Old Bailey Proceedings.
7th January 1856
Reference Number: t18560107

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
7th January 1856
Reference Numberf18560107

Related Material



A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more them once in custody—an obelisk (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters.


OLD COURT.—Monday, January 7th, 1856.


Before Mr. Recorder and the First Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-155
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

155. WILLIAM GRIFFITHS was indicted for stealing, on 19th Nov., 100 slate pencils, value 3d. 2nd COUNT, stealing 12 night lights, value 6d. 3rd COUNT, stealing 12 forks, and 2 lamps, value 1l. 3s.; the goods of Alfred Davis and others, his masters.

MESSRS. BODKIN and BALLANTINE conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM SHAW (City policeman, 224). On 23rd Nov. I was in Bishopsgate-street, watching the premises of Mr. Alfred Davis, of No. 59 and 60, Houndsditch—about 6 o'clock in the evening I saw the prisoner come from the premises, he had this bag with him—I went up to him, and asked what he had got in the bag—he said he had got a lamp which he had bought at Mr. Alfred Davis's, in Houndaditch—I asked him if he would allow me to see it—he took it out, and showed it to me—there were two lamps, I produce them—I took the bag from his hand and examined it, and found in it this packet, containing twelve plated dessert forks—I told him I was afraid it was not all right, and he must go back with me to the warehouse—he asked whether anything else would not do—I told him nothing else but taking him to the police station—he went back with me to the warehouse, I found Mr. Davis, and Mr. Hyams there—when Mr. Hyams saw the forks, he said, "These are our property"—the prisoner said he had bought them—Mr. Davis asked him of whom—he said, "Of Millington"—Mr. Davis asked him when—he said, "Some time"—I then took him into custody, took him to the station, and there searched him—he gave me his address, I

went there and found, among other property, two parcels of slate pencils, which I produce.

Cross-examined by MR. PAKRY. Q. You were, of course, instructed to act as you did? A. Yes—I did not know the prisoner before I was shown him on this occasion—the property at the prisoner's house was readily. shown to me—there was no disguise about it, it was all openly in the house—the prisoner's family were there—I found some invoices on the prisoner's person.

MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Do either of those invoices apply to the slate pencils, the lamps, or the forks? A. No, neither—I was in plain clothes when I went to his house.

JOHN JAMES MILLINOTON . I am buyer and manager of the Birmingham and Sheffield department at the prosecutors—I never sold these forks to the prisoner—they are plated, they are worth 20s. a dozen.

Cross-examined. Q. How long have you been in the house? A. About eight years—the prisoner was there before me—Mr. Hyams is here—when I first went into the employment, it was the constant practice of the servants of each department to sell to each other—they were all allowed to buy from the establishment—I believe that has been going on down to the time of the prisoner's apprehension, although lately not allowed by our employers—I have occasionally purchased things—I have things at my house now that I have purchased—I have not been in the habit of purchasing goods to sell again, I may have done so once or twice, but I have not been in the habit of doing it—I do not know others that are in the habit of doing so, many of them may have done so—as far as my knowledge goes they have not been in the habit of doing so, they have occasionally done so as well as myself, but it has not been a recognised thing among us—I have bought things to sell again; it was kept quiet, it was understood it was not allowed, it was done to accommodate one another—I heard something of some night lights being consigned to Messrs. Davis, which were not sold—I did not take a sample of those night lights, I am quite sure of that, I am not aware that any persons in the employment took samples of them at the request of Messrs. Davis for the purpose of seeing whether they could get rid of them—I am not aware that Mr. Davis asked the prisoner to try and sell them, it is possible he might have done so—I am quite sure that no one, to my knowledge, took a sample away—I never sold the prisoner these forks, nor any plated forks—I may have sold him a set of knives and forks, I think I have on one or two occasions—he has not bought forks of me of this description for the purpose of selling again, he has ordinary knives and forks—I have no book here—these forks were in my department—I was not present when the prisoner said he had bought them from me, I first heard of it on the Saturday morning following—my employers have not blamed me at all since this has been found out for disobeying the orders of the house—I have sold forks, not in the establishment that I know of, I do not remember—I cannot swear that I have not—when I did sell it was usual to make out a bill, and call the cashier to take the money of the purchaser—that was the case throughout the establishment, either when we sold to each other or to any other customer—I have not been a witness here before—my employers have prosecuted several of their servants, and unsuccessfully, except in one instance—ours is a very miscellaneous business, we sell a great variety of articles—we do not keep spirits to give customers to tempt them to buy, we occasionally have a glass of wine, or ale, but not spirits—we take a glass of wine with them occasionally, we are not compelled to do so—we do not

invite every customer, only our bettermost ones that come from a distance—I am not aware that the prisoner need to bay to sell again—we were intimate in business—I have visited him at his house once or twice, and he has visited me on one occasion—when we made out the bills for one another we did not always put the name—we do not always put a name, we have so many customers that we do not know the names of—we do not generally put names for small customers, either for customers, or fellow servants, not unless there is an entry made—I am not aware that the prisoner or any of the servants have had things on approbation for sale, I should say not.

MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Then it is understood in the establishment, is it, that servants should not purchase? A. Yes, but they have done so occasionally—as far as I know, when they have purchased they have paid—they always had an invoice if the amount exceeded 1s.—it was not the custom for them to take the invoice to the cashier and pay for the goods, the cashier would be called to take the money—that would be the case whether it was a servant or an ordinary customer—there is no other person named Millington in the house but myself—I did not sell these forks to the prisoner, nor to anybody that I am aware of—I think I had not sold any forks that day at all.

JURY. Q. In those instances in which you took the money to the cashier, would it be usual to give the prisoner a bill? A. The bill would be made out at the time of the sale of the article, and the cashier would be called to take the money and stamp the bill—that ought to be done on all occasions—I cannot say that it has—I am not aware that he ever purchased goods from me without my giving him an invoice.

THOMAS DAWSON . I am servant to the prosecutors, in the musical and lamp department. On 23rd Nov. the prisoner bought two lamps of me, and I gave him an invoice, which he ought to have taken to the cashier's desk, and paid for the lamps—I do not know whether he did so—these are similar lamps (produced)—I believe the value of them is 3s.

Cross-examined. Q. Have you often sold things to him? A. I do not recollect selling him anything before—I never heard from any of the members of the firm that that was contrary to the rules of the house—I heard it before I went there from the other shopmen—I had been there eighteen months—goods are sold by the young men to each other, it is the constant practice—there are eight departments—I have bought things for my own use, but not to sell again—I do not know that some of them were in the habit of buying to sell again—I have only sold 2s. or 3s. worth at the time, not 30s. or 40s. worth—Griffiths told me that his. passage was rather dark, and he wanted this lamp to light it—I had no hesitation in letting him have them.

MR. BALLANTINE. Q. You supposed he would pay for them? A. Yes.

JAMES CAMP . I am assistant to the prosecutors. Two or three days before the prisoner was apprehended, I saw a box of night lights in a cupboard of the prisoner's—immediately he was taken into custody I went to the cupboard, and it was gone—a day or two afterwards I looked into the prisoner's drawer, and saw some slate pencils tied up in paper; I tore the inside wrapper, and looked at them—these are them (produced)—I know the wrapper by the tear—I opened them at the time—that was before he was taken—I (poked into the drawer again next morning, before he went to his dinner, and they were there then—I looked again directly after he had had his dinner, and they were gone—that was before he was taken—I communicated to my employers what I had seen.

Cross-examined. Q. What is the value of these pencils? A. Threepence

—the night lights are worth 6d. or 7d.—I have not been blamed by my employers for dishonesty, I may have been for inattention to business—some years back there was a deficiency in the money, when I was cashier, but it was eventually proved satisfactorily to them—I never knew that the prisoner has been employed to watch me—I have never been turned away—I did write a letter, begging my employers to take me back, and promising to behave better—about six months ago I was in a situation in Liverpool, and wrote wishing to come back—I had left about two years and a half before—I had not been dismissed—I was decidedly suspected of dishonesty—it was at that time a customary thing, when busy, to stay till 10 o'clock at night; I was an apprentice, and very young, and Mr. James Davis told me that I was not to stop after the usual time—I took the key of the desk, which had 20l., or 30l., in it, hung it on a hook and went away; next morning when I returned I found that the till had been opened, and the whole of the money taken away—I spoke to Mr. Alfred first; he said, "I dare say my brother has had it out, and intends to give you a cheque for it this morning"—when I saw Mr. James he said that he did not know anything about it—I was had up stairs and examined; it remained very quiet for some days, till one of the apprentices absconded, and went some distance by rail with some bad companions, and after that it was satisfactorily proved that he was the guilty party—when I was cashier my masters were sometimes in the habit of taking money from the cashiers, and subsequently giving them a cheque for it, but I have ceased to be cashier some years.

MR. BALLANTINE. Q. How old were you when the loss took place? A. Sixteen or seventeen—I remained there three or four years afterwards, and left of my own accord—I applied to come back, and was at once admitted—all those circumstances were perfectly known to the prisoner, and that I was perfectly exculpated—their treatment was much better towards me than before; feeling quite satisfied, as I know they did.

CHARLES WILLIAM COLES . I am cashier to the prosecutors. It is my duty to keep the books, receive the money, and account for it—I shall be fourteen years old in March—the prisoner did not pay me for these forks, night lights, or slate pencils, to my knowledge; if he had I should have stamped the invoice, and received the money—I do not recollect his bringing any invoice for these night lights—I have my book here, but do not know what they would amount to, I only enter the sum of money and the department—I do not remember these forks being brought to me on that day.

Cross-examined. Q. Are you the only cashier? A. I am the walking cashier—I take the money—I have been cashier about four months—there are about seventy shopmen or more, they all pay me money, which it is my duty to enter—they ought not to pay me two or three amounts all in a lump.

MR. BALLANTINK. Q. You enter under the departments in which the goods come? A. Yes; the lamps belong to the E, and the forks to the A department—I believe the slate pencils belong to the G department; it is the toy department—here is no entry in my book of 3s., on 23rd Nov., in the toy department; if the prisoner had brought an invoice for 3s., worth of lamps, the 3s., would be found here—here is no entry of 20s. for the forks, the nearest amounts to it are 15s., and 1l. 8s. 3d.

MR. PARRY. Q. Do, not you know that mistakes are sometimes made even by you? A. Yes; on that very day there was 8s. 4d., deficient—I do

not know whether a servant, buying in two or three departmente, may have all the money put down in the last department.

MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Was 8s. 4d. deficient on this particular day? A. It was—I was in the habit of giving the prisoner my key every day—I cannot say whether I did so on that day—I found out the deficiency the same evening.

DAVID HYAMS . I am a partner in the firm of Davis and Co., of Houndsditch. We have about eighty servants—the prisoner was shopwalker and manager—it is strictly forbidden that things shall be sold to servants—the prisoner has been in our employ about thirteen years—on 22nd Nov., a communication was made to me—I communicated with a policeman) and in the evening the prisoner was brought back to the warehouse by the policeman, who opened a red bag which he brought in with the prisoner, containing these two lamps and these forks—the prisoner said that they were sold to him by Millington—I was not satisfied, and gave him into custody—he had no right to take them—the forks are worth 20s. a dozen, they would come under department A—supposing Coles has kept his books properly the 20s. ought to appear there.

Cross-examined. Q. About what age is the prisoner? Q. About thirty-five; he has been about thirteen years in the employment—the practice of buying among the young men was permitted very many years since, but was afterwards forbidden; I do not know that it has prevailed in spite of that.

(The prisoner received a good character).

GUILTY . Aged 33.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his character; but MR. BALLANTINE stated, that 160l. worth of property which had come from the prosecutors', we found at his house.— Confined Eighteen Months.

Before Mr. Recorder and the Second Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-156
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

156. CHARLES ALFRED RICKABY , unlawfully obtaining 4l.; the moneys of Walter Justice, by false pretences.

MR. PARRY conducted the Prosecution.

WALTER JUSTICE. I am a solicitor) and live at No. 6, Bernard-street, Bloomsbury; I did so in 1851. On 15th Nov., 1850, the prisoner came to my office—he came in a cab, with a little boy—he sent in his name as Mr. Rowe; and when he came in, I at once concluded that it was a Mr. Rowe with whom I had had business transactions, and who was a blind man—the prisoner is blind—I had received some annuities for Mr. Rowe, and transmitted the money to him by hand, and he had always acknowledged the receipt by letter—the prisoner said that he had called to consult me with reference to a debt of 68l., which a person of the name of Armstrong owed him—he said it was for money lent, and he wished me to apply to Armstrong for payment of it—he also stated that Armstrong had been a tenant of a house of his at Vauxhall; that Armstrong had given him notice to quit, which had expired on the Michaelmas quarter day preceding; that Armstrong had not given up possession at the time, but had remained five or six weeks over the quarter day, and he wished to know whether he could recover any rent for that time—I promised to write to Armstrong for the payment of the debt, and also see what I could do with regard to the rent—he produced a sovereign, and said, "I had better pay you for your expenses"—I said, "I will not take it at present, for I may get the expenses of Armstrong"—the Mr. Rowe who was my client had left the house in which he had resided, and had called on me, and left his card, but I had mislaid the card, and I said to the prisoner, "By the by, where do you live now?"—he pulled a

letter out of his pocket, having a post mark upon it, with "Mr. Charles Rowe, 3, Warwick-street, Vauxhall-bridge-road," upon it—he said, "That is my address"—I copied it down upon a piece of paper, and returned the letter to him—at the same interview he told me that he had let his house again, and he wished to know what the expense of a lease would be—I told him, from six to eight guineas; and he then left, with the little boy, in the same cab—I wrote to Armstrong on that same day, applying for payment of the debt) and for a quarter's rent—Armstrong called upon me on Wednesday, 20th Nov.—I mean the person who was tried and convicted here about five years ago—he produced the letter I had written to him—after Armstrong left, I wrote a letter to Mr. Howe; but before I sent it, the prisoner called—it was about ten minutes after Armstrong had left—he came in the cab with the little boy, as before—I read to him the letter that I had written—this is it (reads:" 6, Bernard-street, Russell-square, 20th Nov., 1850. Dear Sir,—Mr. Armstrong has called upon me, and, after some conversation, he has agreed to pay the 68l., and half a quarter's rent, 6l. 5s. He wishes to have the deeds which you hold, and proposes calling this afternoon, at 4 o'clock, to settle. I shall feel obliged, therefore, if you would call on me at that time with the deeds, or deliver them to the bearer")—That was the substance of what Armstrong had told me—the prisoner said he was very pleased that I had succeeded in getting half a quarter's rent for him, and proposed making me some present, which I did not accept—I said, "He tells me that you have some deeds of his that you hold as security for the 68l."—he said, "Oh, yes; they relate to his wife's property; I have deposited them with a friend of mine, who has advanced me some money upon them; would you let me have the money to get them, and I will let you have them before 3 o'clock, in order that you may settle when Armstrong calls?" and, believing him to be the Mr. Howe with whom I had business, I gave him a cheque for 68l.—I have that cheque here—it has been returned to me by my bankers, as paid—the amount of the cheque is 68l.—the debt was 68l.—the prisoner said to me, "I have agreed with the tenant who has taken my house to pay 6l. for the lease; will you do it for that)"—I said I would—he then told me to deduct the 6l. from the amount which I had to give him, which I did—he said he would return to me with the deeds at 3 o'clock, without fail—I never saw him again until he was apprehended upon some other charge—I think he was then going by the name of Rickaby—that was in 1853 or 1854; I am not sure which—he was apprehended upon another charge, and I went to the police office to have a look at him—at the time this matter occurred I did all I possibly could to meet with him—I had large handbills printed, and circulated about London, one of which I have here—I took every possible step to have him apprehended—when I saw him at Worship-street, I did not pursue him; I had been put to so much expense and trouble—I did not see anything more of him until the other day, when he was apprehended upon another charge—I then felt it right to go on with this; I had so many communications made to me with respect to him, that I said I would prosecute—I never saw Armstrong again until he was apprehended, and tried here, in 1851.

Prisoner. Q. You are a lawyer, are you not? A. I am a solicitor—when you came to me, I had taken out my certificate—I had a client named Rowe—he had been my client for three or four years—as far as I recollect, he was residing at Denmark-place or row, Islington—I had written several letters to him—I had never seen him—it was not house

property for which I was concerned for him—you instructed me first to write to Mr. Joseph Armstrong for payment of a debt of 68l.—it was not 60l.—I swear that—I cannot say that you said you wanted 68l. to redeem the deeds—you did not name any sum—I will swear it was not 30l. or 20l.—when I proffered to give you a cheque for this money, you did not say that you did not want the money, nothing of the sort—I think Mr. Rowe died about five or six months after this transaction—I saw his death in the paper—I think his Christian name was Peter—it was not Charles, certainly—when I found that you did not come again, I sent to Mr. Rowe, my client—I sent a message—the clerk is not here whom I sent—I sent to his old address—I told the clerk to go and see Mr. Rowe—if he did not find him at that address, I dare say he found out where to go to—he found him—I am not quite sure which clerk I sent—I rather think his name is Jones—I sent him to inquire after Mr. Rowe—I was not quite sure his Christian name was Peter—when he came back, he told me that he had seen Mr. Rowe—he gave me a description of him, which did not at all resemble you.

WILLIAM DAVIS . I am a cab driver and proprietor, and was so in 1851. On 20th Nov., 1850, I was called from the stand near Kennington Church by a little boy, to take up, in Camberwell New-road, a man apparently blind, and another one with him—I think the blind man was a taller man than the prisoner—I would not swear it was not him—the other man was Armstrong—I was a witness here against him—I drove to No. 6, Bernard-street, Russell-square—one of the gentlemen went away, and I went to a public-house at the corner of Henrietta-street—the blind man stopped in the cab along with the boy and another one—I think there were four altogether—it is so long ago, I forget which it was that went away—I gave Armstrong into custody afterwards, for a reward, and likewise for merit—(This witness was evidently intoxicated, and his examination was not pursued).

MART ANN PUMFREY . In 1850 I lived at No. 9, John's-place, Commercial New-road. My father kept the house a little before Christmas, 1850—a blind man used to live in Cranmer-road, and I used to work there as a servant—the prisoner is the man—I knew him by the name of Captain Rattan—I used to go backwards and forwards morning and evening—I remember Armstrong, who was tried here—I saw him at the prisoner's, and knew him by the name of Charles—I never heard his surname—he appeared to be very intimate with the prisoner, and was on equal terms with him—I saw him, I think, on 27th Nov., and did not see him again till he was apprehended on another charge—I was dismissed on 28th Nov., by James Rattan, a son of the prisoner's, who said that his father had gone into the country.

Prisoner. Q. Were you occasional servant only? A. I was there every day—every one who applied for you applied the name of Captain to you—I know nothing about Armstrong owing you money—the first day that you went out was Wednesday, 18th Nov.—I usually left at 6 or 7 o'clock in the evening, not at 1 o'clock in the day.

COURT. Q. Armstrong, whom you knew by the name of Charles, was the person you afterwards saw tried? A. Yes.

JANE ABRAHART . I am the wife of Henry Abrahart. In 1850 we lived at No. 3, Warwick-street, Vauxhall-bridge-road—I was a witness against Charles Rowe, and heard him tried and convicted in the name of Armstrong—I keep a tobacconist's shop—Anderson came there inthe

name of Rowe, and asked me if I would allow him to have a letter addressed to my house—I took in letters addressed, "Charles Rowe, Esq., No. 3, Warwick-street, Vauxhall-bridge-road," and he called for them, and took away two.

Prisoner. Q. Do you allude to me when you say Charles Howe called? A. I do not know you—I never saw you till I saw you here.

MR. PARRY to W. JUSTICE. Q. Did you write to Kowe, at No. 3, Warwick-street A. I did not send any letter through the poet—I did not write to Rowe, except the letter produced and read to the Court.

WILLIAM SIMPKINS . I am a hair dresser, of Nine Elms. In 1850, a man named Armstrong came to my shop, and said that he had advertised for the situation of a gardener, and asked me to take letters in for him if they came—two letters came—he got two of them, and I believe Mr. Justice has got the third.

WALTER JUSTICE re-examined. The prisoner told me to apply to Armstrong, and the address he gave was, "Nine Elms, Wandsworth-road," and this is the letter I wrote—(This was signed by the prosecutor, and stated that unless the money was paid by 11 o'clock next day, proceedings would be commenced. Dated 21st Nov., 1850).

Prisoner to WILLIAM SIMPKINS. Q. Do you believe in a future state? A. I do—I have seen you before in different parts, and you have called upon me—you are the person who asked me to take in letters for Anderson—I have seen you walking in the Wandsworth-road, but have not spoken to you—I never had business with you, directly or indirectly—my shop will hold thirty or forty persons.

Prisoner. It would not hold four persons. Witness. Then, very likely you have been there—the last time I saw you was in 1850 or 1851—I think you had a young lady with you on one occasion.

KERRICK UDOLPHUS MARSHALL . I was a clerk in the London and Westminster Bank, Hoi born branch, at this time—I cashed this cheque (produced)—I have no means of referring to the books, but I have no doubt I did so on the day it bears date, and here are the numbers of the notes on the back of it.

Prisoner. Q. Did I ever present that cheque to you for payment? A. Not that I am aware of, but I have a strong presentiment that a man named Armstrong presented it; decidedly not you, as far as my recollection goes—I think he almost confessed it on the trial.

JURY. Q. Did you cash it on the same day? A. Yes, the 20th—it is the pass book keeper's duty to put the stamp on.

Prisoners Defence. I think I must leave the case in your hands; under my present circumstances and affliction, I am quite inadequate to address the Jury upon it; I am taken quite by surprise; I did, under your Lordship's advice, plead not guilty, and I leave it to you and the gentlemen of the Jury; but I wish to ask the prosecutor a question.

Prisoner to WALTER JUSTICE. Q. Did not you send a person, about two years ago, or rather better, to where I was then living, Fitzroy-place, representing himself as a clerk, and saying that he would never trouble me again in the matter if I gave him 10l.? A. Never—I never sent to you; I saw you on another charge about two years ago—I did not prosecute you, because I had been put to so much expense and trouble—I never made any offer to compromise the matter, I never saw you from that day—I understand that you called one day, and wanted to see me, and I sent out a message that I would not see you; I was in the house at the time.


7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-157
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > lesser offence; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

157. CHARLES ALFRED RICKABY was again indicted, with JAMES RICKABY and WILLIAM COX , for feloniously forging and uttering a promissory note for 50l. with intent to defraud.

MR. PARRY conducted the Prosecution.

ALFRED HOWARD . I am A solicitor) and carry on business at No. 3, Angel court, Throgmorton-street, in partnership with Mr. Getty. On 12th Sept last, the elder prisoner called at my office; he was in my room when I arrived—he rose and addressed me, saying, "Mr. Howard, I presume"—I said, "Yes," and begged him to be seated, and asked him his name—he gave me his card, I think it was "Mr. Charles Alfred Rickaby," in print, and "29, Trevor-square, Knightsbridge," in writing—I said, "To whom am I indebted for the introduction?"—he made no answer to that, but went on, and I did not interrupt him—he said he wished me to advise him whether he could recover, against a party who was in this country, a sum of 120l. which he had lent in Ireland; that the party denied his liability on that ground—I then asked him again for an introduction, and he then mentioned the name of Dr. Thompson—I said, "Oh, then, it is not me you want to consult, it is on behalf of Mr. Thompson"—Mr. Thompson had been an articled clerk of ours, and is now a solicitor in Lincoln's Innfields he was out of town, and we had agreed to conduct any business for him during his absence—the prisoner assented to that remark—I then gave him my advice that the debt could be recovered—he gave me the name of the debtor as "Howard Clinton, No. 84, Connaught-terrace, Edgware-road"—I asked him if he had no security—he said he had not; the money had been lent as between gentlemen, eras between one gentleman and another—he also remarked that he should be willing to take half in cash and a promissory note or bill for the remainder—I wrote to Mr. Howard Clinton for payment, and received a reply—I have the letters here—I eventually received 70l. in bank notes, and a promissory note, enclosed in a letter, brought to me by a little boy—I gave a receipt to the boy—this is it.

JOSEPH NEWSTEAD . I know James Rickaby—I am now clerk to Mr. Crockford, of the Law Times office—I was clerk to Mr. Watkins, of the "Directory," at the time I knew James Rickaby; he was employed there as a canvasser—I believe this letter signed "Howard Clinton" to be his handwriting.

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH (for James Rickaby and Cox). Q. How long was he in Mr. Watkins's employment? A. He was employed at two different periods, from April, 1854, till Nov.—he had to sign the time book night and morning—I speak to his handwriting from that, and from his general letters, which I have here—they are letters addressed to Mr. Watkins, not to me; Mr. Watkins handed them to me—I am sorry to be obliged to come here against him, for he behaved very well while with us.

COURT. Q. Had you frequent opportunities of seeing him write his name? A. Every day—(letter read; "No. 84, Connaught-terrace, Edgware-road. Sept 10th, 1805. Gentlemen,—According to my proposal, and the answer I received from Mr. Rickaby, I have enclosed the cash, namely, 70l., and my promissory note for 50l. Be kind enough to send by bearer an acknowledgment for the same. Yours respectfully, Howard Clinton. To Messrs. Gatty and Howard.")

EMILY CLARKE . I am a widow, residing at No. 15, Park-road, Stockwell. I know Cox—I think I know his handwriting—I think two of these letters, marked "B" and "D," are his writing.

Cross-examined. Q. How long is it since you have known Cox? A. He

came to look at some furniture at my house, on 5th Nov.; it was advertised for sale—I had no acquaintance with him, I never saw him before, and never since, till he was at the police court—I know his writing from his writing out an agreement between Mr. Bickaby and myself—that was the only occasion upon which I saw him write—to the best of my belief these letters are in his writing.

COURT. Q. In making this agreement was he acting as the agent of the elder Bickaby? A. Yes; they were all together—the two younger prisoners came first, on 5th Nov., and afterwards they all came together—they were going to buy my furniture—(letters read: "No. 29, Trevor-square, Knightsbridge. Dear Sir,—Having just received your note, and in reply beg to say that I will accede to the terms; his servant has just called, who I have told his master's proposals will be acceded to. Yours respectfully, C. A. Rickaby. Mr. Howard."—"No. 29, Trevor-square, Knightsbridge. Dear Sir,—Yours of yesterday came to hand, and am sorry to inform you that my being seriously indisposed prevents my waiting upon you; but wishing to see you upon more urgent business, should be glad of a personal interview with yourself, at my house, when you can make it convenient to call; I am sure to be at home. I am, dear Sir, yours respectfully, C. A. Rickaby.—Howard, Esq., Angel-court, City.")

ALFRED HOWARD re-examined. I received this letter, signed, "Howard Clinton, per T. Harrison"—I do not know whose handwriting it is—I received it in reply to the letter I wrote at the request of the elder Rickaby.

EDWARD BALDWIN . I served a notice to produce on each of the defendants (tills being ready was a notice to produce two letters, dated 12th and 17th Sept., addressed to Howard Clinton, and three of 15th, 17th, and 18th Sept., addressed to C. A. Rickaby; and all other documents and papers in their custody and possession.)

ALFRED HOWARD re-examined. I have my letter book here—it contains a copy of a letter addressed to Howard Clinton—it was taken by machinery—I did not compare it, but it must be a correct verbatim copy—I can speak from my recollection of my own letter that this copy is correct—(read: "Angel-court, Throgmorton-street, 12th Sept., 1855. Sir,—We are desired by Mr. Charles Alfred Rickaby to apply to you on the subject of a loan made to you some years since, of 120l., of which we are directed to obtain an immediate settlement; and in the hope that your compliance with this application will render any further proceedings on our part unnecessary, we are, Sir, your obedient servants, Gatty and Howard. To Howard Clinton, Esq., No. 84, Connaught-terrace, Edgware-road")—I received an answer to that letter—this is it (read: "No. 84, Connaught-terrace. Sir,—In reply to yours of the 12th, respecting the debt due to Mr. Rickaby, I beg to offer the following terms; viz., 70l. down, and my promissory note for the remainder, 50l. at one month, on Monday, by 12 o'clock; in time for which oblige by letting me have a reply by Monday morning's post from your client, upon whom I have called, but been referred to you, and oblige your humble servant, H. Clinton; per T. Harrison. Messrs. Howard")—I sent a copy of that letter, enclosed to Mr. Rickaby, on the 15th—this is the letter I sent (read: "Dear Sir,—Annexed we beg leave to send you copy of a communication we have just received from Mr. Howard Clinton, upon which we shall be glad to have your directions")—in answer to that I received the letter which has been read—I then received the letter of the 15th, signed "Howard Clinton," enclosing the 70l. and the promissory note, to which I replied, enclosing a receipt; on the same day I wrote to Mr. Rickaby,

informing him of this, and in consequence of his reply, I went to Trevor-square on 19th Sept., the door was opened by Cox—(I omitted to state that Cox accompanied Rickaby to my office on the first occasion, on 12th Sept., but he did not come into my private office, he remained down stairs)—I was shown into the drawing room, and saw Mr. Rickaby—after talking over the other matters of business, I handed him the promissory note, and the bank notes—he said, "You have succeeded beyond my expectations, and I suppose if I give you two guineas, that will satisfy the charges in that matter"—I said a guinea would be all our charge—he then said, "I have no small money," and proposed to exchange cheques with me; for him to give me his cheque for 21l. 1s., for mine of 20l—I declined that, saying it was quite unecessary—he asked me if the promissory note was all right—I said it was, and read it over to him—the promissory note was in the same handwriting as the letter, signed, "Howard Clinton"—he then said he would call upon me in the course of a lew days, he was unable to make an appointment, not having papers—on Saturday, 22nd Sept, he came to my office, and after making some inquiries as to the means of some gentleman at the bar, with reference to a loan that he proposed to make to him, he asked if I would be kind enough to pass the promissory note, which he remarked had only three days to run, through my bankers—that I also declined—I am not quite certain whether he had the note with him then; my impression is, that he had, from his manner and mode of speaking, but I cannot recollect whether I saw it on that occasion or not, I have tried to refresh my recollection—I never saw him again until he was in custody at the police court.

C. A. Rickaby. Q. You state that when I waited upon you, I pretended that I was recommended by Dr. Thompson? A. I understood so—you did not show me a letter from Dr. Thompson to myself—I swear that—I have not got the promissory note here—I swear that it was in the same handwriting as the letter signed Howard Clinton, my experience in handwriting satisfies me of that—I should say that I compared them previous to parting with the promissory note, I think I could swear that I did—my suspicions were slightly excited from, the character of the notes that came in the letter; they had very peculiar marks about them, and I did not form a very favourable opinion of my correspondent, Mr. Howard Clinton; that made me look very cautiously and carefully—I do not know that Dr. Thompson was your professional attendant, I have since heard that you employed him afterwards.

AGNES JONES . I am the wife of John Edward Jones, a stationer, of No. 84, Connaught terrace, Edgware-road. On 13th Sept last the prisoner, James Rickaby, came to our shop and asked if I would receive some letters for him—I said, "Yes"—it is a thing that we often do—he gave me 6d. for my trouble—he said the letters would be addressed to Howard Clinton—next day, I think, a letter came with that address, he called, and I gave it him—there was no such person as Howard Clinton living there at that time, or at any other that I know of—I have lived there two year.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you know anything of the person who you say was James Rickaby, before? A. I never saw him before that I remember—he came three times, twice I saw him, and once my husband saw him—I have said that the person who came wore a moustache—I am certain the prisoner is the person, for he is extremely like a friend of my father's, and I noticed the resemblance at the time—the first time I saw him was in the

afternoon, I do not recollect what time it was when I saw him again—I did not see him again until he was at the police court, rather more than a month afterwards—he was then in the dock—a policeman came for me—he asked me if I could recognise him—I said he had a moustache—I did not say I should know him by the moustache, because so many persons have a moustache now; I knew I should recollect him from his resemblance to the gentleman I knew.

MR. PARRY. Q. How long was he with you the first time? A. Not two minutes, and about the same time on the second occasion—we had no other conversation, except about receiving the letters—I am quite positive he is the person.

JOHN FRASER . I live at No. 56, Hilton-street, Dorset-square—Charles Alfred Bickaby occupied apartments at my father's house there—his son did not—on the day after he was taken into custody I found this receipt in a drawer in the room which he occupied—(read: "London, Sept. 17, 1855. Received of Howard Clinton, Esq., the sum of seventy pounds, on account of 120l. money lent to him by Charles Alfred Bickaby, Esq.—For C. A. Bickaby, Gatty and Howard.")

MR. HOWARD re-examined. I have not made any inquiry to ascertain whether there is such a person as Howard Clinton.

STEPHEN STANDIDGE (policeman, P 200). I made inquiry for Howard Clinton at No. 84, Connaught-terrace, but nowhere else.

MR. SLEIGH submitted that there was no case against Cox; that the promissory note not being produced made it very doubtful whether the forgery could be established as against either prisoner, and that no uttering was proved. MR. PARRY contended that there was evidence for the Jury of forgery by James Rickaby, and against the elder prisoner as an accessory before the fact, which verdict the Jury were enabled to find under Lord Campbell's Act; although he was not so charged by the indictment. The COURT considered the ease as against Cox very slight, but as to the others there was evidence for the Jury.)

C. A. Rickaby's Defence. It is quite evident that Cox has been put into this indictment to prevent my calling him; I wished to do so, to prove that this was not the handwriting of my eon; and if it is the intention of the Court to strike him out of the record, perhaps he may be acquitted now, that I may put him into the box to contradict the evidence of Mr. Howard—(The COURT declined to take a verdict as to Cox until the close of the case) as to Mrs. Jones, I am certain she has told an untruth; the receipt was found in my possession; I paid Mr. Howard Clinton's debts before he went to America; and I have other papers of his which were taken possession of by Emmerson, the policeman; they would show that there is a Howard Clinton in existence, and that he signed the promissory note; I fully expected he would be here; I traversed this case from last Session upon an affidavit, in which I swore that he was a material and necessary witness, and that he might be here this Session, which commenced on the 17th; but from communications I have had, I believe he will not be in town before the 12th; therefore, of course, I cannot call him; he did owe me the money, and he paid me; I certainly asked Mr. Howard to pass the note through his bankers, but he said he did not keep a banker; I never asked him to change cheques; it is absurd; what motive could I have in doing so? I was recommended to him by Dr. Thompson, and my son could prove it.

CHARLES ALFRED RICKABY— GUILTY ,** as an accessory before the fact. Aged 57.

JAMES KICKABY— GUILTY** of uttering. Aged 2l.— Four Years Penal Servitude.


(The prisoner C. A. Hickaby was tried and convicted at this Court in Feb., 1840, and again in May, 1853; and James Rickaby in Feb., 1853.)

NEW COURT.—Monday, January 7th, 1856.


Before Russell Gurney, Esq., and the Fifth Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-158
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

158. ALFRED BYERLY , embezzling 20l.; the moneys of Henry William Nevill: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 16— Confined Three Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-159
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

159. JAMES HIGGS , stealing 15 martin skins, value 15l.; the goods of the Hudson Bay Company, his masters: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 46.— Confined Nine Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-160
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

160. JOHN MALONEY , stealing 1 purse, value 1s.; and 20s. in money; the property of Emma Evans, from her person.

WILLIAM CHILDS . On 20th Dec. I was at the corner of Fenchurch-street about 4 o'clock—there was a stoppage—I saw Mrs. Evans get out of an omnibus—the prisoner and other boys got round her—the prisoner got by her side, lifted up her clothes, and took her purse out of her pocket—he put his hand behind him—I seized his hand with the purse in itr—he dropped it, and I gave it to a policeman.

Prisoner. He came and took hold of my hand, and hit me. Witness. I took his hand—I did not hit him.

MAURICE WALSH (City policeman, 530). The prisoner was given into my custody—this purse was given to me at the station—I found on the prisoner these two handkerchiefs, one round his neck, the other in his pocket.

EMMA EVANS . I got out of an omnibus at the corner of Fenchurch-street—I felt my shawl dragged, and Childs spoke to me—this is my purse—I had had it safe five minutes before.

GUILTY .* Aged 13.— Confined Nine Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-161
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

161. WILLIAM HAYES , stealing 1 coat, value 16s. the goods of Thomas Mills: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 33.— Confined Three Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-162
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

162. CAROLINE BROWNING and ELIZABETH JONES stealing 9 handkerchiefs, value 2s. 6d.; the goods of Thomas Dosseter: to which



Confined Three Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-163
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

163. THOMAS CLARK , feloniously uttering, on 14th Dec., a forged warrant for the payment of 1l. 1s. 2d.; also, on 17th Dec., a forged warrant for the payment of money; with intent to defraud: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 14.— Confined Six Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-164
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

164. JOHN WILLIAMS and CHARLES BROWN , robbery on William Bartram, and stealing from his person 1 watch, value 4l.; his goods.

WILLIAM BARTRAM . I am a japanner, of Rutland-street, New-road. Between 1 and 2 o'clock in the morning, on 26th Dec., I was in Leman-street, Whitechapel—I was suddenly seized from behind by two or more persons—I was severely beaten, and my watch and guard were stolen—I was thrown down, and became insensible—when I came to myself, the first thing I saw was a policeman, who had the two prisoners—my watch and chain were missing—I had the watch only the moment before the attack was made on me—it was in my pocket, and fastened by a chain round my neck—this is my watch—the chain has not been found—a button was missing from my shirt collar—I did not see the face of either of the persons—one of them had a jacket on resembling the jacket that Williams has on now.

HENRY PURCHASE (policeman, H 70). I was on duty on the morning of 26th Dec., and my attention was attracted by a sound as if a man was choking—I looked across the street, and saw the prosecutor in a stooping position, and the prisoners one on each side of him, striking him—in an instant they ran towards me—I ran, and caught Williams in my right hand—I asked him what he was running for—he made me no answer—Brown was coming up—I took him with my left hand, and asked him what he was running for—he said a gentleman had been knocked down—I said, "I suppose you know something about it?"—he said, "No, I don't"—I took them across, and said to the prosecutor, "What is the matter?"—he said, "They have knocked me down, and taken my watch and chain"—I took the prisoners to the station, and found on Brown this watch—I went back to the place, and found this shirt button—I went back again afterwards, and over a fence I found this watch, which the prosecutor claims—from the time I saw the prisoners striking the prosecutor till I took them, I did not lose sight of them—I did not see any other men there—I saw two women.'

Brown. He says he saw me run away from the man; I ran towards him. Witness, They were both running away from the prosecutor as fast as they could run.


BROWN— GUILTY . Aged 21.

Four Years Penal Servitude.

(There was another indictment against Brown for a like offence.)

OLD COURT.—Tuesday, January 8th 1856.


(For cases tried this day, see Kent and Surrey Cases.)

NEW COURT.—Tuesday, January 8th 1856.



Before Rusell Gurney, Esq., and the Sixth Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-165
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

165. GEORGE KEMPTHORNE , feloniously uttering counterfeit coin: having been before convicted: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 20.— Confined Eighteen Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-166
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

166. GEORGE HACKETT was indicted for unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 35.— Confined Six Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-167
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

167. EMMA SMITH was indicted for a like offence: to which she

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 19.— Confined Six Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-168
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

168. GEORGE BAILET was indicted for a like offence: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 30.— Confined Six Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-169
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

169. WILLIAM EDWARD KING was indicted for a like offence: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 57.— Confined Nine Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-170
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

170. ROBERT CLARK , unlawfully having counterfeit coin in his possession: to which he

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 30.— Confined Six Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-171
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

171. JOSEPH EVANS , unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MESSRS. BODKIN and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

ELIZABETH GILBERT . My husband keeps a chandler's shop, in Sloane-street, Chelsea. On Saturday, 29th Dec., the prisoner came, about 9 o'clock in the evening, for half an ounce of tobacco—he paid me with a half crown—I weighed it, and told him it was not a good one—he said he was not aware of it—I asked how he came by it—he said he took it in payment for his work—I called my brother in law down stain, and he said he would go with the prisoner to where he took it—the prisoner said it was over Westminster-bridge—I said he was paid a long way off—he said, I might think what I liked; it would be a great loss to him—I gave my brother in law the half crown, and he gave it me again—I asked the prisoner if he could pay me with any other money—he said he had no more about him—he left the half crown, and went away—I laid the half crown on the tobacco shelf, and afterwards gave it to the officer—I am sure it was the same.

THOMAS ELKLNS . I am brother in law to the last witness, and lodge with her. On Saturday night, 29th Dec., I was called into the shop—the prisoner was there—the last witness gave me half a crown—I examined it, and returned it to her—it was a bad one—the prisoner said he got it from his employ, over Westminster-bridge—I offered to go there—he left the shop—I told him I would give him in charge if he did not—I followed him, and saw him go to Mr. Eldridge's shop, a baker, in Exeter-street, Chelsea—he came out again, and I went in there; and from what they said to me, I came out, and gave the prisoner into custody.

Prisoner. Q. When you came down what did you say to me I A. I asked where you got the half crown, and you said from your work, over Westminister

bridge—I said I would go with you—you said, "I don't know," or something of that kind—I said, "The sooner you are off the better, or I will give you in charge"—you did not say you would go with me, nor that I might go with you.

EMMA ELDRIDGE . I am the wife of Edward Eldridge, a baker, in Exeter-street. On the evening of 29th Dec. the prisoner came for a half quartern loaf—it came to 5d., he paid me with a half crown—I gave him the loaf and the change, and immediately he left, the last witness came in—he spoke to me, and I found the half crown was light—I had not parted with it, I had kept it in my hand till the officer came, and I gave it to him—the prisoner was then in custody.

JOHN WISE (policeman, B 75). I was called, and took the prisoner a little way from the door, he was charged with passing a bad half crown—he said, "All right, I will go with you back, don't lead me"—I took him back to Mrs. Eldridge, and received this half crown—I received this other half crown from Gilbert.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . I am inspector of coin to the Royal Mint—these are both bad, and from one die—they are brass, and electrotyped.

Prisoner's Defence. This is the first time I was ever locked up; I will never come again.

GUILTY . Aged 30.— Confined Nine Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-172
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

172. PATRICK MURRAY was indicted for a like offence.

MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.

MARY VICKEBS . My mother keeps the Orange Tree, at Colney Hatch—the prisoner came there on 14th Dec., he had some liquor which came to 3d. he paid me with ft half crown, I examined it—it was bad—I told him so, and returned it to him—he paid me with good money, I think a 2s. piece—I generally detect bad money, I am sure the half crown was bad.

Prisoner. I never was in the house. Witness.: I am sure he is the same person—I saw him again at the police station, about a week afterwards—he was about ten minutes in the house, he was in front of the bar—ours is a country public house, we have not a great many customers—he was not pointed out to me at the police office—he came out of the cell.

WILLIAM GUTTS . I am a labourer, and live at Whetstone—I was at the Orange Tree on that evening—the prisoner came there and passed a bad half crown—I had not seen him before—I followed him along the road, after he left, to see where he went—as I and a friend were following him, he said he thought it was a very great insult for us to follow him, and he up with his fist and knocked me down—I have no doubt at all he is the man—he went on, I got up and followed him again, and he knocked me down again—my friend went for a policeman—the prisoner knocked me down again with a knock on the forehead, and ran away.

JAMES STEPHENS . I live at Wood-green. On Saturday evening, 15th Dec., the prisoner came to my father's house, the Nag's Head—he asked for a glass of ale, and offered me a half crown, it was a bad one—I took another half crown out of the. drawer and balanced them together—he gave me a good one, and took the bad one away—I afterwards went with the policeman and saw him about a mile from the house, he appeared to be intoxicated.

ELIZABETH WALLEDGE . My husband keeps a general shop at Woodgreen. On Saturday evening, 15th Dec., the prisoner came, between 6 and 7 o'clock, for half an ounce of tobacco—he paid me with a half crown, I examined it, but did not think it was bad—while I was examining it he

touched the lamp with his hat, which made it shake—I could not see exactly—I gave him 2s. 4 1/2 d.; change, and he went out—as he was going I tried the half crown with my teeth, and found it was bad, I went to the door and called him, but he ran away as fast at he could—I called all the way along the village, "Stop thief!" thinking I should get some one to stop him, but he got away—I am sore he is the person, I went to the station to identify him—I gave the officer the half-crown.

Prisoner. Q. How far was I from the shop when you called me? A. I cannot say, I saw you at the end of my window—you went through the gateway, you ran all the way along, and I after you.

WILLIAM PHIPPS (policeman, N 231). The prisoner was given into my charge opposite the railway station, at Hornsey, about a mile from the shop of the last witness—he was walking, I told him what I took him for—he said if he did wrong he was willing to make it all right—I took him to the station, and found on him 17s. 2d. in good silver, and 1s. 2 1/2 d. in copper—I received, this half crown from Mrs. Walledge.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These are both bad.

Prisoners Defence. The woman has been paid her money since; I know nothing about the half crown.

GUILTY . Aged 40.— Confined Twelve Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-173
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

173. WILLIAM WEIGHT was indicted for a like offence.

MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.

ALICE REECE JOHNSON . I am the wife of Joseph Johnson, a grocer, at Chiswick. In the evening of 29th Dec. the prisoner came for half an ounce of tobacco—I noticed when he came into the shop he walked lame—I served him, and he placed a half crown on the counter—I gave him change, two shillings, and 5d. in halfpence—he then left the shop, and all his lameness was gone—I took the half crown from the ledge where I had placed it, looked at it, and went after the prisoner, but he was gone—I immediately fell into the arms of Sergeant Revining—he went back with me—I marked the half crown, and gave it him.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Did you put it with any other money? A. No—I had other half-crowns, but I had put this one on the ledge behind, from having taken a bad sovereign and a bad half sovereign lately—I never put any money into the till that I take from strangers till I have well examined it.

MART ANN POULTON . I am a grocer, and live in Chiswick. On Saturday night, 29th Dec., between 7 and 8 o'clock, the prisoner came for half an ounce of tobacco—it came to 1 1/2 d—I served him—he placed a half crown down—I took it up—it being a new one, I bit it—he said, "Never fear it, mistress"—I said that, to my misfortune, I had had so much bad money—I put the half crown into my pocket, where I had no other money—I gave the prisoner two shillings and 4 1/2 d.—I afterwards looked at the half crown—I did not believe it was bad—I put it aside till the morning—I showed it to the policeman—I marked it, and gave it to him.

Cross-examined. Q. Had you ever seen the prisoner before? A. Yes, he had come to my shop for half an ounce of tobacco, not very often—I might have seen him once or twice—I did not know his name, but that is the man—I cannot say how long before I had seen him, not so long as six months—I had seen him once or twice before—this happened on Saturday night—I saw him afterwards, at the police station—he was not in custody, but I knew him in a moment—he came into the room—when the

police sergeant came to me, he said, "I understand you had some bad money from a man?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "What sort of dress had he on?"—I told him—he told me he had the man in custody—I went and saw him, and said, "That is the man."

MR. ELLIS. Q. On any of those former occasions did you observe whether he was lame? A. No, he was not.

WILLIAM SMITH . I keep a beer shop at Turnham Green. On Saturday evening, 29th Dec., the prisoner came in about 9 o'clock for a pint of ale—it came to 3d.—my wife served him—he put down a half crown—my wife pushed it to me on the counter—I took it in my hand, and did not like the feel of it—I turned to the table, and rung it—it was bad—while I was examining it my wife gave the prisoner the change, and he left the house with it—I went out in search of him—I found him at the George the Fourth—I called him out, and told him he had passed a bad half crown at my place—he said he had not—I told him a second time, and cautioned him, and he said I was a d—d liar—I gave him into custody.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you not say, "If you don't return the money, I will have you locked up? A. Yes, and he said, "I will see you d—d I first"—I knew him before—he has been in my house, but has never sat down—he has called, and had a pint of ale or beer—I did not take the half crown of him, my wife pushed it along the counter—our counter is zinc, and I rung the half crown on the table in the bar parlour—I did not discover it to be bad till I rung it—I suppose the George the Fourth is from eighty to a hundred yards from my house—the prisoner did not give me a good half crown afterwards—I did not take it of him—I did not see him pay it to my wife—I was not present when he paid it—I cannot say whether I was in the back room or not.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Are you sure that the half crown you gave to the police sergeant was the one the prisoner passed? A. I will swear to that.

WILLIAM REVISING (police sergeant, T 7). The prisoner was given into my custody on 29th Dec., by the last witness, about 10 o'clock, with this half crown—I got this other from Mr. Johnson, and this from Mrs. Poulton—I asked the prisoner if he had been at Chiswick that night—he said he had not, and he had not been there for a month, or from that to two months.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you hear him say, after that, that he had changed two half crowns? A. Yea, he said he had changed two half crowns that evening, he did not know whether they were bad or good.

COURT. Q. How far is where you took him from Chiswick? A. About 300 yards—I found on him 6s. in silver, all good, and 2 1/2 d.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These half crowns are all bad, and from one die.

(The prisoner received a good character.)

GUILTY . Aged 22.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his good character.— Confined Six Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-174
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

174. WILLIAM CLARK was indicted for a like offence.

MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.

MARY MADDOCKS . I am barmaid at the Victoria, at Ealing. On 29th Dec., the prisoner came about half past 6 o'clock in the evening; he asked for half a quartern of gin—it came to 2d.; he paid me with a shilling—I did not detect it as being bad then—I gave him the change—I then looked at the shilling, and put it into the drawer—Mr. Wallace said something to me, and I took the shilling up again—I am sure I took the same shilling, I

had not another—I examined it, found it was bad, I marked it, and gave it to the policeman—I am sure the prisoner is the person—I had not known him before.

COURT. Q. When did you Me him again? A. On the Monday following, at Brentford, before the Magistrate—there was another one there, and I fixed on the prisoner as being the person—the other person was a man named Johnsqn.

Prisoner. Q. How can you swear to the shilling, when it was pot with other silver? A. I had no other shilling—only half crowns, sixpences, and 4d. pieces.

JAMES MITCHELL . I keep the Castle, at Baling. On 29th Dec., I saw the prisoner between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening; he came for half a quartern of gin—I served him—it came to 2d.; he gave me a shilling—I put it in the detector and found it bad; I brought it back to him, and asked him how many he had got of them—he said two or three—I said I should like to see them—he gave me a good sixpence—I took for the gin, and kept the shillmg—I afterwards gave it to the policeman.

THOMAS WALLACE . I live at Ealing. On Saturday evening, 29th Dec., I was in the Royal Oak beer shop, about 6 o'clock—the prisoner was there in company with another man named Johnson, who was afterwards taken into custody with him—they had some beer and some refreshment—on the same evening, I was at the Victoria—the prisoner came in and had some gin—he put down a shilling to pay Mary Haddocks, the barmaid—I spoke to her about the shilling, and she examined it.

THOMAS SLONES (police sergeant, T 17). I was on duty on 29th Dec.—I went to the Castle public house; I got this shilling from Mr. Mitchell, and I took the prisoner—I found on him 4d. in halfpence—I afterwards took Johnson, I found on him 4s. 5 1/2 d. in copper, six sixpences, four 4d. pieces, and one shilling, all good—I received this other shilling from Mary Maddocks.

WILLIAM WEBSTER These are both bad.

Prisoners Defence. It is the first time; I hope you will have mercy on me.

GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-175
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

175. MARY WERNHAM was indicted for a like offence.

MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.

STEPHEN LONGMAN CLARK . I am a butcher, and live in High-street, Aldgate. On 21st Dec., the prisoner came and bought two kidneys, they came to 3d.; she gave me a sixpence, I gave her change, and passed the same sixpence to Mrs. Bodenham—it had not been out of my sight—the prisoner went away, and in a few minutes Mrs. Bodenham brought back a sixpence—I examined it, and found it was bad—I kept it separate from other coin till I gave it to the officer—I do not know that I had ever seen the prisoner before.

Cross-examined by MR. PAYNE. Q. When did you see her again? A. Not before the third examination, but I saw her again the same day—Mrs. Bodenham brought back a sixpence—I could not say it was the one I had given her—we agreed that we would lose 3d. apiece—I gave her 3d., and she gave me the sixpence.

MARTHA BODENHAM . On 21st Dec., I was at Mr. Clark's—he gave me a sixpence, I took it to a baker's shop opposite—I offered it to the baker, and he refused it—it was not out of my sight—I carried it back to Mr. Clark's—I am sure it was the same, I had no other money.

Cross-examined. Q. How came you to take 3d. of Mr. Clark? A. He refused to change the sixpence—the baker pat it in his mouth, and bit it, and said it was bad—I said I took it at the butcher's—the butcher refused to change it—he said, "Would you know the woman again?"—I said, "Yes"—I went after her, and saw her go into Mrs. Abrahams' shop.

ELIZABETH ABRAHAMS . I live in Spectacle-alley. I sell bonnets, and other things—the prisoner came on the morning of 21st Dec, she bought a bonnet of me—she gave me a shilling for it—she gave me a sixpence, and sixpenny-worth of copper—I put the sixpence into my pocket where I had one other sixpence—they were mixed together, but the one I had before was a very worn sixpence, and the one she gave me was very different—it was not worn—the policeman came in soon afterwards, I gave him both the sixpences—they were all I had—this is the one the prisoner gave me.

JOHN HUDSON (policemcm, A 445). I took the prisoner—I told her she was charged with uttering a bad sixpence—she said she did not know it was bad—this is the sixpence I received from Mr. Clark, and this one from Mrs. Abrahams.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These are both bad, and from one mould—this old battered sixpence is good.


7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-176
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

176. JOHN WILLIAMS was indicted for a like offence.

MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM PEARSON HOUGH . I keep the Fortune of War, in Giltspur-street. On 19th Dec. the prisoner came, and had half a quartern of gin—my niece served him, and he paid in coppers—he called for another—I served him, and I was going into the bar parlour—he said, "Are you going to take for this?"—I said, "Yes"—he gave me a half crown—I was trying it, and he said, "No, no, I think I can pay for it; I have change"—I knew it was a bad one—I ran round and fastened the door, and he was taken into custody—I gave the half crown to the policeman.

COURT. Q. Have you ever stated before that he offered to give you half-pence when you tried the half crown? A. I stated it at the station—I can assure you that he proffered me halfpence, and he wanted to get the half crown out of my possession.

WILLIAM ALLEN (City policeman, 263). I took the prisoner—I found on him a good. half crown and 3 1/2 d. in coppers, and three duplicates—he gave his address at No. 3, Copenhagen-street, Islington, which is false—I went there, and no such person is known—there are five or six No. 3's—I went to them all, and he was not known.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . This half crown is bad.

GUILTY . Aged 42.— Confined Six Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-177
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment; Imprisonment; Imprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

177. JAMES TERRY, JAMES TURNER , and HENRY WILLIAMS , breaking and entering the dwelling house of William Gascoine, and stealing 3 gowns, and other articles, value 20l.; the property of James Rawson: and 1 coat and 1 handkerchief, the goods of James Joiner: to which

TERRY PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 29.— Confined Twelve Months.

TURNER PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 29.—And received a good character.— Confined Twelve Months.

WILLIAMS PLEADED GUILTY .** Aged 35.— Four Years Penal Servitude.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-178
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

178. GEORGE JONES , breaking and entering the dwelling house of Edward Wood, and stealing 1 coat, and other articles, value 18s., his property.

MR. PAYNE conducted the Prosecution.

EDWARD WOOD . I am a carman, and live at No. 67, Old-street. On the evening of 23rd Dec. I left my house about 25 minutes past 6 o'clock—I left no one in it—the doors and windows were all fast and secure; I am very particular—I was fetched home at near 7 o'clock—I found a large mob, and the house in possession of the police—I went inside, and was shown the things that were taken away; two pairs of trowsers, a coat, a waistcoat, a shawl, and a piece of cloth—I had left them in the back room—the coat was hanging up, and the trowsers, waistcoat, and shawl were in the cup-board—I did not miss those things till they were produced—the prisoner was in custody—I found a pane of glass broken in the window of the back room where the cupboard was—there were several persons in the place before I got there.

Cross-examined by MR. TALFOURD SALTER. Q. Was the breaking in the back parlour window large enough to admit a man? A. No, but a man could put his hand in, and lift the catch up, and then he could lift the window—there is a little yard at the back of the house—anybody getting out of the house could get away—they had to get over a little wall to get into the yard—there is a gate that had been opened—it had been fastened by two bolts, one at top, and one at bottom—the cupboard that some of these things were in was not fastened.

JAMES COOK (policeman, G 74). About 7 o'clock in the evening on 23rd Dee. I was called to the prosecutor's house in Old-street—I was placed in the front, and the sergeant went to the back—there were a few persons in front of the house—I stood there two or three minutes, the prisoner rushed out, and nearly knocked me down with the rush—I took him into custody—he said, "You need not hold me so tight, I have not done anything."

Cross-examined. Q. Your duty was dose to the door? A. I was placed there to take anybody that came out—the prisoner came out, and I caught hold of him—I did not go to the back part—I do not suppose five minutes elapsed from the time I received information till I took the prisoner.

ROBERT NICHOLLS (police sergeant, G 11). I went to the prosecutor's house that night—after posting the last witness at the front door, I went to the back—I got over the wall, and going into the back yard I found the window had been broken, and was up—there were two of the neighbours in the yard in their shirt sleeves—I found this coat, and trowsers, and shawl, and piece of cloth in the yard—the prosecutor has identified them.

Cross-examined. Q. We two neighbours went into the yard at the same time that you did? A. They went with me—the wall is about five feet high. (The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate was here read, as follows:" "I was standing at the front; I saw a mob of people; hearing the constable say, 'Let us go and secure the back,' I followed and got on the wall; I jumped over into the yard, and got in at the window; I went and opened the front door to let the constable in, out he rushed in and got hold of me.")

GUILTY .** Aged 25.— Four Years Penal Servitude.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-179
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

179. JULIA BROWN , stealing 40 yards of printed cotton, value 1l.; the goods of George Emery and another: having been before convicted: to which she

PLEADED GUILTY . Aged 34.— Confined Twelve Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-180
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

180. JOSEPH EWER , burglary in the dwelling house of Matthew Marriner, and stealing 2 boots, value 16s., his property.

WILLIAM HAINES (policeman, A 400). I was on duty in Well-street, Whitechapel, on 7th Jan., about a quarter before 6 o'clock in the morning

—I saw the prisoner and another man in Herod's-place, Well-street—when they saw me, they went away in a hurried manner—seeing they had something bulky, I overtook them in Wellclose-square—I stopped the prisoner, his companion ran away—I asked the prisoner what he had got—he said, "A pair of boots"—I took one boot from the left side of the breast of his coat—I said, "Here is only one, you said you had a pair; where is the other?"—he said, "That man has got it," but I saw him fumbling about the right side of his dress, and I said, "What have you there?"—he said, "Nothing"—I put my hand, and said, "Here is the other boot"—he said, "Yes, that is the fellow to the other one"—I said, "Where did you get them?"—he said; "I bought them in the Commercial-road on Saturday"—I said, "Whereabouts in the Commercial-road?"—he said he did not know—I said it was a strange story, it did not satisfy me, he must go with me—he then said he gave half a crown for them to the man who had run away—these boots are not fellows.

Prisoner. The man that he saw with me was a stranger to me.

MATTHEW MARRINER . I am a tailor and outfitter, and live in Well-street. These boots are mine—they were safe on Sunday night, between 11 and 12 o'clock, when I went to bed on the 6th Jan.—in the morning, in consequence of what my servant told me, I went down and found the fan-light very much broken, sufficiently to draw these boots through—there were two odd boots gone, and one pair; the pair the other man has run away with I suppose—the fanlight was all safe the night before—it was very stout glass—it could not be broken with the hand.

Prisoner's Defence. I bought the boots of this man who was with me; he asked me 4s. for them; I gave him half a crown; I put one in my pocket, and the other under my clothes; the officer came up, and the other man ran away

GUILTY . Aged 24.— Confined Twelve Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-181
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

181. JOHN FOLEYLEY , burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling house of John White, and stealing 7 shirts, and other articles, value 2l., his property.

JOHN WHITE . I am a cutler, and reside in Han well-street, Sevendials. On the night of 6th Nov. I went to bed about 11 o'clock—every door and window was fast, except the second floor landing window—it was shut down, and quite closed, but not fastened—there is a balcony to the next house and a person can get from there—I was disturbed about 4 o'clock in the morning—I got up, and heard somebody in the next room—my wife called out, "Who is there?"—I heard somebody rush down stairs, and go out of the window—I ran to the window, and called "Police!"—I discovered in the next room the drawers and cupboards all open, and seven shirts and other articles were gone—a number of lucifer matches were all about the room—this is my property—it was all safe the previous night.

CHARLES COPCUTT (policeman F 129). I was on duty in Great St. Andrew-street that morning—I heard the cry of "Police!" about ten minutes before 4 o'clock, I ran to the spot and saw the prosecutor looking out of the bed room window—I rang the bell next door and got admission, I looked about and found the prisoner lying down close to a chimney—I asked him what he did there, he made no answer, and appeared very sleepy—I found on him a pair of gloves, and three parts of a box of lucifer matches—I saw the lucifer matches which were in the house of the prosecutor, and they were the same sort as those found on the prisoner—a person could very easily get from the window on the landing to where I

found the prisoner—the knees of his trowsers were wet, as if he had been kneeling, and the gloves on his hands were wet, as if he had been climbing over the roofs; or as if he had gone over the workshops.

JAMES BRIERLY (policeman, F 116). I was on duty that morning in Great St. Andrew-street—I went after the last witness—I got in at the next door, and on going through the passage of this house I saw the back door open, and foot marks on the steps leading to the kitchen—I went down, and the door down stairs was broken open leading to the front kitchen, and in the kitchen I found this bundle of clothes done in a heap—I found the door unbolted leading from the front kitchen to the area, and foot marks to the top of the rails—a person could not have got from the area to where the prisoner was found—I think there must have been another person.

Prisoner. I know nothing at all about it.

GUILTY . Aged 17.— Confined Twelve Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-182
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

182. WILLIAM DUNN , stealing 1 watch, value 3s., the goods of Carl Below, from his person.

CARL BELOW . I am mate of the Agnes, which is lying in the docks. On the last night of the year I was drinking in the Eagle public house, in Shipalley—the prisoner was there, standing on the floor—I came down stairs, and he took my watch from me, which was in my pocket—there was a silk band round it which was broken—I sung out, and a man took hold of him—the prisoner was given to the policeman.

Prisoner. Q. There were others in the room besides me? A. Yes, there were.

COURT. Q. There was there anybody near you besides him? A. No—I could not be mistaken as to who the. person was who took it, and he was taken directly afterwards.

ANTOINE PHILIP MILLER . I am steward of this ship—I was at the public house, I saw the prisoner drinking some beer—he then went to the mate, and the mate sung out, "My watch is stolen"—I saw the prisoner had got his hand outside the mate's waistcoat pocket—the mate tried to take hold of the prisoner—I took hold of him, and the policeman came and took him—I do not know what became of the watch—I know the mate had a watch before, and he had a black band, and that was broken—there were other persons about—I caught the prisoner almost directly—I should think before he had time to make away with the watch—I saw the prisoner's hand outside the prosecutor's waistcoat—just at the moment I took him the others pressed upon me.

HENRY HUDSON (policeman, H 73). The prisoner was given into my custody—he said, "I know nothing about it, I never saw the watch"—the prosecutor was perfectly sober.

GUILTY .* Aged 18.— Confined Six Months.

OLD COURT.—Wednesday, January 9th 1856.


Before Mr. Baron Martin and the Second Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-183
VerdictNot Guilty > non compos mentis
SentenceImprisonment > insanity

Related Material

183. MARY M'NEIL was indicted for the wilful murder of George M'Neil.

MESSRS. BODKIN and CLERK conducted the Prosecution.

HENRY CHARLES PICKERING . In Nov. last I resided at No. 17, Murray-street, Shoreditch. The prisoner was the landlady of that house—she occupied the ground floor, and one of the kitchens, and we had the up stairs apartments, and one kitchen—we had lived there more than a year—the prisoner had three children—one was born in that house—two of them were living with her at the time in question—the eldest child was called George M'Neil—on Thursday, 29th Nov., I saw the prisoner, about 11 o'clock at night, when she came into our kitchen—the last time I saw the boy, George, alive, was about 2 o'clock in the day—next morning, about half past 7 o'clock, I came out of my bedroom, and went down stairs—on the stairs I saw a cash box, and a dress piece lying across it—I believe it was the prisoner's—I went down into the kitchen to wash, as was my usual custom, and afterwards returned up stairs—I took up the cash box to take it into the prisoner's room—her door was slightly open—I knocked at the door, and said, "Are you up, ma'am? are you up, ma'am?"—she then said, "Oh! what have I done! what have I done! what have I done!" three times—I said, "Done? I think you have done a very pretty thing, to put your money and things on the stairs"—at the same moment I pushed the door open, and looked in—I saw the baby lying on the bed—I saw blood on the bed—the prisoner was concealed behind the door—I do not remember seeing her at that time—when I saw the blood on the bed, I directly dropped the cash box, went to the street door, and called across to a milkman, who was the first person I saw—he would not come—I then saw a policeman, and beckoned to him—he came—I told him what had happened, and showed him the room—he went in first—I followed him in, and saw that the two children, George and Edwin, were both dead—the third child had been taken into the country about a month previously—the prisoner was taken into custody by the policeman, and taken to the station—when I returned from the station, I saw a razor lying on the bed, and a case belonging to it—it was my razor—I kept it in a box, locked, in our kitchen—after the razor was found, I went down stairs, and found my box unlocked—I afterwards saw a key brought out of the prisoner's room—I cannot say whether it was taken off the drawer or out of the drawer—it fitted my box—some short time before this, I found that a razor which I kept in a case in the kitchen drawer, along with a comb, and brush, and other things, had been meddled with—it had been turned round in the case, and put in the wrong way, twice within a fortnight—I was determined to find out who had done it, and I spoke to the children and the servant about it—I then named it to the prisoner—she said she had not done it.

Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. She was very comfortably off, was she not? A. I had every reason to believe so—there seemed to be a sufficiency of everything—they had plenty to eat and drink, and plenty of clothes—she seemed very happy and comfortable up to a certain time, and then I observed a change in her—it was on 19th Sept. that I observed the change—the baby was then between four and five months old—I believe up to the time of this change she had been a kind and attentive parent, and very affectionate to her children—when I saw her in her bedroom on the morning in question, after the death of her children, she was moaning—the children had apparently been dead some hours—they were quite cold—from 19th Sept. she appeared extremely unhappy, and extremely bad at times—I have seen her in a great state of excitement with her children—she used to say they had nothing to wear to go out in—that was not the fact—on one Sunday morning I offered to take the little boy for a walk with

my own little boy—she said he could not go, because he had nothing to put on, and she should be ashamed to let him go with me—I told his sister, Harriet, to go and get his clothes, which she did, and I took him out; and his clothes were very nice indeed, as nice as any gentleman's child need appear in.

ELEANOR PICKERING . I and my husband lodged in the house kept by the prisoner, for about twelve months—I have noticed a change in her manner and conduct for the last two or three months—I first observed it about 24th Sept.—I think she was at that time suffering from milk fever—before that she had been a kind and affectionate mother to her children—she was rather hasty with them at times, but generally speaking, kind and affectionate—since this change she has often complained that her, children had nothing to wear—that was not true—she was frequently running up and down stairs; she seemed to be unhappy and low spirited, and different to What she had been before—she had three children; one of them was sent into the country about a month before this—that was in consequence of my observing the prisoner one day attempt to throw him down the kitchen stairs—she took him by his arms, saying, "I will drop him, I will drop him, I will throw him down"—I was alarmed, and took him from her arms—my husband mentioned it to her friends, and in consequence of that the child was sent into the country—nobody slept in the room with the children on the night in question but the prisoner.

EDWIN THOMPSON (policeman, N 147). I was called by Mr. Pickering to No. 17, Murray-street, on the morning of 30th Nov.—I went with him into a room on the ground floor—there was a bed and a cot in the room—a child about four years old was in the cot, and an infant in the bed—the throats of both of them were cut—they were quite dead and cold—the prisoner was in the room sitting on a footstool by the side of the fire place in one corner of the room, rocking herself up and down, and muttering some words to herself—I believe they were, I have done it; but they were said in such a low tone of voice, I could hardly hear it—I asked her whether she had killed the children—she said, "Yes, I have done it; oh! my poor-children, what shall I do?"—she was not in her night dress, she had her gown on—I took her to the station house—I found a razor and a razor case in the bed—that was before I took her to the station—I afterwards showed it to Mr. Pickering—I saw a towel in the room with stains of blood upon it; there was some bloody water in the washhand basin, and some spots of blood upon it—I found a key in the drawer, in a box of keys, which fitted Mr. Pickering's box where his razors were.

WILLIAM HENRY COWARD . I am surgeon to the police. I saw the bodies of these children on the morning in question—they had been dead several hours—the cause of their death was undoubtedly the wounds in their throats—a razor would have inflicted those wounds—I did not know the prisoner.

JOHN ROWLAND GIBSON . I am surgeon of Newgate. I have had opportunities of seeing the prisoner every day since she has been in the gaol, rather more than a month—my opinion decidedly is, that she was of unsound mind at the time she committed the act.

Cross-examined. Q. If you knew, as a matter of fact, that her father had been in a lunatic asylum, a confirmed lunatic for some years, would that confirm your opinion? A. It would.


CATHERINE M'NEIL . I am the prisoner's mother. About six years ago my husband, her father, was sent to a lunatic asylum in consequence of his

deranged state of mind—he was taken to Grove-hall Institution, and from there was removed to Bethlehem Hospital—he was in confinement for a year and a half—he is not in confinement now—he once cut his throat.

GEORGE JOHN AMSDEN . I am a medical practitioner. I attended the prisoner in her confinement; she rather exhausted herself by nursing the child, and by so doing brought on a state of great nervous depression—I was afterwards called in to see her on 23rd Sept.—I found her labouring under extreme excitement, so much so, that I ordered persons to attend to her, and stay with her—I did not see her for seven days afterwards—she was still in a very excitable state, but rather better in health—from what I saw of her then, and from what I have heard of this transaction, I quite agree with what Mr. Gibson has stated—I never saw her before her confinement.

NOT GUILTY, being insane .— To be detained until Her Majesty's pleasure be known .

Before Mr. Justice Crowder.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-184
VerdictNot Guilty > non compos mentis
SentenceImprisonment > insanity

Related Material

184. SARAH ALLEN was indicted for the wilful murder of William Allen.

MESSRS. BODKIN and CLERK conducted the Prosecution.

ELIZABETH WOODLAND . In Nov. last I was lodging in the same house with the prisoner and her husband, in Poulton-terrace, Chelsea—he is a messenger of the Steam Boat Company at Chelsea—they had three children living with them—the eldest boy, William, was six years old—Edward, the second, was three years old, and the third, Arthur, eleven months—I had lived in the house with them better than two years—I recollect 15th Nov.—it was a very foggy day—the prisoner was out that afternoon—she came in about 5 o'clock—the eldest boy, Willie, came home from school before her, and he stopped in my room until she came in—she went out again with the three children some time after 5 o'clock—I dare say it was nearly half-past 5 o'clock—I said to her, "Why, Mrs. Allen, are you going out this foggy night with those children?"—she said, "Yes, I am only going on a little errand"—about a quarter to 6 o'clock her husband came home—I went to bed at 12 o'clock that night—the prisoner had not come home then—I saw nothing of any of the children that night before I went to bed—about 9 o'clock next morning I saw the prisoner—she passed me on the stairs—Mrs. Richards was with her—nothing passed between us at that time—I saw the body of the eldest child at the Inquest, on 18th Nov.

Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. The prisoner was the landlady of the house where you lodged? A. Yes—I have known her two years—she was a very kind and affectionate mother, and lived on terms of great affection with her husband, who is a very sober, respectable, industrious man—for their station in life, they had a very happy home—I know that she had an opinion that her children were scrofulous—I had a book on the subject of king's evil and scrofula—this is it—(produced)—she borrowed that book from me to read—I never heard her say that she thought her husband was scrofulous—the children were very healthy clean looking children—there was not the least outward sign of scrofula—she often used to speak to me respecting the children—she used to say of Willie, the eldest boy, in particular, how very ill he was, and that he had the scurvy in his blood—as far as my observation went, that was quite incorrect—it was a mere delusion of her mind—I have frequently tried to disabuse her of that delusion by telling her that I was sure nothing ailed him—that did not appear to have the least effect upon her mind—she would say I could not

see right she was sure, that I was wrong, and she was right in her belief—she was a very sensible, intelligent woman, upon all ordinary topics—I do not know that she was a religious minded woman, nothing particular in that way—upon all ordinary topics she would discourse rationally and properly, but she would always change it to talking about the children—this book belonged to my husband's mother many years ago—that was how it came into my possession—the prisoner did not ask me to lend it to her, I offered to lend it—I do not think the delusion got into her mind by reading that book, because she was of the same opinion before.

COURT. Q. Perhaps it was upon her stating that opinion that you lent her the book? A. Yes.

JOHN MACEY . I am a blacksmith, and reside at Chelsea. On the Thursday evening in question, about 5 or 10 minutes to 5 o'clock, I was coming up Church-street, Chelsea, which leads to Cheyne-walk, and met the prisoner—it was about 120 yards from the river where I met her—I knew her well—she had the three children with her, one on each side of her, and the infant in her arms—she was going towards the water side—it was a very foggy night, and that was the remark that passed between us—she said, "It is very foggy, is it not?" and I said, "Indeed it is, ma'am"—she then passed on with the children one way, and I came on the other.

Cross-examined. Q. You know her to be a very respectable, well conducted woman?"A. Yes—from all I ever saw I believe she was a very excellent wife and mother.

JOHN JAMES GODBY . I am a waterman at the Cadogan Pier, Chelsea. About 6 o'clock on the evening of 15th Nov. I was on a barge by the side of the pier—it is one of the dummies which the people go on to get on to the pier—it is in the middle of the pier: I mean across the end of it—you go down steps from the end of the pier on to the dummy—I suppose it may be nearly 100 yards from the shore, or not so much—while I was on the dummy, I heard the cry of a child, apparently in the water—I ran off from the pier, took the life buoy and a little boat hook, and got over the rails into a boat, and proceeded to where the sound came from, and just below the Cricketer's Causeway I picked up a child—that is up the river—I suppose it was about 200 or 300 yards from the barge on which I had been standing—I picked up the child from the water—it was the young one, eleven months old—I suppose it might have been about sixteen or eighteen yards from the shore—I took it to the Magpie and Stump, and delivered it to Thomas Holmes, to take into the house—I did not see more than one child in the water.

Cross-examined. You did everything you could to rescue the child the moment you heard its screams? A. Yes.

JOSEPH REYNOLDS . I am a waterman's apprentice, and live at Chelsea—I was walking along Cheyne-walk, coming from Battersea-bridge, on this evening, about a quarter to 6 o'clock, and heard a cry of "Police!"—I was then about forty yards from the pier, on the side nearer to Battersea bridge—I immediately ran down some steps there, and got into the water as far as I could safely go—I had to catch hold of the banisters to save myself, it being so foggy I could hardly see—I went down the steps nearest but one to the pier—they are steps where boats come to—I felt a boat that was made fast to the railing of the stairs, loosed it, and got in—it was about a quarter of an hour before high water, the boat lay right athwart the river—she was lying still, it is all an eddy there—there were other boats there, but out of my reach—none of them were touching the steps, I should say they

were about three yards from the steps—when I got down the steps I heard the splashing of people in the water, and crying, and struggling—I could not see anything, it was so foggy and dark, it was impossible to do so—the crying was that of a child—I made towards the sound, and picked up the boy of three years old—he was just going down underneath my boat's bow—I got him out—I heard the noise of others going out, but did not succeed in getting out any others—I only heard one other voice at that minute, but it appeared that I heard three voices in the water before I went out—I had no sculls in my boat, but I paddled on shore with the stretchers—after giving up the child I went back again, and found the cap of the boy that was drowned—I came up to the younger child, but another man had saved it—the one I saved was, I dare say, about sixteen yards from the shore, as near as I could judge—it was floating up towards Batterseabridge, what tide there was, there was not much tide, it was nearly high water.

ROBERT SPINK . I am a cabman. On the night of 15th Nov. I was directly opposite the Cadogan-pier with my cab, about half past 5 o'clock—while I was there I heard a scream from the water—there were two screams—I should say they were the screams of two children—they seemed to be different voices, one was a much louder voice than the other—a man came by at the time, and I went with him over to the water and listened—after looking for a minute, or a minute and a half, I saw something dark floating on the water, and still heard the scream—I should say it was about five or six yards from the pier, up the river—I called out very lustily for help, for watermen, and police—I ran to some steps that lead down to the shore from Cheyne-walk, and got wet in running down—they were the steps nearest to the Cadogan-pier—there was a gate at the top of the steps, but it was fastened—I had to get over the rails near the gate—I got on to a dummy which was there—I saw a little child floating past the dummy, within about half a yard of my arm's length—I was unable to reach it, and it floated past me—I could not see more than one child in the water, but I heard the screams of the second further out in the water—when I first saw the child in the water I was looking over the wall near the Cadogan-pier, I was standing, perhaps, about eight yards away from the level of the pier, by the side of the wall which bevels out, and the child was coming, it might have been about six or eight yards from the pier—it was floating from the pier at the time.

WILLIAM CUSACK . I live with my brother, at the Magpie and Stump, Chelsea—about twenty minutes to 6 o'clock on this evening I heard cries from the river, they appeared to be cries of children—I directly crossed the road and went down the steps next but one to the pier, which are directly opposite our house—there is a gate at the top of those steps which is kept shut at night—when I arrived at the steps I found two men bringing the two children ashore—they were taken to my brother's house, and everything done to restore them—the prisoner's husband afterwards came, and went with the children to the workhouse—that was about 7 o'clock—I knew him before—I afterwards went with him from the workhouse to his house.

PHILIP PARKER . I am a horse keeper. On 18th Nov. I found the body of a boy in the river, about thirty yards above Vauxhall-bridge, on the Middlesex side—he was dead—the body was about thirty feet from the shore, the tide was running down, it appeared to have been some time in the water—I afterwards saw the body at the Inquest.

MR. PARRY to ELIZABETH WOODLAND. Q. Did the prisoner complain to you in June last that she was suffering from pains her head? A. Yes;

she would not take any medicine to remove it—she need to rub her arms and say that a white powder came out of them, and that was the disease—I could not see any powder.

JOHN COATES . I am a lighterman and boat builder, at Chelsea—I know the state the tide was in about 6 o'clock on 15th Nov.—it was nearly half an hour before high water—I know the Cadogan-pier, Chelsea, there is a wall east of the pier for about eighty feet—it is a sort of curved wall, about three feet high—there is not more than two, or three, or six feet of wall on the western side—there is a curve of about twenty feet, but no wall beyond, there are posts with chains fastened from them—there are steps leading from the roadway to the shore, and gates at the top of those steps which are closed at night—the eighty feet wall bows out, and projects into the river on each side of the pier—anything falling into the river from the outer part of the wall would fall into the current—but on each side it would be still water for it is ten feet from the shore—this plan (looking at one) correctly represents the position of the place—it would be nearly thirty feet from the shore to get into the current.

Cross-examined. Q. I suppose you are quite accurate about this? A. Yes, perfectly—I speak from experience—I am well acquainted with the river, my premises are close to the spot.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Are there gates to the pier itself? A.—they are generally closed when the boats cease running—the last up boat arrives about a quarter after 5 o'clock—but no boats were running at this time, on account of the fog, and the gates would no doubt be closed.

JOHN JAMES GODBY re-examined. I had charge of the pier—there were no boats running that day at all—the pier gates were closed all day, and fastened—I opened them to let in the persons who gave the alarm—I know that they were fastened before that.

ELIZABETH RICHARDS . I am a domestic servant I have been long acquainted with the prisoner—when this unhappy affair occurred I was out of a situation, and was living in Cirencester-place, Fitzroy-square—I had not seen her for about three weeks or a month then—she came on the evening of 15th Nov., about 7 o'clock, or a little after—I did not expect her, it was quite an unusual thing—she came alone—I lived in the first floor—she came up to my room—she appeared very desponding and distressed, and in a flood of tears, and said, "I have lost my children"—I first of all went down to her, and I did not know her; it was very foggy and dark—she said, "Mrs. Richards, don't you know me?"—I said at first I did not, and then I said, "It is Mrs. Allen, is it not?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "I did not know you at first, come in and sit down"—she said, "I want to speak to you, I have lost my children"—I asked her to come up stairs, and then said, "Where is your husband, have you been to your husband?"—she said, "I have not seen him since the morning"—I said, "Then you must go to him directly"—she said, No, I can't go to Allen, I can't go home"—I said, "That is the place you must go to; who can you go to but your husband, he is your friend, the only friend you can go to whatever jmay have happened"—I could not prevail upon her to leave—she kept on saying, I can't go to Allen, I can't see Allen"—she remained in my room I dare say an hour, and I then went out with her and had some coffee at some place in the neighbourhood—we then came back again—I then wanted her to go, but she would not, and it was 12 o'clock before I could get her to leave—she kept on saying she could not go to Allen, and she would not go to

Allen; that was all the answer I could get from her—about 12 o'clock I prevailed upoa her to accompany me to her house—we were from 12 o'clock till 2 getting there on account of the fog—she did not give me the least account of how she had lost her children, all she said was, that she had lost them, and she would not go home to her husband—I always understood he was the best of husbands to her—when we got to her house she let herself in with a key that she had—I went into the passage, closed the door, and stood on the mat; I was rather doubtful whether she would go out again—I said to her, "Mrs. Allen, you go up stairs first, and see whether your husband is at home or not"—she said, "Very well I will, and then we will get a light"—she went up stairs, and knocked at the door twice, and Mr. Allen got off the bed where he had been lying with the little boy, and let her in—I heard him say to her, "Sarah, is it you?"—she said, "Yes, Mrs. Richards is down stairs"—he said, "It can't be you, Sarah"—she said, "Yes, it is."—I then went up—I found Mr. Allen in the room, and his brother, and sister, and the second boy—the boy was in the bed, and Mr. Allen was lying on the bed with part of his clothes on—the prisoner looked at the child and kissed it, and said, "Where did you get in?" or, "How did you, get in?"—Mr. Allen said to her, "Ah! Sarah, where is Willie, where is Willie?"—she made no answer—he said, "And where is the baby, Sarah?"—she said, "Have you got the baby?"—he said, "I have, Sarah"—she said, "Where is my baby?"—the baby was not then in the house, it was with a nurse—she said, "I will have my baby; where is my baby?" why can't I have my baby?"—that was her continual cry—Mr. Allen kept continually asking her the whole of the morning concerning Willie, but she made no answer, she only wanted her baby—I remained there the rest of the morning.

Cross-examined. Q. How long have you known her? A. Many years, the greater part of her life—I knew but little of her till after her marriage, about seven years ago—I have known her intimately since then—when she came to me on this evening she was in a flood of tears—she was in a state that I never saw her in before, she seemed so distressed, and could not speak to me, as though she had lost all self possession, and all control of herself—she was sobbing and crying wkile she spoke—I did all I could to soothe and console her, and to get her to her husband—they lived on most affectionate terms, and she was a most kind and excellent mother, and particularly fond of her children; in fact, I always considered that she was too indulgent, she indulged them to a fault—I knew of the idea of hers about scrofula, and I have tried to reason her out of it—I always considered it was a delusion, but she was so very strong upon it the last time I was with her, about three weeks before this—she told me that I would not heed her—I said, "Oh! Mrs. Allen, all children have got complaints; you are so very fond of your children"—she said, "Oh! look at it; oh, Mrs. Richards, we are all ruined! I am ruined, my husband is ruined, and my children are ruined; my family is ruined altogether!"—she was under the impression that her husband was also scrofulous—I know that her mother's youngest sister died in a lunatic asylum—her mother was not at all affected that I know of—she has only been dead about three months—I should think it is quite a year and a half since she first complained to me about her husband and her children being scrofulous, but it was not so much as the last time—she was so very strong upon it the last time, it seemed to grow, nothing could do away with it—I did all I could to do away with it—the boy Willie was a very fine child—at one time I saw an alteration in him, he was looking

thinner, but I considered he was growing, and I said so—she said, "Oh! nonsense; you don't understand it; you can see by my eyes, by my forehead, that I have the complaint."

COURT. Q. then she had the same impression that she herself was labouring under scrofula? A. Oh, yes, that she was affected—that was latterly—it was the last time I saw her—her impression was, that she was always affected; that something was in the blood, and that it was in the bones, and would never come out, and that in future it would be worse than it was—that was what she held out to me—she said, "I am quite altered, and see how my forehead is swelled out."

THOMAS DRAKE (police inspector). About half past 9 o'clock on the morning of 16th Nov., I went to the prisoner's house, and found her in the kitchen—as soon as she saw me she began to cry—I told her that I should take her into custody on the charge of having caused the death of one of her children—she made no answer, except saying, Let me have my baby"—I asked her if the eldest boy, William, went out with her on the evening previous—she made no answer, but kept repeatedly asking for her baby—the prisoner's house is about 500 yards from the Cadogan pier.

EDWARD TIPPETT . I am a surgeon, and live at Ehnterrace, Fulham. I have been in the habit of attending the prisoner and her children, for between four and five years—she has from time to time made complaints to me of their having an impure disease—she called it scrofula—it is rather more than six months ago that she first called my attention to the children—I examined them in consequence of that statement—I did not find the slightest foundation for it—I told her so, but she still continued to express the same opinion—she said she thought the children would live to suffer for some years, and eventually die of it—remember on one occasion her saying she would rather see them die than live to suffer—that was about three months before this happened—it was in the autumn, about the latter end of Aug. or Sept.—I considered this a perfect delusion, both as regarded herself and her children—I have very often endeavoured to remove the impression, but entirely failed in doing so—I advised her to go to the hospital and take a higher opinion—she frequently complained to me about herself, of a swelling of the head, and the colour of her skin—she said she had a disease of the skin, and also a disease in the bones, which would eventually kill her—she complained of a little pain in the head occasionally—I examined her—there was no foundation for the existence of any actual disease—I prescribed for her once, when she complained of pain in the head—she nad medicine to take, I cannot say that she took it—the last time I saw her, I met her in the street with the three children—I then remarked how well they were looking, particularly the eldest boy—she replied, "Oh! dear, no; they are none of them well; they are far from well"—I think that was in Aug. or Sept.—she appeared to be still labouring under the same impression.

Cross-examined. Q. Was she under the impression that her husband was scrofulous? A. I cannot remember hearing her mention it—her idea was perfectly erroneous; there was no foundation for it.

Q. Do you believe, supposing it should be proved to the satisfaction of the Jury that she threw this child into the Thames, that the delusion in her mind might have induced her to do it to prevent its having a life of suffering? A. No doubt, that is my full impression, from the expression she used.

MR. PARRY called

GEORGE ROBERTS ROWE, ESQ ., M. D. I am a member of the College of Physicians, and also a Surgeon. I am the author of a work on nervous

diseases, and have paid great attention to those matters—I have seen the prisoner, and had conversations with her—my first visit occupied perhaps half an hour—I was then quite satisfied that she laboured under a delusion which is not of unfrequent occurrence in persons of high nervous sensibility—she stated to me that her children had suffered from a scrofulous disease, that their foreheads projected, and their eyes were starting from their heads, all that I could say was futile, and of no avail, she still persisted in her delusion—I saw her about a week afterwards, and the opinion that I had formed of her case was more than corroborated—I extended the period of my visit—I was most anxious to form a correct view of her case—she still persisted in the delusion—I called her attention to a work which she had been reading, and which has been produced to-day, and I believe the reading of that book very much strengthened the morbid view she entertained—she still labours under it—these are cases of a very protracted nature—sometimes the delusion does vanish.

Cross-examined by MR. BODKIN. Q. In either of the conversitions you had with her, did she say anything about the death of her children? A. She alluded to them—she stated that she thought they were better off—she believed they had been suffering, and would ultimately have suffered much more—I think such a delusion would be very likely to lead to the commission of an act of violence like this.

JOHN ROWLAND GIBSON . I am surgeon of Newgate. I have seen the prisoner every day since she has been in the gaol—I entirely agree with what Dr. Rowe has said.

Cross-examined. Q. Is it your belief that, supposing she acted under this morbid delusion, at the time she committed the act, if she did commit it, she was incapable of distinguishing right from wrong? A. That is my impression—that is clearly my opinion.

DR. ROWE re-examined. I am also of opinion that she was incapable of distinguishing right from wrong.

NOT GUILTY, being insane .—Ordered to be detained until Her Majesty's pleasure be known .

Before Mr. Baron Martin.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-185
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence; Not Guilty > unknown

Related Material

185. EDWARD HARVEY and HARRIET RAY were indicted for the wilful murder of Harriet Harvey: they were also charged, upon the Coroner's Inquisition, with the like offence.

MESSRS. BODKIN and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

ELIZABETH PLATT . I live at No. 13, Brunswick-street, Homerton, in the parish of Hackney. The prisoners came to lodge at my house on 29th Nov. last—they occupied the back room on the ground floor, unfurnished—they stated that they had four children, but I never saw but one until the death happened—on Sunday, 23rd Sept., the male prisoner came up stairs between 6 and 7 o'clock in the morning, and asked where the parish doctor lived—I asked him what was the matter—he said two of his children, he believed, were dying—I told him where the doctor lived, and he left—I went down into their room, and found the female prisoner there, and the four children, two alive and two dead—one was quite dead, and the other nearly so—he gave a groan when the doctor came into the room—the doctor came in while I was there, and the male prisoner with him—I looked at the children—they were in a state shocking to relate—I could not describe the awful state they were in—they were quite skeletons—there were not any bed clothes, there was a thin covering over their faces—I took it off, and looked at them—I asked the female prisoner why she did not tell

me their children were in each a state—she said they had not been ill, they had eaten their supper heartily when they went to bed—she said they had been standing by the fire on the previous day—I said it was very surprising if they had stood on their legs the day previous—I said that, from the state in which they were—the other children were nine and two and a half years old—I looked round the room—I only saw what they showed the doctor, a little rice and oatmeal for the day—the only child I saw while they were there was the girl nine years old, who used to go in and out.

JOHN VINALL . I am a surgeon, residing at Hackney; I am surgeon to the South Hackney district. On Sunday morning, 23rd Dec., the male prisoner came to me, at 7 o'clock, and told me that one of his children was dead, and the other dying, and asked me to go to his house—I went with him—as we went along, he said that if his children died he should say they had been starved to death—he told me that he had had an order to go into the workhouse—I told him, if he was in such distress, he was very silly not to do so—I do not recollect that he made any reply—I went into the back room on the ground floor at No. 13, Brunswick-street, and there found the female prisoner and four children—the eldest girl was nursing the infant in one part of the room, and the two children who have since died were lying in another corner of the room, on a mattrass—the girl was dead, and the boy was in a dying state, nearly dead—he died in a few minutes, while I was in the house—they presented the appearance of extreme emaciation—there were two old chairs and a table in the room, and this bed on the floor in the corner—that appeared to be all the furniture—on the chimney piece I saw a little paper with some oatmeal, and another paper with rice in it—the female prisoner told me that there was 1d. worth of oatmeal in one paper, and 2d. worth of rice in the other—I made a port mortem examination on the Tuesday morning, by direction of the parish authorities—I first examined the girl—I found all the organs of the body quite healthy, except that they were entirely devoid of fat—there was no fat about the body at all—I found no food of any kind in the stomach, only a little liquid feculent matter in the lower part of the intestines, and one or two little pieces of stick, which the male prisoner said might have been taken in the oatmeal—I made the examination at the house—the prisoners were not present during the whole of it—I called them in to account for the pieces of stick—there was also a fish bone in the intestines of the girl, which the female prisoner accounted for by saying that they had had a herring the day before—she also said they had eaten a hearty supper the night before—I should not have thought it at all likely that the stomach would present the appearances it did if they had had a hearty supper the night before—in my opinion, the children died from the long continued deprivation of proper and sufficient food—I took away the stomach and intestines of the boy, and next day those of the girl, sealed them up, and took them to Dr. Letheby.

DR. HENRY LETHEBY . I am. professor of chemiatry at the London Hospital. I received from Mr. Vinall the stomach and intestines of the female child on 29th Dec.—I examined them—I found the stomach slightly reddened on the interior coat; and the intestines and stomach were perfectly empty, excepting a little feculent mucus—that was in the intestines both of the boy and girl, but more particularly in the boy's—I also found in the stomach of each some pieces of fish bone, which I produce—I did not find any small pieces of wood—I carefully examined the remains of nutriment, to ascertain whether there was the remains of a meal—I searched particularly

for sugar and starch, but did not find a particle—if the child had eaten a supper of oatmeal the night before, I should have found the husk of the oatmeal, however strong the digestion might have been.

Q. Looking at the state of the stomach and intestines, and assuming that the body presented an appearance of great emaciation, what inference would you draw from that state of things? A. That starvation had been the cause of death—there was not a trace of fat in the intestinal canal, which is very unusual—if a person is deprived of food, the system lives as it were upon itself, until all the fat is consumed—I should imagine that the exhaustion of the system had been a lingering one, from the whole of the fat being absorbed—I think it could not have been any sudden matter; it must have been progressing for some time—there was some redness on the inner lining—I found nothing deleterious—the redness was probably owing to the mechanical irritancy of the fish bone, and the pieces of wood on the coat of the stomach—that appearance has been observed before in cases of starvation—I attribute the death to a lingering deprivation of food, going on for some time.

CHARLES ALEXANDER CHRISTIE . I am relieving officer of St. Matthew, Bethnal-green—the prisoners were living there in July last, with four children—I did not visit them then, they were brought to the workhouse by a policeman—they were in a very destitute state from want of food, and very emaciated—the prisoners were taken before a Magistrate on that occasion for neglecting the children—they were supposed to be man and wife—the man was committed, on 18th July, for one month; the woman was discharged, as not being his wife—she and the children were then in the work-house; an order was made to take them to the Ware Union, and I removed them there on 11th Aug.—they were then perfectly healthy and playful, particularly so—they had very much improved in health, they had then been about five weeks in the workhouse.

Harvey. Q. When I was taken before the Magistrate, was I not discharged with the female prisoner, and sent back to the Union, and stopped there nine days? A. I believe you were—I cannot say whether you went out to get employment.

LAVINIA EDWARDS . I live at No. 2, Great Margaret-street, Hackney—the prisoners'came to lodge at my house at the latter end of Oct.—they took two rooms—they staid with me until they went to Mrs. Platts—I do not know when that was, I have been in the workhouse since that—I saw the two children after their death, and recognised them as two of the children belonging to the prisoners, and living with them while they were with me—they were in a state that I never saw before, and never wish to see again, in a most dreadful state—I should suppose from starvation, so dreadfully fallen away, they did not appear to have any flesh at all upon their bones—while the prisoners lodged with me they never treated their children as they ought to do—I have seen them take food themselves, and turn the children out into the garden, or outside the door, whilst they ate it—I have sometimes given them a little bread and butter unknown to their parents, and they always seemed to eat it up very ravenously.

COURT. Q. What was the girl's name? A. Harriett—they went away 1l. 2s. 6d. in my debt, but they promised to pay it at so much a week.

ELLEN WILSON . I live at No. 29, Margaret-street, Homerton, next door to Mrs. Edwards—I know the prisoners and their children from lodging there—my back yard looks into their garden—I have constantly seen Harriett, and the other children walking together in the garden, hand in

hand—they were about five and seven jean old—I saw the boy gnawing a piece of turnip top, and the girl a piece of turnip rind—I said to them, "Don't eat that, my dear, it is not fit for you to eat; are you hungry?"—they said. "Yes," and I gave them some bread, which they ate very ravenously—they appeared very thin, but looked very clean in their flesh.

CHARLES EARLWIN . I keep a school in Orchard-street, Hackney—I saw the two children, Harriett and William, after their death—they were in a remarkably emaciated state—they came to school on 24th Sept, and continued for about three weeks in Oct.—the child was in a very depressed and quiet state, and saddened, I may say, and remarkably thin—we could not tell whether it was in a starving state, or in a state of rapid consumption—we have given them food, and have seen them eating food which they have taken from the other children—their appetite appeared to be very ravenous, and they appeared to wish to conceal their eating food from the other children—I complained to the children themselves about their eating other children's food; I did not complain to the prisoners, I never saw the prisoners until I saw the children dead—it was a day or two, or, perhaps, a week after I complained to the children, that they discontinued coming—when I went and saw them dead, I said to the female prisoner, "Are these children yours?"—she looked across to the male prisoner without answering—I then asked him, "Are these children yours?"—he said, "Yes"—I then turned to the woman, and said, "Are you this man's wife?"—she said, "I am sorry to say I am not"—I then said to the man, "These children being yours, by whom are they I"—he said, "By my wife"—I said, "Where is your wife?"—he said, "She is dead; she has been dead two years, or two years and a half"—I said, "The youngest child cannot be hers," it did not appear to be above eighteen mouths old as I saw it then in the woman's arms, but he said it was two years and a half old—it had a very diminutive appearance, beyond description—I saw that it was a very distressing case in appearance, and I gave them half a crown, and a friend of mine, who had been there just before, gave them some bread tickets—that was the cause of my going there—there was every appearance of very great destitution in the room.

HENRY DOSSETT . I am the assistant relieving officer of Hackney Union. I know the prisoners—on 16th Nov. the man applied to me at the work-house for relief, on account of want of work—I gave him an order to come into the house with his family, and likewise two quartern loaves of bread to take with him, to eat before they came—they did not come into the house at all—on Tuesday, 18th Dec., the woman came for relief, her husband being out of work—I told her if that was the case, her husband could come himself—I gave her on that occasion a quartern loaf, and a quart of oatmeal to take home with her, and told her to send her husband—she came again on the Wednesday, before the Board, and said the same thing—the Board told her that she must send her husband—she had no food given her on that occasion—next day, the 20th, the male prisoner came—he said he had no work, and wanted relief—I told him I could give him work, which I did—I gave him an order to go to work in the stone yard, and a quartern loaf, and a quart of oatmeal to begin with—he could earn from 18d. to 2s. a day in the stone yard, according to what he did—he did not come to work—he is a bricklayer—it is work that any strong able bodied person can do; lads and young men do it—neither of them made any complaint to me of the children being ill.

Harvey. Q. You say on 15th Nov., you gave me two loaves of bread; you did not, you only gave me an order for the house? A. I gave you two loaves—the female prisoner did not come and ask me for some temporary relief to keep the children from starving; if she had, I should have taken you all into the house—had I been aware of their being in such a state I should have sent a fly, or some conveyance, and brought them all into the house.

Ray. In the morning the male prisoner applied for relief, and had a note given him to go in the evening; I applied, and was denied relief; the witness said he would not give me a bit of anything; I remained there a long time, and said I was not pleading for myself, but for my starving children, and I would not go home without; and at last I had two quartern loaves given to me. Witness. At the time I gave her the loaves she did not say that she required them for her starving children—she did not mention the children at all, she said it was her husband's being out of work—I never gave her two loaves at once, I gave her one loaf and a quart of oatmeal.

Ray. The next application I made they would not allow me to say a word, and I was obliged to go without relief; the next application was a week previous to the children's death, and I had one quartern loaf and some oatmeal, and no more; I attended next day before the Board, and said that I had four starving children at home, and was told I must send my husband, and I had no relief that day; my husband went next day, and had a quartern loaf and a bag of oatmeal, and an order for the stone yard, but he could not go as he was ill, and had a boil under his arm, which he showed to Mr. Vinall. Witness. I was present when she was before the Board—she made no statement about her children, or they would have relieved her immediately—I never heard her—I cannot say how many persons there were at the Board, there are generally about eight or ten—I am certain she did not mention about her children being in a starving condition—she said she came for relief for her family, nothing further—she said there were children—she did not say how many—they had heard all that from me; she said she wanted some relief for her family, and the Board told her to send her husband.

MR. VINALL re-examined. It is true that the male prisoner had boils under his arm; he showed them to me on the morning of the death, and said he was coming to me next morning—I do not think they would render him incapable of working; perhaps it might be painful to him—he might have had them some days.

FRANCIS SATCHWELL . I am a grocer at Leyton. I know the male prisoner—in Oct. last, he worked as a bricklayer at the house I was residing at—his first job came to 15s.; the contract was 4l. 5s., making 5l. altogether, less 9s.—the 15s. was paid to him previous to 8th Oct., and the remainder was paid to him during the mouth of Oct., in different sums—he had a man to do work for three or four days; he had to pay him—he left the job unfinished—he could have gone on with the work if he had chosen—the job was completed in Oct.

Harvey. Q. You forgot to state that I had a boy to pay out of the money? A. I believe you had a boy—at first you had your son, but I believe he ran away, and a boy came afterwards—I cannot say whether you had to pay him or not—a plasterer had to finish the work, but it was in your contract—the contract was not with me.

JOHN PAGE . I am a builder, at Hackney. The male prisoner worked for me from July, on and off—he worked for me in Oct.—in Oct., and Nov., and up to Dec.—I paid him about 1l. 16s., or 1l. 17s., or 2l., and I gave him a few baskets of wood for fuel.

SAMUEL EASTMAN (police inspector, N). I took the prisoners into custody on 28th Dec., at the Black Boy public house, at Hackney, where the inquest was held—I said, "I charge you with having caused the death of William Harvey, aged seven year, and Harriet Harvey, aged five years, by neglecting to provide proper and sufficient food and nourishment for them"—they said nothing in answer to that—I took them to the station—I searched the male prisoner, and found on him an order for work at the stone yard, dated 21st Dec., two shillings, a halfpenny, and a farthing, two orders for bread, two for 56 lbs. of coals each, and an order for 2s. worth of meat, dated 26th Dec.; that was after the deaths—the coal and bread orders are not dated, they were given from Ironmonger-lane, City; it is not parochial relief—I searched their room, but could find no article of children's clothing whatever—there was no clothing, there was merely a dirty mattress, but no blankets, or sheets, or anything for covering—there was every appearance of the deepest misery and distress.

RICHARD CLARK (policeman, N 223). I took the female prisoner to the station—on the way there she said, "I have done my duty by them"—she afterwards stated that she had been in the habit of applying to Mr. Dossett for the last seven weeks past, and he always refused to relieve her—she also said she was not the man's wife.

Harvey's Defence. I did everything that lay in my power towards maintaining my family; I had got no money, and I went begging; I could not get anything by that, and I knew I must not steal, and I did not know what to do; all that I could raise for us on the day previous to the children's death, was one pound of bread in the morning, and 1d. worth of oatmeal, to be divided between the six of us, and in the evening, about half past 4 o'clock, we had 1d. worth of oatmeal and 1d. worth of bread divided between the six of us; that was all we had that day; the female went to a party who owed her some money for some work some time previous, and she got 3d.; with that we provided 1d. worth of oatmeal and a pound of rice for the next day, for six of us to live on all day; I had not one farthing, or one coin about me; the tickets and money found upon me were given to me after the children's death.

Ray's a Defence. For seven weeks we had nothing to live upon but dry bread, rice, and oatmeal; during that time I had from the pariah of Hackney four loaves and two quarts of oatmeal; on Saturday, previous to the children dying, we had a pound of bread and 1d. worth of oatmeal for six of us, and in the evening 1d. worth of bread and 1d. worth of oatmeal; in the evening I went and got 3d., and bought the rice and oatmeal for the next day.

(MR. BODKIN had, in opening the case, called the attention of the COURT to a question which might arise in the case, in consequence of the female prisoner not being the wife of the male prisoner, and therefore not being a person upon whom would rest any legal responsibility of providing for the sustenance of the children, MR. BARON MARTIN, in leaving the case to the Jury, explained that the charge against the prisoners was, that having a duty cast by law upon them to provide food for the children, they culpably abstained from doing so. They must first be satisfied that the duty existed. With respect to the male prisoner, the father, there could be no doubt the obligation lay upon him, and the culpable neglect of that duty would make him responsible, in the form of murder or manslaughter. With respect to the female prisoner, the case was different, and the only duty cast upon her was the supplying to the children such food as was given to her for that purpose.)

HARVEY— GUILTY of Manslaughter .Aged 31.— Confined Twelve Months.


Before Mr. Justice Crowder.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-186
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

186. JOHN HEX , stealing, whilst employed in the Post-office, a letter containing money; the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General.

MESSRS. CLARKSON and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.

CAROLINE FRANCES ROWLEY . I reside with Messrs. Back and Barker, drapers, at Birmingham. I have a sister living in Maiden-row, Hamptead-road, London—on 20th Dec. I sent a letter to her, enclosing in it a half sovereign, sewn up in some flannel—this (produced) is a part of the envelope and letter in my handwriting, and this is the flannel I sent—the half sovereign is now in it—these needles were in the flannel, and after putting in the half sovereign I sewed it round—it is now exactly in the same state in which I sent it on 20th Dec.—I placed it in an adhesive envelope, and closed it, and posted it myself about 8 o'clock in the evening.

GEORGE ROBERTS . I am an inspector of letter carriers at the General Post-office. The prisoner was a letter carrier in Dec. last—he delivered letters in the district of which the Hampstead-road forms a part—a letter posted on 20th Dec. at Birmingham at 8 o'clock at night would arrive at the General Post-office on the morning of the 21st, for the morning delivery—the prisoner was on duty at the Post-office on the morning of the 21st—a letter addressed to Maiden-row would be sorted to him, it is a part of his district—he was the principal letter carrier in that walk—he had an assistant—this letter would be for his assistant to deliver, but it would paas through his bands first, and he would deliver it to his assistant for delivery—for some reason I had that morning, after the prisoner left the Post-office with his letters, I went up to the neighbourhood of his walk, and got there about 9 o'clock—I saw him on his delivery—I remained until he had completed it, and then brought him back with me to the Post-office.

ROBERT CHALCROFT . I was the assistant letter carrier to the prisoner. I assisted him in delivering letters on 21st Dec. last—if there had been a letter for Mrs. Barnes, No. 2, Maiden-row, Hampstead-road, he should have delivered it to me to deliver—he did not do so.

ANN BARNES . I am the wife of Thomas Barnes. In Dec. last I lived at No. 2, Maiden-row, Hampstead-road—Miss Rowley is my sister—I did not receive a letter from her, containing a half sovereign, on 21st Dec. or at any time—some inquiry was made at our house, and I was shown some fragments of paper, which I recognised as my sister's writing—I was expecting a letter from her at that time.

WILLIAM SMEE . I am a constable attached to the Post-office. On 21st Dec. last I searched the prisoner in the solicitor's office at the Post-office—in his right hand coat pocket, behind, I found some torn pieces of paper, along with a quantity of other papers—they have since been pasted on this piece of tissue paper—he was asked by the solicitor, in my presence, how he accounted for them—he said they were a quantity of papers which he curled his hair with and so forth—Mr. Peacock called his attention to these fragments, and he said they were fragments of a letter that he had received from his uncle in the country—I proceeded to search him further, and in the same pocket I found this piece of flannel with the needles, in the same

state it now—the half sovereign was not discovered at that time—he was asked how he accounted for the needles and the flannel—he said, one morning, after his delivery, he bought them of a man in Tottenham Court-road, near the New-road—he was asked if they were in the same state as they now appear—he said, "Yes," at first—it was then discovered that it contained coin, and he was asked again what he gave for them—after a long consideration, I believe he said 3d.—he had not had an opportunity of seeing the half sovereign at that time, but I believe he heard it mentioned that there was a half sovereign in it—I think it was said loud enough for him to hear—he was asked again if he bought them in the same state as they now appeared—he hesitated for some time, and then said, "If they were in my pocket, I know nothing about them, I don't know how they came there"—at that time we could make nothing of the fragments of the letter, no more than "No. 2," and the letters "Ba," of "Barnes," and the "Ha," of "Hampstead-road"—the prisoner was allowed to go, and I went and made inquiry, and returned to the office the same afternoon—the prisoner was then called upon by the solicitor, to know if he wished to give a further account of the needles—he said, "No, I don't know that I am bound to say anything unless I choose, but I tell you, as I said before, I bought them in Tottenham Court-road"—he was asked if they were in the same state as they were then—he said, no, when he went to bed at night he sewed the half sovereign in the flannel with the needles, with the intention of sending it down into the country to his mother, but on account of the mails being so late that morning he had not had time to write his letter, and so he had not sent it—next day I went to the Hampstead-road, in company with a letter carrier who had been on that walk previously to the prisoner—we went to several No. 2's, until we came to No. 2, Malden-row, and found Mrs. Barnes—the prisoner was then taken into custody.

Prisoner. He has made a wrong statement in one thing; he says I said I did not know how they came in my pocket; it is false, no such statement was made; I said I did not know how the pieces of paper came there, and he has referred that observation to the needles. Witness He did say so—his attention was called to the needles, not to the paper.

Prisoner. I have nothing at all to say.

GUILTY . Aged 25.—Six Years Penal Servitude

NEW COURT.—Wednesday, January 9th, 1856.


Before Mr. Recorder and the Fifth Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-187
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

187. MICHAEL MURNAN , feloniously cutting and wounding Thomas Daley, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.

THOMAS DALEY . I lived at No. 4, Palace-place, Kensington—I have lately been in the hospital—the prisoner lives at No. 3, next door to me—on Sunday morning, 2nd Dec., there was some difference between me and my wife—she left my room and went to the station, between 1 and 2 o'clock—I wrapped up the baby, and took it to my mother's, three or four minutes' walk from where I live—when I came back I passed the prisoner's house—I heard my wife talking in his house—I went to the door and called

her by her name, and the prisoner pushed her out of his room before him, and with his shut fist he struck me in the eye, and said, "You b—b—, I will serve seven years for you"—my wife was pushed out of his room, which is at the bottom of the house, and she went up stairs—I got frightened of the prisoner, and I went indoors to my own house—I remained there five or ten minutes—I got frightened of him because he had threatened me a week before this—I did not hear him use any threats—I went before a Magistrate about it—after I had been in my house a short time, I came out—I was afraid to remain in my house—I took the poker in my hand to protect my life—I did not intend to use any violence—when I got to my own door, a voice said, "Daley, look out, he has got the chopper in his hand"—the prisoner directly flew out of his passage, and struck me over the eye—I do not know what with—I did not get time to look—it was dark—I fell down after I received the first blow—I do not know what he did then.

COURT. Q. Did you find yourself afterwards cut anywhere? A. Yes, in three places, in the head, and on the right arm, and once over the eye—when I recovered I found myself in St. George's Hospital—I remained an in patient there—this fire rest (produced) is what I call a poker.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. I believe you and your wife do not agree very well? A. We had always been on good terms till that Sunday night—we had one quarrel before—we have been married three months—I have not frequently turned her out of doors—I do not know that she was in the habit of going to the prisoner and his wife for safety—she never was there before, that I know of—I did not strike her; I pushed her, not down stairs, but out of the door, and she went down stairs herself—I did not strike her in the room—I had struck her on former occasions, not frequently—I do not know that she was in the habit of taking refuge with the prisoner and his wife when I ill-treated her—I do not know that the prisoner has complained of being disturbed by me and my wife quarrelling, and her going to his house for shelter—I went to my mother's with the baby—the prisoner lives in the bottom room, next door to me—they were not in bed—when I first saw the prisoner I do not know whether he was half dressed or not—when I went for my wife I called her by her own name, and the prisoner opened the door, and pushed her out—the prisoner's wife came out, and he and she went in again, after he struck me in the eye—my eye was black; I could not say for how long—it was black while I was in the hospital—my wife did not go home with me—I do not know where she went—I went to my own room—my wife could not go in again with the prisoner and his wife—she turned up the stairs—I went into my own room, and, being frightened, I did not like to stay—I came out, having armed myself with this poker, or fire rest—I had this in my right hand—my left hand was sprained—I did not go to the prisoner's door—I know Mary Warwick and Elizabeth Warwick—I swear I did not go to the prisoner's door, and use very bad language—he did not give me time—I did not challenge him to fight, or strike him with the fire rest—when he made a blow at me, I put up my hand, and this fire rest fell on the ground—I do not know whether it was then it got broken—I did not strike the prisoner, and cause him to bleed.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Did you ever strike him a blow at all? A. No, nor threaten to do it—the quarrel between me and my wife was no more than from her being out late—it seemed to me as if she was drunk—she had not been in long when this took place.

MARGARET FORD . I live at No. 5, Palace-buildings. About half-past 1 o'clock that morning I was about to go to bed—I heard a disturbance in the court—I went to the door—I paw Daley first—he was between his own door and Murnan's—Mrs. Daley was in Human's house, and she was having words with her husband, who was outside—I then went into my own room, as I thought it had nothing to do with me—I stopped about half an hour—I heard a noise again, and came out—I heard a voice across the way, saying, "Oh, Thomas, keep away, Murnan is coming out of the house with a chopper"—I saw Human coming out of his own house with a weapon in his hand—as near as I could see, it was a chopper—I did not observe it so closely—he and Daley both sparred—I mean they both put up their hands, and Daley received a wound on his arm—he dropped his weapon, and went back—he had had something in his hand in the shape of a poker—there is a wall at the end of the court—he went back, and stumbled against the wall—Murnan followed him up, and they laid hold of one another—they both fell—Murnan had the weapon in his hand at that time, and Daley had nothing—Murnan happened to get up first, and he knelt on Daley, and hit him so many blows on the head, I cannot say how many, with this weapon—Daley lay on his back, with his two arms by his side—he was in a pool of blood, and quite insensible—the prisoner got up, and went to his own house, and I cried out, "Oh, Murnan, you murderer, you have killed the man, I will prosecute you to-morrow"—the prosecutor was taken to his mother's, and then to the hospital.

Cross-examined. Q. Are you married? A. No—I have left there now, because Murnan's wile used to be always threatening me since this occurred—she never threatened me before—I go out to work at the wash tub—when I came out first, I saw Daley—he was talking to his wife—I live in the third house from him—I heard his wife speaking to him—I could not judge from the sound of her voice whether she had got out of Murnan's room—there were some very bad words—I had not heard such till that time—I have not been in the habit of seeing much of them—they could not have much difference, they have been but three months married—I had never been to their room but once—I went to see her—that was the only time I ever was in Daley and his wife's room—when I came out, I did not remain listening to them many minutes, not above five—they were abusing each other the whole time—I heard the wife's voice distinctly—I knew the wife's voice, it was almost time I should—I came down again in about half an hour, because I heard the noise in the court again—I know Mary Warwick and Elizabeth Warwick by seeing them—I did not see them there—I heard a voice saying, "Keep back Tom, Murnan is coming out with the chopper"—that was not Daley's wife's voice—as near as I can say, it was some relation of Daley's, because there was a relation of his standing across the court—there was his sister and a relation of his there—I cannot say which spoke—I cannot swear it was either of them spoke—the words were, "Murnan is coming out with a chopper"—Daley's wife was in Human's house at that time—soon after I heard the words I saw Murnan coming out—Daley was at that time close by Murnan's door—I did not hear Daley challenge him to fight, or use any bad language to him—I did not hear Daley say, "Come out and fight, I have that that will do for you"—I never heard him mention a word—when Murnan came out, Daley was at his door, and they both sparred—they put up their hands—I was about four yards from them—there was a light at the corner of the court, but not near them—I saw

something in Murnan's hand—they were sparring two or three minutes, I dare say—I dare say there were blows struck—I saw Daley put up his hand, and Murnan too—each had a weapon—the weapons struck each other,'and made a noise—I said before the Magistrate that the prisoner and Daley were both brandishing some weapons—afterwards Daley staggered back against the wall—they closed, and the poker fell from his hand—I suppose they were struggling three minutes before they fell—they both had hold of each other, and both fell together—Murnan happened to be uppermost in the fall, and he knelt upon Daley—he struck Daley many times, and then Murnan went to his own house—Daley was taken to his father's—I did not see him taken—I went to his own house, and saw him afterwards—at this time Daley's wife was in Murnan's house, as near as I can possibly say—I saw her afterwards—she came over to see her husband, who lay in a pool of blood—she began to cry out, "My husband is murdered, my husband is murdered!"

MARY DONOVAN . I live at No. 5, Palace-place, in the front room, down stairs—I heard a disturbance on the morning of 2nd Dec.—I went out in the passage, and heard Daley and his wife having an argument—I turned in again, and thought it was no business of mine—I afterwards heard a noise again—I came to the door, and Daley and the prisoner were in the act of falling—they were within two or three doors of me—they were against a dead wall—I got frightened, and saw Murnan put his knee on Daley's chest, and he was chopping him on the head with whatever he had in his hand—Daley was lying down on his back, and was insensible—I saw the blood—the prisoner got up and went down the buildings, he went into his own house with whatever he had in his hand.

Cross-examined. Q. Were there many people in the court? A. Not at first—there were three or four till the time the report went about that there was murder—I did not hear any one cry out about a weapon—the last witness stood at the door with me—she was at the door before I came—I do not know how long she had been out—when I came out Daley and the prisoner were in the act of falling.

COURT. Q. Do you and Ford lodge in the same room? A. She slept in my room that night.

WILLIAM HENRY PHIPPS . I am house surgeon at St. George's Hospital. On the morning of 2nd Dec. I was called up to see Daley—he was perfectly sensible—I found he had a scalp wound over the left eyebrow—on putting my finger in I found he had a compound fracture of the skull—the skin was cut through, and the muscle and the bone had been broken also—it was a dangerous fracture, at least we thought so at the time—I saw his hand was bruised—I found nothing else at that time—the nurse afterwards said to me that there were two or three little scratches on the head, but they were of no consequence—I could not tell whether they were scratches, or done with a chopper—they were small wounds at the back of the head—he remained in the hospital till the 26th Dec.

Cross-examined. Q. You see this fire iron, would a blow from this produce the wound? A. Yes, some parts might—some of the injury might be caused by a very hard fall against a piece of flint—if two persons were struggling against a wall, and they fell, it would depend on what the wall was composed of whether it would have caused the injury—a smooth wall would not, but a sharp wall composed of flints might—it must have been done by something sharp—it was rather like a wound by a cutting instrument—the skin was broken, and the different tissues were cut—it was not

a clean cut—it was a serrated margin at the edge—the edges were jagged—it might have been done by the sharp corner of this fire iron.

THOMAS TUGWELL (policeman, T 193). On Sunday morning, 2nd Dec., I heard the cry of "Murder!" worn that court—I went up and saw Daley lying on the pavement in a pool of blood, with a severe wound on his forehead, and two others at the back of his head—I inquired who did it, and they told me, and in consequence I knocked at the door of No. 3—the prisoner refused to admit me—I told him I was a policeman—I burst the door in—another policeman, Woodbridge, was with me—when we got in, the prisoner stood in the middle of the room, with this fire iron in his hand; he was making use of very violent language, and threatening to knock the first person down that should attempt to take him—the other constable and I rushed in upon him, and took the iron out of his hand—he continued to resist, and became very violent—I was obliged to get the assistance of four or five other constables to take him to the station—I found this chopper in the room of Warwick, another lodger in the same house—I did not observe any marks or wounds about the prisoner, he made no complaint—there was some blood on him—I found this other part of the fire rest when I came back to where Daley had been.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you examine the prisoner's head? A. No—there was blood about him—it might have been on his slop—I did not observe any blood on his head—(The prisoner here showed a shirt which was very bloody).

Q. How did the blood come on his shirt? A. That might be in going to the station—he was very violent, he threw me down, and struck the other officer, who spat blood for an hour afterwards—I did not knock him about—he might have fallen on the ground and struck his head—he threw me down two or three times—I saw blood on his arm and on his slop, about the breast—there was very little blood on him—he had his trowsers and his smock on when he was apprehended—I do not know whether he had anything else—his wife was in the room when he was apprehended—it is a very troublesome place, people are always quarrelling there—there was a great deal of blood about where Daley lay—this other part of the poker I found about two yards from where he had lain.

MR. RIBTON to THOMAS DALEY. Q. Will you swear you did not challenge the prisoner to fight when you went to his door? A. I did not—I did not use those words, that I would do for him—I did not hear my wife call out to the prisoner to take care, as I had something in my hand to cut him with.

GUILTY of unlawfully wounding .— Confined Fourteen Days .

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-188
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

188. HENRY MUNNERY and HENRY JOHN BECKLEY , stealing 2 tarpaulins, value 8l.; the goods of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company.—2nd COUNT, receiving the same.

MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.

CHARLES OGBORN (City policeman, 26). On 5th Dec. I took Beckley into custody on another charge—I found on him a watch, 14l. 2s. 6d. in money, 104 duplicates, two knives, three keys, and a pocket book, containing papers—I asked him where he lived—he said, at No. 5, Lauderdale-buildings, Aldersgate-street—I went there on 6th Dec., went to a back kitchen down stairs, what I should call a cellar, and I there found these two tarpaulins—one was in a bag, and the other folded up in a small compass—on 19th Dec. I took Munnery into custody—he afterwards made a statement to me in Newgate—I was sent for here by him on 21st Dec.—when I

saw him he told me he wished to give me some information relative to the tarpaulins—I did not hold out any inducement or threat to him—he stated that he was not the thief himself, but he was a poor man, who had himself and his wife to look to; and if the Company would withdraw the charge against him, he would tell me who he had received the tarpaulins of, and would go along with me, and point out the man whom he received the tarpaulins of—he said, "I took them to Buckley's"—he said that he could give a great deal of other information—he did not mention the name of Mole—he said that he received them of a man in the employ of the Company, at Billingsgate, and who went to Billingsgate every morning with fish—he would not give up his name, but described him to be a man about his own stature, with black whiskers all round his face; he said he was not the thief, but the carrier of the things from the thief to Beekley's—he was examined at Guildhall the same day, and I took him to the Old Bailey.

Cross-examined by MR. LILLEY. Q. When you went to Newgate, you saw the prisoner Munnery? A. Yes—he told me he wanted to see me to give me some information—I did not say anything to encourage the idea in his mind that he would be received as evidence on the part of the Company—I did not lead him to suppose it would be better for him—on my way taking him back to Newgate, when he had told me the man's name, I told him Mr. Richards had said he would recommend him to the Company—that was after what he had told me—we were very near Newgate—he had been to the Hall, and was then under a remand—he was not remanded that he might go as a witness—I told that to the Alderman, that he wished to give further information, if he could be admitted a witness—he was not made a witness—I do not know that the Alderman made any answer—he refused to admit him—he kept talking the matter over as we were going along the street, and just before we got to the prison door he said, "Now I will tell you the name; the name is Mole"—I told him that Mr. Richards, the officer, said he would recommend him to the Company—Mole was apprehended, and he was discharged.

COURT. Q. Before that was said, had the Magistrate, or any one, intimated to him that if he would give the name he Would be recommended? A. Not that I am aware of; not in my presence.

MR. LILLEY. Q. He had not given evidence then? A. No—he had been examined under charge—on his saying that he was desirous of being admitted as a witness, I did not say anything to encourage the idea, beyond what I have stated—he asked me in Newgate to ascertain whether he and Beckley would be allowed to be together—I went and asked, and it was not allowed—he said he should be able to get further information from Beckley—at the time I said Richards would recommend him, I did not say that Richards would guarantee his exoneration from the charge if he would give evidence against the man, and give his name—I did not use words to that effect—I told him that Mr. Richards, the officer, had told me he would recommend him to the Company; I do not know what for—I am not prepared to answer that question—I may fancy that Mr. Richards meant he would recommend him to mercy, or get the Company to recommend him—the whole conversation, on the part of Munnery, was regarding his being made a witness on the part of the prosecution—he told me the name of Mole, and Mole was taken into custody, and taken before the Magistrate—there was no evidence offered, and he was discharged—there was evidence offered, but not sufficient to cause him to be detained—there were two witnesses examined against Mole—Munnery was

present in the dock—he did not at that time my anything about giving evidence.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. You went to Beckley's on the 6th, and found the tarpaulins? A. Yes—I did not go on the 5th—I had never been in the house before I found the tarpaulins—I took Beckley on the 5th, and another constable Went there the same evening—I went to one of the gaolers to know if these men might sleep together—Munnery said he should like to be along with Beckley—I told him I did not know whether it would be allowed—I went and asked if the prisoners would be allowed to be together, and it was not allowed.

THOMAS JOHN GOUGH . I am a tailor, and live at No. 5, Lauderdale-buildings. Beckley occupied two rooms on the first floor of my house—he had been there four months—he lived with a person named Heath—she always went by the name of Mrs. Beckley—I never tow these tarpaulins till Wednesday night) 5th Dec.—a policeman came there on that night, and after he had been, a request was made by Mrs. Heath to me and my wife—I refused it—after that I saw a man carrying a sack down from Beckley's back room into the back kitchen, and he went down a second time with a tarpaulin without a sack—that man was Munnery, the prisoner—he is the man who brought them to the house, and who carried them down to the kitchen—some female held a candle, who I afterwards understood was his wife—Mrs. Heath was on the stairs—I got a light, and went down to see these things—I saw in the cellar this sack and the tarpaulin.

Cross-examined by MR. LILLEY. Q. Did you see Munnery come to the house? A. I have repeatedly seen him come to the house, but did not see him on that occasion—my wife did—I saw him carrying them down stairs—I did not see him come to the house about three weeks before, when the Back was brought.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. How shortly was; this after the policeman had come? A. About half an hour—a policeman had come to tell Heath that Beckley was in custody.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. How often had you seen Munnery? A. I had seen him there on several occasions—I had seen him and other persons come—the Berkleys were often out, and I and my wife had to open the door—I believe Munnery came loaded.

ELLEN GOUGH . I am the wife of the last witness. I recollect the policeman coming to the house oft 5th Dec.—a short time after that, a request was made to me by Mrs. Beckley—after that the sack was carried down by Munnery into the back kitchen, and his wife lit him down with a candle from the first floor—this is the sack, and there was a tarpaulin carried without a sack—they were placed in the back kitchen—I recollect about three weeks or a month before that, the tarpaulins were brought by Munnery—I opened the door for him about half past 9 o'clock in the morning—they were taken and put on the first floor landing, the landing of Beckley's back room—they remained there about an hour—Becktey was not at home—he had not been at home that night—when he came home the tarpaulins were on the first floor landing—I heard them drawn into the back room, but by whom I could not tell—I saw them drawn from under Beckley's bed when Munnery took them down to the kitchen—on the morning Munnery brought them, when Beckley came home, they breakfasted together—Munnery remained there about an hour that morning—I had often seen him there.

Cross-examined by MR. LILLEY. Do you know where he lived?

A. No—I opened the door when Munnery came, about half past 9 o'clock in the morning—I saw he came with a sack, I did not see what was in it at that time—I open the door more usually than my husband—I know Mrs. Munnery by sight, by coming to the house.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Did you ever know what was in the sack till 5th Dec.? A. No—I did not go into the room at all, I stood on the landing—I was told that Munnery remained to breakfast—I know he remained in the front room, which is the sitting room—I have not said I believed it was Mrs. Beckley drew the sack into the room—I said I heard it drawn in, but I do not know by whom—I do not think Mrs. Beckley could have drawn it in—I was there when it was drawn out of the room, because I was called to know if it could go down—I do not swear it was the same sack—it was the same appearance.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Could Beckley have gone up stairs if that was on the landing without seeing it? A. No—the back room is the room in which Beckley slept—the front room is large, the back room is small.

HENRY BRAND . I am a tarpaulin maker, in the employ of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway—these are their tarpaulins, they have their marks and Nos. on them, 267 and 749; one went to the Bricklayers' Arms station, and one to Brighton—they are in a state fit for use—when they are useless they are cut up in strips, and sold—I do not know what use they make of them—the value of these is about 4l.; they are 4l. 10s. when new—they last two or three years with good usage—one of these was new in May, and one in September.

Cross-examined by MR. LILLEY. Q. With bad usage, how long would they last? A. They might not last two years with bad usage—with good usage they might last seven years—these are in a good state now for sale.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Are they used for anything? A. Yes—to cover corn and furniture—they are marked, "L. B. and S. C. Railway Company, makers, New-cross."

GEORGE KING . I am station master at New-cross station—when tarpaulins are condemned by me they are cut up in strips and sold—I never condemned either of these.

COURT. Q. Does the Company ever sell them in a good state, like these? A. Never.

JOHN CARPENTER . I am an inspector of the R Division, and attached to the Brighton Railway—from information, I went to the Bricklayers' Arms station, on 28th Dec., and apprehended Mole, I took him to Guildhall and confronted him with Munnery—Mole had been in the service of the Company about six weeks—I knew Munnery by sight—I heard of the conversation between him and the officer.

THOMAS ALFRED BENNITT . I am an inspector of the A Division attached to the South Western Railway—I know Munnery very well—he never was in the employ of the Company, but he used to work at the Nine Elms goods station—we use tarpaulins of the same description as these—marked with the maker's name similar to these—Munnery left that neighbourhood in 1851.

MUNNERY—GUILTY of Receiving.


(Munnery was further charged with having been before convicted.)

>GEORGE KING re-examined. I produce a certificate of Munnery's former conviction—(read: "Central Criminal Court, Henry Munnery, convicted, Feb., 1851, of receiving 76 knives, and outer goods, Confined One Year")—he is the man.

MUNNERY— GUILTY . Aged 37.— Judgment Respited.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-189
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

189. HENRY JAMES BECKLEY was again indicted (with William Clements, not in custody) for stealing 30 lbs. weight of bark, value 3l., the goods of Samuel Lloyd Howard and others.

MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.

ELIZABETH HEATH . I shall be nineteen years old in July—I have been living with the prisoner five years, ever since I was fourteen—I lived with him at No. 5, Lauderdale-buildings, Aldersgate-street—I recollect the officer coming there on 5th Dec.—I know a man named Clements, he used to come to our place with his wife on Saturday evenings—he came with a basket, sometimes on Saturday, and sometimes on Friday night—he was not in the habit of bringing things to Beckley—I mean to swear that he never brought anything—I know these parcels (produced), they contain bark—I recollect their being at No. 5, Lauderdale-buildings—they were removed there from Red Lion-street, where we formerly lodged before we lodged there—I do not know when we removed from Red Lion-street—I had left Mr. Beckley when he was in Red Lion-street, and was away about two months—I joined him again at Lauderdale-buildings—I found the same parcel of bark that I had seen in Red Lion-street—I removed the bark from Lauderdale-buildings to Aldersgate-street, I do not know the number—my mother occupies the top room there—that was on the day after the prisoner was in custody—these are the prisoner's books, I do not know whose writing they are.

COURT. Q. Now, let no consideration induce you not to give true evidence, do you know whose books they are? A. Yes, I have seen them with Mr. Beckley's other books—I have not seen him use them—I have seen him write, and had letters from him—there is some of his writing here, and some is not his writing—these two lines, "10 bark, and 5 bark" are his writing.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. A. Point out which are his writing? A. These two are, "27 and 20."

COURT. Q. You understood me to read an entry about bark; I asked you if that was his writing; you said it was; look at these two, which relate to bark, which you have sworn were his writing, and look at no others? A. This 27 and 20 are his writing, but these two of bark are not—when I said they were, I did not look at these entries—these entries respecting bark are not his writing—from my knowledge of his writing, I do not believe they are his.

MR. METCALFE. Q. How long had you seen these parcels at Red Lion-street? A. About twelve months there, and altogether about eighteen months—I removed them after the prisoner was in custody—when they were at Lauderdale-buildings, they were on a shelf over the door—they were there the whole time—I never saw them open—I was at Red Lion—street about twelve months—I saw them the whole time I was there—Mrs. Clements called on me when she came from market—she occasionally gave me a home-made loaf—she used to bring it in the basket—the prisoner attended sales, bought all sorts of different things, and sold them again—that was the way he got his living, as a sort of broker.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Was Munnery in the habit of coming to that place? A. No—I saw him there once or twice—the writing on this last page but one in this book is the prisoner's writing—I cannot read this writing—this entry is his writing.

COURT. Q. You moved this parcel, who helped you? A. My lister—it is Mr. Beckley's parcel—I have seen these books amongst his other

books—he was in the habit of buying and selling—he made his entries in larger books than these—I removed the parcel because I was going to live at my mother's—I left Lauderdale-buildings the day after the prisoner was in custody—I did not go to live with ray mother, I remained where I was till a fortnight afterwards—I continued to live in Lauderdale-buildings—I took the things that were moved to my mother's back again.

CHARLES OGBORN (City policeman, 26), I took the prisoner on another charge, on 6th Dec.—I went to No. 62 1/2, Aldersgate-street, and there found a quantity of drugs, and amongst the rest this bark—I found Mrs. Bckley's mother lodging there—I saw Mrs. Heath—I found this bark, about 20 lbs. of ellicum, a large parcel of Cockle's antibilious pills, a parcel of nutmegs, a parcel of mixed spice, and these two little books.

COURT to ELIZABETH HEATH. Q. When do you first remember Clements coming to Beckley's place? A. About three months ago from the present time.

SAMUEL LLOYD HOWARD . I am in partnership with my uncle and others, under the firm of Howard and Kent—we are manufacturing chemists, at Stratford—we grind large quantities of bark—we grind the half of what is imported, or it may be rather more—we had a person named Clements in our service, in the grinding part—I believe this bark to have come from our premises—without doubt it must have been stolen, as it is in an intermediate state—it is never sold in this state—we use similar paper to this in the warehouse—it is not wade on purpose for us, but it is rather different to what the generality of druggists use—while Clements was in our service, he would have direct access to this bark—it was what he was working—we believe we have from time to time missed quantities of bark in this state—it would be very difficult to tell what was missing—we have no means of knowing that any was missing from our stock, but looking at this I believe it to be part of what was on our premises—Clements was discharged at the beginning of Nov.—I dismissed him because I had full undoubted reason to believe he was a thief—I dismissed him on suspicion, in consequence of what I heard oxen Evans and others—this bark weighed about 30 lbs.—it is worth about 2s. a pound in its original state.

Gross-examined. Q. But in its present state what is it worth? A. It is unsaleable in its present state, except to the quinine maker—I should perhaps give 2s. for it—I believe there is one other quinine maker—it is not very likely that there are others whom I do not know—I will not swear that there are not—at the present moment I only recollect one—I know this bark by a sort of instinctive knowledge—I should be very unwise to say that this did not come from the premises of any other maker—I have seen bark ground by others, and that is different to outs—we do not manufacture nutmegs nor pills—I never knew such a thing in my experience as bark being sold in this state—it is not an article of trade in this state—I do not believe this is damaged at all—if some slightly damaged bark is ground, the difference is so extremely small it would be difficult to tell.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Have you seen other ground bark? A. Yes—I could distinguish this from other—we deal in quinine, orchil salts, quicksilver, calomel, acid, grey powder, and cream of tartar.

COURT. Q. This is worth 2s. in its original state? A. Yes, in that state it is a very saleable, much more than this is—a chance lot of this I should think would fetch very little—it is an article that is very seldom in the trade—it is not a marketable article.

GEORGE EVANS . I live at Stratford, and am in the service of Howard and Kent as one of the grinders—in my judgment, this is the property of my masters—I have seen the prisoner once on our premises, where we grind the bark—I should think it is between three and five months ago; he was talking to Clements who was then in our service—I saw Clements take some bark once, between three and five months ago—I took one parcel of 3 1/2 lbs. away from him—I saw him take it more than onoe—I was down below, under the stores, and I heard some one up stairs—I went up, and saw him putting a parcel into his trowsers pocket—I asked him what he was after—he said he was mending his pockets—after he was gone, I went to the place, and I could see where he had taken it from—on another occasion I saw him take a parcel, and I took it away from him—I gave information to Mr. Howard, and he was discharged in Nov.—I have seen him once since he left.

Cross-examined. Q. The first time you saw him doing this, you gave information to your master? A. Yes—I told the foreman to tell the master—it is not because the prisoner is in custody that I say he was the man that was on the premises—I never said a word to anybody that I saw the prisoner with a moustache talking to Clements—that was in front of the mill, persons do not often come there—I had not known the prisoner before—I only saw him in passing, but I am certain he is the man.

THOMAS JOHN GOUGH . I am a tailor, and live at No. 5, Lauderdale buildings. The prisoner came to lodge with me about let Sept—at that time he had no moustache—I know Clements from his coming to Beckley—he came mostly on Saturday night, he used to bring a basket with him—it was always filled, I could not tell with what, only on one occasion—it appeared full, and he said he was tired—one Saturday night he came, and Beckley was not at home—I was going out as he came in—he inquired for Beckley—I said he was not at home, and he said, "I shall be over at the White Bear"—I went back to tell my children—I then went with him to the public house—he there put his basket down on the settle, and I saw a largish sized square brown paper parcel—a sort of heavy purple colour seemed to be on the parcel—there seemed a powder on the top of the parcel—I have seen Beckley and Clements together very frequently—I saw Clements on the Sunday after the Wednesday on which Beckley was taken—I met him in the street, he had his whiskers shaved off.

Cross-examined. Q. On one occasion you went to a public house with him, and saw a paper parcel in his basket? A. Yes—we had a pint of beer—I did not stop a minute—When the prisoner came to me he had no moustache for some time—I think it was growing for two or three weeks after he came to my premises.


(There was another indictment against the prisoner.)

THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, January 9th, 1856.


Before Russell Gurney, Esq., and the Seventh Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-190
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

190. JOHN LEECH , unlawfully assaulting Elizabeth Martin, with intent, etc.

MR. PLATT conducted the Prosecution, and MR. SLEIGH the Defence.

GUILTY Confined Three Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-191
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

191. CHARLES ANDOYER , unlawfully assaulting Selina Allen, with intent, etc.

MR. PAYNE conducted the Prosecution, and MR. PARRY the Defence.


7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-192
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

192. JOHN WHITE,alias Donovan , burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Henry Potter, and stealing therein 1 box, 15 gross of buttons, 1 rule, and other articles, value 3l. 12s., his property.

SAMUEL EGERTON (policeman). On the morning of 2nd Jan. I was on duty in Rosemary-lane, and saw the prisoner carrying a box—I asked him what he had got, he said, "I have got nothing but an empty box"—I requested him to allow me to look into it, he said, "No, I have got something in it, but I do not know what"—I took it off his shoulder, and found it contained buttons, a muslin cap, and other articles—I asked him where he got it, he said that Polly gave it to him to take to Sally—I asked him who Polly was, he said that he did not know; I asked him who Sally was, he said that he did not know, but if I would hold the box he would go and fetch her—I took him to the station, searched him, and found this rule on him (produced), which he said was his property—he gave his name, John White, 9, White Hart-lane, Royal Mint-street—I could find no such place.

Prisoner. I said nothing about fetching Sally you know well that I was intoxicated. Witness. He did not appear drunk then, but when he got to the station he did—he walked very well, and answered my questions very well.

LEAH POTTER . I am the wife of Henry Potter, of Albert-street, Shadwell. This box and contents are my husband's property—it was safe on Tuesday night, 1st Jan., at 9 o'clock, with all these things in it, and a great many more—I had put the shutters, to about half past 4 o'clock, but do not think I bolted them—I was called up about a quarter past 1 o'clock, missed the box and contents, and found a large square of glass broken and the window thrown open—this rule is my husband's, and was in the box—I know nothing of the prisoner.

Prisoner's Defence. About half past 12 o'clock I was coming down Albert-street, home; I work hard for Messrs. Scott and Russell; although I have been on the ticket-of-leave, I was sentenced innocent as ever a man was in his life; I was coming down Albert-street, where the woman says she lives, and two girls came running after me, named Sally and Polly, as a man called them; they asked me if I would take this box; I did so, and took it Rosemary-lane way; I did not know where I was going; I took it off my head, and showed it to the policeman; I asked him next morning whether I came along steadily, he said, "Yes, you came along pretty steady;" it is very hard that the policeman should go to my room and mention my name, as I am on a ticket-of-leave, and that is the reason I gave a wrong name; I did not want my father and mother to know it; the witness said before the Magistrate that it was a taller man than me, and that his voice was not like mine.


(The prisoner was further charged with having been before convicted.)

>GEORGE ROGERS. I produce a certificate—(Read; "Middlesex Sessions; James Donovan, Convicted, April, 1852, of stealing a skittle ball, having then been before convicted.—Transported for Seven Years")—I was present—the prisoner is the person.

GUILTY.** Aged 28.— Six Years Penal Servitude.

OLD COURT.—Thursday, January 10th, and Friday, January 11th, 1856.


Before Mr. Baron Martin and the Fourth Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-193
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

193. CHARLES MADGETT (a police countable) was indicted for unlawfully assaulting William Stephens.

MESSRS. BODKIN and CLERK conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM STEPHENS . I am a hairdresser, and reside in Greet Marylebone-street, Portland-street. On Sunday, 1st July last, a relation of my wife's came to tea with us, and in the afternoon I accompanied her to Park-street—she lived at No. 115 at that time—I left my house at a quarter to 6 o'clock—how I know the time is, because, she wanted to be at home by 6 o'clock—it was perhaps a trifle past 6 o'clock when we got to Park-street—I might have remained at the house a few minutes—after leaving there I went up Park-street again, in the direction of Oxford-street—Park-street runs from Oxford-street, parallel to the Park, Perk-lane, and crosses Grosvenor-street at right angles—there was a crowd of perhaps about 300 persons at the crossing of Park-street and Grosvenor-street—I know Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—I believe it to be the house at the corner of Grosvenor-street, looking into Park-street—I did not know it at that that—I have heard so since—the crowd I speak of was at the corner near that house—I walked through the crowd, and all at once I heard an outcry, and there was a kind of rush—I stood on one side to let the crowd go past—they did pass me, and I saw, I should think, from fifty to sixty policemen pass me, after the people—I was then standing at the edge of the kerb, in Park-street, on the left hand side of Park-street, near Lord Robert Grosvenor's house, on the same side, the Park-lane side, the west side—I had not then passed Grosvenor-street—after the persons had passed me I was in the act of going on towards Oxford-street, when I received a tremendous blow in the back—I turned round as Well as I could, and had just time to say, "I am only a casual passer," and was struck in the mouth by a policeman's fist—I cannot tell what it was that struck me on the back—I should not think it Was a fist—I do not know who the policeman was that struck me in the mouth—there were several other policemen about me at the time; to the best of my belief five—I received ft succession of blows, both with the fist and the truncheon, until I was struck down in the street—I received several blows from C 84 (the defendant)—he struck me several blows in the face with his clenched fist—the other persons who struck me were all policemen—I was struck with the truncheons repeatedly, between the shoulders—I had three blows on the head, several between the shoulders, and the lower part of the back, and also a hurt in the lower part of the stomach—I do not know whether that was from a blow with a truncheon, or whether it was a kick when I was on the ground—I believe I received a kick—I was on the ground when I received the injury—I could not pretend to say how long I was on the ground—I was on the ground very shortly after the assault first took place—perhaps it was not above a minute after, or not a minute—I could scarcely judge of the time—I believe I was struck down on the ground by a blow on the heed—I was beaten severely while I was on the ground, with truncheons I believe,

until persons from the balcony and doorways cried out, "Shame! Shame!"—at the time this was going on I recognised C 84—I did not take his number myself—I recognised the man—I am rather near-sighted—(the witness left the witness box, and went close to the defendant)—I have no hesitation in my mind in saying that is the man—I could not say how many of the blows I received were given by him, but I have no hesitation in saying that be gave me the black eye—when the people called out "Shame!" I was partly raised from the ground by the police, and partly by my own exertions; and I was again beaten, and dragged back from a doorway, where I endeavoured to go up, and called on some persons who were standing there for protection—I was dragged back on to the pavement from the door, and into the road, I could not say by whom—I then received more blows, until I became stupified—I have an indistinct remembrance then of a cab passing, it being called by some one, and my being put into it, and their accompanying me—the back was torn out of my coat as I was being lifted from the ground, and also torn again as I was being dragged out of the doorway—I have the coat here (producing it)—it is in exactly the same state as it was that afternoon—no attempt was made to take me into custody—no one made any charge against me—when I became a little more collected, I found I was in Oxford-street, and I ordered the cab man to drive to Marylebone police station, to lay a complaint—I think it was a young woman who first stopped the cab—I had no friends with me—some strangers got into the cab with me, and went with me afterwards to the Marylebone station—there were no policemen with me—no charge was made against me at the station—I charged two policeman—I had a yellow walking stick with me on this evening—I did nothing with that stick—I never raised it, nor had the opportunity of raising it—I was attended by Mr. Curtain, a surgeon, in consequence of this, for about ten weeks—my teeth were loosened, I believe by the first blow that was given with the policeman's closed fist—the blow in the back I feel at times severely now—my mouth was a good deal cut—I had three blows on the head, but nothing of any particular consequence—the hurt in the lower part of my body I felt for some considerable time.

Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. This was on Sunday, I think? A. It was—the street was by no means full, there was plenty of room for the crowd to pass without jostling me—I was not jostled by anybody—I stood out of the way, on the edge of the kerb, to allow every one to pass—the crowd were rushing through the middle of the street, and on the pavement likewise, and the policemen were following them—at the time I was struck the crowd had considerably dispersed, I was almost the last there—the police had passed me, as I believed, and I was in the act of going on—the main body of the police had passed, and I believed they had all passed—the crowd was flying up towards Oxford-street—the blow which I positively swear the defendant struck me, was the one which contused my eye—I believe he struck me other blows, his hand was on my collar—I can swear that he struck me other blows with his fist, but I could not describe where, his hand was actively employed—I was examined before the Commissioners—I mentioned there that C 84 had done something to me—I did not mention him by his number and letter, I recognised him as being the man—I mentioned throughout the whole of my evidence in the first instance before the Commissioners that it was C 80 who struck me in the way I have described—I was asked, "Did you take the number of any policeman?" and I said, "I believe, but I could not swear, that I did."

Q. Did not you, when you were asked who struck you in this way, state, "I believe C 80 to have been the man who struck me"? A. I believed C 80, and C 84—I stated so before the Commissioners, mentioning the numbers—I charged both C 80, and C 84 at the station house—I was asked, "Did you take the numbers of any policemen?" and I might have answered, "I believe, but I could not swear, that I saw C 80, I should not like to swear to him"—I might have said so, it is some time since, I cannot be supposed to remember everything—I cannot say whether, after having described the blows I received, I was asked, "Should you know him again?" very likely I may have been—to the best of my belief I did not say, "I do not think I should"—I stated that I believed the blows I received from the fist of a policeman were from C 80—I said so repeatedly—I did not swear to either of their numbers, only through my witnesses—in all probability I was asked by Mr. Armstrong whether I could swear positively to C 80, I answered, "I cannot swear to either."

Q. Did you ever say a word about C 84 before the Commissioners? A. I did—Mr. Ellis put a question to me respecting it, and he told me it would save some trouble to state that C 80 was not there—I charged both C 80, and C 84 on the same night the assault took place, and also before the Commissioners.

Q. Did you ever say anything about another policeman doing this violence to you until Mr. Ellis told you that C 80 was altogether in a different part of London at the time? A. Most certainly, I charged from the first C 80, and C 84, and in my letter to the Times—I am not to be bamboozled out of the truth.

MR. BODKIN. Q. At the time you were examined, did you have the opportunity of seeing either of the men, C 80, or C 84? A. Both, before the Commissioners—at the time these questions were put to me I identified C 84, but not C 80—C 80 is the man who refused me admission at Marlborough-street—I recognised C 84 as one of the men that did me the violence—I have no hesitation in saying the defendant is that man.

WILLIAM HUMPHREYS . I live at No. 19, Lower-street, Grosvenor-square. On 1st July I was in Hyde-park, and from ten minutes to half past 6 o'clock I proceeded up Park-street to Grosvenor-equare—I know Lord Grosvenor's house—I saw Mr. Stephens there, on the opposite side, the North Audley-street side of Park-street, as I was coming down the opposite side—he was in the act of stepping on one side to let several policemen pass him that were going after some people, he stepped on one side to the centre of the path to let the police come off the kerb—I saw a police constable run up to him, holding his staff in this manner (one end in each hand) and struck him with the centre of it, across the lower part of the neck, or the top of the shoulder, holding it cross ways; that sent him running a short distance, head down, he turned to see where it came from, and as he turned the policeman struck him two or three blows in the face with his clenched fist—at that particular time there was only the one policeman, but when he got into the centre of the road, from the man striking him, several others came up; but one in particular I noticed who struck him a blow in the face with his fist—I did not take the other policemen's numbers, but he was knocked down by other policemen, and while he was down he was struck across the back, and across the loins, and kicked in the side—the blows when he was down were struck with the truncheon—while he was down in that manner, one policeman laid hold of, him as if he was in the act of

pulling him up, and pulled the back of his coat right out—with that he was assisted on his feet, and passed lower down the street—I saw no further what passed, because a gentleman on a balcony called on me to take the numbers, and I took the numbers of two, one I took correctly, but I was mistaken in the number of the one I took second—I took C 84 distinctly—while he was leaning over the man striking those blows, I stood over him and saw him all the time—the defendant is the man—I also took the number of another policeman, the number I am confident of, but I was mistaken in the number of the one I took second—I took C 84 distinctly—while he was in the act of striking Mr. Stephens, and I was calling, "Shame!" to him at the time—I noticed who kicked him, it was this man, C 84—he kicked him on the right side, down towards the hip, when he was on the ground—I saw nothing whatever in Mr. Stephens' hand—I called on Mr. Stephens next day—when I got down to Marylebone-lane from where I live, I saw Mr. Stephens coming out, and I went in and gave evidence of what I saw; he had been to make a complaint—he was an entire stranger to me, I had never seen him before the Sunday to my knowledge—this was about a quarter of an hour after I left—I spoke to him at the station house, and gave in the numbers and what I saw—I next saw the defendant at the Court of Exchequer, before the Commissioners, he was then produced, and likewise C 80, who I at once said was not the man—I recognised C 84 directly—I saw Mr. Stephens next day, he called on me, and I went to Marlboro'-street with him—I saw the state he was in—I saw him get up, and his mouth was bleeding, and his eye was bruised; but next day his eye was black, and round his loins.

Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. You took the number 80, you swear the number was 80, but you cannot swear to the letter? A. No—I did not say before the Commissioners that I was positive it was C 80, till I heard that he was in another part of the town.

Q. Just look here (referring to the Commissioners' Report, page 60, q. 1690); what I am doing is merely to test your accuracy, not to throw suspicion on your accuracy, or bamboozle you; were you asked, "Did you take the number of that policeman?—Yes, I took it as 80, and I felt confident that it was C 80, but as the gentleman says he was in another position, I should not like to swear to it; but to the best of my belief it was C 80?" A. That is correct—I said just now that it was No. 80, till the policeman was produced—when I went to the station, I gave the number C 80—that was about a quarter of an hour after I had taken it—when I saw C 80, I was convinced that it was not the man, because I have seen that man hundreds of times in my neighbourhood—this man stood over him and struck him, I was able to see him, but the other man was moving about, and I could not catch his number so well.

MR. BODKIN. Q. You thought you were right when you took C 80, as his number? A. Yes, but when I saw C 80, I saw that he was a man who I had seen several times—before I saw C 80, I mentioned C 84 as well, before the Commissioners, decidedly, I mentioned both.

MR. PARRY. Q. Did you take it down in writing? A. No—I gave it to the gentleman in the balcony; Mr. Hughes, I think.

JURY. Q. You stated that you saw the prisoner strike with his fist; do you remember whether he had his staff in his hand at the time he struck him with his fist? A. He had the staff in his hand, but not in the hand he struck him with—I do not remember whether he had it in his right hand;

I am sure he had it, but he struck with his fist—I cannot say which fist, it is not likely in an affair like that—I was looking at the ill usage that the man was having, the man was running to the middle of the road.

COURT. I will read you what you said, "I saw Mr. Stephens on the North Audley-street side, where I was." Witness. Yes, that is correct—that is the left hand side towards Oxford-street, on the Park-lane side, and Mr. Stephens was on the other.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Which side of the street do you say Lord Robert Grosvsnor's is? A. On coming down Grosvenor-street from the Park you turn round to the right.

Q. To the right? A. Yes, at the back of the Marquis of Westminster's, towards Piccadilly.

COURT Q. Lord Westminster's houseis on the left hand side, is Lord Robert Grosvenor's on the same tide, or on the other? A. Two or three turning up, as you go towards Piccadilly, that is where I believe it is.

EDWARD NIGHTINGALE . I am a carpenter's apprentice. On Sunday afternoon, 1st July, I was coming down Park-street, towards Oxford-street, going towards Piccadilly—I do not know Lord Robert Grosvenor's house, but I believe it is on the left hand side, coming from Oxford-street towards Piccadilly—as I was going down Park-street I saw a crowd near Grosvenor-street, they were standing still—when the police came by I saw them move off all ways, towards Oxford-street, Piccadilly, and towards the Park—I believe they pretty nearly all dispersed—the police came from Piccadilly towards Oxford-street, up the street—after the crowd dispersed, I saw Mr. Stephens on the left hand side of Park-street, coming down from Oxford-street, the side furthest from the Park—when I first saw him he was at the corner of a street—I cannot be certain of the name of it, but I think it was North Audley-street—he was on the opposite side of the street to me, nearest to the Park—he was walking along towards Oxford-street when he was accosted by three or four policemen, who came from the other end of the street—they attempted to drive him away by hitting him on the back with their staves, and pulling him about—he got away from those policemen and advanced a little farther towards Oxford street—policeman C 84 came from the other end of Park-street, Piccadilly, and took hold of Mr. Stephens when he was behind him, turned him round face to face, and then struck him three or four blows in the face with his fist—he was holding him with one hand by his collar, while he was striking him with the other—Mr. Stephens then was, I believe, knocked down by him with his staff, but that I cannot say as I had to more off, and did not see him on the ground—I was about five yards from them at the time Mr. Stephens was struck, but I cannot be certain—I next saw Mr. Stephens in the gateway of a private house in Park-street, on the left hand side of the way, and while he was at the gateway, policeman C 84 struck him with his staff on we back—I did not see Mr. Stephens go to that gateway, he was there when I returned—I came back down the street, and the policeman was then at the gatewayafter he had struck Mr. Stephens at the gateway, I believe he tore his coat—I saw the coat torn afterwards, and I believe it was done by that blow—I had again to go away, and after I returned I saw Mr. Stephens getting into a cab—the policemen had not all gone away then—I believe some of them were still there—I went with Mr. Stephens to the station in the cab—I gave information that night against some policeman—I saw policeman C 84 before the Commissioners in the Court of Exchequer—I do not recollect

the day that he was called into the Court, it was the second time that I was examined—I then recognised him—that is the same man.

Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. You said something about C 80, did not you? A. I said that I was not aware of the number, whether it was C 80, or C 84—on my oath I said that before the Commissioners—I was asked to describe what I saw—I am not certain whether I said that I saw about five or six policemen run after Mr. Stephens, as he was close to the corner of Brook-street—I did not say before the Commissioners that it was C 80, I said that I was not certain—I described to Mr. Stuart Wortley how he was hit with the point of his staff—I was not alluding to C 80, during the whole of those answers.

COURT. Q. Did you mention the number C 84, before the Commissioners, or did you not? A. I said I was not certain whether it was C 80, or C 84; and all the time I went through that evidence I was not certain of the number.

MR. PARRY. Q. Did not you hear it stated by the gentleman who appeared on the part of the police, Mr. Ellis, that C 80 was in another part of the town? A. I did—I mentioned C 84 before I heard that stated.

MR. BODKIN. Q. What interval of time was there between your first examination and the second? A. Very nearly a week—I first saw the defendant after the day in question, the third time I was at the Court—he is the man I saw strike Mr. Stephens.

WILLIAM CURTAIN . I am a surgeon, of Weymouth-street. I have attended Mr. Stephens professionally some years—I saw him on the evening of 1st July, and found him suffering from blows on his head, face, and back—I attended him nine or ten weeks for those injuries, and then ordered him into the country, and there he was six weeks—he had a blow on the right side parallel with the navel; that and the injury to the back, which appeared to be three or four blows, were the most severe injuries he had—they might be occasioned by blows or kicks—I know nothing of the transaction more than I have described to you—I had only just arrived in town, and did not know that there had been any disturbance.

The following Witnesses were examined for the Defence.

THOMAS JEATER (policeman, C 30). On Sunday, 1st July, I was attached to superintendent O'Brien's detachment of police, which was kept in reserve at Stanhope-gate—the defendant was also attached to that reserve—he has been in the force about two years and a half—I have also been in the force about that time—about 6 o'clock the reserve was sent for to go from Stanhope-gate to Grosvenor-street—there were fifty constables in the reserve—when we got there, there was a very large mob there, I should say between 2,000 and 3,000, at Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—we came from Stanhope-gate along the Park, to the small gate opposite South-street, through the gate at South-street, and across Park-lane, down South-street, and turned to the left up Park-street, up the centre of the street—Lord Robert Grosvenor's house is not at the corner of Park-street and Grosvenor-street, it is near the corner; there is one house at the corner, and Lord Robert Grosvenor's house is next; it is in Park-street, on the left hand side coming from Piccadilly—the people were making a very great noise, shouting and hooting—and when we came up they were throwing stones at the police—I was in the extreme rear of the police; Madgett was on my left, next to me—we have no particular places to fall in when we march in that way, he was marching on my left hand side—Hawkes and Holliday were there also—Murrell

was not—I saw Mr. Webb, the inspector—Hawkes was in the rear, to the left—a stone struck me on the rim of the hat; it did not hit my person, but struck my hat—some more stones were flying about, and the police broke out—I believe there was some order—I did not hear the order—as we came to Reeves's-mews, it is forty or fifty yards from Lord Robert Grosvenor'a house, the mob were shouting very loud—some persons in the mob were crying out, "Down with the crushers"—I believe that is a nickname for the police—several atones were thrown, one of which struck me on the rim of the hat—they still shouted, and the men broke out; they tried to apprehend the persons who were throwing stones—the mob at that time were hooting, yelling, and hissing, very loud—there was great violence on the part of the mob generally—I heard no order given to clear the mob; the police proceeded to clear the mob—the order would come from rather the front part of the men—I stopped at Reeves's Mews about a minute and a half—from the tame we came up to Reeves's Mews, till the time we left, occupied about ten minutes—at the end of that time we were ordered back to Stanhope Gate, having cleared away the mob from Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—during the time I was there, I got up as far as Grosvenor-street, but not beyond it—Madgett remained with me at Reeves's Mews, and went away with me towards Grosvenor-street—he went to Grosvenor-street with me—I did not lose sight of him for half a minute from the time we got there, until we returned to Stanhope Gate—he was not away from me during that time—the only time I lost eight of him was in turning round and clearing away the people—I might have lost sight of him then, but he was there with roe—I do not know the prosecutor Stephens—I have heard upon former occasions a description of the conduct pursued towards Stephens—Madgett was not the person who committed that outrage—he could not have done it without my seeing it—I did not see him do it—he did not get beyond Grosvenor-street—after we got back to Stanhope Gate, we remained there about an hour and forty minutes—Madgett was there all that time—I have known him ever since he has joined the force—he is a very good tempered, inoffensive man.

Cross-examined by MR. BODKIN. Q. Did you attend before the Commissioners to give evidence? A. I did attend, but was not called upon—I have my number on my coat, underneath the great coat which I have on—it is C 30 (showing it to the Jury)—it was the same number on the day in question—I went up to the corner of Grosvenor-street—that is one door beyond Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—I should say that was about two minutes after we principal body of the reserve had gone up after dispersing the mob—I did not see Mr. Stephens there—I did not see anybody ill treated there—I did not see any of the police use their truncheons upon people—I did not notice any individual case—there might have been persons struck, and I not see it—I did not see it—I never in my life saw a policeman use his truncheon in both hands, and strike people with it so, to force them on—I did not see any violence offered by the police at all—I was in the rear—I remained behind, to endeavour to apprehend the parties who were throwing the stones at Reeves's Mews—I should say ten or twelve of us remained—I cannot say that the whole of them went up to the corner of the street when I did—we mustered at the corner again—six or eight of us at least went up to the corner—we remained there until the main body returned—from the time I came there until I returned, I saw no violence offered to the people there by the police—I did not remain behind by order of anybody—superintendent O'Brien was commanding there—he was with us—I

did not see him after we got into Park-street—he went up Park-street with us, and I lost sight of him at Reeves's Mews—the mob hemmed us in on both sides—we did not go any further, and I did not see where the superintendent was—there was a great many of the mob behind us—we stopped to chase away that portion that was throwing stones, and to apprehend them if possible—I saw several persons at the doorways of the houses at the corner of Park-street—I did not see any in the balcony—I did not hear a cry of "Shame, shame!"—I did not see any man on the ground—I did not see a cab take a man away—I was employed in clearing away the mob, and the men with me were employed in the same way—we were not being pelted at that time, we were before—about ten or a dozen of us were employed in clearing them away after the main body had gone on—I never struck a man with my truncheon in my life—I did not strike anybody with my fist that day—I am quite positive of that—I might have laid my hand upon people, and told them civilly to go away—that was all I did—I had my truncheon in my hand—I did not use it at all, nor did I see any one else.

MR. PARRY. Q. If Madgett had used any violence, must you of necessity have seen it? A. I must have seen it—I attended before the Commission eight days, but was not called—I heard no suggestion at that time of Madgett being prosecuted—he was put into the box to be identified, and I believe he was sworn.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Did you know that there was a complaint made against C 80 and C 84 on this 1st July? A. I did know it.

RICHARD JAMES HOLLIDAY (policeman, C 167). On 1st July last I was on reserve duty at Stanhope Gate from half-past 4 till 6 o'clock—about that time we received orders to go and clear Park-street—there were about fifty of us there in reserve—Madgett was one of them—he was with me in the rear, on the right hand side, on the right hand side of Park-street as you go from Piccadilly to Oxford-street, and immediately on my right hand—when we got to Reeves's Mews, there was a mob of people hooting, yelling, and hissing—there were several hundred people there—they were violent—they threw stones—one caught me on the ankle—they were saying, "Down with the police!"—we cleared the mob by Reeves's Mews—the main body succeeded in clearing Park-street—Madgett was not out of my sight the whole of that afternoon—I do not know Stephens—Madgett did not use the least violence to any one that day, if he had I must have seen it—I have heard of no complaint made of any violence used by the police except by Stephens—the rear of the reserve got as far as opposite Lord Robert Grosvenor's, on the Mount-street side—that is at the corner of Grosvenor-street—Madgett never crossed the road, and went up to a man with his truncheon, and struck him on the back—we had no cause to touch the mob at all, they dispersed of themselves—we were standing there—I have known Madgett for twelve months—I have always found him a good tempered man—he has never, to my knowledge, been charged with any act of violence.

Cross-examined by MR. BODKIN. Q. Were you formed in files? A. Yes, five abreast—the main body went up Park-street—the mob retreated on one side out of the way, and dispersed altogether—they went away from the front altogether, from Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—I did not see any portion of the reserve follow them—the whole main body went to Lord Robert Grosvenor's house, and no further—we all remained together, the whole fifty—I ain quite sure of that—we did not separate at all—we marched up to Lord

Robert Grosvenor's house—our appearance induced the mob to go away—then we marched back again.

MR. PARRY. Q. During the time Madgett was with you, were you in conversation with him? A. Yes, at the corner opposite Lord Robert Grosvenor's, on the Mount-street side—I was in conversation with him all the time—if he had done anything of the kind with which he is charged, I must have seen him—I swear he never did anything of the sort.

ABRAHAM HAWKES (policeman, C 144). I was attached to the reserve which came from Stanhope Gate to Park-street—I was in the rear of the reserve, near to Madgett, Jeaters, and Holliday—when we got there, there wag a mob throwing stones, and hooting, and hissing—they did not disperse before us as we came up—there was a good deal of shouting and hissing, and several stones were flying, and I stepped out by the side of the mews to endeavour to apprehend the party that was throwing them, but I could not succeed in doing so—I went a little way up Reeves's Mews—the main body had gone on towards Grosvenor-street—the mob had gone on in front of the body of police—I was about a minute and a half, I should say, in endeavouring to apprehend the person throwing the stones—I was up the mews about that time, I then came out of the mews into Park-street—with the exception of that minute and a half, I was not away from Madgett from the time we fell in, till we came back—whatever he did during that time, I must have seen it—at the time I came out of Reeves's Mews I saw Madgett standing up at the top of Grosvenor-street, facing Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—he did not go further—I am quite sure that he did not get into the upper part of Park-street, beyond Grossvenor's-street—I never saw him beat, kick, or strike Stephens with his truncheon—I must have seen it if he had done it—I remained about six minutes, to the best of my knowledge, opposite Lord Robert Grosvenor's house, but after the main body returned I stayed there about half an hour, after the main body returned to that part again, several more stones were flying as we were marching back, and I stepped back, and waited there about half an hour—I did not return with the reserve—Madgett has borne a very good character in the force as a quiet, respectable, good tempered man.

Cross-examined by MR. BODKIN. Q. You say the mob was very violent; were they hooting and throwing stones? A. Yes—we had not much difficulty in clearing the street—I did not draw my truncheon—some of them were drawn—I did not see them used—I did not see one blow struck, I swear that—I was there all the time—I saw no blow struck, either with the truncheon or fist—I did not see a man on the ground—I did not see a cab come and take him away—I believe some of our men went beyond Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—a part of them separated from the rest and went on, leaving one part behind—I was left behind and Madgett, he was in front of me—I am sure he was left behind with me—he did not go on with the party that went up the street—I was in the mews about a minute and a half, and when I came out I saw Madgett standing at the corner facing Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—the principal part of the reserve had gone on past Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—I should think there were about nine or ten left at the corner of the street with Madgett—they stopped there until the main body returned, and fell in as they came back—I stayed in the rear—some stones were flying, and I saw the man that threw them, and I went and caught him, and had him taken away—it did not take five minutes to clear the mob away—I was not

examined before the Commissioners—I knew of the examination going on—I knew that Madgett was charged with having assaulted a person.

MR. PARRY. Q. You were ready to be examined, if necessary, were you not? A. Yes, I was not called upon—I acted upon the orders and instructions I received from my superiors in everything I did—Madgett was examined as a witness—Reeves's Mews is about nine or ten yards from Lord Robert Grosvenor's house.

ELIZABETH BLOXAM . I reside with my uncle, in George-street, Grosvenor-square—he keeps a coffee shop there, and I assist him in the business, I remember on Sunday, 1st July, a large mob of persons being in Park-street—I saw an act of violence committed on Mr. Stephens—I was examined before the Commissioners—I was called by Mr. Mitchell, the solicitor, who conducted the complaint against the police—the prisoner is not the man who committed the violence upon Mr. Stephens—I saw Mr. Stephens struck by a policeman, I took his number as "80"—I saw his coat torn in the violence that was done to him—the prisoner is not one of the police who committed that violence—I am positive he is not—I was the only person that was by Mr. Stephens when he was knocked down—I saw the whole of what was done to him, until he was taken away in the cab—I am positive the prisoner is not the man who committed any act of violence to him—il was a much older man, he was at least forty-five, I should say, and was thin in the face—I heard a gentleman call from a balcony, "Take that man's number"—I ran after the man that knocked him down, and he had black hair and large black bushy whiskers—I took number 80, but not the letter.

Cross-examined by MR. BODKIN. Q. Have you ever seen that person since? A. I have not seen any of them since—there were two policemen brought before me at the Commissioners', No. 80 was one, and I directly said that was not the man—I was then asked if I could identify the man—I said I could not—No. 84 was in the box at the same time, and I could not identify him, it was a much older man—I was in the street when the disturbance began—I went down the street—I was close by Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—I believe it is in Park-street, from what I have heard—I could not get in front of the house, there were too many people there—I was just outside the crowds-there was a large crowd—I did not see the body of police come up—the boys and people began hallooing, "Here are the Bobbies coming," and with that they began running—the police and the people were all mixed together—the greater part of the people ran away up Park-street towards Oxford-street, and the principal portion of the police followed them up Park-street—I did not stop to see who remained behind—I was outside the crowd, and I made off—my attention was drawn towards Mr. Stephens—he was outside the crowd, the same as I was, on the opposite side to Lord Robert Grosveuor's—he was going on, and I saw him struck—there was one came and struck him first, then he left him, and four or five more came—they struck him with their truncheons, and one of them hit him in the face—I believe it was with his truncheon, but I did not notice enough to say whether it was his truncheon or his fist—Mr. Stephens was knocked down—he was first knocked down by one, and then the others came round him—they struck him while he was down—I did not see any of them kick him—it was while he was on the ground that they struck him with their truncheons—there were several blows hit him, I would not say they all hit him—there were two or three blows given

him, I know—I could not say how many of the number hit him—I do not suppose he was struck more than three or four times altogether—he tried to get up, and his coat was torn in three or four places on the hack—I believe that was with the people trying to get him up, or his trying to get up, and the policemen hitting him—I then caught hold of him, and assisted him into a cab—he was not dragged from the place before that—he had tried to get up some steps, the police did not follow him—that was when they first knocked him down—he tried to get up some steps, to a crowd there, and before he could hardly get up, the policemen came and knocked him down again, and it was then I helped him to get into the cab—I did not see where the cab came from—it was in the middle of the street, so as to be seen by anybody—it was near where he was knocked down—I should say we had walked twenty yards—I told him I would walk along the street with him if he would take a cab—while this was going on, there were several gentlemen calling out "Shame!"—that was loud enough for the police to hear, and for any one to hear that was there—I took the number of the policeman as "80"—I did not trouble about taking his division, I did not think it would be required, but I noticed the man more than I did the number—the prisoner is not that man, he is nothing like him—I would not swear to any one of the six or seven men that were about him and beating him, because there was such confusion it would be impossible to do so.

MR. PARRY. Q. Did you see the witnesses Humphreys or Nightingale? A. I saw them when I got Mr. Stephens into the cab—they were on the opposite side of the road whilst this was going on—the balcony from which "Shame" was cried was further on towards Oxford-street, should say about four or five houses from Lord Robert Grosvenor's, or more than that—it was the next turning—I do not know whether Brook-street is the next turning—I was never down the street before or since—it is beyond Lord Robert Grosvenor's house, I know—there was no crowd between the balcony and Lord Robert Grosvenor's—the crowd was round Lord Robert Grosvenor's—Mr. Stephens was not by the balcony, or near it—he was at the side of Lord Robert Grosvenor's—the balcony was at a distance—they could see, but not distinctly, not to know what man it was that did it—I went up to the man that struck him, and spoke to him, and took bold of his collar, and told him he ought to be ashamed of himself to knock the man down in that way, and I told him that I had got his number—the defendant is not that man.

CHARLES WEBB (police inspector C. On Sunday, 1st July, I was on duty in Park-street—I had some sergeants and men there under my command—in consequence of the increase of the number of persons round Lord Robert Grosvenor's house, I sent for the detachment reserved at Stanhope Gate—at the time the reserve came up there was a great crowd—they were violent, hissing, and throwing stones—I did not myself see any stones thrown—at the time the reserve came up I was standing at the corner of Grosvenor-street and Park-street—that is the side on which Lord Robert Grosvenor's house is situate—there was a great crowd following the reserve as they came from Stanhope Gate—when they came to Reeves's-mews they halted—a portion of the reserve went back after the crowd that was following them, and the others came on towards me, dispersing the mob as they passed—there was room for the crowd to pass on the pavement—the police took the centre of the street—some of the crowd passed up Grosvenor-street and Park-street, and got away as well as they could—a portion of the reserve

went up Park-street, beyond Grosvenor-street—when I say a portion, perhaps some half dozen men, finding there was a halt at the corner of Park-street, that is the opposite corner of Park-street and Grosvenor-street, the Oxford-street corner, went over to disperse that crowd, and went a little way up Park-street—there is a house on the right, further up Park-street, with a balcony—some of the men went up as far as that, but not the main body—to the beet of my recollection, the rear, that is those that went back to the crowd that was following them from Stanhope Grate, did not return further than Reeves's-mews—I saw Madgett—I saw him at the corner of Grosvenor-street and Park-street—that is near the corner where Lord Robert Grosvenor's house is situate, about opposite there—I saw him strike no one—he bears a good character in the force, as a man of mild, good temper—I have had an opportunity of seeing him—he lives in the station house, with fifty others, and I have had an opportunity of watching his conduct—I believe him to be a man of good temper, and a mild, inoffensive person, more so than many that live in the same house—I did not see him strike any one—I did not see him further than Lord Robert Grosvenor's house—there was a great deal of excitement—my opinion was then, and is now, that had not the reserve come up at the time, and taken the step they did, the windows of Lord Robert Grosvenor's house would have shared the same fate as others did—there were a great many thieves and vagabonds about.

Cross-examined by MR. BODKIN. Q. Tou were there before the reserve was sent for, were you? A. I was there from 2 o'clock in the day—I sent for the reserve—I was there, with ten men that I had there mixed up with the crowd, using persuasion, endeavouring to get them away quietly—I was. between Reeves's-mews and the corner when the reserve came up—I was at the corner of Grosvenor-street and Park-street—a portion of the men came up Park-street, towards me, and the other portion of the reserve went back—the mob continued to retreat before the police up Park-street, followed by the greater portion of the body of police—I remained at or near the corner all the time till the police returned—I do not know Mr. Stephens—I never saw him in my life, to the best of my knowledge—I did not see a man knocked down—I did not see any violence done to anybody—I afterwards saw a man's head bleeding—I saw no blows struck at all, neither do I believe there were any blows struck at the corner where I was standing—where I saw the man's head bleeding was some hundred yards down, beyond Reeves's-mews, nearer Stanhope Grate—(Looking at Stephens) that is not the mail whose head I saw bleeding—I believe he was a foreigner, a civilian—I did not see who the injury was inflicted by—he did not complain to me—I ordered him to be removed to the hospital—I heard cries of "Shame" from a balcony.

Q. Do you mean to say that when that was called out, no blows were being struck by the police? A. You must consider I was at the corner of Grosvenor-street—that is nearly opposite Lord Robert Grosvenor's house, and where this occurred was some seventy yards from me, I should think; I mean where the people were crying out "Shame!"—it was from a balcony at the opposite corner of the street—it was a corner that would command a view of the mob in front of Lord Robert Grosvenor's house, and near enough for me to hear the cries of "Shame!"—still there were people between me and the police—I did not see what caused those cries; I could not see—there were a great number of persons between me and them—I did not see any truncheons lifted up—I saw truncheons drawn

—I did not see them lifted up at that time, nor at any time—I did not see them in the act of striking at that time—as the police came up from Reeves's-mews to the corner of Grosvenor-street, where I was standing, I saw them with their truncheons drawn, and desiring the people to go on, and so on, but I did not see any blows struck—I swear positively there were none—I did not see a cab there.

GUILTY .—(The JURY stated that they were of opinion he was not the person who inflicted the injury, but one of those engaged in it.)— Confined Nine Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-194
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

194. WILLIAM GEARING (a police constable) was indicted for unlawfully assaulting and falsely imprisoning John James White.

MESSRS. BODKIN and CLERK conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN JAMES WHITE . In July last I was a waiter at a public house near Temple-bar. On the afternoon of 1st July I was in Hyde-park—I sometimes go there on a Sunday, I am not in the habit of doing so, I go occasionally—about 4 o'clock I was near the Serpentine, on the other side of the drive, the further side from the Serpentine—there was a very great crowd—I saw an old man struck by some policemen, upon which I cried out "Shame!" and the great majority of the persons in the crowd did the same—at the same time something went by close to where I was standing, I do not know what it was, I did not throw anything, I did not see that it struck any one—I turned my head round to see from whence it came and I was immediately seized by the collar by A 398, the prisoner—I did not have time to recognise his number then, but he is the man—he did not say what he seized me for—I was about to remonstrate with him for taking hold of me, but I was immediately struck down by a blow on the left side of the head with the priaoner's staff—it was a blow sufficient to render me partially insensible—when I recovered my recollection, I found myself being placed in a cab—I was very much covered with blood, my waistcoat, shirt, trowsers, handkerchief, hat, and everything—the blood came from my head and streamed down the side of my face—I had done nothing to the policeman before he struck me, after he took hold of my collar—I had not struck him or raised my hand against him—I did not see him till he seized me by the collar—he was by himself, and the crowd began to close round, and I believe they tried to pull me away, but I could not be positive—the prisoner went with me to Vine-street station in the cab, and there charged me with throwing stones and assaulting him—I was kept there till about 12 o'clock at night, in a cell along with about forty more, I was then taken to Marylebone lane that same night—on Monday I was taken to Marlborough-street to go before the Magistrate, but I did not go till Tuesday—I was then discharged—I was kept in custody till then.

Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. Were you charged with throwing stones at the police? A. The policeman charged me before the Magistrate with throwing stones at the police, but not with assaulting him—I cannot say how many witnesses were examined before the Magistrate—Mr. Hardwick requested the gaoler to examine my head to see whether it was a blow from a truncheon or some missile—he did not examine my head, he put his hand on it but not where the cut was, and I stated so at the time—it was not stated that it was more likely done by an oyster shell than a truncheon—he said there was a slight cut, apparently from a stone, and the Court hissed him at the time—I hissed at the police, I cannot say that I

was shouting and hooting at them—I was crying "Shame!" I was decidedly not so meek and mild as I am now, I was very much excited—I did not hear it stated that it was unlawful to go to the Park—I saw it posted up to that effect—I did not go on purpose for a row—there was no one with me, I went by myself in my best things—I was at that time potman and waiter in Ship-yard, I had been so for about six months—I left there last Christmas eve—I have not been doing anything since—I have been out of place—I have a little money in the bank, in St. Martin's-place—I have not been living entirely upon that—I have been living at home with my parents—I have 4s. 6d. in the bank at present—that is my balance at my bankers—the policeman charged me before the Magistrate with being the person that threw the stone—I cannot say positively whether the mob did or did not try to rescue me, I had not sufficient time, I believe they did—I was pulled different ways, first by the mob and afterwards by five or six policemen—I was knocked down—I believe the policeman did not fall down also, nor was he trampled upon by the mob—I think I could swear he was not—I do not think he ever released his hold of my collar—I cannot say that he went down, he might—I did not see any one in the mob with sticks, flourishing them about and knocking the police—I saw only the one stone thrown—I am not sure whether it was a stone or not, the only other throwing I saw was a man throwing handfulls of dust at the carriages, I do not know that there was a brick or two in it—it all flew back in the faces of the people—I cannot say what I said before the Commissioners—I recollect saying, "I resisted a little, I think, I did not want to be locked up"—I did not beg of the policeman as I went to the station in the cab, to make it as light as possible for me—I said to him, "I believe I did not strike you?"—he said, "Oh! did not you?" and I said, "I dare say you will charge me with it, to justify yourself in striking me over the head"—I did not say if he had not been a plucky one the mob would have got me away, for they were game to it, and I was good for it myself—I am not aware that I said to the police, "I don't care, after all, for I have had a good lark for it"—I do not believe I ever said I had had a good lark in spite of Mr. Commissioner Mayne—I did not say so to the police—I never said so to anybody that I am aware of, not before I was discharged from the Magistrate—I said after that, that I did not care about being locked up, it was in a good cause—I was very much cheered by the people as I came out of the cab—I think it was about half past 3 o'clock when I went to the Park—I was not shouting at the horses as they went by, not generally speaking—I do not recollect shouting at anything in particular until I saw the man struck by the police—I was not shouting at the people, and telling them to go to church—I do not remember saying to the police, "Who stole the goose?"

MR. CLERK Q. Who went with you in the cab to the police station? A. There was another man in the coo besides, charged with picking pockets, I believe, or something of that sort, and another policeman was with him.

ZACHARIAH STILLING . I am a chair caner, at No. 45, Clement's-lane, Strand. On Sunday, 1st July, I was in Hyde-park, I saw White in a cab—the left side of his face was covered with blood, which was streaming from his head—I could not see the wound—I saw somebody in the cab with him.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you know White? A. Yes—I did not go to the Park with him, I had not met him there—I saw him in the cab.


7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-195
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

195. WILLIAM BEWLAY (a police sergeant) was indicted for unlawfully assaulting William Floyd 2nd COUNT, for assaulting James Vassey.

MESSRS. BODKIN and CLERK conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM FLOYD . I am second master at the Philological school, New-road. On Sunday afternoon, 1st July, I was in Hyde-park; I was there till between 3 and 4 o'clock—I think it might have been 4 before I left—I remember being near the railings of the drive, on the north side, the grass side, near the east end of the Serpentine—there were a great many police in the drive, some arranged in single file close to the railings on both sides; and also bodies of police in different places in the centre, standing irregularly—there was a crowd along the side of the railing for a long way—I was at first behind the crowd—I saw parties of the police rush towards the crowd, and order them away from the railing; they seemed to me principally to stoop and come under the railing—the crowd behind, as soon as they saw the police moving in their direction, prepared to run away up into the grass—on one of those occasions, as the crowd settled back again, I happened to get down to the railings in front of the crowd—I was told by a policeman to stand back—I said it would be impossible to stand back while there was such a crowd behind me; that man seemed to think I was perfectly justified in saying so, and passed on—I also said it would be better to request the persons behind to stand back, and then those in front would be able to move back from the railing—the next policeman in this single line by the railing then spoke to me, and a gentleman who was standing with me—he spoke rather roughly, and said, "You must stand back;" and pushed at my friend with his staff—we then made a united effort to stand a little way from the railing, trying to push back the persons behind us—I said to my friend, "What can be the objection to standing with one's arm on the railing, when there is a crowd of people for half a mile doing the same?"—upon my saying that, or some words to that effect, a policeman that I had noticed before among those who stood in the centre of the roadway, called out, "Is not he satisfied?" and turning round to those that were standing near, he said, "Come on"—they then rushed in the direction where I was standing, and getting under the rail, or over it, in whatever way they could, they seized hold of me; the one who had called out to the others, caught me by the collar, and struck me on the arm with his truncheon—others seized me on the other side, and one by the collar at the back of the neck, and at the same time struck me several blows—the blows which I first felt were those on the arms—as soon as possible I said, "What is it for?"—they pulled me about, tore my coat open, and tore my waistcoat, and I received several blows on the back and shoulders—the man who said, "Is he not satisfied?" was D 20—the defendant is the man—I have seen him since, and recognised him in the street—it was the same man that said, "Come on"—he said it instantaneously, "Is not he satisfied? come on;" and it was the same man that first struck me with a truncheon—he was the first who collared me, and the first who struck me—he made no charge against me whatever—he did not take me into custody—as soon as they had struck me they let me go—I called out to 20 D, "20 D, I shall remember you, I shall remember your number"—he shook his staff at me, and mimicked my voice, and said, "Ah!" very angrily, because I had called out his number—there was a gentleman named Horton present at the time, among a great many others—he gave me his address, and wrote down the number of the policeman on the same piece of paper—that was immediately after the police left, in the Park, there and then—I have not

got that piece of paper now, I thought thisaffair was all over after the committee of inquiry, after I had been before the Commissioners, and so all the papers I had have been destroyed—it was only by accident that I heard of Mr. Horton again, or I should have had no witness—I left the Park within a very few minutes after—I suffered very much from the blows that I received on the arms, and back, and spine, and shoulders—some days afterwards I was in Wigmore-street, with a friend, a clergyman named Randall, and saw the defendant standing at the comer of Marylebone-lane, talking to some one—when I was within about fifteen or twenty yards of him, I said to my friend, "That is the man that struck me in the Park"—I then went up to the defendant, and walked round him to see his full face, and his number, and when I came on the pavement again, he said, "Do you want me?"—I said, "No, I do not"—he made some allusion to my looking at him—I said, "I suppose it is not illegal to look at you," or something of that sort—he then became very abusive, and said something to my friend for walking round him; he spoke in a loud voice, so as to draw a considerable crowd—I said, "I hope you are not going to strike me again, as you did last Sunday, with your truncheon"—he said, "I never saw you before;" and then in speaking to Mr. Randall, he said that he had walked round him also—Mr. Randall told him that what he said was untrue, or false, and that he was a clergyman—I took no part with those who were making a disturbance in the Park on 1st July—I usually go into Hyde-park on a Sunday afternoon, and that afternoon as I saw there was a crowd near the road, I went towards the Serpentine, towards Kensington-gardens.

Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. you have given us the language that you used rather mildly, have you not; I mean when you met him in Wigmore-street? A. Perhaps—I do not recollect using anything stronger than "Do you wish to strike me as you did last Sunday?"—I did not call him a d——d ruffian, nothing of the kind—I did not call him a ruffian—the only place in which I am aware of calling him a ruffian was before the Commissioners, when I was asked to identify him—I am perfectly certain I did not call him a ruffian in Wigmore-street—Mr. Randall told him that what he said was a lie, or untrue, or false—I do not think I can swear to the exact words—I know he told him very firmly that what he said was not true—he did not say it was a lie—I can swear he did not say it was a d—d lie—he is a man superior to anything of that sort—I am not so sure that he did not say it was a lie—I was in company with some gentlemen in the Park—I did not go there in company with some gentlemen—I met two there—I went there alone—I usually carry a stick, very likely I had it with me then—I cannot swear that I did not have it, I rather think I had—if I had, it was not one thicker than my finger—it is one that I usually carry—it is rather strange that I have not got it here to-day—there was a great deal of noise—I do not think I saw a carriage all the afternoon, except the cabs which the policemen brought to take the prisoners away in—they were constantly bringing in cabs for that purpose—that was what caused the hooting—there was nothing whatever to keep me in the Park—I was not taking any share with the people, or carrying out any of their objects—I went there with no object, and was carrying out no object—at first I was at the back of the crowd—there was a succession of rushes from the police against the rails, a dozen or more, and in one of those I got to the railings, but I had not been at the railing before—I might have got out of the way altogether if I had chosen—Mr. Horton wrote down the policeman's number—I did not give him the number—he might have heard

me say, "D 20"—I called it out loud enough—he took off his hat, and wrote it down, and his address, and several others the same—I have suffered from this very severely—I was not well for several weeks, and it ended in an attack of epilepsy—I had never had anything of the sort before—a doctor attended me—he is not here.

HENRY HORTON . I am a clerk to Messrs. Waterlow, the stationers in Birch in-lane. I was in Hyde-park on the afternoon of 1st July—I saw Mr. Floyd there, near the drive—there was a rush made by the police upon a quantity of people who were standing together, and several of them got very severely maltreated—among those I noticed Mr. Floyd particularly—I took the number of the policeman who struck him—I took it for the purpose of presenting it to Mr. Floyd, should he request it.

COURT. Q. Are we to understand that you took it yourself, from your own observation? A. I did—it was D 20.

MR. CLERK. Q. At that time had you heard Mr. Floyd call out the number? A. I did not hear him call out the number, because I took it myself—he may have called out the number without my noticing it—I borrowed a pencil from a bystander, and wrote it upon a piece of paper which somebody presented to me—I took off my hat, and wrote my direction upon the paper on my hat, and also the number of the policeman, which I gave to Mr. Floyd—he was a perfect stranger to me—I had never seen him before.

Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Were you there for amusement, or for the purpose of putting down carriages being driven on Sunday? A. I was there for the purpose of exercise, taking a walk, not for ran—I did not anticipate anything—I was walking about and excited by curiosity to see what the policemen were doing—I was very near to Mr. Floyd—I cannot tell the time exactly; I should say it was about half past 4 o'clock—I saw the blows struck—I did not see the defendant knocked down—I saw his number distinctly—I am in regular employment with Messrs. Waterlow.

Q. Am I to understand you to pledge your oath that you took the number yourself, seeing it yourself? A. I took the number myself, seeing it myself, and gave it to Mr. Floyd; of that I have no doubt whatever—I was examined before the Commissioners—I cannot say whether a Mr. Balburnie was examined.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Are you still in the employ of Messrs. Waterlow? A. Yes.

REV. WILLIAM RANDALL , I am a clergyman, residing at Aveling Rectory, near Stroud, in Gloucestershire. I happened to be with Mr. Floyd in Wigmore-street on the Saturday after 1st July, and saw the defendant—when we were about ten yards from him, Mr. Floyd said, "There is the very man that ill-used me so in the Park"—he was standing at the corner of Marylebone-lane, talking to another man—Mr. Floyd having made that remark to me, I particularly noticed his number, that it was D 20, and also gave just one look at the man, which enabled me to identify him to-day, the moment I saw him in Court—as the policeman stood, his side face was to us, and, as we walked up in order to get a front view of him, I suppose, to see if he was correct, he walked round—I passed on into Marylebone-lane, and paid no more attention to the man.

JAMES VASSEY . I am a brewer's servant I was in Hyde-park on 1st July—I was by the side of the Serpentine, close by the Humane Society's house, going towards Kensington-gardens—there was a crowd of people coming down the Park, towards Hyde-park-corner—I was going the other way

—the police were driving them down, and cutting their staves about in all directions—I took no notice of any of them, and I was struck by D 20 on the shoulders, and knocked down on the ground—he did not say a word to me before he struck me—I know it was D 20, because I turned round and saw his number—I next saw him at the Exchequer Court—I got up, and went off home directly—this was between 3 and 4 o'clock—I felt the effects of the blow for a week—I went back to work on the second week.

Cross-examined. Q. Who is the brewer that has the honour of owning you as a servant? A. Mr. Rood, of Grosvenor brewery, in George-street, Grosvenor-square—they brew porter and ale—they do not keep a public house, nor retail beer or spirits—I am in regular employment, and was so at this time, at weekly wages—I attend on the brewer, and get the wort ready—I have been once charged with breaking windows; that is all—I had to pay 14s.—I did not pay it—I had to serve fourteen days for it, with hard labour—that is about five years ago—I have not had a row since that—I do not remember being helped to the station by three policemen, or by any policeman—I have only been there once—that was for breaking the windows—not since—I did not know that I was to answer such questions—I swear I never was at the station but that once—I know a man named Green—I remember being with him in Brook-street, Piccadilly—he was taken into custody for an assault upon a constable—there was no assault upon the constable—he was charged with it, and fined for it—the Magistrate was quite wrong, and the police were wrong in taking him—the Magistrates are sure to fine you whenever a policeman takes you there—it is very seldom you get off again—I have not been found drunk this very week—I was not in Baker-street, at 2 o'clock in the morning, quite drunk, in the same week I was in the Park—I was not charged with it—I did not tell a policeman that I helped to buy his clothes for him; nothing of the kind—I was charged with Green for assaulting the police—I was fined for it—both of us were fined—I did not think of that before—I did not pay the fine—I was locked up for another fourteen days—I quite forgot that.

(MR. BODKIN here withdrew the second count from the jury.)

The following witnesses were examined for the Defence.

EDWIN WALTERS . I am a gas fitter, and reside at No. 7, Blandford-street, Portman-square. I have resided in Marylebone for about ten years—I carry on business for myself—I was in Hyde-park on Sunday, 1st July—I went there about half-past 2 o'clock, and stayed there till about half past 5 o'clock—I was walking in the drive first, and then I was on the left hand side of the drive, as you go from the Duke of Wellington's house, next the water—I know the defendant by having seen him on duty a great number of times—I saw him on duty that afternoon—I do not believe he was out of my sight the whole of the afternoon, from half past 2 o'clock till half past 5 o'clock, when I left—during that time I did not see him commit any act of violence to any one, no more than I saw him, when the people were standing before the horses' heads, and waiving their hats, put them on one side—the people were doing that to stop the horses, and were crying out for the people to go to church—it had a tendency to frighten the horses—I saw two frightened—they were in a carriage—I saw various stones thrown from the opposite side to us, the right hand side—some of them hit Bewlay—there was a large mob on the right hand side, throwing stones, and shouting, yelling, and hissing—I saw a piece of wood thrown from the mob, which struck Bewlay on the collar, somewhere in the neck, and he fell, with the force of the blow, on the ground—he is a big man—it

must have been a heavy blow—it appeared to me to be a portion or one of the uprights of the wooden railing, which was broken down at the time—it was pretty well as big round as my arm—I think this was about a quarter or 20 minutes past 4 o'clock, as near as I can recollect—I saw Bewlay get up again, and get over the rails—I could not observe what that was for—he went exactly to where the piece of wood was thrown from—during the three hours I saw him in the Park he appeared to me to be acting with good temper, discretion, and judgment.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. I understand you to say that you were on the south side of the drive, that is to say on the left hand tide as you go from Apsley House to Kensington-gardens? A. Yes—I never west so far as the Serpentine within forty or fifty yards—it was not near Apaley House that I saw the piece of wood thrown which struck Bewlay—that was exactly opposite where I was standing, about forty or fifty yards from the Serpentine, on the Piccadilly or Knightsbridge aide—it was thrown from the right hand side, the grass or Oxford-street side—I was not before the Commissioners—I know the time at which I saw this happen, because two females who were standing by my side asked me to tell them the time, and I pulled out my watch, and showed them—it was then exactly 4 o'clock, and this was I suppose about a quarter of an hour after—I remained on the same spot till about half past 5 o'clock—I was standing leaning on the rails—Bewlay did not stand opposite to me the whole of the time—he walked backwards and forwards, I should say about fourteen or fifteen yards each way—he was not out of my sight—he was not further than that on each side of me.

MR. PARRY. Q. Did you observe whether he left the spot where he was upon any other occasion than when the hurdle was thrown at him? A. Never.

JOSEPH HIRONS (policeman, A 396.) On Sunday, let July, I was on duty in the carriage drive, in the Park, near the east end of the Serpentine, to and fro, some distance on this side, and some distance up the Serpentine in the drive—I know the receiving house of the Royal Humane Society—it was right at this end of the Serpentine where I went, not near the receiving house at all—I was under the direction of superintendent Hughes, and Bewlay was my sergeant—we went into the carriage drive about half past 2 o'clock—I remained there till somewhere about 5 o'clock, as near as I can guess, when I left to go with a prisoner to Vine-street—I took a prisoner into custody for throwing stones, and took him away to Vine-street station, along with another constable—with that exception, I remained in the carriage drive the whole of the time—my duty was in the carriage drive—I cannot exactly say how far I moved up and down, somewhere about twenty yards—we were posted to keep the carriage drive clear near the end of the Serpentine, a little distance this side, and a little distance up towards the receiving house—we were across the crossing—I looked to Bewlay for orders during the day—I kept my eye upon him the whole of the time, in case he should have orders to give me—I saw him once on his face on the ground, with his face towards the Serpentine—as near as I could judge, that was somewhere about a quarter past 4 o'clock—he was in the drive—I saw the head of a wooden hurdle lying by his side, on the ground—it was about a foot and a half or two feet long, and about a span round—I should not like to have had a blow with it—I went to him, and asked him what was the matter—he told me he had been knocked down by that piece of wood—after he got up he looked round, and said, "There is a man making his way

through the crowd; I have no doubt that is the man that threw it"—he crossed the carriage drive (he was on the side near the Serpentine), and got over the rails—he attempted to get through the crowd, by putting his arm over the people's heads, with his staff in his hand, but he was unable to do so, the crowd pressed him back against the rails; he came into the drive again—he never left the carriage drive on any other occasion during the afternoon but that once, and during that time he was not out of my sight at all—he had no power to get away—I cannot say exactly how many men were under him; about ten, twelve, or fourteen, I think—I never saw him make a blow at any one, but whether his staff hit any one after he got over the rails, I would not swear—that was after he was knocked down—he never left my sight at all, he was not able to proceed any distance from the rails, not above two yards—he was forced back immediately by the crowd and the spectators that were there.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. You say that your beat that day extended for some distance from the eastern side of the Serpentine towards Kensington-gardens? A. Across the east end of the Serpentine and the drive, some little distance on each end of the Serpentine—I know the crossing that comes across the drive from the Marble-arch to the Serpentine—I cannot say to a few yards how far we went beyond that crossing towards Kensington-gardens, we might have gone fifty or sixty yards—I cannot form any idea how far the Humane Society's receiving house is from that crossing, I should say about 200 yards—our party were never near the receiving house in the course of that afternoon—I swear that—I was down at the Commission, but was not called upon—I did not hear the defendant examined, I was outside the Court—I swear, that in the course of that afternoon, Bewlay never went as far as the dairy above the receiving house.

WILLIAM SPENCER (policeman, A 380). I was on duty on Sunday, 1st July, under sergeant Bewlay, on the carriage drive, on the north side of the Serpentine, near to the east end of it—I was never near the receiving house—I was never nearer to the other end of the Serpentine—I saw the sergeant struck by a piece of wood, a hurdle or poet—he was then standing in the carriage drive, and it knocked him down—as he got off the ground he picked up the piece of wood in his hand, and got over the rails on the grass, apparently for the purpose of capturing the person who threw the wood, and I saw some one making his way out of the crowd immediately afterwards—the sergeant was not able to follow that person—I was on duty with him from half past 2 till 7 o'clock, and during the whole of that period, from the position I had under his command, I did not lose sight of him for above half a minute, or a minute together—I did not see him during that time strike any one across the shoulders with his truncheon, and I was in such a position that if he had had a conversation with a party, lasting for two or three minutes and striking him, I must have seen him—I did not hear him say, "Come on, then," or anything of that kind—I have known him eight years; he was always a man mild in his demeanour.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. How near the receiving house did you go? A. I should say about half way between the east end of the Serpentine and the receiving house; the distance is 200 yards or more—I was examined before the Commissioners on the last day but one, I think it was, but it was not on this case—I was in the Exchequer on the day the defendant was examined, and was in Court part of the time that he was examined, but not the whole of it—I do not recollect his stating to the Commissioners that his beat extended from the dairy above the receiving

house to the east end, and that he went backwards and forwards about the length from the receiving house to the top of the Serpentine—I think he might go as far as that—I know the place, I do not recollect that we did go as far as the turning into the dairy during the afternoon, we were the greater part of the time at the other end of the Serpentine—I really cannot say whether we did go as far as the dairy lodge or not—I will not swear we did not—we had a certain portion of the drive allotted to us, from the east end of the Serpentine backwards towards the receiving house—we had no particular boundary westward.

MR. PARRY. Q. In reference to your beat, or the space you would have to walk, would you obey the orders of your sergeant? A. Yea, that would be our duty—we were not during that space keeping a certain line—the crowd extended from the east end of the Serpentine to 100 yards above where the crossing is from Oxford-street, that is the back part of the crowd where it was hanging and clustering together.

BENJAMIN EASET (policeman, A 352). On 1st July I was on the carriage drive, at the east end of the Serpentine—sergeant Bewlay was there, and I was under his orders—he was knocked down by the post about a quarter past 4 o'clock, or from that to the half, hour—I saw him attempt to pursue some one, I followed him as far as the rails, he was not out of my sight at all at that time—he was unable to do so, and was thrown back on the drive—the striking the blow with the hurdle, and the attempt to pursue the party lasted perhaps three or four minutes; after that time he did not again go out of the drive during the whole of our duty—it is our duty to keep our eyes on our sergeant as much as possible—I did not see the sergeant go out of the drive except on that occasion—I was in such a position that if he had had a conversation with a person leaning over the railings, and had struck that person three or four times I must have seen it, and I saw nothing of the kind on the part of the sergeant—I was kicked severely myself, and assistance came to me, and a great many others of the police.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. Some boys who did this were taken away in a cab, in custody? A. Yes—I cannot say whether they were boys or not—I did not see Mr. Floyd that afternoon to my knowledge—I was not examined before the Commissioners—I was in the Court of Exchequer—my duty on that afternoon was in the drive by the side of the Serpentine—I did not go as far as the receiving house till the last thing in the evening—I heard part of Bewlay's examination in the Court of Exchequer, but was not there the whole of the time—I was there during part of the examination of Mr. Mitchell, but not the whole—Bewlay went backwards aud forwards, but I did not hear him say to the Commissioners that he went to the receiving house—I should think the dairy above the receiving house is eighty or a hundred yards from it, nearer Kensington-gardens.

MR. PARRY. Q. Is there a turning which leads to the receiving house from the east end? A. There is a turning in the road—the receiving house may be 150 or 200 yards from that turning—I am speaking of the end, by the dairy—the dairy is half way down, standing dose by the side of the road—there is a slight bend previous to getting to the receiving house—I do not know, as regards the receiving house, where Bewlay's beat extended on that day.

JOHN YOUNG (policeman, A 360). I was on duty in We roadway, under the direction of sergeant Bewlay—I had to look to him for orders during the afternoon—I was there about half past 2 o'clock, and remained till half past 5 o'clock—I was in the drive the whole of that time, and saw

sergeant Bewlay the whole time—I remember his being struck with a hurdle—I did not see him struck, but I saw him down on the ground, saw the post which was said to have struck him, and saw him attempt to follow a man—with that exception, he was not out of the drive, to my knowledge, during the whole time—if he had struck any person during that time, I believe I must have seen him, and I never saw him—there were a good many stones thrown, and policemen struck in all directions—I was 100 yards from the east end of the Serpentine—as to where the beat extended to, all I can say is, that sergeant Bewlay was my sergeant, and we paraded up and down the drive somewhere about 100 or 120 yards—of course he knew the extent to which he could go, and directed us where we were to go—he did not go as far as the receiving house while I was there, and not within 300 yards of it, I should think.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. How many men had Bewlay under him on this afternoon in the drive? A. About a dozen, or something like that; I cannot say as to one, or two, or three—I heard him examined before the Commissioners—I do not know whether he said he had twenty men under him—I heard some portion of his evidence—we were led by him up and down the space that I have stated—I assisted in taking one person into custody, I cannot recollect his name—that was near the east end of the Serpentine—I did not hear Bewlay state before the Commissioners that his duty extended from the turning into the dairy above the receiving house to the east end of the Serpentine—he did not on that afternoon go backwards and forwards from the turning into the dairy above the receiving house to the east end of the Serpentine—I swear I never saw him go more than 100 or 120 yards from the east end of the Serpentine.

MR. PARRY. Q. Did you see him the whole of that afternoon to 5 o'clock or later? A. up to a quarter past 5 o'clock—I never lost sight of him more than a moment, and it would have been impossible for him to have gone up to the receiving house in that time without my seeing him.

WILLIAM NEWSOM (policeman, A 381). I was on duty on this occasion in Hyde-park, from half past 2 to 6 o'clock, under the orders of Bewlay—I saw him knocked down by a post, and saw a man forcing his way through the crowd immediately afterwards—that was about a quarter past 4 o'clock, but I cannot tell within a few minutes—I saw the sergeant go over the rails to follow the man, and he was pushed back afterwards—my eyes were on him during the time I was on duty; that was part of my duty—during the time I was on duty I did not see the sergeant strike any one, and I was close to him most of the time—if he had struck anybody on the shoulder several times, and had a conversation which lasted three or four minutes, I must have seen it.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. How near to the receiving house did you go? A. Not within 300 yards of it—I did not go near it at all.

HENRY BENNETT (policeman, D 208). I was on duty in the drive with sergeant Bewlay, and under his orders, from half past 2 o'clock till about half past 6 o'clock—I remained in the drive all the time—Bewlay was in the drive with the exception of when he was over the railings of the drive after he was struck with the hurdle—I did not lose sight of him for any length of time—I might for a minute or so, while I turned to execute orders—I should say that I went about 100 yards from the crossing in the direction of the receiving house, and within about 300 yards of the receiving house—the crowd was largest near the crossing—we kept where the crowd was most violent, and where most mischief was likely to be done—if Bewlay

had struck any person during that day, I must hare seen it—he might have done so when he was repulsed by the mob, but he did not do so in my sight; if he had, I should have seen it.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. I understand you to say that you went about 100 yards on the Kensington side of the crossing? A. From the east end towards the receiving house, but not within from 300 to 400 yards of the receiving house—it is about a quarter of a mile from the crossing to the receiving house.

JAMES GOODEVE . I live at No. 21, Henrietta-street, Manchester-square—I am a builder. I was in Hyde-park on the afternoon of these riots—I got there about a quarter past 3 o'clock, and left at a little before 6 o'clock—I saw Bewlay on duty there during the whole time—I had known him by sight for five or six years—I remember his being knocked down by a piece of timber, and his getting up and endeavouring to follow the man—he got pushed back by the crowd against the palings—I was walking up and down the drive at the east end of the Serpentine—during the whole time I did not lose sight of Bewlay above a minute—I did not see him strike any one on the shoulder with his staff—if he had struck a person on the shoulder with his staff, and conversed for the matter to last three or four minutes, I must have seen him—he did not do so—if he had cried, "Come on, then," to his men, I must have heard it—he did not do so at all, that I heard—I was not examined before the Commissioners—I did not know this man's name till I saw it in the paper—having read the evidence which was given before the Commissioners, I was going to the station on the Monday morning, as I saw it in the paper on Sunday, and I met Bewlay, and told him I was going to the station on his behalf.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. Where were you? A. At the east end of the Serpentine, between Apsley House and the receiving house, on the drive, in the roadway—persons were allowed to be there walking about, but when the constables came up in a body, we had to clear out—they remained in the drive.

DUNCAN CUMMING . I live at No. 42, Davis-street, Grosvenor-square. I am clerk to Jackson and Graham, upholsterers, of Oxford-street, and have been so some time—I was in Hyde-park on 1st July, when these riots were going on—I got there about a quarter to 3 o'clock, and remained up to 6 o'clock, or it might have been later—I was at the east end of the Serpentine, on the drive—there were several other persons on the drive—when the police came up in a body to clear it, some went on one side and some on the other—I saw Bewlay there at the head of ten or fifteen constables—he was standing with his back towards the north side of the drive, and occasionally inarching his men up and down the drive, and giving orders—he appeared to parade the men forty or fifty yards, so as to disperse the assembling crowds; from the crossing at the end of the Serpentine up towards Kensington-gardens—I scarcely lost sight of him more than three minutes during the time that I was there—I cannot swear positively that I saw him down, but I saw him attempting to follow the person—he went to the rails, but was forced back by the crowd—if Bewlay left the roadway while I was there, he had only three or four minutes, because I should have missed him—he being in command of the detachment would be more observable than an ordinary policeman—if he had struck a man with his staff between the shoulders, and conversed with him for three or four minutes, I must have seen it—he did not do so—I have known him for some years as a policeman, he used to be on duty at the cattle show in Baker-street—I have seen him

on duty there—I was not examined before the Commissioners, but after reading the Commissioners' report in the papers, I sent word to Bewlay to know if I could be of any service to him.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. Do I understand you to say that you saw a hurdle or piece of wood thrown at the defendant Bewlay? A. I cannot swear positively to Bewlay, but it was thrown, and I saw a policeman down—I was, I should say, about six yards from the spot, at the east end of the Serpentine in the roadway—I walked up and down a few yards there.

HENRY SHRIMPTON . I am a greengrocer, and live at No. 20, Davies-street, York-place, Marylebone. On 1st July I was in Hyde-park for about three hours, and saw stones thrown at the police—I saw the mob with stones in their hands, and there was a great deal of shouting and hooting; they were attempting to frighten the horses as they came down the drive, and they succeeded in doing so—I have known Bewlay twelve years, and always as a discreet constable, acting with temper and mildness—I saw him in the drive that afternoon, but cannot say whether I had him in my eye every minute of the time—his clothes were dirty, as if he had been on the ground, and from that time up to half past 5 o'clock I might have lost sight of him, but only for a minute or two—after that time he did not use his staff about the person of any one; if he had done so, and had had a conversation which had lasted three or four minutes, I must have missed him, but I do not think I missed him for so long, as he was in the habit of passing with his men where I was standing—if he had said, "Come on, then," or anything of that kind, I think I must have heard it—the stones were thrown from the north side of the drive—I was not examined before the Commissioners, but I read the report in the newspaper, and believing Bewlay was not the man, thought it my duty to come forward on his behalf.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. Where were you standing? A. On the south side of the drive, and on the north side of the Serpentine, between the Serpentine and the drive—I know the crossing from the drive, coming down from the Marble Arch to the head of the Serpentine—I was within 30 yards of that spot, towards the west end of the Serpentine—the police were walking up and down in the roadway, they passed me—I cannot say to four or five yards, but they appeared to go thirty or forty yards past me, and then turned round and came back again—there were about ten to fifteen men walking together, I cannot say to a man—I had my eye on the defendant at the time they were all walking up towards Kensingtongardens.

JOHN OLIVER . I am a licensed victualler, of No. 54, East-street, Manchester-square. On this Sunday I was in the Park—I saw Bewlay there, walking up and down, and clearing the drive—he appeared to be in command of ten or a dozen men, who were patrolled from the crossing at the east end of the Serpentine to sixty or seventy yards away from it—I saw him knocked down, I suppose it was with a portion of a hurdle; it was a log of wood seventeen or eighteen inches long—I saw him attempt to get into the Park after the person who did it, and he was forced back into the drive—I remained till nearly 6 o'clock—Bewlay did not leave the drive while I remained there; if he had struck any one with his staff, or remained in conversation with a person two or three minutes, I should have seen him—he did not do so—I read the report of the Commissioners about Bewlay in a newspaper, and came forward in consequence—I have known Bewlay upwards of five years, in his capacity of a police officer; he performed duty often at many public places—I have seen him in that capacity, and never

saw him exceed his duty, or use any violence—I have known him nearly six years, and therefore have no doubt that the man I have spoken of was Bewlay.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. You saw a piece of a hurdle thrown at the defendant? A. I did not say, "Thrown at him," I saw it strike him—I was standing on the south side of the drive, within the railings—I was gome thirty yards from the defendant at the time he was struck—he was in front of me; I was nearer to the Serpentine than he was—I never left the spot more than twenty or thirty yards.

ROBERT JACKSON (police inspector D.) On 1st July, I went into Hyde-park, on duty, about a quarter past 1 o'clock, and remained till 10 o'clock at night—the crowd began to assemble rather before 3 o'clock; and in the next two or three hours upwards of 50,000 persons assembled—the part of the Park between the east end of the Serpentine and the Park keeper's lodge, near the receiving house, was very much crowded—the mob was very riotous indeed for some hours, and a great number of stones and pieces of wood were thrown at the police; and the hurdles which mark the roadway were broken up and thrown at the police—upwards of thirty of my detachment were injured, and seventy odd, thieves taken—there was a pretty good sprinkling of thieves in the mob—the horses were being frightened by the mob on either side—Bewlay was a sergeant under me—I do not know a man of better temper, or of greater control—he has been specially employed on many occasions in matters where temper and selfcontrol are extremely desirable, where mobs are collected, and there is likely to be a row—I saw him at intervals during the whole of that afternoon; I may have lost eight of him for ten minutes at a time—I never saw him commit any act of violence—while I had my eye on him, he conducted himself with good temper and judgment—we were obliged to dear the drive at first to prevent the horses being frightened.

Cross-examined. Q. You cleared the drive rather early in the afternoon? A. Yes, before 3 o'clock; we kept it as clear as we could after that, but at times the mob broke in—there was a great crowd on each side of the drive, and in the drive also; it was very difficult for persons to move along—I did not assign the beats to the different officers that afternoon—I never saw Bewlay so high up as the receiving house—I cannot say whether that was his beat on that afternoon—I never saw him beyond an old tree which stands on the drive—that is not so high up as the boat house; not near it—I did not hear Bewlay examined before the Commissioners, I was at the Court—during that afternoon, I endeavoured as much as possible to persuade the people to go away—I was stationed in the drive, between the dairy farm and the end of the Serpentine, but the principal time in the atternoon was spent from about 200 yards from the head of the Serpentine, but at times I was as far as the tree—I am one of the "A" detachment, under superintendent Hughes—Bewlay belongs to the same division.

JOHN BALBURNIE . I am an engineer, of No. 14, Grove End-road, St. John's Wood. On 1st July, from 4 to 6 o'clock, I was on the north side of the drive, Hyde-park—I remember seeing Mr. Floyd there, perfectly well—the police were walking up and down at that part of the drive, and I heard two of them request Mr. Floyd to move—the first one spoke in a good tempered, civil tone, and told him to stand beck from the rails—he was on the Park aide of the rails, the north side of the drive—the next one used similar words, but in a rough, sharp voice—Mr. Floyd said that he could not got back, for the crowd was so thick behind him, and I believe he made a similar remark to the second one—he was there before I arrived

but there was a large crowd behind and on all sides of him; he was in the front rank—after that an attempt was made to force those people back from the railings—I did not see Mr. Floyd struck—I firmly believe that Bewlay was not one of the constables who made a rush at that time—I went to the Court as a matter of curiosity, and recognised Mr. Floyd there—I told him I had seen him on 1st July, in the Park, and had heard the remark made by the first policeman, and had afterwards seen them rush under the rails, and drive him and others back, but with regard to identifying the policeman who attacked him I told the Recorder I could not do it.

COURT. Q. What part of the Park was it? A. About 200 yards from the east end of the Serpentine, on the north side, between the east end and the receiving house.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. You were examined before the Commissioners? A. Yes—I saw some of the policemen striking among the people, on the north side of the drive—I saw the truncheons moving pretty freely about—the first striking I saw on the part of the police was immediately after Mr. Floyd had first been spoken to—at that time I had seen no provocation given by the people—no policeman said words like "Halloo! is he not satisfied?" while I was there—I did not hear it—I saw some policemen pushing under the railings—I did not see that policeman, whose number I did not know, push under the railings—I did not see Bewlay at the Court of Exchequer at the time I gave my evidence—I do not think he was there.

Q. Did you say that it might have been D 20, but you did not know what the number was? A. I cannot recollect, at this distance of time, what my answer was—I got away as soon as I saw that the truncheons were being used—I did not stay to get into any row—I was in the drive—the policeman who spoke roughly went under the rails with others at the same time.

MR. PARRY. Q. Was that Serjeant Bewlay? A. I believe as truly as I stand here that he is not the man—I saw him examined at the Exchequer after my own examination, and I immediately afterwards stated to several of my friends that he was not the man—I had not the opportunity of stating so to the Commissioners, but I was called on afterwards to identity him if I could—the moment I saw him in the witness box, at the Court of Exchequer, I made up my mind that he was not the man—I was subpœnaed by the prosecution to go before the Grand jury, and I believe it was because they learned what I had to say that I was not called.

HENRY CHURCH (policeman. D 66). On Saturday evening, 7th July, I was standing at the corner of Wigmore-street, talking to sergeant Bewlay—Mr. Floyd came up to him, and went round him—sergeant Bewlay said, "I beg your pardon, Sir, do you want me for anything?"—Mr. Floyd said, "No, I had sufficient of your truncheon last Sunday about my shoulders, I believe you to be the ruffian," turning smartly round again, "Yes, you are the ruffian"—sergeant Bewlay said, "I beg your pardon, Sir, you have made a mistake"—another gentleman, whom I had not seen at the time, said, "It is a lie"—I turned round, and saw that it was a gentleman in black—not a word on either side was said afterwards.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. Where was it this conversation took place? A. At the corner of Wigmore-street and Marylebone-laue—I had left duty, and had been home.

MR. PARRY to INSPECTOR JACKSON. Q. How many sergeants were in the drive that day? A. Ten, and I should say that there were ten more

acting further up the drive, full 300 yards further up than the receiving house.

JURY to JOHN BALBURNIE. Q. What is your impression, was it a sergeant or a common man of the police who spoke roughly? A. I cannot tell—there were several.

(A number of witnesses deposed to the prisoners good character.)


NEW COURT.—Thursday, January 10th, 1856.


Before Mr. Recorder and the Sixth jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-196
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

196. HENDRIK PIETER BERNELOT MOENS was indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury.

MESSRS. BALLANTINE and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

THOMAS JONES . I produce the record of the trial in the Court of Common Pleas of Moens against Bremer.

CHARLES BARNES . I am a crier of the Court of Common Pleas. I was there on the 29th June, 1855—the defendant was sworn in the usual manner and examined.

Cross-examined by MR. EDWIN JAMES. Q. The trial lasted all day? A. It lasted a long time—there were a great many documents and letters read to and from Holland.

MOSES BENNETT . I am a short'hand writer. I was present at the trial of Moens v. Bremer, I took notes of the trial—I have here the evidence given by the prisoner—my brother took part of it.

ISRAEL BENNETT . I took a part of the evidence given by the prisoner.

(The evidence given by the defendant was read at length: it was in substance to the following effect: that when he (Moens) first called on Bremer with Linderaan, in 1853, he introduced Lindeman as his clerk and traveller, and that he never stated he was a partner; that he first knew of the letter dated 23rd Nov., 1853, from Bremer to Lindeman after he (Moens) was arrested, in the early part of 1855; that he was not in London, either in the months of Feb. or March, 1854; that he only saw the vessel called the Herne once in England, viz., in Nov., 1853; and that he was never on board that vessel in Jan., Feb., or March, 1854; that he wrote a letter to Bremer in Feb., 1854, and sent it by the John Russell, of which he produced a copy; that he did not receive an account current between himself and Bremer, showing a balance of 2,297l. 6s. 8d. in favour of Bremer, in May, 1854, or Oct., 1854; that he did not receive an account of charges on a vessel called the Queen, in May, 1854; and that he did not receive such account until the latter end of Aug.; that he never engaged or authorised Lindeman to engage the Queen after 14th Feb., 1854, to run on his own account; and that he never knew, until he got from Bremer, his account on 30th Oct., 1854; that he (Bremer) had charged thirty-six weeks hire of that vessel; that before the preparation of a certain agreement some conversation took place at the office of Mr. Hollams as to the amount to be inserted for freight, or for the hire of the ship, and that the sum of 1,800l. was not filled in; that Hollams asked what sum he was to insert; that Bremer said he and Moens had not spoken about it, and that it was of no consequence because he was quite sure to get the remainder of the money; and that

Hollams then said, "Suppose we say 150l. is that fair? or any sum you like.")

MARTIN FREDERICK BREMER . I am a German. I have been forty-one years in England, carrying on business as a ship broker in London, under the firm of Sack, Bremer, and Co.—I was for five or six years the sole owner of a ship called the Queen, on my own account—in June, 1852, we had two letters from Muntz and Co., of Harliugen, and in May, 1853, the prisoner called on me with Mr. Lindeman—I never saw either of them before—they wished me to send my steamer, the Queen, to Harlingen—she had been there, and they wished me to send her again, which I declined—it was Mr. Moens, the prisoner, who proposed it—I declined doing so, stating it had been a losing concern upon the previous year, and at the same time I mentioned that we had had letters from Muntz and Co. to the same effect—to which Moens replied, "It is all the same concern, we are all three partners"—he had not introduced Lindeman to me before—he did not tell me what Lindeman was, nothing else but, "It is all the. same concern, we are all three partners"—I did not make any proposition or agreement; nothing particular—they wrote to me subsequently, inquiring the draught of water, and the price, and I named 10,000l.—I had conversation with them afterwards, they frequently called at the office—the contract was made to purchase the Queen for 10.000l.—they were to pay me 500l. as deposit, in cash, but they gave me a bill—I made the agreement myself, but Mr. Hollania drew out the contract—there was no agreement made at that time for running the Queen in the meantime—I had her employed in the Oporto trade.

Q. Was anything said afterwards by Moens about hiring the Queen? A. A second contract was made, the first bill not being paid—the acceptance was refused—I agreed to take 200l., and they made the second contract for the purchase, and they brought me 500l. more as a deposit, making 700l. but when the time expired they had no cash to pay the remainder; the contract was at an end—I could have kept the 700l. but I did not—the final contract was made on 30th Aug., 1853—I gave them credit for the whole 700l.,—in Aug., 1853, when the contract was entered into, Mr. Hollams was not present—he had made it out, but was not present—on 30th Aug. I entered into a fresh contract—they brought me 3,200l. for purchase or hire, according to the new contract—that 3,200l. included the 700l.—a sum was agreed to be paid, 150l. a week for twelve weeks, or at their option to purchase the ship—(This agreement was here put in and read, dated 30th Aug., 1853, between M. F. Bremer and Messrs. Moens and Co., Harlingen, merchants, by which the parties mutually agreed that the ship Queen, of which M. F. Bremer was the sole owner, should be employed for twelve weeks by Messrs. Moens and Co., they paying tits sum of 1,800l. freight for the said ship, and all claims during that period; that Messrs. Moens and Co. should be at liberty to purchase the same before the expiration of the twelve weeks, for 10,000l.; and recited that Messrs. Moens had paid 2,200l. to M. F. Bremer as deposit, which he should hold until the completion of the purchase)—the cost of working a ship of that kind depends on what voyage it made, to Harlingen I should say it would be about 100l. or 110l. per week—the English crew I paid—the pilot and other charges he paid—under the agreement he was responsible for those charges—the sum of 1,800l. was mentioned—that was not a nominal sum, it was the real sum—no agreement was ever made stating that 150l. was only a nominal sum—I stated that was the lowest I would take—I had had a great deal more from other parties—directions were given by me to Marten and Hollams—I went there with Mr. Moens to instruct them—this agreement would expire on 21st Nov.,

for the first twelve weeks—Moens did not pay for the ship—a second agreement was then entered into, and that was signed by Lindeman, for Bernelot Moens, and Co.—I saw Lindeman and Moens Very frequently together—Lindeman never acted as a clerk—on the contrary, he proposed that we should keep the 700l., and Moens objected to that, and said we ought not to be hard, and I yielded to that, and gave them credit for the whole—in Nov. the second agreement was entered into—on 23rd Nov. I wrote to Moens—this is the letter—it is directed to Lindeman—(Read: "23rd Nov., 1853. Mr. T. H W. Lindeman, Harlingen: According to our agreement, I now have the pleasure to write you, that the directors have asked a price for the steamer, Herne, say 4,500l., but we shall be able to get it for 4,00l. I am now quite prepared to buy the steamer', if a suitable price; at the same time I will thank you to let me know as soon as possible, if you will soon be able to send me some money to make my arrangements accordingly. I remain, etc., M. F. Bremer)"—I received an answer to it in Moens's writing—this is it, signed by Moens himself.

Q. Had you had conversation with Moens about the Herne? A. Yes; he went down with me to see the Herne previous to my writing this letter—he requested me to get an estimate for raising the Herne three feet—he went over the Herne in Nov., 1853: no, Oct. it must have been—I cannot say exactly—Lindeman went over it also—it was in consequence of the conversation about the Herne that this letter was written by me—I received this letter—I believe this is Lindeman's writing—it is the Dutch original of the answer, in Linderaan's writing—(Read: "Harlingen, 29th Nov., 1863. To Mr. M. F. Bremer, London. Dear Sir,—Your esteemed favour of the 23rd inst. duly to hand. Mr. Lindeman being obliged to leave yesterday morning for Amsterdam, to attend a meeting regarding the railway, so he requested me to answer your letter. He thinks 4,000l. is quite money enough, as the expenses for the intended alterations will be rather heavy. As regards the remittances, we'll, within short, be able to mention the amount to you after next week, as Mr. Lindeman and I intend to go over ourselves. I remain, dear Sir, yours most sincerely, Henry Moens."—After the receipt of this letter on 29th Nov., Moens was here again in Dec.—I saw him in Feb., certainly on the 22nd—Lindeman is an older man than Moens—I spoke about remittances—that was in reference to the purchase of the Herne—the were agreements respecting the Herne, decidedly I had no other to make—there had been a conversation about the Herne, and heightening the deck three feet—I had agreed for the sale of the Queen, and 3,200l. was in my hands for the purchase and the freight—at that time the contract was existing for the purchase or hire of the Queen—the new contract had just been entered into—there had been a treaty for the purchase of the Herne—they had asked 5,000l. and reduced it to 4,200l. and I thought they would take 4,000l.—I was to purchase the Herne for them—in Feb., 1864, I saw Moens; I went with him and Lindeman on board the Herne, on 22nd Feb., they measured the ship, and put down the length and breadth—the ship was in the East India Docks—I have a letter, dated 16th Dec., it is in Moens' writing, and is signed "Bernelot Moens and Co."—(Read)—some time after, I wrote word that the Herne was still for sale; and after that they came over in Feb., and visited the Herne, and took measurement—we were on board the Herne two or three hours—they were very particular—I talked to Moens about the Herne—we were on board the Herne—Mr. Lindeman was to write to Mr. De Wit to come and see it, and if he approved of the alterations, Lindeman was to remain here and purchase it—I saw Moens after that, he arrived on the 22nd, and called on me repeatedly—De Wit

came over to examine the vessel; he came to my office with Lindeman, and said it was a good ship, it could be altered—in consequence of what De Wit said, I concluded the purchase, by direction of Lindeman, with the Herne Bay Company, on account of Moens and Co.—I had at that time in my hands unexhausted 1,300l. or 1,400l.—on 2nd March I paid a deposit of 2,000l.—the Company agreed, in consequence of 2,000l. paid down, to take 3,600l.—the vessel was duly transferred to Holland, and Liudeman went over with her—Lindeman paid me 900l. on 20th March, and of the 21st I paid the remaining 1,600l., leaving due to me 2,297l. 6s. 8d.—when Moens and Lindeman were over on 21st Feb., I entered into a fresh agreement about the Queen—I agreed with Lindeman, and I saw Moens subsequently on it—I agreed with Lindeman to let them have the Queen, at 75l. a week, weekly, till they had another ship.

Q. Was anything said about the preceding twenty-four weeks? A. Lindeman came, and said, "If you exact the whole 150l. a week for the back time, I shall have nothing but my coat and my shirt," and I agreed to reduce it—I saw Moens on it, and he expressed his gratitude that I had reduced it from 3,600l. to 1,800l.—the 1,800l. I said I would make him a present of, and Moens expressed his gratitude for it—on 25th May I enclosed an account current and a freight account to Harlingen—I enclosed them both in one envelope—I posted it myself, and directed it to Bernelot Moens and Co., Harlingen—this is the copy of the account current, and this is the copy of the freight account—this is the letter in which they were both sent.

Q. Did you receive any letter disputing this account? A. No—I received a letter acknowledging the receipt of these accounts, and that they were correct—I booked them accordingly—this letter, 25th Sept, is Moens' writing—("Harlingen, 25th Sept., 1854. Mr. M. F. Bremer. London. Dear Sir, Having not heard from you for a long time, we thought it better to write you a few lines. We received last month from Mr. Lindeman the bills of charges of the Queen, which we have found correct, and booked conform with you. We were sorry to find that there have been such severe losses by the large consumption of coals and high prices of the same. As, however, there will, within a short time, be a meeting of our shareholders, so you will oblige us by sending us, if possible, by return of post, your account current, as we also wish to settle with your good selves. We trust that as we, in the first instance, only began that business upon the first plan, that you should stand half in the affair; and looking at the heavy losses we sustained already, even without any hire, so we hope and also trust, of your known goodness, that you'll not charge more than 30l. hire per voyage. Expecting the favour of your reply, we are, dear Sir, yours most truly, Bernelot Moens, and Co.")

Q. You had sent the accounts in May? A. Yes, and I wrote and said so, and Moens wrote, and said they had not received them.

COURT. Q. When did you write an answer to this? A. On the 30th that I had sent the account current on 25th May.

MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Did he write again? A. Yes, and said he had not received it—I sent him another account on 6th Oct.—(Letter of 30th Sept. read: "London, 30th Sept, 1854. Messrs. B. Moens and Co., Harlingen. Dear Sirs, in reply to your favour of the 25th instant, I beg to say that it is not my intention to make any deduction from the account current I sent you as long ago as the 25th of May, showing a balance of 2,297l. 6s. 8d. in my favour, and I am very much surprised that you have not made me remittance long since. You are aware that I have been

extremely liberal in making a very considerable sacrifice in my just claim, and you must expect no more. I shall now be obliged to put new boilers, and coal bunkers, &c., into the Queen, which will cost me 2,000l. If you had not chartered her, I should have kept her in the Oporto trade, and afterwards chartered her to Government, which would have paid me more than 200l. per week. Respectfully I remain, dear Sirs, yours very truly, M. F. Bremer. P. S. I am sorry to find that your engineer has taken out of the Queen one of the vacuum gauges, and sent it to Amsterdam. There are also several tools belonging to the engine room taken away, which is very wrong." (Answer read: "Harlingen, 3rd Oct., 1854. To M. F. Bremer. Dear Sir,—Your esteemed favour of 30th ult. came to hand. We are astonished to see you sent us the account current as long ago as the 25th of May, as we never received anything of the kind; and you will greatly oblige us to send us a copy of the same per return of post; as we cannot make out that balance, we very much want it. As to your writing about your having been liberal in making a very considerable sacrifice, we cannot judge of it, as we don't know; but trust it will not exceed 30l. or 40l. as it is already a heavy loss to us. We don't need to say that the boilers were not in a very good condition when we had her in the station, although we were made to suppose they would last for two or three years. We are, dear Sir, yours most truly, Bernelot Moens, and Co. Please to give us a note of everything they told you that the engineer (Kalkwerf) has taken out of the Queen.")

Q. When had the Queen ceased running? A. On the 8th May—supposing it had not been for the purchase of the Herne, there would have been a balance against me of about 1,400l.—no application had been made to me for the payment of that balance till the 27th Dec., 1854—that was the first claim made by Moens and Co. on me—Moens had called on me in the autumn, I believe in Nov.—he had not then made any claim on me—(Letter read: "Harlingen, 27th Dec., 1854. Mr. M. F. Bremer, London. Dear Sir,—As it appears by your letter with the contract that you still are pretending of our owing you money, although Mr. Moens showed you all the wrong posts in your account; and as also you not yet acknowledge receipt of the account charges sent to you in our letter of the 16th of May, 1854, so we beg to enclose you our account current, as also a duplicate of the charges, and if you don't remit us the amount of balance due to us, say 2,063l. 1s. 4d., we will take liberty of drawing upon you for that amount, as we don't like to be troubled any longer with your false claims. We once more repeat that the Herne was a private affair of Mr. Lindeman; and the reason why we are at present agents of the Leinwarden is, because when Mr. Lindeman sold the Herne to Mr. Muntz he made this a condition, as promised to us when he retired himself from our firm. A friend of us (Mr. M.) being in want of a steamer, we should like to know the present price of the Queen, and what commission you would allow us on the amount. We are, dear Sir, yours most truly, Bernelot Moens and Co."

Q. Did you answer that claim? A. I answered it on 12th March, with a threat of arresting them—I never received the letter of 16th May, which is alluded to in this letter of theirs on 27th Dec.—no proceedings were taken against me—I heard that Moens was in London in March—I employed my solicitor, and he was arrested—after he had been arrested, he commenced an action—I had commenced an action first, but from some circumstances his action came on to be tried first—I heard the evidence about his not being on board the Herne—I saw Mr. James produce a book,

similar to this one, and Mr. Moens had it in his possession; and a letter was read, professing to come from Harlingen—I did not receive it—I could not—it is three days' post from Harlingen—I received letters by the Lord John, Russell, but I did not receive this letter—I do not think it would have taken it—they were rival boats.

Cross-examined by MR. JAMES. Q. When was it you were first introduced to the prisoner? A. In May, 1853—at that time he was carrying cattle—this agreement of 150l. a week was to cease if he bought the vessel—if he had bought the Queen, and paid the purchase price, this 150l. a week would have ceased, and have been included in the purchase money—I had given 5,000l. for the Queen, and I had had it lengthened by about 200 tons, which cost upwards of 2,000l.; and about 2,000l. for boilers and machinery—I had bought it of Mr. Hartly, in London—besides the 150l. a week they would pay all the charges—in my account current I debited them with 500l

Q. You said you acted with great liberality, and abandoned your charge of 150l., and charged 75l.; did you not direct your solicitor to charge 3,600l. for the hire of the steamer, Queen, for twenty-four weeks? A. Not in the original action—I do not know whether the solicitor thought it well to do it—I do not remember that in my set off to Mr. Moens'action, I directed my solicitor to claim 3,600l. for the hire of the Queen—I thought Lindeman to be a partner of the house of Bernelot Moens and Co., of course—I thought he was the monied partner—I swore that I thought he was the monied man at the time I bought the Herne—this is the bill of the sale of the vessel when I bought it of the Steam Company, it is made out in Lindeman's name only, at his request; for this reason, he told me as the ship was to be enlarged at Amsterdam, it would save the expense and trouble of bringing the other parties over, if he had it made out in his own name—I had not 2,600l. in hand when I bought the Herne—I had 3,600l. deposited with me originally—some Moens brought, and Lindeman brought some—after the purchase I received 900l.—in Nov., when Moens came to my office, I told him I had bought the Herne on his account—he asked me to show him the note which Lindeman had signed for the payment of 3,600l., signed in the name of Bernelot Moens and Co.—he asked me to show him the original memorandum of the order to buy the Heme—I refused to show it him—I got rather warm—I did not tell him I would kick him out of the office—I thought he was very impudent—I had this document in my possession—I would not show it him for fear he should snatch it away—I knew he was a bad character before—I never did show it him—it was produced at the trial—of course I requested Lindeman to sign it, and he signed Bernelot Moens and Co., and I made him sign it himself, his own name—Moens did ask for it, and I refused to shew it him.

Q. You have spoken of as many as two letters, asking for the account current; do you swear that you sent it, and that you posted it yourself? A. I do—I am very frequently in the habit of doing that—this was dated the 25th May—in the mean time I had been writing to Lindeman at Amsterdam—I believe I wrote a couple of letters—I only addressed one letter to Lindeman after the purchase that I remember—I write 4,000 letters a year—I do not post them all—to my recollection, I wrote one letter to Lindeman before the sale, and one after—I insured the vessel from here to Amsterdam, in our own name—on the 22nd Feb., 1854, I saw Moens in the forenoon—we went down to the boat—Mr. De Wit came over; he was at my office on the 2nd March—he must have been here about two days before—he did not go over the vessel with me and Lindeman—I do not

think I went—I think I had not received letters by the Lord John Russell in 1854.

JOHN GALLONIN . I am the manager of the Union Hotel, in Salisbury-square, Fleet-street. I know the defendant—he came there on 22nd Feb., 1854, and was there three days, on the 22nd, 23rd, and 24th—he left on the 25th—I have my book here.

Cross-examined. Q. What time did he arrive? A. I do not recollect whether it was morning or afternoon—I was subpœnaed by the defendant at the trial in the Court of Common Pleas—I attended there with my books, but I was not called—I was subpœnaed on the second trial—Moens had been there before—he came in Dec., 1853, and Mr. Lindeman too, the game day—he came in Nov., 1853—Mr. Lindeman came in Sept—Moens came on 5th Sept, 1853—after Feb., he was there in June, 1854, and again on July the 19th.

MR. BALLANTINE. Q. You were subpœnaed by the defendant? A. Yes—that was the day after I had been subpœnaed on the other side—the first time I was subpœnaed by Mr. Bremer, and the day after by Moens.

JOHN HOLLAMS . I am a partner in the firm of Marten, Thomas, and Hollams. I was attorney in the actions of Bremer against Moens, and Moens against Bremer—the action of Moens against Bremer was tried first—I received instructions from Mr. Bremer in presence of Mr. Moens respecting the agreement—it was ultimately drawn from those instructions—when it was said the terms were 150l. a week, it was not spoken of as a nominal sum, never—the terms were not discussed before me—they merely told me the agreement they had made—it was prepared in my own office, and I read it over in presence of Moens.

Q. When you came to where the amount of freight was filled in, was it filled in before you read it over? A. It was—it is not true that it was not filled in—it is not true that I asked what I was to fill in for the amount—Mr. Bremer did not say that he had not spoken about it—nothing of the kind—he did not say that they had not spoken about the amount of the freight—Mr. Bremer did not say it was no consequence, because he was quite sure to get the remainder of the purchase money, no such conversation took place.

Q. Did you say, "Suppose we put 150l.; is that fair? or any sum you like?" A. Nothing of the kind—no conversation took place at that time, and nothing was said about the 150l. being a nominal sum—the arrangement between themselves was not discussed in my presence—these matters were all put into my hands, and afterwards 75l. per week was charged—I put that down—I was present at the trial, and heard Mr. James open the case—I heard him read the letter reported to be sent on 21st Feb.—I afterwards saw this book put into the prisoner's hand, and heard the evidence he gave—the book was passed by me towards him, and I took the liberty to see that the letter was in the order of date—I believe the prisoner had the book in his hand, and I heard him make the statement he did—I heard the verdict given—it depended upon certain principles, and the figures were adjusted by the Chief Justice—I heard the prisoner state that he was not in England on the 22nd Feb.

Q. Was there a letter produced written by Lindeman? A. I cannot speak to that, at the time of the trial—it was produced before the arbitrators—it was directed to Bernslot Moens and Co., Harlingen; it is dated "London. 21st Feb., 1854"—it is from Lindeman to Moens—here is an indorsement on it—"Letter, London, 21st Feb., 1854; R 23, R. 25;" meaning

received on the 23rd, and responded to or answered on the 25th—this indorsement is the prisoner's writing—the letter appears to have gone by the Queen—it was written in Dutch—this is a translation: ("London, 21st Feb., 1854, per Queen. To Messrs. Bernelot Moens and Co., Harlingen. Gentle-men,—I have seen to-day, Mr. Bremer, and according to your orders communicated him that you decline to renew the agreement, as you think there is no chance to find the necessary funds to make up the purchase money for the Queen, and that you do not feel inclined to keep the Queen on the station for your account, on paying hire. It appeared, however, that Mr. Bremer was very well satisfied with the freight made this week by the steamer, and he is decided to run the boat, for instance, a few voyages more to Harlingen, for his own account and risk. With regard to the hire for the twenty-four voyages or weeks, I had also a conversation with him; and although he must confess that the hire stated in the agreement cannot be of any consequence, he would not take less than 75l. per week. I gave myself much trouble to have this enormous high price reduced, but Bremer's mind was not to be altered upon this point. I am sorry that you decline entirely upon this steamer mentioned to you by Mr. Bremer, in his letter last week, as it appears to me to be very suitable. Even if you would, the boat is not to be purchased now, and the chance lost. By the accounts of sale, you will perceive that the cattle dealers have lost this week much money. The market was very dull; my opinion, however, is, it will be better next week. Within a few days I hope to write you more about the other matter, and remain with kind respects, your obedient servant, J. H. W. Lindeman")—The original is indorsed in the handwriting of the prisoner, "London, 21st Feb., 1854, J. H. W. Lindeman; R 23, R 25"—from hearing what Moens swore, with reference to the 22nd, 23rd, and 25th of Feb., I caused inquiry to be made, and having learned the facts which have been deposed to to-day, I caused the hotel keeper to be subpœnaed—when the case was called on the next time, one point was referred to Mr. Davidson; and there was one that the Lord Chief Justice was to determine, that was the purchase of the Herne—that would turn the verdict either way—I was present when Moens was examined before the arbitrator—the books were produced, and amongst them were these two books—while Moens was being examined, I examined this book (looking at it)—Moens objected to my looking at the books, more particularly these two books—the prisoner more than once complained that I was looking at matters which did not relate to the transaction—there were some letters which in my opinion had reference to this transaction—there were several in Dutch; I said I could not read Dutch, and I wished I could—that was heard by the prisoner—the books were retained by the arbitrators—when I saw this book again it was not in the same state in which I had examined it before—a great many letters had been torn out—some of them undoubtedly were letters to which I had called attention in the presence of the prisoner—one letter which I had remarked, but had not called attention to, still remained—it is in the handwriting of Moens—it is in Dutch, and is dated the 4th of Sept., 1854—I looked carefully at the dates—this hole in the paper was not there when I turned over the letters.

(This letter being read, announced the receipt of Mr. Bremer's letter of the 2nd instant, and enclosed fifty guilders.)

Q. Tell us what the effect of this alteration is? A. Muntz is the word written over the hole—I believe this word was not there when I saw the book before.

Q. Look at page 80; was your attention called to that before and after

the book had been returned? A. Yes—I have examined it with minuteness, and submitted it to a person who is conversant with making these books—this appears to have been a leaf inserted—the arbitrator said the book was not to be taken away—it attracted my attention that the figures of the page did not correspond, that led me to refer to the index, and I find that this letter purports to be on an erasure—here is the erasure (showing it to the Jury)—supposing this letter to have been inserted between pages 79 and 81, there ought to have been a letter page 80—I examined the index, and found a letter indexed to page 86, which appears in its place in the book, but I also found a letter indexed to Austin and Co., page 86, with a small mark under the 6, which appears to have been altered—there is no corresponding letter to Austin—here are two letters indexed to page 86, one of which is not here.

COURT. Q. What is the peculiarity about the 80? A. That is a letter to Bremer, but the 80 is on an erasure—this letter in 80 appears to have been pasted in the book—here is paste or gum on it.

MR. BALLANTINE. Q. This other book was examined? A. Yes, it was—I think Moens was not examined before the arbitrator as to the freight account—the books were produced—I saw the entry, "Steam boat Queen"—the prisoner produced the account, and I traced it to the book—it appeared to be regular, but on referring to the bottom I saw some entries were on erasures, and some further erasures have been made in it since then—I turned over the book page by page, and found one page appeared to be thick, and I found page 76 went to page 78—I subsequently opened it in Moens' presence, and found this page had been pasted up very neatly—I found page 98 pasted up and there are entered the freight account, under the date of the 29th May—I heard the prisoner asked when he had received this account, and he said he had not received any till Aug., and the current account he said he had never received till Oct.—this account is the freight accounts, dated 29th May, and they were not visible till I opened the page—I heard him examined before the arbitrator—I had the hotel keeper there.

Cross-examined. Q. Bid not he, when examined before the arbitrator, say he had inquired, and wished to correct the statement) and that he went with Mr. Linklater directly to the hotel to inquire? A. Yes—this pasted together is an account between himself and the partners of the vessel—it is not an account of Mr. Bremer's—I have acted as attorney for the prisoner—this agreement had been come to between them together, they told me merely the result of it—when this letter book was produced at the trial, I looked at it, and the letter dated the 21st Feb. was at that time on page 80.

JOHN MOORE . I am superintendent of an account book manufactory, Messrs. Niessen and Parker's, Mark-lane—this book was made there—I have had experience in binding—some thousands of books pass through my hands.

Q. Look at this leaf inserted in page 80; was that leaf originally in that position? A. From the appearance of the paging I should say it was not originally in the book—a portion of the corner has been removed, leaving the two figures which ought to be hundreds—I should say this page has been 800 and something—the 8 is too far removed to be 80 originally, and on examining the book amongst the leaves of the 800, I have every reason to believe that the leaf here placed as 80 was originally 809—at page 80 here is a portion off the corner—79 and 81 appear to fit, and the 7 of the 79

comes on the C of the 80; that confirms my opinion—in page 809, the book not having been used to that part, it is easy to detect a leaf has been taken from there, and the corresponding leaf would be 826, and both 809 and 826 are gone—I find the first two sections of this book are sewn in with a thinner thread than the others—it appears these have been taken out and sewn in again, and page 80 comes between the two.

Cross-examined. Q. What is there about it that makes you say that this book was bought at your house? A. Our house is the only house that I know of that binds these copying letter books in this style—I am not positive it was bought at our house, but it has the appearance of our style of binding, and I do not know any house that makes books precisely like this—I cannot tell the year in which this book was sold—I bind myself—if I cut this book open, I expect I shall find a label in it, unless it may have been torn out, and here is no fly leaf, in consequence of their having taken the two sections out, and the first leaf of the alphabet has been pasted to the board—(The witness here cut ike cover open, and found the label inside)—we have manufactured books of this kind about eight years—you will find them all over the world.

HENRY GAMBLE . I am clerk to Mr. Davidson. I remember the arbitration, when Moens was examined—I remember his fetching away these books—he said he wanted to see the books, to look at them—they were afterwards returned.

GUILTY on all the points, except as to his not being in London, and not being on board the Queen more them, once.— Judgment respited.

THIRD COURT—Thursday, January 10th, 1856.

PRESENT—Mr. Justice CROWDER; Mr. Ald. WIRE; and Mr. Ald. LAWRENCE.

For Cases tried this day, see Surrey Cases.

NEW COURT.—Friday, January 11th 1856.


Before Mr. Recorder and the Fifth Jury.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-197
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment; Imprisonment

Related Material

197. ROBERT WAGHORN and JOHN BAKER , stealing 1 sack, value 1s. 6d., and 4 bushels of beans, value 1l. 4s.; the goods of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company.—2nd COUNT, receiving the same.

MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.

HENRY HOADLEY . I live at Dane Hill, Sussex, and am a corn dealer. On 5th Dec. I sent up twenty sacks of beans to the Bricklayers' Arms station—ten were my own sacks, and ten the farmer's sacks—five quarters were sold at 47s., and the beans in my sacks were sold at 24s. a sack—this sack is mine (looking at one), it has my name and address on it—I believe it to be one of the ten which I sent; I have brought another to compare with it—the beans in this sack I believe are the beans I sent, they are

similar to them—I was selling them At 24s. to a corn dealer at Hayward's. Heath station—there were two labels attached to the sacks, one on one set of ten, and one on the other.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Do beans vary much in prioe? A. Not very much—they might vary 2s. or 3s.—24s. was not the top price, there might be some higher—I nave not bought any at 20s. this year—there are four bushels in a sack—I believe they are never so low as 20s. a sack—I cannot tell what name was on the other ten sacks—I did not see them—the name of the com dealer they were directed to was Mr. Errey.

FREDERICK JOHNSON . I am a porter in the service of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company. I recollect on 10th Dec. receiving, at the Bricklayers' Arms station, twenty sacks of beans—several of them had the name of Hoadley on them—they were pat at the corner of No. 6 platform, near where I unloaded them, one beside the other—there were some sacks of wheat stacked on both sides of them—on 27th Dec. I counted the sacks of beans, and found nineteen, one was gone.

Cross-examined. Q. Was it on the 10th you placed them there? A. Yes—I saw nothing of them from the 10th to the 27th—a great portion of the sacks of wheat have been removed—they were on both sides of the beans.

JOSEPH COUGHTREY . I am a porter at the Bricklayers' Arms station. On 20th Dec. I saw the prisoner Waghorn there with a van—he came for twenty-four sacks of wheat—I helped to load the wheat—the distance between the wheat and the beans might be three or four yards; they were on the same platform which was continued between them, bat there was other grain between them—when Waghorn came with his van, he backed it up to the platform, so that we run the sacks with what we call a hand truck—I did not assist to put the whole twenty-four sacks in, I helped to put four sacks in—my fellow servant said, "What do you want to make four riders for? why do you leave this space at the back of the van? why do you not put one more sack in behind, instead of making four riders?" (riders are sacks that lie on the top of the sacks that stand up)—Waghorn said that his van load would be too heavy behind, or words to that effect—when they were all loaded, the space behind was still left—I went to sign for delivering them, and Cormack went to his work—I went to No. 10 platform, which is, very likely, fifty yards from the van—Waghorn came shortly after me, he signed for receiving them—he went away—I saw no more of him.

Cross-examined. Q. Have you got the delivery book here? A. No—I counted the sacks as they were shot—there were four who shot the twenty sacks, and three counted the other four—the wheat was shot, out of the sacks it came in, into the prisoner's master's sack—Waghorn did not bring the sacks himself—we shot four sacks in his presence, and twenty in his absence—he put twenty sacks into the van himself, and I and another porter put in the other, four—after we had shot the wheat into the prisoner's master's sacks, they lay on the platform till the prisoner himself pat them on the truck and wheeled them into the van—the other four were not wheeled, we rolled them to the tail of the van, and then took them in our arms and put them in—the prisoner was assisting.

COURT. Q. You put the four sacks on riders by his direction? A. Yes—he said if we put one more in the opening, it would be too heavy behind.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Will you undertake to swear that you did not shoot any beans? A. Yes; only wheat—the sack is put on the truck in a moment—it is made for the special purpose of carrying these sacks.

WILLIAM CORMACK . I am a porter at the Bricklayers' Arms station. I assisted in loading four sacks of the wheat on 20th Dec.—I can undertake to say that neither of them were beans—as soon as the wheat was put into the van I left—I remarked to Waghorn about leaving a space at the tail of his van—I told him there was a space that would hold one more sack, without putting them on the top—he said he wished to have the four sacks on the top.

Cross-examined. Q. How many sacks went across the van? A. Three—they were in rows of threes—when I put up the first of the four, that did not complete a row—the bottom of the van was complete, except this space for one more sack—the van would not have contained the whole twenty-four without putting some on the top—I cannot tell whether the prisoner said he wished the tail of his van not to be too heavy, or that he wished to have them on the top.

JOSIAH WOODHAM . I live at No. 11, Carlile-terrace, Pear Treerow, Bow; I assist my father, who carries on the business of a miller, at Bromley, in Middlesex. Waghorn was in our service as a carman—Baker was formerly in my cither's service, as a flour dresser—he is now a corn dealer, and has a small shop nearly opposite my residence—on 22nd Dec. I received some information about Waghorn, and on that evening my father spoke to him in my presence—he asked him where the sack of beans was that he had to dispose of—Waghorn said he had had no beans—my father said he knew he had a sack of beans to dispose of, and he must tell him where they were—Waghorn said, "They are at Mr. Baker's"—he then said, "I will tell you the whole truth about it; I found them on my waggon on Thursday last, as I was coming home from the Willow-walk (the Bricklayers' Arms station)"—he said he made the discovery as he was coming down the Mile End-road—he said he did not know how they came on his waggon, but he believed they must have been put on at the station—my father said he must know whether they were put on at the station or not—he said he did not know—my father asked him whether they were in the body of the waggon, or thrown on the top—he said they were in the body of hie waggon—my father said he must see the beans; and my father, and I, and Waghorn, then went over to Baker's—my father asked him to show us the sack of beans that Waghorn had left there on Thursday—Baker said he had not got them—my father asked him where they were—Baker said, "I do not know"—Mrs. Baker, Baker's mother, then came in, and said that Waghorn had left the sack of beans there on Thursday, stating that Mr. Baker had asked him to bring them for him from London, and that they were left in Baker's absence—my father then asked Baker whether he had sold them—he said that he had not—my father asked him whether he had removed them, or ordered them to be removed—he said, "No"—my father then said he must know what had become of them—Baker then said, "Mr. Samuels has them, of Robin Hood-lane, Poplar;" and he said that he would accompany my father over to Mr. Samuel's to see the beans—we left the shop, and shortly after Baker came over to my father—as we were leaving the shop, I heard some conversation, and Baker said to Waghorn, "Did you not say you would take 15s. for the beans?"

Cross-examined. Q. You have known Baker a long time? A. I have known him about twelve months—I believe he was with my father for two or three years—I have heard my father say he had a good character—he left my father's to go into business for himself, a corn and flour dealer—I never had any conversation with him about beans before that day—my

father had heard what Waghorn said, which induced him to go to Baker's—it was Baker's mother who said they were left in his absence—I have known Waghorn about twelve months—we knew nothing against him—he came from Mr. Gharrington's.

BENJAMIN SAMUELS . I live in Robinhood-lane, Poplar, and am a corn dealer. On 22nd Dec. Baker came to my house between 11 and 12 o'clock—he said, "I have a sack of old beans to sell"—I said, "What is about the price, Mr. Baker?—he said they were 15s. or 16s., I do not know which—I said, "Do you think my pigs would eat them?"

COURT. Q. Are beans better when old than new? A. If beans are in good condition, old ones are best, but from the price, I thought they were inferior beans.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. What did he say when you asked if the pigs would eat them? A. He said, "Yes, first rate"—I said that I would send for them—he said, "You shall have them if they are not sold and gone"—I sent my man Blyth for them in the afternoon, with one of my own sacks, and he brought them back—these are the beans he brought—I went and looked at them, and said, "Mr. Baker could not have looked at these"—they must have been very cheap at 15s. or 16s.—I gave about a peck of them to my pigs—this was on Saturday afternoon—Mr. Woodham and Baker caine to my house on Saturday night, about half past 8 o'clock—Mr. Woodham asked me whether I had bought any beans of Mr. Baker that Saturday—I said, "Yes"—Mr. Woodham said, "Where aw they?—I said, "Here they are"—they stood on another sack, near the door—Mr. Woodham said, "Did you go to Mr. Baker, or did Mr. Baker come to you?—I said, "Mr. Baker came to me"—Mr. Woodham said, "Mr. Baker sold you these beans?—I said, "Yes"—Mr. Woodham said to Mr. Baker, "Is that true, John?"—Mr. Baker said, "Yes"—Mr. Woodham then said to me, "Take care of those beans for me till Monday"—I said, "I will"—on the Monday morning Mr. Baker called on me for the money for the sack of beans I had of him on the 17th—I said to him, "How came you to send me these beans (meaning the last sack)?"—"Why," he said, "I wanted to get rid of them"—he then told me that Mr. Woodham's carman had left them at his house when he was not at home—he said they were not Mr. Woodham's, they came from the railway—I said, "Why not have gone to Mr. Woodham, and told him that his carman had left a sack of beans there, and if he did not take them away you would put them into the road, or something of that"—Mr. Baker said, "That is what I ought to have done"—Waghorn called on me on Wednesday, the day after Christmas Day, and said that Mr. Woodham told him he might take the beans back to the railway station—I said, "Have you got a written order, signed by Mr. Woodham?—he said, "No," and I would not let them go—I said, "Did Mr. Woodham tell you this morning that you were to take them away? come, let us have the truth of it"—he said, "No"—I had had a great many dealings with Mr. Baker before—he is a corn dealer.

COURT. Q. How long have you been a corn dealer? A. Nearly five years—when I saw these beans, the value of them was about 24s.

Cross-examined. Q. Was there full measure? A. I did not measure them—my sack was rather a big one—I should think it would hold five bushels—the sack looked as if it had four bushels in it.

WILLIAM BLYTH . I am in the service of Mr. Samuels. On 22nd Dec. I was sent with a sack to fetch some beans from Mr. Baker's—I saw Mr.

Baker—he helped me to shoot the beans out of a sack into my sack, and I took them to Mr. Samuels.

JOHN CARPENTER . I am an inspector of the R division, and am attached to the Brighton Railway. On the night of 26th Dec. I went to Mr. Woodham's premises—I found Waghorn there—I told him I was a police officer, and had come from the Brighton Railway respecting a sack of beans he had stolen from there, when he was over there on Thursday last—he said that he knew nothing about them, and did not know they were on his waggon until he was in Mile End-road—I said, "It is no use your saying that; if you found them on your waggon by accident you would have brought them home to your master, and not have taken them and sold them to Mr. Baker, who has since sold them to Mr. Samuels, of Poplar"—he made no reply—I said that he must go with me to Mr. Baker's, and I and Richards and Waghorn went to Baker's—I did not find Baker there—I went in search of him, and found him at the Five Bells public house, at Bromley—I called him out, and told him I was a police officer, and that he must consider himself in custody for receiving a sack of beans from Mr. Woodham's carman, Waghorn—Baker said, "He left them at my house when I was not at home"—I said, "But you have since sold them to Mr. Samuels; if you had done as you ought to have done, knowing that Wag horn was in Mr. Woodham's employ, you would have communicated with Mr. Woodham directly"—he made no reply—I took him to his own house, where Waghorn was—I told Waghorn he was charged with stealing, and Baker with receiving, and they must go to the station with me—Baker said, "Yery well, come along"—I got this sack of beans from Mr. Samuels, and produce them, and also a sample of the beans in the other nineteen sacks at the station.

THOMAS RICHARDS . I am a police constable at the railway station. I took Waghorn, with the last witness, on 26th Dec.—on the way to the station Waghorn said he should like to see his wife—I told him I was going to search his house—he said "What for?"—I told him, to look for the sack the beans were in—he said, "It is no use for you to go there, it is not there; I either took it back to the Bricklayers' Arms station or it is in the van at Mr. Woodham's"—he said, "It is the van that is under the shed, with the wheel off"—he said it was the one that was at the Bricklayers' Arms, and had broken down—I went there, and found this sack, which has Mr. Hoadley's name on it—it was on the seat of the van—he said that it was the railway porter's place to count the sacks as they shot out, and said, "I don't know whether I put it on or they put it on, and that is the truth."

THOMAS PETER ERREY . I am the person who was to receive these twenty sacks of beans, and I only received nineteen—I was to pay the carriage—I am not prepared to say how much that would be.

MR. RIBTON to FREDERICK JOHNSON. Q. Did you make any entry of these sacks of beans? A. Not that I am aware of—I put them on the platform, and counted them—on the 27th I found there were only nineteen—I did not book them.

(Waghorn's statement before the Magistrate was here read, as follows:—"I did not know the sack of beans was in my waggon, till I saw it there in the Mile End-road.") (The prisoners received good characters.)

WAGHORN— GUILTY of stealing. Aged 37.— Confined Twelve Months.

BAKER— GUILTY of receiving.— Confined Twelve Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-198
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

198. JAMES DAVIS, HENRY MOYS , and JOHN BASTOW , unlawfully, and by night, having in their possession, 11 picklocks, 1 wrench, and other implements of housebreaking.

MR. MEETCALFE conducted the Prosecution.

WALTER HOLMES (policeman, F 50). At a quarter before 1 o'clock, on Tuesday, 11th Dec., I was on duty in Newcastle-street, Strand—it was between the night of the 10th and the morning of the 11th—I saw Bestow looking up at the front of Mr. Mumford's house, who is a corndealer, in Newcastle-street—he was standing on the opposite side of the way—I went round to the back of the Olympic, and there met Davis coming towards Newcastle-street—he was, perhaps, about twenty-five yards from Bastow—Davis looked at me very hard—I went a few yards further, and I saw Hoys standing up in the path, leaning against the theatre, in the dark—he came out and followed Davis, and they entered Newcastle-street—Moys and Davis joined, and went down on one side of the street, and Bastow on the other—they went as far as the Strand—they all three joined together, and went down the Strand towards Temple-bar—I saw another officer, and he and I followed them till we got within three or four yards of them—they then all turned round and looked at us, and all set off running in different directions—I was in uniform—they were in conversation when they separated—Moys ran up a small court opposite the White Hart, between Holywell-street and the Strand; I followed and seized him—he asked me to allow him to stop for a needful purpose, which I did—I brought him into the Strand—we were about a yard of a yard and a half from the houses when he made a sudden spring back, placing his hand to his coat pocket behind—I put my hand behind him, and caught his hand in his right hand coat pocket—he was then over an area that projects a little distance out on the pavement—I found in that pocket 11 skeleton keys, and picklocks, wrapped in this bit of rag (produced)—he said, "I suppose you are satisfied now"—my brother officer came back, and I said, "Take hold of him"—I then found these two instruments in separate pockets, which will open the lock of a street door when the key is in it, by turning the key round—I also in another pocket found this wrench to take nuts off, and in another pocket these matches—Moys said, "I can give a good account of these"—I told him I should take him to the station, and he might account there—he said, "I was going to do a job for Mr. Griffith, the coffee house keeper in Covent garden"—he was asked where he lived, and he would not tell—I have made inquiries, and there is no such person on the division—I cannot find such a person near Covent-gardan—Bastow was not taken that night, but on the 13th—I saw him in Horsemonger-lane—he saw me and turned back—I followed and took him into custody—I told him the charge, he said I was mistaken—I am quite sure he is the man—I told him I should take him for being concerned with Moys and Davis in having house breaking instruments in their possession—he refused to give his address, and said he was a sailor.

Cross-examined by MR. PAYNE. Q. It was at one o'clock in the morning you saw Bastow by himself? A. Yes; I went round and saw him again, walking down Newcastle-street, which comes into the Strand, the carnage way to the Olympic—the prisoners went about fifty yards along the Strand before they separated, to opposite Surrey-street—Bastow went towards Temple-bar—on the 13th I saw Bastow in Horsemonger-lane, about 3 o'clock in the afternoon—he was coming up the lane—he saw me and turned back—I followed him some distance before I overtook him—I followed him to

a shop, where a man who was with him went in—I believe it was a stationer's shop.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Do you know Hoys to be a locksmith? A. No; I saw a vice a this house, but it was fitted up in a place that might be called a coal hole—I never saw him at work—he said he was a locksmith—I should judge by the place the vice was in, that no man could work at it, because it was in the dark—I went just after dinner—Moys said he was going to do a job for Mr. Griffith, in Covent-garden—I went to look for it—I know every coffee shop there—these instruments are used by locksmiths most decidedly, in case any one loses a key—I do not mean to say that there is not a person named Griffith in Covent-garden—I did not look in the "Directory."

MR. METCALFE. Q. Did you make inquiries amongst the other members of your division of police? A. Yes, I did—the inspector will tell you the same—I do not find locksmiths going out at 1 o'clock in the morning unless they are called out.

JURY. Q. Did you see any forge at Move's house? A. No; I saw a few files, very rusty—his house is No. 12, Charles-street, Harper-street, New Kent-road—there was no anvil, nor bellows, nor forge—there were a few old files in a box under the vice—that was the address Moys gave me—Davis gave a false address, at No. 19, James-street, Stepney—I went and inquired, and no such street could be found there—I afterwards found he lived in the same house with Hoys.

WILLIAM COLEMAN (policeman, F 48). I was on duty on the morning of the 11th—I saw A. 307 and Davis run up Strand-lane—I went up the Strand, and saw him run out of Strand-lane, and by St. Mary's Church—I saw his hand go, and heard something rattle on the pavement, which sounded like a piece of iron—I saw him fling something away—I could not see what it was—I overtook him at the corner of Drury-court—I did not lose sight of him—as I was taking him to the station, he told me not to hold him so tightly, and he ran away again, but I took him, and took him to the station—I went back to where I heard something flung away, and found thin dark lantern—but this was not exactly at the place where I saw him fling away something, and for that reason I know it was not this that I heard—I found this in Strand-lane, a place where I had seen the prisoner pass from.

JAMES VAUGHAN (policeman, A 307). About 1 o'clock on 11th Dec. Holmes spoke to me, and I saw the three prisoners walking down the Strand—we followed them—they separated, and I ran after Davis, and sprang my rattle—I could not catch him—I called to the last witness—I lost sight of Davis at the end of Norfolk-street—I am certain he is the same man—I saw him again the same night.

THOMAS GIBSON (policeman, F 151). I was acting gaoler at the station when Moys and Davis were brought in—they were locked up in the cells, and I heard Davis say to Moys, "Halloo, old chap, what are you locked up for?"—Moys said, "Only for having some picklock keys in my possession"—Moys then asked Davis what he was in for, if it was for stealing a coat—Davis said that they could not do anything with him, for they found nothing on him—soon after Moys said to Davis, "I thought this would be a bad night's job, and I told Jack so; Jack has got off, and I am blowed if we two aint screwed up"—Davis replied, "They cannot do anything with rue, they found nothing on me, lor I threw the jemmy and the dark lantern away."

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Where were you when heard this? A. Close to the cell door—the door was shut, I was inside the passage, into which the cells open—there was a door between me and the prisoners—I was not standing there for the purpose of hearing what I could, I was on duty—I was standing still, a yard or two from the cell door—I was not more than that from the first cell that Davis was in—he was the nearest to me—I knew which cell he was in—there is a door separating their cells—they could not see each other—there is a little hole in each door—they were hallooing to one another—they were a yard or two from each other.

COURT. Q. Is it your duty to visit the passage into which the cells open, from time to time? A. Yes.

ROBERT M'KENZIE (police inspector, F). On the morning of 11th Dec. the prisoners were brought in, about half past 1 o'clock—Moys was brought in by the first witness, charged with having housebreaking instruments in his possession—Moys said they were instruments used in his business, and he was a locksmith and bellhanger—I said, "Are these two used in your business?"—he said, "Yes," they were gas keys that he used—Holmes said that Moys was in company with two other men, who ran away—while this was going on, Davis was brought in by Coleman, and Coleman said, "This is the other man, Sir"—Moys said, "So help me God, I never saw him before in my life; I don't know the man"—Hoys gave No. 12, Charles-street as his address, and Davis gave No. 19, James-street, Mileend—on the 14th, I said to Davis, "You know the address you gave me was false, there is no such street in Mile-end"—he said, "Well, you know where"—I said, "Will you now give your address?"—he said, "No. 12, Charles-street".

PRISCILLA LEWIS . My husband is a constable of the M division; I live in Charles-street, Harper-street, Bermondsey. I know all the prisoners—Moys and Davis live at No. 12, I live at No. 13, on the opposite side of the way—I have seen Bastow with Moys and Davis repeatedly, going into the house and coming out—I might have seen him three or four times.

MARTHA MARIA DOBELL . I live in Charles-street, opposite No. 12—Moys and Davis live at No. 12—I do not know Bastow.

(MESSRS. PAYNE and RIBTON contended that there mutt be a personal possession, of the implements by each prisoner, in order to support the indictment. The COURT considered that there might be a joint possession, but would consider the case if it became necessary.)

DAVIS— GUILTY . Aged 25.

MOYS— GUILTY . Aged 31.

Judgment Respited.



7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-199
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation; Guilty > with recommendation

Related Material

199. JOHN BASSETT and THOMAS EARLE , unlawfully obtaining 1l., the moneys of Hannah Cuffley, by false pretences.

MR. HORRT conducted the Prosecution.

NANCY WALFORD . I live with Mrs. Hannah Cuffley, a widow, of West Ham—Earle was in her service—on 2nd Jan. he brought in this bill—(produced, marked A) it is a delivery note for a sack of chaff (Read: "Mrs. Cuffley, to Wm, Coleby, sack chaff, 4s. 8s.; 2 bushels oats, 10s.; 4 trusses straw, 3s. 8d.: 18s. 4d. Paid A. Bassett")—I saw Mrs. Cuffley give Earle

a sovereign, he brought in 2s. and she owed him 4d.—he took the bill away with the sovereign, and brought it back afterwards—I cannot say whether it had Bassett's signature when it was first brought.

PAMELA BUTCHER . I am servant to Mrs. Cuffley, and know Bassett—he came to my mistress's house, on 6th Dec., with a horse and cart, and gave me this bill (B) (Road: "M. Cuffley, to Wm. Coleby, sack of chaff, 4s. 8d.; 2 bushels oats, 10s.; 4 trusses straw, 3s. 8d: 18s. 4d. Jack Bassett")—my mistress gave me a sovereign which I handed to Bassett, he wrote this receipt, and gave me 1s. 8d. change.

Cross-examined by MR. PAYNE. Q. How do you know that this is the bill he gave you? A. Because he receipted it "Jack Bassett," and I saw him write it—we had no other.

THOMAS GAZE . I am a clerk in the employment of William Coleby, of Stratford, Bassett was his carman—Mrs. Cuifiey was a customer of his—on 2nd Jan. I made out this bill, marked A, to Mrs. Cuffley, for "1 sack of chaff, 4s. 8d."—I wrote that, and no more, and gave it to Bassett in that state—only one sack of chaff was sent that day by Bassett to Mrs. Cuffley, the other words and figures I know nothing about—when Bassett returned he paid me 4s. 8d., as the money he had received—this other bill, marked B, is in Mr. Coleby's writing, it was for 14s. 8d., but something else has been added—Bassett paid me 14s. 8d. upon it when he came borne—I did not see it before it left the shop, and do not know in whose writing this "4 trusses straw" is; but it is not my master's—Bassett took a sack of chaff, and two bushels of oats to Mrs. Cuffley's on 6th Dec.—to the best of my knowledge he did not take a truss of straw.

Cross-examined. Q. What is your work? A. In the shop—they take the articles out of the warehouse; I have the delivery of all the goods—if the cart stood at the door I should see it—the things are brought by the carman from the warehouse to the cart—Bassett's employment is to drive the horse and cart—there is another person besides myself and Bassett in Mr. Coleby's employment—I did not see this truss of straw go away that day—Bassett has been in the employ better than two years and a half, he has borne a very good character.

COURT. Q. Did you see the cart go on 2nd Jan.? A. Yes, and saw what was in it, but saw no truss of straw; I should have seen it if it had been there.

THOMAS NAUNTON CUFFLEY . I reside with my mother, at Upton—in consequence of something I heard, I spoke to Earle about this bm, A—I was at breakfast, he passed in the passage, and I called him in and asked him whether the goods had come in from the corn dealer's on Wednesday—he said that they had—I said, "What do they consist of?"—he said, "A sack of chaff, two bushels of oats, and four trusses of straw"—I asked him if he had received them from the man, he stated that he did—after breakfast, I went into the garden, called Earle again, and said, "There is something very strange about this; Mr. Coleby says he did not supply these goods, let me see them"—he took me to the chaise house, pointed to the corn bin, and said, "There are the oats; here is part of the chaff, and the remainder is up in the loft"—we went up into the loft, and he showed me the remainder, and four trusses of straw—I asked him if they were the identical goods which came on Wednesday, he said that they were—I said, "It is very strange, are you perfectly sure it is all right?" he said, "Yes," and that we had received value for our money—I am not in a condition to say whether what he stated was correct.

JOHN WILLEN MANNING (police-sergeant, K 5). From information I received from Mr. Cuffley, I went, last Saturday evening, to Mr. Coleby's shop, and while I was speaking to Mr. Gazes, Bassett came in—we were at that time talking about these bills, and drew Bassett's attention to them—he said, "That is my writing," pointing to the signature to both bills; "but that above," pointing to the alteration, "I know nothing about"—I took him into custody, and told him the charge—he said that he knew nothing about it—I then went to Mrs. Cuffley's with these bilk, and saw Earle—I asked him what he had received of Mr. Coleby's man on the 2nd of the present month—he said, "The regular allowance"—I said, "What is that?" he paused for a time, and said, "Chaff, oats, and straw"—I said, "And what on 6th Dec., 1855?"—he said, "The same; chaff oats, and straw"—I asked him if he was sure, he replied, "Yes"—I said that I should take him on a charge of obtaining, by false pretences, sums of money from his mistress—he again paused for a time, and said, "I am very sorry, it is the first time I have ever been in trouble, I only received the chaff," pointing to this bill of 2nd Jan; and pointing to the other bill, "the chaff and oats; and I should not have done it had I not been persuaded to do so by Bassett. I have always borne a good character before"—pointing to the bill, A, he said, "I told him when he brought the first bill that I would have no more of it; it is done now, let it go; we divided the money between us."

(The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate were here read as follows: Earle says: "I am extremely sorry; it is the first offence I ever committed." Bassett says: "I have nothing to say about the matter, except that what he told the policeman is all false.")

Earle's Defence. I did not alter the bills, or do any writing; it is my first offence, and I hope you will be lenient.


EARLE— GUILTY . Aged 36.

Recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor.— Confined Nine Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-200
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment; Imprisonment

Related Material

200. SAMUEL KELLY and JOHN COLLINS , stealing 2 metal tape, and 2 pieces of lead, value 6s. 4d.; the goods of William Gore, fixed to a building.

MR. HORRY conducted the Prosecution.

JOSEPH BENTON (policeman, K 381). On the evening of 26th Dec. I was on duty, about 7 o'clock, in High-street, Stratford, with Collins, a policeman, and saw the prisoners together—I watched them from the dark side of the way, and they were on the other—we then removed our capes, crossed the road, and followed the prisoners to Shea's marine store shop—they had some conversation outside the shop—it was shut np, it being boxing day—Collins then left Kelly, and went on the other side of the way—Kelly pulled the shop bell—the door was opened, he went in, and I followed—I saw him hand three brass tape, with some leaden pipe attached to them, to Mr. Shea—I asked Kelly how he came by them—he said, "I shall not (or will not) tell you"—I was asking Mr. Shea some questions, and Kelly escaped—I directly afterwards apprehended Collins at the Bird in Hand public house, near Mr. Shea's—I told him the charge, and he said that he had not seen Kelly, and had not been with him that evening—the prisoners were remanded next day, and I made inquiries, and found that the taps came from Nos. 2, 3, and 4, Waddington-place, Windmill-lane, Stratford—I fitted them to the water butts there, and found that they corresponded at each bouse—I saw footmarks in the gardens of No. 2 and No. 4, and very slight ones in No. 3—the impressions were of two

persons—I went to the gaol, got the prisoner's shoes, compared the impressions, and found that they corresponded—I made, in company with sergeant Manning, these three plaster of Paris impressions of the footmarks (produced)—Kelly lives with his mother, at the back of the houses from whence the taps were lost, and Collins lives close by.

Cross-examined by MR. PLATT. Q. How far is the Bird in the Hand from Mr. Shea's? A. From 100 to 200 yards—these are the taps, and these are the pieces of pipe which I cut from the water butts, but they have been knocked by the tenants, to keep the water from flowing out—they fit the taps, but some of them have been knocked more than the others—the plaster of Paris impressions were made on the second day—the soil was damp—I poured the plaster into the footmarks, and pulled it out with a piece of wood—I afterwards washed it—here are stones sticking on it now—these shoes (Collins's) tit this impression—I apprehended Collins on the second day—I have taken impressions from one foot in each yard—I say on my oath that this boot formed the model from which this cast is taken—these are Kelly's boots (produced).

MR. HORRY. Q. Were the pipes battered up before you cut the pieces off? A. Yes, before I examined them.

THOMAS COLLINS (policeman, K 74). I was with Ben ton, and saw the prisoners separate—I watched Kelly into a marine store shop—I saw Benton go and look at the taps, and Kelly ran out—I caught him, and we both fell violently on the ground—I took him to the station.

JOSEPH SHEA . I keep a marine store shop in High-street, Stratford. On Wednesday evening, 26th Dec., Kelly came and offered me these three taps—while he was doing so Benton came in—I asked Kelly where he got them—he said that he bought them.

HABBIETT KNIGHT . I am the wife of James Knight, of No. 2, Waddington-place, Stratford. On Thursday morning, 27th Dec., about half past seven o'clock, I missed the tap from our water butt—it was safe as long as it was light the afternoon before—Benton showed me this tap next morning—it is the same—Mr. Gore is our landlord.

Cross-examined. Q. How do you know the tap? A. It is rather white here, and it has a "W" on it.

CATHERINE SPARKES . I am the wife of Nathaniel Sparkes, of No. 3, Waddington-place, Stratford. On Thursday morning, about half-past 7 o'clock, I missed the tap from our water butt, and sent information to the police—it was safe at the close of the evening of the 26th—this is it.

Cross-examined. Q. Is there any mark on it? A. I know it, because it will only turn one way, and I fastened it to the water butt with my own hands.

WILLIAM GORE . I am a plumber, and am the landlord of these houses. These are my taps, and were attached to the back of my houses.

(The prisoners statements before the Magistrate were here read, as follows:—Kelly says: "A man at Stratford told me to take them, and sell them."Collins says: "I know nothing about it.")

JURY to THOMAS COLLINS. Q. Was the shoe put into the footmark before you took the impression? A. Certainly not, but they were in my possession at the time—the constable fetched them from the gaol.

(Ketty received a good character; but the police stated that he had been in custody before, but discharged, and that he was the associate of thieves.)

KELLY— GUILTY .*† Aged 23.— Confined Six Months.

COLLINS— GUILTY .*† Aged 21— Confined Three Months


Before Mr. Recorder.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-201
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown

Related Material

201. LEONARD FARRANT, JOSEPH BARLEY , and JONATHAN FERRIER , stealing 1 sack and 4 bushels of oats, value 10s. the goods of William Rutley.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

HARRY DUNCAN . I live at Sydenham, and work for a grocer there. On Saturday night, 22nd Dec., about twenty minutes to 12 o'clock, I was passing along Wells-road, Sydenham, on my way home—I saw the prisoner Earley lying on a sack at the end of the bowling green, by the tarred fence of the Fox and Hounds public house—I saw a man jump over the fence, but could not see who it was—he picked up the sack, and Earley held it up behind—I saw something fall from it, and Earley said that he could not keep the sawdust in—they went up the Wells-road with the sack—I afterwards spoke to Bradshaw, and went with him to the spot where I had seen the sack lying, and saw about a peck of black oats upon the ground.

WILLIAM BRADSHAW (policeman, R 161.) On Saturday night, 22nd Dec., about twenty minutes to 12 o'clock, I saw two men with a sack full of something, at the back of the Fox and Hounds public house, Sydenham—I went round to see what they had, but before I could get round they escaped—I met Duncan, who showed me about a peck of oats on the ground—I picked some of them up, and put them into a handkerchief—my sergeant came up on horseback—I followed him up the Wells-road—he galloped on before, and stopped some men, but I was not close enough to see what they were doing, but went and found them with the sergeant in the Beehive public house—he delivered Earley over to me, and they were taken to the station—I went, by the sergeant's orders, to Ferrierr's house, the sergeant took him into custody, and I found this sack (produced) in his back garden, behind a shed, there were no oats in it.

Cross-examined by MR. LILLEY. Q. How far is Ferrier's house from where you saw Earley and Farrant stopped by the sergeant? A. About 100 yards, and about 200 yards from the Beehive—I know Ferrier's premises—a hedge parts his garden from the road, but there is no fence that I am aware of—his stables are in the garden—he is a carman—I do not know how many horses he has.

GEORGE SOLE (police sergeant, P 41). On Saturday night, 22nd Dec., I saw Bradshaw, and from what he told me, I went up Wells-road, at the corner of the Springfields, and met Farrant and Earley coming back down the Springfields, in a direction from Ferrier's house, and about 200 yards from it—I was on horseback—I said, "Halloo, my lads! what are you up to here?"—they made no reply, but began to reel about as though they were drunk—I said, "What are you doing here?"—Farrant said, "I have been up to Jack Ferrier's for a night's lodging; he has promised me a night's lodging, but now he will not give it to me"—they then reeled along till they came to the Beehive public house, and went in—I got off my horse, went in, and took them into custody, telling them they were charged on suspicion of stealing a sack of oats—Earley said, "I know nothing about the oats; you have had me two or three times before, but I always got over it, and so I shall this"—I then called the constable, gave Earley in custody, and took Farrant myself—on the road to the station Farraut said, "I am not going to get myself in trouble about Earley; I was coming up the Wells-road,

and saw him with a sack on the ground he asked me to help him up, and I did so; the sack came up some of the oats came out, and I lent him my shoelace to tie the sack, and we took them to jack Ferrier's"—I then took them to the station and went to Ferrier's house—he was at supper—it was about a quarter or twenty minutes past 12 o'clock—he is a carman house adjoins another cottage—I told him I had come for the oats that Farrant and Barley had brought—he said, "What oats? I have not had any oats"—I said, "It is a serious charge, and I should advise you to be careful what you say, as I may have to make use of your words for or against you"—he said, "Well, there are a few oats in the bin which they brought"—he went with me to the stable, and showed me the oats, and they corresponded—there were from three to four bushels—I told him that I must take possession of them, and asked him where the sack was—he said that he did not know, but he would lend me a sack to put the oats in—when we had got about two bushels in, he said to his wife, "Let us see, how many were there in before these were shot?"—she replied, that there were "a goodish few"—I told him they appeared to be the same oats, and that I should take possession of the lot, which I did—I took him to the station, and asked him what he had given for the oats—he said, "Nothing;" nor was he to do so that he knew of—this (produced) is a sample, they are rather a particular sort of oats.

Cross-examined. Q. You have been stationed there some years? A. About five years—I have known Ferrier very nearly all that time—he has been a resident in the neighbourhood very nearly all that time, and has borne a good character in the neighbourhood—it was about a quarter of an hour between my receiving information from Bradshaw to the time I took Earley and Farrant—it is about a quarter of a mile from the Fox and Hounds to Ferrier's premises—his stable is at the end of the road, and is bounded by a small low hedge from the road—I believe there was a horse in the stable—I made no memorandum at the time, but I did two hours afterwards, at 2 o'clock in the morning—I have not got it here—Bradshaw showed some oats to me—these oats are not clean, they have a great deal of chaff with them—I have seen plenty of black oats before—I found the stable door on the jar—Ferrier said, "Well, there are a few oats in the bin, which they brought"—the name of a person of whom some oats were purchased was not mentioned; it was ten minutes or a quarter of an hour afterwards, but not at the time we were speaking—he said that he had bought some black oats of two people—I asked him who, and he made no reply—I will not undertake to say that what he said was not "Well, there are some oats which I have bought, in the bin," but I do not think I could I have been so much deceived, I was only a few yards from him—he offered to lend me a sack, helped to fill it, and afforded me all the assistance he could—he carried it part of the way to the station, and the constable the other part—a sack holds four bushels.

WILLIAM RUXLEY . I am a fly proprietor of Sydenham—I occupy a stable in the yard of the Fox and Hounds public house—on Saturday morning, the 22nd Dec., I had some sacks of black oats safe in a loft above my stable—there were sixteen sacks altogether, but I cannot say how many were black oats, they were not separate—I was called up on Saturday night between 12 and 1 o'clock, by the police, and found that one sack of oats had been shot in the bin by my lad, and another had been taken away—a sack and some black oats were shown to me by the police—the oats corresponded with mine, I have a sample here—the sack has the same mark on it as that

which I missed from the loft, "G. Stemp, Prixton—I believe it is to be mine—from the stable alley a person could put his hand through the door and turn the button.

Cross-examined. Q. All your sacks were marked in the name way? A. No, some came from a Sydenham farmer—Stemp is a corn dealer—I cannot tell how many sacks of black oats I had.

COURT to WILLIAM BRADSHAW. Q. How did the men escape? A. They must have got over the fence, and I had to go round to the gate of the bowling green, where they were, and when I got in they were gone—I did not see them run.

FERRIER received a good character. NOT GUILTY


EARLEY— GUILTY .** Aged 18.

Confined Six Months

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-202
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

202. PATRICK FITZGERALD, CHARLES FIELD , and EDWARD NOBLE , unlawfully having in their possession 55 lbs. weight of mixed metal nails, and 7 lbs. weight of pieces of copper, all stamped with the broad arrow, neither of them being contractors.

MESSRS. ATHERTON and SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution.

GEORGE CHAPMAN (policeman, R 208). On the evening of 21st Dec, I was on duty in plain clothes at Deptford, and between 6 and 7 o'clock, as I was passing the shop of the prisoner Noble's father, I saw the prisoners in the shop—I looked in at the door and saw something wrapped up in an apron on the weighing machine, which is not on the counter—the three prisoners were standing round it—they were in the shop about two minutes—I saw Noble take the bundle and carry it into the back room—I then went in, followed by Turner, who was with me—I asked the lad Noble to produce that bundle which he had just taken into the back room—he brought it to me in the same state in which I had seen it in the scale (he had some communication with his father, who was fitting in the back room with a friend)—I asked him how he got it—he said that two of Mr. Smith's men, the contractor for the Dockyard, brought it—I opened it, it contained 55 lbs. weight of composition nails, and 7 lbs. weight of old sheet copper (produced)—these nails bear the mark of the broad arrow—there is the head of a nail in this copper, which has the mark of the broad arrow—this other piece of copper also has it—the nails are some of them marked on the shank—I asked Noble if he did not know that it was government property—he said that he did not, for he had not examined it—I told him he must keep it till I had made some inquiries about it—next day I went to Deptford Dockyard and saw Field with Mr. Smith's cart—I apprehended him, and told him that he was charged with taking a quantity of nails to Mr. Noble's shop on the previous night, in company with Fitzgerald; he said that he did so, and it was a lot that he had picked out of the dust from time to time, threw it by under Fitzgerald's horse's manger, and took it there to sell—I took him to the station—I intimated to Noble that his attendance would be required at the police station, and he attended voluntarily.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Was he examined on the first occasion as a witness? A. No, but he was taken there for the purpose—the weighing machine was about three yards from the door—there was a good gas light in the shop; I could see perfectly—Noble was not behind the counter; he was near the weighing machine, with the men—Noble's father was in the back room—he did not come in afterwards, or I should have seen him—the younger prisoner took it in—he told me that he found it in

the dirt, which he was employe to remove—I looked in the dirt which had been shot that morning and found a nail—whether Turner or I asked the question of Noble I cannot say, but he said that they had weighed the property and there was 1l. 12s. 6d. worth, but that it had not been paid for—I am sure it was not Noble's father who said that, but I believe he was presert—Turner was Present—when I asked Noble who brought this parcel there I believe his words were, "Two of Mr. Smith's men, that bring the stuff out of the Dockyard—by his mentioning the Dockyard, I knew who he meant by Mr. Smith.

COURT. Q. Was any reason given why they had not paid for it? A. Not at that time—I do not believe that the parcel was opened till it was examined by me.

JOSIAH TURNER (policeman). I was with Chapman on this evening—I looked into the shop, and saw something on the weighing machine—I saw several persons in the shop, two or three of whom were females, and after a bit Fitzgerald came out, and after him, Field—I saw Noble at the right side of the weighing machine, and the other two prisoners on the left, but was not near enough to hear any conversation between them—two or three minutes elapsed before they came out—I then followed Chapman into the shop, went up to the weighing machine, and Chapman, and Noble, and his father, were conversing—Chapman said, "You must know it is all Government metal"—Noble said that he was not aware of that—Chapman asked Noble what he had given for it—the father said, "We have not given anything for it yet, but we are to pay 12l. 12s. 6d. for it"—on the following morning I went to the Dockyard at Deptford, saw Fitzgerald, and asked him what account he had to give of that metal which he had taken to Mr. Noble's the night before—he said, "It is a lot which we have been saving from time to time up to Christmas, to get us a Christmas box; I had not a great deal to do with it myself, but I was there, and assisted in taking it to the shop"—I took him into custody.

Cross-examined. Q. Just tell me the words the father used? A. He said, "We have not given anything for it, but we are to give 1l. 12s. 6d."—I am sure he said "We," and not "I."

JAMES TUDHOPE . I am in the employ of Her Majesty, in the store-keeper's department, Deptford Dockyard. I have examined these nails and copper sheathing—it all bears Her Majesty's mark of the broad arrow—the copper nails are marked on the shank, and the metal nails under the head—the broad arrow is discernible on some part of each nail—this copper and these nails constitute Government stores—the broad arrow is the mark invariably used on such stores—I was obliged to put some of them through the fire before I could see the mark—(The COURT considered that the case against Noble could not be supported)—the sheets of copper are stamped all along—you might cut out a slip without the mark—these nails are worth 9d. a lb. as old nails, and the sheathing 11 1/2 d.—old nails and bits of sheathing rejected by the Government are re-manufactured at Chatham—they are never sold—the price put upon them is according to the official rate—we have to give the ships credit for it at that price—that is the price Government allows for old metal—it is fixed according to the price that Government pays for new copper—I know Fitzgerald and Field—they are in the employ of Mr. Smith, the contractor—I have got his contract here—he contracts to remove chips, sullage, and sawdust from one place to another, out of the Dockyard, for which he is paid—sullage is small chips.

Cross-examined. Q. From time to time there are a great many nails in

naval stores? A. Yes—no metal or copper is sold to my knowledge—I never heard of copper bolts being sold—there are copper nails on these—the broad arrow is on all the nails that I have examined John Smith removes the rubbish—the contractors have not the power of selling anything that is found—they are not permitted to do so by their contract, that I am aware of.

MR. ATHERTON. Q. What is the destination of copper bolts which have been used? A. They are sent to Chatham to be remanufactured—if copper nails are found among the rubbish, it is the contractor's duty to return them, and he makes a declaration that he has returned all copper—it may happen by accident that a nail or bolt will find its way in.

COURT. Q. What is "rubbish"? A. Sweepings from the dockyard, common dust—a man is appointed by Government to search to see if there are any old stores—he sifts or rakes it over, and while the contractor's carts are loading, there is a police constable in attendance, to see that there are no Government stores put into the carts—I have seen them sift it with a wire sieve, like they screen coals with—if he had done his duty, things like this copper bolt could not have passed; but in loading such a quantity it sometimes might get in—it would not get through a sieve.

JAMES SMITH . I live at Deptford, and contract with the Government. I have entered into these two contracts (produced)—Fitzgerald and Field were in my employment in Dec., at the dockyard—Fitzgerald has been employed there about eight years for me, to cart chips and the sweepings of the yard, and Field has been so employed about five years—I cart the chips away, and pay for them, by one contract, and by the other I take out the sweepings of the yard, from time to time, as they are made—about one-fifth is sifted when there is any suspicion of there being stores; men are employed to sift and search, and there is a policeman at all times at the tail of the cart with the men—I carted this rubbish away, and was paid for it as rubbish—it was my duty to return all Government stores that these men found—Fitzgerald was the leading man; I told him in the first of his employment that he was to return all Government stores found in the rubbish to me, and he was in the habit of doing so—I told Field the same, but I gave them the run of the dust heap for any other matters, and they might sell them and make what they liked of them—Field has also been in the habit of returning stores.

Cross-examined. Q. Repeat what you said about giving them the run of the dust heap? A. It was their employment, when they had no chips to cart, to sift this stuff, and put the clinkers on to a road; to select the dirt for the dust heap, and they might sell anything which was not Government stores, such as bones and rags—I did not know that there was metal found in the dust—I swear that I mentioned to them the exception of Government stores—the dust is not sifted before it gets to my yard—there are pieces of dross in it as big as a peck measure—I know that they sold things which they found, and have seen them go with their bags, and have examined them—they are the best servants I ever had.

MR. ATHERTON. Q. When you examined their bags, did you find such things as you had given them permission to sell? A. Yes, and not Government stores.

(The COURT considered that the section of the Act of Parliament under which the indictment was framed was most obscure, as it only mentioned "contractors to MAKE any stores, etc.;" and also, that the prisoners had a legal right to have the stores in their possession, being the servants of the

contractors. MR. ATHERTON suggested that they were appropriating them to their own special possession, and that they were not "contractors to make" or "employed by the contractor to make." The COURT decided to reconsider the question if it became necessary.)


Before Russell Gurney, Esq.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-203
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence; Guilty > lesser offence; Guilty > lesser offence

Related Material

203. FINLEY CAMERON, JAMES SCOTT , and CHARLES LAMMIE (marines,) unlawfully wounding Thomas White.—2nd COUNT, charging them with a common assault.

THOMAS SPOONER . I am a labourer, in the Royal Arsenal, Woolwich. On the night of 13th Dec. I was going from the Fountain public house with Reynolds and Slark, at a few minutes before 11 o'clock—we passed a young man and woman talking together—we then heard a disturbance, looked round, and saw four marines; they hit the young man and woman, and I said they had better step it off—Reynolds said, "What for?"—I turned round, Lammie hit me with his belt under the right jaw, on the left hand, and left knee—they then hit Reynolds, and knocked him down an area—I called, "Police!" caught Lammie, took his belt away, and put it into my pocket—it was covered with blood—those are two of the men.

Cameron. Q. Did I strike you? A. No, you began upon the others.

Lammie. Q. Did you give me any provocation? A. No, we did not speak to you, you were behind us a long way.

GEORGE REYNOLDS . I was with Spooner, I turned round when he did, and saw the prisoners running down the road, after insulting the young man and woman—they then hit Spooner, and one of them, I cannot swear which, hit me on the back of the head with a belt; another hit me on the eye, and they broke a rail down, and put me down an area—I am sure the prisoners are three of the four—there were no other soldiers near.

Lammie. Q. Might it have been the fourth man who insulted you? A. It might for what I know, but two of them put me down the area—they were all four acting together.

HENRY SLARK . I was with the last two witnesses, and was accosted by four soldiers—the prisoners are three of them—I was knocked down twice, and kicked when I was down—I do not know who it was kicked me.

Cameron. Q. Do you know me? A. Yes, I can swear to you—you struck me in the presence of the constable—I did not strike you—I had nothing in my hand.

JOHN LANE . I am a hammerman, working in the Arsenal—I was at the corner of Mount-street, about 11 o'clock, and saw the prisoners with their belts off—they knocked these men down—I saw them all three use their belts, and saw Lammie strike Spooner when he was down—I hallooed out, "Police!" and Scott ran after me, and said that he would cut my b—y head open—I saw Lammie strike Spooner with a rail.

THOMAS WHITE . I am a smith, in the Arsenal—I was in the street and a civilian passed me at a running pace—I afterwards heard his pursuers behind, and all of a sudden somebody took me by the collar, and threw me down—I saw three marines over me, who hit me with their belts shamefully—as soon as a policeman came up, they ran away, but he caught them within thirty yards of me—my head was cut in three places, and bled profusely—I cannot swear to the prisoners.

JOHN LARKING (policeman). I was on duty on the night of 30th Oct., and saw White lying down, and several marines round him with their belts flying up in the air—I pursued them—I lost sight of Cameron for about a

minute, but the other constable and I were both together—I saw Scott apprehended, by the railway station—I received information from Slark that there was another one further on—I got up to Cameron, and he had got his belt up, and was in the act of striking Slark—I cannot tell whether the prisoners are the persons I saw round White, I did not see them striking him—I apprehended Lammie at the barracks next morning—I had seen the prisoners' countenances previously, but lost sight of them during the time that White was attacked—I can say that they are the persons by whom White was attacked—I did not see a fourth.

Lammie. Q. Did you see me assaulting Slark? A. I saw Cameron assaulting Slark—I know you by speaking to you, and asking you what all this was about.

COURT. Q. Were they drunk? A. No—when I first went to them they appeared very much excited, and they said that that was because some person had called them the pig marines—these are the belts with the blood on them, and this is the rail (produced).

CAMERON— GUILTY on 2nd Count. Aged 19.

SCOTT— GUILTY on 2nd Count. Aged 22.

LAMMIE— GUILTY on 2nd Count. Aged 20.

Confined One Month.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-204
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

204. EDWARD DAVIS , stealing 1 pair of trowsers the goods of Augustus Whittingham.

JOHN NEWELL (policeman, R 67). I was on duty at Woolwich on 20th Dec., about half past 6 o'clock in the evening—I saw the prisoner going up Powis-street, with a bundle under his arm—he went into a second hand clothes shop—I went in a minute after him—I saw Mr. Hart, who keeps the shop, looking at these trowsers—I asked the prisoner how he became possessed of them—he said he was a tailor, and he made them—he afterwards said he bought them of a recruit.

Prisoner. He has made one mistake, I said the person I bought them of was a tailor, and he made them. Witness. No; I asked him to account for the possession of the trowsers, he said, "I am a tailor, I made them."

JAMES WILLMOTT . I manage the business of Augustus Whittingham, he is a retailer of clothes at Woolwich. On the evening of 20th Dec., about twenty minutes to 7 o'clock, I missed two pairs of trowsers—this is one pair—they were safe at 6 o'clock.

Prisoner. Q. How do you swear to these trowsers? A. They were hanging at the door—here is the mark of the iron—there was a private mark on, which, is torn off—that was the mark of the maker—he sends to other shops—I had seventy pairs hanging on the rail.

Prisoner's Defence. He swore before the Magistrate, that he knew them by a fold on the knee, where they had hung over a rail; he never said a word about the mark, but he spoke about some dirt on them; it is well known to all tailors and cutters that they are cut out three pairs at a time; as to the mark of the dirt, that might have happened to any.


7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-205
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

205. ABRAHAM PARSONS , stealing 24 lbs. weight of lead, value 5s. 6d.; the goods of Frank Clark Hills, his master.

MR. CAABTEN conducted the Prosecution.

GEORGE CHAPMAN (policeman, R 208). On Thursday, 20th Dec., I was in Church-street, Deptford, about 11 o'clock in the morning—I saw the

prisoner—he had a bundle in a handkerchief, he was carrying it in his hand—I asked him what he had in the handkerchief, he said, "A piece of lead"—I asked him where he got it, he said from No. 13, Friendly-street, Deptford New-town, at his brother's—I believe he said No. 13, but I found his brother in law at No. 12—I went there, and left the prisoner in custody of another officer—I afterwards returned to where I left the prisoner—I asked him where he worked, he said at Mr. Hill's—I cannot say whether he said any more than Mr. Hill's, but I knew Mr. Hill, he is the manufacturing chemist in Creek-street, Deptford—I went there, and took with me the pieces of lead I had found on the prisoner—I saw Mr. Hill, and the foreman, and showed them the pieces—I took the prisoner to the station—I told him Mr. Hill's foreman had identified the lead as being their property—he made no reply—Gooch was there, and he said, that while I left the prisoner in the Broadway with him, he wished to go to the water closet, and he allowed him to go to the water closet in the Fountain public house yard—I went to that water closet, and in the soil I found 18 Ibs. of lead, and a door key—Gooch was with me at the time—I afterwards saw the prisoner, and told him I had found a quantity more lead, and asked him what he had to say—he said, "Nothing."

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Did he not say, "About that I know nothing?" A. No, nothing of the kind—Gooch was present at part of this conversation—I left the prisoner in the care of Gooch while I went to Mr. Hills, and when I came back the prisoner was still in his custody, on the road to the station—I believe Gooch was present at part of the conversation, I cannot say positively—when the prisoner was met by me, I believe he had the same jacket on that he has now—I cannot say about his trowser—he had a bundle carrying in his hand, which was these pieces of lead—he told me he worked at Mr. Hill's—he might say Mr. Hill's chemical works, but I knew where he meant—I produce the lead that was found in the water closet; it is all included in the 28 lb.

THEOPHILUS GOOCH (policeman, R 122). I was on duty at Deptford, on the morning of 20th Dec.—the prisoner was given into my custody by the last witness—while he was away, the prisoner asked me to let him go to the water closet—I let him go to the water closet in the Fountain public house yard—after he was taken to the station, I went with Chapman to that water closet, and he got this lead out of the soil, and this key; and I found this one piece of lead behind the door—I returned to the station, told the prisoner what I had found, and asked if he knew anything about this piece—he said, "Yes, I put it behind the door."

Cross-examined. Q. Did he say, "I put it behind the door; or," I have put it behind the door?" A. He said, "I put it behind the door"—I did not tell him I found it behind the door—I asked him if he knew anything about it—I told him afterwards—I did not tell him before—he was afterwards searched in my presence by Chapman.

HORTON HABRILD . I am foreman to Mr. Frank Clark Hills, a manufacturing chemist and druggist The prisoner has been employed at Mr. Hill's upwards of two years—I know this piece of lead—it is Mr. Hill's—it is what we call a socket syphon—I did not miss it—I might have seen it a fortnight before the 20th Dec.—I cannot say exactly, because we have more of them—we perhaps should not have missed it at all, because such a quantity as is taken into the warehouse, it would be almost impossible to tell—I have seen this other lead, part of it has been melted out of lead we had—some parts I could not positively swear to—the value of this one article

is 1s. 2d.—it was in use on the premises—it was not old lead—it was getting worn—we have new ones to replace the old—the prisoner had no right to it only in his work at the manufactory—he worked in that department.

Cross-examined. Q. The prisoner worked with you two years, and some calamity happened to him? A. Yes; some acid got to his eyes, and injured them—this one piece of lead I have no doubt about—it was made on our premises, we have a great many—as they get worn they are not thrown by, they are kept by the man who is in the same department as the prisoner; they are used for various things—this has not been out away from anything, it hangs by a chain over a wheel—it is uncertain whether this was in use when I last saw it—they hang by the chain whether they are in use or not—this piece found behind the door has no mark on it, but I believe it is my master's property—old lead is never given to the men as perquisites, it goes to the lead merchant again.

GUILTY . Aged 28.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury.— Confined One month


Before Mr. Recorder.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-206
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

206. JOHN PYE , feloniously uttering a forged receipt for the sum of 2s.; and 16 forged receipts for the sum of 1s. each.

MR. METCALFE conducted the Prosecution.

HENRY ROLFE . I am in the service of Price and Co., candle manufacturers—there is a savings bank established on their premises for the use of the men—the deposits in the year exceed, or are about 2,000l.—I am the clerk receiving the deposits—I furnish books of this description (produced) and write down the amount I receive, and my initials opposite the amount—this book was furnished to William Lovett, and he deposited from time to time small amounts up to June—on 19th Aug. the amount was repaid to him—I made the addition, balanced the account, and wrote off "Repaid 1l. 2s." and the date—that was the balance of the account—I did not write it, I put it in figures—since I wrote that, the "1l" appears to have been scratched out in each case, the figure "2" being left—the word, "Repaid," has also been scratched out, and the words "two shillings" substituted—here are sixteen other items, making altogether 1l. they have been added since I returned the book to Lovett—on 11th Dec. the prisoner presented the book to me in its present altered state, I noticed the writing directly, and asked him his name—he said, "William Lovett—I asked him who he brought the money to—he said that he brought it to me himself—I spoke to the officials in the counting house, and the prisoner was told to leave the book and call again, but we sent for him before the time that he was told to come—he was asked how he came by the book—he said that he found it—he was given into custody—none of these items are written by me, or by my authority—the initials on the margin are not mine, I have written nothing since Aug.—this alteration from 1854 to 1855 is not by me.

Cross-examined by MR. PAYNE. Q. Are you the only person who receives the books, and enters the sums paid? A. Yes—if 2s. was paid in on a particular day it would be paid only to me, except in case of illness—I enter in the books as well as in this pass book—there is no person to assist

me—when I spoke of the officials I meant the general cashiers of the concern—the savings bank department is entirely under my control, nobody helps me in that department—this "H. R" is my initials—I detected at once that this was not my writing—I had no recollection of Lovett at first—I have seen him a good many times, and after a little recollection, I knew that it was not him.

WILLIAM LOVETT . I am in the service of Price's Patent Candle Company, and am in the cookery department—up to Aug. I was employed in the stables—I had a box there with some old rags and things in it, with which I used to clean the horses—I had a deposit in the savings bank which I drew out on 19th Aug., it was 1l. 2s.—I have paid in nothing since—I put the book in the box in the stable, where the prisoner worked—I generally had it locked while I was there—I left about three months ago, and went to the cookery department—it was unlocked when I left, and I thought no more about it—the prisoner worked in the stable till he was taken.

Cross-examined. Q. How long did you work in the stables? A. For five years—the prisoner came about a week after me—I do not know his writing—he continued in Messrs. Price's service till he was taken—Mr. Kelly is the head of the stable department.

JOHN LARGE (policeman, V 93). I took the prisoner on 11th Dec.—he said that he found the book, as he presented it to Mr. Rolfe, in the stable, and that he was wrong in attempting to draw the money; that he intended to draw the full amount, which he was wrong in doing.

(The prisoner received a good character.)

GUILTY . Aged 18.—Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury and the Prosecutor.— Confined Four Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-207
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

207. JAMES LEBLANC (a black), robbery, with other persons, on Thomas Towell, and stealing from his person I watch, I guard chain, and I seal, value 29l.; his property.

THOMAS TOWELL . I am a surveyor, and live at Brunswick-terrace, Waiworth. On Monday afternoon, 10th Dec., I was passing along the Walworth-road between 3 and 4 o'clock, and somebody came and begged of me—it was broad daylight—I just turned my head round and observed that it was a man of colour, I am certain of that—I unbuttoned my coat, and felt in my pocket, but had no halfpence, I felt in another pocket and gave him a 3d. piece—I fancied that black men are persons who cannot get employment, he was shabbily dressed, and I thought he was out of work—I had then about one eighth of a mile to go to my gateway, and nothing attracted my attention till I was stooping to pull the lock of my gate, when I was struck on the back of the neck from behind, and knocked down insensible—I did not see any person—it must have been with something more than the fist, as the back of my head was swelled up with two large lumps—I recollect nothing from that time till I came to myself on the sofa in my parlour, and missed my watch and chain, which were safe when I opened my coat and gave him the 3d.—the chain went through a button hole of my waistcoat, and of my trowers also—I was quite sober, and had been looking over some old houses in West Smithfield—I saw the prisoner at the station a day or two afterwards.

Prisoner. Q. Was it me that you gave the 3d. bit to? A. I do not know—I noticed nobody near me after giving it.

COURT. Q. You say that you were not affected by liquor, have you any peculiarity about you which makes you walk in an odd way? A. Occasionally

I have a very severe nervous head ache, which I was anxious to remain at home for, but could not—I cannot say whether that affects my walking.

CHARLES BOURNE . I am errand boy to Mr. Box, a grocer, of No. 6, Milk-street, South wark. On this day, about 4 o'clock, I was coming down Brunswick-terrace, Walworth-road, and saw Mr. Towell, who I knew by sight, because I work directly opposite—four young chaps were following him towards his own house—when I first saw them, I was not quite a quarter of a mile from them, but I got close to Mr. Towell, and the lads were standing talking to him—one of them was a black lad, and that is him (pointing to the prisoner)—he was standing with one foot on the kerb, and the other in the road—another lad, genteelly dressed, said, "It is all right, governor; if you do not interfere with me, I shall not interfere with you"—the prosecutor walked on, and there was a short, stout young chap further on, and on my right hand side, on the opposite side of the road, stood the prisoner and another one, while the one who was a yard from him was talking to him—a butter boy came by, and one of them said something to him—(I have known the prisoner for four years—he lived two doors from me four years ago, and his father used to cut our hair)—I went on my journey with a wine basket on my arm, and had got nearly to the bottom of Brunswick-terrace when I heard running, and looked and saw all four of them running towards the Walworth-road—they ran part me directly I turned round—as the prisoner ran by me, he held his hand to the side of his face, so that if I had not seen him before, I should not have seen the colour of his face—I know that he is the same man, because I could see his back and the back of his head, and I knew him perfectly well—he ran along the kerb, up as far as French's, a quarter of a mile—he leaped off the kerb, and went over to the other side—I lost sight of them by the Red Lion public house—I then went into my master's, which is almost opposite Brunswick-terrace, and that is all I saw—Mr. Towell seemed a little the worse for liquor—he did not seem to walk as a sober man would—the prisoner had a hat on, and was dressed apparently like a young gentleman—I saw his face, and have no doubt that he is the man—while he was speaking to the gentleman, I saw Samuel Perry, a butter boy, going up towards Grosvenor-park.

SAMUEL PERRY . I am a butter boy, in the employ of Mr. William Carter, and live at No. 17 A, Trafalgar-street, Walworth. On that afternoon I was going along Brunswick-terrace, towards Groavenor-park, and saw the prisoner and four others in Brunswick-terrace—I was on the left side, and saw one young man go up to Mr. Towell, of No. 18, Brunswickterrace, and try to trip him up—they were all following the gentleman—one of them wanted to shake hands with Mr. Towell, but he would not—he had one ring on his finger—I saw it distinctly—neither of them was the prisoner—Mr. Towell would not shake hands, and he said that it was all right, and turned back—Mr. Towell was proceeding on his journey home, and the next thing I saw was the prisoner on the left hand side of the road, making a urinal of the wall—the other lads left Mr. Towell, and when he had got about ten yards I heard a violent fall—(I had passed Mr. Towell on the opposite side of the way, facing him on his left)—I turned round, and saw a young man rifling the prosecutor, who was on the ground, of his watch—it was just opposite his own door: I have repeatedly seen him go in—one young man took a watch away from him, but this is not the man—I distinctly saw the watch in his hand—the other four were hanging about

on the other side of the way, about twenty yards from the one who took the watch, and on the same side of the way as I was—the lad who took the watch ran up between the others, and they all decamped as hard as they could, hustling the watch between them from one to the other—I distinctly saw the man who took it, pass it to the prisoner, but did not see him pass it to anybody else—I have known the prisoner by sight seven or eight years, and am quite sure of him—I went across the road, and a milkman was passing, and we helped Mr. Towell up—I then left my basket at the gate, and ran after the lads, but could not see anything of them.

Prisoner. Q. How was it that you did not tell the Magistrate that you saw another young man give me the watch? A. I said so—(The witness's deposition, being read, stated, "They hustled the watch between them," but did not state that it was handed to the prisoner)—to the utmost of my knowledge, I said so to the Magistrate—I did not particularly notice your dress or whether you had a hat or a cap.

THOMAS NEWMAN . I am a milkman, of No. 28, Richmond-street, Walworth. On Monday, 10th Dec., as near 4 o'clock as could be, I was walking towards Brunswick-terrace, and saw four persons coming in that direction—I knew one of them by sight, a coloured young man; I forget his name—that is him (the prisoner)—they were running as fast as they could towards Walworth—they got off the terrace, and turned off by the Lion public house—I went on to Brunswick-terrace, and saw Mr. Towell standing resting on his gate—a lady at the house asked me to help him in, and I did so—he was quite senseless, and I laid him on his sofa—I did not look to see if he had any wound, but went on about my business—he did not appear as if he was in liquor—he seemed stunned—I did not know the prisoner before—I saw him next, I think it was on 12th Dec., at the station—it was then gas light, and I had some doubt of him, but on the 20th I saw him by daylight, and knew him—I am sure he is the same man.

Prisoner. Q. What was the reason that you did not recognise me? A. Because it was gas light—I knew that you were the same party after you had been remanded a week.

THOMAS BARRETT . I am an omnibus proprietor, of No. 1, Beresford-street, Walworth. On 10th Dec., about 4 o'clock, I was standing at Commercial-gate, Walworth-road, and saw Mr. Towell go by, and the prisoner and three more following him—they went towards Brunswickterrace, opposite my yard—I lost sight of them—I stood at my yard five or ten minutes, and saw all four of them run back again towards town—two of them crossed the road, close to my yard—I knew the prisoner by sight—I have been in the habit of seeing him about—I saw him next at the station, I think it was the next morning, but did not recognise him at first—he had a different suit of clothes on, and a great coat, and a shawl round his neck, but when I had the great coat and shawl taken off I knew him.

Prisoner. Q. Did not you tell the inspector at the station that I had a cap on? A. No; I said that the other lad had—the policeman made you put a cap on, and then I said that you were more like him—it was between the lights—I did not come to the police court for a week, though I recognised you—that was because I was not summoned, and I could not leave my business.

SAMUEL COPPIN (policeman, P 15). I took the prisoner on 12th Dec., about 1 o'clock in the day—Barrett is mistaken, if he says that he saw him at the station on the 11th; it was Wednesday, the 12th—I told the prisoner

that I took him for being concerned with others in stealing a gentleman's gold watch, chain, and appendages—he said, "Very well, master; I suppose I must go with you; it is a bad job"—he had on this new coat, new wrapper handkerchief, and a new pair of boots, or as good as new (produced)—I told him that I was going to ask him several questions, and he could answer them if he pleased—I saw a ticket on the wrapper, and asked him where he bought it—he said, "I bought it at Tower-hill, and gave 3s. for it"—I said, "When?"—he said, "Saturday morning"—I took his coat off, and said, "This is new; where did you get it?"—he said, "I bought it in the lane"—I said, "What lane?"—he said, "Petticoat-lane" I said, "What did you give for it?"—he said, "10s."—I said, "When?"—he said, "Saturday morning"—I asked him to describe the shop, which he did, and I found it—I said, "These are new boote, Peter; where did you get them?"—(we always called him Peter)—he said, "I bought them at a shop in Lambeth-walk, opposite the Feathers, and have left 8s. on them; the man is going to make me a pair, because these are not quite large enough, and when he has made them I am to pay him another shilling"—I asked him where he got the money—he said that he won it at gambling—I gave him a caution before I asked him the questions—I do not understand that that is contrary to my instructions.

Prisoner. He left me in the cell for a couple of hours without any boote. Witness. The boots were taken away to the shop, to be inquired about.

Prisoners Defence. I am quite innocent, but, having been in trouble once or twice, have been two or three times taken away to be recognised, and discharged afterwards; because they know that I have been in trouble, they come to me for everything, it does not matter whether I am the party or not.


(The prisoner was farther charged with having been before convicted.)

EDWARD HEWLET (policeman.) I produce a certificate of the prisoner's conviction—(Read: Surrey Sessions; James Leblanc, Convicted, Dec., 1853, of stealing a dead rabbit; Confined three months)—I was present—the prisoner is the man—I had him in custody.

GUILTY.** Aged 20.— Four Years Penal Servitude.

Before Mr. Justice Crowder.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-208
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

208. CHARLES BUTLER and SARAH BUTLER , feloniously killing and slaying Emma Waldon Butler.—They were also charged on the Coroner's Inquisition with the like offence.

MR. CAABTEN conducted the Prosecution.

ELIZABETH SANDS . I am the wife of Edward Sands, of No. 13, Bermondsey-street. The prisoners came to lodge at our house on 12th Dec., as near as I can say—they occupied the back parlour and the shop, and carried on a stationer's and newspaper office business—they had three children—the deceased child was named Emma Waldon Butler, and was I believe two years and nine months old—she was very well indeed when she came, in my opinion; she had a very pretty little colour—she was very cold when she came, and I took her into my room and warmed her, and she seemed very cheerful—the husband was at home all day, he generally went out late in the evening, and I have known him return at 1 or 2 o'clock in the morning; I think he is a musician—the female prisoner was very harsh to the child at times—I have heard her beat it. but have not seen it, and I have frequently told her that I considered kind treatment would go further than such harsh beating to such a little girl—I have heard her beat her five or

six times prior to 21st Dec., and on one occasion I spoke to her, and she said that she was very stubborn, and very dirty, and would not do by fair means—the child appeared a pretty behaved and a well spoken child—she died on Friday, 21st Dec.; and about a week before that, I was in my room, which is on the first floor, over theirs, and heard the child crying dreadfully, and I heard as if her head was being knocked on the wainscoting—I heard her distinctly say, "Oh, mother, I will be a good girl!"—that was between 9 and 10 o'clock in the day, and I believe the father was out—I told the mother a day or two afterwards that she really made my flesh creep, to hear the child cry, and to hear its head knocked against the wainscoting—she said that it was her little brother who knocked her head—the little brother will be five years old in March—there were several knocks, and they must have been violent for me to have heard them so distinctly—I can almost be positive that the father was out, but one morning before that) the children were both walking up and down the passage crying dreadfully, and I took the little girl by the hand and said to the father, who was in the shop, "Father, let this little girl come to the fire, she will be good now"—he took her kindly, and the little boy was then turned into the wash house by the mother—that was the only time I knew the father to be present—I did not see the mother beat the child, but I heard her; she slapped it—that was in the parlour—there is a communication between the parlour and the shop both ways—on Friday morning, 21st Deo, about 12 o'clock, I was in the wash house, and the prisoners were in the back room—the father brought me a pan which belonged to me, and said, "I thought we should have lost the little girl in the night"—I said, "What a pity you did not call me"—he said, "I wanted to call you, but my wife would not let me"—I asked how the child was—he said, "We have not looked at her this morning"—I had not seen either of the prisoners that morning till the male prisoner came with the pan—the wife was not present then—(they were in the habit of getting up between 11 and 12 o'clock)—I then heard a knocking at their parlour window, which looks into the wash house, but saw no one—that was when he was there, and he then went and opened the parlour shutters, which open from the outside—I saw his wife beckoning, and I went into the parlour after him, and saw the little girl lying on two pillows which were on two chairs, right opposite the fireplace—there was not a bit of fire in the grate, and there could not have been any for many hours—the child had on a man's old flannel shirt, but I could not see of what length, as it had some dark covering over it, which I think was old moreen curtains, and they appeared to be doubled over the child, but her chest and arms were quite naked—it was very severe weather—by the side of the child's head lay a pool of wet blood and matter, or blood and water, as large as my hand—I did not see where it was coming from, and thought she had been sick—I said, "Dear me, this is enough to kill the child to be laid in this cold place, right in the draught of the fireplace"—the father said, "We left a fire when we went to bed, and we thought it would be the warmest place," and that they had put it in a warm bath over night—I took hold of it's hand and said, "The child is quite dead"—I told the father that he ought to have called in a medical man—I then went up stairs to give my husband his dinner—I had been there a minute or two when the husband came up, and said, "Mrs. Sands, if you have got a kettle of water, we will put the child in another warm bath, as I think she is still alive"—I got some water, made it hot, took it down to them, and the mother put it into a pan, and put the child into it, but it had no effect on it—the husband went for Dr. Challis—the

prisoners slept in the same room as the child—there was a bed and bedstead in which they slept, and the baby slept with them—there was no other bed in the room, and I do not know where the little boy slept—they had fundture of their own, and the shop was very prettily stocked—I do not think they had sufficient food, and I am sure the children bad not at all times—I never saw them at their meals—I do not know whether this child took its meals with them.

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. What rent did these poor people pay you for this little shop and parlour? A. They did not pay any rent to me—the landlord is not here—they engaged to pay 8s. a week—I rent the first floor—the prisoners had been there three weeks when the child died—I believe they paid one week's rent, and declared their inability to pay any rent after that—I think they have had money sent on different occasions—I never knew that they were in want of anything till after the child's death; but after that Mr. Butler told me that they had no money in the place—I knew that the children had not sufficient food, because they frequently asked for bread and butter; they did so the first night that they came into the house—I was never in their room till the child died—the father said that he believed the place where the child was lying, before the fireplace, to be the warmest part of the room—I have four young children in the house—my rooms are immediately over their's—the prisoners were perfectly sober—I think the male prisoner goes to different public houses playing some instrument.

MR. CAARTEN. Q. Does the landlord live on the premises? A. No—the male prisoner told me that he had half a sovereign sent him to pay the first week's rent.

COURT. Q. Did you ever see the children at meals? A. Never—I think they all fared alike, at least the two little ones did—the boy was a step child; there were two step children, the baby was her own—I heard that the baby was ill treated more than ever I did of the eldest child—I did not see the child placed in the bath over night—the mother appeared to treat the child kindly on the first night, when she fetched it out of my room—I am sure the child was dead when I first saw it, and I said so at the time—I fetched hot water for the purpose of resuscitating it if possible—ten minutes or a quarter of an hour elapsed from my first seeing the child to the doctor being called.

JOHN CHALLIS , Esq. M. D. I reside at Bermondsey. On Friday morning, 21st Dec., just after 12 o'clock, I was at my dispensary, in Crucifix-lane, the male prisoner came and said that he wished me to see a chad of his that was very ill; he said that he thought it was suffering from cold—I asked him how long it had been ill—he said, the night before—I told him to place it in a hot bath, and I would come in a few minutes—it is about 200 yards from my house—I went in about ten minutes, and found the child in a pan of water; it was dead, and from the temperature of we room my impression is, that it had been dead more than an hour; the hands were getting cold, and the features set—I examined the body; for being informed that it was very ill, I was surprised to find it dead—it was rather emaciated, but not excessively so—I saw a bruise on it's head, several on it's forehead, and about two table spoonsfhll of bloody serum on the pillow, oozing, apparently, from the child's ear; that quantity would make a considerable stain on the pillow—the prisoners were both in the room—I said, "There has been an oozing of blood and matter from the ear"—the female said that the child was accustomed to pick her ears a great deal—it had come from the

internal part of the ear; there was no sore behind the ear—I asked how the bruise came over the left eye, on which the male prisoner asked the female if the child had not had a fall from the bed; she replied that it had, and my impression is, that she said that it was the night before, and by the swelling I judged that it might have been—I did not notice other bruises so minutely then; I discovered them more particularly afterwards—that bruise might have been from a blow or a fall—the child was quite naked—I lifted it out of the pan, and placed it on a chair—I made a post mortem examination three or four days afterwards—the external appearance was rather emaciated, but not more than many children of that age are—there was a bruise on the left leg, and one on the forehead—there were six or seven distinct bruises—there was another violent bruise over the right eye, not the one to which my attention had been called—that over the left eye was not severe in comparison with the other, but the integuments were completely darkened down to the bone—the brain was healthy, there were no marks of concussion—the chest was perfectly healthy, with the exception of a alight congestion of the lungs, which in all probability arose from cold—the internal organs were, generally speaking, those of a healthy child—the stomach and intestines were healthy, and all the organs—there was no appearance of any organic disease—there was about a table spoonful of a greenish fluid in the stomach; I did not expose it to the microscope, as I detected a husk of wheat, so that it appeared to be vegetable matter—I should say, from the appearance of the body, that the child had not had sufficient food—it must have suffered from the bruises—I do not think the bruises alone would have caused death, but looking at the condition of the body, that it was not extremely emaciated, the death could not have been occasioned from absolute want of food, neither from the slight congestion of the lungs, or from absolute exposure to cold; but I consider that injuries such as it must have received, upon a weakened frame, and that frame exposed to a very low temperature, such as the night of 20th Dec. was, those combined causes are quite sufficient to account for the child's death—the place where it was placed on the chairs was the coldest part of the room, close to a large old fashioned fireplace.

COURT. Q. You believe that the cold that may have been experienced by that child in the night, supervening on a weakened constitution, caused the death? A. Yes—there was no other cause—I should imagine that the blow just above the forehead, on the right side, although it was not transferred to the brain to show any permanent result, yet it must have nearly stunned the child, as in a child in that condition the vitality is very slight, and I believe that it was by those injuries made more liable to succumb, more likely to be killed by cold; life would be half knocked out of it, and it would be pretty much the same with respect to food—if it had been well fed, it would have been less likely to be affected by cold, but probably the injuries would have had a worse effect on it if it had been well fed—the prisoners seemed poor—there were marks of poverty, but not of extreme distress.

Cross-examined. Q. You have told us that the bloody serum proceeded from the interior of the ear; are not children frequently in the habit of picking their ears and causing a flow? A. Yes, and there is then an exudation of bloody serum from the interior of the ear—I am quite unable to say whether the bruises were occasioned by a blow or a fall, but children do not generally pitch head foremost, without protecting themselves with their hands—there was nothing like congestion of the brain—my impression is, that not one of these causes singly was the proximate cause of death,

but it was the combined causes—I do not think the stomach being in a healthy state would negative the impression that the child had been starved—in cages of children who have died from starvation, the stomach is un usually red, from the gastric juice feeding upon it, but that was not the case.

MR. CAARTEN. Q. With regard to the picking of the ear; would you expect to find two table spoonsful! of matter from it? A. I never saw so much—a blow on the head, or the side of the ear, would be very likely to cause a swelling inside, which would occasion a discharge—I mean a blow struck, or a blow received by a fall—any injury to the head would be likely to cause it—an injury such as I saw would.

EDWARD SANDS . I am the husband of Elizabeth Hands—I knew the deceased child, it looked very sickly indeed, and on the 17th or 18th, I came home to dinner about 10 minutes after 12 o'clock and noticed two black marks on the forehead of the child as it was in the shop, one over the left and the other over the right eye—the skin was not broken, but it was discoloured—I have heard the child cry three or four times—I never saw it beaten, I am not much at home.

Cross-examined. Q. Could you trace any cause for its crying? A. No, I never heard the father's voice or saw him at the time—he was not in the shop when I saw the child with the bruises on it's head—the eldest boy opened the door to me, and the child was standing by his side.

SARAH HANSOM . I am the wife of William Hansom, we lived at No. 35, Gloucester-street, Hackney-road—up to last Saturday the prisoner lived with us there between four and five months, up to five weeks before Christmas—I knew the child Emma—they occupied the first floor front room—I have frequently heard and seen the child cry, and have known it to be beaten—it was a very delicate child, very pale looking—she had no illness while they were with me—I cannot say whether they had their meals together, they were very poorly off—the child did not appear to me to have sufficient food—I sometimes did not see her for two or three weeks, and sometimes she was down for an hour or two playing with the other children—her clothes were poor, but clean.

Cross-examined. Q. During the whole time that these people were living with you, were they in a poor, distressed condition? A. Yes—they might be in the habit of pawning their clothes, but I know nothing of their affairs, they were very close indeed—I never went into the room except when she was confined—she had a doctor from the poorhouse, and they had relief from some charitable source.

ELIZABETH HUMPHREYS . I keep a chandler's shop at No. 44, Glouceater-street, Hackney-road—during the time Mr. Butler resided in the street, about five months, I knew the deceased little girl, I saw her two or three times, but not so often as the other children—she has come to my shop and asked for food, and I have given it to her—she presented the appearance of a child not having sufficient food, all three of the children appeared so.

Cross-examined. Q. You know nothing about the troubles of these poor people? A. No—I know nothing about how they lived or fared.

CHARLES WELCH . I am a surgeon, and am medical officer for Bethnalgreen parish—I attended the female prisoner by the parish order—I put her to bed with the present infant on 8th Oct.—I examined the deceased child, Emma, on the same or the following day—she was very much attenuated, exceedingly weak, and had the appearance of having been very much neglected—I discovered no marks of violence—I spoke to the father on the same day, in the mother's presence, and told him the report I had

heard, and the reason of my examining his children, and that my opinion was, that they were suffering from want of sufficient food—he said that he was a poor man and was out of work, and the children fared as he and his wife did; that they had animal food once or twice a week, and in the intervals lived chiefly on bread and butter—I told him he should provide more food for his children—he said that he could not afford more, and I directed him to apply to the workhouse for relief—he told me that he would, but on my next visit, on the following day, I found he had not, and asked him why; he replied that he thought he should be asked too many questions—I immediately went home, being early in the morning, and wrote to the relieving officer, stating the case, and he came down and brought food with him for the family—they only received food that once—he subsequently told me that he had been down, and had been examined by the parish authorities, who questioned him about his mother; that they wished him to write to his mother, who lived at Chatham or Rochester, who was very well off; keeping a bookseller's shop, I think it was in Chatham—he said that he would write to her, and would not receive relief from them, for he had no doubt that his mother would supply him with what was necessary for his family, and he afterwards called on me with a letter which he said that he had received from his mother that morning, and that she promised to supply them with whatever they needed—I saw the outside of the letter, but not the contents—I was not present at the post mortem examination—I have heard the evidence of Dr. Challis, and my opinion is, that the shock of the blow on the head, to have produced such effects, must have produced concussion of the brain for a time, and that the concussion, after a few hours, would leave no trace behind it; the effects would be entirely evanescent, and I think that the shock to a system already reduced by insufficient food rendered it so far susceptible to the influence of cold, that the cold would produce death.

Cross-examined. Q. You saw that the whole family were in a very reduced state? A. Yes, and they were very poor—I know that the male prisoner went to the union—I am not aware that they told him that he should have nothing out of the house, but that if he liked to come there with his family he might—he did not tell me so—it may have been so—I believe that this night in Dec. was the very coldest we have had this winter.

WILLIAM SOCK policeman, M 13). I took the male prisoner into custody on 28th Dec., at St. Thomas's Hospital, in the Borough, and found on him 14s. 10d.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you find any pawnbroker's duplicates on him? A. No, nor at his lodging, nor am I aware that any were found there—it may be that the landlord or persons living in the house have found some—I did not hear that he had received the 14s. 10d. that very morning that I took him—he said it was what he intended paying his rent with.


7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-209
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

209. EVERETT CARLTON was charged, on the Coroner's Inquisition only, with feloniously killing and slaying Lydia Robins.

MR. W. J. PAYNE conducted the Prosecution.

ELIZA POWERS . I am the wife of Edward Powers, a labourer. On Wednesday, 19th Dec., we lived at No. 22, Mint-street, Southwark—I slept on the top floor that night, and Mrs. Robins slept in the same room—I knew her well, her name was Lydia—she had a little child, about three years old living with her—about 2 o'clock in the morning the deceased awoke me,

and the place was on fire—I succeeded in escaping on to the roof with my two children—Mrs. Robins handed me out my child, and I saw no more of her, she was burnt.

ROBERT BYGRAVE . I am landlord of No. 25, Mint-street On Wednesday night, 19th Dec., I went to bed—in the middle of the night I awoke, and found my room full of smoke—before I could come down I saw fire coming up the back stairs from the kitchen—there has been no fire in the kitchen since I have been in the house—the kitchen is level with the one next door—I am satisfied from examination that the fire broke out in the kitchen—the flue of the copper of the next house came to the cupboard of my house—the brick noggin was in it; that is a wooden frame which is built up first, and bricks are put in afterwards—it was also boarded on my side in the cupboard, and that formed the wooden wall of the cupboard—on the No. 24 side it was all brick noggin—the next door is an eating house, and it opened on the same night as the fire—the fire broke out at my cupboard—I saw the fire in the kitchen, out of the back window—I am a smith and gas fitter, I know nothing about setting coppers.

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. On your side there was a wooden partition? A. Yes, and on the other brick work, covered with plaster—it was against that that the copper pan was set.

RICHARD HENDERSON . I am foreman of the Fire Brigade. After putting out this fire, I made an examination in the kitchen of No. 24, and found a copper built against the plaster of the brick noggin—I believe it was a stone floor—there was a common fireplace under the copper, above one foot and a half deep—the wall was composed of brick and timber—there was a hole at the end of the flue, about a foot from the ground, caused by the wood work breaking away—by the flue I do not mean the chimney—the flue runs right round—this (produced) is a piece of the wood work of the noggin—I have no doubt that the fire commenced at that part of the wood work, by it's catching fire by the flue—I have seen many coppers set, but they always cut the wood work out first.

THOMAS COOK . I am a bricklayer and builder, and have been so forty-three years next June. I examined this kitchen—the front of the flue was covered with flat plain tiles to form the front of the chimney, the chimney having been cut out to form the flue at the side of the copper—in taking these tiles down, I found that the inside of the chimney had been cut out, and I found one of the quarters of the partition between Nos. 24 and 25—it probably had been an old kitchen, and had been filled in with brick work to keep the cold out—by the partition, I mean the brick noggin, and it was partially burnt away in the upright flue, leading into the kitchen chimney—there was a fireplace under the copper—it was about two feet nine inches from the door to the back, and from the front of the copper to the brick noggin was three feet—the depth of the fireplace was about two feet—the copper was set on the floor—where the flame caught the back part of the flue there was another quarter which had only plaster to cover it, and the flame beat against it; it was where the fire went into the furnace—the fireplace is what I call the furnace; furnace is the proper name for it—the mouth of the furnace is eight or nine inches square—if a person was putting up that copper, it would be his duty to see what he was putting it up against; he ought to have ascertained that by taking off the plaster—merely tapping it would not be sufficient to ascertain whether it was brick noggin or not—it would be enough to tell him whether it was wood or bricks, but not enough to enable him to tell what description of wall it was—the whole of the

plaster ought to have been cut away to ascertain—it is not uncommon for walls to be composed of brick noggin, especially old houses, but it is very dangerous—a person who has had experience in setting coppers would know that fact.

Cross-examined. Q. That mode of building is prohibited now by the Metropolitan Buildings Act? A. It has been for some time—if there had been brick, and there had been no wood work, it would not have occurred—six inches square had been cut out of the chimney breast to form the flue—I cannot say whether the person who set this copper had cut that out, or whether there had been another copper set there before—a piece had been taken out, which has been burnt.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate was here read, as follows:—"I have heard all that has been said to day; I was employed by Frederick Colt, of John-street, Sussex-street; I do not know what he is; he was a chimney sweeper once; he takes jobs, and has employed me to do plastering and bricklayering; he employed me to do this; he took and showed me the job, and he brought the iron pot out, and told me to set it there in as little compass as I could; I sounded tire wall, found it brick work, and thought I could save room by making it answer one side the flue, and I set it as I am in the habit of setting coppers; I have set hundreds; it never struck me about being brick noggin partition; I thought it was a wall; I ought to have knocked the plaster down, and examined it; Mr. Colt was not there, I did it myself."

MR. SLEIGH to THOMAS COOL Q. Were you examined before the Coroner? A. Yes—I had stated that the prisoner ought to have knocked the plaster down, before he made that statement.


Before Russell Gurney, Esq.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-210
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

210. JANE HARRIS , unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MESSRS. CLERK and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM KEEN . I am a coal dealer, and live in Princes-place, Westminster-road. On Friday, 7th Dec., the prisoner came to the shop, about half past 9 o'clock—I was in the parlour—she asked for a bushel of coke, and 3d. worth of chump wood—I said I did not sell wood—she said, "Never mind the wood, send the coke to No. 6, Charles-street, Westminster-road"—she walked out of the shop, came in again, and said, "I have got a half sovereign, and a crown piece"—she gave me the crown, I chucked it on the table, and my mistress gave her 4s. 6d. change—two or three minutes after she left, I looked at the crown and found it was bad—I ran to the place where the boy was gone with the coke, and he was standing at the door—I could not find the prisoner there, or hear anything of her—I gave the crown to my wife, she wrapped it in paper, and locked it in a drawer.

Prisoner. Iknow nothing about it, I never was in the shop. Witness. I am quite sure she is the woman.

COURT. Q. When did you see her again? A. At the Court—I knew her by her dress—I had given a description of her to Mr. Winford and Mr. Meacock the next day, after I had taken the 5s. piece—I described her by her dress and features.

Prisoner. I was not near the place.

JANE KEEN . I am the wife of the last witness—I was at home when the prisoner came to buy some coke—I am sure of her—I stood against the parlour door and saw her—she gave my husband a 5s. piece—he threw it to me, I gave her the change, I counted it into her hand, three shillings and

three sixpences—she was not in the shop above two or three minutes—she had conversation with my husband, not with me—as soon as she was gone I observed the crown—it was bad—it was a thin one, and there was a small tooth mark on it—I wrapped it up in paper and locked it in my drawer) in case the prisoner should be taken—I gave the same 5s. piece to the policeman on 20th Dec.—I saw the same mark on it that I observed on the 7th.

Prisoner. I know nothing of what they are saying—I am quite innocent.

GEORGE THOMAS WINFORD . I am a coal dealer, and live at No. 52, Mitre-court, New-cut, Lambeth. On Friday, 7th Dec., I was there—the prisoner came about a quarter before 10 o'clock for half a hundred weight of coals, to be sent to No. 10, New-street—she gave me a 5s. piece—I took it in the parlour to my wife—I came out and gave the prisoner 4s. 3d. change—my wife came running out and said, "George, it is a bad one"—I went after the prisoner, and brought her back to the shop—she gave me the change back—I told her the crown was bad—she said I might do as I liked, she took it of her husband, who took it for wages, and he was a pilot on the river—I broke two pieces out of the crown piece and gave it her back—my house is about five minutes' walk from Mr. Keen's—I saw Mr. Keen the next day.

MART WINFORD . I am wife of the last witness. I was in the parlour on Friday, 7th Dec., and he brought me a crown piece—I put it into my mouth, and found it bad—I went into the shop, and told him it was bad—I was at the shop door, and saw the prisoner there—she said the coals were to be sent to No. 10, New-street; but when she went, I followed her, and she went past New-street, and went in another direction.

JANE BURN . I am servant to Mr. Meacock, who fives in Walnut Tree-walk; he deals in coals. On Thursday, 20th Dec., the prisoner came for a bushel of coke, and 2d. worth of chump wood, to be sent to No. 17, Richmond-street—she gave me in payment a 5s. piece—I took it to Mr. Meacock—he came into the shop, where the prisoner was—an officer was tent for, and the prisoner was given into custody.

JAMES MEACOCK . On 20th Dec. the last witness brought me a 5s. piece—I went into the shop, where the prisoner was—I found the 5s. piece was bad, and told the prisoner she ought to be ashamed of herself for passing bad money on poor people—she said, "Do you say that it is a bad one?"—I said, "Yes, you know it is"—she offered me halfpence to let her go, and said she would never do it again—I sent for a constable—the 5s. piece never went out of my hand till I gave it him—I saw Mr. Keen on the 8th, at the place where I work—he gave me a description of the person who had come to him.

WILLIAM CURTIS (policeman, L 90). The prisoner was given into my custody on 20th Dec.—she did not at first say where she lived—she said it was at some low place, but did not tell me where—but when she was charged, she said she lived at No. 3, Martha-place, Kingsland-road, Shoreditch—that is four or five miles from the last witness's shop—I got this crown from the last witness, and this other from Mrs. Keen.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . I am inspector of coin to the Royal Mint—these are both bad.

GUILTY . Aged 25.— Confined Twelve Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-211
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

211. THOMAS WOOLSEY was indicted for a like offence.

MESSRS. CLERK and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN ISLIP . I am a tobacconist at Richmond. On Saturday, 8th Dec., the prisoner came for half an ounce of tobacco; he gave me in payment a crown—I gave him 4s. 10 1/2 d. change—for a minute he remained there; he lighted his pipe at the gas, and left the shop—I had put the crown in the till—after he was gone, I looked at it two or three minutes afterwards—when the next customer came in he offered me half a sovereign; I was going to give him the crown which the prisoner gave me, and when I opened the till, I had no other 5s. piece there—I had taken no other, and had no other in the house—when the other party came in I found this 5s. piece was bad—I marked it, and locked it in the shop desk—on the following Tuesday I saw the prisoner again; he came about the same time in the evening for half an ounce of tobacco—he gave me in payment a half crown—I knew him instantly—the half crown he gave me was bad—I told him I suspected it was a bad one—I went to the door of the shop to look for a policeman—I could not see one—I asked a friend of mine to look at the half crown—the prisoner ran away—I ran after him nearly a quarter of a mile—I did not lose sight of him—I gave him into custody with the half crown, which I still had in my hand—I gave the officer the half crown.

Prisoner. Q. Were you taking any other money at the time you were taking mine? A. No, you were the only person in the shop—I was not taking a 5s. piece of a man, and weighing it to see if ft was bad—that was another time—I had taken a 5s. piece in the course of the evening, but I had paid it away.

COURT. Q. How did the prisoner know that? A. I stated it before the Magistrate—no one was in the shop when the prisoner was there.

MR. CLERK. Q. How long before had you taken a 5s. piece? A. It might be five minutes—that crown had been brought back, and it was said that it was bad—I took the one that I had taken of the prisoner, and weighed them both, and said, "They are just alike," but that I had paid it away, and it was brought back, and I weighed it with the one the prisoner gave me—I had two crowns, but I am sure that the one I gave to the policeman was the one the prisoner gave me—a much bigger man than the prisoner paid me the first 5s. piece, and he had long hair—I cannot say how long it was before the prisoner came—I should not know the person to whom I paid away the first 5s. piece—I suppose now that was bad also—I weighed the two together, and they were the same weight, and I said, "Take which you please, this is the same weight as the other," and he said, "I will take the one I had before"—it was the newest looking one.

CHARLES POVEY (police sergeant, V 3). The prisoner was given into my charge—the last witness gave me this half crown, and afterwards this crown.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These are both bad—this crown is very light—it is not more than 8 dwt. or 10 dwt, and it ought to be 18 dwt.

GUILTY . Aged 19.— Confined Nine Months.

7th January 1856
Reference Numbert18560107-212
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

212. SEVILLA CAMPBELL was indicted for a like offence.

MESSRS. CLERK and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN LEWIS . I am assistant to Mr. Sewell, a surgeon, in Lower Marsh, Lambeth. On 17th Dec., the prisoner came for some potash and camphor spirit—they came to 2d. each, and the phial 1d.—she gave me a half crown—I put it in the till, and gave her 2s. 1d.—she left, and in three or four minutes afterwards I looked in the till, and there was only one half crown in it—I had not served anybody else in the meantime—I looked at

the half crown, it was bad—I put it back into the till—I went out to see for the prisoner—I did not go far—she was gone—during my absence my wife was in the back room, I was not absent three minutes—my wife is not here—when I came back I looked into the till, and there was still the half crown there, and no other—I took it and put it into my pocket till the next morning, when I gave it to a policeman—the prisoner told me her husband was a fireman, and had just gone out to a fire, and it always made her nervous; and she complained of a bad leg, and said it always made her leg much worse.

Prisoner. When I was in the shop, you were talking to me some minutes before you took the money up. Witness. It may be so—I have no knowledge of having seen you before—I did not understand that you said your husband was in the West of England Brigade—you asked me to look at your leg, and that took my attention off the coin—it is my usual practice to put coin in a detector—it was merely looking at the leg that took my attention from the half crown.

JOHN HASTINGS (policeman, L 91). I saw the last witness on Tuesday morning, 18th Dec., at his shop—I saw the prisoner the same night in Waterloo-road, about half past 10 o'clock—I told her she was the person I wanted—I did not tell her the charge—on the way to the station I saw her chuck this half crown away—I stopped her, and picked it up—I received this other half crown from Mr. Lewis.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These are both bad.

Prisoners Defence. I was not aware that the half crown was bad.

GUILTY . Aged 28. — Confined Six Months.


View as XML