other.

EDWIN DOLLING . I am a carman in Staple Street, Borough—I bought a van of George Holmes, for 40l. 16l., at the beginning of April, and changed it with Brierly.

THOMAS EASTGATE . I am a member of the firm of Eastgate and Co., 12, Three Crown Square, tea merchants—Hiscock became my traveller from April, 1879, unil November—he introduced from 120 to 150 orders, among them George Holmes, for a half-chest of tea, at 6l. or 8l.—I made inquiries and did not execute it—the total amount of the orders Hiscock introduced was about 500l. or 600l.—I executed about 120—about 20 of them paid, to the extent of 50l. to 70l.

Cross-examined by MR. FILLAN. Hiscock did not object to my making inquiries about Holmes, he said we were rather too particular in oar inquiries—I hope to be able to get some of the money that is due—we refused many of the orders, and then, upon Hiscock's representations, we were induced to send the goods.

AUGUSTUS WILLIAM PARKER . I am an insurance broker, of Lombard Street—in April last Samuel Holmes applied for a loan of £300—he was to find three sureties and insure his life in the General for double the amount—his references were Dover, Lawrence, and Farrington—inquiries were made, and the loan was refused—Holmes was introduced by a person named Manning, of 2, Albert Terrace, St. Ann's Road, Stamford Hill, and Manning was introduced by Mr. Lee, of Russell Villas, Seven Sisters Road.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOHEGAN. Dover came to my office—he did not object to become surety; he came with Holmes to know if the loan would be granted—I received two guineas as inquiry fee.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. I never saw Farrington; a form was sent to him, and he agreed to become security.

WILLIAM JOHN GRIFFITH . I am a merchant, of 86, Fenchurch Street—I know Farrington, Lawrence, and Samuel and George Holmes—I first knew Farrington about the end of February, as a flour factor, seeing him in the Corn Market—I had some flour from Hamburgh, and thought he would be able to sell it—I heard that he bore a very good character on the market, and I made inquiries—he gave me an order for 10 sacks of flour some time in March—it amounted to 23l. 10s.—he gave me a bill for that amount, and that was met—he gave me a further order for the same amount, for which he gave me a bill at a month; that was dishonoured—I have never received the money for that, or for a third order for pea-meal (10l. 12s.), which he said he would pay within a week—George Holmes came to my office about 15th March and gave an order for 30 sacks of flour, amounting to 69l. 15s.—he paid half cash and half in a bill, which was met—he then

gave a further order for 20 sacks, amounting to 45l. 11s., and gave me a 14 days' bill, dated 17th April; that was not met—while that bill was running be ordered 50 sacks of Scotch flour, which came to 60l.—for that he gave me a cheque for 30l., which was honoured, and a bill for 30l., dated April 19th, which was dishonoured—before supplying the Scotch floor Lawrence wrote, on 23rd March, asking for samples and prices of foreign flour—up to that time I knew of no connection between Farrington, Holmes, and Lawrence—I sent him a sample, and received a letter, of 24th March, stating he would submit the same to his friends and let me know the result—on 14th April I received this letter from H. Lawrence and Co., stating that a friend of theirs, a baker at the West-end, would take 15 sacks of flour, and next day I received this letter, offering a two months' bill, but I did not supply the flour—I afterwards supplied Samuel Holmes with Scotch flour to the amount of 58l. 15a. on his own introduction—he came to me and said it was through Farrington—he gave me two bills, which were not met—I have never got any of the money—I was dealing on the footing of an ordinary trade transaction.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. I trusted Holmes on Lawrence's recommendation—I went to Long Lane and saw the shop—it had the appearance of a large business; there was a very large quantity of bread, and I think some milk—he was in custody when the bills were due.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. Before trusting Farrington I made inquiries of Seth Taylor and others; in consequence of those inquiries I called on him and he gave me an order—he was not introduced to me by my of the prisoners, and he did not directly introduce any of them to me; Holmes said he knew me through Farrington; I call that an introduction—Farrington came in while George Holmes was there, and seeing him, he said, "what a fool I was to give him your name"—and Holmes said to Farrington, "I will wait outside till you transact your business"—I had not made any inquiry of Farrington about George Holmes; I asked Lawrence what he knew about Holmes—I had heard that there was a gang of them trading as a long firm; I told Lawrence that—Lawrence told me that Farrington was a poor man, and could not be engaged in big transactions; that was after I had supplied him—this all took place about a week or so before the affair came on at Southwark Police-court—I can't say the dates—Farrington kept out of the way—I called at his residence several times; I saw him one Saturday evening, and the detectives took him while I was talking to him—he had told me that he could not carry on his trade unless he got the usual monthly credit he offered to pay, and said he had the money in his pocket, but I did not see it, or I would have grabbed it—I saw his brother; I don't think I asked him to pay me.

Cross-examined by Lawrence. I have written to you asking if you would discount bills for Farrington and Holmes—you said you had discounted for Holmes of Long Lane—when I told you I had trusted Holmes, you said I ought to have tried to get something in cash—you said that a solicitor you knew had discounted bills for Holmes, and you said you would discount another one for him if you had it—you warned me that Holmes of Dulwich had sold his shop; but all this information was too late—you said Holmes had lent you money, but that was no proof that he was safe—all this was after I had supplied the goods—you pretended you were very innocent in the matter, and would help me, but you never did—you asked me to lend

you 3l.—you told lie you had facilities for an advance of 2001, and you gave me a bill for 10l. and one for 40l. of Lindsay's, but they were not worth anything—before Holmes had any flour, you said he was safe and doing a large business.

Re-examined. I trusted Holmes on Lawrence's recommendation—I have lost 100l. by these transactions—Lawrence attempted to get flour on hia own account; I refused to supply him—I had not the flour at the time and I thought I had taken bills enough; I did not like to trust him—I have since recognised some of the flour I sold to the two Holmes's—I saw half of it at Spratts', and the rest at the Phoenix biscuit club; that was two mouths afterwards.

CHARLES LUCOCK . I am manager for Spratts' biscuit works—I bought 50 sacks of flour of Farrington, on 21st April, for 50l. 10s.; it was a common cheap kind.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNCH. He called the day before and left a sample; I gave the full market value—he represented it as his own, and I made the cheque payable to him.

THOMAS KAY . I am a wine merchant, trading as T. J. Kay and Co., 34, Minories—Phillips was a traveller in my service from December 1878, till 31st January, 1879—he gave a verbal order for spirits for C. J. Holmes, of Long Lane, to the amount of 17l. 2s.—I supplied it; I have never been paid—I knew that Phillips had previously been traveller for Mr. Mossey.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. My porter delivered the goods to Holmes, and got a receipt for it, I have not got it hero—I made inquiry about Holmes through my traveller; I ascertained that he was a respectable man, but we found afterwards that the inquiry was about the father.

Cross-examined by MR. PHILLIPS. You said he was in a good way of business, I did not trust him entirely on your statement, but to a great extent on Mr. McDennot's; you advised me to get cash—Holmes afterwards called, and I think it was in consequence of what he said that I gave him credit; you brought him once, and he came by himself afterwards, and it was after that I supplied the goods on credit fully a month afterwards—yon were no party to that—I am not prosecuting; I am simply a witness; I was bound over; you called on me since you were out on bail—I don't knot that we discussed the case, I said if this was my matter alone, I did not see how you could be charged—you asked me to let you try and make Holmes pay.

RICHARD WELSH . I am a miller, at Barton Mill, near Petworth, Sussex—on 26th March, 1878, I received an order for flour from Holmes, giving two references, Vincent was one and Simonds the other—I replied as to Vincent that I could not accept him if he was the same person I did business with some years ago, and who owed me several hundred pounds—I think be said he was not the same person—I did not send the flour.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. I never saw Holmes, and don't know his writing.

Cross-examined by FILLAN. I never applied to Vincent—he used to sell goods for me on commission three years ago—he was a baker, and I supplied him with flour; he paid at first—he now owes me some hundreds.

Re-examined. He was my traveller from 1866 to 1869—during that time he brought me many orders from people who did not pay—in 1869 he owed me 500l. or 600l. on his own account, besides the bad debts he made

as traveller—I heard nothing of him After that till this application of Holmes.

JOHN HARRIS . I am agent to Booth, Brothers, coal merchants, at Walworth—Vincent at one time took orders for that firm on commission—he introduced an order for coals from C. J. Holmes, of 89, Long Lane—on 11th December, 1879, to the amount of 2l. 18s.—they were not paid for—Vincent said they would be paid for on delivery; but when the carman returned, he reported that they were to be paid for in a month, according to the terms with the traveller—I would not have parted with them on those terms—I applied for payment within an hour, and have since make many applications, and sued in the County Court, but have not recovered anything.

HENRY BARTON WOOD . I am traveller to Messrs. Leney and Sons, brewers, at Walworth—Hiscock was our traveller from November, 1878, to July, 1879; he was paid 2l. a week and commission of 1s. a barrel on all he sold; he was to lose 15 per cent on money not recovered—he made a good many bad debts, one was the prisoner Holmes, two casks at 2l.14s.—he also introduced a small order from Phillips and Whitehouse, wither paid—altogether I should think the number of bad debts amounted to about 130l., 70l. or 75l. of which is still unsatisfied—he would be a loser under the terms of his contract.

Cross-examined by MR. FILLAN, We made inquiries before executing some of the orders, the order from Phillips and Whitehouse were each for a nine gallon cask—I don't believe we made inquiry about Holmes.

THOMAS HANCOCK . I am employed by Daniel Greenaway, printer, of 30, Camomile Street—Phillips was a traveller. for us from October, 1878, to January, 1879—he introduced on order from C. J. Holmes, of 89, Long Lane; and we supplied handbills and posters relative to opening a branch business at East Surrey Grove, Peckham—we sent an account; it has never been paid—Phillips introduced a few other small accounts which have not been paid—he left principally for quarrelling with other people, and we also discovered that he was travelling for Mr. Massey at the same time.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. Holmes' account was 2l. 8s. 6d.—I know there was a shop at East Surrey Grove, I believe opened by Holmes—the goods were delivered in Long Lane—he had no other dealings with us to my knowledge.

Cross-examined by Phillips. Ten pounds would be the outside of the bad debts you made, including Holmes—since you left Mr. Greenaway has asked you to collect several of the outstanding accounts, and you have collected some and handed over the balance.

EEENEZER SLATER KING . I have been in the employment of the executors of Mr. Charles Flowers, a miller, of Biggleswade—Farrington was a traveller of Mr. Flowers, and his father had been so before him—in December, 1878, an order was taken by one of the Farrington's, for flour to be supplied to Charles Holmes, of Tabard Street, to the amount of about 32l.—I cannot tell which of the Farrington's brought the order; they were both in the service at that time, the son acting during his father's illness—it was the son's duty to get in this debt from Holmes—he did not succeed in doing so—we have never been paid—Holmes had previously paid for small-quantities of flour.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. I never saw Holmes of Tabard Street—I am not prepared to say it was the prisoner.

Cross-examined. by MR. LYNCH. I had been with Mr. Powers 11 years—this debt of Holmes was contracted in 1877 or 1878—Farrington became our traveller in April, 1879—I am not prepared to say that the debt was not contracted by him because he acted for his father—he became traveller on the death of his father—I have not my books here—I speak from recollection—our system was that customers should pay one lot under the other—when Farrington left he sued the executors in the county court for wrongful dismissal—he got a verdict—he made about half-a-dozen bad debts.

WILLIAM JORDAN . I am a clerk to Powers and Son, of Albion Mills, King's Cross, brother to the last witness's firm—in August, 1879 I met Holmes in Mark Lane—he asked me to supply him with ten sacks of flour which I did—he paid on the following Monday morning—they were delivered in. Tabard Street on the Wednesday, and on Thursday morning we received a letter from a man stating that he (the writer) had bought the business of Holmes—payment was not made—we put the matter in the hands of our solicitors; they sued him, but were unable to serve the writ—I met him in Mark lane some weeks afterwards; I did not speak to him—I afterwards heard of his doing business in Dulwich—the writ was afterwards served in Long Lane, but on the wrong man—I obtained a second writ, and meeting Holmes in Mark Lane, I said "Mr. Holmes;" he said "Yes"—I said "I have a piece of paper for you"—he took the writ, tore it in two, and knocked me down.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. There is no doubt as to which Holmes knocked me down or which got the flour—I swear that Samuel Holmes bought it—I did not deliver it myself—I don't know whether it was delivered to him or his brother—it might have been in '77, '78, or '79—he was fined at the Mansion House for the assault—I am prepared to swear it was the prisoner—George Holmes is very like him; he was a witness for his brother at the Mansion House in the assault charge—I am certain it was not George who knocked me down.

EDWARD WALKER . I am a partner in the Phoenix biscuit works, Ratcliff Cross—on 1st May I purchased from Farrington 40 sacks of middlings, at 18s. a sack; 50 sacks were delivered—they have since been recognised by Mr. Griffiths.

By the COURT. I had not had any previous transaction with Farrington—I gave him what I considered a fair market price—I have bought better stuff since at less money—I bought it in the ordinary way on the market.

FREDERICK BENJAMIN GANDEE . I am a teacher of drawing—in April, 1879, I saw an advertisement in the paper which caused me to write a letter to H. Lawrence and Co., and got this answer of April 15th, 1879—it states: "We duly received your favour of 3rd January"—I had written so long before as that (this was a proposal to borrow 50l. or 100l. as additional capital to increase the business of cordial manufacturers)—after receiving that letter I saw Lawrence at Burton Crescent—he told me he was doing a good business, and offered me his book to look over—I found that he had done business to the amount of something under 50/. in a few months—I said "Mr. Lawrence, we are strangers, you must give me references," and he gave me three; one to Mr. Hamilton Boss, Secretary to an important Scotch club in Great George Street, consisting of about 1,500 noblemen, and one to Mr. Hayman, of Middleton Square; I forget the third, but it was some

distance off—it was neither of the prisoners—I called on them all—I said "You want 50l.?"—he said "No, I think I can do with 25l."—I thought that was greatly in his favour—I said "If your references are satisfactory I will let you have amount," and I did—I have only got 8l. of it back; he paid me 1l. a week for eight weeks; he cannot pay more, he is a poor man—he gave me no security, only his bill; he has not taken it up—I have not got it—there was no name on it but his own—I afterwards lent him 3l.10s. to buy goods, and afterwards on Thomas's bill for 58l. I lent him 15l., and afterwards on Hayman's bill of 86l. 10s. 35l., and afterwards 10l. more on Hayman's renewed bill, and afterwards 17l. 10s. on a bill of Farrington's—my solicitor, Mr. Davis, has that—I afterwards lent him 40l. more on Holmes's bill, in all 138l., which he still owes me—I have none of the bills here—they are all overdue, none of them produced anything—I think I was applied to for a further advance, which I refused—I have here a letter of Lawrence's in June, 1879, written on a printed prospectus of the "Princess Royal Stimulant; "also one of 2nd November, 1879, with reference to Farrington's bill—I employed Mr. Dinn, a solicitor, to make inquiries with regard to Farrington—I have not had any communication personally with any of the prisoners except Lawrence—it was after Mr. Dinn's report to me that I advanced the money on Farrington's bill—I have sued all the parties, and got judgment in every case, but got nothing—-—I have paid Mr. Dinn his costs—he is not my solicitor now—I have since employed Mr. Davis—these (produced. are the two bills of Farrington and Holmes—I endorsed them both—I endorse every bill, as a receipt for the money; I always do so if I advance money on them, thinking they will be paid; I shall not do so again—I put in an execution against Farrington that yielded 17s. I think; the others nothing—this bill for 82l. 7s., of 9th March, drawn by Dover Brothers, is the one I declined—it was given to me by Mr. Davis—it comes from Holmes—Lawrence had no connection with that, so far as I know—I trusted to Mr. Dinn, and paid him for it.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. I only discount occasionally—I advanced 40l. this 61l. 10s. bill on 12th March—it became due on 24th May—I did not charge any interest; I was to have the balance for the money lawrence owed me—I never saw Holmes till he was at the police-court.

Cross-examined by MR. SAMPSON. I advanced 17l. 10s. on the 41l. 6s. bill-—I had no other security—I have never realised anything on it—I had Mr. Boss's promise in writing to pay me if these parties failed; this is the letter, dated 11th February—Mr. Ross told me that Lawrence was a respectable man, though poor, and that he would get on if he had a little capital, and that he had himself advanced him 30l.—in consequence of the letters I got from the three references, Mr. Ross being one, I advanced the 25l.—I did not require the bill to be endorsed by Mr. Boss—on the second occasion I said I could not do it without Mr. Boss's authority—Lawrence said he would get it, and I got Mr. Boss's letter and gave Lawrence the money the next day.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I do not remember the names of Cook and Urquhart being given me as references to a bill, with Holmes's name on it—I don't think said so at the police-court; if I did it must be so.

Cross-examined by MR. FILLAN. Hiscock was not one of the references—Mr. Dinn was my solicitor in carrying out these loans—I don't think that he also acted for Lawrence; I was not aware of it.

Cross-examined by Lawrence. I answered your advertisement seeking a a partner—you took no notice of the application for three months-you gave me three references, Hayxnan, Silverman, and Rose—I saw Mrs. Silverman; she said you were poor but honest—I looked over your books—I did not tell you if you required a reference you might refer to me; I did not know you enough—I paid you a visit at Charing Cross—the office was a good-sized room, quite sufficient for your purpose—it was respectably furnished—I thought Hayman was a respectable man, but I am sorry to find he is not—I referred Holmes's bill to Mr. Dinn—I believe his clerk made personal inquiries about him—I have heard that Mr. Dinn advanced money to Holmes out of his own pocket; I don't know it as a fact.

Re-examined. I saw Mr. Boss several times; he said he Lawrence had been misled, that he was not so guilty as he was represented; he lost money by Lawrence; he lent him a large sum of money—Lawrence represented that these were genuine trade bills, that he had sold cigars to those persons, and they had given him the bills for them.

HENRY DINN . I am a solicitor of Doctors' Commons—I acted for Mr. Gandee to a certain extent in a professional capacity—at that time I did not know any of the prisoners; I did subsequently, only Lawrence—he was sent on to me by Mr. Gandee—I subsequently made the acquaintance of Dover—I never saw Farrington; I am not sure whether! wrote him a letter—to the best of my knowledge I did not—I had no communication with Vincent or with Holmes in reference to Mr. Gandee's matter—I wrote this letter (Head, from the witness to Vincent, dated 11th March, 1880; "Sir,—Mr. Holmes, of 91, Long Lane, has given you as a reference to his respectability and solvency, and I shall be glad if you will inform me by return of post what you know of Mr. Holmes and his means, and if he can be safely trusted from 60l. to 80l.")—I was not instructed by Mr. Gandee as to that inquiry—what Mr. Gandee has stated with regard to the instructions he gave me as to the two bills is correct—I received this answer from Vincent ("March 10, 1880. In reply to yours of this day I have known Mr. Holmes for some year, and have done a large business with him, and always found him straightforward and punctual in payment, and I consider him safe for the amount you name")—I had forgotten that when I said I had had no correspondence with Vincent—I sent a clerk to make inquiries about Holmes and Farrington, but not on behalf of Mr. Gandee—I have been a solicitor thirty years.

JOSEPH WASSEY . I am a teacher in public schools, and am engaged in literary pursuits—at the time I employed Phillips I had an agency in Mark Lane with several French houses in the wine trade—I was agent for a wine house in Epernay—I had an office at 72, Mark Lane—Phillips became my traveller towards the end of 1878 in answer to an advertisement—I employed him on commission—he brought me between 14 and 20 orders, but they were hardly worth putting down—they varied in amounts—they were very bad orders—I put faith in his representation that all the orders he brought me were to be exceptionally good—some of them were fictitious—he brought an order from Charles John Holmes for champagne, and another in the name of John Holmes, the two together amounting to 14l. 16s—I did not execute the order to John Holmes; I did the one to Charles John Holmes; that was never paid; that wine was delivered in Long lane—Phillips

gave me his own address as No. 5, Anstey Road, Peckham Rey—he remained with me about six weeks during December and January.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. I gave up the wine trade the beginning of January—the firm at Epernay have not directed customers not to pay any account to me—the firm drew on all the buyers.

Cross-examined by Phillips. I do not know the signature of Mrs. Tasse of Epernay; I never saw it—the firm have dissolved—I represented them from 1877 to the beginning of 1879—I am now living at East End, Finchley—I have no place of business—I have now continued my own profession, which I have exercised 30 years—you introduced about eight fictitious orders—you did not tell me when I employed you that you were traveller for Mr. Greenaway, or I should not have employed you; I found it out afterwards—I have paid you nothing—you sued me for 8l. or 9l. for commission in the Loud Mayor's Court, and you owe me 8l. 16s. for legal costs which I incurred—the action went entirely against you; the verdict was in my favour—I do not owe you anything—you did not leave me at your own accord; I kicked you out of the office—I was not turned out of my office in Mark Lane and sold up—I did compound with my creditors in 1871—I have given a bill of sale to suit my own puroses—I have no judgment out against me.

HENRY HOST SWINNEY . I am a commission agent in Fenchurch Street-in November, 1879, I engaged Whitehouse as a traveller—he brought me three orders from C. J. Holmes for biscuits to the amount of 17l. 3s. 8d.—that has never been paid—the terms were at one month—I have taken steps, but have recovered noticing—Whitehouse also brought me an order from George Holmes for about the same amount; he did not pay—he also brought an order from Hiscook to an amount of 26l., for which he gave me an acceptance—Simmonds called at my office on the 28th January last, and applied for the same post as Whitehouse had had.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. The orders supplied to C. J. Holmes we on the 21st and 22nd November, and 3rd December, 1879—I tare never Been Holmes—I took proceedings in the City of London Court, but I found he was them, in custody.

Cross-examined by MR. FILLAN. It was some tea that Hiscock had—the acceptance was due on the 7th April—he called on me on the 5th, and asked me for an extension—I gave him until the 19th, but he did not pay—I do not remember whether he was in custody at that time or not.

CHARLES SCALES . I am in the service of Godenti, Spazaguapue, and Cod, fancy confectioners, 49 and 50, Milton Street, City—Whitehouse became their traveller on 29th September, 1879, until about the end of October—he introduced orders to the amount of about 140l. or 150l. of which only 17l. was paid—the goods were not all delivered—one order was from Charles Holmes, of Long Lane; another from George Holmes, of Dulwich were never paid for—I went to George Holmes's place and made and found he had sold his business and gona.

Cross-examined by MR. LEVY. I saw the prisoner Holmes when I called; in Long Lane—it looked like a genuine concern—we took proceedings him in the Mayor's Court.

MARTIN TUCKER . I am sub-manager at the Universal Tea Association, 4, Mark Lane Square, and Simmonds was our traveller from 26th April to 24th May this year—he introduced an order from C. J.

Holmes for six half-chests of tea to the value of about 30l.—we made inquiry, and did not execute it.

WILLIAM SEARLE . I am a stationer at 16, Camomile Street, City—Phillips came as traveller 14th July, and remained until the 21st November last year—he introduced an order from Hiscock—it was only 7s.—he did not pay.

GEORGE WILLIAM CHITTY . I am a miller at Dover—on 25th July last I received a letter, signed C. J. Holmes, asking for prices, and afterwards another letter containing an order and giving references—one was to Simmonds—I wrote and got this reply of the 9th August (produced.—I did not supply the flour, although the answers were satisfactory—I had an application from Farrington to be employed as traveller, but I did not want one—I had a further letter from Holmes, asking if his references suited and why I did not send the flour; and on the 7th September another letter from Farrington—I became suspicious—I did not send the floor.

JAMES CHRISTY . I am a miller of Chelsea—on the 25th July I received a letter from Holmes asking for prices of flour, and on the 2nd August an order for 20 sacks, and enclosing references to Simmonds and Shaw—I wrote to them and got replies; in consequence of which I sent 20 sacks of flour to Holmes, value 35l.—I got a cheque from him in return, which was dishonoured—I have never got paid.

Several letters produced in the course of the ease were read, tending to show the connection between the different defendants.

Holmes and Lawrence received good characters.

HOLMES— GUILTY of obtaining and of conspiracy.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. DOVER, LAWRENCE, and FARRINGTON— GUILTY of conspiracy.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. HISCOCK, VINCENT, SIMMONDS, and PHILLIPS— NOT GUILTY .

View as XML