The Proceedings of the Old Bailey

 

494.   JOHN GLOVER was indicted for stealing, on the 3d of June , a ring with a hair device set in gold, value 22 s. the property of   Henry Robins .

- LAWSON sworn.

I was left in care of Mr. Robins's saleroom at  Covent-Garden ; I was in the saleroom, the prisoner came in and asked me for a catalogue; he asked me for the ring, which was lot 111; I gave him it to look at, and he kept it, and about two minutes, I asked him for it, and he said he had not got it, and had given it back again; I took hold of him, and he put his hand in his waistcoat-pocket, I thought he put the ring in, I sent to Bow-street, and   Thomas Pearce came, and asked the prisoner several times for the ring, and he said he had not got it, he was stripped and searched; he pulled off his gloves himself, and threw them on the floor, and the man looked in the glove, and found the ring in it.

Prisoner's Counsel. He did not attempt to go, old he? - No.

  JAMES COX sworn.

I happened to be at the room looking at some goods when the prisoner was asked for the ring; he said he had returned it, and had not got it, he was stripped to his shirt, I took up his gloves from the ground, and one of them dropped; I asked him frequently if he had it, or knew any thing thing of it, and he said no.

Court to Lowson. What sort of a ring was it you gave the prisoner to look at? - A hair device ring, I never looked particularly at it, but I know it again; it has letters round it, I never read it, I saw the letters round it, it was lotted and had a ticket on it; it says a hair device ring, the letters I know nothing about, it is a lock of hair, I know nothing of it, but from the description of the catalogue.

Is that the ring (shewing him a ring)? - No, this is not the ring, the ring lost was a larger ring.

Look at that then? - No, that is not the ring, it had no letters in the middle.

What think you whether that is the ring or not? - This is the ring; I know it by the hair in the middle.

  THOMAS PEARCE sworn.

I was sent for to Mr. Robins's room; the prisoner was there, I asked what was the matter; I told him, young man, why do not you give it them again? says he I know nothing at all about it, for I restored

it again; says I, do not tell any stories, you will get yourself into trouble; says I, I must strip you into your shirt; he pulled off his shoes and stockings, and breeches, his coat and waistcoat; and I said, why do not you pull off your gloves? and he pulled off his gloves, and threw them on the floor; Cox took up one of the gloves, and he threw it on the floor, and it rung, and I said there is the ring, and I saw the ring found in the glove, in the inside of the glove; when first I came it was in the ball of his hand.

Prisoner's Counsel. You could not see through the glove? - No I did not.

Doctor   JOSEPH HART MEYERS sworn.

I am a physician, I live in John-street, America-square; I have know the prisoner some what about two years, I have attended him in the character of a physician, I cannot speak to his character at all, only attended him as physician; I was called in to him about two years ago, under a great delirium; he had every symptom of insanity; I have not attended him since; but after attending him four or or five weeks, his fever yielded to the treatment we administered; but there was a degree of idiocy which remained, a perfect fatuity, absolute fatuity.

Court. You attended him; how long did you attend him after his fever had abated? - His fever intermitted and returned with as much severity as at the first: I attended him after his fever was removed, and there was a degree of fatuity remained, and idiocy, and a want of recollection in his conduct that convinced he was not recovered.

Is it not common for a state of weakness and wandering of mind to remain for some time after a fever, for a delirium to remain? - Yes.

Were you able from attending him for a week after his fever had left him, to form any judgment whether his disorder was of a permanent nature or not? - From his having been deemed incurable by other professional men, I was convinced his disorder would not yield to the treatment; I believe his disorder was of the kind called idiocy; I frequently met him in the street, and he appeared the same; he had a ticket I believe from St. Luke's, to which I recommended him.

  SOLOMON DE BAS sworn.

I am not his apothecary, I never attended him; I knew him; he was along with me about two years ago in the country, he had a very great fright by St. Edmund's-bury, by some thief that there was on the road; we were travelling on the road together, and we were coming by St. Edmund's-bury, and there were some thieves, and we were both frightened together.

Court. Do you mean that he was so frightened, hearing that there were thieves on the road, that he lost his senses; did you lose your reason by being frightened? - I know the reason why we were frightened, because there were thieves on the road; I did not lose my senses, but he was frightened out of his wits; I desired him to be blooded, and ever since he was so.

Prisoner's Counsel. You had no senses to lose.

  DANIEL JACOB DE CASTRO sworn.

I have know him a considerable time, some years; I am secretary to the Jewish communion; this man's friends applied for relief, in consequence of his being in a state of lunacy; I looked back to my books, and I found that in consequence of that two guineas were granted March was a twelvemonth; I saw him in a state of melancholy so late as February, I went to carry some charity to him; an unfortunate accident had happened to him which rendered him worse; a child of his was burnt to death, he was sitting with his wife big with child, and he in a state of insensibility, and I have observed him frequently since in the very same state; he had the appearance of a man whose mind was not right; I knew him before, a sprightly young man, I knew no harm of him, but I knew him at that time.

  BENJAMIN DECASTO sworn.

I attended this young man with Dr. Meyers; I attended him four or five weeks, I found him in a state of delirium, when that delirium went off, he was quite an ideot; it appeared quite a perfect idiotism, I looked upon him incurable, not only me but Dr. Meyers pronounced him so; I have seen him lately, he was then in that state.

Court. You saw him lately did you? - Yes.

Where? - At his house.

How long were you with him? - Not long.

How long? - It might be about a quarter of an hour; his wife was ill, and I went on that occasion, his wife sent for me, he was in the room at the time I was there.

What conversation had you with him? - I asked him how he did, and he did not give me a proper answer, and I judged his mind was the same.

What answer did he give you? - Upon my honour I cannot take upon me to say the exact words, but I know he did not give me an answer agreeable to what I asked him, I cannot tell you what sort of answer.

How came you to judge it not a proper answer? - I knew he did not give me a proper answer.

Why not? - I remember it was not, and I have seen him since that in the street.

Had you any conversation with him? - None at all, I judged of the state of his mind, by his raving about, jumping about the street; not walking in a manner that a man in his senses should do, he walked in a harum scarum manner.

Now describe a little? - Just as a madman does.

I really do not know how a madman walks till you tell me; I want to know? - By his raving and jumping about.

Did you see him jumping? - Yes, about the street.

In what manner, do describe a little? - Why, jumping from one place to another.

By himself, or with anybody? - By himself.

Where was he jumping? - Why, it was at Bethnal-Green that he was jumping about.

What to try how far he could leap? - I do not know, I do not recollect that anybody was with me, but I know he was by himself; I had no conversation with him then, the last conversation I had with him was at his own house; I asked him how he did, and I do not recollect what his answer was, but it was not a direct one.

Do you think that every man that does not give a direct answer is mad? - No, certainly not; I think that the answer he gave me was not a direct one.

You cannot tell us anything like his answer? - No, I cannot.

The Remainder of this Trial in the next Part, which will be published in a few Days.

 

Continuation of the Trial of   John Glover .

  ISAAC SAUL SILVAREZ sworn.

I am clerk of the Portuguese Synagogue, I have known him many years; I never heard anything at all against him, his character was good about two years ago, he had been deranged in his mind; he has continued in a state of insanity, after the first violence was over; and was put on the lift of the poor, because from his idiotism he was not able to support his wife and family, and once they brought him to the synagogue, and he ran about and threw himself down like a madman; that is about eight months ago, and he continues so still.

Jury. What was he before? - He used to deal in drugs, to the best of my knowledge.

  ABRAHAM BALASCO sworn.

I am a watch instrument-maker, I have known him ever since he was a little boy, a very honest young man as any in the world; I nursed him in his disorder about five or six weeks when he had this disorer quite raving; I met him three weeks ago, says I, how are you, he looked in my face and laughed, and would not give me any answer.

MESHOD BELLISLE sworn.

The prisoner had a very good character; I went to see him when he was very ill; I assisted to nurse him several times; when I asked him one question, he answered me another; I asked him how he did, sometimes he laughed, sometimes he answered me contrary, he appeared to be in a sulky manner like.

Court. What appearance of sulkiness had he? was it from his laughing you concluded him to be sulky? - I could not get a word from him.

  JOHN SEXTON sworn.

I have known him fourteen months, very honest I believe, and supported his family; I looked upon him to be out of

his mind, from his manner of acting in the shop; I never saw anything dishonest of him.

PROSPER BOTTIBO sworn.

The prisoner's name is   Judah Bottibo , the prisoner is the man, he is my own brother.

How long has he gone by the name of   John Glover ? - Never to my knowledge, I never knew him by that name; he has been out of his mind two years ago; he went out one morning after his living to maintain his family, and was quite out of his mind; he has been supported part by the synagogue and part by me.

Was he in a state of mind, so as to be able to take care of his family? - No, he was not.

How long before this happened did you see him? - I saw him the day before; he never was perfectly in his mind, since he was taken; he was not in his mind then.

Court to Lawson. How came this man to be indicted by the name of   John Glover ? - When he came to the bar at Bow-street, they asked him his name, and he said his name was   John Glover ; he was examined before a magistrate, and said he was a Jew; he did not give much account of himself; when he came into the room, he walked round the room, and asked for a catalogue and looked at the things.

Did you observe any thing particular in his behaviour different from other men? - No, I did not.

When he was before the justice, how did he behave himself? - Just the same as he did in the room.

Court to Cox. In what manner did the prisoner behave? - I did not observe him, till they were going to stop him.

When they did stop him, in what manner did he behave? - He stood still and said nothing till I asked him what he had done with the ring; and he said he had returned it back, he had not got it, so he said to the constable, I observed nothing in his behaviour that had the appearance of either a madman or an idiot; I was present before the justice, when he was examined, he behaved the same as he did in the room; Sir Sampson asked him what profession he was, he said no profession; his father was a jew, and he was born in Gibraltar; he said very little more.

Jury. How long was he examining these articles before you missed the ring? - About three minutes, he had in his hand a catalogue and looked at the catalogue.

Did he behave like any other person? - Yes.

Were there rings of more value? - There was no diamond rings.

(Prisoner's Counsel looks at the Catalogue.)

The next article but two is a brilliant ring, and soon after a diamond pin and diamond locket.

The Prisoner's Brother. Please to enquire how he has behaved since he was in confinement.

Owen. I have seen him once or twice, he was committed only the day before yesterday; he seemed to be very stupid since he has been with us; I have taken no further observation of him.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Court. Upon the ground that this man has been acquitted by the jury, care should be taken of him.

Mr. De Castro. I shall take care of him, he shall lie in close confinement; it is out of foolish humanity to let him go at large; I shall certainly take care that he is either put into Bedlam, St. Luke's or a private madhouse.