JAMES BRUCE.
26th October 1846
Reference Numbert18461026-2086
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

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

2086. JAMES BRUCE was indicted for stealing 3 watches, value 22l. 10s., the goods of John Charles Henry Delolme.

MR. CLARKSON conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN CHARLES HENRY DELOLME . I am a watchmaker, and live in Rath bone-place. On the 16th of Sept. the prisoner came to my shop, and said he wanted some watches to show to a customer—he said, "I suppose you know who I am; I come from Jermyn-street; my name is Bruce"—I have had a customer named Bruce, sixteen or twenty years ago, a respectable jeweller, the father of the prisoner—he had lived in Cranbourn-alley—on the 18th he came again, in my absence—I was called down by my shopman, between one and two o'clock—the shopman said he wanted some watches again—the watches were selected, and a bill of parcels made out, but as I came down stairs I made up my mind not to let him have them—I said, "I cannot let you have these watches; I will send them to Jermyn-street"—he insisted on having them—he said he should not keep them long—I said 1 expected a customer who I wanted to show them to—he said he should only be half an hour; he was going to Fitzroy-square, to show them to a customer who was to select one—I was persuaded to let him have them to show his customer—he said he should be back in half an hour—I should not have parted with them for any purpose but for him to show them to a customer—they were worth 23l.—if I had known they were going to be pawned I should not have parted with them.

Cross-examined by MR. BALLAHTINE. Q. If he had brought you back the money you would have been quite satisfied? A yes there was no understanding

that he was to have credit—if he had found a customer he was entitled to deliver the watch to him, obtain the money, and deliver it to me—my shopman made me out a bill on the 16th, that on the 18th was not completed—I do not recognize this bill—it was not delivered to him in my presence—I only considered it a memorandum—I had not looked at it—it seems my assistant gave it him—I had made up my mind not to trust him—this is the amount I was to receive, not what he was to sell them for—if they had been sold I should have looked to him for the money—I heard that the mother still carries on the business, but had called the creditors together, and I did not intend him to have the goods—the mother denied any know-ledge of the transaction.

MR. CLARKSON. Q. Did he want three watches to sell? A. He had them merely to try to sell them—he did not say he would keep one for a certainty—he was only to sell one.

COURT. Q. What induced you to part with the property? A. Having known the father for many years as a respectable jeweller, and I did not hesi-tate to part with them at the moment, but I objected to give credit till I made further inquiry—the bill of parcels was not made out under my directions—it was made out previous to my coming down stairs—I did not direct that it should be completed—it is not a bill.

HENRY RICHARDSON . I am a pawnbroker, and live in Henry-street, Port-land-town. On the 23rd of Sept. a watch was pawned with me for 3l. by a female, in the name of Ann Smith.

ANN POORE . I am servant at No. 17, Buckingham-street, Fitzroy-square. I pawned the watch produced, by the direction of Miss Hamilton—the pri-soner was lodging in the house with her at the time.

Cross-examined. Q. He was not the only gentleman living with her; who lived with her a fortnight before? A. I do not know—it is not a common brothel—it is a lodging-house, either single or married persons lodged there, not generally ladies—there is one male lodger named Lawrence—Miss Lawrence and Miss Hamilton are the same person—I cannot say whether Lawrence is Miss Hamilton's husband—I do not know that the women who lodge there are prostitutes—I have not a daughter living there, and never had—Mrs. Bayley is the landlady of the house, and is no relation of mine—she is my mistress—I cannot swear that there is no relationship between us—she is my daughter—it is a respectable house, for what I know.

JAMES PALMER . I am in the service of George Chapman, pawnbroker, of London-street. On the 23rd of Sept. I received this watch in pledge for 3l. from the witness Lawrence—I have seen the corresponding duplicate produced by Fowler.

ANN HAMILTON . I am single. On the 23rd of Sept. last I was living at No. 7, Buckingham-street—the prisoner lived there with me for a fortnight—we shared the same bed—I put the watch produced, pledged with Richardson, into Poore's hand, as she said she knew a lady who would buy it—the pri-soner had given it me—I did not give another watch to George Lawrence to pawn—the prisoner gave him that.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you mean Poore stole the watch? A. No—there is no doubt of the character of the house—I had met the prisoner by acci-dent the Sunday week before this.

GEORGE LAWRENCE . I sometimes live at No. 17, Buckingham-street. By the directions of Fowler I fetched a watch out of Ann Hamilton's bed-room and gave it to him—the prisoner had given me a watch to pawn, and I pawned it for 3l. at Chapman's.

WILLIAM BRUCE . I manage the business of a jeweller for my mother in Jermyn-street, St. James's. On the 18th of Sept. the prisoner had no authority

from me, or my mother to obtain the watches from Mr. Delolme, neither on approbation or for any purpose.

Q. He was not living with the family? A. It was his home.

Cross-examined. Q. I believe he bad had 50l. a year? A. Yes.

HENRY FOWLER (policeman.) On the 26th of Sept. I searched the prisoner's lodgings, at No. 17, Buckingham-street, and found six duplicates, three of which relate to the watches produced—I produced them to the prisoner, and asked him if they were his property, and said he had authorized the parties to pledge the articles for him—after he was in custody he told me he had given a watch to Miss Hamilton—I afterwards received that watch from her brother.

JOHN SERGEANT (police-constable E 65.) On the 26th of Sept. I took the prisoner in charge, at No. 17, Buckingham-street—I asked him if he was living there in the name of Blunt—he said, "No"—Miss Hamilton said he was—I told him he must consider himself in custody for obtaining watches from Mr. Delolme by false pretences—he said, "Oh my God! I intended to give bills"—on the way to the station he said his credit was at an end, and that was the only way he had of getting a living.

Cross-examined. Q. You had made no observation to him about that? A. No.

J. H. DELOLME re-examined. He had the three watches, with power to select only one for the customer.

GUILTY .


View as XML